IS SUNDAY THE TRUE SEVENTH DAY?

2%

Publishing Committee · Rochester, N. Y. · Aug 5, 1852

FromReview and Herald, Vol. 3, No. 7.

Read the full edition

IS SUNDAY THE TRUE SEVENTH DAY?

A LETTER from a brother beloved in the Lord, in which he incidently notices the case of certain friends, who think that the "true seventh day" comes on Sunday, suggests the following remarks. They are respectfully addressed to those who thus believe.
As it is presumed that no one denies that those who kept the Sabbath according to the commandment, after the death of the Lord Jesus, [Luke xxiii, 55, 56,] did actually keep the day which the fourth commandment required, viz: that day which was blest and set apart at Creation, [Ex. xx, 8—11; Gen. ii, 1—3,] I begin this side the crucifixion and inquire:
(1.) In what year of the Christian Era did all Christendom change the reckoning of the week, and thenceforward call the seventh day of the week the first day?
What historian records this extraordinary event?
If there is such a writer, how does he explain that all the jarring sects and contending factions of the professed church, scattered over the face of the wide earth, and fiercely warring with each other, should by a simultaneous mistake, without a dissenting voice, adopt the idea that the seventh day was in reality the first day of the week?
As there is no such writer, who knows that such an event ever did happen?
(2.) But how did it happen that the Jews who had the knowledge of the true Sabbath as late as Jerusalem's destruction, [Matt. xxiv, 20,] and who were then dispersed into all nations under heaven, [Luke xxi, 24,] made a corresponding mistake?
Does not the fact that they have ever hated, with bitter hatred, those who have even nominally borne the name of Christ, forbid the idea that they would ever agree to such a change in the reckoning of the week?
If such an agreement was ever made between the parties, was it not on this wise: the Christians were to call the seventh day from thenceforth the first day of the week, and the Jews, out of respect to this new method of reckoning the week, were to take up the sixth day in the place of the seventh, which they then and there relinquished, and thenceforward call the sixth day the seventh, and observe it religiously, as such.
But as such an agreement never could take place, and certainly never did, will you say that both parties might make a mistake in the case?
Do you think it possible that every individual in every sect and order in the Christian world, could, at the same moment, make precisely the same mistake? And as they had previously, according to this theory, kept Sunday because it was the seventh day of the week, how could they, after making the supposed mistake in the reckoning, go forward and keep it because it was the first day, and no one dissent or notice that any change had happened?
But is it not a still more extraordinary thing, that not only every Christian made a mistake in the reckoning of the week at the same moment of time, but every Jew, also, in every land under heaven, made at the same moment, precisely the same mistake?
Should you not think that if the idea of keeping Sunday as the first day of the week, did not bring even a single Christian to his senses, when before the time of this mistake all of them had kept it as the seventh day, I say, should you not think that when they saw the Jews keeping one day, and themselves observing another, (when before this mutual mistake, Jews and Christians, according to this theory, both kept Sunday as the seventh day,) that this would have led some of them to see that something was wrong?
Let me state this doctrine: Jews and Christians throughout the world, were once united in keeping Sunday as the seventh day. At a certain point of time, every professor of Christianity throughout the world mistook the reckoning of the days of the week, and, calling Sunday the first day of the week, thenceforward kept it because it was such! While every Jew throughout the world, at the same time, by mistake, called Sunday (the day which he had always observed) the first day of the week, and selecting the sixth day or Saturday, he thenceforward religiously observed it as the true seventh day!!!
(3.) But as there is still another witness, who has kept the reckoning of the days of the week, we inquire again. Perhaps, in the mouth of two or three witnesses, the point may be established.
The Mahometans keep a different day of the week from either Jews or Christians. Do they reckon the days of the week in the same manner that Jews and Christians do?
Mahomet selected the sixth day of the week as a Sabbath for his followers. Is it not a remarkable fact, that the sixth day of the Mahometan week corresponds exactly to the sixth day of the week as reckoned by Jews and Christians?
If it can be supposed that all who bear the name of Christians, of every sect, and in every land, could all make the same mistake at the same moment, and no one of them perceive or rectify it; if, in addition to this, we can go another step and conclude that the Jews, who are dispersed in every corner of the habitable earth, could all, without dissent, at the same time, make a mistake that should exactly correspond to that of their hated and hating Christian brethren, have we not gone as far in believing absurdities as you can ask us to go?
But when we have agreed to all this, you require us to take another step in absurdity. The Christians, to a man, made this mistake in the reckoning of the week; at the same time, and to a man, the Jews made a mistake that precisely corresponded; and to crown the whole, the Mahometans made a mistake in the reckoning of the week that precisely corresponded to that of the Jews and Christians! "Believest thou all this?"
If a mistake had been made, is it not absolutely certain that there would be a discrepancy somewhere? As there is no such discrepancy, is it not absolutely certain that no such mistake exists?
