Chapter XXVIII: Part 28

To this we may also add, that idolatry which is practised by them in their devotion, to the images of other saints. Every saint in their Kalendar is called upon, in his turn; among whom some indeed were good men, as the martyrs, who refused to be worshipped while on earth; how much soever these worship them now they are in heaven. But there are others whom the Popes have canonized for saints, who were little better than devils incarnate, while they were here upon earth; and others have been rebels and traitors to their king and country, and suffered the just reward of their wickedness; such as these are found among those whom they pay this worship to. There are also others whom they worshipped as saints; concerning whom it may be much questioned whether there ever were such persons in the world; these may be called fabulous saints. Nevertheless, images are made to their honour, and prayers directed to them. And there are other things worshipped by them, which never had life, as the picture of the cross, and many pretended relics of the saints. So that upon the whole, we cannot but think that we have, in this mode of worship, a notorious instance of the breach of this Commandment. And we cannot but conclude, that herein they have apostatized, or turned aside from the purity of the gospel.

It may be observed, that the church, for the first three hundred years after Christ, had comparatively, but little superstition, and no idolatry; but in the fourth Century, superstition began to insinuate itself into it; then it was that the pictures of the martyrs, who had suffered in Christ’s cause, were first set up in churches, though without any design of worshipping them; and this was not universally approved of. As for image-worship, it was not brought into the church till above seven hundred years after Christ; and then there was a considerable opposition made to it by some; and this kind of worship was set up in one reign, and prohibited in another; but afterwards it universally prevailed in the Romish church, when arrived to that height of impiety and idolatry, without opposition, as it is at this day. We now proceed to observe,

III. The reasons annexed to this Commandment, which are taken from the consideration of what God is in himself; _I am the Lord_, or _Jehovah_; which being a name never given to any creature, is expressive of all his divine perfections, which render him the object of worship, and oblige us to perform that worship which he requires, in such a way as is agreeable thereunto; he also styles himself a God to his people, _I am thy God_; therefore to set up strange gods, or to worship him in a way not prescribed by him, is a violation of his covenant, as well as not performing the duty we owe to him, and would render us unfit to be owned by him as his people. And it is farther observed, that they who thus corrupt themselves, and pervert his worship, are styled haters of him, and therefore can expect nothing but to be dealt with as enemies. This he gives them to understand, inasmuch as he styles himself _a jealous_, or sin-revenging _God, visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the children_. For the understanding of which, let it be considered,

1. That though God does not punish children with eternal destruction, for the sins of their immediate parents, yet these oftentimes bring temporal judgments on families. Thus, all the children of Israel that murmured and despised the good land, so far bare their fathers iniquity, that they wandered in the wilderness near forty years.

2. These judgments fall heavier on those children that make their parents sins their own; which was the case of the Jews. Upon which occasion our Saviour tells them, that _all the blood that was shed upon the earth, should come upon them, from the blood of righteous Abel, unto the blood of Zacharias, whom they slew between the temple and the altar_, Matt, xxiii. 35. They approved of, and committed the same sins which their fathers were guilty of, and consequently are said to fill up the measure of their sins; therefore the judgments of God, which they exposed themselves to, were most terrible.

3. Whatever temporal judgments may be inflicted on children for their parents sins, shall be sanctified, and redound to their spiritual advantage, as well as end in their everlasting happiness, if they do not follow their bad example; and therefore it is farther observed, that God _shews mercy unto thousands of them that love him, and keep his Commandments_. These are very great motives and inducements to enforce the observation of all God’s Commandments, and this in particular.

Footnote 208:

_See more of this in Vol. I. Page 226._

Footnote 209:

_See Page 498._

Quest. CXI., CXII., CXIII., CXIV.

QUEST. CXI. _Which is the third Commandment?_

ANSW. The third Commandment is, _Thou shalt not take the name of the
Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless, that
taketh his name in vain_.

QUEST. CXII. _What is required in the third Commandment?_

ANSW. The third Commandment requires, that the name of God, his
titles, attributes, ordinances, the word, sacraments, prayer, oaths,
vows, lots, his works, and whatsoever else there is whereby he makes
himself known, be holily and reverently used in thought, meditation,
word, writing, by an holy profession, and answerable conversation,
to the glory of God, and the good of ourselves and others.

QUEST. CXIII. _What are the sins forbidden in the third
Commandment?_

ANSW. The sins forbidden in the third Commandment are, the not using
of God’s name as is required, and the abuse of it, in an ignorant,
vain, irreverent, profane, superstitious, or wicked mentioning or
otherwise using his titles, attributes, ordinances, or works; by
blasphemy, perjury; all sinful cursings, oaths, vows, and lots;
violating of our oaths, and vows, if lawful, and fulfilling them, if
of things unlawful, murmuring and quarrelling at, curious prying
into, and misapplying of God’s decrees, and providences,
misinterpreting, misapplying, or any way perverting the word, or any
part of it, to profane jests, curious or unprofitable questions,
vain janglings, or the maintaining of false doctrines, abusing it,
the creatures, or any thing contained under the name of God, to
charms, or sinful lusts and practices, the maligning, scorning,
reviling, or any ways opposing of God’s truth, grace, and ways,
making profession of religion in hypocrisy, or for sinister ends;
being ashamed of it, or a shame to it, by uncomfortable, unwise,
unfruitful, and offensive walkings, or backslidings from it.

