Your ShelfYour Projects

Review and Herald, Vol. 44, No. 1.

SABBATH—VS. SUNDAY

Review and Herald

Jun 16, 1874

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jun 16, 1874

SABBATH—VS. SUNDAY.

By Dudley Marvin Canright

SIXTY-FIVE FACTS CONCERNING THE SABBATH.

1. The great God rested on the seventh day. Ex. 31:17.
2. The Creator has blessed the seventh day. Ex. 20:11.
3. The Lord has sanctified the seventh day. Gen. 2:3.
4. It was made the Sabbath day in Eden. Gen. 2:1–3.
5. It was made before the fall of man. Gen. 2:1–3.
6. Types and shadows pointing to the cross were not instituted till after the fall; hence the Sabbath is not a type.
7. The Sabbath points back to creation, not forward to the cross; and therefore it is not a type.
8. It is a memorial or sign of creation. Ex. 31:17.
9. Gentiles and Christians need this memorial now as much as did Adam or the Jews.
10. The Sabbath was made for man. Mark 2:27.
11. It was given to Adam, the head of the human race. Gen. 2:1–3.
12. Hence, through him, as the representative, to all nations. Acts 17:26.
13. It was made 2300 years before there was a Jew; hence it is not Jewish.
14. It differed from all other holy days in that it was founded on God’s own acts, while no others were. Ex. 20:11.
15. Sabbath means rest. The seventh day is called the Sabbath, or rest, day of the Lord because the Lord rested upon the seventh day. But the day upon which God rested must ever remain his rest, or Sabbath, day; hence the seventh day, and no other, is still the Sabbath day of the Lord.
16. All the facts and reasons upon which the Sabbath was founded at first still exist. See Ex. 20:11; Gen. 2:1–3.
17. It was a part of God’s law before Sinai. Ex. 16:4, 27–29.
18. If the Sabbath had been lost, God pointed it out by four notable miracles wrought every week for forty years. See Ex. 16.
19. Sabbath violation was one of the sins for which Israel was excluded from entering the promised land. Eze. 20:13–24.
20. It was commanded by God’s voice from heaven. Deut. 4:12, 13.
21. That command was written by the finger of God. Ex. 31:18.
22. It was engraved in stone. Deut. 5:22.
23. It was deposited in the ark in the most holy place. Deut. 10:1–5.
24. In all these particulars, it was honored above all other holy days.
25. God placed it in the moral law. Ex. 20:1–17.
26. God forbade work upon it, even in the most hurrying time. Ex. 34:21.
27. The Sabbath given to the Jews was the same day which God gave to Adam. Compare Ex. 20:8–11 with Gen. 2:1–3.
28. God promised that Jerusalem should stand forever if Israel would keep it. Jer. 17:24, 25.
29. He sent the Jews into captivity for breaking it. Neh. 13:18.
30. He destroyed Jerusalem for its violation. Jer. 17:27.
31. He has pronounced a blessing upon the Gentiles who will keep it. Isa. 56:6.
32. God has promised to bless any man who will keep it. Isa. 56:2.
33. The Lord requires us to call it honorable. Isa. 58:13.
34. It is a sign of the living God. Ex. 31:17.
35. By keeping it, we may know that we are sanctified. Eze. 20:12.
36. It was kept by the patriarchs. Compare Ex. 16:4, 27–29; Gen. 26:5, &c.
37. All the holy prophets kept it, as all admit.
38. The Father himself kept it. Gen. 2:1–3.
39. The Son of God kept it. Luke 4:16; John 15:10.
40. He was its Lord to honor and protect it as a husband his wife. Compare Mark 2:27 with 1 Pet. 3:6.
41. He vindicated it as a merciful institution. Matt. 12:7, 8.
42. He recognized the law of the Sabbath as binding in the New Testament. Matt. 12:12.
43. He carefully taught how it ought to be kept. Matt. 12:1–13.
44. He instructed his disciples to observe it at least forty years after the resurrection. Matt. 24:20.
45. The holy women carefully kept it after the crucifixion. Luke 23:56.
46. Matthew and Mark after the resurrection call it “the Sabbath.” Matt. 28:1; Mark 16:1.
47. Fourteen years after the resurrection, by the inspiration of God, it is called “the Sabbath day.” Acts 13:14.
48. Paul calls it the “Sabbath day” in A. D. 44. Acts 13:27.
49. At the same date, Luke terms it “the Sabbath” day. Acts 13:44.
50. Converted Christian Gentiles called it the Sabbath day. Acts 13:42, 43.
51. James, in a great Christian assembly, called it the Sabbath in A. D. 46. Acts 15:21.
52. The Gentiles (or Greeks) kept it as well as the Jews. Acts 17:1–4.
53. Paul held prayer-meetings upon it. Acts 16:13.
54. He read the Scriptures upon it. Acts 17:2, 3.
55. He preached upon it many times. Acts 13:14–41, 44–46; 16:13, 14; 17:2; 18:4.
56. There is no mention of any dispute between Jews and Christians about the Sabbath; hence both kept the same day.
57. There is no Bible record that any Christian ever worked upon it.
58. God has never given permission for any one to work upon it.
59. There is no record that God has ever removed his blessing or sanctification from it.
60. It is not once said that it has been abolished.
61. It is mentioned in the New Testament 59 times as the Sabbath day, and always with the same respect as in the Old Testament.
62. It is called “the Lord’s day.” Rev. 1:10. Compare Ex. 20:8–11; Isa. 58:13; Mark 2:28.
63. It is a part of that law which is binding in the gospel. Matt. 5:17–19; James 2:8–12.
64. It is to be restored after it has been trodden down for “many generations.” Isa. 58:12, 13.
65. Finally, it will be kept forever in the new earth. Isa. 66:22, 23.

