American Sabbath Tract Society

By WILLIAM M. FAHNESTOCK, M. D.

"WE OUGHT TO OBEY GOD RATHER THAN MEN."

Most professors of religion, who found their faith on the Word of God, attach much importance to a weekly day of sacred rest, however much they may differ in regard to the day to be sanctified as the Sabbath, or the manner in which its sacred hours are to be improved. It is not the design of the writer of this small tract, to enter upon the discussion of the multifarious points of disputation, which have been raised by most writers, in treating this question, but simply to exhibit the scriptural account of the day to be honored unto the Lord, with some cursory remarks on the prominent topics of the controversy, which can be, and which ought to be, determined by direct reference "to the law and the testimony." Without, therefore, any pretensions to an extended confutation of men's hypotheses and men's subterfuges on this subject, he desires merely to present a concise epitome of what saith the Scriptures in reference to the day which legitimately challenges our profound veneration and implicit obedience; and will restrict his comments; on the bearings of the sacred text, to as few words as is practicable in a matter of such grave importance; that, in embracing and defending so sacred an institution, and in responding to the scriptural interrogation, "Who hath required this at your hand?" the reader may, confidently and without fear of contradiction, answer, "The Lord thy God—the Almighty Jehovah!" and lay his finger on the clear, unequivocal, ungarbled, "Thus saith the Lord," for his practice.

The Scriptures tell us, that God "rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made; and God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it." Gen. 2:2, 3. This is the first notice of the Sabbath in the Bible; and it is the first religious institution established by the Almighty for the benefit of all after generations. The rest of the testimonies of the Lord to the sacredness of his holy day, are like unto it, wherever they occur in the Inspired Volume.

During the sojourn of the children of Israel in the wilderness, the Lord, to supply their necessities, sent manna daily, save on the seventh day; thus recognizing strictly his holy Sabbath, by affording them a double portion on the sixth day, and requiring them to secure it at that time for the seventh day.

"And Moses said unto them, This is the bread which the Lord hath given you to eat. This is the thing which the Lord hath commanded. Gather of it every man according to his eating; an omer for every man according to the number of your persons, take ye every man for them which are in your tents. And the children of Israel did so, and gathered, some more, some less. And when they did mete it with an omer, he that had gathered much had nothing over, and he that had gathered little had no lack; they gathered every man according to his eating. And Moses said, Let no man leave of it till the morning. Notwithstanding, they hearkened not unto Moses, but some of them left it until the morning, and it bred worms and stank; and Moses was wroth with them. And they gathered it every morning, every man according to his eating; when the sun waxed hot it melted. And it came to pass, that on the sixth day, they gathered twice as much bread, two omers for one man; and all the rulers of the congregation came and told Moses. And he said unto them, This is that which the Lord hath said, To-morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord; bake that which ye will bake to-day, and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up for you to be kept until the morning. And they laid it up till the morning, as Moses bade; and it did not stink, neither was there any worm therein. And Moses said, Eat that to-day; for to-day is the Sabbath unto the Lord; to-day ye shall not find it in the field. Six days ye shall gather it; but on the seventh day, which is the Sabbath, in it there shall be none. And it came to pass, that there went out some people on the seventh day for to gather, and they found none. And the Lord said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws? See, for the Lord hath given you the Sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days; abide ye every man in his place on the seventh day." Exod. 16:15-30.

This was before the giving of the law, and is irrefragible evidence of respect unto the Sabbath before the law was promulgated.

When the Decalogue, written on stone by the finger of God, was committed to the Israelites, the obligation to honor the Sabbath—the seventh day—was emphatically renewed, and most explicitly defined and enjoined.

"Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. Six days shall 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, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy man-servant, nor thy maid-servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates; 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." Exod. 20:8-11.

The same is reÏterated by the same writer in another place.

"Six days shall work be done; but the seventh day is the Sabbath of rest, an holy convocation; ye shall do no work therein; it is the Sabbath of the Lord in all your dwellings." Lev. 23:3.