QUEST. CXIV. _What are the reasons annexed to the third
Commandment?_

ANSW. The reasons annexed to the third Commandment in these words
[_the Lord thy God_] and [_for the Lord will not hold him guiltless
that taketh his name in vain_] are, because, he is the Lord and our
God, and therefore his name is not to be profaned, or any way abused
by us, especially, because he is so far from acquitting and sparing
the transgressors of this Commandment, as that he will not suffer
them to escape his righteous judgment, albeit, many such escape the
censures and punishments of men.

As the second Commandment respects the manner in which God is to be worshipped, agreeably to his revealed will; in this we are commanded to worship him with that frame of spirit which is suitable to the greatness of the work, and the Majesty of him with whom we have to do. By the name of God we are to understand all those things whereby he is pleased to make himself known; and these are his names, titles, attributes, words and works. The attributes of God have been largely insisted on in that question, _What is God[210]?_ His names and titles have also been considered, as belonging to all the persons of the Godhead, in proving that the Son and Holy Ghost are God equal with the Father[211]. His word is that in which the glory that is contained in his names, titles and attributes, is set forth in the most glorious manner. Thus the Psalmist says; _Thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name_, Psal. cxxxviii. 2. or, thou hast given a brighter discovery of thyself in thy word, than thou hast done in any thing else, by which thou hast made thyself known to thy creatures. And as for the works of God, whether of nature or of grace, these are designed to lead us into the knowledge of his power, wisdom, goodness, holiness and faithfulness, which are eminently glorified in all that he does. Now this Commandment respects our having a due regard to all those ways whereby he makes himself known, and contains a prohibition of every thing that may tend to cast the least dishonour upon them.

The method in which we are led to speak to it, is to consider,

I. What is required in it. This supposes, that it is an indispensible duty for us to make mention of the name of God. Since he has given us some discoveries of himself, by what means soever he has done it, it would be an instance of the highest contempt of the greatest privilege, for us to express no regard to them; which they may be said practically to do, who make no profession of religion, and desire not to be instructed in those things which relate to the name and glory of God; which argues a person to be abandoned to the greatest wickedness, and to live without God in the world.

Now there are several duties mentioned in this answer, in which we are said to make use of God’s name; particularly, when we attend on his ordinances, viz. the word, sacraments and prayer; and take religious oaths, and make solemn vows; which, doubtless, are to be performed with the utmost reverence. We have many instances, in scripture, of holy men who, when they have drawn nigh to him in prayer, have adored his divine perfections, with a becoming humility. Thus Solomon, at the dedication of the temple, addresses himself to God; _There is no god like thee, in heaven above, or on earth beneath, who keepest covenant and mercy with thy servants, that walk before thee with all their heart_, 1 Kings viii. 23. And Jacob, when wrestling with God in prayer, says, _O God of my father Abraham, and God of my father Isaac, the Lord which saidst unto me, Return to thine own country, and to thy kindred, and I will deal well with thee. I am not worthy of the least of all the mercies, and of all the truth, which thou hast shewed unto thy servant_, Gen. xxxii. 9, 10. And Hezekiah expresses himself thus in prayer, _O Lord God of Israel, which dwellest between the cherubims, thou art the God, even thou alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth, thou hast made heaven and earth_, 2 Kings xix. 25. And Daniel in prayer, styles him, _The great and dreadful God, keeping the covenant, and mercy to them that love him, and to them that keep his commandments_, Dan. ix. 4. And Abraham, when standing before the Lord, and pleading in behalf of Sodom, says, _Behold, now I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, which am but dust and ashes_, Gen. xviii. 27. And the inhabitants of heaven, who are nearest the throne of God, are represented as worshipping him with the greatest reverence, _casting their crowns before the throne_, in token of their being unworthy of the honour that they are advanced to, and saying, _Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory, and honour and power_, Rev. iv. 10, 11. which is to be understood of him, exclusive of all others. And as this reverence is to be expressed when we ask any thing at the hand of God, by a parity of reason, it ought to expressed in any other religious duty, on which he has made, some impressions of his glory.

If it be enquired, whether this reverence is consistent with that boldness which believers are said to have in prayer, when they are exhorted to _come boldly unto the throne of grace_, Heb. iv. 16. and to _have boldness to enter into the holiest of all, by the blood of Jesus_, chap. x. To this it may be answered, that the word there used[212], which is called boldness, may be rendered a liberty of speech. So that though he be infinitely above us, and a God of infinite holiness and purity, and therefore has the utmost abhorrence of sin, which we have reason to charge ourselves with, yet we are encouraged to come to him, as sitting on a throne of grace: from whence he displays his glory, as a sin-pardoning God, who otherwise appears in his jealousy, as a sin-revenging Judge. Therefore this _boldness_ is nothing else but our making use of that liberty which God gives us to come into his presence with hope of being accepted in his sight, in and through a Mediator.

