THE HOLY SABBATH OF THE LORD.
By B. F. Snook
WE come now to consider the last head of the above subject. As far as we have gone, the masses of Bible believers are with us. But we now step out upon grounds entirely in opposition to those who have heretofore agreed with us. The question for present consideration is one of great importance. Has the Sabbath been changed from the seventh to the first day of the week? The orthodox would say it has. They affirm. We deny. Here we will give a statement of their views and consider the arguments adduced as their proof. 1. As it is the law of nature that in general a due proportion of our time be set apart for the worship of God, so in his word by a positive, moral and perpetual commandment binding all men in all ages, he hath particularly appointed one day in seven for a Sabbath to be kept holy unto him, which from the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ was the last day of the week, and from the resurrection of Christ was changed into the first day of the week. Standard of the Associate Reformed Church of North America. p. 127. 2. John Brown says, "In honor of his own resurrection, Jesus the Lord of the Sabbath, changed the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the week." Bible Dictionary. 3. Prot. Epis. Church says, "The day is now changed from the seventh to the first day of the week in commemoration of our Lord's resurrection." 4. Adam Clarke, D. D. says, "The change of the Jewish into the Christian Sabbath, called the Lord's day, shows that Christ is not only the Lord, but also the truth and completion of it; for it seems to have been by an especial providence that this change has been made and acknowledged all over the Christian world." Com. on Matt. xii, 8. 5. It is further observed in this answer that the day which we call the seventh part of time was the seventh day of the week from the beginning of the world till the resurrection of Christ, but the day was changed by the substitution of another in its room. Ridgely's Body of Div. p. 346. We have given the above citations to show the position occupied by the religious world. Next we will examine the evidence on which they rely for their proof that the Sabbath has been changed. 1. Dr. Ridgely says, "This change of the Sabbath appears from the example of Christ and his apostles who celebrated the first day of the week as a Sabbath after his resurrection." Body Div. p. 347. In proof of this statement he cites John xx, 19. "Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst and saith unto them peace be unto you." Well do we find anything in this to prove the Dr.'s statement. The word change is not in the verse, neither is the day on which they were assembled called the Sabbath. The leading terms of the Dr.'s argument are of home manufacture and do not occur in his proof text. But we will give him another chance. If we can find terms equivalent in meaning to "change," and "Sabbath," we will give them equal weight. The words alter, and rest, would be exactly synonymous with the above. But these we cannot find in the text. Therefore it comes short of proving what it was quoted to prove. Let us now critically analyze this declaration and see what it does teach. 1. It teaches that the disciples were assembled on the first day of the week. 2. That they were assembled for fear of the Jews. The Dr. says it was to commemorate the resurrection of Christ. Quite a difference between John and the Dr.!! No wonder; John was giving a plain statement of historical facts; but the Dr. wrote to serve a purpose, to sustain an unscriptural practice. 3. Jesus appeared and stood in their midst. Not one word do we find here to prove the change of the Sabbath. 4. He said, Peace be unto you. This proves that he blessed the apostles, but is no evidence that he blessed the day or appointed it to be kept and observed for any purpose. He next brings verse 26 into court to testify for him. "And after eight days again his disciples were within and Thomas with them; then came Jesus, the doors being shut and stood in the midst and said, Peace be unto you." It really appears that the cause must be hard run for proof that hangs upon this text. The Dr. assumes that this meeting was on the first day of the week because he thinks it was just eight days from the preceding one. But the text says after eight days. If the text be true this meeting could not have been on a day earlier than the ninth, for after eight days cannot mean just eight. The text is definite proof that this meeting was not earlier than the ninth day, but affords no proof that it was on the first day of the week. Again, does this scripture afford any proof that they were assembled to commemorate the resurrection of Christ? We will see. The connection proves the opposite. He rather appeared to more fully develop the fact of his resurrection. This he did by proving to unbelieving Thomas that he had really risen from the dead. Verses 27, 28. This therefore like the preceding testimony affords the Dr. no proof whatever on any one point. 