Meetings in Santa Rosa and Surrounding California Churches by John Norton Loughborough

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jun 20, 1871

Meetings in Santa Rosa and Surrounding California Churches

By John Norton Loughborough

California.

Since our excellent State Meeting, I have held meetings at Santa Rosa, Stony Point, and Sebastapol, and have spent a few days with the friends in Healdsburg, trying to prepare to enter again into a new field. The interest awakened in Santa Rosa by the State Meeting, I followed up with thirteen discourses. One of these was in reply to a discourse by a Baptist elder on the Sabbath question. His arguments generally were similar to those usually presented, and need not be given here.

His main reliance, however, seemed to be “a new discovery” he had made “in the Greek.” He “did not know just what it would prove to be.” His “discovery” was first-day. In reply, we claimed that he was mistaken, and that the same Greek word in the New Testament which stands for Sabbath is used for Sabbath, and that according to the testimony of Robinson, Greenfield, Liddell, and Scott, and other lexicons, Sabbaton, when following a numeral as first, second, third, &c., meant week; while it stood without these numerals when designed to express the Sabbath. It was not first-day then that stood for Sabbaton, but the term week; and, if the Elder’s position was true, he could make by the Greek any day a Sabbath as well as he could the first-day, because to express the second day of the week they would use the term Sabbaton for week, the same as when speaking of the first day of the week. If he traced his discovery back to its origin, he would learn that in ancient times the same mode of expression existed among the Greeks, even before Christ’s first advent, which would carry his first-day Sabbath back farther than he designed.

We claimed that a week originated from the idea of six days of labor and a day of rest. So, while the seventh day was the Sabbath, in counting their time, it would be “one of the Sabbath,” first-day toward the Sabbath; “Two of the Sabbath,” or second day toward the Sabbath; but when it came to the seventh day it was the Sabbath. By this mode of numbering their days, they would call the Sabbath to mind even in calling the name of any day of the week. We made a reference to a statement in Mr. Horne’s Introduction to the study of the Scriptures, which I will insert here. He copies the calendar from Michaelis’ Introduction to the New Testament:

“Seven nights and days constitute a WEEK; six of these were appropriated to labor and the ordinary purposes of life, and the seventh day or Sabbath was appointed by God to be observed as a day of rest, because that on it he had rested from all his work which he had created and made. Gen. 2:3. This division of time was universally observed by the descendants of Noah; and some eminent critics have conjectured that it was lost during the bondage of the Israelites in Egypt, but was revived and enacted by Moses agreeably to the divine command. This conjecture derives some weight from the word Sabbat or Sabbata, denoting a week among the Syrians, Arabians, Christian Persians, and Ethiopians, as in the following ancient Syriac calendar, expressed in Hebrew characters [This Mr. Horne gives in Hebrew characters, with translation as follows; but we omit the Hebrew for want of letters]:”

“One of the Sabbath, or week, Sunday; Two of the Sabbath, Monday; Three of the Sabbath, Tuesday; Four of the Sabbath, Wednesday; Five of the Sabbath, Thursday; Eve of the Sabbath, Friday; The Sabbath, Saturday.”

“The high antiquity of this calendar is evinced by the use of the cardinal numbers, one, two, three, etc., instead of the ordinals, first, second, third, etc., following the Hebrew idiom: as in the account of the creation, where we read in the original, ‘one day, two day, three day,’ etc., where the Septuagint retains it in the first, calling it the hemera mia. It is remarkable that all the evangelists follow the Syriac calendar, both in the Sabbata used for ‘a week,’ and also in retaining the cardinal number mia Sabbaton, ‘one of the week’ to express the day of the resurrection. (Matt. 28:1; Mark 16:2; Luke 24:1; John 20:1.) Afterwards Mark adopts the usual phrase, prote Sabbato, ‘the first of the week’ (Mark 16:9), where he uses the singular Sabbato for a week, and so does Luke, as nesteuo dis to Sabbato, ‘I fast twice in the week’ (Luke 18:12).”—Horne’s Int. Vol. ii, p. 73.

So, instead of “one of the Sabbath” being a new form of expression, used by the apostles, as the Elder hinted, to show that the first day was sacred, it is an expression borrowed from the Septuagint and Syriac mode of expression, as old at least as three hundred years B. C.

