Is the Seventh Day of the Jewish week, the Christian Sabbath?
By John S. Williams
THE only reliable source of evidence in determining this question is the sacred Scriptures of divine truth. Is the seventh day the patriarchal Sabbath? Is it in accordance with the original Sabbath as instituted by God himself? Here the seventh day keepers affirm and we deny. Let it be admitted that the seventh day of the week is the Jewish Sabbath; or in other words that those who contend for the hallowed use of the seventh day of the week, are correct, according to the time of the Jewish Sabbath at the time our Saviour made his appearance in the world. But does it147therefore follow that this was the original, or the patriarchal Sabbath, or that it was intended to be of universal and perpetual obligation on all christians throughout all time, and in all places where christianity is to be embraced! Our Seventh-day friends sometimes demand, in what we have regarded as a kind of supercilious and dogmatical manner, and with an air of seeming triumph, just one single passage of scripture in which God ever authorized any change in the time of keeping the Sabbath. Now the Scriptures fully authorize us to claim that the original Sabbath commenced in the morning and not in the evening, as the Jews were in the habit of reckoning. Let us see if God himself did not allow the Jews to reckon their Sabbath from evening to evening. "From even to even shall ye celebrate your Sabbath," Lev. xxiii, 32. The above passage of scripture will warrant us in saying that God himself did authorize a change to the extent of half a day at least. We think no one will presume to contend that God either commenced or ended the work of creation in the evening; and let it be particularly noted that at whatever hour he commenced his work, at that very hour he ended it. Hence the sacred historian says, "The evening and the morning were the first day," &c. Let us now look for a moment at the Jewish method of regulating time. They had no way of dividing their year into months but by the phases of the moon. Now as the sun and moon were not created until the fourth day, it appears manifest that the Sabbath in the first moon of time would occur respectively on the 3d, 10th, 17th, and 24th days of the first month. A little thought and attention are requisite just at this point, in order to have a correct understanding of what we mean. In order if possible to give our readers a clear idea of this matter, let it be recollected that the moon, so to speak, is not as old as time by at least four days. Hence while the original Sabbath occurred on the seventh day of time, it occurred on the third &c., days of the month, as stated above. The great Jewish legislator requested Pharaoh to let the Hebrews go three days' journey into the wilderness, and sacrifice. Now it is certain they started on the fourteenth day of the month, and crossed the Red sea on the seventeenth, and we very respectfully submit if this be not in accordance with the original institution of the Sabbath. In all probability the Israelites passed over the Red sea just about the time God finished the magnificent work of creation, and also about the precise hour and on the same day of the month on which our Saviour arose from the dead, of which the crossing over the Red sea was undoubtedly typical. Notice particularly that the passover was to be killed on the fourteenth day of the month; then just so many days were to intervene between that and the Sabbath day. Now let us carry this great national festival down to the days of Christ, when he as "our passover was to be sacrificed for us." "Then came the days of unleavened bread when the passover must be killed." Luke xxii, 7. This according to specific enactment of God was to be on the fourteenth day of the month Nisan; and no matter into what mistakes or errors the Jews might have fallen, our Saviour doubtless knew and observed the correct time, for he "came to fulfill the law." Hence we notice that he arose from the dead on the seventeenth day of the month, or what the Jews called the first day of the week; and that the same length of time intervened between the time he celebrated his own death, and the time he arose from the dead; and the time that was allowed to intervene between the killing of the passover and the Jewish Sabbath. Let us go back again to the law, and we shall find that the wave sheaf was to be presented to the priest on the first day of the week after the passover sabbath; and as this was to represent, or rather to typify the resurrection of Christ, is it not highly probable to say the least of it, that the type and antitype would thus far coincide with each other. It seems that the Jews had by some means or other got wrong in their reckoning, because their sabbath at the crucifixion fell on the sixteenth instead of the seventeenth day of the month, according to the original institution. We are fully aware that God incorporated into the decalogue, the observance of the seventh day—that it was written with the finger of God. But no christian is now so insane as to contend for the observance of the Jewish Sabbath as they observed it. Now let us see if there be not a very strong intimation given us that the Jewish Sabbath was to be abolished. Our Saviour, on the Sabbath day plucked the ears of corn and gave them to his disciples, which was unlawful for any to eat thereof until the wave sheaf had been presented to the priest. No one will allow that our Saviour was compelled to this from absolute necessity; for he who fed the hungry thousands in the wilderness, could have supplied his own wants and likewise those of his disciples. Why then did he do this thing? We answer, manifestly to show that he had abolished the Jewish priesthood, and transferred it to his own disciples, constituting them his future priests; and this is what doubtless so enraged the bigoted, Scribes and Pharisees. Let these things be specially borne in mind; for with the disannalling of the Jewish priesthood, away went the Jewish Sabbath also. There being a change of the priesthood, there is of necessity a change of the law. Let no one forget that as our Saviour arose from the dead on the first day of the Jewish week, so likewise every subsequent special manifestation to his disciples occurred on the first day of the week. That priesthood which he had so significantly transferred to them in the act of plucking the first fruits and giving to his disciples, thus wrestling it from the Jewish priest, was afterwards confirmed to them on the first day of the week, when he appeared and said unto them, "Whatever ye bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven" &c. Now if the apostles ever bound the observance of the Jewish Sabbath, or the seventh day of the week on the converts to christianity, we most respectfully ask where it is written! It is by no means important for us to show how or when the Jews lost the correct reckoning. Perhaps in the valley of Ajalon, when the sun and moon stood still about the space of a whole day. If they called that two days, God called it but one day, (* which is the fact in the case) then any one may plainly perceive how they got wrong in their reckoning. We do not affirm that this was the way in which they did get wrong; but one thing is very apparent, viz., had our Saviour arisen on the Jewish Sabbath, there would have been but little opportunity to investigate the evidences on which you now rely for this glorious truth in our holy christianity. Thus we perceive, all things were ordered by an all-wise Being. In conclusion: we have written the above at the request of a seventh-day preacher, with the assurance that it should appear in their periodical, together with such criticisms as might be deemed requisite. And as I have confined myself exclusively to the Scriptures, if any one choose to review this brief article, I hope he will confine himself to the same. If not, I desire that neither the article nor any notice of it may ever appear before the public. Monroe, Green Co., Wis., Sept. 10th, 1858. NOTE. We confess that our Correspondent has the advantage of us, in going, in some places, entirely beyond our depth, or else in being somewhat obscure in the expression of his ideas. If Brn. Ingraham, Waggoner, or Cottrell can appreciate the force of the reasoning, and wish to offer some criticisms thereon, the columns of the REVIEW are open for them.—ED.