WHEN DID THE SAVIOUR RISE?
By Editor
OUR article in Review No. 17, touching the crucifixion and resurrection of the Saviour, has called forth an expression from some of those who take a different view from the one there set forth. Bro. D. P. Curtis sends us the following which, he says was written by a correspondent of the Sabbath Recorder, and published in that paper, Sept. 7, 1854. By way of introduction Bro. C. says: "TO THE EDITOR: I perceive that yourself and others of your persuasion, even Bro. Andrews in his History of the Sabbath, admit that the resurrection of Christ occurred on the first day of the week. I am aware that this admission has no real bearing on the question of the day of the Sabbath; nor would it even if it was a fact that he did rise on that day, because the Sabbath is fixed by law of the immutable Jehovah upon the seventh day; yet inasmuch as it is on this ground that the advocates of the first day predicate their practice, is not the admission of what they claim even though (as is the fact) it cannot be proved, calculated to strengthen them in their positions, and weaken the arguments by which you seek to overthrow those positions? It so appears to me, and I suggest the matter to you as a fellow laborer in the same great and glorious, and ultimately triumphant cause. May we all have wisdom from on high to direct us into all truth. Yours in hope of eternal life. Those who hold with the Seventh-day Baptists on this subject in the views expressed below, claim that on this ground the error of Sunday keeping can be more effectually combatted than on any other; for this view does not admit that Christ rose upon the first day of the week; and hence, whatever claim in behalf of their institution Sunday-keepers base upon this fact, is wrested from them. We do not however, think this view possesses the advantages which are claimed for it, for the following reasons: 1. When we undertake to prove to Sunday-keepers that the resurrection of Christ took place on the seventh and not the first day of the week, we have undertaken a task, more difficult than to convince them of the Sabbath itself. This would however be no objection if there was anything to be gained by it. But let us inquire what, in this case we do gain by it? Nothing; for it has no real bearing on the question of the Sabbath, as admitted above, and Sunday is easily and hopelessly refuted without it. 2. We believe it is considered the best policy in controversy to concede all we can to an opponent without compromise or damage to our own side of the question. But in this case, instead of narrowing down the question to its real issue, we are only adding another bone of contention and distracting the attention and exhausting our energies on an irrelevant point. 3. By admitting this point to discussion in connection with the Sabbath question, we tacitly give it an importance which, in this connection, it does not possess, and which no Sabbath-keeper will be willing to acknowledge that it does possess. And as the Sunday-keeper marks our anxiety to prove this point, a victory on his part here becomes in his own mind equivalent to a victory on the Sabbath question itself. Much better would it be, if we mistake not, to concede this point and give him to understand at once that it has nothing to do with the question. 4. By the position that Christ was crucified on the fourth day of the week, and not on the day preceding the weekly Sabbath, we throw away one of the strongest texts that can be found in the Bible to prove the perpetuity and observance of the Sabbath in this dispensation; namely, Luke xxiii, 56; for if two Sabbath days intervened between the crucifixion and resurrection, it cannot be made to appear that that text has reference to the weekly Sabbath. Besides it remains to be shown with what propriety the day following the preparation could be called a "high day," if it was the passover sabbath merely. It appears that some circumstance did distinguish it from the usual passover sabbaths. And how can we suppose, further, that the sanctity of a mere passover Sabbath would have restrained the disciples from going on with their work of embalming the Lord? But we will not detain the reader further; and although our article of the 15th ult. as expressly stated was not designed to call this matter up for discussion, the other side is nevertheless perhaps entitled to a hearing. The article to which Bro. C. would call attention is the following: THE RESURRECTION OF CHRIST ON THE SEVENTH DAY.
