THE FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK

5%

Publishing Committee · Paris, Me. · May 5, 1851

FromReview and Herald, Vol. 1, No. 10.

Read the full edition

THE FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK.

If the Sabbath has been transferred from the seventh to the first day of the week by divine authority, the Scriptures should contain the account of it. And as the precept requiring the observance of the seventh day is plain and positive, nothing less than as positive testimony should satisfy any person in regard to the claims of the first day. The texts usually quoted as divine authority for keeping the first day of the week are Cor. xvi, 2; Acts xx, 7; Rev. i, 10. These we will briefly examine.
"Upon the first day of the week, let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come." Cor. xvi, 2.
The Apostle's subject is a "collection for the saints" at Jerusalem. He does not make mention of a Sabbath, or of resting from labor, neither does he intimate that the brethren at Corinth should meet together for worship on the first day of the week. The evident design of this text was to teach a systematic manner of collecting money for charitable purposes. And the words, "Let every one of you lay by him in store," show, not a public meeting, but that each should attend to this duty at their homes. There, each was to have his bounty, laid "by him in store," ready for the Apostle when he should come.
"And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, (ready to depart on the morrow,) and continued his speech until midnight." Acts xx, 7.
Luke here records the fact that St. Paul once preached all night of the first day of the week at Troas, and past midnight broke bread with the disciples. This is the only text in the New Testament in which the first day of the week is mentioned in connection with public worship. But there is no intimation given that the disciples regarded the first day of the week as a Sabbath, or that they rested from labor on that day. As that meeting at Troas was held in the night, and as there is no evidence that the disciples met regularly on that night of the week before or after that time, it is evident that it was an occasional meeting appointed to have a communion season, and for the Apostle to take leave of his brethren, for he was to "depart on the morrow."
It is said that apostolic example proves the first day of the week to be the Sabbath. To this we reply, that there is no record in the New Testament that the disciples ever met for worship in the day-time of the first day in the week. Therefore those who profess to follow the example of the disciples at Troas should, to be consistent with their own profession, hold their preaching meetings in the night, continue them "till break of day," and past midnight break bread. Says J. Marsh, "Harbinger," Dec. 29, 1849.
"Then why keep the first day? Because Christ rose on that day, and the Apostolic church have set the example, that we should assemble on that day to commemorate his resurrection, by breaking of bread, and other duties belonging to the worship of God." Acts xx, 7.
To this we reply, that the communion does not commemorate the resurrection, but the crucifixion. Says the Apostle, "For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's DEATH till he come." Cor. xi, 26. The Lord's supper was instituted the night before the crucifixion, and the disciples at Troas broke bread the night following the Sabbath. And there is nothing in the New Testament that confines it to any day of the week; yet it seems most proper in the evening following the Sabbath. After enjoying the blessings of the Holy Sabbath, the true disciple is best prepared to receive the emblems of the body and blood of Christ. If the communion was designed to be strictly confined to one day of the week, the sixth day is the only proper one; for on that day, the crucifixion, the event which it commemorates occurred. And if attending to the communion on a day makes it a Sabbath, as is inferred from Acts xx, 7, then the sixth day of the week should be observed by all Christians.
Again, according to the first division of time [Gen. i.] the day closed at 6 o'clock, P. M., and if that meeting at Troas was held the night following the day time of the first day of the week, it was on the second day instead of the first. And according to the Roman division of time the day closed at midnight, therefore Paul broke bread and "talked a long while, even till break of day," on the second day of the week, if that meeting was in the night following the day time of the first day of the week. Accordingly, those who talk of apostolic example for observing the first day of the week, should keep the second day.
But that meeting was evidently in the night following the Sabbath of the Lord. The Apostle, "as his manner was," see Acts xvii, 2, preached to them on the Sabbath; then the disciples, the evening following, met together expressly "to break bread."Such a meeting must have been very desirable to the disciples at Troas, especially as Paul was "ready to depart on the morrow." "Morrow" here should be understood as we use it, referring to the day light that followed, and not to the next twenty-four-hour day. For in that case Paul would have to tarry at Troas till the next evening, and then travel to Assos and Mitylene in the night. In the morning of the first day of the week, Paul left Troas, and walked to Assos, and from Assos he sailed with his brethren to Mitylene. See Acts xx, 7-14. A singular "apostolic example," truly, for Sunday-keepers!! With these facts before us it seems perfectly preposterous to talk of the "example" of the "apostolic church" for observing the first day of the week.
"I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet." Rev. i, 10.
It is first assumed that "Lord's day" in this text refers to the first day of the week, and then because St. John was in the Spirit on that day, it is supposed to be what is called "the Christian Sabbath." We object to this view, because it is not sustained by the Word. In fact it is entirely destitute of support from the Holy Scriptures. Others may refer to the "Fathers," but we appeal to the word of God. The Bible nowhere calls the first day of the week the "Lord's day," therefore we should not call it so. But one of the seven days of the week is called the Lord's day, and that is the seventh. God has never hallowed, sanctified and blessed but one day of the week, and that was the day on which he rested. That day he called after his own holy name. "The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God." Here we are not at a loss to determine which is the "Lord's day." But the testimony is full more to the point in Isa. lviii, 13, where God styles the Sabbath, "My Holy Day," and "The Holy of the Lord." Jesus declared himself "Lord also of the Sabbath." Mark ii, 28. Here are three testimonies, two from the Old Testament, and one from the New, that prove the seventh day of the week to be the "Lord's day."—Two testimonies from the Eternal Father, and one from his Son Jesus Christ, are worth more to us than ten thousand from the so called "Christian Fathers," however near the apostolic age they might have lived.
Then, according to the word of God, and that shall decide this question, St. John recognized the "Lord's day," the Sabbath of the Lord our God, A. D. 96. This was 65 years after the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ. But, if it should be admitted that the "Lord's day" refers to the first day of the week, and that St. John was in the Spirit on that day, then what would be gained in favor of the first-day sabbath? Verily nothing; for the circumstance of the Apostle being in the Spirit on that day would not make it a Christian duty to keep the first day of the week as a Sabbath. Those who reject a plain and positive precept for observing the seventh day, and keep another day, with no divine authority for it, with only the weak and groundless inferences drawn from Cor. xvi, 2; Acts xxi, 7, and Rev. i, 10, in favor of the first day of the week, are to be pitied. May the Lord have mercy on his sincere followers, and may they be speedily turned from the tradition of men, to observe the commandments of God.
It is said that Christ often met with his disciples on the first day of the week, and that his example proves the first day to be the Sabbath. But this assertion, so often repeated, is untrue, and deceptive. There is no record that the disciples ever assembled for worship in the day time of the first day, either before or after the ascension. On the very day of the resurrection "Jesus himself drew near," and went with the two disciples who were traveling to the village of Emmaus, seven and a half miles from Jerusalem. Did Jesus rebuke them for traveling on that day, and tell them it was the "Christian Sabbath?" Far from it; he even went with them. And as "they drew nigh unto the village" they constrained him, saying, "Abide with us; for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent." Jesus went in and "sat at meat with them," and then the two disciples returned to Jerusalem that night, and "found the eleven gathered together." And while they were relating the interesting events of that day's journey, "Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and said unto them, peace be unto you."
If the first day had then become the "Christian Sabbath," that was a favorable opportunity for Jesus, the Head and Example of the church, to enforce it. But instead of this, he never hinted a word to them about a new Sabbath, and could say to those Sunday-breakers who had walked fifteen miles on that day, "PEACE BE UNTO YOU."
There is no intimation that the disciples had been together for worship during that day. On the contrary, the absence of Thomas, and the fact that most of them were not satisfied that Jesus had risen, shows the impropriety of representing this meeting as proof of a regard for the first day on account of the resurrection. The only other meeting of Christ with his disciples which is said to be on the first day of the week, is mentioned in John xx, 26—“And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them.” Now had this interview been on the following first day, it could afford no proof that they religiously regarded that day, since it is not noticed as a meeting designed for worship. But the expression “after eight days” by no means shows that it was just a week. Who can say that it was not on the ninth day after his first appearance? It was certainly full eight days after, which would bring it to Monday night.

