[IN the following able treatise on the divine appointment of the Sabbath of the Bible, the writer makes use of an argument or two which we might not employ. Yet we can commend it to the readers of the SIGNS, especially to those who have been, and still are, misinformed in regard to a very plain, important, and ancient institution of Jehovah. This brief discussion of a small, but intensely interesting, portion of the Sabbath controversy, is designed especially for the perusal of those Christians, styled orthodox, who do not keep holy the seventh day of the week.]
CHAPTER I.
PROPOSITION.
The seventh day of the week is the only weekly Sabbath of God's appointment.
First Reason.
My first reason for believing this proposition is, That the original Sabbath law referred to in Gen. 2 : 2, 3, and embodied in Ex. 20 : 8–11, requires the sanctification of no other day.
Gen. 2 : 2, 3: "And on the seventh day [on day the seventh] God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day [on day the seventh] from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day [the day the seventh], and sanctified it; because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made."
Ex. 20 : 8–11: "Remember the Sabbath day [the day of the rest, or Sabbath], to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work; but the seventh day [day the seventh] is the Sabbath [rest] of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy man-servant, nor thy maid-servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates; for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day [on day the seventh]; wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day [the day of rest, or Sabbath], and hallowed it."
The only object, direct or indirect, of this commandment, is "the day." What are we commanded to remember? "The day." What are we required to keep holy? "The day." What did the Lord bless and hallow? "The day." In what are we forbidden to work? In "the day." Now let us inquire:—
1. What day? Not the day of Adam's fall; nor the day Noah went into the ark; nor the day of the overthrow of Sodom; nor the day of the exodus; nor the day of the provocation; nor the day of the removal of the ark; nor the day of Christ's birth; nor the day of his crucifixion; nor the day of his resurrection; nor the day of his ascension; nor the day of judgment. It may be, and certainly is, proper that we should remember all these; but we are not told to do so in this commandment. Neither is it some one day of the week, but no day in particular; for how could we remember "the day," that is no day in particular? how could we keep holy "the day" that has not been specified? and how could we say that God had blessed and hallowed "the day" that was no one day more than another? What day, then? God says, Remember the Sabbath day, or the day of the Sabbath; Keep holy the day of the Sabbath; The Lord blessed and hallowed the day of the Sabbath. He also says, The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do any work. This day, therefore, is "the seventh day," or "the day of the Sabbath."
2. What Sabbath? Not "a Sabbath," or any Sabbath that man can invent, or that God may hereafter keep; for that would be "some Sabbath," but no one in particular. Not some institution yet undetermined that God may require man to observe weekly; for the command is not, Remember the Sabbath institution, but, "Remember the day of the Sabbath;" not, Keep holy the Sabbath institution, but, "Keep holy the day of the Sabbath." The Lord did not bless and hallow the Sabbath institution, but, "the day of the Sabbath." We are not forbidden to do work in the Sabbath institution, but in "the seventh day." In fact, the phrase, "the Sabbath," in this commandment, means neither more nor less than "the rest." It is not here the name of any institution at all, though it is often thus used in other parts of the Bible. Hence this Sabbath is "the Sabbath [or rest] of the Lord thy God."
3. Which day of the week is "the day of the Sabbath?" No other than that day on which the Lord rested; for the command refers to God's Sabbath. On which day of the week did he rest? "And he rested on the seventh day." Gen. 2 : 2. Therefore the day of "the Sabbath" is the same day of the week on which God rested from the work of creation; and as he rested on the seventh day of the first week, and on no other, the seventh and no other day of every other week must be the only "day of the Sabbath."
Let it be particularly observed that God does not say, Remember the Sabbath, or, Remember the Sabbatic institution, though this is necessarily implied in the command; but, Remember "the day of the Sabbath"—the day on which I have ordained that the Sabbatic institution be observed. As if he had said, There is little danger, comparatively, that you will forget the fact of my having kept Sabbath; nor is it likely that you will altogether neglect to observe some day of rest from your arduous toils; for you will be driven to this by the ever-returning demands of your exhausted bodies; but you are, and always will be, in especial danger of forgetting the proper day of the week for honoring me in my own institution. Satan, who takes infinite delight in all kinds of "will-worship," while he hates a perfect hatred every act of strict obedience to my law, will do all he can to persuade you that some other day will do just as well or even better. Remember, therefore, the day of my Sabbath, and keep the same day holy in every week; for—mark the reason—I have myself rested on the seventh day, and on that account I have blessed and sanctified that, and no other, day of the week, that you may observe it, and keep it holy, not because it is in itself better than any other day, but because I have blessed and sanctified it.
