n LIBRARY OF THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY PRINCETON, N. J. Purchased by the Mrs. Robert Lenox Kennedy Church History Fund. BV 110 .L48 1888 Lewis, Abram Herbert, 1836- 1908. Biblical teachings concerning the Sabbath and --^xH r i- 1 fiii v^ '^^' BIBLICAL TEACHmaS^'^^ 9 " 1926^ CONCEKNIXG THE SABBATH AND THE SUNDAY, BY A. h/lEWIS, D. D. AXJTHOB OF " SaBBATEI AND SUNDAY, ABGUMENT AND HISTORY " ; " A CRITICAL HISTORY OF THE Sabbath and The Sunday, in the Christian Church;' "A Critical History of Sunday Legislation from 321 to 1888, A. D. ;" "The Seventh-day Baptist Hand Book." Editor of " The Outlook and Sabbath Quarterly," and of " The Light of Home. " TO WHICH IS ADDED AN IMPORTANT CHAPTER ON "THE ORIGIN OF THE WEEK." ^Econti iStiition, Eebi3£ti, THE AMERICAN SABBATH TBACT SOCIETY ALFRED CENTRE, N. Y. 1888. PREFACE. In 1870 the author of the following pages issued a work entitled '' The Sabbath and the Sunday, Argument and History." The favorable reception granted to that volume, and the increasing agita- tion concerning the Sabbath question in the United States, led to the issue of three other volumes, as follows: The first edition of this book in 1884; " A Critical History of the Sabbath and the Sunday in The Christian Church," a larger volume, which embodies the history of the theories and practices relative to both days; in 1886, "A Critical History of Sunday Legislation, from A. D. 321 to 1888," which appeared in March, 1888. The second edition of this book appears at a time when the agitation of the Sabbath question is more wide-spread and intense than at any previous time in our national history. The popular tendency is to avoid a direct appeal to the Word of God in the set- tlement of the question. There is also a persistent but most unscholarly effort made in certain circles to avoid the claims of the Sabbath as against the Sunday, by asserting that the week is an uncertain and variable division of time, and that we cannot attain any definite knowledge as to what day is PREFACE. the Sabbath. The following pages exalt the Word of God as the only rule of faith and practice for Chris- tian men. The Sabbath question is larger than any de- nominational lines. It involves the highest in- terests and the future destiny of the Christian Church. The theory which seeks to abolish the Decalogue, and thus remove the Sabbath, is illog- ical, deceptive and destructive. Few men profess- ing to be Christians could urge such a theory were it not for their desire to avoid the claims of the Sabbath. The mission of this book is tc exalt the truth that Calvary glorifies Sinai, but does not remove it; that faith in Christ establishes the law of God, but does not make it void. Truth can afford to wait calmly, while error digs its own grave. But for the sake of truth we have the right to demand a candid and earnest investigation of the Sabbath question- from the Biblical stand- point. What saith God's Word ? Read thought- fully, and act in the light of truth and in the pres- ence of God, from whose eyes neither excuses nor sophistry can hide the soul. Plainfield, N. J., June, 1888. ' THE SABBATH A^^D THE SUNDAY. CHAPTER I. A PRIORI ARGUMENT. The patterns of all things must exist as pure thoughts in the mind of Jehovah before there can be any outward creation. These pattern thouglits are the laws by which the work of creation is developed, and governed. Therefore "law" in its pure pri- mary meaning is another name for God's ideal. Hence no primary law can be abrogated or changed ; for God's ideals are perfect and absolute. Any change or abrogation of primary laws must destroy the creation, or the government which has been de- veloped according to those laws, and is founded upon them. Abrogate the law of "gravitation," and the physical universe is at once destroyed. The same is true in moral government. Even the disobedience of a single subject produces discord, and to a certahi 1 2 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. extent, breaks up the order of the government. If the hiw-making power shall change or abrogate the laws on which the government rests, the government is changed or destroyed. It is also a self-evident truth that all primary laws must antedate the govern- ment which is based upon them, and all perfect laws must meet the necessities which grow out of the rela- tions between the governor and the governed. Obe- dience on the part of the governed is at once the sign of fealty, and the means of blessing. It is befitting to inquire, in the light of the foregoing principles, whether the Sabbath Law is a primary law in moral government, or only a temporary en- actment made with reference to a primary law. The conmiemorative rest of Jehovah at the close of his creative work is the first expression of the Sabbath idea. This rest follows close upon the com- pletion of the work, as though it were a j^art of the original pattern. And when it is rememl)ered that the Sal^bath law meets the demands which grow out of our relations to God, which relations existed from the birth of the race, the conclusion is inevitable that the Sabbath law was a primary, structund law in the moral universe, and, like all other [)rimary laws, had its origin in the mind of Jehovah "before the world was." A PRIORI ARGUMENT. 3 The idea of God as Creator is the all-embracing idea. His character as Law-giver, and Redeemer, flows from the idea of Creator. Fealty to God, as well as our highest good, demands that we constantly remember him and our i-elations to him. Hence the Sabbath law links itself with this all-embracino: idea of the true God, the maker of heaven and of earth, the Creator and Redeemer of men, and holds it ever before us. A law which thus forms the central thread of communion between the Creator and the creature, which thus meets the universal demands arising from our relations to him, which is God's never-ceasing representative in time, must be as universal and enduring as the system of which it is a part. Man is a social as w^ell as a religious being. In this dual nature the highest motive that can enter into our relations to each other is, "Love to man." This unites the race, and linking with "Love to God " leads us up to him. The universal expression of love to God is worship. Social worship is, therefore, the natural result of the highest action of man's dual nature. But social worship could never become uni- versal or permanent without a stated and definite time, fixed by the author of man's nature and the object of his worship. Illustration ; If a governor orders an election of oflicers, and appoints no time 4 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. when the election shall be held, there is not only a want of wisdom in the arrangement, but the election must be a failure. To say that God did not pre-or- dain the Sabbath law, as a structural law in moral government, is to charge the Perfect One with simi- lar folly. Thus it is seen that God's relations to his own work, our relations to him, and our relations to each other, all combine to show that the Sabbath law must have been a primary, structural law of the moral government under w^hich we exist. Being such, it can only be abrogated by the annulling of all these relations, and the destruction of the government. CHAPTER II. SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. Approaching the Scriptures, we find the funda- mental facts in exact harmony witli the foregoing a 'priori conclusions. When the Sabbath law appears, it is linked with the ])eginning of man's experience, and founded upon the example of Jehovah. Hence the question arises at the threshold of the Scriptural argument concerning the Sabbath : Can the Laic of the SahhafJi and the Day of the Sabbath be separated? Two points carefully ex- amined, will answer this question. (a) Why was the seventh day chosen as the Sab- bath? {b) By virtue of what did it become the Sabbath? {a) God could not commemorate the work of crea- tion until it was completed. It was not completed until the close of the sixth day. Hence no day pre- vious to the seventh could have been chosen as the Sabbath. Previous to the seventh day creation was only a " becoming." With the opening of the seventh 5 6 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. day it sprang into full being. This, therefore, was creation's birthday, and hence the only day that could be chosen to commemorate the rest of God from the completed work of creating. As one cannot celebrate his birthday on a day earlier or later than that on which his birth occurred, so Jehovah sancti- fied the seventh as the only day which could answer the original idea of the Sabbath law. Therefore the Sabbath Law and the Sabbath Day designated by its author are inseparable. Applied to any other day the- law has no meaning. (b) The acts of Jehovah by which the seventh day was consecrated as the Sabbath. God rested on that day, hence the sacredness arising from his example can pertain to no other day. God blessed the day and hallowed it, because he had rested upon it. Thus the elements of sacredness and of commemorative- ness are inseparably connected with the day. If the law be applied to another day, it becomes meaning- less ; for the law demands a day thus made sacred, and