Learned Men on the Sabbath.
To the question, If there is no divine authority for the change of the day from the seventh to the first, why have not learned men found out this before? We will let learned men answer for themselves. RICHARD WATSON.—The obligation of a Sabbatical institution upon Christians, as well as the extent of it, have been the subjects of much controversy. Christian Churches themselves have differed; and the theologians of the same Church. Much has been written upon the subject on each side, and much research and learning employed, sometimes, to darken a very plain subject. Now, though there is not on record any Divine command issued to the apostles, to change the Sabbath from the day on which it was held by the Jews, to the first day of the week; yet, when we see that this was done in the Apostolic age, and that St. Paul speaks of the Jewish sabbaths as not being obligatory upon Christians, while he yet contends that the whole moral law is obligatory upon them; the fair inference is, that this change of the day was made by Divine direction.—Theological Institutes. ARCHBISHOP WHATELY.—It is not merely that the apostles left us no command perpetuating the observance of the Sabbath, and transferring the day from the seventh to the first; such a change certainly, would have been authorized by their express injunction, and by nothing short of that; since an express Divine command can be changed or altered, only by the same power, and by the same distinct revelation, by which it was delivered. But, not only is there no apostolic injunction, than which nothing less would be sufficient; there is not even any tradition of their having made such a change; nay more, it is even abundantly plain that they made no such change.—Note A. to Essay V. CALVIN.—It was not without reason that Christians substituted what we call the Lord's Day for the Sabbath. The resurrection of our Lord being the end and accomplishment of that true rest, which the ancient Sabbath typified, this day, by which types were abolished, &c.—Calvin's Institutes, Book ii, chap. 8. PRES. HUMPHREY, D. D.—It is a settled principle, in all governments, that there are but two ways in which any law can cease to be binding upon the people. It may expire by its own limitations, or it may be repealed by the same authority which enacted it; and in the latter case, the repealing act must be as explicit as that by which the obligation was originally imposed. Now, we have it in proof, that the Sabbath was instituted by the infinite lawgiver in Paradise. In priority of time, it stands at the head of all his enactments. It is the very first statute, in that Divine code of laws, which he has promulgated in the Bible. Of course, it has an authority entirely independent of the Jewish ritual, and was no more a part of that system, which has "waxed old and vanished away" than the sixth commandment is. The law of the Sabbath can never expire by its own limitations; and for the plainest of all reasons, that it has no limitations. And God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because that in it he had rested from all his work, which God created and made. Now if this solemn act made the Sabbath binding upon mankind at all, it made the obligation universal and perpetual, as no limitation, or exemption is hinted at. Again he says: Which day of the week was originally appointed to be kept, and for what reason? As this is not a controverted question, it will detain us but a moment. The first point is settled in these express words. "And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made, and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it." The same day is specified in the recognition or re-enactment of the Sabbath, at mount Sinai. "Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work; but the seventh is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God." Indeed, wherever the weekly Sabbath is mentioned in the Old Testament, the seventh day of the week is intended. Jesus Christ, himself, kept the same day during his public ministry; and the Jews, in every part of the world, where they have been scattered, still adhere to it as the true and only Sabbath. The reason for the original sanctification of the seventh day, is no less distinctly specified, than the designation itself. "And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it, because that in it he had rested from all his work." So in the fourth commandment, "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." Here we see that the seventh day was set apart, rather than the sixth, the first, or any other, because that God himself rested on that day, or ceased from the work of creation. It was to keep in remembrance that stupendous work, and to excite mankind to celebrate the glorious attributes of wisdom, power, and benevolence, which were displayed in its progress and completion, that this particular arrangement was made. And what other could have been so appropriate?—Surely, if any solemn commemoration at all was demanded, or was proper, it was suitable that it should begin on the very day when "the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy;" and that the same day of the week should be devoted to holy rest, meditation, and praise. The seventh day is the Sabbath. It was so at that time, and for many ages after. But it is not said, that it always shall be.—pp. 17, 18, 34, 37. REV. JOHN S. STONE, D. D.—It is highly probable that while, under the Patriarchal dispensation, the Sabbath was observed on the seventh day, in commemoration of God's rest from his works of creation, under the Mosaic dispensation, it was observed on a different day of the week, commemorative of his people's deliverance from Egyptian bondage; and that, therefore, under the Christian dispensation, it would be observed on still another day, commemorative of Christ's completed work of redemption, which was at once a new and moral creation, and a deliverance from worse than Egyptian bondage. Thus each of the three great dispensations, under which the Church of God has existed, will be found to have its own day for the Sabbath, and its own reason for the assignment of that day to its observance. It is highly probable, when the Sabbath was revived in the wilderness, the old seventh day had been lost, and a new one was substituted. It has already been said, that when the day of the Sabbath has once been fixed by Divine authority, it requires the sanction of the same authority to effect a change. This sanction may be given in either of two ways; by express precept, or by clear example and approbation. That we have no express precept for the change is readily granted. The change of the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the week, was at first introduced by Christ and his apostles, and has ever since met with a full Divine approval and sanction. Why, if there was to be a Sabbath in the Christian Church, and if the day for its observance was to be changed from the seventh to the first day of the week, why is there no mention of this in the writings of the New Testament; no precept either enjoining or justifying the change? To this question, which really presents the whole difficulty in the case, I reply, No precept enjoining the change was given, for the very reason, evidently, that Divine Wisdom saw it was not best to issue such a precept. This, upon looking below the surface, appears wondrously and beauteously clear.—pp. 83, 85, 86, 92, 93. CHANNING.—We know, that it is said, that the ancient Sabbath remains untouched; that Christianity has only removed it from the last to the first day of the week, and that this is a slight, unessential change, leaving the old institution whole and unbroken. To this we have several replies. In the first place, this change of days, which Christianity is supposed to make, is not unessential, but vital, and subversive of the ancient institution. The end of the ancient Sabbath was the commemoration of God's resting from his works, and, for this end, the very day of the week on which he rested was most wisely selected. Now we maintain, that to select the first day of the week, the very day on which he began his works, and to select and separate this in commemoration of another event, of Christ's resurrection, is wholly to set aside the ancient Sabbath. We cannot conceive of a more essential departure from the original ordinance. This substitution, as it is called, is a literal as well as virtual abolition. Such is our first remark. We say, secondly, that not a word is uttered in the New Testament of the first day being substituted for the seventh. Surely so striking a change would not have been made in a universal and perpetual law of God, without some warning. We ask for some hint of this modification of the fourth commandment. We find not a syllable. We say, thirdly, that the first Christians knew nothing of this substitution. PROF. ALEXANDER, D. D.—It must not be forgotten, that till the Romans destroyed Jerusalem, the Jewish Christians showed a respect to the ancient Sabbath, and the apostles very often took the opportunity of preaching to the Jews, as they thereon assembled in their synagogues.—Pocket Dictionary, Under the Sabbath. PROF. EDWARD BEREWOOD.—It is commonly believed that the Jewish Sabbath was changed into the Lord's Day by Christian emperors, and they know little who do not know, that the ancient Sabbath did remain and was observed by the eastern churches three hundred years after our Saviour's passion.—Treatise on the Sabbath, p. 163. J. B. F.