Wets on BVI 13 ASIA P'^T •"'"■'°'^~5" ?^'> *"^J X :• V^^/ >7 *-^.\i.' ClJ? and identifies the old planetary Sunday and the Christian Sabbath. "In regard we on that day received the knowledge of the truth by the Holy Spirit, who fell upon the faithful in the form of fire," Strom., b. vi. Pentecost, as we know, fell on a Sunday that year. Eusebius in his oration in praise of Constantine says that the Emperor commanded his army to worship God on "a fit day;" and it is worthy of notice that while he gave different directions to the Christians and the heathens of which it was composed, he commands both to worship on the same " fit" day which in each case designates the sun day or Lord's day, which are used as convertible terms. His words are, "But to them that as yet have not embraced the doctrine of the divine faith, he issued out a precept in a sacred law, that on Sundays they should go out into a pure field in the suburbs, when, after a signal given, they should together pour forth a prayer to God which they had learned before." In another passage he quotes the words of Constantine's exhortation to the army to pray on " that day which is chief and first of other days, and which is truly the Lord's (xug/axji) day, and the salutary day, and which derived its name from, light, life, immortality, and everything that is good." But we need not multiply pas- sages to prove that the Sunday of the planetary week coincided with the day of Christ's resurrection, and from that date the Sabbath of the cliurch of all lands and all future ages. Before inquiring whether this identity necessarily implies that it is also the original day of rest instituted by God at * See Smith's Bib. Die. t Life of Constantine. RESTORED BY CHRIST. 19 creation, — not a mere accidental coincidence, but a deeply significant providential circumstance, — it will be desirable to inquire briefly whether the hebdomadal division of time be of planetaj-y, and consequently heathen or human origin, or be a primeval divine institution. We can only spare time for a few considerations which will, we trust, after what we have already proved, be suffi- cient to carry conviction to candid inquirers, in favour of the divine origin of the week and of the Sabbath. I. We would observe that the naming of the days of the week after the seven planetary bodies is in itself no proof that the division of time into weeks was not long anterior to the practice of imposing names on the separate days. It is not Quakers only who can dispense with names. The Jews used no names for any day save the Sabbath, probably because the custom of naming the days had not been introduced and at a later date, or if customary when they left Egypt, because the custom and the names were alike heathen. Still it was a natural and convenient device which can be easily accounted for from the coincidence of number, and would be the more easily accounted for when idolatry had corrupted the true religion. It would give a colour of truth to the false religion to note such a harmony between the objects of Sabean worship and the number of days originally instituted by God. It seems impossible to prove more than a mere coincidence. It is admitted that there is no historical evidence of this having been the origin of the week ; the only authors who speak of its planetary origin are all avowedly of later date. The week can be proved, and is indeed admitted, to have existed, and the names imposed, long before any record of the theory can be discovered. II. We know that it was a very common practice to trace many things to the heavenly bodies which science and rea- son have long discovered to have no connection with them. The metals and the seven sounds in music were long regarded as mysteriously connected* with, if not derived from, the seven planets. The evidence for the general belief of this by the ancients is much stronger, and that it took a far firmer hold of the minds of philosophers than the planetary origin of the week. Dion Cassius gives it only as a theory, not as an ascertained fact. Surely candour and com- mon sense should lead men in these days to reject the theory of the planetary origin of the week when we have universally See Appendix D. 20 THE PRIMITIVE SABBATH set aside the pretty and equally plausible notion of the " music of the spheres." III. The coincidence of the number of days, and of the planetary bodies, has the appearance oi being forced ov ac- commodated. The classing of the sun and moon, so different in appearance and motion from the five planets with -which they are classed, looks like an adaptation, and seems rather to be an attempt to make the heavenly bodies harmonise with the number of days previously fixed than of fixing the number of the days by the number of the planets. IV. If the naming of the days after the heavenly bodies be idolatrous, as it seems to be, even that custom, taken in connection with its forced character, appears to point to an institution of a sacred day. That day named after the sun was either previously regarded as different from the rest, or in future would be regarded as having a place of pre-emi- nence. History shews that it was so regarded as consecrated to the supreme deity; and we can scarcely suppose that idolaters were the first to set apart a day for rest or sacred uses. Natural religion would be likely to suggest it from the earliest time, even if God had not appointed it. This, however^ may be disputed, and we do not build upon it. v.- We find that the week of seven days, with one day of rest, has existed where there is not the remotest reference to the seven planets in connection with it. In China the most independent and important witness that xan be ap- pealed to, the week is in the nearest approximation to the month, and the days are named after the twenty-eight constel- lations — purely arbitrary signs from grouping the stars from fanciful resemblances; as in ourwestern signs of the zodiac — the girl, the ox, the tail, the heart, the stomach, a sieve, &c. This testimony is of great value from the attention paid to astronomy and chronology by the Chinese from earliest times, and from the accuracy and extent of their knowledge. VI. The testimony of those nations in which we find a different division of time along with a sacred day, is strong evidence against the planetary origin of the week, so that ten, nine, and eight days of Greece, and South America, and Italy are all turned as evidence against the planetary theory. They seem to prove that man feels the need, and has a recollection of a day of rest or worship, while natural religion fails to give uniformity in the time of its recurrence. Men may corrupt the practice and change the day from a seventh, to an eighth, ninth, or tenth, but the original idea is there — God's witness in favour of that tribute which is due from the creature to the Creator. This will be seen more fully ere we close. VII. We may observe that the testimony from Gi'eek and EESTOBED KY CHRIST. 21 Roman literature in regard to the week and a day of rest is comparatively of little importance. Compared with the records of Egypt and the East, and especially of China, it is of little significance on subjects of real antiquity. These are' comparatively modern ■ nations ; and while they evidently borrow their religious systems from the East, they as evi- dently alter and corrupt them, or we may say, idealise and rationalise them. That they should have altered an old tra- dition of a seven day week to one of eight or ten days, is not to be wondered at. It rather confirms the uniform testi- mony of three-fourths or nine-tenths of all the nations of antiquity in favour of a week of seven days. It shews that seven is not a natural number which men would necessarily or generally have fixed on of themselves. It stamps the will and authority of an early legislator on the arbitrary n^im- ber seven. Eationalism would prefer the number ten, as we see in Greece and Prance at the Revolution. VIII. It is an important admission, drawn, or rather forced, from the opponents of a primeval Sabbath, that the origin of the week can be traced to the first seat of the human race after the flood. Mr Hessey refers to this in trying to account for the wide diffusion of what he calls the planetary week. But is it not far more confirmatory of its primeval institu- tion by divine authority ? It is just the quarter from which we would expect it" to emanate. It is as far back as we can go by the imperfect help of profane history ; and if we talje into account the very probable opinion that the Chinese emigrated to the far east before the race had fallen into idolatry, as the history and old patriarchal customs of that^ ancient people seem to prove, it makes it most probable, we might say almost certain, that the planetary names were not imposed until a later period, and after the rise of Sabean worship. IX. Add to these considerations, and many others that could be named, the simple record of the book of Genesis, as to the