The Sabbath-A Review by H. F. Courter

International Tract and Missionary Society · Oakland, California · Aug 27, 1885

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 11, No. 33.

The Sabbath—A Review.

By H. F. Courter

SOME time ago a sermon was delivered in Gilroy, Cal., by Mr. U. S. Urmy, of the M. E. Church. His subject was: "Reasons why we keep the first day of the week instead of the seventh." As the speaker expressed a desire to arrive at the truth, and apparently had a good deal of kindly feeling towards those who differ with him, I feel sure no one will take offense at an examination of the scriptures on this subject. My remarks will therefore be upon what was said, rather than upon the speaker, believing that people differ most frequently either from a want of proper investigation or from prejudice.

The speaker said: "Christians are under no obligations to keep the Jewish Sabbath."

I object, first, to the application of the term "Jewish Sabbath" to God's Sabbath, as being unscriptural. The Bible use of God's Sabbath is shown in two of the passages quoted by the speaker, as follows: "Moreover also I gave them my Sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they may know that I am the Lord that sanctify them. And hallow my Sabbaths; and they shall be a sign between me and you, that ye may know that I am the Lord your God." Eze. 20:12, 20. Isaiah (58:13, 14) says: "If thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day, . . . then shalt thou delight thyself in the Lord; and I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth." Jesus said, "The Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath." Mark 2:28. John says, "I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day." Rev. 1:10. Now if Isaiah was speaking of the seventh-day Sabbath in chapter 1, verse 13, as the speaker would have us believe, then God must have changed his mind wonderfully by the time he inspired Isaiah to pen the words of verses 13 and 14 of chapter 58, quoted above.

Our second objection is to Mr. Urmy's attempt to show that the decalogue was done away, or superseded by the new covenant, and in fact he himself objected to it, for at the same time he said, "We don't want to abolish the ten commandments." The speaker would have expressed himself more clearly if he had said: "I think these scriptures teach that the fourth commandment—can't we manage some way to get rid of the—that is I wish—don't you think that these teach that Christ substituted 'first day' for 'seventh day' in the fourth commandment?"

The speaker claimed that the two commandments of which Christ spoke in answer to the lawyer's inquiry, "Master, which is the great commandment in the law?" were outside of and greater than the ten commandments. See Matt. 22:34-40. But a careful examination will show that the two commandments given by Jesus in answer to the lawyer were a summing up of the commandments on the two tables of stone. The first four refer to our duty to God, and may be briefly summed up in the words of Christ: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind." The last six have reference to our duty to our fellow-man, and are properly summed up in these words, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." The first four commandments were doubtless written on one stone and the last six on the other; else, what were the use of the two tables of stone? Christ summed up these laws or commandments as the lawyers do our laws; for instance, we have a "school law," "civil law," a "criminal law," and an "international law." Is there any one that does not know that under each of these heads there are many laws? So Jesus, by summing up his Father's commandments, shows that all are important.

The speaker said, "Christ broke the Sabbath," and he cited John 5:18 in proof.

The Scriptures show plainly that this accusation of the Jews was not correct; but Christ disregarded their traditions concerning the Sabbath. Jesus kept his Father's commandments (John 15:10), and did no sin. 1 Pet. 2:22. Neither of these passages would be true if the speaker's and the Jews' assertion that "Christ broke the Sabbath" were correct; "for sin is the transgression of the law." 1 John 3:4. Paul says, "I had not known sin, but by the law." Rom. 7:7. Christ justified acts of mercy in saying, "It is lawful to do well on the Sabbath days." It could not have been lawful and at the same time contrary to law. Those who accused the Saviour of breaking the Sabbath also accused him of having a devil. John 7:20. They accused John the Baptist of having a devil, and they accused Christ of being a glutton and a wine-bibber. See Matt. 11:18, 19. Shall we take what the Jews said about Christ in preference to what Christ said about himself? Nay, "let God be true, but every man a liar." Rom. 3:4.

Mr. Urmy said: "Christ appeared to his disciples on at least seven occasions—all on the first day of the week."

Now the first time Christ met his disciples after his resurrection was on the day of his resurrection. See John 20:1, 14, 19; Mark 16:2, 9, 12, 14; Luke 24:1, 13, 34, 36.

The second time was after eight days from the first. John 20:26. A good many first-day observers have a peculiar faculty for counting this so as to make "after eight days" come on the next first day. Should the school-teachers of any State adopt such methods of counting, their certificates would be revoked forthwith.

Christ appeared the "third time" at the Sea of Tiberias; for John says: "After these things Jesus showed himself again to the disciples at the Sea of Tiberias" (John 21:1); and in verse 14 he says: "This is now the third time that Jesus showed himself to his disciples, after that he was risen from the dead." Notice that John testifies that this was the third time. Now as we have but one more meeting given, and that was when he ascended, forty days after the resurrection, where can Mr. Urmy get his "seven appearances on the first day of the week"?

It is evident that the speaker must have great power of contracting and expanding the Scriptures to suit his purposes; for he could only count the "after eight days" by contracting it to just seven, and he could only count the "forty days" to the day of ascension by expanding them to forty-three; and then, too, he would have to expand these "four times" a considerable degree to make "seven."

