p. 229 | Nothing but Shucks by G. D. Ballou

International Tract and Missionary Society · Oakland, California · Apr 15, 1886

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 12, No. 15.

Nothing but Shucks.

By G. D. Ballou

THE idea seems to be getting quite prevalent of late that the keeping of a definite day as the Sabbath is only the shell of Sabbath-keeping, while "observing the Sabbath on Sunday," as it is said, is held to be the true kernel of obedience. But I have observed that those people who observe Sunday are about as particular to enforce the keeping of the "Sabbath," as they call it, on the particular first day of the week, as Sabbatarians are to keep the particular seventh day.

Now the query arises in my mind, if keeping the particular seventh day is only the shell, what can the keeping of the particular first day be? If keeping the day of God's own appointment is only the shuck, can the keeping of a day never once suggested by divine authority or example be anything more than a shuck? Then where is the true kernel of Sabbath observance? It is certainly lost in this shuffling effort to excuse and perpetuate a change in the practices of the people, for which there is no divine authority. So to the majority of professed Christian Sunday-keepers who adopt the thought first suggested, Sabbath-keeping amounts to nothing but shucks.

The great Creator saw fit to connect the true spirit of Sabbath-keeping with the last day of the week, so that we might follow his example in working and resting; then, if keeping the Sabbath on the day God has named is really the shell, is it not best to keep the kernel of Sabbath observance in the shell which God has made for it? If God had only made it manifest that he had made a mistake in commanding men to keep the seventh day as the Sabbath, and had named a better time for its observance, then there would be no controversy over this question. But if men can take this matter in their own hands and separate this "kernel of Sabbath-keeping" from the seventh day and place it inside of the Sunday shell, why may they not put it inside of the Monday or Tuesday shell and keep it there just as well?

The trouble lies at the beginning of their action. They cannot separate the "kernel of Sabbath observance" from the "shell" in which God has placed it without breaking that "shell;" and here is where the sin begins, in violating the plain letter of the fourth commandment, and then plying their ingenuity to find excuses for their sinful course. If it is no sin to break the letter of the fourth commandment, then is it a sin to break the letter of the commandment that says, "Thou shalt not steal"? Can we love our neighbor and respect his property rights and at the same time steal his goods?

If we may, with such perfect impunity, crack the shell of Sabbath observance and take the kernel out of it, why may we not, with the same impunity, crack the shell of the third commandment, take out the kernel of reverence which it contains, and preserve it, while we openly blaspheme the name of God?

It strikes me that the proper place to look for a well-preserved kernel is inside the shell; for when the kernel is taken from the shell, it soon spoils; and so this effort to transfer the spirit of the Sabbath from the day of God's appointment to another day has resulted in almost obliterating the Sabbath idea from the minds of Sunday observers. There is very little sacredness in Sunday-keeping in any of our modern churches. Visiting and pleasure-seeking and feasting are the order of the day after the sermon.

The only true, acceptable Sabbath observance will be found in keeping the fourth commandment according to the spirit and the letter. If the reader thinks he can keep the spirit of the Sabbath commandment while he breaks the letter, let him examine the other commandments, and he will soon be convinced that it is impossible to keep the spirit of any commandment while deliberately breaking the letter.

Lompoc, Cal., March 21. G. D. BALLOU.