Objections to the Sabbath Answered by Dudley Marvin Canright

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jan 28, 1873

Objections to the Sabbath Answered.

By Dudley Marvin Canright

SECOND OBJECTION.

Nine of the ten commandments are brought over into the New Testament; but the Sabbath, or fourth commandment, is not.

Answer. This means that nine of the ten commandments are either repeated, re-enacted, or referred to in the New Testament, while the fourth is not. We will examine each point. The ten commandments as given by God may be found in Ex 20:1-17. I often meet with persons so ignorant of the Bible as not to know whether these are in the New Testament or not. With them an assertion that they are all there but the Sabbath, is received as the truth; and many religious teachers seem willing to take advantage of this, and to carry the impression that all the commandments except the Sabbath are repeated word for word in the New Testament.

But such is not the case. Neither the first, second, third, nor fourth commandments, are anywhere repeated in the New Testament. A large reward is frequently offered to any one to find either of these there; but they are not to be found. They are not there. This is an important fact, as it shows that the New Testament does not propose to give a new code of laws, but simply refers to that already existing.

The other six commandments are quoted in the following passages in the New Testament: Matt. 5:21, 27; 15:4; 19:18, 19; Mark 7:10; 10:19; Luke 18:20; Rom. 7:7; 13:9; Eph. 6:2, 3; James 2:11. If, then, the Sabbath is not now obligatory because that commandment is not directly quoted in the New Testament, then also the first three are not now binding, and it is no sin to have other gods, worship images, or profane God's name! What a monstrous conclusion this theory drives its advocates to! So it always will be found that every argument framed against the Sabbath comes with equal force against other of the commandments.

But our opponents, yielding the point that there are several other of the ten commandments as well as the Sabbath, not quoted at all in the New Testament, next claim that there were nine of the ten commandments re-enacted in the New Testament, not indeed in the very words of the old law, but in substance the same. It is painfully amusing to see them try to find these commandments as thus re-enacted. Here is the mode generally adopted. First commandment, 1 John 5:21: “Keep yourselves from idols.” How plain! But stop! When was this written? Not till A. D. 90, or about sixty years after the resurrection. Here, then, were sixty years before the first commandment was re-enacted—sixty years in which there was no law against idolatry! If to evade this terrible conclusion, it is admitted that this passage is not the place and time where this commandment was re-enacted, but only a quotation of it as already existing, then the whole point is given up. For thereby they admit that they have no record of the time when, or place where, this was re-enacted. It only shows that there was a law against idolatry, and this is simply a reference to it as previously existing. Here they are compelled to admit the whole truth, and come squarely upon our ground. That commandment with the time and place of its enactment is nowhere to be found in the New Testament; but is found in the decalogue, Ex 20:3.

But it puzzles them very much to find the second commandment re-enacted in the New Testament. Matt. 22:37, is generally quoted as the nearest to the point—“Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart.” If a man loves God with all his heart, he will not worship any image. But try that a little further. Would he have other gods? No. Then this includes the first commandment. Would he profane God's name? Certainly not. Would he violate God's holy rest-day? No. This then includes the fourth commandment as well as the first three, and so proves too much for our opponents.

But this language was spoken by Christ some time before his crucifixion, at which time they claim the old law was abolished. So they have a part of the law re-enacted before it is abolished! But the simple fact is, this is only a quotation by Christ from the Old Testament. The lawyer asked him which was the great commandment in “the law”—the law already existing, not a new law which Christ should give. In answer to this, Jesus quotes verbatim from Deut. 6:5, the great commandment, to love God with all the heart, and from Lev. 19:18, the second, to love your neighbor as yourself. If, therefore, the giving of these two great commandments was to supersede the decalogue, then it must have passed away in the days of Moses, B. C. 1500!

Look at the places where the other commandments are claimed to be re-given. In Matt. 19:16-19, Jesus, in answer to the young man, quotes the fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth commandments just as found in the decalogue.

This was no re-enactment of them; but simply a quotation from the law as already existing. This, too, was before they claimed the law abolished so that Christ re-enacted these before he abolished them, if this be a re-giving of them! So Paul, in Rom. 13:9, quotes five of the ten commandments. This also is seized on as a re-enactment of those commandments. But were they re-enacted both by Jesus and by Paul, and then again by James? Chap. 2:8-12. Such a position is so manifestly absurd that it is strange how a candid man can for a moment maintain it. How much more easy and natural is the simple fact that both Christ and the apostles were only quoting from the law before given by the Father, than whom there could be no higher authority. On this point, then, we conclude that there is no evidence that any of the commandments were ever re-enacted in the New Testament.

If it is claimed that nine are referred to while the fourth is not, this is false. The Sabbath is mentioned in the New Testament oftener than any other of the ten commandments, being not less than fifty-nine times in all. It is worthy of notice that in all these numerous references not one word is spoken as derogatory to the honor and sacredness it had always possessed. Notice

some facts:

Jesus says it was made for man: Mark 2:27, as a mercy to him, Matt. 12:7. He himself was its Lord, Mark 2:28, and carefully observed it all his life, being always found in the house of the Lord on that day. Luke 4:16. He taught that it should be devoted to deeds of mercy and benevolence, Matt. 12:1-12, and instructed his disciples not to break it after his resurrection. Matt. 24:20. The holy women carefully kept it after his crucifixion. Luke 23:54-56. Thirty years after the resurrection, inspiration calls it “the Sabbath day,” the same as it always had before. Acts 13:14. Paul often preached on that day and called it “the Sabbath day.” Acts 13:27. The Gentiles kept it, and called it “the Sabbath day,” and wished Paul to preach to them on that day, which he did. Acts 13:42-44. James, A. D. 51, in that first great Christian council at Jerusalem, calls it the “Sabbath day.” Acts 15:21. Paul and Timothy held a prayer-meeting on that day. Acts 16:13. John, A. D. 96 calls it the Lord's day. Rev. 1:10. Compare Ex. 20:8-11; Isa. 58:13; Mark 2:28.

And, finally, nowhere in the New Testament is any license given for men to work on that day; it is not said that the blessing has been removed from it; it is not said that it is no longer to be kept; there is not a single instance where a Christian ever worked upon it; there was no dispute between the Jews and Christians about the Sabbath, showing that both kept the same day. In short, the Sabbath stands in the New Testament just where it stood in the Old.

Was circumcision abolished? How plainly it is said so. 1 Cor. 7:19; Acts 15:5, 24. Were sacrifices no longer to be offered? How expressly this is declared. Heb. 10:1-9. Was the observance of meats, drinks, new moons, feasts, and yearly sabbaths no longer to be regarded? How unequivocally this is stated. Col. 2:14-18. But not so of God's holy Sabbath day. D. M. CANRIGHT.

Sigonier, Iowa.