We can hardly find it in our power to believe that the inhabitants of a single district could, at the same point of time, make a mistake in the days of the week, and to heighten the wonder every one make precisely the same mistake! But when we extend this simultaneous act to all the districts in a town, thence to all the towns in a county, thence to all the counties in a state, and thence to all the states in the Union, we have carried the matter almost an infinite distance beyond reason or credibility.
But as there are three vast bodies who have kept the reckoning of the week, we will introduce two other nations, that each witness may be represented. We will begin with England. At the same time when every individual in this nation (in the case supposed) made a mistake in the reckoning of the week, every individual in England made a mistake on the same point, so as to correspond exactly to the mistake made here. (Else a discrepancy in the reckoning would show an error at once.) And at the same moment, every individual in France made a mistake corresponding exactly to the mistake made by every individual in England and the United States. And so perfectly deceived was every one of these persons, that they continued their dates, records, &c., and never mistrusted that a mistake had been made!
But all this is not so remarkable as the supposed mistake of Jews, Christians, Mahometans and all nations! That these classes, each composed of many millions, not confined to any country, but scattered in every land under heaven, should all make a mistake—should all make the same mistake, and should all make the same mistake at the same time, and no individual of the number ever discover, or ever suspect, that such a mistake had taken place, is a theory not only absolutely unreasonable and in the highest degree absurd, but it is positively beyond the power of those who would, to credit it!!
But, say you, though we have no history that records any such event, as the mistake in question, [the inhabitants of the globe were all asleep when this mistake was made, just as they were when Mahomet wrought his miracle on the moon,] yet we have "plain Bible testimony" that establishes the fact that Sunday is the seventh day. Here it is:
"For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth."—Matt. xii, 40.
It is made to prove the point in this way: Christ was crucified on Friday, lay in the grave this period in full time, was raised on Monday, which is thus shown to be the first day of the week; hence Sunday is certainly the seventh day.
An indirect method of establishing a theory that involves the most extraordinary difficulties. But the evidence mentioned shall have all possible weight allowed it.
The "three days and three nights" shall be reckoned in full time, though there are certain facts that seem to modify this, which may be noticed in their place.
We inquire, then, respecting the evidence on which it is asserted that Christ was crucified on Friday. It is answered, "Every one admits this fact." But why does every one admit this fact? There is but one answer that can be given: Christ was crucified the day before the Sabbath, [Mark xv, 42,] which, according to all records, Pagan, Mahometan, Jewish and Christian, comes on Saturday. For this one grand reason, it has been treated as an established fact, that the crucifixion occurred on Friday.
Now mark this point! In order to fill the space of two entire days between the crucifixion day and the day of the resurrection, which this theory presents, you say that two sabbaths came in connection, viz: the passover sabbath and the Sabbath of Jehovah. And that the crucifixion occurred the day before the passover sabbath, and two days before the Sabbath of the Lord.
Very well; have your own idea of this also. Now what have you gained? Simply this: the crucifixion did not occur on Friday, the day before the Sabbath, but it occurred on Thursday, two days before the Sabbath.
One plain fact ought to put this argument into oblivion for ever. It is this: The Sabbath is the fixed point which determines the day of the week on which the crucifixion occurred, and not the crucifixion day, the fixed point which may set the Sabbath forward or backward. Weigh this fact; its force will be seen.
The only way that the day of the crucifixion can be determined, is by its relative distance from the Sabbath; hence it is the height of folly to adjust the Sabbath by the day of the crucifixion. Is it not so?
The premises of our brethren who maintain this theory, sadly clash. Their evidence, when allowed in its full length and breadth, amounts to this: the crucifixion occurred on Thursday. But it is a fundamental point with them that it occurred on Friday. The argument at most can only claim to set the crucifixion back, and can never lay the least claim to having set the Sabbath and the resurrection forward. It destroys the very foundation on which it claims to rest! We bespeak serious attention to the point.
But we present two or three points as worthy of the attention of those who reckon this period in full time.
1. The theory which reckons the three days and three nights in full time, seems, at least, to contradict the multitude of texts that speak of the resurrection on the third day. For as He was buried before the close of the crucifixion day, he was in the tomb (if we follow this theory) a part of Friday, all of Saturday and Sunday, and a part of Monday; thus making a part of four days. How then could he be raised on the third day?
2. He was crucified on the fourteenth day of the first month, the antitype of the paschal lamb, [1 Cor. v, 7; John xviii, 28,] and raised on the sixteenth day, the "morrow after the Sabbath," the antitype of the first fruits. Lev. xxiii, 4—11; 1 Cor. xv, 23.
3. He was crucified the day before the Sabbath, [Mark xv, 42] and raised the day after the Sabbath. Mark xvi, 1, 2.
But does not this idea of making out Sunday the Seventh day, look much more like an ingenious excuse for breaking the fourth commandment, than a real, sincere effort to obey it?
On whom does the blessing of heaven rest? On those who obey the commandments, or on those who find an excuse for not obeying? J. N. A.