Worse and Worse by M. E. Cornell

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · May 9, 1865

Worse and Worse.

By M. E. Cornell

[We give the above heading to the following positions publicly taken by Eld. T. M. Preble on the Sabbath question. By comparing them with his positions as found in Both Sides, it will be seen that at least he has not materially improved in his views of this important subject.—Ed.]

BRO. WHITE: Eld. T. M. Preble having become somewhat noted as a champion for Sunday, against the Bible Sabbath, I send you for the Review the following notes of his late sermons in Manchester, N. H., with my reply. The sermons were preached on Sunday, April 16th, and I had an appointment on the following Monday evening. Bro. Wm. C. Gage being present, took notes, and announced that I would review those discourses the next evening. We shall be excused for publishing these notes because Eld. P. claimed that he had new light on the question, and strove hard to make the people hope that he would confirm the word.

When Bro. Gage announced our review, Eld. P. objected, that we had preached much in Manchester on our side of the question, but he had not before given a discourse upon it. Bro. Gage answered that inasmuch as the claim had been set up of a great discovery of "new light," it was best to have it fairly investigated.

In the introduction of my reply, I remarked that as the notes had been taken for me by another, I should not be able to speak so understandingly as if I had heard them myself. This together with the fact that Eld. Preble requested his friends to be present at the review to see that he was not misrepresented, prompted me to read the notes, and ask for any corrections if they were not right. No objection being made I entered upon the review of the notes, of which I can only give a brief outline in dialogue form.

Preble.—The Jewish dispensation was all death, but the Christian is life.

REPLY.—Life and death are held out in both dispensations. It is a mistake that all was death under the first covenant. Deut. vi, 24. "And the Lord commanded us to do all these statutes, to fear the Lord our God, for our good always, that he might preserve us alive, as it is this day." Deut. vii, 15. "And the Lord will take away from thee all sickness," &c. Deut. viii, 1. "All the commandments which I command thee this day shall ye observe to do, that ye may live," &c. Also in verse 3: "Man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the Lord doth man live." This last is endorsed by our Saviour in Matt. iv, 4, and is brought over as the rule also of this dispensation. God never was the author of an "all death" dispensation. The wages of sin always was, and still is death, while in all ages those who kept God's law had the promise of life. Compare the above scriptures with Matt. xix, 17; Rom. viii, 6, 7; Rev. xxii, 14.

Preble.—God never sanctified the seventh day of the week. Reads the last part of the fourth commandment.

REPLY.—That God did sanctify the seventh day is certain, from the reading of the whole of the commandment. Exodus xx, 8–11.

"Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, &c., * For in six days

the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is and rested the seventh day; wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it." If God rested on the particular seventh day, then it is certain that he blessed and hallowed the seventh day.

Preble.—The question is important in view of the nearness of the judgment. If we are wrong it is high time that we know it.

REPLY.—We most heartily endorse the above because it is according to the Scriptures. The commandments of God are to be the rule in the judgment. Eccl. xii, 13, 14: "Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man; for God shall bring every work into judgment," &c.

James ii, 11, 12. The apostle quotes two of the ten commandments, and then says, "So speak ye, and so do as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty." That the law of liberty was the law binding in the former age is evident from Ps. cxix, 45: "I will walk at liberty, for I seek thy precepts." Also in verse 165, "Great peace have they which love thy law."

But in the above Eld. Preble does not agree with many of his brethren; for they have decided that it is too late in the day to discuss doctrine; such as the Sabbath, non-resurrection, &c.

Preble.—The Sabbath was not changed by precept, but by the Spirit. The first-day was not sanctified by Christ and the apostles, but by the Spirit.

REPLY.—How could the Spirit change the Sabbath and sanctify the first-day, without expressing it in words? If it required express words to institute the Sabbath or seventh-day, it will require as much to change it to another. Would the unchangeable God leave the world to infer the change?! The spirit which now says that the Sabbath is changed, must be an evil one; for it does not agree with the word. I remember that when Luther was exposing the men-made doctrines of the papists, they appealed from the written word to the "Spirit." "The Spirit, the Spirit teaches us," was their cry. Luther was so vexed with the absurdity of their course, that he proposed that he would "Rap their spirit on the snout." Now if Eld. Preble's spirit continues to exalt itself above the written word, it may be necessary to try it by Luther's rule, and inflict upon it his penalty.

Preble.—The law written with ink is done away, but the ten commands are all in the new covenant, written on the heart.

REPLY.—Fatal admission. If the ten commands are all in the new covenant, of course the fourth one is there. If the fourth command is there, it is there without change. For no man can prove a change, when it is not once recorded.

Preble.—The New Testament is silent about the seventh-day except in connection with Paul's labors. He observed it, as he did circumcision to get access to the Jews.

REPLY.—When Paul observed an institution merely to have an influence with the Jews, he so expressed it in plain language. Acts xvi, 3: "Him would Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him because of the Jews which were in those quarters." Now where is it said, that they observed the seventh day because of the Jews in those quarters? There is not even an inference in that direction in the whole Bible. On the other hand Paul sets a clear distinction between the law of God and circumcision. 1 Cor. vii, 19: "Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God, is something," Whiting's translation, "or is everything," according to Wakefield.

But is it true that the New Testament is silent about the Sabbath except in connection with Paul's labors? Let us see. Mark ii, 27. "And he said unto them, The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath; therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath." Luke xxiii, 56. "And they returned and prepared spices and ointments, and rested the Sabbath day according to the commandment." Is the New Testament silent about the Sabbath-day except in connection with Paul's labors?!

Preble.—The reason why Christ did not change the Sabbath was because it would give offence to the Jews.