origin of the week and the Sabbath, — see how it fits into all the facts of history in all parts of the world, — and can any reasonable man doubt that it is the true account of the origin of both. To deny it is to reject the sure record of inspiration, to oppose the testimony of history, to resist the inference of reason, and to doubt the beneficence of the Creator in his original plans for the temporal and spiritual welfare of his creatures. We have always felt that far too great a value was set on the references in the classics by both friends and opponents of the antiquity of the Sabbath. In questions of evidence the nearer we come to the time any event took place the more B 22 THE PRIMITIVE SABBATH reliable will it be if the witn.esses possess ordinary intelli- gence and honesty. The evidence we have on this subject in the classics is all at second hand, or too recent to be of much use. The wisdom and culture, the grace and fancy, the social, political, and intellectual superiority of the Greeks and Eomans, are of no account in a mere question of evidence, however important in a matter of taste or opinion. The most conclusive proof of the secondary value of the testi- mony of classic notions as to the true week and sacred day is found in the practical acknowledgment of classic notions themselves. Whenever the Eomans came into direct contact with the ancient chronology of the Egyptians they at once saw and admitted its superiority ; and the first and greatest of her emperors inaugurated a new era by adopting it and making the system of a despised and conquered province the rule for the greatest empire of the world, a system which continues, with slight modification, the best to this present time ; and as we have seen, in adopting the chronology they adopted at the same time, or a little later, the Egyp- tian week with the sacred day, also taking the order of the days as they found them and translating the names into their own language ; a most convincing proof of their esti- mate of the vast superiority of the ancient Egyptians over the bungling Eoman measure of time by weeks "and years. We have made frequent reference to one day in the week as being of a sacred character. This day, as we have seen, was not actually observed as a day of rest or worship within ■ the historic period, but the idea of its true character was preserved in almost all parts of the world, whether right division of time were preserved or not. In China we saw that the idea of rest was preserved in their sacred books, and the practice of worship is still kept up in their funeral rites on a seventh day, and the worship of ancestors is the principal part of the popular religion. In all those countries in which the planetary week prevailed, the Sunday is conse- crated to the worship of the principal deity. In India and the surrounding countries the same rule nominally holds good, while in Ceylon, to which the Budhists were driven, carrying with them some of the oldest traditions of the continent, the custom prevails. Hardy informs us that there are four days in each month called " poya," on which " great merit is obtained by laymen observing the pi'ecepts" of their reli- gion. " These days must be observed with clean garments and clean hearts. They must prepare their food for that day the day before. They must not trade nor even calculate EESTOEED BY CHRIST. 23 the profits of trade. They must do nothing that will injure another. They must recite the precepts and meditate on the impermanency, sorrow, and mutability connected with all things."* In South America we learn from Bailly, quoting from Garalasso, that " according to an ancient law of the Inca Pachacutee there ought to be in each month three days for festivals and markets, and that the people were to work eight days and rest on the ninth." t The fishermen, a race amongst whom old superstitions and traditions cling long, still refrain from fishing on the ninth day in some parts of the southern continent. This idea of the sacredness of a portion of time to rest and worship is clearly brought out in the laws and customs of the Romans, "though we cannot say that it was kept up at weekly intervals, still less, that it was observed on the intro- duction of the planetary week. On the feriffi or sacred days, to most only holidays, " free born Eomans suspended their political transactions and their law-suits, during which their slaves enjoyed a cessation from labour.".! "The people generally frequented the temples of the gods, and offered up their prayers and sacrifices." On the more sacred of these days, " the rex sacrorum a,ni flamens were not even allowed to see any work done ; hence, when they went out they were preceded by heralds, who enjoined the people to abstain from work. Those who neglected this admonition were not only liable to a fine, but in case their disobedience were intentional, their crime was considered to be beyond the power of any atonement. "§ The preceding quotation recals the strictness of the Mosaic law with its penalty of death to the violater of Sabbath rest. The Romans did not inflict that penalty, but for the wilful transgressor there was no atonement, while' the unconscious transgressor might atone for his fault by a sacrifice. The following reminds us vividly of the Saviour's commentary on the Jewish law as to what might be lawfully done on the Sabbath : — "It seems," says Dr L. Schmitz, "that doubts as to what kind of work might be done at publie feriro were not unfrequent; and we have some curious and interesting decisions by Roman pontiifs on this subject. One Umbro declared it to be no violation of the feriae if a person did such work as had reference to the gods, or was connected with the offering of sacrifice." (The priests in the temple * Hardy's Eastern Monacliism, p. 23(i. t Humboldt's Kesearches, v. i., p. 285. I Smith's Classical Dictionary at Ferife. § lliid. 24 THE PIllMITIVE SABBATH profane the Sabbath and are blameless.) "All work, he moreover declared, was allowed which was necessary to supply the urgent wants of life." — Smith's Dictionary. "The Pontiff ScEevola, when asked what kind of work might be done on a dies feriatus answered that any work might be done if any suffering or injury should be the result of neglect or delay ; as for example, if an ox should fall into a pit the owner might employ workmen to lift it out, or if a house threatened to fall down, the inhabitants might take such measures as would prevent it falling without polluting the sacred day." — Smith's Classical Dictionary. These quotations' need no comment. So close is the resemblance to the character of a Sabbath, with its rest and worship, and its works of necessity and mercy, that were it not for the absolute impossibility, moral or physical, we would be led to suppose they were taken from the laws of Moses or of Christ. But the primeval Sabbath as described in Genesis sufficiently explains the existence of such ideas wherever the descendants of Adam and of Noah migrated with the deep impressions of a divine command upon their memories, and the divine and patriarchal examples warm in their hearts, and the testimony of conscience, and hopes of the " rest that remaineth " to preserve and practise their religious duties. Is there not in this divinely impressed ideal of a Sabbath, traced in such remote periods and distant regions, and in the preservation of these records of ancient times, the hand of an all-wise over-ruling Providence, telling the whole world that " the Sabbath was made' for man at the first?" and may we not hope that all lands are yet destined to enjoy the blessings of that holy rest ? We are now able to see a satisfactory "reason for the change of the Sabbath at the resurrection of Christ. It has generally been assumed as an indisputable fact that the Jewish Sabbath was on the original seventh day of creation ; and those who have called this in question have not given sufficient evidence to satisfy earnest inquirers that there was a change made at the departure from Egypt ; and the his- torical evidence for the identity of the Christian with the creation rest has not been attended to. In the light of the chain of facts which we have brought forward in favour of this identity, we are prepared to understand those passages which are generally supposed, without any proof, to identify the Jewish Sabbath with the patriarchal. The brief refer- ences that are at first made to the Sabbath, after a period of silence extending over so many centuries, need explanation, and it is one mark of the correctness of our theory, that it is ]iot only in harmony with all that is said on the subject, RESTORED BY CHRIST. 