p. 28 | Still in the Dark by Editor

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Dec 20, 1864

Still in the Dark.

By Editor

"DARKNESS covers the earth, and gross darkness the people." If you don't believe it, read the following, which we find in the Voice of the West, of Dec. 6, 1864.

"Br. Himes: I was glad to see in your 'journal' of Oct. 9, the idea you present on the commencement of Sabbath keeping. This truth is very important in its bearings on the time when God made the observance of his rest-day obligatory upon man. The Sabbath advocates stoutly affirm that it was required of man from creation, ever onward, to sanctify that day; but it is positively understood that just seven days previous to the first account we have of its ever being kept, the whole host of Israel commenced their march from Elim, and journeyed to Sin, on the route to Sinai. This Israelitish host numbered 600,000 adults, besides children, who had left Egypt but seventy-five days previous, and also a mixed multitude went with them, and flocks and herds, even very much cattle. Josephus says that Moses had 600,000 fighting men out of Egypt, besides women and children. This number far exceeds any two armies who have met in bloody combat since our national trouble commenced, yet all this vast multitude were tramping, by the direction of their unerring guide, the angel, and the cloud, on the seventh day, as sure as the book. Can it be possible that God would lead his only chosen ones in the wilderness, to march with weary limb and burdened back on that day, after he had bidden all men to keep it holy? Surely, this is too absurd to be credited! Though men may affirm and re-affirm it, the assertion is like "the baseless fabric of a vision," which the light of truth will as surely dispel as the Eastern Sun does the morning dew.

"In conclusion, let me say, that there is neither command, precept, or example, for any man to set apart, or have respect for any set day as sacred, until about twenty-five hundred years from creation.

"Yours for light. "MARY."

The writer well subscribes herself "Yours for light;" for she is sadly in need of it; yet it would seem from her signature that she prefers to keep herself in the dark.

The article to which reference is made, is the one on which we offered some criticisms under the heading of "No Sabbath," in Review No. 25, last volume. The arguments set forth in the Voice, will be, no doubt, to many, perfectly satisfactory without further examination. Such seem to be unable or unwilling to notice two facts which are to us very apparent at first sight.

The first is, that when Moses in Ex. xvi, speaks of the sixth day, there is absolutely nothing to show that he reckons from the fall of the manna; and when, one month later, we come to the commandment given from Sinai, the proof is absolute that it was the day of the week that was referred to, without reference to the fall of the manna. There is, therefore, no evidence that on the Sabbath preceding the one mentioned in Ex. xvi, the whole congregation of Israel were traveling from Elim. Yet, that they were doing this, "Mary" thinks is "as sure as the book!"

The second fact is, that if the children of Israel were thus marching at the command of God, they were not doing "their own work" which the Sabbath law forbids, but were obeying God; and it would have been no more a violation of the Sabbath law, than was the marching around Jericho, forty years later. Yet she thinks it "too absurd to be credited," that Israel should be marching on the Sabbath. Is the record that Israel marched around Jericho seven days in succession, one of which must have been the Sabbath, too absurd to be credited? Will "Mary" think of this? When she will do this, she will find her argument weaker than the walls of Jericho, and everlastingly buried beneath their ruins.