no other day than the seventh could be made sacred for those reasons. Nor can the seventh day cease to be thus sacred, until it shall cease to be a fact that God rested upon that day and blessed it. This can never be. Again, no other day than the seventh can meet the SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 7 demands of our own natures, since no other day can keep God in mind through this commemorative sacredness. Any other day, observed for any reason not mentioned in the law. has another kmguage — speaks of other things, and hence cannot speak to the soul as God designed the Sabbath shoukl speak. Thus it appears tiiat God chose the seventh day for good and sufficient reasons, reasons which spring from the eternal fitness of things, and which co-exist with our race. Therefore, if there be any Sabbath, it must he the seventh day. The law centers around the da//, and is meaningless when applied to any other. Much is said by certain writers concerning the " Sabbath institution," as though it were distinct from the Sabl)ath law and the Sabbath day. A glance will suflSce to show the illogicalness of such a claim. An institution io only the outgrowth of organific law. Refuse or neglect to obey the law the institution is destroyed. Illustration: During the late "rebell- ion," the institutions of the United States' govern- ment ceased to exist w^herever the laws of that irovernment were disobeved. So he who refuses to obey the Sabbath law destroys the Sabbath institu- tion so far as his power extends. At this point, some readers will raise the query as to the lenirth of God's creative days, and their 8 - SABBATH AND SUNDAY. bearing on the question before us. Our answer, briefly, is this : God's power is infinite, measureless. His acts, and the time in which he performs them, are also unmeasurable by us. We apprehend that the creative week was infinitely longer than our week of sev^en days of twenty-four hours. But since it was a week, and since God rested from his work on the seventh day of that week, and since he command- ed us to do in our iceeh^ as he did in /a'.s, all difficulty in the case vanishes. Our week is modeled after God's by his command. AYe are to do in our sphere of action after his example in his sphere of action. The Sabbath law, given by him, demands this, and the observance of any other day than the seventh and last day of the week, for any reason, is not obe- dience to God's law. Finite men, acting in finite days, do follow the example of an Infinite God, acting in unmeasured days, if they preserve the same order, according to his command ; otherwise, they do not. The second question is : Was the Sabbath Law knoicn to men before the giving of the Decalogue at Mount Sinai ? All the arguments presented in a former chapter, to prove that the Sabbath law is a pri- mary law, will apply with equal force to the above question. To those reasons the following may be added : All the primary relations between God and SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT . 9 his creatures existed before the giving of the Deca- loofue. All the wants of man's nature existed durins: that time, hence all laws made to meet these rela- tions and answer these wants must have been co- existent with the relations and demands. There was an especial demand for a knowledge of the Sabbath during this period, as a safeguard against the prevail- ing tendency to forget God and accept heathenism. Besides this, God having made the Sabbath sacred at creation, it could have been no less than sin to pro- fane it in any time thereafter, and God does not leave his creatures without the knowledge requisite to obedience. Hence we must conclude that the Sab- bath was known before the giving of the law at Sinai. This conclusion is in harmony with the unanswerable argument of Paul in the Epistle to the Romans,^ in which he shows that since sin existed " from Adam to Moses," therefore the law must have existed, for "Sin is not imputed where there is no law." Christ pro- claims the same truth when he teaches the eternal nature of the law, and the fact that " the Sabbath was madfe for man, and not man for the Sabbath." ^ In this Christ clearly indicates that the Sabbath law an- tedated the race, and was given for the especial ben- iKomansv. 12 — 15; and iv. 15. 2Markii. 27. 10 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. efit of the race. Hence also his right, as "Lord of the Sabbath," to indicate how it ought to be observed, since all things were made by him. The brief Scriptural record concerning the period between the creation and the giving of the law con- firms the foregoing conclusions. In the second chapter of Genesis, first to fourth verses, we have the history of the instituting of the Sabbath in the following words : "And the heaven and the earth were finished and all the host of them." " And on the seventh day God finished his work which he had made ; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made." "And God blessed the seventh day and hallowed it; because that in it he rested from all his work w^hich God created and made.^ " This fact so full of deep meaning, and inseparable from the history of creation, could not have been un- known to Adam and the patriarchs who "walked with God," and were taught by him. Knowing of the existence of the Sabbath, they must have known of its sacredness, and their duty to observe it. The septenary division of time into weeks was well un- derstood during the patriarchal age. ^ This knowl- ^ All quotations are from the Revised Version. 2 See Genesis vii. 4—8; 10—12. SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT. 11 edge necessitates a knowledge of the Sabbath by which the weeks are separated.^ But positive tes- timony is not wanting. The sixteenth chapter of Exodus shows that the Sabbath was known and ob- served before the giving of the Decalogue at Sinai, and that the first special test of obedience which God made after the Israelites left Egypt was concerning its observance. The orivinof of the manna occured on the fifteenth day of the second month, and the Hebrews did not reach Sinai until some time during the third month after their departure from Eg\^pt. In the fourth verse of this 16th of Exodus, it is said that God told Moses : " Behold I will rain bread from heaven for j^ou, and the people shall go out and gather a day's portion every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law or no." This shows that the test of obedience was to be made in connection with the gathering of the man- na according to a certain daily rate. The next verse gives the test, viz. : '"And it shall come to pass, on the sixth day that they shall prepare that which they bring in, and it shall be twice as much as they gather daily." 1 For collateral testimony showing that the week and the Sab- bath were known also outside the patriarchal line, testimony which indicates an universal revelation concerning the week and the Sabbath at the first, see Appendix A. 12 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. It is plain that the test lay in the voluntary jorep- arations for the Sabbath on the part of the people ; for in the sixteenth verse Moses reveals nothing: to the people except the order to gather the stated por- tion each day ; and when some would not heed this order, ^ the manna not only became worthless, but Moses testified his displeasure at their disobedience. The people were not ordered to gather a double por- tion on the sixth day, nor were they at first informed that the manna should not fall upon the Sabbath. They were left wholly ignorant on this point in order that the test of their obedience might be complete. Hence it is said in the twenty-second verse that when the sixth day came, and the people voluntarily gath- ered an extra portion for the Sabbath, the rulers came at once and told Moses of their apparent diso- bedience. Then, for the first time, Moses revealed to them what God had said concerning the test to be made and told them^ that there should be no manna on the Sabbath. Nevertheless some went out to seek for it on the Sabbath, and God rebuked them in a way, and with a severity, which is wholly inconsist- ent with the idea that this was their first offense. He says : ^ ''How long refuse ye to keep my command7nents J 20th verse- " 26th verse. ^ 28th verse. GIVING THE LAW. 13 and my laws,'' etc. There is no appearance of any- thing new, or of the introduction of anything before unknown. The conditions of the test, and the vol- untary act of the people in preparing for the Sabbath, show that the law of the Sabbath was well under- stood b}^ them, and that it had come to them from the patriarchal age, before their bondage in Egypt. GIVING THE LAW. A careful study of the history of the organization of the Jewish nation reveals the following important facts : 1. The Decalogue was given first in order of time, as the embodiment of all moral law, the foundation of all government. 2. Certain ceremonies were instituted teaching physical and spiritual purity, offering forgiveness through faith and obedience, and pointing to a coming Saviour. 