But you say the phrase, "the Sabbath day," or, "the day of the Sabbath," does not mean any particular day, but "one day in seven," or some one of the days of the week. You allege that "the day of the Sabbath," like "the pope of Rome," "the Emperor of Russia," or "the King of Denmark," is a generic term, alike applicable to all the members of the same class. The phrase, "the Emperor of Russia," you say refers alike to Peter, to Alexander, and to Nicholas, though only one of them could be emperor at any given time; so "the day of the Sabbath" refers alike to the seventh and to the first day of the week, though there never was but one Sabbath at any one time. This is a very ingenious and plausible method of evading the force of the divine testimony; but, as the reasoning by which it is sustained appears to be entirely sophistical, I cannot but look upon the whole thing as a fabrication. I believe that any man, possessing the requisite qualifications, may become "Emperor of Russia," but deny that any day but one can be the day of God's Sabbath, inasmuch as God had never kept, at that time, but one Sabbath, and that occupied only one day. There is only one day of American Independence; only one day of the resurrection of Christ; only one day of the birth of any one man; and only one day of judgment. And why? Because the American Independence was declared on but one day; Christ arose on but one day; the same man cannot be born on two different days; and God hath appointed only one day in which he will judge the world. Now, on the same principle, there can be but one "day of the Sabbath" of the Lord our God. If I should say that the day of Christ's resurrection is not on any particular day of the week, but only "one day in seven," you would not hesitate to call me a fool, while my ignorance would excite your deepest sympathy; but when you say that "the day of the Sabbath" does not mean that particular day on which the Lord's Sabbath occurred, but only "one day in seven," you expect me to receive your assertion as the infallible teaching of superior wisdom. I cannot, however, so receive it for the following reasons:—
1. If God had meant "one day in seven," he would have said so. His first and great design in writing his law on tables of stone was to be understood by his creatures; but, for more than two thousand years after he gave the law, no human being ever suspected that "the day of the Sabbath" meant anything else than the seventh day of the week, because it was commonly known that that day alone was in reality "the day of the Sabbath." Indeed, this "one-day-in-seven" doctrine is known to have been invented within a few hundred years, with the pious design of accounting for a change of Sabbath, without the necessity of repealing a portion of the moral law. It is matter of great surprise that those pious theologians who first substituted "one day in seven" for "the day of the Sabbath" did not shudder at the thought of presuming to amend the language of the Holy Ghost. "The words of the Lord are pure words; as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times." Ps. 12 : 6. Brethren, are you prepared to enter into judgment, and answer for the liberties you have taken with God's word? In substituting the vague and indefinite expression, "one day in seven," for the definite and unequivocal terms, "the Sabbath day," and the "seventh day," you have as truly taken "away from the words of the prophecy of this book" as if you had blotted the fourth commandment from the decalogue; while your leading object has been to make way for the introduction of a new command that, for aught the Scriptures teach, it never entered into the heart of the Almighty to put into his law. "A faithful witness will not lie," and when the world asks, Which day of the seven hath God appointed to be the weekly Sabbath? God expects that you, as faithful witnesses, will not only "not lie," but that you will not equivocate, or give with the gospel trumpet an "uncertain sound." He does not expect that you will quote a text from the Acts of the apostles, that says not one word about Sabbath-keeping, to prove that the fourth commandment enjoins the keeping holy of "one day in seven," but of "no day in particular."
2. God never blessed "one day in seven," without blessing a particular day. He either blessed some definite object or nothing. You may say, indeed, without falsehood, that God blessed "one day in seven;" but if you mean that this act of blessing did not terminate on any particular day, you ought to know that you are asserting what is naturally impossible. As well might you say of a band of robbers that they had killed "one man in seven," while in reality they had killed no man in particular. No, brethren, yourselves know very well that God had not blessed and sanctified any day but the seventh of the seven, prior to the giving of the written law. You know that if God blessed any day of the week at all, it was a definite day, distinct from all the other days of the week. But this commandment says that "the Lord blessed the Sabbath day." Therefore the Sabbath day must be a particular day of the week. Therefore the "Sabbath day" is not "one day in seven," or an indefinite seventh part of time. Therefore it is not "one day in seven" that we are required to remember, and keep holy, and in which we are forbidden to do any work, but "the seventh day of the week," which was then, is now, and will be till the end of time, "the day of the Sabbath of the Lord" our God.