THE FATHERS.

With a consistent Christian, the testimony and practice of what are called the "Christian Fathers," have not sufficient authority to direct him either in devotion or duty, especially when their testimony has to be relied on in the absence of divine authority. Christians should follow Christ. Jehovah said of Jesus, "This is my beloved Son: hear him."—If Jesus has taught that a new Sabbath was designed for his followers, then Christians should observe it. But as he never intimated a change of the Sabbath, either before or after the resurrection, and as he has shown (by his own example in travelling to Emmaus on the first day, and, in pronouncing his blessing on those who walked fifteen miles on the first day of the week) that it was not a day of rest, those therefore who follow Christ in this respect will not observe it. Jesus declares himself Lord of the only Sabbath of the Bible, and says that it was made for man.
The apostles are also entirely silent upon the subject of a new Sabbath, and apostolic example is against the first day.—The Sabbath was Paul's regular preaching day, and he had no other. There is no record of his holding but one meeting on the first day of the week, and that was in the night, and the day time of that very day he spent in travelling. It really seems unfortunate for the advocates of the first day, that they cannot give us the first word of inspired testimony in favor of their Sabbath from the epistles of Paul, Peter, John, James and Jude. On the testimony of such "Fathers," (if we may be allowed to style them so,) Christians can rely with unshaken confidence. But as they cannot produce divine authority the uninspired, misinterpreted testimony of the so called "Christian Fathers" is made to answer. The testimony of those who lived in the time that Paul refers to in Acts xx, 29, 30, can be but sliding sand, while God's word is a solid rock. "For I know this," says Paul, "that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise SPEAKING PERVERSE THINGS to draw away disciples after them.
We notice in the "Advent Herald" for April 19, an article headed "THE LORD'S DAY—THE CHRISTIAN SABBATH" which is calculated to deceive some; we therefore give the following from "Sabbath Tract No. 4," which presents the subject in its true light.