3. Civil and ecclesiastico-civil regulations were made for the organization of the nation and the en- forcement of obedience to the laws of the Deca- logue, which b}^ its nature, and by the circumstances that attended the giving of it, is shown to be entirely distinct from the ceremonial and civil regulations. That nine of these ten laws are eternal is unques- 14 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. tioned. Some are found who claim that the Sabbath law, embodied in the fourth commandment is cer- emonial and not moral. If the claim be true, then God, the infinite in wisdom, placed it where it did not belong, and so deceived, not only the Israel ites, but the world. By such misplacement, too, the ceremonial code was left imperfect, in a very im- portant particular. It is also an unquestioned fact that the Jews never deemed the Sabbath law as cer- emonial. God bases the Sabbath law upon his own example, and teaches that it finds its beginning and authority in his acts at the close of the creative week ; while, if the above claim be true, it was not commemorative of God and his work, but typical of Christ. A theory which thus charges God with ignorance or premeditated deception, or with both, sinks under the weight of its own inconsistency. THE TWO COVENANTS. Before closing this chapter, it is necessary to an- swer another query which will arise concerning what are loosely called the Old and the New Covenants. It is a prominent part of the stock in trade of mod- ern No-Sabbathists to claim that God made one cov- enant with the Jews, which was annulled when Christ came, and that thus the Decalogue, and so THE TWO COVENANTS. 15 the Sabbath law, were annulled. The confusion which exists in the popular theories on this point is great. It arises from a superficial understanding of the nature of God's government, and the mean- ing of the term covenant. To clear up this con- fusion, it is necessary to inquire Avhat the meaning of covenant is, as used in the Scriptures. Worcester gives the following excellent definition of the theological use of the term, viz.: "The promise of God to man that he shall receive certain temporal or spiritual blessings upon certain condi- tions, or upon the performance of the duties pointed out in the Old and New Testaments." What was the " old covenant " ? The term cove- nant occurs first in Gen. vi. 18, in connection with the building of the Ark ; that covenant was essentially this : Noah, believing God's word, and building the Ark, as God directed, should be saved from destruc- tion. This is the model of all "covenants." Men are to do a given thing, whereupon God does or grants certain things, as results. The covenant with Abraham, Gen. xv., is of the same nature; in this, God promises to give "This land," etc. (18 v.), to Abraham's seed, if they obey him. In the 17th chapter the promise of a great posterity is added. In all the covenants between individuals, the same 16 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. features appear ; an agreement wherein each has a part to perform. When the children of Israel groaned under the bondage in Egypt, God assured them that he remembered his promise to give them the land of Canaan. Ex. ii. 24; vi. 4, 5. In the organizing of the Hel)rew theocracy, after the exodus, the deeper meaning of covenant comes out, in what is properly termed the law covenant. Man is not an independent contracting party, l)ut a subject who is under obligation to obey whatever God -may command. Hence, obedience to God's law is the only way in which man can keep a cove- nant with God. In Exod. xix. 5, 6, obedience is the ground on which it is promised that Israel shall become a " kingdom of priests and an holy nation." Since the law of God contains the essential terms of the covenant l)y indicating what ol^edience consists in, the law is often spoken of as the covenant, by a common figure, metonymy. This metonymical use of law, and covenant, is common in Exodus, and in Deuteronomy. The failure to recognize this use has led to no little confusion and error, as has also the fact that the reasons assigned in Deuterononjy why the Isralites should o])ey the law of God, are spe- cific, national, and narrow, when compared with the general and eternal reasons on which the laws of the THE TWO COVENANTS. 17 Decalogue rest. This covenant concerning the keep- ing of the Decalogue also included the method l^y which men might find forgiveness when they had broken the law, viz., by sacrifices. This was the method of "administering " the law. In the broad- est sense, therefore, the "old covenant" included, (a) The Decalogue, which was the basis of all else. (b) The ceremonial system through which forgive- ness of sin might be found in case of the transgres- sion of the Decalogue. In order to complete our answer to the query un- der consideration, we here add : the "new covenant" was, (a) The same law of God, written in men's hearts instead of on tables of stone. That is, changed from an outward restraint to an inward control ; thus its power was intensified, (b) For- giveness of sin — the transgression of God's law — through faith in Christ, and not through ceremonies and sacrifices. A common and most hurtful error of our time is the essential destruction of this new covenant, by teaching the abrogation of the Decalogue, and hence the removal of all obligation from men; which, be- ing done, there can be no covenant, since obedience is man's part of the covenant. The Epistle to the Hebrews is referred to by many as teaching such 2 18 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. abrogation of the Decalogue, and hence of the Sab- bath. Without discussing the authorship of He- brews, it is pertinent to say that it is not a general Epistle. It is addressed to a single church, or to a small group, probably at Alexandria. Those ad- dressed had accepted Christ as the Messiah, but still cluns to the ceremonial code as the sfround of for- giveness and justification. Thus they were sure to sink back into Judaism, unless they could be brought to a higher view of faith in Christ, as both Messiah and Saviour. The first ten chapters of Hebrews aim to bring about this broader view, and this deep- er conviction. The argument culminates in the six- teenth verse of the tenth chapter, wherein the new covenant shows the law written in men's hearts, and for«:iveness granted through the blood of Christ. The argument is not that the law is done away, but that, under the gospel covenant, men are made free from the sin resulting from disobedience, through Christ's sacrificial work, and not through the ofter- ings whereby forgiveness had been sought under Judaism. The same idea is brought out in Paul's second let- ter to the Corinthians (iii. 2-11). This is often ad- duced as showing the abrogation of the Decalogue, whereas the true intent is a comparison of the glory THE TAVO COVENANTS. 19 of the two methods of administering the law, and find- ing forgiveness for its transgression. In the sixth verse, Paul defines the new covenant as based upon the deeper, spiritual meaning of the law. In the seventh verse he shows that the law of the Decalogue, even when written on stones, was glorious, but when it is written in the heart, and its deeper mean- ing is understood, it is far more glorious. The eleventh verse shows that what is specifically spoken of as being " done away," is the glory which shone on the face of Moses when the law was given on Sinai. This represents the glory of the former method of administering the law, which glory passed away before the surpassing glory of the gospel method of administering the same law. It is the same thought which is set forth in Hebrews, by the law as written on tables of stone, as less power- ful than when written in men's hearts by the Holy Spirit. Paul to the Romans teaches the same truth in the most intense manner. The first seven chapters of Eomans are terrible in the severity with which they set forth the power of the law of God, the Deca- logue, whereby comes the knowledge of sin, and its condemnation. At the same time they set forth faith in Chris«t as the means of relief from this 20 SABBATH. AXD SUNDAY. condemnation, throuirli forgiveness. The argument opens in the 16th verse of the 1st chapter. It reach- es the climax in the 7th chapter. But lest any should misapprehend his meaning, Paul draws several clear- cut conclusions in the course of the argument. He places the main question at rest, and beyond contro- versy, in the 3d chapter, 31st verse, "Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid. Yea, we establish the law." The logic of this prop- osition is unmistakable. Faith is demanded under the gospel as the means of salvation from sin ; hence faith establishes the law which convicts of sin. This is the ]>urden of Paul's argument throughout. "For by the law is the knowledge of sin ;" "For where no law is, there is no transgression ;" "But sin is not imputed where there is no law ;" "What then? shall we sin l)ecause we are not under the law but under grace ? God forbid ; " " What shall we say then ? Is the law sin? God forbid, Nav I had not known sin but by the law;" "Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just and good." Rom. iii. 20 ; iv. 15 ; v. 13 ; vi. 15 ; vii. 7, 12. Such are the conclusions which Paul scatters through his argument before he reaches the climax in the seventh chapter. Please study those chapters, and see that the whole economy of grace in the gospel is a farce, if THE TWO COVEXANTS. 