FORTY-ONE FACTS CONCERNING THE FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK.

1. The first thing recorded in the Bible is work that was done by the Creator on the first day of the week. Gen. 1:1–5.
2. God commands us to work upon it. Ex. 20:8–11.
3. Hence he forbids us to keep it.
4. None of the patriarchs kept it.
5. None of the prophets kept it.
6. Christ did not keep it during his whole life.
7. The apostles worked upon it during the same time.
8. It is called a working day. Eze. 46:1.
9. God never rested upon it.
10. Christ never rested upon it.
11. There is no record that the apostles ever rested upon it.
12. God never blessed it.
13. Christ never blessed it.
14. It was never blessed by any divine authority.
15. It was never sanctified.
16. No law was ever given to keep it; hence, it is no sin or transgression to work upon it. 1 John 3:4; Rom. 4:15.
17. The New Testament nowhere forbids work to be done upon it.
18. No penalty is given for its violation.
19. No blessing is promised for its observance.
20. It is never called Christian Sabbath.
21. It is never called the Sabbath at all.
22. It is never called the Lord’s day.
23. It is never called a rest-day.
24. No sacred title whatever is applied to it.
25. It is simply called “first day of the week” wherever mentioned.
26. Jesus never mentioned it in any way.
27. It is never said that the Sabbath was changed from the seventh to the first day.
28. If you keep it, “Who hath required this at your hands?” Isa. 1:12.
29. It is only mentioned eight times in the New Testament.
30. And six of these eight texts all refer to the same first day.
31. No regulation is given as to how it should be observed.
32. Paul required Christians to do secular business upon it. 1 Cor. 16:2.
33. Only one religious meeting upon that day is recorded. Acts 20:5–13.
34. And this was only an evening meeting.
35. It is not said that the disciples ever had a meeting on it before.
36. It is not intimated that they ever did afterward.
37. It is not said that it was their custom to meet on that day.
38. There is no requirement to meet and break bread on that day.
39. There is only one case where it was done. Acts 20:7.
40. That was done in the night, after midnight. Acts 20:7–11.
41. Paul has given us the “apostolic example” of traveling during all the daylight of that day. Acts 20:11–14.
D. M. CANRIGHT.

The Kingdom of God.—No. 11.