2. He says this change farther appears from the fact that the church met on the first day of the week. Acts xx, 7 is then brought forward and after all the torturing that it can be subject to it will not testify in behalf of the Dr. "And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them ready to depart on the morrow and continued his speech until midnight." The fact that the church at Troas met on the first day of the week no more proves it to be the Sabbath than the fact that Christ was with his disciples forty days after his resurrection proves that each of those forty days was a Sabbath. But suppose it was the custom of the early church to meet on the first day of the week. Does that prove the change of the Sabbath? Does that give men the right to violate the law which says, The seventh day is the Sabbath? If so where does the proof occur? Again, if it was the custom of some of the early Christians to meet on the first day of the week is that any evidence that we should. But we think the meeting referred to above was an evening meeting. Verse 8 confirms this: And there were many lights in the upper chamber where they were gathered together. There would be no necessity of lights in a room in daylight, but there would be in the evening. The fact also of the young man going to sleep, &c. is good evidence that this was an evening meeting. But if not how could Paul preach till midnight? According to the Bible the day ends and begins with the setting of the sun. The above meeting was on Saturday night, which would be the commencement of the first day of the week or Sunday. This is the truth of this matter. Hence we have a good reason for the lights in the upper room. The young man perhaps became a little weary of Paul's long sermon and34like many now, in like circumstances, fell asleep. But unfortunately he fell down and was nearly killed. Paul restored him and they broke bread and conversed until break of day; and on Sunday morning he left them and started away on his long journey to Jerusalem; therefore this proves that Sunday is rather a day of labor than a day of rest. 1 Cor. xvi, 1, 2 is next brought out. "As I have given orders to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye: upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come." According to this the first day of the week is a day of business, in which the disciples are required to lay by them as they have been prospered. If Paul had been a good Sunday-keeper he never would have penned the above. 3. The Dr. next says, "This change further appears from the fact that there is a day mentioned in the New Testament which is styled the Lord's day. I was in the spirit on the Lord's day." Rev. i, 10. We admit that the Lord has a day yet; but we do not admit that that is any evidence of the change spoken of. We believe that the day of which the Son of man is Lord, is the Lord's day. He is Lord of the Sabbath day [Mark ii, 29], which is the seventh. Ex. xx, 9. Therefore the seventh and not the first day is the Lord's day. We have now examined all the strongholds of Sunday-keepers, from which we come to the following conclusions. 1. Sunday is not a day of rest by any divine authority. 2. The primitive Christians did not rest upon it, neither did they regard it as a holy day. 3. There is no divine authority for keeping it in commemoration of the resurrection of Christ. 4. The primitive Christians did not keep it in commemoration of the resurrection of Christ. 5. Those who work on the Sabbath and rest on Sunday act without any authority from God and sin against him. 6. The phrase, first day of the week, in all occurs eight times in the New Testament and is never applied to the Sabbath. 7. The phrase Sabbath or Sabbath day occurs in the New Testament 59 times and is never applied to the first day of the week or any other day. Having now noticed the evidence brought forward to support the change of the Sabbath we will pass from this part of the subject. We are ready to admit that a change has been attempted and made, to a great extent; but we question the authority that made the change. Our opponents say, Christ did it; and we, in the absence of their proof, deny. We have proved in a previous article the perpetuity of the Lord's holy Sabbath throughout all time. We will next state that according to prophecy the law of God was to be changed, and a result of this change is a change of Sabbath time. Dan. vii, 8. And I considered the horns, and behold there came up among them another little horn before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots; and behold in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things. Verse 25. And he shall speak great words against the Most High, and shall think to change times and laws. Dan. viii, 12. And it casts the truth to the ground. Dan. xi, 36. And the king shall do according to his will, and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvelous things against the God of gods. These scriptures evidently speak of a power that should arise against God, oppose his law and trample it under foot, and make war against the saints. For mark, the one who does one of these deeds does all of them. Therefore if Christ changed the law and Sabbath, he exalted himself above God, spoke against him, and waged war against the saints. But this does not harmonize with Isaiah: He will magnify the law and make it honorable. Chap. xlii, 21. Christ then exalted the law, and humbled himself [Phil. ii, 8]; and he obeyed the law in honor of his Father. John xv. But this law and time changer was to exalt himself. Paul speaks of the same power. 