25' but that it throws light on some things which are otherwise not easily explained. The passage in Exodus xvi., where the Sabbath is first commanded to the Israelites, has all the appearance of being a command to observe as the future Sabbath of the nation the seventh day /rom the fall of manna. We cannot otherwise understand why an explicit command should be required at that stage of the nation's history. It would not have been required if there had been no change of the day, for both Israelites and Egyptians had a knowledge of it. A command to observe it more in harmony with its original institution might have been necessary, but not as we find it, a command to consecrate each seventh day, unless we assume that the blessing recorded in Gen. iii. 2, was pro- leptical, and even the planetary week of later origin. If there was a change of the day at the departure from Egypt, it will explain the fact recorded in the first verse of that six- teenth chapter, that the children of Israel made a day's march from Elim to the wilderness of Sin on the fifteenth day of the second month — the day before the fall of the manna, and ivhich would be a Sabhath if there had been no change. The manna feU'on the 16th, and continued to fall until the morning of the 21st, six days ; and the 22d, the seventh day of this heavenly food, was the Sabbath now commanded. It would have been a strange introduction to a series of Sabbaths of strict rest when no' man was to move out of the camp, either to gather manna or sticks to cook it, if the cloudy pillar had led the whole host on the previous Sabbath a toilsome march from the wells and palms of Elim into an arid region, without any apparent reason of necessity or mercy to justify such toil. It explains the surprise of the "rulers of the congregation" (ver. 22) at the people gathering a double portion, on the sixth day, of manna. They doubtless expected that the supply would stop on the old creation Sabbath, which would have-fallen on the 23d, and that the people were to gather the supply for that day on the sixth day of the creation week. But the common people, taking the command of Moses literally, and seeing the larger provision on the sixth day of manna, which was only the fifth of the original week,- gather a double portion that they may rest on the sixth day of creation week, which is henceforth to be their seventh day of rest.* The reply of Moses is in harmony with this change. In ver. 23 he says, "This is that which the Lord hath * See Appendix E. 26 THE PRIMITIVE SABBATH said, To-morrow is the rest of the holy Sahbath unto the Lord." Such a change might have been expected at the com- mencement of the peculiar and temporary economy of 'the Jews. It was desirable to break loose from all the_ idola- trous customs which the people were apt to associate with the sacred day from the Egyptian mode of observii^ the Sabbath. We find other changes of a similar kind in principle to make a distinction between the Israelites and all the idola- trous nations around them. It throws light on the fourth commandment itself, and renders its grave argument more binding on us than on the Jews. While the fundamental command, " six days shalt thou labour," &c., "but the seventh is the Sabbath," is equally applicable whatever day be regarded as the first of the series. The argurtient from God's example of resting on the seventh day after the six days work of creation is specially applicable to us if the day we so observe is indeed the very day on which Jehovah rested; and it shews the striking propriety of Moses's argument in Deut. v. 15, where the law is repeated, not from Sinai by the voice of God, but as explained and enforced by a wise ruler, who is also the teacher of the peculiar people. He there urges obedience to the fourth commandment, not as in the tables of stone, which was the form adopted for all nations, — "For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and rested the seventh day," &c., — but in an argument which came home to their personal history, "Remember that thou wast a ser- vant in the land of Egypt, and the Lord thy God brought thee out," &c., " therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the Sabbath day." These and many other difficulties in the test, and objec- tions of opponents of the primeval Sabbath,, are thus far more satisfactorily met than by the explanations we see generally given ; and other inferences may be deduced from this change of day to the Jews which may satisfy the minds of many to whom these difficulties are real obstacles to the right solution of this important question. But if light is thrown on the change of day for the Jews, it sheds still stronger light on- the purpose of God in the change from the Jewish to the Christian day of rest. If it' is only a return to the original Sabbath which was made for man, and of which, as we have seen, man had kept a record as of the sacred charter of his liberty as a child and servant of God, we . can easily see the divine purpose in choosing this day. It could be no accident which so ordered the im- portant events at the death and resurrection of Christ, that RESTORED BY CHRIST. 27 the latter -should occur on the day so generally recognised as a sacred day, three-fourths, if not nine-tenths of the ancient world retaining some record of it. There were many chances, if we may so speak, against that arrange- ment, by which the day of the passover should happen on a Jewish Sabbath. The day was regulated by the moon, not by the week, so that it might fall on any day of the seven. It would only occur on a Sabbath once in an average of seven years; and if it had happened on any other 'day than that on which it did fall, the striking coincidence of the death of Christ on the evening on which the paschal lamb was slain, and his resurrection on the morning of the third, would not have occurred on that day which we have traced with such probability, if not certainty, to the creation Sab- bath. The wisdom which fixed the "hour" had also ar- ranged the year and day, so that our blessed Lord should rise, not on the Jewish Sabbath, or any other day of the week, but that which we have seen reason to believe com- memorated Jehovah's rest at creation, — the same day on which Christ was to " enter into his rest as God did from his." If that Sunday had been only a day of human origin, and derived from an idolatrous worship of the heavenly bodies, we cannot think that God would so have honoured it, when no adequate reason for changing from the Jewish Sabbath, and specially if that had been the old creation Sabbath, can be shewn. The reasons usually given seem to be insufiicient, and no inspired authority can be given in support of them. One instructive argument for the divine purpose in intro- ducing the Egyptian, or, as we would call it, the primeval week by the Eoman government, is seen in the fact that our Lord and the apostles not only adopted the Sunday thus brought in, but adopted also the Eoman method of calculat- ing the day from midnight to midnight. Much nonsense is spoken about the Jewish division, from sunset to sunset being the only one divinely recognised in Scripture. The fact seems to be strangely overlooked that Scripture settles this question conclusively, if men would only carefully study its pages. So long as the true church was confined 'to the tropics, and time was but imperfectly measured, nor greatly valued, the old mark of the commencement and close of the day was appropriately regulated by the setting sun ; but for a religion designed for all latitudes, and when the day would vary with the changing seasons of the year, it was important that a definite period of time should be fixed for the com- * See Appendix F. 2;S THE PRIMITIVE SABBATH mencement of the sacred hours of the day of rest, as well as of the busy days of labour, accordingly the Eoman method, which was known and practised at the time of our Lord, was recognised and adopted. In the notice of our Lord's resurrection it is mentioned in such a way as to shew that the first Sabbath of the new era was from midnight to midnight. We are told expressly that Jesus rose " early in the morning, while it was yet dark;" and by Jewish notation that day should have closed at sunset, as by their reckoning it had begun at sunset pre- ceding. But we find that "the same day at evening" the Lord appeared to the disciples, and we are told it was still " the first day of the week" (John xx. 19). The word used is o^)//a, that generally employed for the later evening or sunset ; and that it was the later evening, and consequently the beginning of a new day according to the Jews, is, we think, - rendered certain by the fact recorded in Luke xxiv. 29. There we learn that it was "toward evening" when the disciples pressed Jesus to spend the night with them at Emmaus. After they had so pressed him to stop, " for the day is far spent," they had eaten their evening meal and walked a distance of about eight miles at least. They had met with the disciples, and had time to learn of the Lord's appearance to Peter, and to tell of his conversation with them, before "Jesus stood in the midst of them." This must surely have been after sunset, a;hd yet it was still the "first day of the week." Time must have been measured, not by Jewish but by the Eoman method. This is put beyond all question by Acts xx., where it is said Paul waited at Troas seven days, evidently to have a Sabbath with the converts. On the first day of the week when the disciples were come together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow, and continued his speech until mid- night. Prom the eleventh verse we learn that the apostle left at break of day. Now if this was the morrow, i.e., our Monday morning, of the seventh verse, the writer could not have reckoned by the Jewish dawn of the day, from sunset to sunset, for in that case the hvak of day, after that night of privilege and miracle, would have been but the first hour of light of the same day. The morrow would not have come till the sunset of that day, when the apostle could not have travelled without spending another night after that on which we are told they met and brake bread. But the narrative is most explicit that the apostle left at daybreak after that same night, and every hour is accounted for from the time of lighting the lamps till midnight and on till break of day, BESTOBED BY CHEIST. 