3. No day of the week but the seventh was ever called the "day of the Sabbath," either by God or man, till long since the death of the last inspired writer. Search both Testaments through and through, and you will find no other day called "the Sabbath," or even "a Sabbath," except the ceremonial sabbaths, with which, of course, we have nothing to do in this controversy. And long after the close of the canon of inspiration, the seventh day, and no other, was still called "the Sabbath." If you can prove that any one man, among the millions of Adam's children, from the beginning of the world to the rise of Antichrist, ever called the first day of the week "the Sabbath," you will shed a light upon this controversy, for which a host of able writers have searched in vain.
But further, the first day of the week was not observed by any of the children of men, as a Sabbath, for three hundred years after the birth of Christ. Do you ask proof? I refer you to Theodore de Beza, who plainly says so. If you are not satisfied with the witness, will you have the goodness to prove the affirmative of the proposition?
I infer, therefore, that "the day of the Sabbath," or "the Sabbath day," is the proper name of the seventh day of the week, as much so as "the day of Saturn;" and that to attach this proper name now to some other day of the week, and to affirm that God meant that other day, as much as he did the seventh, when he wrote the law on tables of stone, is as unreasonable as it is impious. If you say that when God speaks of the Sabbath day, he means "one day in seven, but no day in particular," you are as far from the truth as if you had said that when he speaks of Moses he does not mean any particular man, but some one of the Israelites. Moses was one of the Israelites, just as the Sabbath day is one day in seven. But when God says Moses, he means Moses, the son of Amram; and when he says "the Sabbath day," he means the seventh day of the week. You may give different names to the same object, without interfering with its identity; but to apply the same name to two different objects, and then to affirm that these two objects are identically the same, so that what is predicted of the one must be true of the other, is as though a navigator should discover an island in the Southern Ocean, and call it "England," and then affirm that the late work of Mr. Macaulay, entitled "The History of England," is a veritable and authentic history of this newly-discovered empire. Which would you wonder at the most, the stupidity or the effrontery of that navigator?
I cannot close this chapter without reminding you that, in attempting to refute the above reasoning, the main thing you will have to show is, that "the Sabbath day," or "the day of the Sabbath," is an indefinite expression, applicable alike to at least two different days of the week, and that it is used indefinitely in this commandment. If it has been proved that "the day of the Sabbath" refers, and can refer, only to the seventh day of the week, then it is true, and will remain forever true, that the original Sabbath law requires the sanctification of no other day. This is the truth which I undertook to exhibit in this chapter, and is my first reason for believing the proposition under consideration.
CHAPTER II.
Second Reason.
My second reason for believing this proposition is, That Adam and all his posterity have solemnly covenanted to keep holy the seventh day.
Gen. 2 : 15–17: "And the Lord God took the man, and put him in the garden of Eden, to dress it, and to keep it." And the Lord commanded the man, saying, "Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it, for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die."
Rom. 5 : 12, 19: "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned." "For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one many shall be made righteous."
Gal. 3 : 10: "For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them."
On these passages it may be remarked:—
1. "God gave to Adam a law, as a covenant of works by which he bound him and all his posterity, to personal, exact, entire, and perpetual obedience."
2. "This law, after his fall, continued to be a perfect rule of righteousness; and, as such, was delivered by God upon Mount Sinai in ten commandments, and written in two tables." Therefore, the fourth commandment and the Sabbath law of the covenant of works are one and the same law; and all believers in Christ are now bound by this law as a rule of life, to remember and keep holy the same Sabbath day that Adam and all his posterity covenanted to remember and keep holy.
3. You admit that Adam, and all his posterity, pledged themselves to keep holy the seventh day of every week, and no other. Therefore, we are all born under a solemn obligation, our own obligation in Adam, to keep holy that same seventh day of every week as long as we remain on earth: "Neither doth Christ in the gospel any way dissolve but much strengthen this obligation."