We might farther observe, that as we are to express an holy reverence, in drawing nigh to God, in all religious duties; so we ought not to think of any of his works, but with a due regard to, and the highest veneration of, his glory shining forth therein. Thus it is said, _Remember that thou magnify his work, which men behold_, Job xxxvi. 24. and this reverence is to be expressed in our meditations, words and writings; so that we should never think or treat of divine subjects, but in an holy manner; we should never speak of any thing, by which God manifests his glory, but with a design to beget in ourselves and others, a reverential fear of, and the highest esteem for him.

II. We are now to consider the sins forbidden in this Commandment; and accordingly, we violate it by not using the name of God in such a way as it is required. This includes in it,

1. The not making any profession of religion, as being afraid or ashamed to own, that in which the name of God is so much concerned. Persons, indeed, do not usually arrive to this height of wickedness at once; but the mind is alienated from God, and his worship, by degrees. There is first a great deal of lukewarmness, formality, and hypocrisy, reigning in the heart of man; so that if they attend on the ordinances of God’s worship, it is with great indifferency, many prejudices entertained against them, and with such a frame of spirit as savours more profaneness than true religion. After this they are ashamed of Christ and his cause, being influenced by the reproach that is cast on it in the world. Thus the Jews pretended, concerning Christianity, that it was _a sect every where spoken against_, Acts xxviii. 22. And Demas forsook the apostle, _having loved this present world_, 2 Tim. iv. 10. being more concerned for his reputation in it, than for Christ’s interest. After this, such cast off all public worship; and this is generally attended with a seared conscience, and running into all excess of riot.

2. Persons take the name of God in vain, when though they make a profession of religion, yet it is not in such a way as God has required; and this is done by using his titles, attributes, or any ordinances or works, in which he makes himself known in an unbecoming manner; with ignorance, when we speak of the divine perfections, and, at the same time, have no just ideas of what is intended thereby; or when we use the name of God with a vanity or levity of spirit, and mention sacred things in a common way, whereby we may be said to profane them; or when we superstitiously pay a kind of veneration to the sound of words, relating to divine matters, but regard not the thing signified thereby. This is using the name of God in such a way as he has not required, and consequently taking it in vain.

3. The name of God is taken in vain by blasphemy; which is a thinking or speaking reproachfully of him, as though he had no right to the glory that belongs to his name; which is, in effect, a cursing him in our hearts, and offering the greatest injury that can be done, to a God of infinite perfection; which, though it be no real lessening his essential glory, yet it argues the greatest malignity, and highest degree of impiety in those that are guilty of it. This was so great a crime, that, by God’s command, it was punished with death, Lev. xxiv. 16.

4. This Commandment is broken by not using religious oaths in a right manner, or by violating them; and, on the other hand, by all sinful and profane oaths and cursing.

(1.) By not using religious oaths in a right manner. It is certain, that we are, upon extraordinary occasions, to make mention of the name of God, by solemn oaths, in which we appeal to him as a God of truth, the searcher of hearts, and the avenger of falsehood. That this is a duty, appears,

[1.] In that we have various instances, in scripture, of God’s condescending to confirm what he has spoken, by an oath; wherein he appeals to his own perfections for the confirmation of our faith. Thus he is represented as _swearing by himself_, and by _his holiness_, Gen. xxii. 16, 17. Psal. lxxxix. 35.

[2.] There are several examples and commands, in scripture, which make it our duty to appeal to God, on some occasions, by solemn oaths. Thus it is said, _Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God, and serve him, and shalt swear by his name_, Deut. vi. 13. And elsewhere, _To me every knee shall bow, and every tongue shall swear_, Isa. xlv. 23. But we must observe that there is a vast difference between God’s swearing by himself, or by any of his perfections, and man’s swearing by him. When God swears by himself, it is a display of the glory of his perfections, as a God that cannot lye; but when man swears by him, it is an act of religious worship, containing an acknowledgment of his perfections, and an appeal to him, as a God of truth, and the avenger of a lye. Therefore an oath is not to be taken, but in matters of great importance, which cannot be decided without it; and being an act of religious worship, it ought to be performed in the most solemn manner; otherwise we profane the name of God, and so violate this commandment. This respects not so much the form used in swearing, as the levity of spirit with which it is done, or our pretending to confirm that which is false hereby.

The form used in solemn oaths has been various.