The reader will observe, that this commandment does not ordain a new and peculiar institution, but reminds the Israelites of one which had been established long prior to their existence as a nation, to be had in remembrance and to be rigidly observed. "Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy." The reader will also observe, that it does not simply appoint a Sabbath, or a seventh part of time to be consecrated as holy time, but that the precise time, the particular day, is specifically certified by Jehovah himself—that it is the day, and not the institution, which the Lord blessed and hallowed; that it was not the sabbatic law, but the day of rest, which was enjoined. The law was predicated on the sanctified day, not the day accommodated to the institution; and that there might be no mistake on the subject, the law defines the day as it found it, and assigns clearly and most unequivocally the reason for its observance. It aims simply at hallowing the day, the precise, particular day; which is still more emphatically expressed in the original, ??? ????, "the day of the rest," because in it, the day, God rested from all his work, and subsequently enjoined like rest, on the same day, and for the same purpose, upon all his people. This Bible truth ought to be sufficient to overset all the sophistry of equivocators, in their attempts to blind the inquirer, by astutely insinuating the idea, that the sabbatic law only demands the consecration of a seventh portion of time, which position, they, in turn, as stoutly repudiate, when any one sees proper to choose any other seventh part of time than the day which they propound for them. To proceed; Nehemiah says:—

"In those days saw I in Judah some treading wine presses on the Sabbath, and bringing in sheaves and lading asses; as also wine, grapes, and figs, and all manner of burdens, which they brought into Jerusalem on the Sabbath day; and I testified against them on the day wherein they sold victuals. There dwelt men of Tyre also therein, which brought fish and all manner of ware, and sold on the Sabbath unto the children of Judah, and in Jerusalem. Then I contended with the nobles of Judah, and said unto them, What evil thing is this that ye do and profane the Sabbath day? Did not your fathers thus, and did not our God bring all this evil upon us, and upon this city? Yet ye bring more wrath upon Israel by profaning the Sabbath. And it came to pass, that when the gates of Jerusalem began to be dark before the Sabbath, I commanded that the gates should be shut, and charged that they should not be opened till after the Sabbath; and some of my servants set I at the gates, that there should no burden be brought in on the Sabbath day. So the merchants and sellers of all kinds of ware lodged without Jerusalem once or twice. Then I testified against them, Why lodge ye about the wall? if ye do so again, I will lay hands on you. From this time forth came they no more on the Sabbath. And I commanded the Levites that they should cleanse themselves, and that they should come and keep the gates to sanctify the Sabbath day." Neh. 13:15-22.

To turn to the New Testament, our blessed Redeemer proclaimed himself Lord of the Sabbath, (Mark 2:28,) thereby incorporating it in the new dispensation. He also declared most distinctly, that he did not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it; that not one jot or tittle should pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Matt. 5:17, 18. Luke also affirms, in reference to the course of the disciples after the crucifixion, that they "rested the Sabbath day according to the commandment." Luke 23:56. This was after Christ had declared that all his work was finished—the new covenant perfected, and he had been nailed to the tree. This doubtless refers to the commandment to observe the seventh day. No one disputes it, as no command was given to observe any other day. And from the Acts of the Apostles, we find that they made it the day of their special ministrations of the Word, as their Lord and Master had done before them.

"But when they departed from Perga, they came to Antioch in Pisidia and went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and sat down. And after the reading of the law and the prophets, the rulers of the synagogue sent unto them saying, Ye men and brethren, if ye have any word of exhortation for the people, say on. Then Paul stood up, and beckoning with his hand, said, Men of Israel, and ye that fear God, give audience." Acts 13:14, 15. "And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next Sabbath. * * * And the next Sabbath day came almost the whole city to hear the word of God." Id. verses 42, 44. Paul "reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks." Id. 18:4, 5.