4. It is now too late to alter the covenant of works, by substituting some other day of the week for the seventh, for the following reasons:—
First. Because the whole transaction was finished in the person of our representative, nearly six thousand years ago. The covenant was made, the obligation assumed, the deed of transgression consummated, the curse pronounced, and the bitter death experienced, in kind, though not in degree, and all this before the first revelation of the mercy of God in Christ. We are, therefore, all of us, the very moment we are born, accursed of God, for not having kept holy the seventh day of the week according to our covenant. And all who are not redeemed therefrom by Christ, remain forever under this curse. From which it is plain, that to substitute some other day for the seventh, since the fall of man, is as impossible as it would be to substitute some other tree for the "tree of knowledge." To all who admit that God made a covenant of works with all mankind in Adam, these truths ought to be self-evident. Brethren, we acknowledge that we are all guilty before God of having eaten of the fruit of the tree of knowledge, while we disclaim any guilt whatever in regard to the fruit of every other tree; so are we guilty of violating the rest of the seventh day of the week, while we are not by nature guilty of polluting any other day.
Secondly. Because such substitution would destroy an integral part of the moral law. The law written on the heart of man said nothing about keeping holy any other day than the seventh; for all admit that, had Adam not fallen, there never would have been any other holy day. If, then, this law does not now require the sanctification of the seventh day, the fourth commandment must have been annihilated; and if another day is now the Sabbath, a new commandment, requiring for a new reason the sanctification of a different day, must have been substituted in its place. But this new law can be no part of the moral law, because it was not written on man's heart, nor did any human being know of its existence till thousands of God's people had been taken home to glory. God gave to Adam free permission to labor upon every day but the seventh, and he, as a free moral agent, accepted the proffered boon. Therefore, to labor on any one of the first six days of the week is, under the covenant of works, as innocent in itself as to pray to the Creator of the universe. It is as much a natural and inalienable right as "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Now, if there is a law that requires the keeping holy of some other day, it must have its origin in the new-covenant grace of God; and if that other day, and not the seventh, is now the Sabbath, men are no more under a natural obligation to keep a Sabbath than to be baptized, or to celebrate the Lord's supper. The obligation to keep it must, on your principle, grow out of their new-covenant relation to God in Christ.
Let us now look for a moment at the consequences flowing from the doctrine that some other day—the first, for example—has been substituted for the seventh. "Try the spirits." "By their fruits ye shall know them."
1. If this doctrine be true, the doctrine that Adam represented all his posterity, must be false; for, if Adam covenanted, as you admit he did, to keep holy the seventh day of every week, and we are not bound to do so, he certainly did not represent us, neither in that nor in any other part of the covenant; for if we did not promise in Adam to keep holy the Sabbath day, we did not promise to keep anything else.
2. If this doctrine be true, there is now no such thing as original sin. This follows as a matter of course; for, if Adam did not represent us, we are not born sinners. The fact might be proved another way, but this is enough.
3. If this doctrine is true, and the law of the new Sabbath binds "all men," as you say it does, it must bind the heathen, who are a part of "all men." But if there is a new Sabbath instituted, it can be made known through the written word of God, of which the heathen can know nothing. This new Sabbath has never been made known to them, nor to any of their ancestors. Nevertheless, you say that they are bound to observe it according to the written word, and that they shall be punished to all eternity for breaking it, which is contrary to the teaching of the apostle (Rom. 2 : 12), that the heathen shall be judged and condemned, not by the written word, but by the law of nature, which you know can reveal no Sabbath but that of the seventh day; for Adam, who understood the law of nature better than any other mere man, never thought of keeping holy any other day. And, moreover, the heathen have, on your principle, only nine commandments to obey or disobey; for they are under the law of nature which says, "Keep holy the Seventh day;" but you say that God does not now require this; therefore they are released from the obligation. And, what is stranger still, the heathen have no means of knowing that to keep the seventh day is a work of supererogation. These are a few of the consequences of your doctrine of a change of Sabbath. What must be the character of that tree which yields such fruits!
Let us now attend for a moment to your objections.
Do you say, Those who believe in Christ are redeemed, not only from the curse of the Sabbath law, but also from the obligation to obey it in future? If so, who can tell but we are redeemed from every other moral obligation?