By Joseph Harvey Waggoner

Thus it is made plain by the Scriptures that the New Covenant has been made; that it was made with Israel and Judah; and that the middle wall of partition has been broken down so that the Gentiles are placed on an equality with them, and made partakers of the same promises.
Now the whole theory of the return of the Jews, and of their restoration to eminence, or of special blessings being reserved for them, rests on the supposition that there are a class of promises recorded in the Bible belonging to them exclusively. But two points should be considered on that subject, to wit: (1.) Whether these promises were conditional, and (2.) Under which of the two covenants the special blessings were to be conferred on them.
Jesus Christ, the Son of God, first revealed as “the seed of the woman,” is the only source of blessings to man since the fall. By the free grace of the Father he was promised and given to man as the only way of life; and this promise and gift was without any condition whatever. God never promised to let his Son die for the world provided that the world would do certain things or fulfill certain conditions. But having opened the way of life through his blood, every blessing promised through him is placed on conditions. As our present investigation relates to the first covenant with Israel, under which the special promises to them were given, we will look at the evidences of their being conditional. God chose the children of Israel to be his people because of the love he had totheir fathers; but their fathers obtained the blessings by faithful obedience, and continued obedience was necessary on the part of the children to retain the promises. When God required Pharaoh to let them go, it was not merely that he might bless them, but that they might serve him. Ex. 10:3. Also he said unto them, “If ye will obey my voice indeed and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me,” &c. Ex. 19:5–8.
As the blessings set before them were conditional they could claim them only on fulfillment of the conditions. But the Scriptures abundantly prove that they were “a disobedient and gainsaying people.” Therefore, it must be admitted that they can receive nothing in the future for any consideration rendered in the past. And therefore, again, if any promise is fulfilled to them in the future, it must be on the future performance of the conditions on which such promise is based. Otherwise the promise is forfeited, and cannot be fulfilled.
And not only is it true that they have forfeited the blessings there promised, but the covenant has been abolished, and has passed away. The Lord gave as a reason for making a new covenant with them, that they had broken the other. Although he had promised to be their God, and that they should be to him a peculiar treasure above all people, yet by reason of their rebellion, he could not consistently perform his promise, and so he “regarded them not.” As transgressors of his law, they were not peculiar; they were not holy; but were like other sinful nations. And if they had any claim under that covenant, it could not have been abolished without infringing on their rights. Surely, it is plain enough that, to secure the promises, they must comply with the conditions of the new covenant, the only one that can possibly convey a good and valid title to any blessing.
We say that in the gospel there are no special privileges; and the gospel is the means whereby this equality before God is effected. Paul declares that the Gentiles are fellow-heirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel. Eph. 3:6. Thus the gospel of Christ produces a union of Jew and Gentile, and it is effected by his “having abolished in his flesh the law of commandments contained in ordinances: for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace.” Chap. 2:15.
As long as the law of commandments contained in ordinances existed, so long was a distinction recognized between Jew and Gentile; but the middle wall was broken down and both are made one; “for there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female [in the purposes or promises of God]; for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” Gal. 3:28. Paul’s rebuke to Peter has a bearing on this point. Peter was virtually acknowledging the distinction as yet existing, by conforming to that which had marked such a distinction; but Paul says, “If I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor.” Chap. 2:18.
The several points proved in this argument are as follows. (1.) They forfeited all claims under that covenant. (2.) That has passed away and been superseded by the new. (3.) It is an offense against the new covenant, or the gospel, to revive or “build again” the old. Gal. 2:18. (4.) The priests, or mediators of that covenant, could not take away their sins, Heb. 10:1–4, and, therefore, they could not recover under it what they lost by transgression. We cannot see what further is necessary to settle this question. If they by transgression forfeited everything under the old covenant, if that covenant has passed away and cannot be restored, and if they have no special promises in the new, where shall we look to establish their claim? Evidently no foundation for such a claim exists in the Bible.
