HISTORY OF THE SABBATH by John Nevins Andrews

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Mar 4, 1862

HISTORY OF THE SABBATH.

By John Nevins Andrews

(Continued.)

THE SABBATH DURING THE MINISTRY OF THE APOSTLES.

We have now traced the Sabbath through the period of its especial connection with the family of Abraham. The termination of the seventy weeks brings us to the call of the Gentiles, and to their admission to equal privileges with the Hebrew race. We have seen that with God there was no injustice in conferring especial blessings upon the Hebrews, and at the same time leaving the Gentiles to their own chosen ways. Twice had he given the human family, as a whole, the most ample means of grace that their age of the world admitted, and each time did it result in the almost total apostasy of mankind. Then God selected as his heritage the family of Abraham, his friend; and by means of that family preserved in the earth the knowledge of his law, his Sabbath, and himself, until the coming of the great Messiah. During his ministry the Messiah solemnly affirmed the perpetuity of his Father's law, enjoining obedience even to its least commandment, Matt. v, 17-19; at his death he broke down that middle wall of partition, Eph. ii, 13-16; Col. ii, 14-17 by which the Hebrews had so long been preserved a separate people in the earth; and when about to ascend into heaven commanded his disciples to go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature; teaching them to observe all things which he had commanded them. Matt. xxviii, 19, 20; Mark xvi, 15. With the expiration of the seventieth week, the apostles enter upon the execution of this great commission to the Gentiles. Dan. ix, 24-27; Acts ix, x, xi; xxvi, 21-23; Rom. xi, 13. Several facts of deep interest should here be noticed.

1. The new covenant or testament dates from the death of the Redeemer. In accordance with the prediction of Jehovah, it began with the Hebrews alone and was confined exclusively to them until the expiration of the seventieth week. Then the Gentiles were admitted to a full participation with the Hebrews in its blessings, being no longer aliens and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints. 1 Cor. xi, 25; Jer. xxxi, 31-34; Heb. viii, 8-12; Dan. ix, 27; Eph. ii, 11-22. God entered into covenant this time with his people as individuals and not as a nation. The promises of this covenant embrace two points of great interest. (1.) That God will put his law into the hearts of his people. (2.) That he will forgive them their sins. These promises being made six hundred years before the birth of Christ, there can be no question relative to what was meant by the law of God. It was the law of God then in existence that should be put into the heart of each new-covenant saint. The new covenant then is based upon the perpetuity of the law of God; it does not abrogate that law, but takes away sin, the transgression of the law, from the heart, and puts the law of God in its place. Matt. v, 17-19; 1 John iii, 4, 5; Rom. iv, 15. The perpetuity of each precept of the moral law, lies therefore at the very foundation of the new covenant.

2. As the first covenant had a sanctuary, and within that sanctuary an ark containing the law of God in ten commandments, Heb. ix, 1-7; Ex. xxv, 1-21; Deut. x, 4, 5; 1 Kings viii, 9, and had also a priesthood to minister before that ark, to make atonement for the sins of men, Heb. vii-x; Lev. xvi, even thus it is with the new covenant. Instead of the tabernacle erected by Moses as the pattern of the true, the new covenant has the greater and more perfect tabernacle which the Lord pitched and not man—the temple of God in heaven. Heb. viii, 1-5; ix, 23, 24. As the great central point in the earthly sanctuary was the ark containing that law which man had broken, even thus it is with the heavenly sanctuary. "The temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament." Rev. xi, 19. Our Lord Jesus Christ as a great High Priest presents his own blood before the ark of God's testament in the temple in heaven. Respecting this object before which he ministers, let the following points be noted:

1. The ark in the heavenly temple is not empty; it contains the testament of God; and hence it is the great center of the sanctuary above, as the ark of God's testament was the center of the sanctuary on earth. Ex. xxv, 21, 22.

2. The death of the Redeemer for the sins of men, and his work as High Priest before the ark in heaven, has direct reference to the fact that within that ark is the law which mankind have broken.

3. As the atonement and priesthood of Christ have reference to the law within that ark before which he ministers, it follows that this law existed and was transgressed before the Saviour came down to die for man.

4. And hence, the law contained in the ark above, is not a law which originated in the New Testament; for it necessarily existed long anterior to it.