All the promises, and all the penalties connected with the observance or the desecration of the Sabbath, refer to the seventh day Sabbath, and to no other in future.

"Blessed is the man that doeth this, and the son of man that layeth hold on it; that keepeth the Sabbath from polluting it, and keepeth his hand from doing any evil." Isa. 56:2.

"If thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day; and call the Sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, honorable; and shalt honor him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words; then thou shall delight thyself in the Lord; and I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth, and feed thee with the heritage of Jacob thy father; for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it." Id. 58:13, 14.

"Thus saith the Lord: Take heed to yourselves, and bear no burden on the Sabbath day, nor bring it in by the gates of Jerusalem; neither carry forth a burden out of your houses on the Sabbath day, neither do ye any work, but hallow ye the Sabbath day, as I commanded your fathers. * * * And it shall come to pass, if ye diligently hearken unto me, saith the Lord, to bring in no burden through the gates of the city on the Sabbath day, but hallow the Sabbath day to do no work therein, then shall there enter into the gates of the city, kings and princes, sitting upon the throne of David, riding in chariots and on horses, they and their princes, the men of Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and this shall remain forever. * * * But if ye will not hearken unto me, to hallow the Sabbath day, and not to bear a burden, even entering at the gates of Jerusalem on the Sabbath day; then I will kindle a fire in the gates thereof, and it shall devour the palaces of Jerusalem, and it shall not be quenched." Jer. 17:21, 22, 24, 25, 27.

No where in the Inspired Word have we any other weekly Sabbath appointed. No where has that Sabbath ever been abrogated or superseded. No where in the Scriptures is any other day called the Sabbath-day. No where is any other day required to be observed as the Sabbath. If, then, He, the Almighty, gave the seventh day, and sanctified and hallowed it as his Sabbath, and has not abrogated it—has not absolved us from its duties, nor delegated authority to others to do so—it remains in as full force as when first instituted by Jehovah himself, and will stand in the Judgment against all the crafty inventions and futile subterfuges of perverse, rebellious man.

The foregoing summary is a plain, unvarnished, unmutilated scriptural account of God's rest-day, which He enjoined on all mankind, for all ages, for all nations, tongues, and kindred. Some persons, nay, the great mass of the Christian world, have been taught, that the Sabbath alluded to is a "Jewish Sabbath," and "has been done away;" in proof of which position, they adduce the passages in Paul's Epistle to the Colossians—"Let no man, therefore, judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy-day, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath-days, which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ."[11] Col. 2:16, 17. "Who blotted out the hand-writing of ordinances, that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross." Col. 2:14. This, I must remark, proves too much; for if it has abrogated the seventh-day Sabbath, it has blotted out the sabbatic law also; unless it be shown, that it is reserved, or that another has been re-enacted, clearly and expressly ordained. If so, let its advocates point to a single requirement, an unequivocal injunction, to observe any other day as the Sabbath, and it will terminate all controversy on the subject. The "hand-writing of ordinances," which was "nailed to the cross," was merely "the ceremonial law," the onerous burdens of the Levitical ritual, not the "moral law of commandments"—the Decalogue! If the opposite view be correct, then the Sabbath, or any "rest-day," is "against us," contrary to our nature and wants, and is not for our good, and ought to be annulled and obliterated forever. Then, also, we are driven to the doctrine of the "Friends," that all days are alike holy under the gospel dispensation. The advocates for the first day of the week can not consistently escape this dilemma. They must accept the Sabbath hallowed by the Lord, or hallow all days alike.

Much as man has attempted to obscure and pervert this holy institution, the Word of Truth is clear, express and emphatic, in regard to the perpetuity of the particular day to be hallowed, as well as it is explicit in the precise time to be sanctified. The Scriptures no where speak of a "Jewish Sabbath" or a "Christian Sabbath." The Sabbath of the Bible is but one, and has but one name—"the Sabbath of the Lord thy God;" which the Scriptures declare is the seventh day, instituted more than two thousand years before there was a Jew in the world, and, consequently, could not have been a "Jewish Sabbath." The Sabbath, Christ, who is "Lord of the Sabbath," asserts, "was made for man"—the whole race of man—not for a particular nation or people, but for mankind at large.

