By the above, attention is again called to the course pursued by the Harbinger, in the investigation of Bible Truth. We had contented ourselves with what has already been written on this subject, had not the sophistry and deception used by the editor of that paper, been too gross and glaring to be passed over in silence; we had heeded the admonition, "Ephraim is joined to idols; let him alone," and said no more. But the cause of truth demands that a course so contrary to its own profession of "free investigation," so inconsistent with reason and the Word of God, should be fully exposed, that honest souls be not deceived thereby. With truth and fairness on our side, we have only to regret that every reader of the Harbinger may not have the privilege of seeing the REVIEW to learn for themselves our position and mark the injustice with which we are met.
The words of J. Marsh, (editor of the Harbinger,) given above, are a part of his reply to some remarks which I made on Bro. Monroe's article, found in No. 2 of the present Vol. of the REVIEW. These quotations are there given: "Remember the Sabbath-day, to keep it holy," [Ex. xx, 8,] "The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God," [Verse 10th,] and, "The Sabbath was made for man," [Mark ii, 27,] which the Harbinger at once denounces as a "perversion of the truth." Now we ask—How? Have we not stated them, directly as given in the Word of God, and furthermore stated that they needed neither "note nor comment?" How then are they perverted? But, a few lines below, in the remarks of the Harbinger, the mystery is solved. The three sentences, commencing, "Christians, 'remember the Sabbath-day'" &c., explain the whole matter. There we see that the editor has reduced them down to his own adulterated notions of truth, made unwarrantable additions, and then told his readers, that that was the way we intended they should read; thus, himself perverting the scriptures, and then charging it upon us. We are satisfied to take it as it reads: "The Sabbath was made for man," and so long as any one claims to be a man, so long he is amenable to the Sabbath law.
But let us take another view. How must the passages referred to, read, to sustain the Harbinger's notion, that the Sabbath was intended for the Jews exclusively? must they not read thus: Jews, "remember the Sabbath-day to keep it holy." "The seventh day is the Sabbath" for Jews, and, "The Sabbath was made for" Jews? Therefore, with as much propriety it might be said that the Sabbath was not intended for the Jews at all, because the word, Jews, is not mentioned, as to say that it was not intended for Christians, because the word, Christians, is not given. The folly of the Harbinger's remarks on this point, will be readily seen.
Again, he says, "Here then we have presented the best proof that an experienced and zealous Sabbatarian can find in the Bible to prove that Christians are required to keep the seventh day, or Jewish Sabbath." Now when he talks of proof, why dont he give the proof I presented? Why take only a portion of the testimony, and pervert that, and then throw it out as the best proof that can be offered? The request was emphatically made, that the Harbinger would give us one plain direct passage from either the Old or New Testament, without note or comment, that reads that either a Jew or Gentile Christian, is required to keep the [Jewish] commandment, not to bow down to graven images. This point is very artfully and studiously avoided. Why? Because it could not answer it; yet its readers were told that they had the best proof presented, that could be given for keeping the Sabbath.
If, as the Harbinger would have us believe, we are required to observe only those precepts which are directly commanded to the Christian, then we may bow down and worship graven images, without sin, and the Harbinger cannot deny it. So with the other commandments. But however much he may amuse46himself and his readers by his absurd quibblings on the word, Christian, he has first to prove that the Sabbath is abolished. We want no inferences, assumptions or assertions; if God has annulled his law or any portion of his law, surely the record of such an event can be found. God would never do an act of such importance, and then, in regard to it, leave the world entirely ignorant. Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets. Amos iii, 7. Show us, then, the place where God has given intimation, by any of the prophets, that he ever intended to abolish his law; or show us plain, direct testimony from the New Testament that it has been done. Mark the importance attached to the giving of that law on Mount Sinai, and the awful grandeur with which it was accompanied; shall it then be abolished and mankind know nothing of it? But we would not have people, to prove its abolition, waste time in bringing up such passages as the following: "One man esteemeth one day above another," &c. [Rom. xiv, 6,] and, "Let no man therefore judge you in meat or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath-days; [Col. ii, 16;] for, in the first place, every candid mind will see that these have no reference to the "royal law," and, secondly, even if they had, what would they prove in favor of that position? Nor would we have people throw away words in referring to this text: "But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stone, was glorious," &c.; [2 Cor. iii, 7;] for every one ought to know that there is a distinction between a law and the ministration of that law, and that a particular ministration can be done away without abolishing the law with it. Then we would say, and once for all, let the Harbinger give us plain, direct, unequivocal proof that the Sabbath of the Lord is abolished, or from henceforth, forever, hold his peace on this subject.