5. If therefore God has revealed this law to mankind, that revelation must be sought in the Old Testament. For while the New Testament makes many references to that law which caused the Saviour to lay down his life for sinful men, and even quotes from it, it never publishes a second edition, but cites us to the Old Testament for the original code. Rom. iii, 19-31; v, 8-21; viii, 3, 4; xiii, 8-10; Gal. iii, 13, 14; Eph. vi, 2, 3; James ii, 8-12; 1 John iii, 4, 5.

6. It follows therefore that this law is revealed, and that this revelation is to be found in the Old Testament.

7. In that volume will be found, (1.) The descent of the Ancient of days upon mount Sinai; (2.) The proclamation of his law in ten commandments; (3.) The ten commandments written by the finger of God upon two tables of stone; (4.) These tables placed beneath the mercy-seat in the ark of the earthly sanctuary. Ex. xix, xx, xxiv, 12; xxxi, 18; Deut. x.

8. That this remarkable Old-Testament law which was shut up in the ark of the earthly sanctuary was identical with that in the ark in heaven, may be thus shown: (1.) The mercy-seat which was placed over the ten commandments was the place from which pardon was expected, the great central point in the work of atonement. Lev. xvi. (2.) The law beneath the mercy-seat was that which made the work of atonement necessary. (3.) There was no atonement that could take away sins; it was only a shadowy or typical atonement. (4.) But there was actual sin, and hence a real law which man had broken. (5.) There must therefore be an atonement that can take away sins; and that real atonement must pertain to that law which was broken, and respecting which an atonement had been shadowed forth. Rom. iii, 19-31; 1 John iii, 4, 5. (6.) The ten commandments are thus set forth in the Old Testament as that law which demanded an atonement; while the fact is ever kept in view that those sacrifices there provided could not avail to take away sins. Ps. xl, 6-8; Heb. x. (7.) But the death of Jesus as the antitype of those sacrifices, was designed to accomplish precisely what they shadowed forth, but which they could not effect, viz., to make atonement for the transgression of that law which was placed in the ark beneath the mercy-seat. Heb. ix, 10.

We are thus brought to the conclusion that the law of God contained in the ark in heaven is identical with that law which was contained in the ark upon earth; and that both are identical with that law which the new covenant puts into the heart of each believer. Jer. xxxi, 33; Rom. viii, 3, 4; 2 Cor. iii, 3. The Old Testament therefore gives us the law of God and pronounces it perfect; it also provides a typical atonement, but pronounces it inadequate to take away sins. Ps. xix, 7; xl; James i, 25. Hence what was needed was not a new edition of the law of God; for that which was given already was perfect; but a real atonement to take away the guilt of the transgressor. So the New Testament responds precisely to this want, providing a real atonement in the death of the Redeemer, but giving no new edition of the law of God, Rom. v, though it fails not to cite us to the perfect code given long before. But although the New Testament does not give a new edition of the law of God, it does show that the Christian dispensation has the great original of that law in the sanctuary in heaven.

3. We have seen that the new covenant places the law of God in the heart of each believer, and that the original of that law is preserved in the temple in heaven. That all mankind are amenable to the law of God, and that they ever have been, is clearly shown by Paul's epistle to the Romans. In the first chapter he traces

the origin of idolatry to the willful apostasy of the Gentiles, which took place soon after the flood. In the second chapter he shows that although God gave them up to their own ways, and as a consequence left them without his written law, yet they were not left in utter darkness; for they had by nature the work of the law written in their hearts; and dim as was this light, their salvation would be secured by living up to it, or their ruin accomplished by sinning against it. In the third chapter he shows what advantage the family of Abraham had in being taken as the heritage of God, while all other nations were left to their own ways. It was that the oracles of God, the written law, was given them in addition to that work of the law written in the heart, which they had by nature in common with the Gentiles. He then shows that they were no better than the Gentiles, because that both classes were transgressors of the law. This he proves by quotations from the Old Testament. Then he shows that the law of God has jurisdiction over all mankind:

"Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God." Rom. iii, 19.

He then shows that the law cannot save the guilty, but must condemn them, and that justly. Next he reveals the great fact that redemption through the death of Jesus is the great means by which God can justify those who seek pardon, and at the same time remain just himself. And finally he exclaims:

"Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid; yea, we establish the law." Rom. iii, 31.

