AN OLD OBJECTION TO THE SABBATH.
By Editor
A CORRESPONDENT at Marin, Ind., writes us that he makes a claim that the Old Testament teaches a change of the Sabbath to the first day of the week. And how does he do this? He says:— There were two reasons given them [Israel] for keeping the Sabbath, and while one was of general application, the other only applied to the Israelites. The reason given in Exodus 20:8-10 you are familiar with, but as I never see you mention the other I will take it that your readers, at least, are not familiar with it. We find it in Deut. 5:15. We will not take space to quote the text. The reader may turn to it. It has been noticed in these columns frequently, three times we believe, in this present volume. Its significance is clearly shown in the sermon entitled "Christ and the Sabbath," given in this issue. Let the reader turn to that and he will learn the force of Deut. 5:15. Our correspondent thinks that the rest of the Sabbath given Israel was a memorial of their deliverance from bondage, while the Sabbath given to Adam as a seventh day was a memorial of creation; but the rest of the Sabbath given Adam was a type of the rest given by Christ. But as these types were different they could not be one, that is, could not come on the same day. Now all this is the baldest assumption. It is the same day—namely, the seventh—given in Deut. 5:15 that is given in Ex. 20:8-11. The reason for its observance in the former text seems to be different from that of the latter. At the most it could consistently be presented only as an additional reason, appealing to Israel's gratitude, just the same as in the case of other moral obligations. See Lev. 19:35, 36; Deut. 24:17, 18. Righteousness and justice are obligatory in the very nature of the case, even as was the creation Sabbath, but Israel, being redeemed of God, were under renewed obligation to do all his requirements. But the very reason given in Ex. 20:8-11—God's creative power—was manifested in the redemption of Israel from Egypt. Deut. 5:15 therefore only emphasizes the commandment spoken by the Lord as recorded in Ex. 20:8-11. He further says: "After Adam sinned, the Sabbath as a rest day pointed to the death of Christ." Indeed! but what is the warrant for this statement? And then as the Passover pointed to the same event, he says that "could not be held on any other day than an Adamic Sabbath." The fact is the Passover had naught to do with the days of the week whatever, but solely with the day of the month. And here is another piece of information:— I have said the Israelitish Sabbath was not the Adamic Sabbath. It is true that it was the beginning Sabbath of their exodus life, but did not continue so. The seventh Sabbath after the Passover was the last Adamic Sabbath. The fiftieth Sabbath after this was their first Sabbath under the law given at Sinai. Thus they had two Sabbaths coming together then. Now all this the intelligent reader will know is expressly contrary to the positive declarations of God's word. The fall of the manna, as recorded in Exodus 16, points conclusively to the seventh-day Sabbath of God, not a makeshift arrangement, and this is confirmed by the voice of God from Sinai, which enjoined the very Sabbath given to Adam. The remainder of the letter is based on what we have given, and presents nothing new to our readers. The writer has fixed up a calendar of his own; he ignores the most positive and express declarations of Scripture, and endeavors to make it appear by a perversion of the Greek in which the unprejudicial scholarship of the world is against him, that Sunday is the true seventh day. Notice, we have the institution of the Sabbath as given in Gen. 2:2, 3, the fall of the manna as recorded in Exodus 16, the Sabbath commandment as given in Ex. 20:8-11, the record in Matt. 28:1; Mark 16:1, 2; Luke 23:56; 24:1, all showing that the Sabbath came just before the first day of the week, and all the above records showing that the original seventh day has been the Sabbath—the only weekly Sabbath—in every age. We marvel that men can so pervert the plainest statements of God's word. If belief in the true Sabbath did not involve a cross, if its observance did not involve self-denial and loss of reputation, there would be no more question as to which day was the Sabbath. There is no Bible doctrine which has any stronger support. There is none that has met stronger opposition and grown in strength and clearness under the opposition. The Sabbath of the Lord is fortified by Scripture from Genesis to Revelation, from Eden lost to Eden restored, from the creation through Christ to completed redemption through Christ. There is one objection against it which is difficult to meet; in fact, it can only be met by the individual who holds it. This objection Paul states in Rom. 8:7: "Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be." We do not say that all who oppose have this mind, but we can understand a great part of the opposition to God's Sabbath, the true Lord's day, in no other way. Reader, do you oppose the Sabbath of the Lord? If so why?