_1st_, We read of some ceremonies used in swearing, that were only occasional. Thus when Jacob and Laban took a solemn oath to each other, at their parting, a _pillar was erected_, and a _heap of stones_ gathered together, and they both eat upon the heaps and _sware by the God of Abraham and Nahor, and the fear of Isaac, that they would do no injury to each other_, Gen. xxxi. 45,-53. Also we read, that when Abraham made his servant swear, that he would take a wife for Isaac, from among his kindred, and not out of the land where he dwelt, he ordered him to _put his hand under his thigh_, chap. xxiv. 2, 3, 4. This form of swearing seemed to be an appeal to God, as having promised that his seed should be increased and multiplied, and that in his seed, all the families of the earth should be blessed; which was a circumstance well adapted to the matter and occasion of the oath, viz. that he should provide such a wife for Isaac as God approved of.

_2dly_, The common form of swearing used of old, seems to have been by _lifting up the hand_ to heaven, thereby signifying their appeal to God, whose throne is there; accordingly the _lifting up the hand to heaven_ imports the same thing as to swear, according to the scripture-mode of speaking, Deut. xxxii. 40. In this manner Abraham sware, Gen. xiv. 22, 23. and the angel which appeared to John, Rev. x. 5. and this is undoubtedly, a very good and justifiable form of swearing; and it is used, in some Protestant countries, even at this day.

As to the form used by us in public solemn oaths, viz. laying the hand on the Bible, or on the gospels, and kissing the book, it is no where warranted by scripture, and therefore is not so eligible as that lifting up the hand; yet because it is the common legal form used among us, it is rather to be complied with, than that the duty should be neglected; because, as has been but now observed, some forms of swearing are said to have been used in scripture, and not reproved, which were of men’s invention. And the thing principally to be looked at in an oath, is, the solemn appeal made therein to God. Therefore it is the frame of spirit with which this is done, that is chiefly to be regarded. And what we have promised to do, is religiously to be observed, that so our oaths may not be violated.

_Obj._ The objections against the use of religious oaths, are principally taken from two or three scriptures, not rightly understood, in which they seem to be forbidden; as when our Saviour says, _I say unto you, Swear not at all_, Matt. v. 34. and in James v. 12. the apostle speaks to the same purpose; and it is farther objected, that the prophet speaks of this as a national sin; when he says, _Because of swearing the land mourneth_, Jer. xxiii. 10.

_Answ._ In these scriptures profane swearing is forbidden; whereby persons make use of the name of God to confirm what they say, in a light and trifling manner; or swearing by creatures, as the heaven, the earth, or any creature therein. But they do not forbid swearing, as containing in it a religious appeal unto God in a solemn manner, for the confirming of what we assert. And when the prophet speaks of the _land’s mourning because of swearing_, it may be rendered, as in the margin of our Bibles; _because of cursing the land mourneth_, intimating, that it was a custom among them, to imprecate the wrath of God against one another; which was a sin highly provoked to the Majesty of heaven. And, besides, it appears that the prophet is speaking of profane cursing or swearing, by what is said in the words immediately following; _for both prophet and priest are profane_. So that people of all ranks and degrees, were profane; the prophets and priests by abusing the sacred mysteries; and the people, in their common discourse, using oaths and curses; for which things the land mourned. This is the plain sense of that scripture; and therefore no arguments can be drawn from thence to prove that solemn and religious oaths are unlawful.

It is, indeed, unlawful to swear by creatures, as is observed in the scriptures but now mentioned; for they are not omniscient, and therefore not to be appealed to for the decided matters, which are known to none but ourselves, and the Searcher of hearts; neither are they to be reckoned avengers of the cause of injured truth; for they have not a sovereignty over man, or a right to judge and punish them in such a way as God has; for that belongs only to him, and therefore to swear by their name, is to give them a branch of his glory, and consequently to take his name in vain.

(2.) This Commandment is broken by violating religious oaths, both those that are assertory or promissory. Therefore, when men assert that, for truth, which is uncertain; or, especially if they know it to be false, and so design to deceive, they break this Commandment. As for promissory oaths, they contain an appeal to God concerning what respects some things to be done by us, conducive to the good of others. Now we are guilty of the breach of this Commandment.

[1.] When we assert a thing, without implying this condition that ought to be contained in it, if God will, or he be pleased to enable us to do it. This the apostle particularly mentions, when he blames those who say, _To day or to morrow we will go to such a city, and continue there a year, and buy, and sell, and get gain. Whereas they know not what shall be on the morrow._ And therefore, they _ought to say, If the Lord will, we shall live, and do this, or that_, James iv. 13, 15.

[2.] When we promise a thing, that is out of our power to perform; and, much more, when we do not design to perform it.

[3.] When we promise a thing, which is in itself unlawful; as the Jews did, who _bound themselves under a curse, that they would not eat nor drink till they had killed Paul_, Acts xxiii, 12. If we have obliged ourselves by an oath, to perform that which is unlawful, as we sin in making, we should do so in fulfilling it. There are, however, some cases in which persons may not perform what they have sworn to do, and yet not be guilty of perjury, or violation of their oaths; as,

_1st_, When they have used their utmost endeavours to fulfil what they have promised to do, but yet cannot accomplish it. Though here it must be observed, that if the thing promised was absolutely out of their power when the promise was made, the oath (as we but now observed) was unlawful. But supposing the thing was in their power when they promised it; but an unforeseen providence has put it out of their power at present, though they have used their utmost endeavours to perform it, they are not chargeable with the guilt of perjury.