29 ''and so he departed." On the Jewish reckoning the narrative is self-contradictory, but reckoning the day by the usual method it is plain and self consistent. Whether they had any meetings during the day time we are not informed. It is probable they had at night, according to custom, met to observe the Lord's Supper, both as being more in harmony with early usage, and to prolong their enjoyment of the apostle's presence. It was still Sabbath until midnight, and then the morrow begins ; and we see as day appears the loving fellowship is broken up; the sanctity of Sabbath feeling and of Sabbath exercise unbroken by the short hour of the secular day. The practice of the early Church fully confirms the fact of the Eoman day having been adopted from apostolic times, and it appears from the example of Christ and Paul that we have the same divine authority and inspired warrant for beginning our Christian Sabbath at midnight, that we have for changing it from the seventh to the first day of the week. As to this change of terms, seventh or last, and now first day of the week, we can only regard them as relative to the Jewish terms, and as a clear and weU understood way of designating the day now set apart. The terms are purely relative, and in no way affect the ques- tion at issue. If the day was distinctly known, it matters little whether it be called first or last of the series. Indeed, at the first institution of the Sabbath in Paradise,- the day which was seventh to the Creator in respect of His six days' work was the first to Adam and Eve, who were created on the sixth day, and entered appropriately on their new and blessful life in acts of social worship and holy rest, while fresh from their Maker's hand, and with minds and bodies unwearied by the toils of life. We may still be asked for some explioit testimony, that the day we now observe as commemorative of the Lord's resur- rection from the dead is really the same day of the week on which Jehovah rested from His work of creation ; and the ' pious worshipper may feel the want of direct Scripture evi- dence for such an opinion. But in such a case, is direct testimony to be expected? or is such evidence needed? If we were in search of authority for keeping one day in seven as sacred, or for observing this day in preference to another, such historic testimony or scriptural warrant might well be demanded. But such are not the subject of inquiry ._ The command to set apart one day in seven is explicit and admitted, and the particular day has been fixed by our Lord and his apostles, or, as some say, by the Church; and is 30 THE PRIMITIVE SABBATH allowed to be suitable by all parties/independently of any theory on the subject. Profane history cannot be asked for direct testimony on such a subject. It does not go far enough back, and it is too much bound up -with vain fancies, and heathen mytho- logy, and foolish speculations as to the origin of things. While its records of facts, which were incorporated with old customs, or formed a part of their ancient chronology, or were impressed on conscience, or associated with their reli- gious traditions, might be fully relied on, their reasonings about, or deductions from, them may be quite untrust- worthy. While no wise man would" do more than weigh the historic evidence for or against the facts they record, every judicious student will form his own independent judgmeii of the validity of any theory they may propound, regarding the origin or import of these facts. Neither are we entitled to expect any explicit statement in Scripture as to the identity of the Christian and the creation Sabbath. It is sufi&cient if the opinion we express be found to harmonise with all that we find recorded regard- ing the Sabbath, and if we find that it is not only in har- mony with all it says, but throws light on what would be otherwise obscure or inexplicable, we are not at liberty to demand more. Again, we may be asked with more show of reason, if there be any references in the fathers of the Christian Church to the identity of the Lord's day and the Paradisiac Sabbath, We have shewn that they recognised its coincidence with the day to which the heathens attached a character of saeredness. But did they regard the day observed by the heathen as of primeval and divine origin ? Even here we are not entitled to look for anything very explicit. It might have been generally understood, and for that very reason not made the subject of discussion or assertion ; it might have been- assumed as demanding no proof from its being so generally accepted. Any argument from silence on this subject would be as fallacious as the argument from the silence of the Patriarchs, of which so much is made by the opponents of a primeval Sabbath. I do not positively assert that we can now prove that the Fathers recognised the Sunday of the heathen as a divine institution, or a corruption of the original creation Sabbath. It may not have been a subject in regard to which there was any doubt or discussion, and it is generally difficult to discover the current of influences which lead to changes which are universally and harmoniously effective. The very absence of opposition renders it difficult to dis- RESTORED BY CHRIST. 31 cover the causes at work. Like the smoothness of the river, it implies the depth and strength of the current. In the writings of the fathers, we find expressions which seem to imply a recognition of this identity. They speak of the eighth being identical with the first, and being the real seventh. Barnabas, speaking of the Jewish Sabbath, says : ' The Sabbaths which ye now keep are not acceptable unto Me, but those which I have made when resting from all things. I shall begin the eighth day, that is the beginning of the world, for which cause we observe the eighth day with gladness, on which also Jesus rose from the dead." The resting from all things seems naturally to refer to the creation rest, and although he uses the days of creation as symbolical of the world's duration for a like number of thousand years, it is confirmatory of our view that he makes the rest of the new world, not on the Jewish seventh, but on the eighth, which was also the first of the heptade. Justin Martyr appears, in some passages of his works, to deny that there was any day of rest and worship before Moses. " For," he says, "if there was no need of circum- cision before Abraham, nor of the observance of Sabbath keeping, and festivals, and oblations before Moses, neither now is there any need of them." Eut he cannot mean that there was no sacred day or sacrifices before Moses, or that the former was abolished now, for he repeatedly refers to the prfictice of the Church in keeping a day of worship. " We all of us assemble together on Sunday, because it is the first day in which God changed darkness and matter, and made the world, on the same day also Jesus Christ rose from the dead," so that he connects creation and the Christian Sabbath. He must refer to the Sabbath with its Jewish name and peculiar day, and possibly meant that the patriarchs had not their Sabbath on the same day as the Jews. By this reference to the first day as the day of the change of matter at creation, and, at the same time, the day consecrated by the Christian Church to worship, as the day of the sun, on which Christ rose from the dead, he con- firms our view that the early Church did recognise the Sun- day of the heathen as the original sacred day. This seems to be taught by TertuUian, who was a firm supporter of the primeval Sabbath, but says the Jewish Sabbath "was a temporary Sabbath." And again, apparently in reference to the idea of the identity of the creation and the Christian Sabbath, he says, "That very day which was holy from the beginning by his Father's benediction, he made more holy by His own benefaction " {Adv. Marcion). To show what 32 THE PEIMITIVE SABBATH day he meant, he says elsewhere, " we give up to rejoicing the day of the sun." A sentence from Theophilus of Antioch is still more explicit. In Book II. chap, xii., on " the glory of the six days work," he says, of the philosophers and poets among the heathen : " Moreover, concerning the seventh day, which all men acknowledge; but the most know not that what among the Hebrews is called the ' Sabbath,' is translated into Greek the ' seventh ' {IBSo/iae), a name which is adopted by every nation, although they know not the reason of the appellation." When he says the seventh day of the week corresponded to the Jewish Sabbath, he must have known that their ^rsi day, which was their sacred day, corresponded to our Christian Sabbath. In the eleventh chapter, he had shewn his conviction of the divine origin of the week, by the way in which he quotes Genesis iii. 2, 3. 