SABBATH AGITATION IN MINNESOTA by A. C. Morton

Publishing Committee · Battle Creek, Mich. · Apr 30, 1861

SABBATH AGITATION IN MINNESOTA.

By A. C. Morton

Bro. Smith: I send you the ground work of a discourse by Elder Sweet against the Sabbath, with our reply. The evident object of this effort has been to check the interest of present truth, which has seemed to be gradually increasing since the meeting held by Bro. Bostwick last winter in the neighborhood known as the Dunkard Settlement, near Bro. Erb's. Our prayer is that God may deliver the honest from the blighting influence of no-Sabbath and no-law teaching.

1. Elder Sweet commenced with Gen. ii, 2, and then remarked, If the keeping of the Sabbath had been binding on man, we should have had some account of it; but we have no record of its being binding; and came to the conclusion that the Sabbath was not kept until the exodus from Egypt, and cited Ex. xvi, 6; Deut. v, 15 as proof why we should keep the Sabbath. Verses 22, 23.

In our reply we endeavored to show from Mark ii, 27 that the Sabbath was made for man; and from Gen. ii, 2, 3 when it was made; and then argued that if the Sabbath was not to be kept until the deliverance of Israel from Egyptian bondage, God had created an institution which could be of no avail for over two thousand years, which would charge folly on God. And in the second place we endeavored to show from Ex. xx, 11 that the deliverance of Israel from Egyptian bondage was not the reason given why we should keep the Sabbath, but that Deut. v, 15 was simply a declaration of Moses, reminding the people that they were bondsmen in Egypt, and had not their liberty; but now that God had delivered them they had no excuse for not keeping the Sabbath; and showed from Gen. vii, 4; viii, 10, 12, and xxix, 27 that time was reckoned by sevens and weeks, and from Ex. xvi, 23; xxvii, 28 that the Sabbath was spoken of as a then-existing institution.

2. Elder S. next introduced Ex. xx, 3-17 as the old covenant, or the covenant under the old dispensation; quoting Deut. v, 2, 3, as proof. He then referred to 1 Cor. x, 14; James v, 15 as proof of the new dispensation, and argued that as the fourth commandment is

not in the New Testament, it does not therefore belong to the new dispensation or covenant. Heb. viii, 7 was quoted to show the old covenant (or ten commandments) faulty, therefore not to be taught under the gospel unless copied in.

In our reply we endeavored to show from Ex. xix, 5-8, that covenant is used in two senses: First a covenant commanded, which was the law written on two tables of stone, (Deut. iv, 13); and second, a covenant agreement between God and the people; the people on their part agreeing to keep his covenant or law; and God on his part agreeing that if they would, he would make of them a kingdom of priests; and that the covenant referred to in Deut. v, 2, 3, was the covenant agreement, and that this was the covenant which Paul declares faulty, and not the law. Second, we argued from Ps. xix, 7; lxxxix, 34 that it could not be the covenant commanded (or law, Deut. iv, 13) from the fact that the law was perfect and therefore could not be faulty.

3. Elder S. next referred to Ex. xxxi, 12-16; Eze. xx, 10, 12, 20, as proof that the Sabbath was a sign between God and the Jews, and nobody else, and labored to throw it in with the ceremonial law [Col. ii, 16]; and then introduced Hosea ii, 10, 11, to prove that it should cease. Matt. xii, 7, 8; Mark ii, 23; Luke xiii, 14-17, were then cited, as proof that the Sabbath was not then binding, and that Christ regarded it so.