_2dly_, If we have promised to do a thing that is for the advantage of another; but now see reason to alter our mind, apprehending some detriment will accrue thereby to ourselves; we must, notwithstanding, fulfil our promise. Thus the Psalmist says, _he sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not_, Psal. xxv. 4. However, if the person to whom we have made the promise, who is to receive the advantage by our fulfilling it, is willing to discharge us from our obligation, we may omit to do it, and not be guilty of perjury.

Here it might be enquired; whether we are always obliged to fulfil a promise extorted from us by violence? In answer to which, it is generally supposed, by divines, that we are not. Nevertheless, the person can hardly be excused from sin in snaking such a promise, when he designs not to perform it, though some small degree of force or threatening were used; especially since the will cannot be obliged to consent, or the tongue to utter the promise. And to all this we may add, that they are guilty of the breach of this Commandment (how much soever they may think themselves guiltless) who use equivocations, or mental reservations, in taking solemn and religious oaths. Thus the Papists make no scruple of swearing to support the government under which they live, and yet take the first opportunity that offers to subvert it, pretending they swore to support it as it stood before the reformation; or when they swear allegiance to their sovereign, and yet do what they can to dethrone him; and have this mental reservation, that they intended only to do it for the present, till they have a convenient opportunity to join in a successful rebellion. By this means they break through the solemn tie of religious oaths, elude the law, and impose upon the common sense of mankind, in such a way, as even the Heathen themselves are afraid and ashamed to do.

(3.) This farther leads us to consider this Commandment as broken by swearing profanely; namely, when we make use of the name of God, and pretend to confirm what we assert by an appeal to him, and, at the same time, are far from doing this in a religious manner. This many do, who give vent to their passions by profane swearing, by invoking the name of God upon light and trifling occasions, without that due regard that ought always to be paid to his divine Majesty.

Under this head we may observe, that cursing is a vile sin, whether a man imprecates the wrath of God on himself or others. They who curse themselves, do, in effect, pray that God would hasten their everlasting destruction; as though their damnation slumbered, or as if it were a thing to be wished for. These do that which the devils themselves would not venture to do. And to curse others is to put up a profane wicked prayer to God, to pour out his vengeance upon them, which is the highest affront to him; as though the vials of his wrath were to be emptied on men, when they pleased, to satisfy their passionate revenge against them. This also includes in it a vile instance of uncharitableness, towards those whom we are commanded to love as ourselves, Matt. xxii. 39. And how contrary is it to that golden rule laid down by our Saviour, _All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them?_ chap. xvii. 12. Thus we are said to break this Commandment by perjury or profane swearing. And to this we may add, that it is notoriously broken by sinful vows; either when we resolve, or determine, to do what is unlawful, or bring ourselves under solemn engagements, to do that which is lawful, to our own strength, without dependance on the grace of God in Christ.

(4.) It is farther observed in this answer, that men take the name of God in vain, by sinful lots; but this is to be farther explained. Therefore let it be considered; That when lots were an ordinance by which God, in an extraordinary manner, determined things that were before unknown; they being an instituted means of appealing to him for that end; as in the case of Achan and others, Josh. vii. 13, 14. Acts i. 26. then lots were not to be used in a common way, for that would have been a profaning a sacred institution. But since this extraordinary ordinance is now ceased, it does not seem unlawful, so as to be an instance of profaneness, to make use of lots in civil matters; [213] provided we do not consider them as an ordinance which God has appointed, in which we think we have ground to expect his immediate interposure; and to depend upon it as though it were a divine oracle. In this view it would be unlawful at present, to use lots in any respect whatsoever.

(5.) Persons are said to break this Commandment by murmuring, quarrelling at, curiously prying into, and misapplying God’s decrees or providences, or perverting what he has revealed in his word, _i. e._ when we apply things sacred to profane uses, and have not a due regard to the glory of God, which is contained therein; when we pervert scripture, by making use of those sacred expressions that are contained therein, in our common discourse, as some make the scripture the subject of their profane wit and drollery. This is certainly a taking God’s name in vain. And, it is farther added, that we do so, by maintaining false doctrines, _i. e._ when we pretend, that such a doctrine is from God, when it is not, or that he makes himself known hereby; when the doctrine is altogether disowned by him.

(6.) This Commandment is farther broken, by making use of God’s name as a charm; as when the writing, or pronouncing some name of God, is pretended to be an expedient to heal diseases, or drive away evil spirits; which is a great instance of profaneness, and that which he abhors.

