Chapter 21
What Say the Scriptures? Nehemiah and the Sabbath
What Say the Scriptures? Nehemiah and the Sabbath
Of course, a most serviceable example of dependence upon Moses for specifically the origin and explanation of the sabbath is provided by the Old Testament’s book of Nehemiah.
“But yet, I say, if imputation, and strong circumstances, which lead directly to the door of truth, will give you satisfaction, you may have’t”1.
And for several reasons, Nehemiah provides a unique opportunity to consider, and reflect upon our subject matter.
A. Only Nehemiah
Of the above mentioned eleven Old Testament writings, using the word, “sabbath” outside of the books of Moses, the most frequent occurrences of this Hebrew noun are found in Ezekiel (Ezekiel 20:12, 13, 16, 20, 21, 24; 22:8, 26; 23:38; 44:24; 45:17; 46:1, 3, 4, 12) and Nehemiah (Nehemiah 9:14; 10:32, 34; 13:15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22). While the total number of Ezekiel’s uses of this word in both its singular and plural forms exceeds that in Nehemiah, only Nehemiah uses this noun in its simple singular form as many times, as does Exodus.
B. A Most Singular Opportunity
Because, however, of the relative brevity of Nehemiah in comparison to Ezekiel, Leviticus or Exodus, which also make above average use of the word, “sabbath”, the number of its uses in this particular book, in relation to this book’s overall length assures the sabbath of having a greater focus, more exposure and at least some prominence as well as “good persuasion”2. This in addition to the fact, that Nehemiah is among the chronologically latest written books of the Old Testament suggests its being a most singular opportunity to consider the meaning of the Fourth Directive’s sabbath, perhaps a thousand years after its institution.
C. This Would Surely Be…
Needless to say, this could also divulge a clue to that period’s understanding of God’s seventh day “resting”.
“I long to know the truth hereof at large”3.
By the time of Nehemiah, the Fourth Directive of Exodus 20:8-11 is several hundred years older and perhaps that much better understood: If ever there should be an auspicious occasion for learning more about God’s supposedly having “rested”, as stated in the traditional Fourth Directive, this would surely be such an occasion.
D. Instead
An examination of Nehemiah’s recollection of the original explanation for the Fourth Directive’s sabbath, however, discloses the following relevant wording in Nehemiah 9:6 (deMSby):
“Only you, Yahweh are he who made the heavens, the heavens of the heavens with all their host; the earth with all that are on it and the seas with all that are in them, and you are sustaining all of them; and the host of heaven bow down to you”.
Instead of reciting the truth of Yahweh’s having “made the heavens…the earth…and the seas with all that are in them” to speak of his having “rested” thereafter, Nehemiah sees in these Fourth Directive words occasion for declaring Yahweh’s being the one, who in fact is “sustaining”, and ever “sustaining all”, without any interruption or lapse of any kind.
E. Realistic Appraisal?
Clearly, Nehemiah’s recollection of Yahweh’s being “maker of heaven and earth” reminds its author of attendant recollections, that make no allowance for God’s ever having “rested”: In Nehemiah, such reminiscence is rather an opportunity to affirm his “sustaining”.
This of course is perfectly consistent with the same Nehemiah, who is quoted in Nehemiah 1:10, speaking in prayer to his God of “your great strength” and “mighty hand”: Recalling such a God’s having “rested” would plainly be most inappropriate, and would altogether abort the intent of the above passage.
Was this seventh day “rest”, after all, an interruption of his above mentioned “sustaining” of all? Or did he somehow maintain his Almighty agenda throughout his seventh day “resting”?
How could both God’s “sustaining” and his “resting” as well be the meaning and the message of his Fourth Directive function? Wouldn’t a realistic appraisal of one necessitate an equally consummate dismissal, refutation and censure of the other? And in truth, such must predict the decision, the conclusion and yield of our inquiry, when considered in the light of the de MontSabbathby Version of Exodus 20:11.