It is proper here to remark, that this sneering at the "Jewish Sabbath," which in times past was, and still is, by weak minds, constantly resorted to, in the absence of legitimate argument, to prejudice the populace against giving this subject a fair and impartial examination, and thereby to lead them to prejudge the case, has, within a few years past, been abandoned by all sensible and consistent advocates for the sabbatic institution. They find that it stultifies their own pretensions, and has done much damage to themselves in sustaining the claims of sacredness for any other day; for, while they maintain that the ancient Sabbath was a Jewish institution, they unwittingly prove that there is no longer any Sabbath to be observed, since they fail to show that another has been ordained or established for the Christian Church. If a "Jewish Sabbath," it was done away with by the Jewish dispensation; and if no other Sabbath has been expressly appointed by Divine authority, the Christian Church is certainly left without the Sabbath, or any substitute possessing any of its sacredness—a sacredness which can only be derived from an express and explicit mandate from the Lord of the Sabbath. That puerile quibble, the nick-name "Jewish Sabbath," has, therefore, been abandoned by the most prominent writers of the present day; who generally fall back and found the institution (the origin and grounds for its perpetuity) long anterior to the "Jewish," the Mosaic dispensation—even back to the Sabbath of Paradise. Thus Dr. Barnes, of Philadelphia, in a series of sermons on this subject, delivered and published in the fall of 1845, advocates this position, and contends strenuously for the Ante-Mosaic Sabbath. The same view was inculcated by the "National Lord's Day Convention," held at Baltimore, November, 1844; and it has been reiterated more distinctly and emphatically by "The Rhode Island Sabbath Union," in an address to the people of that State, in 1846, to which, among others, we find attached the name of Dr. Wayland, the honored President of Brown University. The Committee of the Rhode Island "Sabbath Union," in calling attention to the claims of the Sabbath, remark:

"The Lord of the Sabbath has here said, 'The Sabbath was made for man.' Man is here used, most certainly, as a generic term, and, therefore, presents a universal proposition. The Sabbath was not made for man, for man as a genus, as a race, unless it was made for every individual of the race; for the first, and for the last man; for the first generation, and for every other. The Sabbath, then, must have existed from the beginning, and is as old as the human race. Our Lord says, moreover, 'The Sabbath was made for man.' He says not, the Jewish Sabbath, or the Christian Sabbath, but the Sabbath, the common, the universal one, which belongs to mankind. Is this not the very language to denote a universal and perpetual institution?

"Let us look at the connection of the Sabbath with the work of creation. 'God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it.' If the Creator had merely rested on the seventh day, it would have been an impressive consecration. But when he proceeds to bless and sanctify it, there is authority, a positive Sabbath, forming a part of the primeval arrangement, when God fixed the order in which the world should go—six days labor and one day rest, over and over forever. The first week of the world, then, was not completed till there had been a Sabbath, as well as a first day or a sixth. Is not this indicative of the universality and perpetuity of the institution?"

Here we might rest the question, with perfect safety, if the mass of mankind would be content with the plain teachings of the Bible; but, having "itching ears," they, unfortunately, are too apt to leave "the law and the testimony," and cleave to "the commandments of men;" which teach them, that "Christ or his Apostles" have transferred the sacredness of the seventh day to the first day of the week. The writer, therefore, feels constrained to bring before his readers the passages on which that notion is predicated, to exhibit the weakness of their untenable position, and thereby establish the Sabbath of the Bible.

What saith the Scriptures to support the claims of the first day of the week to be holy time? The first notice we have of the disciples being together on "the first day of the week," on which the assumed "change" is predicated, is found in the Gospel by John:—

"Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut for fear of the Jews (mark that!) came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. And when he had so said, he showed unto them his hands and his side. Then were the disciples glad when they saw the Lord." John 20:19, 20.