And still a query may arise in regard to certain promises to Israel, such as their being gathered to their own land, which seem to look to the future for fulfillment. And some will wonder how these can be harmonized with the view here taken, and whether we believe in these promises. We accept these promises fully, and believe they will have a perfect fulfillment in the future. But the inquirer will please bear in mind that there are two Israels, and two gatherings of Israel spoken of in the Scriptures. We will notice both.
The name “Israel” is significant. It is an acquired name, and does not belong to the Jews “according to the flesh,” in the gospel dispensation, in its true significance. Jacob received it because he prevailed with God. Afterward it became a family and national name, but the Scriptures show that God kept its significance in view; especially is this plain in the New Testament. Hence it came to be used in two senses. Not observing this fact, many have erred concerning God’s purposes.
Everything peculiar to the Jewish system was typical; and every term by which a type is designated must be used in two senses, one referring to the type, the other to the antitype. It is not difficult to determine in what sense a term is used if we keep in view its relation to first principles, or observe to what covenant it belongs. The following are instances: Israel according to the flesh, Jews outwardly, Palestine under the curse, the sanctuary or pattern of heavenly things, Jerusalem which now is, and circumcision outward in the flesh. These are all peculiar to the first covenant. On the other hand, we find Israel (the prevailers), the faithful children of promise, Jews inwardly, an incorruptible, undefiled, and eternal inheritance, the heavenly sanctuary, Jerusalem which is above, and circumcision of the heart, in the Spirit. These are of the new covenant. These two classes belong to two different systems; one of enmity—the other of peace (Eph. 2:14, 15); and each has its own place in its own system, and cannot be transferred to the other by any means. So that he who is outwardly a Jew, an Israelite according to the flesh, can no more take his place in the other class, or gospel system, without becoming Abraham’s seed by faith in Christ, than can the Greek or the Hottentot.
It is often asserted that Gentiles by birth can have no right whatever to the name of Israel. But this is not in accordance with the Scriptures. Notice what Paul says to the Ephesians—we were aliens from the commonwealth of Israel. But what do they become when they are no more strangers, or aliens and foreigners? Take our own nation for an illustration. Here are individuals born in different countries; aliens and foreigners by birth. But they come to our shores, and by virtue of the naturalization laws they cease to be strangers or aliens, but are constituted American citizens. They are Americans by adoption; and in any transaction of, or with, the government they would not be styled or treated as English, French, or Germans, though they were born in England, France, or Germany. So, says Paul to the believing Gentiles, “Ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens”—of what?—“of the commonwealth of Israel.” They are Israelites by adoption: they are of “the same body”; they are no more two, but one in Christ.
Again, Paul says in Rom. 9, that “they are not all Israel which are of Israel.” Now it is evident that if the term Israel was strictly a national name, indicating the origin or birth of him who bore it, as our opponents claim, this declaration of Scripture could not be true, for then they who are of Israel would all be Israel, and no others.
We notice here that in the plan of the gospel there is a change in the relation of both Jews and Gentiles; that is, of such as are Jews and Gentiles by birth or descent. Thus, the unbelieving descendants of Abraham and Jacob are not children of Abraham, nor counted for his seed; nor Israelites, according to Rom. 9. They are not of that body, nor partakers of their promises. While the faithful, though Gentile born, are Abraham’s seed (Gal. 3:7, 29; Rom. 4:11; 9:6–8), and citizens of the commonwealth of Israel, of the same body, partakers of the same promises.
There is a very specific declaration respecting each class in Rom. 2. Circumcision distinguished between the Jews and the Gentiles. “Uncircumcision which is by nature,” certainly refers to Gentiles. And if the circumcised (i. e., the Jew) be a breaker of the law, his circumcision is made uncircumcision; that is, his claim to the title of a Jew is reversed, and he is counted a Gentile. But if the uncircumcision (i. e., the Gentile) keep the righteousness of the law, his uncircumcision is counted for circumcision; that is, his Gentile origin is set aside, and he is counted for a Jew. This might be called an extravagant pretension by Judaizers, but Paul does not leave it indefinite or open to cavil, but plainly says, “FOR HE IS NOT A JEW WHICH IS ONE OUTWARDLY,” that is, by birth or natural descent: “BUT HE IS A JEW WHICH IS ONE INWARDLY,” that is, of faith, whether circumcised or uncircumcised—whether Jew or Gentile by birth.
Proofs on this subject might be given at greater length, but we think this is sufficient. And now, having established the truth that there are two Israels, we are prepared to examine the question of the two gatherings of Israel.
J. H. Waggoner.

