DR. HERRICK JOHNSON'S STATEMENT OF THE DIVINE ORIGIN OF THE SUNDAY-SABBATH.
By G. H. Derrick
ON Thursday, December 13, 1888, the United States Senate Committee on Education and Labor gave a hearing on the bill introduced by Senator Blair "to secure to the people the enjoyment of the first day of the week, commonly known as the Lord's day, as a day of rest, and to promote its observance as a day of religious worship." Among those who appeared as advocates of the bill was Herrick Johnson, D.D., of Chicago. After a few preliminary remarks, Dr. Johnson said: "This appointment of one day in seven is arbitrary. There is nothing in nature to indicate that division of time. There is the day of twenty-four hours, there is the month, there is the year, all these are natural divisions; but there is nothing in nature to indicate the weekly division—the observance of one day in seven. It is arbitrary, and we regard that as an evidence of the divine origin." Senator Blair, chairman of the committee, then asked several questions, in answering which Dr. Johnson stated the authority for Sunday observance. The Chairman—How do you base the Sabbath itself upon a divine ordinance when there is no natural law to indicate which day is to be observed? Mr. Johnson—It is in revelation, and it is found to be exactly in accord with the laws of nature. The Chairman—You base the law of one day's rest in seven upon revelation; that is to say, upon the Bible? The Chairman—There are many who doubt that it is established by revelation, are there not? Mr. J.—I think no one who accepts the Bible doubts that there is one day in seven to be observed as a day of rest. The Chairman—Will you just state the authority? Mr. J.—Remember the Sabbath-day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work. The Chairman—Is there any other? Mr. J.—There are references to this law all through the Bible. The Chairman—Now you come and change that Sabbath-day to which the Lord there refers? Mr. J.—That we hold was changed by the Lord himself. The Chairman—When did he do that, and by what language? Mr. J.—There was a meeting for worship on the first day in the week, the day the Lord arose, and seven days after there was another meeting for the same purpose, and there it is referred to as the Lord's day. The Chairman—After the change? Mr. J.—Yes, sir; after the change. The Chairman—It is based, then, upon two or three days being observed as days of religious worship after the resurrection? Such is the ground upon which a minister of the gospel will ask for a law to compel sixty millions of his fellow-men to cease work one day in every seven. Upon such authority,628he will ask that a law be enacted to fine or imprison all who do not agree with his whim. When asked for the divine commandment for Sabbath observance he quotes the fourth commandment of the decalogue (Ex. 20: 8–11), "Remember the Sabbath-day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work." When asked if there was any other authority, he replies, "There are references to this law all through the Bible." This is all true. The fourth commandment is the law of the Bible Sabbath, and the law of which it is a part is referred to in the highest terms. The psalmist speaks of the law as being "perfect" (Ps. 19: 7), and when considering its perpetuity, he says, "All His commandments are sure. They stand fast forever and ever." Ps. 111: 7, 8. In giving a summary of the book of Ecclesiastes, Solomon said, "Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments; for this is the whole duty of man." Eccl. 12: 13. In the New Testament this law is referred to as being "holy," "just," "good," "spiritual;" and the Saviour said, "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." Matt. 5: 17, 18. To this law Dr. Johnson refers as the authority for Sabbath observance, and to it he appeals in support of a Sunday law; but the words immediately following those quoted by him in favor of the first day of the week, tell us, "The SEVENTH day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do any work." This, however, would not do, for he is before the committee to ask for a law to stop men from keeping the seventh day, and to compel them to keep one of the six working days on which the Lord says, "Thou shalt labor, and do all thy work." He holds that the day "was changed by the Lord himself." "When did he do that, and by what language?" Now is the Doctor’s grand opportunity to forever settle the question. Surely such an important change in the law of God will be stated so clearly and explicitly that there can be no doubt in regard to the matter. One text of Scripture is all that is required. But the long-sought commandment for the Sunday-sabbath is not in the Bible, and hence the answer is, "There was a meeting for worship on the first day in the week, the day the Lord arose." The record of this meeting, however, omits the essential point of its being for worship. "Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and said unto them, Peace be unto you." John 20: 19. Yet even though the text does say "for fear of the Jews" instead of "for worship," it must be used, because texts for Sunday-keeping are very scarce, and this is undoubtedly the best one in the Bible. Such an important question, however, must have more support than this, and so Dr. J. adds, "Seven days after, there was another meeting for the same purpose." Here the Doctor, quoting from memory, has made a very serious mistake, for the text (John 20: 26) says, "And after EIGHT days," which shows that if the mere fact of the Saviour’s appearing to his disciples on a particular day made that day sacred, Monday as well as Sunday should have a law to protect its hallowed hours from desecration. In our humble opinion, Dr. Johnson should have considered this point very carefully before asking for a law which will inevitably injure thousands of his fellow-men who conscientiously observe the seventh day as God commanded. Such arguments and quotations may be accepted as good enough when presented from the popular pulpit, but it is dangerous to trust to a very inaccurate and treacherous memory to furnish the foundation for a law to affect the entire nation.