2- '. "2^, ^ / Clement of Alexandria throws light on the idea the early Church had of creation and the day of rest, referred to by Justin and others, when he says, " The commandment (the fourth) informs us that the world was made by God, and that He gave us the seventh day for rest, on account of the sufferings and afflictions of life, and the eighth appears to be rightly called the seventh, and to be the true seventh." — Strom., Lib. vi. ch. 16, And again, what does Epiphanius mean, when he says, " The first Sabbath from the beginning decreed and declared by the Lord in the creation of the world, has revolved in its cycle of seven days from that day till now?" This looks like a clear recognition of the ideiitity of the creation and Christian Sabbath for which we contend. These, and similar expressions which might be quoted, all favour the idea that the early Church not only knew tliat the resurrection of Christ sanctioned and sanctified the "Sunday" or " Lord'« day," which was known to the heathen world, but that that day, of which the heathen had kept the correct record, was the original Sabbath appointed by God at the beginning, and now rendered doubly sacred by the completion of redemption on the day which closed the work of creation. The evidence is all that we could reasonably look for in regard to such a change as was made at the transition from the Jewish to the Christian Sabbath. Those who know a little of the writings of the early fathers are aware, that on many more important points, their testimony is very scanty, and, viewed by itself, far from conclusive. Take, for example, all that can be gathered on the subject of infant baptism, or the mode of baptism, and how little do BESTOEED BY CHEIST. 33 we find in comparison with what we might have expected ? and yet, I suppose, it will be considered by disputants on both sides that it is as much as could be looked for in the cir- cumstances, and by all, the comparative silence will be accounted for in the same way. It is, because the view which each advocates " was the' unquestioned belief and practice of the early Church," we shall be told ; '' It did not need to be formally stated ; it never was a subject of discussion." I not only can bring forward clearer evi- dence from the " fathers " that the early Christians did recognise the identity of the Christian and the creation Sabbath, than can be adduced on either side of the baptist controversy ; but I have a much more conclusive proof, not only for the adoption of the Lord's day, but also for the reason of its universal and unquestioned adoption. Not only is the Scripture evidence sufficient, but the day was so obviously made for their use and advantage, by the intro- duction of the ancient week, with its sacred day, from Egypt into the Eoman Empire, that we are constrained to look to an over-ruling Providence preparing the way for the change. But, apart from all consideration of what the fathers said, or the influences at work on the introduction of the Christian Sabbath, I return to our historic fact, which we are willing to leave, without further comment, to the study of thoughtful and honest minds. It would have been easy to multiply proofs from other sources in favour of a week, and day of sacred observance. For example, I could adduce the names and order of the days of the week in our own Saxon tongue. Any one with a good lexicon may see that our names bring the evidence of both Saxon and Scan- dinavian tradition to support that of Egpyt and India, and all the nations of Europe, whose language is based on the Latin, such as Prance, Spain, and Portugal, bring addi- tional weight to the early introduction of the Egypto-Eoman week into these countries, apparently before the spread of Christianity. I might have brought evidence from Africa, if the more ancient and authentic record from Egypt had not fully represented the race of Ham. But enough, and more than enough, has been adduced to establish the im- portant truth, that all antiquity bears evidence to the iden- tity of the Christian and creation Sabbath. I do not think it necessary to .enlarge on the importance of this testimony to the day' which the Lord hath blessed. I attach no super- stitious importance to " days, and months, and times, and years," but I do reverence that day which has been conse- crated by God from the beginning, and of which He most 34 THE PEIMITIVE SABBATH KESTORED BY CHKIST. wonderfully preserved the record in every region _ of the earth. It is not only a seventh portion of time which God requires, but He has decreed that the earth shall, as one family, observe the same day. Not the same in absolute time, but the same in succession. The first Sabbath sun which dawned on Paradise continued in his course to the west, to illumine the yet unpeopled lands with what was to each quarter of the world its first Sabbath day ; and such has been the unbroken chain of Sabbaths, that the sacred seventh day which shed its light on the solitude of our little isle some five or six hours later than on the garden of' Eden, has never been lost ; and we can say the same of other lands in every degree of longitude, east or west. I dare not trifle with a fact like this, — I dare not tamper with a day to which the finger of God points in the historic conscious- ness of the world. It seems to bear as clear an evidence for one set and heaven-appointed day of rest and worship as human conscience bears to the one object of worship. I would like to pursue the evidence in favour of a weekly Sabbath from the analogies in nature, — from the physical, intellectual, moral, and spiritual nature of man as an indi- vidual, and as a member of society ; and I feel assured that, had I the time and talents required for such an inves- tigation, the evidence for our Sabbath would stand forth as unassailable, even by the weapons of unbelief, as the doc- trine of the unity of God, as maintained in pur better works on natural theology. But I must leave to other and abler hands the elaboration of the evidence for a Sabbattologia Natwalis. Enough for my purpose, if I have called atten- tion to the divine intention in preserving the original Sabbath. May He, who at first did institute the day, pre- serve it from all assaults, and make the diffusion of its blessings as permanent in duration and universal in their compass, as the records of its existence and antiquity. APPENDIX. Note A. —P. 12. Since wilting the preceding pages, my attention has been called to an article which appeared in the Chinese Repository iot March 1849. It is part of a sermon, by a Chinese preacher, — one of Dr Morrison's first converts. In proving to his countrymen that the Sabbath was anciently known in China, he quotes the passages I have given from the classics. As his evidence is both interesting and important, I give a few of his remarks. After enforcing a seventh day of rest, he says, " But now there are people in many countries entirely ignorant of the Sabbath. This is the cause, men's hearts are continually treacherous, and the heart of rectitude is ever small ; so that, the longer the world exists, the more it forgets the commands of God. If we trace the matter up, it will be found that there is now no countr/ which does not know the Sabbath, and even the Chinese speak of it. The diagram, Fuh, in the ' Book of Changes,' says, ' this rule goes and returns, in seven days if comes again.' Twan (Prince Wan), says, ' This rule, going and returning, and in seven days coming again, refers to the revolu- tions of heaven.' This is a trace of a seventh day rest coming round; for if not, why did these ancient worthies speak in such a way ? The age of Fuh-hi (from whom the first quotation was made), ' was not far from the creation, and the time of a Sabbath was not yet altogether forgotten in China, and his not saying seven moons, or seven times, but seven days, is a clear trace of it. But, unhappily, those who afterwards expounded the Book of Changes, could not at all follow in his steps, and made quite another meaning, which is much to be regretted. In the sentence (also quoted from the Book of Changes,) ' Do we again see the heart of heaven and earth ? ' this is still plainer. The Chinese use the phrase, heaven and. earth, to indicate the Supreme Euler, and he instituted the Sabbath, with no other reason than to benefit the bodies and the souls of men, as the Scriptures say, ' the Sabbath was made for man.' Do we not again see, in this, the love of God for man ? Truly these words are trust- worthy. In respect of the expression, (continuing to quote from the same book), ' The ancient kifigs ordered that on that day the gate of the great road should be shut, and traders not permitted to pass, nor the princes to go and examine their states,' it is plainly to be seen, that in the time of the ancient kings, on the day of the Sabbath, all classes kept at rest, and observed it. Is it so, that the Chinese had not at first a Sabbath ? " 36 THE PEIMITIVE SABBATH RESTORED BY CHRIST. These comments, on the most venerated of the Chinese classics, by a native of well known intelligence and honesty, are the more valuable from being the independent result of his own careful study. He^ had been told, by his first and much-esteemed instructor, that the Chinese had no knowledge of a Sabbath, and this was accounted for on the theory that the Sabbath was not instituted in Paradise, but at some later period, after the founders of the Chinese empire had separated from the rest of mankind. And yet the truth is forced upon him, by his own reflection, that these old records did speak of a week and a day of rest. To explain the enigmatical form of the expressions quoted, I may briefly refer to the book in which they are found. They are all taken from the most ancient and revered of all the sacred books of the Chinese, called the Yih King, or Book of Changes. It was compiled in prison, by Prince Wan, also called Twan, about the year 1150 before the Christian era. This literary prince, as "his name imports, found, even at that remote period, certain fragments of great antiquity, attributed on what seems very good authority, to Fuh-hi, who flourished three or four hundred years after the flood, and with whom, according to the generally received opinion of both Chinese and European scholars, the authentic history of China begins. Fuh-hi embodied, or we might rather say concealed, his philosophy in eight diagrams, which were increased to sixty-four. These diagrams have exercised the acntest minds in China for more than three thousand years, and are still a mystery. Along with these figures he lays down a body of rules, or, as they are sometimes called, institutes, and states truths which seem to have been the general belief of that early period. The expression, " Seven days complete a revolution," as given at p. 11 from memory, is a free but just rendering of one of these old truths, thus traced back to the days of Noah. It is given more literally in the article quoted from the Repository, and the editor, in a note, gives it more fully. Fuh-hi, referring to the diagram called Fuh, says, " This law goes and returns, in seven days it comes again, wherever it influences advantages follow." The three subsequent quotations are from Prince Wan, who not only compiled, in the 12th century B.C., the earlier work of Fuh-hij but added important scholia of his own, which are regarded with almost as great veneration as the original. The last of these, if taken as referring to the seventh day, previously spoken of, or the law which is said to go and return in seven days, is more explicit than as given by me, " on the seventh day the passages are closed," and as I lay no claim to Chinese scholarship, I gladly accept the fuller and more accurate rendering, " on that'day the gate of the great road should be shut." That this was by order of the " ancient kings," gives great signifi- cance to the fact referred to. Those kings, who were ancient in the 12th century, B.C., must, from Chinese notions of antiquity, be such as Fuh-hi and his successors, not long after the flood, and if " traders were not permitted to pass, nor the princes to go and examine their APPENDIX. ^7 states," on " that day," we may well ask, with the preacher, " Is it so, -that the Chinese have not a Sabbath ? " I have no desire to conceal the fact that no heathen Chinese scholar interprets these passages as the Christian has done, of a week and a Sabbath. This division of time, as well as the practical observance of a day of rest, was lost at an early period, along with the true know- ledge and worship of God. The decimal system was applied by them to time as to other things, and, like the Greeks, they have long regu- lated the recurrence of market days, &c., by decades. The last quo- tation is doubly instructive, it shows what the ancient kings did on the seventh day, but it indicates also, that what had been done by these ancient kings was no longer the custom in his day. And if the law prescribing a day of rest was disused in the twelfth century, we need not wonder that it was unknown in the sixth century b.c, when Confucius restored the book, which had been in a great measure lost to the nation. Many European students of Chinese literature also try to explain away these passages. Starting with the general assumption that there is no trace of a Sabbath in China, they are as much lost in their vain guesses at the meaning of these passages as the Chinese themselves. On our interpretation of these passages, they are naturally and comparatively easily understood, and we fairly challenge any scholar, either native or foreign, to explain them consistently in any other way. There are 1450 treatises on that Book of Changes in the catalogue of the imperial library alone, how many there are in China no man can telL Not one of them satisfies an in- dependent student, and the same may be said of any attempt by Europeans. Is it not by refusing the explanation furnished by Moses in the second chapter of Genesis ? These passages in the classics would never of themselves lead us to suppose that the Chinese had once a knowledge of the septenary division of time. But let these passages be viewed in the light of the proofs we give in the other facts or classes of facts at pp.10-12, and our interpretation of them will appear the natural, if not the inevitable, one. These facts put any one, who reads and understands their import, in about as good a position for understanding these passages as the Chinese scholar ; better than those who start with a wrong assumption. Note B. —P. 13. I find that I have greatly understated the evidence from Indian history in regard to the record of a week of seven days, and a Sunday corresponding to that of the western nations. This record is found in the most ancient of their literature, the Sanscrit, and the attempts which are made to account for its introduction by the opponents of the divine origin of this division of time, only shew. the shifts to which men are put by the adoption of a false theory. Dr Hessey thinks it may be accounted for by " the intercourse of the Jews with Egypt, and the expeditions of Egyptian conquerors into Scythia, which, according to Sir Henry Kawlinson, was the cradle of the Per- 38 THE PRIMITIVE SABBATH BESTOKED BY CHEIST. sians and ' Hindoos,' wtile others refer its introduction to the Arabs and Mohamedans." How Egyptian expeditions could have such a result is difficult to conceive. If the Egyptians had kept the infant nation of Persia and Hindostan in sabjection for a length of time, and moulded their in- stitutions when they were in their cradle in Sey thia, it might have been possible to transfer the week from Egypt to India. But an Expedi- tion of Conqwrors is not likely to inspire infant nations, with a love for their institutions. Especially, when these are not evidently fitted to promote material prosperity, and less likely when connected with religious ideas. But the supposition is an evident anachronism. The intercourse of the Jews with the Egyptians, spoken of by Dr Hessey, must have been at a period long subsequent to the emigration of the Hindoos from Central Asia, and that the Indian week was not copied from the Mohamedans, is proved from the well known fact, that they entirely differ from each other. The most sacred day of the Mohamedau week, is on our Friday; that of the Hindoos, is on our Sunday. Besides, the names do not so resemble as to imply a derivation the one from the other ; and, moreover, the week, with the Sanscrit names, was transferred to the Hindoo colony in Bali, long before the birth of Mohamed. The following interesting Table, shewing the identity of the order and names of the days of the week in India with those of Europe, is taken from an able article in the British and Foreign Evangelieal Eeview) for April 1866. Sanscrit days ofthe week, as jj^jnes at length inti-o- English names (with the meanings yet scarcely changed in ^^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^ in g,, t^e three languages).' India. Aditya-war. Diea-Solis. Sunday, or day of the Sun. Soma-war. Dies-Lunse. Monday, or day of the Moon. „ Ja-war. Dies Martis. Tuesday, or day of Mars. Bud&a-war. Dies-Merourii. Wednesday, doubtfully identi- fied witii Mercury. Bnuhaspat-war. Dies- Jovis. Thursday, or day of Jupiter. Suora-war. Dies- Veneris. Friday, or day of Venus. Shun-war. Dies-Satumi. Saturday, or day of Saturn. " Here" the writer adds, "is an uncommonly curious and interest- ing series of facts. Not merely is there a division into weeks in various lands, the several days being named after the sun, moon, and planets, but making allowance for difference of longitude, the Sunday of any one country has, it would appear, always fallen on precisely the same day with the Sunday of all others, and so with the remaining days of the week." In a note, kindly sent me, in answer to some inquiries regarding the above table, the writer of the article says, " The Indian Aditivar (Sunday), and the Sabbath of Europe, are to all intents and purposes on the same day, the Only difference is one of hours, that is, that when it is noon here, it will be about five in the afternoon in India, owing to the difference of longitude." In connection with the above table, we subjoin one taken from a APPENDIX. 