REPLY.—I will apply this reason to their query. They say, If the Sabbath is binding, why did not the apostles teach it? Answer. They kept it on the sly, and said as little as possible, for fear of the Gentiles, who observed the Sunday. But is it true that our Saviour was cringing and smoothing his tongue lest he offend the Jews? Read his scorching testimony in Matt. xxiii, 23–33.

"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith." He goes on to call them, "blind guides," "whited sepulchres," "full of hypocrisy and iniquity," "ye generation of vipers," &c. Who can believe that Christ kept back the truth, for fear it would give offence?

Preble.—We find by church history that the change was made from the seventh to the first-day.

REPLY.—The learned Roman Catholic finds by church history, that Peter was pope, that the apostles and early Christians prayed to the dead. Those who advocate sprinkling for baptism, give up that it is not expressly taught in the Bible, but they appeal to history. And what heresy, I ask cannot be proved by an appeal to the "Fathers," and to history?

Preble.—God sanctifies the first-day in the place of the seventh, because that was a memorial of the old creation which was cursed, but the first-day is a memorial of Christ's new creation.

REPLY.—How can there be a memorial of Christ's new creation when it does not yet exist? A new heavens and earth are to be created out of the old by taking off the curse, but it is yet future, hence the memorial is of no account. And I affirm that it will ever be out of place; for the Sabbath was instituted as a memorial of creation before it was cursed, before the fall, and will answer just as well when the curse is removed. Why not?

Preble.—God has forbidden us to keep the seventh day because it was written with ink.

REPLY.—The other nine precepts were also written with ink, and of course they are forbidden to be kept for the same reason. But they were also written on stone by the finger of God, and Eld. P. has said "all ten" were in the new covenant. Then why not keep them?

Preble.—There never was but one kind of law.

REPLY.—The ten commands were a whole and complete law set apart from all other laws, whether civil or ceremonial. Ex. xxiv, 12: "And the Lord said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount, and be there, and I will give thee tables of stone, and a law, and commandments which I have written, that thou mayest teach them." We learn from this text, 1. That the ten commands were "a law," not a small portion of a law, but a complete code of itself. 2. It was a law which God had written in distinction from the ceremonial, and civil codes which God did not write. The great Lawgiver himself has made the distinction, and we ought to recognize it.

Preble.—The ten commands must be changed because there has been a change of the penalty.

REPLY.—Not so. The Jews were broken off because of their unbelief and disobedience, and the Gentiles are grafted on by faith and obedience. That law which regulated the priesthood is changed of necessity, because the priesthood is changed. Heb. vii, 12. But the law of ten commands refer to moralities which do not change with the change of dispensations. The change of subjects does not necessarily change the law. To illustrate: Suppose that the Mormons, being unfaithful to the constitution, should be banished, and a German colony grafted in, to occupy the same territory. Would that change the laws of the United States? The ten commands are the constitution of God's moral government, and are therefore unchangeable. Capital punishment for murder has been abolished in many States; but the law forbidding murder remains the same. The law respecting the penalty can be changed and not affect the law in the least.

Preble.—Visionary women have always dragged in the Sabbath.

REPLY.—This is evidently said for effect. Falling in argument, an appeal to the hearers' prejudices is the dernier resort. The Sabbath is taught in the Bible. The true prophets were its friends. We read of "Miriam the prophetess," "Deborah the prophetess," "Huldah the prophetess," "Anna the prophetess," and the four daughters of Philip which did prophesy. Prophets have visions. Then according to Eld. P. these were "visionary women!" They kept the Sabbath no doubt. No true prophet ever "dragged in the Sabbath," but they have exalted it, as the "holy of the Lord and honorable." Isa. lviii, 13. If any have true visions of the Lord in these last days, I should expect they would harmonize with the ancient prophets, in regard to the Sabbath.

Preble.—There is no commandment for the first day. But we are to be guided by the Spirit. Those who don't keep the first day are now Sabbath-breakers!

REPLY.—If the first day is only commanded by the Spirit, which the wicked do not have, how can they be called Sabbath-breakers? Where there is no law there is no transgression. Eld. P. admits there is no letter for the first day, and the sensual have not the Spirit, and yet are Sabbath-breakers! How is this? Error goes crooked. I never knew a man to oppose the Sabbath without contradicting himself, and outraging reason and common sense.

Preble.—Applies Isa. lviii, 12, 13, to the first day of the week. Sunday needs to be restored. The Catholics have trodden it down and made it a mere holiday, and this is a prophecy of its restoration.

REPLY.—But Sunday always was a mere holiday of man. Eld. P. has twice admitted that there is no precept for the first day, and now he applies a scripture to the first day, which everybody knows had reference to the ancient Bible Sabbath. We advise the Elder to find scripture for the institution of Sunday, before he undertakes to prove its restoration. The Scriptures clearly reveal how the ancient Sabbath was divinely instituted, and enforced by the highest law ever given to man. We have also a record of its observance by the disciples, as a Sabbath. They "rested the Sabbath-day according to the commandment," but there is nothing of the kind for the first day. No institution, no law enforcing it, and no record of its observance as a Sabbath-day can be found in the whole Bible.

No doubt my readers will be astonished at the positions now taken by Eld. Preble. The notes were taken by one who is capable, and too conscientious to misrepresent. Still I have no doubt that Eld. P. will complain that he is misrepresented. He complained that Bro. Smith misrepresented him, when he gave every word of his (Eld. P.'s) articles, verbatim et literatim. Of course when the reader had both sides in the authors' own language he could judge of all misrepresentations.

We have publicly accepted Eld. P.'s challenge for discussion of the question of the Sabbath, and shall be ready when time and place are agreed upon. Truth will bear investigation. M. E. CORNELL.