21 we attempt to interpret Paul's argument in any other way. If the Decalogue, ihe only law which can con- vict of sin, be abrogated by the death of Christ, or destroyed as a part of the old covenant, then Christ made it impossible for men to sin or to have a knowl- edge of sin after that time. Thus he died to redeem men from that which could not be. To such contradic- tion does no-lawism come. Paul taught that the law of God which convicts of sin, the Decalogue, was in full authority, as a condemning power. AVe have already seen that the author of Hebrews teaches that the hiAv is intensified in its authority and power to condemn, by being written in men's hearts. Thus Christ who came not to destroy the law, and the apostle who teaches that it is established, confirmed, strengthened by faith, agree. The Decalogue instead of being done away as a part of the Old Covenant, is the foundation of both cov- enants, being the rule whereby man is to be guided in keeping his part of the covenant with God. Upon the ground of obedience God promised Israel certain blessings. But in his mercy he also added a 'method whereby forgiveness might be attained in case of failure to obey. Under the Jewish economy this was through the ceremonial system ; under the Gospel it is through faith in Christ ; under ]>oth systems con- 22 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. fession must precede forgiveness, which must also be foUowed by a forsaiving of sin in order to continued acceptance. When Christ came the better method of finding forgiveness and salvation from sin supersed- ed that which was more burdensom eand less glorious. The foundation of both covenants was God's law in the Decalogue. The difference between the two was in the method by which men were to find forgiveness in case of transgression. CHAPTER III. TEACHINGS OF CHRIST CONCERNING THE LAW. Christ is the central figure in both dispensations. If new expressions of the Father's will are to be made in connection with the work of Christ on earth, they must be made by the " Immanuel," who is thus '^ rec- onciling the world unto himself." Did Christ teach the abrogation of the Decalogue of which the Sab- bath law is a part? Let his own words answer : ''Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets. I came not to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the law, till all things be accomplished. AVhosoever, therefore, shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven ; but whosoever shall do and teach them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."^ When Christ speaks of the law (tov vofiov) in these emphatic words, he cannot mean the ceremo- nial code, for these ceremonies were typical of him 1 Matthew v. 17—19. 23 24 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. and must pass away with his death. Besides this, the word fulfill (yrXTjpcoaai) means the opposite of destruction (^KaraXvaai) . Clirist fulfilled the law by perfect obedience to it. He corrected false in- terpretations, and intensified its claims. He taught obedience to it in the spirit as well as the letter, and urged obedience from love rather than fear. Such a work could not have been done in connection v^ith the dying ceremonies of the Jewish system. Such a work Christ did do with reference to the Decalogue. In connection w^ith the passage above quoted Christ immediately refers to two laws from the Decalogue, explains and enforces their meaning in a way far more broad and deep than those wdio listened to him were wont to conceive of them. On another occasion ^ a certain shrewd lawyer sought to entrap the Saviour by asking '* which is the greatest commandment in the law." The question has no meaning unless it be applied to the Decalogue. Christ's answer includes all the commandments of the Decalogue and thus avoids the trap designed by the questioner, who sought to lead him into some distinction between laws known to be equal in their nature and extent. in the sixteentJt chapter of Luke, '^ Christ again 1 Matthew xxii. o5 — 40. ^j^Q^yerse CHRIST AND THE LAAV. 25 affirms in the strongest language, that " It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail." Language could not be plainer than that which is used in these statements. These sentiments accord fully with the practice of Christ rehitive to the Sabbath. He boldly condemned the unjust requirements which the Jews had attached to the observance of it, and taught that works of mercy were to be freely done on that day ; that it was made for man's good, and not his injury. But he never taught that because it was " made for man " therefore it was to be abrogated, or unsanctified. Neither did he delegate to his disciples any power to teach the abrogation of the law, or of the Sabbath. On the contrary, their representative writings con- tain the same clear testimony in favor of the perpe- tuity of the law, and show the same practical observance of the Sabbath. Paul, the great reasoner among the Apostles, after an exhaustive discussion concerning the relations between the law and the Gospel, concludes the whole matter in these words : "Do we then make the law of none effect through faith? God forbid ! Nay, we establish the law."^ Again in the same epistle ^ he presents a conclu- sive argument, starting from the axiom that " where i Romans iii. 31. ^p^Q^^ai^s y_ 13 14 26 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. there is no law there is no sin." Showing that since death, which came by sin, reigned from Adam to Moses, therefore the law then existed, and, by the same reasoning that if there be no law under the gos- pel dispensation, there can be no sin ; if no sin, then no Saviour from sin, and Christ died in vain, if by his death he destroyed the law. In another place Paul contrasts the Decalogue with the ceremonial code and declares the worthlessness of the one and the binding character of the other, in these w^ords : "Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is noth- ing, but the keeping of the Commandments of God."^ Thus, in a plain and unequivocal way, Paul teaches as his Master taught. ^ EXAMPLE. The example of Christ and his apostles is in full harmony with their teachings. During Christ's life, while his disciples were with him, the Sabbath was always observed by him and them. In all his acts there is no hint that the law was to be annulled. On the contrary, Christ speaks prophetically of the Sab- bath as an existing institution at the time when Jeru- ^ 1. Corinthians vii. 19. 2 Passages quoted from Paul's writings, to prove the abrogation of the law, will be fully examined in another place. EXAMPLE OF APOSTLES. 27 salem should be destroyed,^ and tells his disciples to pray that their flight might not occur on that day, knowing that this destruction would not come until long after his death. DID THE APOSTLES OBSERVE THE SABBATH? The book of Acts is the main source of history concerning these men. It tells where they journey- ed, what they preached, and what befell them. The tJiirteenth chapter ^ contains the following account : " But they, passing through from Perga, came to Anti- och of Pisidia, and they went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and sat down." Being invited to speak, Paul preached to them concerning Christ, and especially concerning his death and resurrection ; — a significant fact to be care- fully noted and more fully examined hereafter. To say that this was done by the Apostles, as Jeics^ is to charge them w^ith unmanly dissembling. They w^ere Christians teaching others to become Christians. Neither did they seek the synagogue on the Sabbath simply to teach the Jews ; for it is stated in this same chapter, that : " And as they went out, they besought that these words might be spoken to them the next Sabbath. And the next 1 Matthew xxiv. 20. " 14th verse. 28 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. Sabbath almost the whole city was gatherea together to hear the word of God." ^ Pursuing the history through the next chapter, we find Paul and his companions continuing to travel from place to place, preaching and gathering churches, until the calling of the council at Jerusalem, an account of which is found in the fifteenth chapter. This council and its decisions have a direct bearing upon the question under consideration. The object of the council was to decide how far Gentile converts should be required to conform to those ordinances and ceremonies which were peculiarly Jewish. Had the Sabbath belonged to these, some reference to it could not have been avoided, since the Jews deemed it of paramount importance, and Paul and his com- panions had just come from a tour among the Gen- tiles, to whom they had taught its observance. The silence of that council concerning the Sabbath, and its decisions relative to minor questions, are evi- dence that the Sa1)l)ath was openly recognized and observed by all, under the universal law of the fourth commandment. The points involved in the Jerusalem council are as follows : (a) Should Gentile converts be required to sub- ^ 42d and 44th verses. EXAMPLE OF APOSTLES. 