To say as many do, that our Lord was crucified on the sixth day of the week, and that he rose on the first day of the week appears to be an error. 1. He was to be "killed and after three days rise again." Mark viii, 31. Matt. xxvii, 63. Now supposing he was killed on the sixth day of the week, called Friday; after one day would be the seventh day, or Sabbath; after two days would be the first day of the week, and "after three days," would be the second day of the week, called Monday; and none will admit that he arose on the second day of the week; consequently he could not have been crucified on the sixth day of the week. 2. Again, "it was on the first day of the week" that the two disciples which went with Christ to "Emmaus," said to him, "To day is the third day since these things were done." Luke xxiv, 13, 21. Then the second day "since these things were done," must have been the seventh or Sabbath day; and the first day "since these things were done" must have been the sixth day, called Friday. This must have been one day after, or "since these things were done," so that these things must have been done or finished one day at least before the sixth day of the week called Friday. 3. Now to be plain and easy to be understood on the subject, our Lord gives it as a "sign" to the Jews, that "as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly, so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." Matt. xii, 40. We understand therefore that Jesus was to be in Joseph's new tomb precisely three days and three nights—no more nor no less. And to find the exact time when he arose, we must find the time of day at which he was laid in the new tomb. If he was laid in the new tomb at "even," before the commencement of the high Sabbath of the Jews (Matt. xxvii, 57, 60. Mark xv, 42. Jno. xix, 31), then he must have arisen at "even," precisely three days and three nights after he was laid in the tomb. This is my third witness to prove that he was not crucified on the sixth day of the week; for it is impossible to make out "three days and three nights" between what is called Friday "even," and the "even" before the first day of the week. "In the end of the [seventh day] Sabbath as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre; and behold there was [had been, in the margin] a great earthquake; for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled back the stone from the door and sat upon it." Matt. xxviii, 1, 2. This was "in the end" of the seventh day Sabbath and "toward" the first day of the week, and the Saviour was risen before they came to the sepulchre; consequently he must have risen before the first day of the week commenced. Many people seem to notice but one Sabbath while Jesus was in the new tomb; but there were two Sabbaths distinguished by Luke and John: "The Sabbath day according to the commandment," [Luke xxiii, 56] and "that Sabbath day (which) was an high day." Jno. xix, 31. This last mentioned was the next day after he was crucified (Mark xv, 42), the other, according to the fourth commandment, in which he appears to have risen at "even." The plain truth upon this subject appears to be this:— 1. That our Lord was crucified for us on the fourth day of the week, "at the ninth hour;" three o'clock, P. M. Mark xv, 38. 2. At "even," as it was the preparation day for the high (ceremonial) Sabbath of the Jews, and as that "Sabbath drew on," which would be on the fifth day of the week, Joseph took the body and "wrapped it in clean linen cloth and laid it in his own new tomb." Matt. xxvii, 59, 60. 3. "Now the next day that followed the day of preparation (which would be on the high ceremonial Sabbath, i. e., the fifth day of the week) the chief priests and the Pharisees came together unto Pilate" and obtained authority to set a watch, &c. Matt. xxvii, 62-66. (This work we should think they would hardly do on the weekly Sabbath). Thus the two disciples that went with Christ to "Emmaus" could say on the first day of the week, "To-day is the third day since these things were done," i. e. sealing the stone and setting the watch on the fifth day of the week. 4. After the body was laid in the new tomb, the women that followed him "returned and prepared162spices and ointments," (this they could do on the sixth day of the week between the two Sabbaths), and then rested the Sabbath day according to the commandment." Ex. xx, 10. Luke xxiii, 55, 56. 5. As the "Son of man" was to be "three days and three nights in the heart of the earth," we count from that fourth day "even" to fifth day even is one day and one night; from fifth day even to sixth day even is two days and two nights; from sixth day even to seventh day even is "three days and three nights." Then if the body of Jesus was laid in the new tomb at even before the commencement of the high Sabbath (as all their Sabbaths commenced at evening), then according to the Scriptures Jesus must have risen at "even" on the seventh day of the week, before the commencement of the first day of the week. Then ought not the Sabbath of the Lord our God, the Sabbath of our Lord Jesus Christ, to be doubly precious to the believing Christian?