This passage contains no command, no intimation whatever, to sanctify that day. It does not even claim that they were there for any sacred purpose, much less to celebrate the Sabbath, or institute a new day of worship, but simply for common protection, "for fear of the Jews;" and a design to comfort them in their trepidation is all the legitimate inference we can draw from the circumstance of Christ's appearing unto them. All the Apostles were not together; Thomas was absent! If they had met together to sabbatize, he, certainly, would have been with them. Not having been present, and not having seen the risen Saviour, while doubting and disputing on the subject of his resurrection, "eight days afterward," Christ appeared again, to confound the incredulity of Thomas, and for no other ostensible purpose.

"Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe. And after eight days the disciples were within,[12] and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the door being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you. Then said he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side, and be not faithless, but believing. And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God." John 20:24-28.

So much, and that is all, is the authority adduced by the advocates for the sacredness of the first day for Christ having changed the day of rest, the Sabbath, or having given his sanction to the change. Ought such a vague inference overturn the fiat of the Almighty—change times and laws ordained by Jehovah to endure forever? Is the "being together," save one, of the twelve, "for fear of the Jews," and "being within eight days afterward," any evidence of their being there to celebrate the "Sabbath" or Lord's day? Is there, in these transactions, any re-enactment of the sabbatic law, which some persons maintain was abrogated by the "blotting out of the hand-writing of ordinances?" Is there any injunction issued by them—the apostles—requiring the disciples to honor, hallow, and sanctify the first day of the week, in any of the above proceedings?

The next Scripture assumed for the substitution of the first day of the week in the place of the Sabbath of the Lord, is found in the Acts of the Apostles:—

"And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow, and continued his speech until midnight. And there were many lights in the upper chamber where they were assembled together. And there sat in the window a certain young man named Eutychus, being fallen into a deep sleep; and as Paul was long preaching, he sunk down with sleep, and fell from the third loft, and was taken up dead. And Paul went down, and fell on him, and embracing him, said, Trouble not yourselves, for his life is in him. When he, therefore, was come up again, and had broken bread, and eaten, and talked a long while, even till break of day, he departed." Acts 20:7-11.

It is necessary to a proper understanding here, to bear in mind—1st. That it was the custom of the disciples, in the days of the apostles, to meet together, and break bread, every day. "They continued steadfast in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers." "And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart." 2d. That in those times a day was counted "the evening and the morning were the first day." "From even unto even shall ye celebrate your Sabbaths." Lev. 23:32. Thus it appears, by this passage, that they had simply met, as was their uniform, daily custom, to celebrate the breaking of bread on the evening (the commencement of the day), it being the last evening Paul was to be with them; and in all probability the circumstance would not have been noticed so particularly, but to introduce the case of Eutychus, in confirmation of Paul's miraculous powers. The passage does not prove any thing for the sacredness of the first day of the week, but proves much against it; for, if the first day of the week is holy time, Paul, in preaching till midnight, and departing on the morrow, would be a Sabbath-breaker for traveling on that day. He would have kept the evening only. "From even unto even shall ye celebrate your Sabbaths." The same disregard for the sacredness of the first day of the week was manifested by the Redeemer himself, in traveling on the "resurrection day" to Emmaus, a distance of seven and a half miles, while a "Sabbath-day's journey" was restricted to one mile: slender evidence, indeed, of the Saviour's having transferred the holiness of the Sabbath to "the first day of the week," or having "sanctioned" it, as is often claimed by its advocates.

The next passage adduced is found in Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians—"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." 1Cor. 16:2. First day? Day is not in the original, but is supplied, and is so designated by being italicized. So the true reading is, "In the first of the week." However, if it mean the first day, Sunday, it makes it a commercial day, a day of business, a day of reckoning, not of rest, as it requires a man to cast up his accounts, to find what amount he can "lay by."