29 mit to circumcision and keep the ceremonial law, as requisites to salvation ? To this question the council promptly answered, No. This answer did not touch the Sa])bath in any way. (b} Certain things were required. But these were really outside of the ceremonial code. Idola- try and lewdness were in direct violation of the laws of the Decalogue. The eating of blood was akin to idolatry, as a species of sacrilege. The first prohi- bition concerning it was given to Noah. Gen. ix. 4. This was repeated and more fuU}^ explained in Lev. xvii. 10-14. In the 11th verse the reason given makes the requirement more than ceremonial, since it is based on the fact that God had made blood the sign of atonement on the altar. To the early Jewish converts it stood as the representative of Christ's blood so lately shed for the salvation of both Jew and Gentile. Hence James deemed it worthy to be classed with moral precepts, since sac- rilege and idolatry were thus one. This council was not called for the purpose of legislation, and had no, power to annul a law of the Decalogue. Its purpose was to arrange the difference between the Judaistic and the Gentile elements in the church, and to testify that salvation came by faith, and not by ceremonies which had once pointed to Christ, but 30 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. were now obsolete, since Christ had come and suf- fered. It is a preposterous stretch of logic to claim for such a council the right to annul a law of the Decalogue. And more: if silence concerning the Sabbath, on the part of this council, indicates that it deemed the Sal^bath law annulled, the same is true of all the other laws except those against idolatry and lewdness. The proposition destroys itself. At the conclusion of this council, Paul and Silas set out in one direction, and Barnabas and Mark in another, to revisit those churches already formed, and preach the Word in other fields. The history of this tour shows the same recognition and observ- ance of the Sal^bath. It is said^ that they came to Philippi, "the chief city of that part of Macedonia, and abode there certam days," and, in the words of the historian : " And on the Sabbath day, we went forth without the gate by a river side, where we supposed there wns a place of prayer ; and we sat down and spake unto the women which were come together." This was a place for out-door worship in a city which was probably destitute of a synagogue. It was twenty years after Christ's resurrection, and among those who, of all others, w^ould be most likely ^ Acts xvi. 12. 10. EXAMPLE OF APOSTLES. 31 to discard the Sabbath. From Philippi the apostles proceeded to Thessalonica, "Where was a synagogue of the Jews, and " Paul," as his custom was, went in unto them, and for three Sabbath days reasoned with them from the Scriptures." '' Opening and alleging that it behooved the Christ to suffer and to rise again from the dead, and that this Jesus whom said he I proclaim unto you is the Christ." "And some of them were persuaded, and consorted with Paul and Silas ; and of the devout Greeks a great multitude, and of the chief women not a few." ^ Passing from thence to Berea, and thence to Atli- ens, in both of which places Paul taught in the syna- gogues, they came to Corinth, where Paul remained "a year and six months, and reasoned in the syna- gogue every Sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks." -^3 The nineteenth chapter relates that Paul taught for two years and three months at Ephesus. ^' So that ail they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greelvs."' 1 xVcts xvii. 2, 5. ■ 2 Acts xviii. 4 and 11. 3 It was at this time that Paul organized the church at Corinth, to which he wrote five years later, telling them to lay by their gifts for the poor at Jeiusalem, on the first day of the week. See an examination of this passage in the next chapter. 32 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. SUMMARY. Collating these facts, and summing up the case as regards the example of Christ and his apostles, it stands as follows : 1. During the life of Christ the Sabbath was al- ways observed by him, and b}^ his followers. He corrected the errors and false notions which were held concerning it, but gave no hint that it was to be abrogated. 2. The book of Acts gives a connected history of the recognition and observance of the Sabbath by the apostles while they were organizing many of the churches spoken of in the New Testament. These references extend over a period of eight or nine years, the last of them being at least tw^enty years after the resurrection. 3. In all the history of the doings and teachings of the apostles, there is not the remotest reference to the abrogation of the Sab1)ath. Had there been any change made or beginning to be made, or an}^ authority for the abrogation of the Sal)l)ath law, the apostles must have known it. To claim that there was is therefore to charge them with studiously concealing the truth. And also, with recognizing and calling a day the Sabbath which ivas not tJte Sabbath. SUMMARY. 33 Add to these considerations tlie following facts : (a) The latest books of the New Testament, in. eluding the Gospel of John, were written a])ont the year ninety-five. In none of these is there an\' trace of the change of the Sabbath, nor is the abrogation of the Sabbath law taught in them. (6) The Sabbath is mentioned in the New Testa- ment sixty times, and always in its appropriate character. Thus the law and the gospel are in harmony, and teach that "the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God." But some will say, "Christ and his apostles did all this as Jews, simply." If this be true, then Christ lived and taught simply as a Jeiv and not as the Saviour of the looiid. On the contrary he was at war with the false and extravagant notions of Judaism concerning questions of truth and duty. If Christ were not a "Christian," but a "Jew," what becomes of the system which he taught? If his first followers, who periled all for him and sealed their faith with their blood, were only Jews, or worse, were dissemblers, doing that w^hich Christians ought not to do, for sake of policy, where shall Christians be found? The assumption dies of its own inconsistency. More than this. New Testament history repeatedly 3 34 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. states that the Greeks were taught on the Sabbath the same as the Jews, and in those churches where the Greek element predominated there is no trace of any different teaching or custom on this point. The Jewish Christians kept up their national institutions, for a time, such as circumcision and the passover, while all Christians accepted the Sabbath as a part of the law of God. The popular outcry against the Sabbath as "Jewish " savors more of prejudice and i'gnorance than of consistency and charity. Christ was in all respects, as regards nationality, a Jew. So were all the writers of the Old Testament, and all the writers of the New Testament. God has given the world no word of inspiration in the Bible, from Gentile pen, or Gentile lips. Is the Bible therefore "Jewish"? The Sabbath, if possible, is less Jewish than the Bible. It had its beginning long l)of()re a Jew was born. It is God's day mark- ed by his own example, and sanctified by his blessing, for the race of man, beginning when the race l)egan, and can end only when the race shall cease to exist. Christ recognized it under the gospel as he recog- nized each of the othcsr eternal laws with which it is associated in the Decalogue ; recognized them as the everlasting words of his Father, whose law he came to magnify and fulfill. It tells of pitiable weakness. NO-SABBATHISM, O. T. 35 and unchristian irreverence, to attempt to thrust out and stigmatize any part of God's truth as "Jewish," when all of God's promises and all Bible truth have come to us through the Hebrew nation. CHAPTER IV. OPPOSING THEORIES EXAMINED. NO-SABBATH THEORY. By this is meant the prevalent theory that there is no sacred time under the gospel dispensation ; that the Sabbath was only a Jewish institution, which began with the Hebrew nation, and was abrogated at the death of Christ. Against such a theory the following points have already been established. 1. The Sabbath law, being a primary law in moral government, is necessarily co-existent with that gov- ernment. 2. The Sabbath as God's memorial, his monument and representative in time, came into being when he rested upon the seventh day, and blessed and sancti- fied it. 3. The Sabbath law grew out of the relations which always have existed between the Creator and the creature, and meet certain universal demands in hu- man life ; it cannot therefore cease until these rela- tions and demands shall cease. 33 NO-SABBATHISM, O. T. 37 4. The BI])le history, and collateral testimony, (see appendix,) show that the Sa])bath was ol)served pre- vious to the organization of the Hebrew nation. 5. When Jehovah a'ave the eternal laws of his o-ov- ernment to the world, in the Decalogue, he placed the Sabbath law as the key-stone of the arch. It alone contains the signature of God, the Creator. 6. The Bi])le nowhere represents the Sabbath as a ceremonial institution. It has nothing in common with those festival days, which, as a part of the cere- monial code, pointed to Christ. 