Or, do you allege that Christ makes a new contract with the sinner, saying, If you keep holy the first day, I will release you from the obligation to sanctify the seventh? "Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid; yea, we establish the law." Rom. 3 : 31. But perhaps you say, To change the Sabbath from one day to another is not to "make void the law;" it is only to vary its application. I reply, It is to make void, to annul, to annihilate, one-tenth part of that law that God wrote on Adam's heart; for, as has been shown already, that law required him to keep no day holy but the seventh.
Or, do you plead that, as God has substituted the Lord Jesus Christ for the sinner, without violating the moral law, so he may have substituted some other day for the seventh? I reply, The cases are not parallel; for,—
1. The substitution of Christ does not render a change of any part of the law necessary; but the other does. Christ "came not to destroy the law," but to fulfill it; and in fulfilling it, he honored the seventh day. But the substitution of some other day for the seventh, had it taken place before Christ came, would have released him, as well as us, from the obligation to obey part of the law of the covenant of works.
2. A change of Sabbath is not like the substitution of Christ, necessary to the salvation of sinners; for God had saved thousands before this change is alleged to have taken place.
3. The substitution of Christ changes the moral condition of the church only; but the change of the Sabbath would affect the moral relations of all men; for the Sabbath was made, not for the church, but "for man."
4. The evangelical doctrine of the substitutionary sacrifice of Christ, of itself, proves the impossibility of a change of Sabbath. All evangelical Christians hold that believers are delivered, through Christ, from the curse of the law—the law of the covenant of works—but not from the obligation to obey it. If, therefore, that law required Adam and his posterity to keep holy the seventh day of the week, Christ has never redeemed them from the obligation to render exact obedience, in this particular, as in every other.
Do you plead, as the last resort, that, as the command not to eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge has passed away, so it may be with the law of the seventh-day Sabbath? I reply, The cases are not parallel; for that command never was a part of the moral law. It was never written, either on man's heart, or on tables of stone; but this was. Besides, the tree of knowledge has been destroyed from the face of the earth, so that to eat of its fruit is now impossible; but the seventh day will continue to return "while the earth remaineth."
Brethren, you bewilder yourselves and others, by adopting, as a moral axiom, the false principle that whatever is in its nature positive, is, for that reason, changeable. There is no principle more deadly than this. Do you not know that all our hopes, as Christians, for time and eternity, are suspended on the immutability of that positive arrangement between the Father and the Son, which we call the covenant of grace? Are not the decrees of God all positive, yet, at the same time immutable? So, also, the Sabbath law, though in its nature positive, has been made unchangeable by a solemn covenant arrangement, "in which it was impossible for God to lie." If God had not made the law requiring the sanctification of the seventh day an essential part of the covenant of works, your doctrine of a change of Sabbath would not be so preposterous. As it is, how can serious, thinking men help viewing it as a monstrous and impious absurdity!
CHAPTER III.
Third Reason.
My third reason for believing this proposition is, That Christ and his apostles honored this day; and did not intimate that it would ever cease to be the Sabbath, but the contrary.
1. Christ honored this day.
Luke 4 : 16: "And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up; and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up for to read."
Luke 4 : 30, 31 (See also Mark 1 : 21): "But he, passing through the midst of them, went his way, and came down to Capernaum, a city of Galilee, and taught them on the Sabbath days."
Luke 13 : 10: "And he was teaching in one of the synagogues on the Sabbath."
Mark 3 : 1, 2: "And he entered again into the synagogue; and there was a man there which had a withered hand. And they watched him, whether he would heal him on the Sabbath day."
Mark 6 : 2: "And when the Sabbath day was come, he began to teach in the synagogue."
2. The apostles honored this day. Read carefully the following passages and their contexts:—
Acts 13 : 14: "But when they departed from Perga, they came to Antioch in Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and sat down."
Acts 13 : 44: "And the next Sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God." (That is, to hear Paul and Barnabas preach.)
Acts 14 : 1: "And it came to pass in Iconium, that they [Paul and Barnabas] went both together into the synagogue of the Jews, and so spake, that a great multitude both of the Jews and also the Greeks believed."
Acts 16 : 13: "And on the Sabbath we went out of the city by a river side, where prayer was wont to be made; and we sat down, and spake unto the women which resorted thither."