(7.) This Commandment is farther broken, by reviling or opposing God’s truth, grace, and ways; whereby we cast contempt on that which is most sacred, and lightly esteemed that which he sets such a value on, and makes himself known by. To this we may add, that this is done by hypocrisy, and sinister ends in religion, whereby we walk, so that we are an offence to others, and backslide from the ways of God. This is an abuse of that which ought to be our glory, and a disregarding that, whereby God manifests his name and glory to the world.

III. We are now to consider the reasons annexed to the third Commandment. And these are taken,

1. From the consideration of what God is in Himself, as he is the Lord, whose name alone is Jehovah; whereby he puts us in mind of his sovereignty over us, and his undoubted right to obedience from us; and hereby intimates that his excellency should fill us with the greatest reverence and humility, when we think or speak of any thing, by which he makes himself known. Moreover, he reveals himself to his people as their God, that so his greatness should not confound us, or his dread, as an absolute God, whom we have offended, make us despair of being accepted in his sight. Therefore we are to look upon him as our reconciled God and Father in Christ; which is the highest motive to obedience.

2. The observation of this Commandment is farther enforced, by a threatening denounced against those that break it; concerning whom it is said, That the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain. This implies that there will be a judgment, a reckoning day, when all shall be called to an account; and it shall be known whether they are guilty or not guilty. It is farther observed, that the profaning of God’s name is a sin that carries in it a great weight of guilt, and renders the sinner liable to punishment, in proportion thereunto; and accordingly God is said not to hold them guiltless, or that they shall not escape the punishment from him; though they may, and often do, escape punishment from men.

There are many instances of the profanation of the name of God, which no laws of man can reach. As when we attend on his ordinances without that inward purity of heart, and those high and becoming thoughts of him, which we ought always to entertain. On the other hand, human laws against open profaning the name of God, are not severe enough to deter men from it; and if they are, they are seldom put in execution; which is one reason why we behold the name of God so openly blasphemed, and yet this iniquity go unpunished from men. Nevertheless, such are to expect that God will follow them with the tokens of his displeasure, sometimes with temporal, at other times with spiritual judgments. And this is assigned as a reason why we ought to make mention of the name of God, or of every thing whereby he makes himself known, in such a way, as that we may glorify him thereby.

Footnote 210:

_See Vol. I. Quest._ iv.

Footnote 211:

_Quest._ xi.

Footnote 212:

Παρρησια.

Footnote 213:

If they appeal to God in an irreverent manner, they are a violation of
this commandment. If they be not appeals to him, they are in fact, an
application to him without any knowledge of him, and this is Atheism.

Quest. CXV., CXVI.

QUEST. CXV. _Which is the fourth Commandment?_

ANSW. The fourth Commandment is, _Remember the Sabbath day to keep
it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work; but the
seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not
do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy man-servant,
nor thy maid-servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is
within thy gates. For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth,
the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day;
wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it._

QUEST. CXVI. _What is required in the fourth Commandment?_

ANSW. The fourth Commandment requireth of all men, the sanctifying,
or keeping holy to God, such set time as he hath appointed in his
word; expressly, one whole day in seven, which was the seventh from
the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ, and the
first day of the week ever since, and so to continue to the end of
the world; which is the Christian Sabbath, and in the New Testament,
called the Lord’s day.

In this Commandment it is supposed, that God is the sovereign Lord of our time; which is to be improved by us, to the best purposes, as he shall direct. And, inasmuch as there are some special reasons which he has appointed for the exercise of religious worship, these are called _holy days_, and as we are to abstain from our secular employments therein, while engaging in religious duties, they are called _sabbaths_; and that more especially, because they are sanctified, by God, for his service. These are considered more generally, as including in them all those set times which God has appointed in his word, which is contained in the moral reason of this Commandment; and therefore, if he was pleased to institute, as he did under the ceremonial law, various Sabbaths, or days appointed for rest, and the performance of religious worship, his people are obliged to observe them. And therefore, I take the meaning of this commandment to be, Remember a sabbath day, or every sabbath day, or every day which God hath sanctified for that end, to keep it holy; and then follows the particular intimation of the weekly sabbath. This, as is observed in the answer we are explaining, was the seventh day of the week, from the beginning of the world, to the resurrection of Christ, and the first day of the week ever since; which is the Christian Sabbath, and, in the New Testament, is called the Lord’s day. In considering the subject-matter of this Commandment, we must

I. Inquire, since it is contained in the decalogue, which is an abstract of the moral law; whether we are obliged to observe the Sabbath by the law of nature, or by some positive law. For the understanding of which, let it be premised, that some laws are moral by way of eminency, or, in the highest sense, as distinguished from all positive law; and others we may call moral-positive, that is, the laws are positive; but yet there is some moral reason annexed to enforce our obedience to them. And this moral reason is either what is founded in the sovereignty of God commanding, which takes place in all positive laws, which, in this respect, are moral, though they could not be known without a divine revelation; or else positive laws may have a moral circumstance annexed to them, to engage us to obedience, taken from some glory that redounds to God, or good to ourselves, by the observation thereof; or from some other reason which God annexes to them. As for instance, the reason annexed to the fourth Commandment, is taken from God’s resting from the work of creation on the seventh day, and its being sanctified for our performing religious duties therein. Here we shall consider,

1. In what respects the Sabbath is moral in the highest and most proper sense of the word, as before mentioned. That this may appear, we shall lay down the following propositions, which may be considered in their respective connexion.

