p. 1 | FIGHTING AGAINST GOD by D. Bosworth

Publishing Committee · Battle Creek, Mich. · May 7, 1857

FIGHTING AGAINST GOD.

By D. Bosworth

ED. REVIEW AND HERALD, DEAR SIR: My attention was called last eve to an article in your paper of Feb. 19th, entitled, "Fighting against God," the latter part of which was devoted to reviewing an answer to a question proposed to me through the Advent Herald of Jan. 17th. The writer does not notice that the article referred to was simply a word of explanation in reference to a tract I had published on the Sabbath question, and I would (if possible) have the charity to believe he had not seen the tract, for he assumes that I occupy a position which I expressly disclaim, and contend against in my tract, viz., That any portion of the ten commandments have been abrogated, but rather that all are binding. Again, if the writer had quoted enough of the article referred to, to have fairly represented me, in respect, even to that, I should have submitted to the judgment of your readers without noticing him. But he has not done so. But by garbled extracts, leaving out an illustration (by which I show that two different days may be called the Lord's Sabbaths, and for widely dissimilar reasons,) by denying that a certain form of expression is in the Bible, thus conveying the idea that I affirm it, and rest at least a portion of my argument upon it,—he presents me as occupying a lame position, and (to my mind) helps by special pleading, to lead those already blinded, into denser, deeper darkness. Whereas the position I occupy (if rightly represented) I believe to be founded on the rock of eternal truth. But to the article, "We will now notice the effort of another writer in the same No. of the Herald to creep around the law of God." Now, Mr. Editor, did that writer know what he was battling, when he perpetrated that sneer? Had he seen the tract which drew out the question and answer in the Herald? If so, he knew that I contended for the whole of the moral law without any abrogation or revision. If not, why did he raise that man of straw, and when he had felled the effigy to earth weep over me as one who was

— "laboring hard to lose eternal life."

It may be said he supposed you thought the law abrogated. But why did he suppose? "I have taught openly . . . and in secret have I said nothing." Creep around forsooth. I have come up and put my neck to the yoke, as I understand it, and as I expect to be judged by it. And now let the sneering manner in which he has introduced my remarks be witness between me and him.

Again: quoting my remark, "it being generally conceded that the true Sabbath was lost during the sojourn in Egypt, if it had been observed before," he says, "is not conceded by any advocate of the Sabbath that I know of." Now what does the assertion, that "God worked miracles to point out the Sabbath-day, and to enable the children of Israel to keep the true Sabbath-day," which has been iterated again and again by various writers in your paper, and which I have heard repeated and re-repeated by Sabbatarians, amount to, if they do not "concede that the Sabbath has been lost." But whatever they may mean, I think it may be safely said, that those who have been careful readers and observers, know the statement to be true.

Again: he says "the seventh from the first of falling manna." This last day is nowhere named in the Bible. If none had desired to evade God's law, it would never have been dug up? I would simply say, I read the 16th chap. of Exodus, I see one day employed by divine direction, in traveling from Elim to the wilderness of Sin, six days following manna falls—the seventh is named as the Sabbath. And as I do not find the Lord causing the camp to move again on the Sabbath during the sojourn in the wilderness, I suppose that journey could not have been performed on the Sabbath-day. For God without a reason assigned, would not have commanded man to do what he soon after forbade his doing, on pain of death. And as the six intervening days manna rained on Israel, and its cessation made known the Rest-day God would have them observe, let Him who judgeth all hearts decide whether I went about to "dig up" something, or whether I drew a perfectly natural conclusion. And the man whose heart is so dark as to see nothing but dishonesty or evasion in a brother under circumstances so simple, must at least lack all that charity that "thinketh no evil." But enough, I proceed no further with the subject, and shall promise this writer never to notice him again, unless he can so convey his ideas as not to leave the impression, that a brother differing against him must be

— "laboring hard to lose eternal life."

But in conclusion, I again call on Sabbatarians to answer to the limitation of the Sabbath. It ran parallel, and only parallel with the priesthood, [compare Ex. xxxi, 13, 16, with xl, 15,] the priesthood having ceased, the Sabbath must have passed away. And now we either have another day marked, or since the death of the Aaronic priesthood, no Sabbath is binding. But as I believe the whole law is binding, i. e., the moral law, I look for another day. Accordingly before the closing of that dispensation I hear the prophet saying, [Ps. cxviii,] The stone which the builders refused, is become the head stone of the corner. This is the Lord's doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes. This is THE DAY which the LORD hath made, we will be glad, and rejoice in it.

And now, Mr. Editor, I would say in conclusion, my desire is so to learn of the great Teacher, that whether your corresponding Editor shall accuse me of "creeping around," "evading God's law," "digging up excuses," &c., &c., he whom I serve may never so charge me. Yours looking for the Sabbath that remains. D. BOSWORTH. Bristol, Vt., Apr. 17th, 1857.