Paul's meeting the disciples to break bread was given as proof that the first day of the week is a holy day. Christ's words concerning this ordinance were as follows: "This do in remembrance of me" (Luke 22:19); and, "for as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come." 1 Cor. 11:26. It was to commemorate his death and not his resurrection that it was given; besides, it was administered on different days. Acts 2:42-46 says: "And they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread. . . . And they, continuing daily with one accord, . . . breaking bread from house to house."

We would now invite the reader's attention to the following assertions made by Mr. Urmy. He said: "It cannot be proved that the apostles kept the seventh day after the resurrection. In the Acts of the apostles we find nothing of its observance."

Let us call in the apostles themselves as witnesses in regard to what was considered the Sabbath after Christ's crucifixion and resurrection.

Matthew takes the witness stand some ten years after the resurrection and says: "In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week." Matt. 28:1.

Mark, who wrote about thirty-three years after the resurrection, testifies: "And when the Sabbath was past." Mark 16:1, 2.

Luke, twenty-nine years afterwards, testifies: "And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the Sabbath day according to the commandment." Luke 23:56. "Now upon the first day of the week." Luke 24:1.

From these witnesses, then, we learn that the apostles considered the day before the first day of the week, the Sabbath, and that they still thought it was according to the commandment. From these we shall know what day is meant by the term Sabbath in any of the apostles' writings. In Acts 13:14-16, 42-44, we learn that Paul and his company went into the synagogue on the Sabbath and sat down; and after listening to the law and prophets, Paul, upon invitation, preached to the Jews and Gentiles two Sabbaths in succession. Again, while Paul and his company were in Philippi, Luke testifies to their attending prayer-meeting on the Sabbath. Acts 16:13. And at Thessalonica, Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three Sabbath days reasoned with them out of the Scriptures. Acts 17:2. It seems to have been Paul's manner to preach on the Sabbath. But at Corinth, where Paul stayed one year and six months, we have the fullest account of how he regarded the Sabbath. The record says: "And because he [Paul] was of the same craft, he abode with them, and wrought, for by their occupation they were tent-makers. And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks." "And he continued there a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them." Acts 18:3, 4, 11. We see that he worked at tent-making week days, and preached every Sabbath. Here the inspired writer gives us an account of seventy-eight Sabbaths of worship, in succession.

Was the speaker correct when he asserted that "it cannot be proved that the apostles kept the seventh day Sabbath after Christ's resurrection"? or, that "in the Acts of the apostles we find nothing of its observance"? Reader, what do you say?

We now come to another of the speaker's reasons for keeping Sunday. He said: "We are keeping the old Sabbath or day that God rested on and blessed, by keeping the first day of the week; because the Sabbath was evidently set back a day when the manna commenced to fall." In proof of this assertion Mr. Urmy read Ex. 16:1-26, the first verse of which says: "The children of Israel came into the Wilderness of Sin . . . on the fifteenth day of the second month;" and the fourteenth verse says: "Upon the face of the wilderness there lay a small round thing, as small as the hoar frost on the ground;" and the twenty-sixth verse says: "Six days shall ye gather it; but on the seventh day, which is the Sabbath, in it there shall be none." "Here," said the speaker, "we find that the children of Israel came there on the fifteenth, the manna commenced falling the sixteenth and fell six days, and the next day, which was the twenty-second, was the Sabbath; now, they either broke the Sabbath on the fifteenth or else it was set a day backwards at that time."

The speaker preferred to think that the Sabbath was set back a day. I shall show that neither conclusion is warranted by the Scriptures; but for the sake of examining his argument, we will suppose that the manna did commence falling on the sixteenth, as the speaker claimed, and fell six days, and then the twenty-second would be the Sabbath. Now I will leave it to my readers if it would not set the day forward instead of backward. Let any one who keeps the first day travel on Monday, letting it answer to the fifteenth of the month, on which the Israelites came into the wilderness; then let him work six days, corresponding to the time the manna fell in the wilderness, and he will find it will put his next rest-day forward to the next Monday; or, if he commences Tuesday, and labors seven days consecutively, it will throw the next rest-day on Wednesday of the following week.

But the most serious trouble with the speaker's argument is that he took for granted what needs to be proved, viz., that the manna commenced falling on the sixteenth, the very next day after they arrived. This cannot be proved, nor could it be, even if there had been no intervening verses between the account of their arrival as given in the first verse, and the falling of the manna as shown in the fourteenth; for, not unfrequently, there are many years separating events narrated in the same or adjoining verses. Genesis 4:2 reads: "And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground." According to Mr. Urmy's plan of interpretation, Abel and Cain went into business pretty young. Exodus 1:8, 11 reads: "Now there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph. . . . And they built for Pharaoh treasure cities, Pithom and Raamses." Surely these cities must have arisen like magic if they were built the next day after Pharaoh took the throne. Numerous incidents of similar character might be cited to show the absurdity of such a foundation.

The speaker placed a good deal of stress upon this fact: "Those who keep the first day are in the majority." I was not aware before that the majority were necessarily in the right, but if that is so we ought all to become Buddhists; for there are about 340,000,000 of them, while there are only about 292,000,000 Christians,—all denominations put together. The Scriptures inform us that the large majority were in the wrong just before the flood and that only eight persons were spared the terrible destruction that then came upon the world. Sodom was destroyed because there were not even ten righteous in that great city. The majority rejected Christ, and he utters these solemn warnings: "Enter ye in at the strait gate; for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in there; because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." Matt. 7:13, 14. Jesus says through John (Rev. 22:12, 14): "Behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be." "Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city." H. F. COURTER.