It follows therefore that the law of God is unabolished; that the sentence of condemnation which it pronounces upon the guilty, is as extensive as is the offer of pardon through the gospel; that its work exists in the hearts of men by nature; from which we may conclude that man in his uprightness possessed it in perfection, as is further proved by the fact that the new covenant, after delivering men from the condemnation of the law of God, puts that law perfectly into their hearts. From all of which it follows that the law of God is the great standard by which sin is shown, Rom. iii, 20; 1 John iii, 4, 5; ii, 1, 2, and hence the rule of life, by which all mankind, both Jews and Gentiles should walk.

That the church in the present dispensation is really a continuation of the ancient Hebrew church is shown by the illustration of the good olive tree. That ancient church was God's olive tree, and that olive tree has never been destroyed. Jer. xi, 16; Rom. xi, 17-24. Because of unbelief some of its branches were broken off; but the proclamation of the gospel to the Gentiles does not create a new olive tree; it only grafts into the good olive tree such of the Gentiles as believe; giving them a place among the original branches, that with them they may partake of its root and fatness. This olive tree must date from the call of Abraham after the apostasy of the Gentiles; its trunk representing the patriarchs, beginning with the father of the faithful; Rom. iv, 16-18; Gal. iii, 7-9, its branches the Hebrew people. The ingrafting of the wild olive into the place of those branches which were broken off represents the admission of the Gentiles to equal privileges with the Hebrews after the expiration of the seventy weeks. The Old Testament church, the original olive tree, was a kingdom of priests and an holy nation; the New Testament church, the olive tree after the ingrafting of the Gentiles, is described in the same terms. Ex. xix, 5, 6; 1 Pet. ii, 9, 10.

When God gave up the Gentiles to apostasy before the call of Abraham, he confounded their language, that they should not understand one another, and thus scattered them abroad upon the face of the earth. Standing over against this is the gift of tongues on the day of Pentecost, preparatory to the call of the Gentiles, and their ingrafting into the good olive tree. Gen. xi, 1-9; Acts ii, 1-11.

We have followed the Sabbath to the call of the Gentiles and the opening events of the gospel dispensation. We find the law of God, of which the Sabbath is a part, to be that which made our Lord's death as an atoning sacrifice necessary; and that the great original of that law is in the ark above, before which our Lord ministers as high priest; while a copy of that law is by the new covenant written within the heart of each believer. It is seen therefore that the law of God is more intimately connected with the people of God since the death of the Redeemer than before that event.

That the apostolic church did sacredly regard the Sabbath, as well as all the other precepts of the moral law, admits of no doubt. The fact is proved, not merely because the early Christians were not accused of its violation by their most inveterate enemies; nor wholly by the fact that they held sin to be the transgression of the law, and that the law was the great standard by which sin is shown, and that by which sin becomes exceeding sinful. Rom. vii, 12, 13. These points are certainly very decisive evidence that the apostolic church did keep the fourth commandment. The testimony of James relative to the ten commandments, that he who violates one of them becomes guilty of all, is yet another strong evidence that the primitive church did sacredly regard the whole law of God. James ii, 8-12. But besides these facts we have a peculiar guaranty that the Sabbath of the Lord was not forgotten by the apostolic church. The prayer which our Lord taught his disciples, that their flight from Judea should not be upon the Sabbath, was, as we have seen, designed to impress its sacredness deeply upon their minds, and could not but have secured that result. In the history of the primitive church we have several important references to the Sabbath. The first of these is as follows:

"But when they departed from Perga, they came to Antioch in Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the Sabbath-day, and sat down." Acts xiii, 14.

By invitation of the rulers of the synagogue, Paul delivered an extended address, proving that Jesus was the Christ. In the course of these remarks he used the following language:

"For they that dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they knew him not, nor yet the voices of the prophets which are read every Sabbath-day, they have fulfilled them in condemning him." Verse 27.

When Paul's discourse was concluded we read:

"And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next Sabbath. Now when the congregation was broken up, many of the Jews and religious proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas; who speaking to them, persuaded them to continue in the grace of God. And the next Sabbath-day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God." Verses 42-44.