2 Thess. ii, 3, 4: Let no man deceive you by any means; for that day shall not come except there come a falling away first and that man of sin be revealed the son of perdition, who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped; so that he as God, sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. According to Paul, this power will not only exalt himself above all that is called God and worshiped, but he will actually sit in the temple or place of God, and will show that he is God. Then there are at least two Gods; the true and false, even him whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders and all deceivableness of unrighteousness. Again the false god or antichrist is to oppose the true God. This he does by working himself into the temple of God, and changing his law. The true God has a code of laws. Deut. iv, 13. And he gave unto you his covenant which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments. This is a perfect law. Ps. xix, 1. The law of the Lord is perfect. It cannot be added to nor diminished from. Deut. iv, 2. Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish aught from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you. The false god will also have a code of laws. This code is made by changing, adding to and dividing the law of the true God. Has such a power arisen? All history responds, There has. The papal power evidently fulfills this prophecy perfectly. The pope has exalted himself above God; has taken his place; has garbled the law of God, and torn from it the second commandment. To supply this deficiency in the number of commandments he has divided the tenth command, making two of it. And last, though not least, he has changed the fourth commandment from the seventh to the first day of the week. This he acknowledges: "In profaning Saturday they violate one of God's commandments, which he has never clearly abrogated: 'Remember thou keep holy the Sabbath day.'" Doct. Cat. p. 352. Again, "During the old law Saturday was the day sanctified, but the church, instructed by Jesus Christ and directed by the Spirit of God has substituted Sunday for Saturday; so we now sanctify the first, not the seventh day. Had the church power to do this? Certainly. The uniform, universal and perpetual tradition of all ages and nations attest the antiquity and consequently the divine assent to this change. Why did the church make this change? Because Christ rose from the dead on Sunday, and rested from the great work of redemption." Cath. Cat. The foregoing is but a tithe of the evidence that might be adduced attesting the fact that the pope thus fills the description of Daniel and Paul. We have now before us two opposing powers. Each demands our worship. If we worship the true God we must obey his law, without a jot or tittle being displaced. He gave his own law as he desired it should be, and requires us to obey it just as it was proclaimed. But if we desire to worship the pope, the beast of Rev. xiii, 1–6, we can do it by only obeying his law. "Know ye not that to whom you yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey, whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto life." Rom. vi. Those who keep Sunday have no higher authority for their practice than the man of sin. Are they willing to continue in his service? If so, they must remember that the awful threat of the third angel will be realized by them to their exceeding great sorrow. Notwithstanding the abundance of our proof, many of them will try to prove by the Bible, that about which it is silent as the grave. Do they not know that every such effort only confirms Catholicism! Further, they, in so doing, acknowledge the right of the pope to change laws. Having now proved that a law and Sabbath changing power was to arise, and having proved this to be the papal power, we will consider one more question and then conclude. Some of our modern D. D.'s have made a discovery quite recently, seeing that they cannot sustain the old position of the change of the Sabbath. They now maintain that they are keeping the regular seventh day, the very day on which God rested. But we have proved that there has been a change in the day; and the world acknowledges it. But this change has no Bible authority; and they see it, and rather than renounce their erroneous practice, they will try to bolster up their Sunday-keeping from other sources. This is very unreasonable. All men who know anything, know that the Jews still keep the seventh day Sabbath commanded in Ex. xx, 9. This day is either the day on which God rested, or it is not. If not, then there is no command to keep the day on which he rested; and inasmuch as this class of Sunday-keepers are keeping the day on which God rested, they are doing that for which they have no command. But if this is the day on which he rested, and we keep it, then we have a command for our practice while they have not. Thus the darling Sunday must be sustained by other evidence than this, or go begging. We think our opposers would experience a much better time in keeping the Sabbath than in warring against it. Better live so as to say with David, I am a companion of all them that fear thee and keep thy precepts; or to say with Christ, I have kept thy commandments.