Acts 17 : 2: "And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three Sabbath days reasoned with them out of the Scriptures."
Acts 18 : 4: "And he [Paul] reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks."
Brethren, if you produce one solitary apostolic example of unnecessary labor performed on the seventh day, I will at once give up the argument in its favor.
3. Neither Christ nor his apostles intimated that the seventh day would cease to be the Sabbath.
This being a negative assertion, I am not bound to prove it, of course. If you assert that they did, I demand the proof of it.
4. Christ has very plainly intimated the contrary.
Matt. 24 : 20: "But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the Sabbath day."
The "flight" here spoken of was to take place about the time of the destruction of Jerusalem; and the Saviour admonishes his disciples to pray that it might not happen on the Sabbath day. Now, if he knew that the Sabbath day would be changed into the "Lord's day," forty years before the event he had just alluded to, why did he speak of it as a thing that would be then in existence? Many are the efforts that have been made to evade the force of the argument from this text; but they are all unavailing.
Matt. 5 : 17–19: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in nowise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever, therefore, shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven; but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."
It is almost universally admitted that the Saviour, in these verses, refers principally to the ten commandments, which were then, as now, called by way of pre-eminence, "the law." That he may have referred also to the ceremonial code, which he came to fulfill, we do not deny. But this has nothing to do with our present purpose.
That the fourth commandment enjoins the sanctification of the seventh day of the week, no man in his senses denies. But you allege that that part of it has been taken away, so that it does not now bind us.
Now, in making this assertion, you either affirm what is positively denied in the above quotation, or you make this commandment at least partly ceremonial, and peculiar to the Jews. This will appear evident from the following considerations:—
First. The command to keep holy the seventh day of the week is far more than "one jot or one tittle" of this law. It could be no less, but it is much more. Indeed, it is very certain that Adam considered it a very important part of the law; and so did Christ when he uttered these words, for he kept the Sabbath as devoutly as Adam ever did.
Secondly. Heaven and earth have not yet passed away; but you say that this seventh-day law has; therefore, much more than "one jot or one tittle" has passed from the law, which is contrary to Christ's assertion.
Thirdly. If you say that Christ has fulfilled this law, and so taken it away, you make it a ceremony, like the passover. You know that Christ never fulfilled, so as to take away, any law but those that he "nailed to the cross," and that he never nailed to the cross any law that bindeth "all men in all ages." If, then, the law requiring the sanctification of the seventh day of the week has been nailed to the cross of Christ, it must have been a ceremony peculiar to the Jews, and to which the Gentiles were never bound. Was Adam a Jew? Was Enoch a Jew? Were Noah and his sons Jews? But these all kept the seventh day, and no other.
Brethren, it has been proved, in the first chapter of this treatise, that the fourth commandment requires simply the observance of the seventh day of the week. I will not repeat what is there said. I now ask you, as candid inquirers after truth, to place this commandment and our Saviour's declarations, quoted above, side by side, and see if your conduct is not at war with both. You neglect the only day that God's law requires you to remember, while Christ assures you, in the most solemn manner, that "one jot or one tittle" shall in no-wise pass from the law, "till heaven and earth pass," or till time shall be no more.
There is a little commandment in that law that says, "The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do any work." Christ says that whosoever doeth and teacheth this commandment "shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." But this hath been my only crime. God knows, and you know, that the only thing I have done to offend you is, that I endeavor to refrain from doing work on the seventh day, and to "teach men so." Yet for this I am declared to be the "least in the kingdom of heaven," and no longer worthy of a seat at the table of Him who said, that "one jot or one tittle" should in nowise pass from the law.
Blessed be God! it is a light thing to be judged of man's judgment. But I confess that sometimes my blood runs cold when I think of this solemn declaration of the same "Lord of the Sabbath" (John 12 : 48), "He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him; the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day." "Never man spake like this man." O brethren, are you ready for that awful judgment day? Nothing but God's word will avail you there. If you are determined to go on, appropriating the seventh day to secular purposes and "teaching men so," I cannot help it; but I call heaven and earth to witness, that in regard to every reader of these pages my skirts are henceforth clear. On your own souls will rest the responsibility of rejecting those solemn words of Christ. And you who are ministers—how will you answer for the wanderings of those lambs of Christ's fold, whom you are leading into strange pastures?