The last text, and the one most relied upon, is from John's Revelation—"I was in the spirit on the Lord's day." Rev. 1:10. There is nothing in this passage, or in the context, to indicate that it was the first day of the week. It is a mere assumption, without any Scripture to fortify the position. The best biblical critics admit that there is no scriptural evidence to identify the expression with the first day of the week. If we follow the Protestant rule, to prove Scripture by Scripture, and not evade the plain teachings of the Bible, it will be an easy matter to see a much more apt application of the expression. Many of the best commentators suppose that it alludes to the Gospel-day. "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day; he saw it, and was glad." John 8:56. Was not this a day which approximates (if it will not be admitted to be identical) not only in idea, but in a kin-name—the day of Christ—the Gospel-day? Paul speaks of it as something yet to come. "That ye may approve things that are excellent; that ye may be sincere and without offense, till the day of Christ." "Holding forth the word of life, that I may rejoice in the day of Christ, that I have not run in vain, neither labored in vain." "Who shall also confirm you unto the end, that ye may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ." "Now, we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, that ye be not soon shaken in mind, or troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter, as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand." "That the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus." Phil. 1:10; 2:16; 1Cor. 1:8; 2Thess. 2:1, 2, 3; 1Cor. 5:5. Again, it is maintained by some expounders, that allusion is had to the Judgment Day. "The day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat; the earth also, and all the works therein, shall be burned up." 2Peter 3:10. Therefore John, in saying, "I was in the spirit on the Lord's day," simply asserts, that in prophetic vision his spirit reached forward to the great day for which all other days were made, and beheld the momentous transactions of that awful crisis, which he was directed to reveal to the churches on earth.

From this brief examination, it appears, that the term "Lord's day," as here used, does not refer to any particular day of the week. But if it refer to any special day of the week, as some suppose, it must refer to the seventh; for that is the sanctified, hallowed rest-day of the Bible, and is the only day which the Lord calls his holy day (Is. 58:13), and therefore must be the Lord's day. If, however, the term "Lord's day," used by John, does not refer to the gospel day, or the day of judgment, nor to the Lord's "holy day," the seventh-day Sabbath, but alludes to a festival day to commemorate the resurrection, as is assumed, where is the command requiring it to be kept holy? And where is the evidence in the Scriptures, that it was kept as the Sabbath, or in place of the Sabbath?

Even were there any intimations given by the prophets or the apostles, (which we deny,) that the resurrection day should be regarded as the "ceremony-worship-day" under the gospel dispensation, where is the evidence in the Scriptures that the first day of the week is or was the resurrection day? It is assumed, not proved. The Bible and human theories are at conflict on this subject. It is generally assumed, that the Redeemer was crucified on Friday, and rose early on Sunday morning. This makes Christ a liar; for he said, "As Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly, so shall the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." Matth. 12:40. Crucified on Friday, and rising on Sunday morning, would make but part of three days, and only two nights. Christ said three days and three nights, and he certainly must be right. Therefore, crucified on Friday, he could not have risen on Sunday. The New Testament does not assert that he rose on the first day of the week; it only says, that he was seen on the first of the week, not first day. In all the places in which allusion is had to this matter, (Matth. 28:1; Mark 16:1, 9; Luke 24:1; John 20:1, 19), the original says, in the first of the week—day is not once named, but is supplied in our version, as is indicated by being italicised. But even if the term first of the week implies first day, the Scriptures no where assert that he rose on that day. Being seen, and rising, are two entirely different matters. So is a part of three days and two nights different from three days and three nights. If Jesus had said, "three days and nights," it might not involve the present difficulty; but no one questions that Jonas was three whole days and three whole nights in the whale's belly. Then, as the Redeemer makes that the simile of his own confinement in the heart of the earth, the antitype, to be verified and accredited, must be like unto the type. He must have been there the three days and the three nights, according to his word. It is vain presumption, arrant blasphemy, to make it any less to gratify a human theory. Let God be true, though it make all men liars.