These texts show, 1. That by the term Sabbath in the book of Acts, is meant that day on which the Jewish people assembled in the synagogue to listen to the voices of the prophets. 2. That as this discourse was fourteen years after the resurrection of Christ, and the record of it by Luke was some thirty years after that event, it follows that the alleged change of the Sabbath at the resurrection of Christ had not, even after many years, come to the knowledge of Luke or Paul. 3. That here was a remarkable opportunity to mention the change of the Sabbath, had it been true that the Sabbath had been changed in honor of Christ's resurrection. For when Paul was asked to preach the same words the next Sabbath, he might have answered, that the following day was now the proper day for divine worship. And Luke, in placing this incident upon record, could not well avoid the mention of this new day, had it been true that another day had become the Sabbath of the Lord. 4. That as this second meeting pertained almost wholly to Gentiles, it cannot be said in this case that Paul preached upon the Sabbath out of regard to the Jews. On the contrary, the narrative strongly indicates Paul's regard for the Sabbath as the proper day for divine worship. 5. Nor can it be denied that the Sabbath was well understood by the Gentiles in this city, and that they had some degree of regard for it, a fact which will be corroborated by other texts.

Several years after these things the apostles assembled at Jerusalem to consider the question of circumcision. Acts xv. "Certain men which came down from Judea," finding the Gentiles uncircumcised, had "taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved." Had they found the Gentiles neglecting the Sabbath, unquestionably this would first have called out their rebuke. It is indeed worthy of notice that no dispute at this time existed in the church relative to the observance of the Sabbath, for none was brought before this apostolic assembly. Yet had it been true that the change of the Sabbath was then advocated, or that Paul had taught the Gentiles to neglect the Sabbath, without doubt those who brought up the question of circumcision would have urged that of the Sabbath with even greater earnestness. That the law of Moses, the observance of which was under discussion in the assembly, is not the ten commandments, is evident from several decisive facts. 1. Because that Peter calls the code under consideration a yoke which neither their fathers nor themselves were able to bear. But James expressly calls that royal law, which, on his own showing, embodies the ten commandments, a law of liberty. 2. Because that this assembly did decide against the authority of the law of Moses; and yet James who was a member of this body did some years afterward solemnly enjoin obedience to the commandments, affirming that he who violated one was guilty of all. Acts xv, 10, 28, 29; Jas. ii, 8-12. 3. Because the chief feature in the law of Moses as here presented was circumcision. Verses 1, 5. But circumcision was not in the ten commandments; and were it true that the law of Moses includes these commandments, circumcision would not in that case be a chief feature of that law. 4. Finally, because that the precepts still declared obligatory are not properly either of the ten commandments. These were, first, the prohibition of meats offered to idols; second, of blood; third, of things strangled; and fourth, of fornication. Verse 29; xxi, 25. Each of these precepts may be often found in the books of Moses [Ex. xxiv, 15, 16; Num. xxv, 2; Lev. xvii, 13, 14; Gen. ix, 4; Lev. iii, 17; Gen. xxxiv; Lev. xix, 29]; and the first and last ones come under the second and seventh commandments respectively; but neither of these cover but a part of that which is forbidden in either commandment. It is evident therefore that the authority of the ten commandments was not under consideration in this assembly, and that the decision of that assembly had no relation to those precepts. For otherwise the apostles released the Gentiles from all obligation to eight of the ten commandments, and from the greater prohibitions contained in the other two.

It is evident that those greatly err who represent the Gentiles as released from the obligation of the Sabbath by this assembly. The question did not come before the apostles on this occasion; a strong proof that the Gentiles had not been taught to neglect the Sabbath, as they had to omit circumcision, which was the occasion of its being brought before the apostles at Jerusalem. Yet the Sabbath was referred to in this very assembly as an existing institution, and that too, in connection with the Gentile Christians. Thus when James pronounced sentence upon the question, he used the following language:

"Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles, are turned to God; but that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath-day." Acts xv, 19-21.

This last fact is given by James as a reason for the course proposed toward the brethren among the Gentiles. "For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath-day." From this it is apparent that the ancient custom of divine worship upon the Sabbath was not only preserved by the Jewish people and carried with them into every city of the Gentiles, but that the Gentile Christians did attend these meetings. Otherwise the reason assigned by James would lose all its force, as having no application to this case. That they did attend them, strongly attests the Sabbath as the day of divine worship with the Gentile churches.