(1.) It is a branch of the moral law, that God should be worshipped. This is founded in his divine perfections, in the relation we stand in to him, and in the consideration of our being intelligent creatures, capable of worship.

(2.) The moral law obliges us to perform social worship. This appears from hence, that man, as a creature, is capable of society, and naturally inclined and disposed to it: which we cannot but know, when we look into ourselves, and consider the disposition of all intelligent creatures, leading them together with ourselves, to this end; so that without any positive law to direct us, we should be naturally inclined to converse with one another.

(3.) As man is a creature designed to worship God, as the law of nature suggests, so it appears, from the same law, that he is obliged to perform social worship. For if we are obliged to converse with one another, and thereby to be helpful to each other, in other respects; certainly we are obliged, by the same law to converse with one another therein, and to express our united concurrence in those things that relate to the glory of God.

(4.) The law of nature farther suggests, that as the whole of our business, in this world, is not included in that of society, which is rather to be occasional than stated; and there are other secular employments, which we are to be engaged in, in which we do not converse with others; so we are not to spend our whole time in public or social worship. Therefore,

(5.) It follows from hence, that some stated times are to be appointed for this end; and it is agreeable to the law of nature, that God, who is the sovereign Lord of our time, as well as the object of social worship, should appoint these times; that is, that he should ordain a Sabbath, or what proportion of time he pleases, for us to perform those religious duties which he enjoins, therein. These considerations, relating to our observation of the Sabbath, are purely moral, and not positive.

2. We shall shew in what respects the Sabbath is positive, and not moral in the highest and most propense sense of the word. Here let it be considered, that it is the result of a positive law, that one proportion of time should be observed for a Sabbath, rather than another; namely, that it should be a seventh, rather than a third, fourth, fifth, or sixth part of our time; for this could not have been known by the light of nature, any more than the other branches of instituted worship that are to be performed therein. So that, whether it be the seventh day in the week, or the first, which we are to observe, this being founded in the divine will, we conclude it to be a positive law. This we are obliged to assert, that we may fence against two extremes, namely, that of those who, on the one hand, deny the Sabbath to have any thing of a moral circumstance contained in it; and that of others, who suppose that there is no idea of a positive law in it. That, in some respects, the fourth Commandment is a branch of the moral law, may be proved from the following arguments:

(1.) It is inserted, among other commandments that are moral, which were proclaimed by the voice of God from mount Sinai, whereas the ceremonial and judicial laws were not; though they were given by divine inspiration. _These words the Lord spake unto all your assembly in the mount, out of the midst of the fire of the cloud, and the thick darkness, with a great voice; and he added no more_, Deut. v. 22. _viz._ at that time.

Moreover, they were written on two tables, with the finger of God, which none of the other laws were; and were laid up in the ark before the Lord, Exod. xxxi. 18. all which denotes the dignity and perpetuity of these laws, above all others that were ceremonial, judicial, or merely positive.

(2.) The Sabbath was enjoined to be observed not only by the Israelites, who were in covenant with God, together with their servants, who were made proselytes to their religion, and were obliged to observe the ceremonial and other positive laws; but it was also to be observed by the stranger within their gates, namely, the Heathen, who dwelt among them, who were not in covenant with God, and did not observe the ceremonial law; these were obliged to obey the Sabbath, it being, in many respects, a branch of the moral law.

(3.) If the observation of the Sabbath had been a duty of the ceremonial, and, in no respects, of the moral law, it would have been wholly abolished at the death of Christ; but, though then the day was altered, yet there was still a Sabbath observed, after his resurrection, even when the ceremonial law was no longer in force.

(4.) The weekly Sabbath is distinguished from all the ceremonial festivals; which are also called _sabbaths_, in that God lays a special claim to it, as his own day; and therefore it is called, in this Commandment, _The sabbath of the Lord thy God_; and it is styled, _his holy day_; Isa. lviii. 13. by way of eminence, to distinguish it from other days, which he has appointed to be, in other respects, devoted to his service; and when changed, it is called The _Lord’s day_, Rev. i. 10. which is a peculiar honour put upon it. For these reasons we conclude, that the Sabbath has in it something moral, and is not a part of the ceremonial law.

_Obj._ 1. It is objected, that the Sabbath is included, by the apostle, among the ceremonial laws, which were designed to be abrogated, under the gospel-dispensation; and therefore he says, in Col. ii. 16, 17. _Let no man therefore judge you in meat or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon; or of the Sabbath days; which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ._

_Answ._ To this it may be replied, that by the Sabbath days, which are _a shadow of things to come_, we are to understand the Jewish festivals; such as the new moons, the passover, pentecost, the feast of tabernacles, &c. which are often called sabbaths: wherein holy convocations were held. So that when the apostle says, _Let no man judge you_, in respect of this matter, he means, let none have occasion to reprove you for your observing of those days, which were merely ceremonial, the design whereof was to typify the gospel-rest. Now, that the apostle does not mean the weekly Sabbath, is plain; for hereby he would contradict his own practice, and that of the churches in his day, who observed it; whereas, the other sabbaths were abolished, together with the ceremonial law.