7. Christ and his apostles taught the perpetuity of the law, and always observed the Sabbath. Such an accumulation of evidence is enough to justify these pages in giving the Xo-Sabbath theory no further notice. Nevertheless, it is better to ex- amine its leading claims. The following is a repre- sentative passage from the Old Testament : ^ " The Lord our God made a covenant with us in Horeb." " The Lord made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us alive here this day." The claim is made that the Decalogue was this cove- nant. Vie have shown that the covenant was not God's law, but an agreement between Jehovah and his people, by which they were boun 1 to keep that 1 Deut. V. 2, 3, 15. 38 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. law, and he, upon such obedience, to grant to them certain promised blessings. The case is a very plain one, and needs no further remark, in addition to what has been said on pages fifteen and sixteen. The fifteenth verse reads as follows : " And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the Lord thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched-out arm ; therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the Sabbath day." In the face of the plain statement made by Jeho- vah in the Decalogue, the claim is here made that the deliverance from Egypt was the cause why the Sab- bath was instituted. The reader will remember that the goodness of God in delivering the Israelites from bondage is often used as a reason for their obedience to all his commandments. ^ If, therefore, the claim of the Xo-Sab])ath theory be correct, all the laws of the Decalogue were given for that reason. This is absurd. The whole truth is contained in a single sentence, namely : God's goodness to the Israelites is presented as a reason why tJiey sJioidd obey him. In the case quoted, the latter clause of the fourteenth verse shows that the Israelites were there urged to allow^ their servants the blessing of the Sabbath rest, and they are referred to their own bondage in Egypt '■ See Exodus, xx. 2. Lev. xxvi. 13. Ps. Ixxxi. 9, 10, etc. NO-SABBATHISM, N. T. 39 in contrast with their delivered state, to strengthen this appeal. But if there were any doubt as to the correctness of this simple explanation, the fact that the Jews never understood the 8al)bath as commem- orative of their deliverance from Egypt settles the question. More than this, the "passover" was giv- en and is yet observed , to commemorate that deliv- erance. Its whole meaning and language befit such an end, while the rest of the Sabbath is in no way sig- nificant of the turmoil and hurry oi t\\Q. exode. Be- sides all this, the No-Sabbath theory contradicts God's plain words, in Genesis, ii. 3 ; and Exodus, XX. 11. NO-SABBATHISM IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. Only a few " proof texts " are quoted from the New Testament in- support of the No-Sabbath theory. The following from Paul's letter to the Roynans'^ is deemed a strong one. "Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, hut not to doubtful disputations." '^ " For one believeth he may eat all things ; another who is weak, eateth herbs." " Let not him that eateth, despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not, judge him that eateth ; for God hath received him." ^ xiv. 1-7. - " Not to judge his doubtful thoughts." 40 SABBATH AXD 8UXDAY. " Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? To his own master he standeth or falleth ; yea he shall be holden up ; for God is able to make him stand." " One man esteemeth one day above another ; another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be inWy per- suaded in his own mind." "He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord ; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks ; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks." This passage concerning the observance of days is thus given with its contexts, that the reader may the more readily see what theme Paul is considering. This fourteenth chapter directs how those shall be treated who still cling to that part of the ceremonial code which refers to clean and unclean foods, and cer- tain days which were associated with them. There is no description of the days, or the manner in which they were observed, but every law of just interpre- tation classifies them with the other ceremonial ob- servances mentioned. It is well known that public and private voluntary fasts abounded among the Jews at this time, in addition to the older ceremonial feasts. Whatever did not touch the question of seeking for- giveness through Christ is thus spoken of as not important enough to ])e a bar to fellowship, or a source NO-SABBATHISM, N. T. 41 of contention. A similar instance occurs in Gal. iv. 10, where the ceremonial times are grouped as " days, months, times, and years " ; in this case, as with those addressed in Hebrews, the tendency seems to have been tow^ard apostasy from Christ by substituting these ceremonial observances for faith. The observ- ance of the Sabbath had never been a part of the ceremonial system. It had always been a promi- nent feature of the Decalogue, and its observance could not conflict with faith in Christ any more than the observance of the remaining ten commandments could. As a matter of fact, it was reliance on the ceremonial system for purification from sin, rather than on faith in Christ, which the apostle is every- where opposing. Paul being his own interpreter, makes this doubly sure ; for in the seventh chapter^ of this same epistle — Rom. — he speaks of the Dec- alogue, of which the Sabbath law^ is a part, in these words : "Wherefore the law is holy, and the commaudment holy, and just, and good." A careful study of this seventh chapter of Ro- mans will show that Paul places the highest impor- tance upon the observance of that law which convicts of sin, and is thus our "school-master," leading us to ^ 12th verse. 42 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. Christ for forgiveness. And James, speaking of the same law, says : ^ "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and 3'et offend in one point ^ he is guilty of all." Paul could not say in one breath that such a law was of great importance, and in the next that it was of little or no importance. The second chapter of Colossi ans'^ is often quoted as a clear statement of the No-Sabbath theory. " 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 Christ." Here it is claimed that the "sabl)aths" are dis- tinctly included among things indifferent. Note, first, it is not said that they are abrogated ; the most that can be made of the expression is that they are not to be made a matter of dissension or con- demnation. Looking at the passage more closely we find that four of the things mentioned are certainly ceremonial : eating, drinking, feasts and new moons. Mi. 10. 21GLI1 and 17th verses. 3 Greek, "for eatiiiiij or drhiking." * Greek, "conceniinsj the participating in a holy festival." 5 Greek, "Sabbaths.'' NO-SABBATHISM, N. T. 43 The fifth item, "sabbaths," is in the same construc- tion, and stands in the midst of the sentence. If the expression does include the weekly Sabbath, it is an illogical and unwarrantable eftbrt to take an eter- nal law from the heart of the Decalogue, and class it with temporary ceremonial precepts, for the sake of abrogating it. Christ never ventured such an attack on the law of God, as Paul makes here, if he means the weekly Sabbath. But we are not left in doul^t as to what "sabbaths" are meant, for, without stop- ping to take breath, Paul defines them as being, like the other items, shadows, types of Christ. What- ever the word "sabbaths" might mean considered alone, the definition given here cannot include the weekly Sabbath. That antedated the ceremonial code man}^ centuries. The law of the fourth com- mandment was placed in the heart of the Decalogue, before the ceremonial code was compiled. God knew where it belonged. The reason given for en- acting the fourth commandment is i)erfectly plain. It was a memorial of God as Creator. It is never spoken of as a type of Christ. The Jews never understood it to be snch. If the fourth command- ment was a type of Christ, and is done away, then each of its nine associates is in the same category. Even the ol^scure passage in the 4th of Hel)rews 44 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. makes it a type of heaven, if a type at all. The construction of the passage in Colossians, and the definition given, both preclude the idea tliat the weekly Sabbath is meant. The third chapter of second Corinthians is also impressed to do duty in defense of the No-Sabbath theory. The following passage embodies the testi- mony, so-called : "But if the ministration of death written and engraven in stones was glorious, so that tlie children of Israel could not steadfastly look upon the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance — which (jlory was to be done away — how shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?" etc.