39 yaluable note on Dion Cassius, by Keimarus. We leave out the names of the planets in Arabic and Persic, as they are imperfectly given in Hebrew characters, from which little can be learned, we give only the Egyptian, .which he represents in Greek character, the Hebrew, Jewish, and the Grecian, along with the signs for the planets, which have been transmitted from the earliest times to the science of the present day, and to these we have added the more recent names in Greece and Italy. Signs. Roman Names. Egyptian. Hebrew Names. Hebrew Names in Greek Characters, from Epiphanius. Greelt. © Sol n<{»i z^aaf or non HfiX xai Se^ij "HA./5S J Luna Xhios njaS l£fE£ XKi AXfiecva. SeXu'vi) 3 Mai-s M»Xo;U DnxD Xa;t;£/3, 0;^/iuX Ajjfj 5 Mercurius II;s{|a»i? 3313 Xi»X'fi, 0;k^3 'Ej^Sf Tl Jupiter n,ltus nx Xu^l/i, BuaX Zitis 9 Venus 2oV^OT nji3 SejoSk 'A^gflS/TW h Satumus Pn^av *Kn3tJ' Xi,x;lfi S«^Jirf K^ovos We have taken the liberty of altering this table, as well as of omit- ting and adding to it, but not without a careful reference to the au&orities from which it is professedly taken. Pfitpav, or Saturn, he puts first, without giving any reason for doing so. Epiphanius and Bede both put it last. Epiphanius (Kara (pagieaim), treating of the superstition of the Jews, gives them in the order we have observed, putting the sun first, and ending with "lastly," Saturn is called Xw;^ej8 'Sa.^Tii. In the Latin version the translator renders it " Saturnus denique cochab Sabeth vocatur." Bede gives three arrangements in the order of the names. In a chapter entitled, " Ordo Planetarum juxta naturam et numerum earum secundum Hebraeos," he says, " Sol qui dicitur juxta Hebraeos Hama, prima est Planetarum, Seounda Venus, quse dioitur Noga, Tertia Mercurius, id est cocaph ; Quarta Luna, quae et Libala, Quinta Satumus, videlicit Sabbai, Sexta Jupiter, id est Sedech, Septima Mars qui et Madei," &c. In another chapter, " De Eatione," he gives a different order from any we have met with, beginning with Saturn, the Sun fourth, and the Moon last. And in a third chapter of his Prognostica, " De Septem Feriis," which alone has reference to the order of days of the week, the order is as we have ' given it above, only for the first and last he has the names of Lord's day and Sabbath. " Dominus," being an old heathen designation for the sun, and it is interesting to find the Hebrew name for the seventh day used to designate Saturn, and identified with the same planet as called by the Egyptians Prjfpav 40 THE PRIMITIVE SABBATH RESTORED BY CHRIST. (Eephan), which, according to Stephen, was the first, or one of the first, objects of Sabian idolatry after the departure from Egypt (Acts vii. 43). " The star of your god Eemphan," or more properly, Eephan. This throws important light on the question of the origin of the names of the week, and seems to prove that the names of the seven days were not derived from the planets, but that the names of the days set apart for the worship of particular deities were transferred to the planets, which were the seats or symbols of these gods, not thai the name of the planet was transferred to the day. It is admitted on all hands, that the name Sabbath was divinely appointed as the desig- nation of the Jewish day of worship. We find that the Jews, depart- ing from the worship of Jehovah, gave the name of their sacred day to the planet Saturn, and if the Jews at an early period took this way of giving names to the planets and gods, is it not extremely probable, if not certain, that they did so after the customs of their heathen neigh- bours ? This probability is greatly strengthened by the fact, that the planet which they designated *Kri3t}' (Sabbathai), or, according to Epiphanius 2a/3?jd (Sabbath), or as Bede spells it, Sabbai, was called by the Egyptians Eephan, and stands in their arrangements of the days of the week on the same day as the Jewish Sabbath, and, as will be seen from our two tables, occupies the same place in the week of other lauds. Note C— P. 15. In Book Ixvii. ch. 7, he says, " Oiirca /ih t& Ifcgoo'o'Xu,u.a h aurp rp To-j xoovou rifjAgcf, riv ihokisra. tn xa/' ntv louSa/b/ aiBoudiv, s^wXero." " Thus Jerusalem, on that very day of Saturn, which day chiefly the Jews then and now reverence, was utterly destroyed." Again, in Book xxxvii. ch. 16, referring to the taking of the temple after the capture of the city, he says, " Nor if they had defended it equally every day (or on all the days) would it have been taken, but because on Saturn's day (Saturday), as the day is called, they refrained from fighting," &c, " mv hi raj rou xgovou hi\ mo/iaao/iivas iitiljas dia^eivovreg," &c. This has all the appearance of being an account of the destruction of the city, and of the cause of the failure of the Jews in defending it, taken from some contemporary narrative now lost to us. And it is specially worthy of note, that the writer speaks of the days of the week entirely from a heathen point of view, as if they were familiarly known at that early period by Eoman or Greek writers. He could not be speaking of the Jewish week, or he would never have spoken of the Jews calling their sacred Sabbath after the name of the heathen deity Saturn. The Jewish name of the planet Saturn in Greek was, as we have seen, ta^r}6. And as little can we suppose that he was using the language of Christians. It is true that we find the Christian apologist using the same names for the days of the week. But that was be- cause their names were known to the heathens. As for example, Justin Martyr (born about 112), in his address to the Emperor Antoninus Pius, calls the Christian day of worship Sunday. ," They met ™ roD APPENDIX. 41 "HX/ou Xeyo/ietTi ii//-eo(f." And in his dialogue with Trypho, he tells ns that our Lord was crucified on a Saturday, and rose on a Sunday the day after Saturday, " r fisra r^v x^ovix^v ring iartv jj' rou 'HX;ou rH/il^a,." We can only account for this use of the heathen names for the days- of the week by both Christian and heathen waiters, from these being the names in familiar use at that early period. And we feel fully justi- fied in maintaining that the week, as found in Egypt, was introduced into the Eoman empire at or before the commencement of the Chris- tian era, probably in the year 46 b.o., when the calendar was refornoed, and that, while it was adopted by the Eomans from its obvious anti- quity and accuracy, the change was providentially arranged by God for the preparing of the way for the introduction of the Christian religion and specially of its day of sacred rest. I have not adduced any of the oft quoted passages from ancient, Greek and Latin authors, to shew that the Greeks and Eomans had, at an early period of their history, a trace of the week of seven days, not because I think such a trace cannot be found, even as far back as the days of Homer, but because I do not attach much importance to the evidence, even if more clear than it is. I think too much has been attempted to be proved from the passages quoted. The most that can be directly proved from such passages as are collected by Ensebius and others, and repeated in many of the Puritan and modern writers, is, that there was somethiny sacred in the number seven, and that this sacredness applied to the seventh period of time, as to the seventh day of the month, the seventh month. And I agree with Dr S. Lee, in thinking that neither Aristobulus, Clemens, nor Ensebius, quoted sayings from the ancients to establish a regular recurring seventh sacred day, but only a certain sacredness in a seventh period of time. That other days were sacred does not destroy this evidence. In the Christian Church there are saints' days as well as Sabbaths. Let any one look over the reference to sacred days, and he vrill be struck with the vast preponderance of evidence for the sacredness of the seventh, which