Lord’s Day | AdventAI

Pacific Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Oakland, California · Jun 29, 1876

Lord’s Day.

JOHN, speaking by the Spirit of inspiration, declares that he was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day. This was written about sixty-six years after the resurrection of our Saviour, and at a time when the Christian dispensation was fully introduced, and bears upon its bosom an important fact—that there is a Lord’s day in this dispensation. There are several positions taken in reference to this day; the chief are as follows: 1st. The day of the Lord which is introduced at the second coming of Christ, and extends during the thousand years, mentioned in Rev. 20. 2nd. It applies to the first day of the week. 3rd. It applies to the seventh day of the week.

We wish to examine these three positions in order to find out its right application.

1. That the “Lord’s day” is rightly applied to the thousand years we could never believe; for it is stated that John was in the Spirit (i. e., inspired) on the Lord’s day. Now if this vision had been concerning the Lord’s day, it might then, with some consistency, be applied to the thousand years; but instead of its being concerning the Lord’s day, it was concerning the seven churches in Asia. It was given on the Lord’s day, not concerning it. As the thousand years are yet future, and as it would be as impossible for a man to live in the future as it would be to live in the past, so it would be as absurd to claim that John was inspired in the days of Abraham as to claim he was inspired during the thousand years; for he neither lived in the days of Abraham nor in the thousand years. I admit that he could have had a revelation concerning the days of Abraham, and also concerning the thousand years; but I deny that he could be inspired during the thousand years any more than he could be inspired during Abraham’s day. This is utterly impossible, for he did not live at any of these times; consequently we see no reason why the above day should be applied to the thousand years. Now this revelation was given at a definite place, to a definite individual, and at a definite time: 1st. The place—the island of Patmos. 2nd. The person—John. 3rd. The time—on the Lord’s day. Therefore the time must be as definite as the person and place.

2. The next position taken is that Lord’s day refers to the first day of the week. But those who put forth this claim do so without any Scriptural authority whatever. They claim that the word Lord refers to Christ, and as it is in the possessive case, Christ then owns or claims the day as his. We might admit this, but then the question is, Where did Christ claim the first day of the week as his? Where is the book, chapter, or verse that records such a claim? Not in the Bible, certainly. On the contrary, Christ never as much as once uttered the expression “first day of the week,” as far as we have any record, much less did he claim it as his.

3. If the Lord’s day does not mean the thousand years, neither the first day of the week, what day does it mean? We answer, the seventh day, which is the Sabbath. We reason as follows: Now if Christ the Lord claims a day as his, then the Lord’s day must be the day he claims. But does the Lord claim a day as his? He does. Please hear our Saviour’s claim on a day as put forth by himself: “Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath.” Mark 2:28. “The Son of man is Lord even of the Sabbath day.” Matt. 12:8. Here we have two passages from our Saviour in which he claims to be Lord of a day. Consequently the Lord’s day must be the day of which he is Lord, which he himself says is “the Sabbath day.” Arranging the above reasoning in the form of a syllogism, we have the following: Christ is Lord of a day. Rev. 1:10. The day of which he is Lord is the Sabbath day. Matt. 12:8; Mark 2:28. Therefore the “Lord’s day” is the Sabbath day.

Though the above reasoning ought to be conclusive to all, yet there is another line of argument which drives us to the same conclusion. The Greek word kuriake, translated Lord in Rev. 1:10, is contracted from the two Greek words kurios oikon, which mean the Lord’s house. Dr. Adam Clark, in his comments on Matt. 16:18, at the conclusion of the chapter, expresses the same idea. Also Webster, in his Unabridged dictionary, under the word church, expresses the same. Now the above derivation of this word being correct, the idea expressed in the text is that John was in the Spirit on the day of the Lord’s house, that is, on the day which was accustomed to be spent in the Lord’s house. Now the day that was spent in the Lord’s house was the Sabbath; for it was to be a “holy convocation.” It was the custom of Christ, and also of Paul, to go to the house of the Lord on the Sabbath day, Luke 4:16; Acts 17:3. It was the Lord’s day that the Jews, as all admit, and also many of the Gentiles, spent in the house of the Lord. See Acts 13:42–44; 18:4. Consequently we conclude that the day of the Lord’s house, on which John was inspired, was the Sabbath day. Therefore, there must be a Sabbath in this dispensation, and that Sabbath must be the seventh day of the week.—Sel.