^ A careful reading will show that the contrast here introduced is between the glory of the Mosaic dis- pensation as compared with the Gospel. It is not the Decalogue which is to be "done away," but the "glory" of the former ministration, which must be lost before the surpassing glory of the later one. Read again the passage and its contexts. These passages form the stronghold of the No- Sabbath theory in the New Testaaient. We leave them without further remark, pausing to call the at- tention of the reader to the utter ruin which this theory Avorks in the realm of moral obligation : ^ Ttli iind 8th vprso9. NO-SABBATHI8M, N. T. 45 1. If the Decalogue was abolished by the death of Christ, then Christ by his death prevented the possibility of sin, to redeem man from which, he died. 2. "Sin is not imputed where there is no law,^ hence the consciousness of sin which men feel under the claims of the gospel is a mockery, and all faith in Christ is but a farce. It only increases the diffi- culty to say that the law is written in the hearts of believers. If that be true, then : 3. None but believers in Christ can be convicted of sin, for no others can know the law which convicts of sin. Therefore those who reject Christ, thereby become, at least negatively, righteous by refusing to come where they can be convicted of sin. Thus does the No-Sabbath theory make infidelit}^ better than belief, and rejection of Christ the only means of salvation. It leads to endless absurdities, and the overthrow of all moral government. It contradicts the plain words of God, and puts darkness for light. Its fruitage in human life has been only bitterness and ashes. i Rom. V. 13. CHAPTER Y. CHANGE OF THE DAY THEORY. The Puritan branch of Protestants claims that the Sabbath has been changed, by divine authority, from the seventh to the first day of the week. This theory is based upon the assumption that the Sab- bath institution is a separate thing from the Sabbath day, and hence that the Sabbath law may be applied to any seventh portion of time. In opposition to this theory it has been shoAvn : 1. That the Sabbath law and the Sabbath day are inseparable, and that the Sabbatic institution is the result of obedience to the Sabbath law, and ceases to exist when that law is broken. 2. That there could have been no Sabbath if God had not rested on a definite day, for a definite purpose, which no other day could answer. Having rested on a definite day, he blessed and sanctified a definite day, and thus made it the Sab1)ath. To say that the Sab- bath is only an indefinite seventh part of time, is to say that God rested on an indefinite seventh part of 46 CHANGE OF THE DAY THEORY. 47 time, and blessed an indefinite seventh part of time, all of which is illogical and unscriptural. This theo- ry also " begs the question " by adhering to the septen- ary division of time, and rejecting the definite day. Upon such an illogical assumption the whole theory of a change of the Sabbath is based. Nevertheless we shall examine the reasons offered in its support in detail. They are as follows : 1. Christ rose from the dead on the first day of the week. 2. The apostles met on that day for public wor- ship, and to commemorate his resurrection. The first reason is usually separated into the fol- lowing propositions : (a) Redemption is a greater work than creation. (h) Redemption was completed at the resurrec- tion of Christ. (c) Christ rose from the dead on the first day of the week. Conclusion. Therefore, since the resurrection, the Sabbath law applies to the first day of the week, and not to the seventh. It were answer enough to the alcove theor}^ to suo^orest that the conclusion is not a leo:itimate deduc- tion from the premises. Indeed, the premises over- throw the conclusion ; for, if " redemption " is a 48 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. ofreater work than '' creation " and different, then that Avhich was only sufficient to commemorate crea- tion cannot commemorate redemption. Different works must be differently commemorated, and the greater cannot be commemorated by that w^hich only measures the less. Again, the seventh day can only cease to be sacred, and hence to be the Sabbath, when the causes which make it the Sabbath shall cease to exist. This can never be, since those causes were the words and acts of the infinite Jehovah. These propositions are equally unsound when con- sidered separately. The first one, in saying that "Redemption is a greater work than creation," as- sumes that finite man can measure the work of "Creation," and comprehend the goodness, power and wisdom of the Infinite One as therein displayed ; that he can look into and understand the work of Redemption as the angels desired to do, but were not able ; can comprehend the infinite love and mercy of God as wrought out in that plan, and having thus comprehended and measured two infinite works, can compare one with the other, and decide which of them is the r/reater infinity. Such presumption and want of logic combine to crush the proposition which contains them. The second proposition asserts that " Redemption was completed at the resurrection [)f Christ." This CHANGE OF THE DAY THEORY. 49 is faulty in point of fact. The work of redemption began witii the advent of sin. Christ was as a lamb slain from the foundation of the world. ^ The tirst sacrifice that smoked on the altars of Eden told of re- demption. The work of the Redeemer will continue until, as Judge of men, he shall put all things under his feet, and deliver up the kingdom unto his Father. Instead of ceasing the work at his resurrection, Christ ascended to the right hand of the Father, to be our intercessor, until, in the fullness of time, he shall deliver the redeemed and glorified universe up to God. 2 If any one point marks the close of the earth-life of Christ as Redeemer among men, it is the hour of his death, when he cried, "it is finished," and died. ^ Hence the second proposition 'fails. The third proposition — "Christ rose from the grave on the first day of the week" — has been ac- cepted without question by the majority of those who will read these pages. Xeither the fact of the resurrection, nor the time when it occurred, has any logical connection with the Sabbath question, or rightful place in the Sabbath argument ; but since the public mind associates the two questions, it is needful to pass this third proposition under a careful review in order that the reader may see on what sandy grounds the popular theory rests. iRev. xiii. 8. ^1 Corinthians xv. 24—29. ^ john xix. 30. 4 50 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. TIME OF CHRIST'S RESURRECTION. Before taking up the historic accounts of the resur- rection by the evangelists, certain outlying facts need to be examined. Christ uttered an important proph- ecy concerning this matter in the tirelfth chapter of Matthew, 1 which reads as follows : " Then certain of the Scribes and Pharisees answered him, saying ; Master, we would see a sign from thee." " But he answered and said unto them, an evil and adul- terous generation seeketh after a sign, and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of Jonah the prophet." " For as .Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale : so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." The circumstances forbid all indefiniteness of ex- pression. It is a case in which Christ oft'ers to his enemies a test involving not simply the truthfulness of his words, but the proof that he w^as the Son of God. In keeping wdth this thought; the language respecting the time is carefully and exactly w^orded. The Greek says ; 'OcTTrep 7a/3 riv 'Icoya? iv ry KocXia rod Ktjrovf; rpeU rj/jL€pa<; Kal rpel^; vi)KTa<^ ,ovrw<^ ecrrai 6 vi6<; rov avOpoo- TTOV iv rfi KapBla rrj^ 7/;? rpeU ijf^epai; Kal rpeU vvKTa<;. The Latin says : 1 38 — 41st verses. TIME OF Christ's resurrection. 51 " Sicut enim fuit Jonas in ventre ceti tres dies et tres noctes : sic erit Fillius hominis in eorde terrae tres dies et tres noctes." The original account in Jonah ^ reads as follows : " And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights." The Greek of the Septuagint, says : Kal TjV 'Iwm? €V rfj KOiXla rod K7]tov(; rpek rj/nepaf; fcal rpel^ vv /era's' The Hebrew is in the same construction and equally definite. It is omitted for want of Hebrew type. In this prophecy one point is unmistakably es- tablished, namely : the length of the time during which Christ must remain in the grave. This forms the basis for investigation. The time when Christ was entombed is equally clear and definite. Matthew ^ says : " And when even was come, there came a rich man from Arimathea named Joseph, who also himself was Jesus' disciple." "This man went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. Then Pilate commanded it to be given up. "And Joseph took the body, and wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, and laid it in his own new tomb which he had hewn out in the rock ; and he rolled a great stone to the door of the tomb and departed." The Greek of the passage which refers to the M. 17. 2xxvii. 57— 61. 