That the ancient Sabbath of the Lord had neither been abrogated nor changed prior to this meeting of the apostles, is strongly attested by the nature of the dispute here adjusted. And the close of their assembly beheld the Bible Sabbath still sacredly enthroned within the citadel of the fourth commandment. After this, in a vision of the night, Paul was called to visit Macedonia. In obedience to this call he came to Philippi, which is the chief city of that part of Macedonia. Thus Luke records the visit:

"And we were in that city abiding certain days. And on the Sabbath we went out of the city by a river-side, where prayer was wont to be made; and we sat down and spake unto the women which resorted thither. And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, which worshiped God, heard us; whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul." Acts xvi, 12-24.

This does not appear to have been a gathering of Jews, but of Gentiles, who, like Cornelius, were worshipers of the true God. Thus it is seen that the church of the Philippians originated with a pious assembly of Sabbath-keeping Gentiles. And it is likely that Lydia and those employed by her in business, who were evidently observers of the Sabbath, were the means of introducing the gospel into their own city of Thyatira.

"Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the Jews. And Paul as his manner was went into them, and three Sabbath-days reasoned with them out of the Scriptures, . . . And some of them believed and consorted with Paul; and of the devout Greeks a great multitude, and of the chief women not a few." Acts xvii, 1-4.

Such was the origin of the Thessalonian church. That it was an assembly of Sabbath-keepers at its beginning, admits of no doubt. For besides the few Jews who received the gospel through the labors of Paul, there was a great multitude of devout Greeks; that is, of Gentiles who had united themselves with the Jews in the worship of God upon the Sabbath. We have a strong proof of the fact that they continued to observe the Sabbath after their reception of the gospel in the following words of Paul addressed to them as a church of Christ:

"For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judea are in Christ Jesus." 1 Thess. ii, 14.

The churches in Judea, as we have seen, were observers of the Sabbath of the Lord. The first Thessalonian converts, before they received the gospel, were Sabbath-keepers, and when they became a Christian church they adopted the churches in Judea as their proper examples. And this church was adopted as an example by the churches of Macedonia and Achaia. In this number were included the churches of Philippi and of Corinth. Thus writes Paul:

"And ye became followers of us, and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Ghost; so that ye were ensamples to all that believe in Macedonia and Achaia. For from you sounded out the word of the Lord, not only in Macedonia and Achaia, but also in every place your faith to Godward is spread abroad." 1 Thess. i, 7, 8.

After these things Paul came to Corinth. Here he first found Aquila and Priscilla.

"And because he was of the same craft, he abode with them and wrought; for by their occupation they were tent-makers. And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks." Acts xviii, 3, 4.

At this place also Paul found Gentiles as well as Jews in attendance upon the worship of God on the Sabbath. The first members of the church at Corinth were therefore observers of the Sabbath at the time when they received the gospel; and as we have seen, they adopted as their pattern the Sabbath-keeping church of Thessalonica, who in turn patterned after the churches in Judea.

The first churches were founded in the land of Judea. All their members had from childhood been familiar with the law of God, and well understood the precept, "Remember the Sabbath-day to keep it holy." Besides this precept, all these churches had a peculiar memento of the Sabbath. They knew from our Lord himself that the time was coming when they must suddenly flee from that land. And in view of this fact they were to pray that the moment of their sudden flight might not be upon the Sabbath; a prayer which was designed, as we have seen, to preserve the sacredness of the Sabbath. That the churches in Judea were composed of Sabbath-keeping members, admits therefore of no doubt.

Of the churches founded outside the land of Judea, whose origin is given in the book of Acts, nearly all began with Jewish converts. These were Sabbath-keepers when they received the gospel. Among these the Gentile converts were engrafted. And it is worthy of notice that in a large number of cases, those Gentiles are termed "devout Greeks," "religious proselytes," persons that "worshiped God," that "feared God," and that "prayed to God alway." Acts x, 2, 4, 7, 22, 30-35; xiii, 43; xiv, 1; xvi, 13-15; xvii, 4, 10-12. These Gentiles at the time of their conversion to the gospel, were, as we have seen, worshipers of God upon the Sabbath with the Jewish people. When James had proposed the kind of letter that should be addressed by the apostles to the Gentile converts, he assigned a reason for its adoption, the force of which can now be appreciated: "For Moses," said he, "of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogue every Sabbath-day." The Sabbatarian character of the apostolic churches is thus clearly shown.

