Last week we considered Mr. Parker’s first chapter on the “Transferred Sabbath,” in which it was clearly shown that all the week there was in the beginning, all the seventh day there was in the beginning, were those appointed of God,—all the days of that week having direct reference to the Sabbath. Mr. Parker’s second chapter deals with the “Evidence from the New Testament of the transfer of the Sabbath,” which he believes (and we will not question it) “is sustained by a correct interpretation of the sacred Scriptures.” Mr. Parker continues:— “In Matt. 28:1 two Sabbaths are mentioned, one occurring on Saturday, and one on Sunday. The words of the apostle are, ‘In the end of the [Jewish] Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week,’ or as it reads literally, Towards one of the Sabbaths (eis mian Sabbaton), that is, the Christian Sabbath. The apostle here speaks of two Sabbaths, and says that the [Jewish] Sabbath had come to an end, and as the Christian Sabbath began to dawn, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to see the sepulcher.” The whole chapter is a labored argument by the writer to sustain his rendering. In this he violates the grammatical laws of the original Greek; he sets aside the modern Greek version; he utterly ignores all the reputable translations of modern times—translations by observers of Sunday. To be more explicit, (1) Mr. Parker’s rendering does violence to the original language itself. The Greek expression, eis mian Sabbaton, does not mean one of the Sabbaths. Eis means “to,” “toward,” “into,” or “unto;” mian is a numeral adjective meaning “one,” used by a Hebraism for the ordinal “first.” Sabbaton is a noun meaning “Sabbath” or “week,” as all the lexicons agree. Now one of the laws of the Greek grammar is that an adjective must agree with its noun in gender, number, and case. But mian is in the feminine gender, singular number, and accusative case, agreeing with a similar noun; while Sabbaton is in the neuter gender, plural number, and genitive case. There is no agreement between them. But mian (first) does agree with hemera (day), a noun in the feminine gender. This would make eis mian hemeran Sabbaton, “toward the first day of the week.” 2. Mr. Parker is against the Modern Greek, as he himself admits. That rendering is tes protes hemeras7tes hebdomados; literally, “the first day of the week.” 3. Mr. Parker ignores all the best translations of to-day—translations in which the translator would be pre-eminently glad to be able, if he could be faithful, to give the first day of the week the divine term of Sabbath. But he can not. Take the following renderings of Matt. 28:1, which might be greatly multiplied:— Our Common Version: “In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulcher.” Literary Greek of Hind’s Interlinear Translation: “Now late on Sabbath as it was getting dusk toward the first day of the week.” Rotherham: “And late in the week, when it was on the point of dawning into the first of the week.” Rotherham’s New Translation: “And late in the week, when it was on the point of dawning into the first of the week.” American Bible Union Version: “And late in the Sabbath, as it was dawning into the first day of the week.” Revised Version: “Now late on the Sabbath day, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week.” Murdock’s Translation of the Syriac: “And in the close of the Sabbath, as the first day of the week began to dawn.” Certainly if Mr. Parker’s rendering were justifiable, these eminent authorities would have adopted it. Now Mr. Parker’s contention, in the chapter under review, is that the first day of the week, or Sunday, is the holy Sabbath transferred. In a circular advertising the book is quoted the approving opinions of certain learned men, and men of prominence. Among these is the following:— “Whatever may be said as to the technical exegetical contention of the book, no one can candidly read it without being deeply impressed with the fact that there is a divine sanction for our Christian rest-day, and a sacred obligation for its permanent religious observance.”—Henry Hopkins, D. D., pastor First Congregational Church, Kansas City, Mo. “He gathers from prophecy the foreshadowing of its [the Sabbath’s] transfer to the day of the resurrection, and from the early records of the church the evidence that they regarded that transfer as made in fact.”—The Sunday-school Times, Philadelphia, Pa. “This brief discussion ... makes very plain to the discerning and intelligent reader that the transfer of the Sabbath, or the choosing of the first day of the week as the Sabbath day, was an actual fact. It is a clear answer to seventh-day people, and they ought to read it.”—The Baptist Commonwealth, Philadelphia. “I shall take great pleasure in commending it to pastors, Sunday-school students and workers, as a work fitted to do good in strengthening the hold and promoting the observance of the Lord’s day as the Christian Sabbath.”—George W. Clark, D. D., Author of Harmony of the Gospels in English, People’s Commentary on the New Testament. Now all the writers quoted as approving the book believe in a definite day, the first day of the week, and seem to talk as tho they thought Mr. Parker had proved it; yet in the same circular Bishop John H. Vincent, D.D., LL.D., of the Methodist Episcopal Church, sweeps away the whole definite-day idea in the following:— “I have long been familiar with the theory advanced and defended in your little volume on ‘The Sabbath Transferred.’ I am in sympathy with anything that appropriately belittles the absurd idea that it makes the slightest difference as to which twenty-four hours a man worships God.” Then the seventh day is as good as the first. And finally, not to weary our readers, we quote from the Christian Statesman of July, a paper which has excelled in its labors for the first-day Sabbath. In speaking of Mr. Parker’s rendering, the Statesman says:— “But the so-called literal rendering is not grammatically correct. The Greek word sabbaton is neuter. The adjective mia is feminine. The corresponding neuter is hen. ‘One of the Sabbaths’ in Greek would not be mia sabbaton, but hen sabbaton. The feminine cardinal mia used for the ordinal, relates to and agrees with the feminine Greek word for ‘day’ understood. The only grammatical rendering of the Greek words, therefore, is, ‘the first day of the week.’ If not classical, this is at least a Hebrew idiom in harmony with the rules of Greek grammar. The other so-called literal rendering is neither classical nor grammatical.” “All such authorities as Schleusner in his magnificent Lexicons of Septuagint and New Testament Greek, give sound and reliable discussions of this use of the cardinal adjective in place of the ordinal.” “This attempt to find in a so-called literal translation of a well-understood New Testament Greek expression a proof of the transfer of the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the week does not help the other arguments of this volume. Our judgment is that if this part of the argument were wholly eliminated from the book, it would do far better service in the cause of the Christian Sabbath.” (Italics in English ours.) And all this applies to all the other passages in the New Testament when the Greek is similar. One thing more: What right has Mr. Parker to say that one Sabbath occurred on Saturday, or to call that seventh-day Sabbath the Jewish Sabbath. In the first place, Saturday is purely a heathen day as to name, and a civil day as to time, extending from midnight to midnight, while the Lord’s Sabbath extends from sunset to sunset. And in the second place, the Bible Sabbath is never called “Jewish;” nor is any other term applied to it that would indicate that it was in any way a local or racial or national institution. The Sabbath law, spoken by the Creator, declares: “The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God.” What right has man to term it “Jewish”? As well call the Bible Jewish, or Christ Jesus Jewish. The seventh day is the Sabbath of Christ Jesus the Creator, the only Bible Lord’s day; and those who love the Word, believe in the integrity of God’s law, and the example of Christ Jesus, will not be moved by the argument under review.