is a shadowy kind of proof in favour of a tradition of an early observance of a week even in Greece. I have seen it stated, though I cannot now remember where, that the Greeks have a tradition that time was once measured by seven days, and that it was afterwards changed into decades. , This is such a change as was likely to be made by such a people, more under the con- trol of rationalism than religion, or superstition, in their later history, like the French, at the Eevolution, when they made a like change on the week. The same change from seven to ten has been made in China from a remote period. While time for practical purposes in China has been divided into decades for many centuries, they have still left the record of an earlier division by sevens, more clear and definite than can now be found in the extant writings of ancient Greek authors. Yet even in the latter, the evidence for a sacred seven is not to be lightly set aside. I caij see no sufficient reason for reject- ing all the quotations from Hesiod and Homer, which are not found in their works as we now have them. They are allowed to be incom- 42 THE PEIMITIVE SABBATH EESTOBED BY CHEIST. plete. As for Callimachus and Linus, from whom also interesting quotations are given, we possess but a few poems of the former, who is reported to have written eight hundred works ; and though the latter is little better than a mythical person, still the verses attributed to him may have been genuine specimens of antiquity. For th^ evidence from Koman writers, as well as Grecian, we must refer to accessible works like Owen on " Hebrews," or Gale's " Court of the Gentiles," &c. I attach little importance to either. Both countries showed their sense of the superiority of the chronology of Egypt as soon as they understood it, by rejecting their own in its favour. I have not thought it necessary to quote authorities for the antiquity of the Egyptian week. It is universally admitted. Note D.— P. 19. It strongly confirms the opinion formerly expressed, that the deri- vation of the names of the days of the week was only a later fancy of the Greeks and Romans, when we compare the fact brought forward in the preceding note, with the well known tendency of the ancient philosophers to attribute efiects to most inadequate causes, and often to mistake a coincidence for a cause. Dion Cassius himself gives the theory of the derivation of the seven sounds in music, from the seven planets. An opinion held by eminent philosophers, and ex- pressed in verse by the learned Varro, thus — " Videt et setherio mundum torquerier axe Et septem setemis sonitum dare vocibus orbes, Nitentes aliis alios quae maxima divas, Laetitia stat tunc longe gratissima Phoebi, Dextera oonsimiles meditatur reddere voces. " But there is another aspect of the connection of the seven days of the week with the seven planets which it pleased the Creator to render visible to the naked eye. May it not have been the design of Him who set the sun and moon "for signs and for seasons, and for days and years," to perpetuate, among all nations the observance of the seven- day-week, by the silent testimony of the seven witnesses in heaven. We cannot fathom the Divine purposes, but we see that the design of God to preserve this septenary division of time, has been attained, in its association with the seven planets, in almost all parts of the world. That God attaches great importance to this division, and to the one sacred day which it was designed to conserve, is seen from its prominence in the institutions of Moses and of Christ, even if we denied its institution at the creation, and the witness of the seven planets, the seven sounds in the scale of music, and the seven colours in the rainbow, would teach the early world that this sacred seven, which they found in the diverse regions of space and time, which met the eye in the hues of heaven and earth, and touched the ear with such varied, and yet simple and harmonious sounds, implies a unify of plan in the natural and moral arrangements of the Divine Hauler; and the analogies in nature woujd dispose men more readily to APPENDIX. 43 acquiesce in His arrangements for observing a day of stated rest and worship in every week, and even when they neglected religious duty, to remember and perpetuate the record of its institution. We have no doubt the seven planets preserved the week, amid the heathenism of the world, until the time arrived for its restoration to its original Note E. P.— 25, The change of the day at the departure from Egypt, and the restora- tion of the ori^nal day of rest, as observed from the creation, and restored at the resurrection, will be rendered clearer by the following plan : — Order of days as Days of Creation. obserred by the montli Week. heathen. Ex.xiv. Jewish week. 6th, Saturday, Tth, Sabbath, 1st, Monday, 2nd, Tuesday, 3d, Wednesday, 4th, Thursday, 5th, Friday, 6th, Saturday, 7th, Sabbath, 15th, Day of march from Elim to Sin. 16th, 1st Day of Fall of Manna. 17th, 2d, 18th, 3d, 19th, 4th, 20th, 5th, 21st, 6th, 22d, 7th, Manna ceased, now made the Sabbath of the Jews. 23d, 1st day of Jewish week, on which Christ rose, and thus restored the primitive Sabbath. If the above be compared with the tables at p. 38, the coincidence will be found very striking. It will be seen that the sacred day of the Jews was different from that of all other people, from In^ia (we may say from China) to the west of Europe. _ The only exception I know of, is that of the Syro-Phenicians who, according to Porphyry, as quoted by Eusebins, " kept the seventh as well as the Jews." This one exception only confirms the general rule, as we knew that Saturn was their god, and was worshipped on Saturday, which was also the day of Saturn, or Bephan in the Egyptian week. Was not this the occa- sion of the Israelites so frequently falling into the worship of that god ? If their day of rest was Saturday, it was natural, when they departed from the true God, that they should adopt the god wor- shipped by their idolatrous neighbours the Egyptians and the Syro- Phenicians, on that day, as Stephen tells us, they were in the habit of doing. See the use of the imperfect tense in Acts vii. 43. I cannot here give anything like even a resum& of the argument for such a change as, we suppose, took place at the exodus. I only refer to it. as lying in the way of our argument, not as necessary to its validity. Those who wish to see the question discussed at length, can find it ably argued in " a sermon by Dr Samuel Lee, preached before the University of Cambridge, on Sunday, June 80th, 1883." I regret that I did not see it until this pamphlet was in type. Many 44 THE PRIMITIVE SABBATH EESTOEED BY CHBIST. of the ablest and soundest writers of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries held the same views. But while many passages of Scripture seem to imply such a change, and to anticipate a return to the original Sabbath, it is not of im- portance for us to press the theory, however probable it may appear. The coincidence of the resurrection of Christ on the first day of the Jewish week, can be accounted for without supposing that the day was changed by Divine appointment, at the departure from Egypt. Amongst other ways of accounting for it, that of an error having crept into the later reckoning of the Jewish week may be suggested. They may have lost a day, and thus transferred the Sabbath from the - seventh to the sixth day of the week. During the repeated periods of defection from the worship of Jehovah, which are always characterised by a neglect of the Sabbath, or when dispersed in other countries, that the land of their fathers " might enjoy her Sabbaths," they may have failed to keep a true record of the sacred day. God complains, " Her priests .... have hid their eyes from my Sabbaths," * and in righteous judgment he may have fulfilled literally that word, " The Lord hath caused I the solemn feasts and Sabbaths to be forgotten." f The probability of such an error having been made, and allowed by God, for the pur- poses He had in view, is strengthened by the generally- admitted fact, that our Lord kept the passover on the day before that on which it was observed by the Jews, and thus so ordered the grand events of His death and resurrection, that the former should take place on the ere of the slaying of the Paschal Lamb, and the latter on the morning of the primitive Sabbath. If the Jews had lost their Sabbath before, or during their disper- sions, they would be very apt to resume it on the sixth day of the week. They would find the sacred day among the heathen called the first day of the week, and not knowing that it was really the seventh, though called first, they would naturally put their Sabbath a day before it, supposing that the seventh, though really the sixth of the creation week, as may be seen from the preceding table. * Ezekiel xxii. 26. t Lam. ii. 6. ''^-^.^.Sij, > -^ ^^' .k ^^^!"v^;?>,^ -v*.-. i. ;\:'^S." r^-:-- V V ./*^; »fT ^.. >r^- > *-- -