Their Testimony Does Not Agree.
By Editor
If the Sunday could be sustained by the Bible, its advocates would be able to agree upon a line of argument in its favor, as do the advocates of the Sabbath of the Lord. These, having the express precept of Jehovah in favor of the seventh day, and the concurrent testimony of the whole Bible in harmony with the words spoken by the Lord himself, have no difficulty in being of one accord, of one mind, and all speaking the same thing, being perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. Phil. 2:2; 1 Cor. 1:10. But how different with Sunday-keepers. Having no Scripture to lean upon, depending on tradition and "the Fathers," who, as Dr. Clark said, "blow hot and cold," they are constantly contradicting each other, and a good defense of the Sabbath might be maintained by reproducing the "arguments" of the various phases of the advocacy of "the venerable day of the sun." We have before us a pamphlet of over fifty pages, aimed at the Seventh-day Adventists, in which are given the following reasons for our success. We commend these words to all who think they can keep Sunday in obedience to the fourth commandment. ED. SIGNS. Another cause of success with these people is the false notions that prevail in most communities about the perpetuity of the fourth commandment of the decalogue. Nearly all of the Protestant sects in this country appeal to this commandment as authority for keeping the first day of the week. Many of these sects feel that it is next to sacrilege to call the first day of the week by any name except that of Sabbath. This appealing to the fourth commandment and this calling of the first day of the week the Sabbath is a matter of astonishment. Any one who will take the trouble to make an examination will find: (1) That in the New Testament the name Sabbath is never applied to the first day of the week; (2) That the fourth commandment is never appealed to as authority for keeping this day till after the days of Constantine, that is, not before the middle of the fourth century; and (3) That the prevailing custom of calling this day the Sabbath did not take its rise till near the end of the sixteenth century. In proof of these statements I refer, to the New Testament in proof of the first, to "Smith's Bible Dictionary" in proof of the second, and to church histories generally, and to Alvan Lamson's "Church of the First Three Centuries," page 379, in particular, in proof of the third. In view of these incontestable facts how Protestant ministers of intelligence can persist in quoting, "Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy," when they mean the Lord's day, or the first day in the week, is what astonishes me. If the Saviour, and the apostles, and the primitive church, for more than three hundred years never referred to the fourth commandment as authority for observing the first day of the week, what right have we to do so? Are we wiser than they? This false position furnishes ground ready for the seed of the seventh-day advocates. They can approach the people in this wise: "You see we all believe that the entire decalogue is in force, and of course the fourth commandment is binding upon us. But we must bear in mind that 'Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy,' is not all of the commandment, for the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God, is equally a part of it. How can we claim that one part of it is binding, and not all of it?" Some one may answer that the day is changed. But these seventh-day people will quickly reply, "Where is the chapter and verse in the teaching of Christ or his apostles that authorizes us to read 'the first day is the Sabbath of the Lord'?" Then if the practice of the early church is referred to, the result is the same. Smith in his Bible Dictionary sums up the results of his investigations as to the custom of the early church for three hundred years, in these weighty words: "Finally, whatever analogy may be supposed to exist between the Lord's day and the Sabbath, in no passage that has come down to us is the fourth commandment appealed to as the ground of the obligation to observe the Lord's day." The advocates for the observance of the Sabbath take advantage of this false position on the binding force of the fourth commandment and easily carry some good, conscientious people with them. They are not to blame for what they do. The blame rests with those who, contrary to the teaching of Christ and his apostles, and the primitive church for more than three hundred years, quote the fourth commandment as authority for observing the Lord's day, and who also, contrary to the custom of the church for sixteen hundred years, call the first day of the week the Sabbath.