We replied that the Sabbath was a sign between God and the children of Israel forever [Ex. xxxi, 17]; and then remarked that we did not understand the term Israel, here, as referring to the literal Jews exclusively, and then argued from Rom. ix, 6-8 that it was not all that were the seed of Abraham according to the flesh (or Jews) that were Israel, but that they which were of faith were the children of Abraham. Gal. iii, 7. We then showed from verse 28, that there is no difference between Jew and Gentile in this matter; but that all who are of faith in Christ are children (or Israel), and heirs according to the promise: Verses 26, 29. We further showed that the Sabbath spoken of in Col. ii, 16, and Hosea ii, 11, were ceremonial sabbaths [Lev. xxiii, 24, 27, 32, 34] which were a shadow of good things to come [Col. ii, 17] and not the Sabbath of the fourth commandment, as that was never a shadow of anything to come; but was a memorial by which to keep in memory the Creator of all things. Hence the Sabbath is and will ever remain a sign between God and those who are heirs (or Israel) by faith in Christ. Gal. iii, 29.

4. S. quoted Gal. iii, 10, and applied it to those who keep the seventh day as being those who are of the works of the law, and therefore under the curse; and then introduced chap. iv, 9-21, and exclaimed in the language of verse 21, Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? He then introduced Acts xv, 1, and argued, that if we keep the seventh day we must be circumcised and keep the law of Moses, applied verse 10 to us as being those who put a yoke on the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we are able to bear.

We replied that we did not believe that the keeping of any of the precepts of the law of God was a curse to man! [Gal. iii, 10], or that by keeping the principles of the law of God we were returning to weak and beggarly elements. Chap. iv, 9. We then showed by comparing Romans vii, 7, 12, and Eph. ii, 15, that there were two laws; the one declared to be holy, and the law by which is made known sin; the other a law of commandments contained in ordinances, which was the law of enmity, which was contrary to us and taken out of the way at the cross. Col. ii, 14. And we further showed by comparing Deut. x, 1-5, and xxxi, 24-26, that there were two laws. This is proved first, from the manner in which they were given, and second, from the position they occupy. The law spoken by God, and engraven on tables of stone, received by Moses, and by him placed in the ark, is the law of which Christ speaks in Matt. v, 17, 18, while the body of the law [Gal. iii, 10] is the same that was written by Moses, received by the priests and by them placed in or by the side of the ark; and this is the law referred to in Gal. iv, 21; Col. ii, 14; Eph. ii, 15, and Acts xv, 5, the keeping of which, would be returning to weak and beggarly elements [Gal. iv, 9, 10], and place them in a position where the atonement of Christ would profit them nothing. Chap. v, 1, 2. We then introduced Matt. v, 17; xix, 17; Rom. iii, 31; James i, 25; ii, 8-10; Rev. xxii, 14; Ps. xix, 7; Deut. iv, 13; Ex. xx, 3-17; Luke xxiii, 56, in favor of that law of which the Sabbath is a part, and then argued the impossibility of a change from the nature of the law, and showed from Col. ii, 16, 17; Rom. xiv, 5, 6; Hosea ii, 10, 11, that the sabbaths there spoken of were monthly sabbaths connected with the ceremonial law (or book of the law. Deut. xxxi, 24, 26), and not the Sabbath of the fourth commandment, which is a precept of the law. Deut. x, 4; Ex. xx, 8-11.

5. The Elder concluded his discourse by undertaking to prove the first day of the week the christian Sabbath. Quoted Rev. i, 10, and remarked that at the resurrection of Christ the Lord's day was proclaimed, and it was the first day of the week, and endeavored to prove it from Acts xx, 7, and John xx, 19, 26.

We replied that Rev. i, 10 furnished direct proof that there was a day under the gospel known as the Lord's day, and that Acts xx, 7; John xx, 19, 26 did not furnish any proof that the first day of the week was the Lord's day, much less the Sabbath. Argued from Mark ii, 27, 28; Isa. lviii, 13, that the day recognized by God as his, over which Christ declared himself Lord, is the Lord's day, and then proved from Ex. xx, 8-11; Luke xxiii, 56, that that was the seventh and not the first day of the week.

O when will men cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord? The majority acknowledge that Elder S. is in error, but how many will turn their feet to the right ways and shun the error, and thereby be prepared to enter through the gates into the city, the Lord alone can tell.

A. C. MORTON.