In the absence of all direct scriptural evidence to sustain the assumption, that the first day of the week is the "resurrection day;" and in the absence of all such evidence, that the Lord designed to elevate the first day of the week to the special regard of the Christian Church, and confer upon it the sacredness of the ancient Sabbath; would we not, at least, have some intimation of it in the writings of the prophets, in which all the important circumstances of the Redeemer's life and mission are foreshadowed? Where, reader, will you find any thing in them that predicts any change of the holy Sabbath to the resurrection day? If found, let it be adduced. The Sabbath is a standing monument against Atheism, for all ages, declaring the workmanship of God; yet some assume, that as redemption is a greater work, and a more important work, than the creation of the universe and the living souls which inhabit all the spheres, therefore the resurrection day ought to be honored as the rest-day. Has not the Lord the right to determine this matter? If He deemed it important that the resurrection day be thus distinguished, would He not have declared it, expressly, unto us? Would He have left us to infer it? Can we, will we, be justified in casting aside the explicit command of the Most High, in this matter, to substitute our fancied day of greater importance than the one the Almighty has ordained? "Wherefore kick ye at my sacrifice and at mine offering, which I have commanded?" 1Sam. 2:29. "It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks." Acts 9:5.

If, then, there is no evidence in the Scriptures, that the first day of the week is the "resurrection day," (which, even if satisfactorily established, would not invalidate our position, nor entitle it to supersede the holy Sabbath); and, more particularly, if there is no evidence in the Inspired Volume, that the term "Lord's day" is intended to designate the first day of the week; we are reduced, by every principle of reasoning, to regard the seventh day—the Heaven-heralded Sabbath—as the only "Lord's day," the only "rest-day," sanctified and hallowed by the Almighty as holy time.

All days, in one sense, are Lord's days; but there has never been but one Heaven-appointed weekly Sabbath, and that, most unequivocally, is the seventh day. "Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy"—"the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God." Ex. 20:8. If that sacred injunction has been abrogated, we should expect—(for it would be unreasonable to recognize its repeal or transfer, without as explicit and as authoritative a mandate from the Court of Heaven)—at least a re-enactment somewhat thus: "From the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, ye shall no longer sabbatize, but shall give heed to the assembling of yourselves on the first day of the week; in it ye shall do no work; and, to avoid the appearance of symbolizing with my ancient people, the Jews, call it no longer the Sabbath, but designate it by the term Lord's day!" Is there any intimation of such an abrogation, or such a transfer of the sacredness of the Sabbath to Sunday, in the inspired volume? Not the semblance of it. Even if the early disciples, without any intimation from the Lord of the Sabbath, but of their own accord, chose to set apart a special day as a festival day, as they were wont to do for martyrs and saints, it can not, certainly, supersede the institution of Jehovah; neither can they confer upon it the sacredness belonging, by the decree of the Most High, to his rest-day. Indeed, this is so evident, that the erudite and frank Neander expressly says, "Opposition to Judaism introduced the particular festival of Sunday, very early, indeed, into the place of the Sabbath ... Sunday was distinguished as a day of joy, by the circumstance that men did not fast upon it, and that they prayed standing up, and not kneeling, as Christ had raised up fallen man to heaven again through his resurrection. The festival of Sunday, like all other festivals, was always only a human ordinance; and it was far from the intention of the apostles to establish a divine command in this respect—far from them, and from the early apostolic church, to transfer the laws of the Sabbath to Sunday. Perhaps at the end of the second century, a false application of this kind had begun to take place; for men appear by that time to have considered laboring on Sunday as a sin."[13]

Such, then, is the scriptural account of the Sabbath, and such the frank admission of one of the most distinguished ecclesiastical historians, who could have no motive in perverting or misrepresenting the facts in the case, but who has always shown himself above all mean subterfuges for any purpose whatever. His testimony might be fortified by many names of high authority among writers of eminence, who do not contend for sabbatizing on the seventh day, yet whose candor and honesty constrain them to make the like admission.

