WHAT WILL YOU DO? by Editor

Pacific Press Publishing Company · Oakland, California · Nov 27, 1893

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 20, No. 4.

Read the full edition

WHAT WILL YOU DO?

By Editor

THE following are leading principles in the interpretation of law, and are so recognized by leading jurists:—

"In the case of all law, it is the intent of the lawgiver that is to be enforced."

"When words are plain in a written law, there is an end to all construction; they must be followed."

"When the intent is plain, nothing is left to construction."

These principles are called to mind by an article in the Occident (Presbyterian) of November 16, by Rev. H. A. Ketchum. The writer is a member of the California Synod Committee on Sabbath Observance. At the late meeting of the Synod of California, recently held in this city, a resolution was unanimously adopted, "requesting the directors of the Midwinter Fair to make provision, so far as possible, for closing the gates or doors of the Fair on the first day of the week, commonly called Sunday, Lord's day, or sabbath." Mr. Ketchum continues:—

"By the precedent established at Chicago, probably by municipal law also, the place of ingress and egress to Golden Gate Park cannot be closed on any day. But buildings may be closed and exhibits may be covered, all unnecessary work suspended so that a proper recognition of the day shall be secured, the command of God, AS EXPRESSED IN THE FOURTH COMMANDMENT, OBEYED, and the most earnest wish of all Christian people not only in California, but throughout the United States and the world, shall be respected."

Now if Mr. Ketchum, and the Presbyterian Synod, which he represents, meant just what he said, his words would be a plea for the seventh day; for thus the law of Jehovah reads:—

"Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work; but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, 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; wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it."

Now apply the above principles to the above commandment. Is it not the intent of the Lawgiver that the seventh day, and not the first day, should be kept? Did not God show that this was his intent for more than forty years, by a constantly recurring threefold miracle, as shown in the giving of the manna? Are not the words plain? Do the words "the seventh day" mean "the first day of the week"? Can they, in common honesty, be made to mean that? Should they not, then, be followed, and the seventh day observed by our Presbyterian brethren, and by all God-fearing people? And, as God has made his intent plain in the Decalogue, in the giving of the manna, and in the example of Christ, what right have men to construe his words to mean something else?

Inspiration shows us in the New Testament, again and again, that the Sabbath is not the first day of the week:—

"In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week." Matt. 28:1. See also Mark 16:1, 2; Luke 23:56; 24:1.

The Sabbath of the Bible, "as expressed in the fourth commandment," is therefore the seventh day of the week, the day just before the first day of the week; and the Sabbath is not, nor can it be, the first day of the week.

Our intelligent readers all know what would be said of a judge who would so construe or interpret a mere human law. By the same methods every safeguard of law and government could be demolished. God has made plain the intent of the fourth commandment of the Decalogue; his words are plain, and they say the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God. What right have Presbyterians, or any other body of men, to say that God means otherwise than he has not only said but demonstrated?

The Senate of the United States, in making the fourth commandment the basis of legislation in the matter of closing the World's Fair on Sunday, knew that, to be consistent, the words must be changed, and so they amended it to read the first day of the week. But those who profess loyalty to God and his law seem to feel at perfect liberty to place whatsoever construction they please on God's word. Is it ignorance of that word?—Then let them be learners. Is it blindness?—May God's Spirit enlighten them. Is it willful, persistent misrepresentation?—May God pity them. They are striking right at the foundation of all morality, and "if the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?" What it is that moves our brethren to place such falsehood before the people we do not know. God is their judge. But their principles, their interpretation, construction, wresting of God's word, is wrong and is contrary to every principle of that word. It is putting the interpretations and traditions of men in the place of God. Thus does the man of sin, the mystery of iniquity. 2 Thess. 2:3-8.

Reader, what will you do? Will you respect man or God? Will you follow that law which men say you ought to follow, or will you follow their perversion of that law? Will you keep the Sabbath of Jehovah, sanctified and sanctioned by Christ himself, a sign of his creative power and redeeming love, or will you keep that pseudo-sabbath wholly of popo-papal origin? Which will you do?