Moreover, it is evident, that he intends no more than the ceremonial sabbaths, or Jewish festivals; because he adds, _Let no man therefore judge you in meat or in drink_, as well as _in respect of an holy day_, &c. by which he does not mean, let no man have reason to judge or condemn you for gluttony or drunkenness, but for your abstaining from several sorts of meat, forbid by the ceremonial law; by which he means that the distinction of meats is removed under the gospel-dispensation. And consequently the ceremonial sabbaths, or holy days, are taken away; which are intended by the _sabbath day_ in that place, and not the weekly Sabbath; and therefore our translation rightly renders it, the _sabbath days_, not the Sabbath day. Or if it ought to be rendered _the sabbath day_, or the weekly Sabbath, because it is distinguished from the holy days before mentioned; then it may be farther replied to it, that he means the seventh-day Sabbath, which was abolished, together with the ceremonial law, in opposition to the Lord’s day; and how far this was a sign or shadow of good things to come, will be considered in what will be replied to the next objection.

_Obj._ 2. It is farther objected, by those who pretend that the Sabbath is a branch of the ceremonial law, that it is said, in Exod. xxxi. 16, 17. _The children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant. It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever, &c._

_Answ._ To this it may be replied; that whenever the weekly Sabbath has an idea annexed to it, agreeably to that of the ceremonial law; as when it is said to be _a sign_ between God and Israel, as in this scripture, we are to understand nothing hereby, but that there was a ceremonial accommodation annexed to it, as an ordinance for their faith, in particular, signifying the gospel-rest; which signification was not annexed to it from the beginning; but when it was given to Israel. From the beginning, it was not a type; but when God gave the ceremonial law, it was made a type. Even as the rainbow, which proceeds from natural causes, and was, doubtless, set in the heavens before Noah’s time; yet it was not ordained to be a sign of the covenant between God and him, till God ordered it to be so, in his time. Thus God ordained the Sabbath to be a type or sign to Israel, when he gave them the ceremonial law, though it was not so before. And at Christ’s resurrection it ceased to be an ordinance, for their faith in the gospel-rest, or to be observed, when another day was substituted in the room of it, to wit, the first day of the week.

_Obj._ 3. It is farther objected, that when the observation of the Sabbath was enjoined, God bade the Israelites, in Deut. v. 15. to _remember that_ they were _servants in the land of Egypt, and that the Lord_ their _God brought_ them _out thence through a mighty hand, and by a stretched out arm_; and _therefore commanded them to keep the Sabbath-day_.

_Answ._ To this it may be replied,

1. That God’s bringing his people out of Egypt, is no argument that this is a part of the ceremonial law, which was given soon after that time. For we read in the preface to the ten Commandments, of his bringing his people out of the land of Egypt; which is assigned as a reason why they should observe all the Commandments. Therefore it might as well be inferred, that they are all a part of the ceremonial law, as that the fourth Commandment is so; because enforced by the same motive.

2. Though this particular reason is given to induce the Israelites to observe this Commandment, and it is in a more especial manner, applied to that dispensation of providence which they were lately under; yet this could not be said to take place in the first institution of the Sabbath, if we suppose that it was instituted before Moses’s time, which we shall endeavour to prove under a following head.

3. This particular reason, taken from their having been _servants in Egypt_, is added to enforce the obligation laid on masters, to let their servants rest on the Sabbath-day; namely, because they themselves were once servants in Egypt, without any regard had herein to the matter of the Commandments, or any intimation that it is a branch of the ceremonial law.

II. We shall now consider when this law, relating to the observation of the Sabbath, was first given. There are various opinions about this matter.

1. Some think the Sabbath was first instituted when God spake to Israel from mount Sinai; inasmuch as it is one of the ten Commandments, which God gave them from thence[214].

But to this it may be replied, that the Sabbath was observed some days before Israel came into the wilderness of Sinai, viz. when they were in the wilderness of Sin. Thus Moses, when speaking concerning their gathering twice as much _manna_ as was usual, the day before the Sabbath, assigns this is as a reason for it, _To morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord_, Exod. xvi. 13. And that this was before they encamped at mount Sinai, appears from hence, namely, that it is said, that _they came into the wilderness of Sin on the fifteenth day of the second month_, ver. 2. Whereas they did not come into the wilderness of Sinai, till the _third month_, chap. xix. 1. Therefore,

2. Others fix the Epocha of the giving this law, from their coming into the wilderness of Sin; this being the first time, in which the Sabbath is expressly said to be observed, in scripture.