“WATCHMAN, WHAT OF THE NIGHT?”

By Wm. Milne

What seest thou, watchman upon Zion's hights? What are the tokens of a brighter dawn? And what the import of those glorious sights Seen by those who, from the world withdrawn, Are waiting for their Lord, the King of kings, To come again “with healing in his wings”?
Adown the vista of the coming years There seems no place for holy, calm repose; Sin, shame and sorrow, war and blood, and tears, Fill up the measurement of human woes Till He appears whose right it is to reign Forever—King of Zion to remain.
Men make advance, with restless, hurried stride, Through every lane and avenue of art, But gold and self, the idols of their pride, Defile the temple of the human heart. They honor science as a thing divine, And bow the knee to Mammon's glittering shrine.
They climb high up among the burning stars, And, all ambitious of posthumous fame, They dig down deep through earth's eternal bars, And on her rock-ribbed sides engrave a name,— Unveil her hidden measure as they go, And of her mysteries make open show.
With skillful hands they guide the iron steed, Dragging its mile-long heavy-laden train Through tunnelled mount, or 'neath the river's bed, O'er ocean crest, or deep, dark, bridged ravine, Near where the foaming, thundering cataract Scatters its spray upon the iron track.
A highway of communication men have made,— A way the vulture's red eye hath not seen; Deep, down, along old ocean's slimy bed And far beyond the reach of human ken; Old ocean, belted with magnetic wire, Affords a railway for the lightning's fire.
Men sit like gods, and on the electric flash Send their dispatches to the world abroad, Sometimes to fall, too, as the lightning's flash, On guilty heads escaping from the rod; The lightning's message heads them on the track, And sends the law's bold violators back.
All this is done, yet still the world grows worse,— More reckless, riotous, more lewd, more rude; Downward to death in devious ways men force, Through crimsoned paths all slippery with blood; The world's athirst for glitter and for gold, And men in crime grow every day more bold.
There is no sacredness attached to life, There's no security for worth or wealth; Incendiary's torch, assassin's knife Seek hardly now night's sable cloak of stealth; Men with the robber and the murderer meet, In the thronged mart and on the crowded street.
They mouth the heavens, and openly defy, And laugh to scorn the laws of God and man; Left to believe their own stupendous lie, They live but dark and damning deeds to plan; A groaning, war-cursed world to flood With seas of sorrow, burning tears and blood.
No day goes by without its murderous deeds, No night without its horrifying crimes; Yet unconcerned the easy watchman reads The long, black catalogue—and says the times Are, notwithstanding, steadily improving, And onward to millennial glory moving!
Youth jostles age, and scoffs at hoary hairs, The sire submits to the precocious son; And children, to repay parental cares, The tottering steps of gray-haired parents shun, Rush on to ruin, and provoke the doom Of disobedience, and an early tomb.
Still deeper, darker, denser, grows the cloud That o'er the future of the nations lowers; Distrustful murmurs every day more loud And general grow against despotic powers, Who break the people with an iron rod, Claiming to be the vicegerents of God.
“How long,” the prisoners cry, “O Lord, how long Shall sin and sorrow in the world prevail, The wicked prosper and their hands grow strong, The wrong and right successfully assail? Defiant, fearless, daring to blaspheme Thy ever holy, ever hallowed name.
“How long shall blood touch blood, and rampant crime Stalk unabashed in open face of day? Whilst sainted hypocrites pour out the slime Of adulation on the powers that slay Earth's needy ones—the helpless and the poor— Lord, unrebuked, how long shall this endure?” —Wm. Milne.
Continue reading: The Importance of the Old Testament