1Othello III.3.405-408
2A Midsummer Night’s Dream I.1.156
3The Comedy of Errors IV.4.145
Of course, a most serviceable example of dependence upon Moses for specifically the origin and explanation of the sabbath is provided by the Old Testament’s book of Nehemiah.
“But yet, I say, if imputation, and strong circumstances, which lead directly to the door of truth, will give you satisfaction, you may have’t”1.
And for several reasons, Nehemiah provides a unique opportunity to consider, and reflect upon our subject matter.
A. Only Nehemiah
Of the above mentioned eleven Old Testament writings, using the word, “sabbath” outside of the books of Moses, the most frequent occurrences of this Hebrew noun are found in Ezekiel (Ezekiel 20:12, 13, 16, 20, 21, 24; 22:8, 26; 23:38; 44:24; 45:17; 46:1, 3, 4, 12) and Nehemiah (Nehemiah 9:14; 10:32, 34; 13:15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22). While the total number of Ezekiel’s uses of this word in both its singular and plural forms exceeds that in Nehemiah, only Nehemiah uses this noun in its simple singular form as many times, as does Exodus.
B. A Most Singular Opportunity
Because, however, of the relative brevity of Nehemiah in comparison to Ezekiel, Leviticus or Exodus, which also make above average use of the word, “sabbath”, the number of its uses in this particular book, in relation to this book’s overall length assures the sabbath of having a greater focus, more exposure and at least some prominence as well as “good persuasion”2. This in addition to the fact, that Nehemiah is among the chronologically latest written books of the Old Testament suggests its being a most singular opportunity to consider the meaning of the Fourth Directive’s sabbath, perhaps a thousand years after its institution.
C. This Would Surely Be…
Needless to say, this could also divulge a clue to that period’s understanding of God’s seventh day “resting”.
“I long to know the truth hereof at large”3.
By the time of Nehemiah, the Fourth Directive of Exodus 20:8-11 is several hundred years older and perhaps that much better understood: If ever there should be an auspicious occasion for learning more about God’s supposedly having “rested”, as stated in the traditional Fourth Directive, this would surely be such an occasion.
D. Instead
An examination of Nehemiah’s recollection of the original explanation for the Fourth Directive’s sabbath, however, discloses the following relevant wording in Nehemiah 9:6 (deMSby):
“Only you, Yahweh are he who made the heavens, the heavens of the heavens with all their host; the earth with all that are on it and the seas with all that are in them, and you are sustaining all of them; and the host of heaven bow down to you”.
Instead of reciting the truth of Yahweh’s having “made the heavens…the earth…and the seas with all that are in them” to speak of his having “rested” thereafter, Nehemiah sees in these Fourth Directive words occasion for declaring Yahweh’s being the one, who in fact is “sustaining”, and ever “sustaining all”, without any interruption or lapse of any kind.
E. Realistic Appraisal?
Clearly, Nehemiah’s recollection of Yahweh’s being “maker of heaven and earth” reminds its author of attendant recollections, that make no allowance for God’s ever having “rested”: In Nehemiah, such reminiscence is rather an opportunity to affirm his “sustaining”.
This of course is perfectly consistent with the same Nehemiah, who is quoted in Nehemiah 1:10, speaking in prayer to his God of “your great strength” and “mighty hand”: Recalling such a God’s having “rested” would plainly be most inappropriate, and would altogether abort the intent of the above passage.
Was this seventh day “rest”, after all, an interruption of his above mentioned “sustaining” of all? Or did he somehow maintain his Almighty agenda throughout his seventh day “resting”?
How could both God’s “sustaining” and his “resting” as well be the meaning and the message of his Fourth Directive function? Wouldn’t a realistic appraisal of one necessitate an equally consummate dismissal, refutation and censure of the other? And in truth, such must predict the decision, the conclusion and yield of our inquiry, when considered in the light of the de MontSabbathby Version of Exodus 20:11.
1Othello III.3.405-408
2A Midsummer Night’s Dream I.1.156
3The Comedy of Errors IV.4.145