In a letter addressed to the Corinthians about five years after they had received the gospel, Paul is supposed to contribute a fifth pillar to the first-day temple. Thus he wrote them:

"Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order 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." 1 Cor. xvi, 1, 2.

From this text it is argued in behalf of the first day Sabbath, 1. That this was a public collection. 2. That hence the first day of the week was the day of public worship in the churches of Corinth and Galatia. 3. And therefore that the Sabbath had been changed to that day. Thus the change of the Sabbath is inferred from the public assemblies for divine worship on the first day at Corinth and Galatia; and the existence of these assemblies on that day is inferred from the words of Paul, "Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store."

What then do these words ordain? But one answer can be returned: They ordain precisely the reverse of a public collection. Each one should lay by himself on each first day of the week according as God had prospered him, that when Paul should arrive, they might have their bounty ready. Mr. J. W. Morton, late Presbyterian missionary to Hayti, bears the following testimony:

"The whole question turns upon the meaning of the expression, 'by him;' and I marvel greatly how you can imagine that it means 'in the collection-box of the congregation.' Greenfield, in his Lexicon, translates the Greek term, 'with one's self, i. e., at home.' Two Latin versions, the Vulgate and that of Castellio, render it 'apud se,' with one's self, at home. Three French translations, those of Martin, Osterwald, and De Sacy, 'chez soi,' at his own house, at home. The German of Luther, 'bei sich selbst,' by himself, at home. The Dutch, 'by hemselven,' same as the German. The Italian of Diodati, 'appresso di se,' in his own presence, at home. The Spanish of Felippe Scio, 'en su casa,' in his own house. The Portuguese of Ferreira, 'para isso,' with himself. The Swedish, 'när sig sjelf,' near himself.—Vindication of the true Sabbath, pp. 51, 52.

Dr. Bloomfield thus comments on the original:

"Παρʼ ἑαυτῷ, 'by him.' French, chez lui, 'at home.'"—Greek Testament with English Notes, Vol. II, p. 173.

The Douay Bible reads: "Let every one of you put apart with himself." Mr. Sawyer thus translates: "Let each one of you lay aside by himself." Theodore Beza's Latin version has it: "Apud se," i. e., at home. The Syriac reads thus: "Let every one of you lay aside and preserve at home."

It is true that an eminent first-day writer, Justin Edwards D. D., in a labored effort to prove the change of the Sabbath, brings forward this text to show that Sunday was the day of religious worship with the early church. Thus he says:

"This laying by in store was not laying by at home, for that would not prevent gatherings when he should come."—Sabbath Manual of the American Tract Society, p. 116.

Such is his language as a theologian upon whom has fallen the difficult task of proving the change of the Sabbath by the authority of the Scriptures. But in his Notes on the New Testament, in which he feels at liberty to speak the truth, he thus squarely contradicts his own language already quoted. Thus he comments on this text:

"Lay by him in store: at home. That there be no gatherings; that their gifts might be ready when the apostles should come."—Family Testament of the Am. Tract Society, p. 280.

Thus even Dr. Edwards confesses that the idea of a public collection is not found in this scripture. On the contrary, it appears that each individual in obedience to this precept, would at the opening of each new week be found at home laying aside something for the cause of God, according as his worldly affairs would warrant. The change of the Sabbath, as proved by this text, rests wholly upon an idea which Dr. Edwards confesses is not found in it. We have seen that the church at Corinth was a Sabbath-keeping church. It is evident that the change of the Sabbath could never have been suggested to them by this text.

This is the only scripture in which Paul even mentions the first day of the week. It was written nearly thirty years after the alleged change of the Sabbath. Yet Paul omits all titles of sacredness, simply designating it as first day of the week; a name to which it was entitled as one of "the six working days." Eze. xlvi, 1. It is also worthy of notice that this is the only precept in the Bible in which the first day is even named; and that this precept says nothing relative to the sacredness of the day to which it pertains; even the duty which it enjoins being more appropriate to a secular than to a sacred day.

J. N. A.

(To be Continued.)