The Author of the First-Day Sabbath
By F. M. W.
THE law of God is the character of God in written form. As every law-maker puts himself and his character into the law he formulates, so the Omnipotent One expressed in his law of ten commandments his own divine attributes. This is so in the very nature of the case. God could not do otherwise than give to an instrument of this kind an expression of himself. Hence there could come no change in the law of God and that law still continue to express his character unless there came a change in God himself. As God is the same yesterday, to-day, and forever, the same in this dispensation as in the old, the same when he died for men as when he made the world in the beginning, we must therefore conclude that if any change has been wrought in what men regard the law of God, it has been made by another power than the Lord Jesus Christ. Has there arisen in the earth a power that has tampered with the law of God? Is any such opposing principle brought to view in the Sacred Scriptures? It does not require a very careful reading of the Word of God to see that this is the case. For many centuries there have been two opposing principles in the universe — God and Satan. And ever since the fall of man these two principles have been manifest in the world, and in the flesh. God was manifest in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself. He came not to tear down the government of God, but to exalt it; not to detract from the law, but to magnify it. And faith in him, instead of abolishing the law, only serves to confirm its authority. The principle of evil has likewise been manifest in the flesh, and its highest manifestation is in Antichrist. And the object of this power from the beginning has been to draw subjects from the kingdom of light to the kingdom of darkness; to misrepresent the character of God in the earth, and to weaken and bring to naught his rightful authority. And it is upon this latter power that the responsibility rests of working a change in the divine requirements, so far as the practise of men is concerned. Several scriptures bring this power to view. We shall content ourselves, however, with an examination of the references made by the prophet Daniel and the apostle Paul. The prophet states that after the Roman kingdom had become divided, there would arise a power which would speak great words against the Most High, wear out the saints of the Most High, and think to change the times and laws of the Most High. Dan. 7:25. That unmistakable reference is made here to the Papacy there can be no dispute among Protestant Bible students. That power has met every specification of the charges brought against it. It has spoken great words against the Most High in claiming to be God upon earth, to have power to forgive sins, and to be the arbiter of the consciences of men. It has worn out the saints of the Most High in the ages of the past in subjecting to death those who were unwilling to support its claims as against the leadings of their own consciences and the authority of the Word of God. The sacrifice of from fifty million to one hundred million martyrs testifies to the truth of this statement. And in addition to these crimes against High Heaven, the prophet states that it even would have the audacity to dictate a change in the government of God itself. The same work is brought to view in the epistle to the church in Thessalonica. Of this same power, under the name of the man of sin, the apostle writes that it would oppose and exalt itself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped. 2 Thess. 2:1-4. In enforcing the law of God as his own, he would place himself on an equality with the great Lawgiver; but his exaltation above God could come only by assuming superior authority, by changing the requirements of God, and enforcing the change instead of the original requirement. Has the Papacy met these requirements? and does it plead guilty to the charge? To prove this indeed true, we have but to call attention to the words of the Roman Church as printed in its representative publications. The following confessions, which might be multiplied twentyfold by similar quotations, reveal the position assumed by the papal church upon this subject:— Question.—Have you any other way of proving that the church has power to institute festivals of precept? Answer.—Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her,—she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday, the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday, the seventh day, a change for which there is no Scriptural authority. Q.—When Protestants do profane work upon Saturday, or the seventh day of the week, do they follow the Scripture as their only rule of faith? Do they find this permission clearly laid down in the Sacred Volume? A.—On the contrary, they have only the authority of tradition for this practise. In profaning Saturday, they violate one of God's commandments, which he has never clearly abrogated,—"Remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath day."—Doctrinal Catechism, pages 174, 352. Q.—How prove you that the church hath power to command feasts and holy days? A.—By the very act of changing the Sabbath into Sunday, which Protestants allow of; and therefore they fondly contradict themselves by keeping Sunday strictly, and breaking most other feasts commanded by the same church. A.—Because by keeping Sunday they acknowledge the church's power to ordain feasts, and to command them under sin; and by not keeping the rest by her commanded, they again deny, in fact, the same power.—Abridgment of the Christian Doctrine, page 58. From the foregoing prophecies and with the plain facts of their fulfilment, it is not difficult to determine the author of the observance of the first day of the week. It was not the Lord or his apostles, but it was the power which is pointed out in all the Scriptures of truth as the most dangerous enemy of the gospel of Christ. The Sunday sabbath rests alone upon the authority of the tradition of the Catholic Church. And he who observes it pays deference, though it may be unwittingly, to the authority of Antichrist. Respect for the Lord Jesus Christ and the proper recognition of his authority can be found only in obedience to his requirements, and in the sacred keeping of the day he himself made and set apart for the use of all men. Shall we honor Christ, or Antichrist? Shall we keep the Sabbath of the Lord, or the sabbath ordained by the great enemy of the church of God?