Thus it will be seen, that the observers of the seventh-day Sabbath can look up with full confidence of having a "thus saith the Lord" for their practice; while the observers of the first day of the week must confess, with confusion of face, that they are but following "the commandments of men," and can only plead "the nakedness of the Fathers," as Whitby terms their inconsistencies. Will the Lord admit such a "vain oblation?" Will he suffer such a perversion of his holy institution to go unreproved? Where, reader, can you find in the Bible any authority for appropriating the title of the holy rest-day, the Sabbath, to the first day of the week? If you can not, is it not "robbing God" thus to falsify his Word? Is it not base felony every time any worm of the dust thus perversely uses the term which He, the Sovereign of the Universe, has attached to his holy day—thereby wantonly "changing times and laws"—overturning the decrees of the Lord God? Is it not wresting the Word to your own destruction? If the Lord charge man with robbery in withholding perishable tithes and offerings, and curse him for that delinquency, how much greater, think ye, must be the condemnation of those who set at naught his prerogative to institute and ordain the service of the sanctuary? He alone has the right to impose religious ordinances; and it is but the reasonable service of his creatures to obey, implicitly, his righteous mandates—the sacred injunction, to hallow and sanctify his holy Sabbath. "Will a man rob God?" asks the Almighty, through his prophet; "yet ye have robbed me, saith the Holy One. Ye are cursed with a curse; for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation." Mal. 2:8, 9. Where, then, will you find your excuse for this perversion of the Word of God, when that Word shall come to judge you? for it is the Word, the written Word, (given to be a lamp unto your feet and a light to your path,) which shall judge you at the last day. Of old it was said, "From the days of your fathers ye are gone astray from mine ordinances, and have not kept them." Mal. 3:7. The apostle of the Gentiles speaks of those in his day who corrupted the Word. 2Cor. 2:17. In another place it is asked, When wilt thou cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord? Acts 13:10. To which interrogation all are obnoxious who seek out inventions of their own, or follow "the commandments of men," which subvert the testimony of the Lord.

Canst thou, reader, contend with the Almighty? It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God, when he shall lay judgment to the line, and righteousness to the plummet, and shall sweep away the refuge of lies. Isaiah 28:17. The true principle, reader, and the only safe principle, is, to "let God be true, though it make every man a liar." Rom. 3:4. "Ye are my friends," says Christ, "if ye do whatsover I command you." John 14:15. "He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him." 1John 2:4. "In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrine the commandments of men." Matt. 15:9. "What thing soever I command you, observe to do it; thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it." Deut. 13:32. "Turn not from it to the right hand or to the left." Josh. 1:7. "Add not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar." Prov. 30:6. "If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book; and if any man shall take away from the words of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things that are written in this book." Rev. 22:18, 19. Ponder well this subject, reader, and render unto God the things that are God's, that it may be well with thee, and thou be admitted into the rest reserved for those who "delayed not to keep the commandments"—for those who keep his covenant and walk in the way of the Lord.

[11] The Sabbath was no type of Christ—a shadow, of which Christ was to be the body. It was instituted before the transgression; consequently, the term Sabbath-days, here, has no relevancy if applied to the weekly Sabbath; but it evidently alludes to the festival days among the Jews, usually called Sabbaths, as all the Israelites had at those periods to refrain from labor—"such as the festivals of the Passover, Pentecost, the Feast of Tabernacles, &c., &c., which are alluded to in Leviticus, 19:3-30. Keep my Sabbaths."—Calmet.

[12] Within does not imply that they were assembled at any public place for worship, or to celebrate a holy day. Within may simply mean, that they were together in the place of their common lodgment—where they abode together.

[13] The History of the Christian Religion and Church during the First Three Centuries. By Dr. Augustus Neander. Translated by Henry John Rose, B. D. New York, 1848, p. 186.