Your ShelfYour Projects

WERE THEY NEGLIGENT?

14%

Pacific Press Publishing Company · Mountain View, California · Apr 18, 1906

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 32, No. 16

Read the full edition

WERE THEY NEGLIGENT?

By E. S. Brooks

AFTER the Redeemer had been raised from death by the Father, He did not inform His apostles that the sanctity of the Sabbath was transferred from the seventh to the first day of the week. Nor did He inform them that from that time the days of the week would begin and end at midnight. Was He negligent? The apostles called the Sabbath by its proper name, and the “first day of the week” by its proper name.
In Acts 13:14 we read that Paul preached on the Sabbath day. In verse 42 it is said that the Gentiles besought Paul to preach to them on “the next Sabbath,” not on the next day. But we are not informed that the next Sabbath was the next day. In verse 44 we are told that on “the next Sabbath” a great number came to hear.
The writer failed to say anything about “the first day of the week,” nor did he inform us that there was a disagreement between Christians and Jews regarding the Lord’s day. We are nowhere told that the Jews (very sensitive regarding the Sabbath) complained that Christians had a rival Sabbath.
In Acts 20:7 we read of a meeting on “thefirst day of the week,” without any hint that it was the Lord’s day. Such a meeting would naturally take place after sunset, the close of the Sabbath day. Since Paul would start on a journey Sunday morning, how natural that a farewell meeting should take place the previous evening after the close of the Sabbath. Here was a good opportunity to tell us that “the first day of the week” is the Lord’s day, but he failed to write the few words. Was Paul negligent? or was the Spirit negligent?
In 1 Cor. 16:2 we learn of the brethren being advised to look over their business matters so as to determine how much they could donate to the famine-stricken brethren in Palestine. Paul has failed to inform us that this business affair should occur on the Lord’s day; but he called the day by another name.
In Rev. 1:10 but six additional words would have been needed for John, the seer, to have written, I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, the first day of the week. Why did he fail to insert the last six words? What a consolation such a parenthetical phrase would have been to Protestant Romanizers! Was John negligent? E. S. BROOKS.