As the result, thus far apparent, of our meetings in Santa Rosa, six have taken their stand to serve the Lord. Four of these were baptized and united with the Santa Rosa church. The meeting seemed to be a source of courage and strength to the Santa Rosa church. We thank God for the evident progress that has been made by some in that church the last year, and we hope for greater results. If all take hold to exemplify their profession by strict conformity to God’s word, avoiding the fashions and follies of the world; and in trying to avoid slothfulness in business, are careful not to be “overcharged” with the cares of this life—if all thus move, with God’s blessing, the Santa Rosa church may stand as a beacon light in the cause of truth on this coast. As it is a central point in location, may its members so live that it may be a central point in truth, and a model church in piety. To become thus, we must make God’s cause of more consequence than everything else.

At Stony Point, we spent a Sabbath; found that those who had taken their stand upon the truth were firm, although some of them are subjected to severe trials in consequence of their determination to serve the Lord. God will help those who trust in him. Trials cause us to see our own weakness. Paul said, “When I am weak, then am I strong.”

At Sebastapol, the promised discourse on the Sabbath question was given, which consisted mainly of very positive statements, which, if they had been backed up by proof, would have told mightily on the Sunday question.

1. “It was the design of Christ to change the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the week.” No proof was read to show that it was so designed, and it reminded me some of the man who on another occasion told his congregation that he was going to tell them what was the secret will of God.

2. It was claimed that “if it was Christ’s design to change the Sabbath, he would shape matters in such a way as to lead to the change.” Here reference was made to John 20, about the resurrection on the first day of the week, and the day of Pentecost; and the statement was made that if we would read our Bibles, we would see that the day of Pentecost was the seventh Lord’s day after Christ’s resurrection. I tried to read it carefully before replying, and saw clearly, according to instructions given to the Jews for finding the day of Pentecost (Lev. 23:15), that the day before the day of Pentecost was the Sabbath, and that there must needs be seven Sabbaths from the time of “the first fruits” (Christ, 1 Cor. 15) to the day of Pentecost.

The Elder told us that if we would read the New Testament we would find instructions all the way through to keep the first day of the week as the Lord’s day; and that even “Paul told the Corinthians to ‘lay by’ on the first day of the week.” We were exhorted faithfully that while preparing for the Lord’s coming, we should not “be found with an ax on our shoulders or our hands in the wash tub on God’s holy Sabbath.” Some reference was made to the necessity of a civil law upon the subject, and I certainly concluded when the Elder closed that the Lord had no law for keeping the first day of the week, and perhaps this is deemed a necessity for human legislation; but let us be careful to know God’s living laws, and not make human enactments to conflict with them. Strange indeed that men should deem it such a sin to keep God’s fourth commandment as plainly expressed, if thereby we do not conform to custom’s law made by humans. This same Elder asked a brother who had lately renounced infidelity to obey God: “Bro. ——, do you keep Saturday?” “Yes, sir.” “Why, Bro. ——, that man has accomplished your eternal ruin.”

The discourse in Sebastapol, I replied to some ten days since, before a good audience. The Lord gave liberty, and I trust that this effort will not be entirely fruitless.

At Healdsburg, I was surprised to hear of the novel manner in which a “great revival” in progress there for some two months had terminated. The last evening of the meeting it was stated that Eld. —— had been with them some time, laboring, and had not received much for his services, and that he had a spicy lecture to give the next evening on “Young America,” or California. All were invited to attend the mirth-provoking entertainment, and pay their quarter to raise means to pay the Elder. Of course it is none of my business, only it seemed to me nothing like the old ways of closing up revivals, leaving a solemn impress of grace on the heart, instead of mirth and pleasure-seeking. And it seems as though men who have been turned from sin to holiness, ought to love the cause enough to pay a reasonable sum for the support of the laborer, instead of calling in everybody for a time of glee, to raise the money. But Paul said in the last days men would be lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God.

I do not speak of these things as against the cause of true religion, or to discourage many who would do right; but the tendency of things in the world around us, shows the necessity for all to take heed lest this world, with its cares, pleasures, and follies, draw us away from God. May God help us.

J. N. LOUGHBOROUGH.

Healdsburg, May 31, 1871.