52 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. time, is : 'O-^/rta? Be yevofj,6V7]<;, literally, " when it was late." John corroborates the words of Matthew and shows ^ that it was late in the day, just before the setting of the sun, that the body of Christ was laid in the grave. By the words of his own prophecy, then, he must have risen at an hour in the day corres- ponding to the hour of his entombment. Thus two points are established, namely : the time of the day when the resurrection must occur, late in the day, and the length of time which must intervene between the entombment and the resurrection, three days and three nights. We are now prepared to examine the history of the resurrection as given by the evan- gelists. Three of the evangelists speak of the resurrection only in general terms, giving neither the time when it occurred, nor the circumstances attending it. John says : ^ "Now on the first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, while it was yet dark, unto the tomb, and seeth the stone taken away from the tomb," etc. Luke says :^ " But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they came unto the tomb, bringing the spices which they had prepared." ixix. 31, 38, 42. ^xx. 1. 3 xxiv. 1—3 TIME OF Christ's reslrrectiox. 53 " And they found the stone rolled away from the tomb." " And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus." Mark says : ^ "And when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene and Mary the Mother of James, and Salome, bought spices, that they might come and annoint him." "And very early on the first day of the week, they come to the tomb when the sun was risen." These accounts teach nothing more than the fact that when the parties mentioned visited the sepul- chre, they found it empty\ Christ had risen and gone. But Matthew gives an account quite different, and more definite ; one which tells of a visit previous to the one spoken of l)y the other three writers just examined. The following is the account .-^ Now late on the Sabbath-day, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week came Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary to see the sepulchre." " And behold there was 3 a great earthquake; for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled away the stone, and sat upon it." " His appearance was as lightning and his raiment white as snow." " And for fear of him the watchers did quake, and be- came as dead men.'' ixvi. 2. ^xxviii. 1-S. 3 Margin, "had been"; Greek, iy^v^ro 54 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. "And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye ; for I know that ye seek Jesus which hath been crucified." " He is not here ; for he is risen even as he said, come, see the place where the Lord lay ; " etc. Here is an account minute in details respecting both the time of the resurrection, and the circum- stances connected with it. It agrees in all particu- lars with the recjuirements of the prophecy of Christ and the time of his entombment. The opening clause of the twenty-eighth chapter fixes the time, "Late in the Sabbath."^ The Sabbath dosed at sunset. This point of time exactly corresponds to the hour of the entom]:>ment. No amount of " surmising ' or "supposing" can change this plain statement. If the exeo^etical arscument be souo:ht from the con- struction of the Greek it is equally as plain and strong. The possessive idea denoted by the geni- tive necessitates that the point of time denoted by 6^^r6 be contained within the time denoted l)y the noun. So here, aa/S/Sdrcov holds 6^fre within its limits, '0^fr€, when constructed with a verb in the infinitive may sometimes mean " after," in the sense of "too late," when referring to an action. But in the case under consideration it can not thus mean. No commentator has attempted to tlius interpret this TIME OF Christ's resurrection. 55 passage except upon the assumption or upon the SKppositio/i that Matthew meant something which he did not say, and that his account must be forced to agree with the other three, and thus give some shadow of support to an inferential "harmony." Nor is the word translated "dawn" opposed to the view here expressed. It is iincficocrKova-r) from ^E7n(f)(o(TKco, This is used but once, besides this, in the New Testament. That use is by Luke,^ where the Passover Sabbath folio winsr the crucifixion is said to "draAV on." Here the term is used concern- ing the da}^ closing at sunset. This is a natural and legitimate translation of the word, and there is no reason why it should not be thus rendered in Mat- thew xxviii. 1. Such a rendering only, agrees with the facts. The Sabbath closed at sunset on the seventh day of the week. At the same hour the first day of the week "drew on," "came in sight," " began to appear." Translators of the New Testa- ment have been more truthful to the correct render- ing than interpreters have been to the correct exe- gesis, as the following facts testify : The Syriac Peshito version, renders this passage, "In the evening of the Sabbath." The Latin of the Vulgate renders it by the same words. Beza's Latin ixxiii, 54. 56 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. translation has the same. Tyndale's translation says : " The Sa])bath-day at even." Coverdale's translation reads. " Upon the evening of the Sabbath holy day." Cranmer's, the Genevan, and the Bishop's versions, all render it, "In the latter end of the Sab- bath-day." The Greek is literally — '* Late in the Sabbath." Rotherhani's Critically Emphasized Ver- sion, says: "And late in [the] week, when it was on the point of dawninsf into [the] the first of [the] week," etc. Alford — Greek Gospels — acknowledges the important fact, but attempts to make Matthew accord with the other evangelists by " supposing " that he meant something different from what he says. These are Alford's words. '* There is some little difficulty here, because the end of the Sabbath (and of the week) locfs at simset the night before. It is hardly to be supposed that Matthew means the evening of the Sabbath, though eTre^wo-Ke is used of the day beginning at sunset.^ It is best to interpret a doubtful expression in unison with other testimonies, and to suppose that here both the daij and the breaking of the day., are taken in their natural.^ not in their Jeivish sense. On Luke xxiii. 54, Alford says : ^ " i7recf>o)a-K€v, ' dreio on^ a natural word, used of the conventional (Jewish) day beginning at sunset. There is no reference to the lighting of candles in the evening, or 1 Luke xxiii. .54, and note. 2 Greek Gospels. TIME OF Christ's resurrection. 57 on the Sabbath. Lightfoot (in loc.) has shown that such a use of the word was common among the Jews who called the evening (the beginning) of a day, 'light.' " The italics in the abo'/e are Alford's. His scholar- ship is far better than his eflbrt to make Matthew's account harmonize with the rest of the Evangelists. His words as a scholar, forbid his supposition as a theologian. There is nothing " doubtful " in the meaning of Matt, xxviii. 1, when it is allowed to say what it does say. About 1865, the writer published the proposition that Christ's entombment occurred on the eveninor of the fourth day of the week, and his resurrection be- fore the close of the Sabbath, and not upon the first day of the week. The proposition was met with a storm of criticism by some, and with careful consideration by others. This interpretation has gained ground steadily, until the highest authorities in New Testa- ment criticism now support it. The revisers of the Ntiw Testament have given it absolute sanction, by translating as above. To place the matter still firther beyond dispute there has lately appeared a " Greek- English Lexicon of the New Testament^ Grimni's wake's Clavis JSTovi Testamenti. Translated, Re- vised and Enlarged, by Joseph Henry Thayer, D. D., Bussey Professor of New Testament Criticism and 58 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. Interpretation in the Divinity School of Harvard University " : in which the construction of ]Matthew xxviii. 1 is fully discussed. After giving the refer- ences which have been adduced in support of the translation "after the Sabbath," Prof. Thayer says : ''But an examination of the instances just cited (and others) will show that thev fail to sustain the rendering after (although it is recognized by Passow, Pape, Schen- kel and other lexicographers) : opk, followed by a geni- tive, seems always to h^ partitive, denoting late in the period specified by the genitive, (and consequently still belonging to it, ) cf. B. sec. 132, 7 Rem. Kuehner sec. 414, c> /?. Hence in Matthew [1. c] late on the Sabbath. Keim. iii. p. 552, seq. [Eng. trans, vi. 303, seq.] endeavors to relieve the passage differently (by adopting the Vulg., vespere Sahhati : on the evening of the Sabbath), but without success. Compare Keil, Com. ueber Matt. Ad loc.'' Thus is the weight of past and present scholarship thrown in favor of the explanation here given. This explanation shows that the prophecy of Christ, and the accounts of the entombment, and of the resurrec- tion agree with extreme fidelity. And the accounts of the Evangelists agree w^ith each other when the fact is thus recognized that, in the opening of the twenty-eighth chapter, Matthew speaks of the first visit to the sepulchre "late in the Sabbath," to which visit the other evangelists do not refer ; they TIME OF Christ's resurrection. 59 describe a second visit made early on the following mornino^. Matthew's account of the first visit evi- dently closes with the eighth verse, and in the ninth he passes to the scenes of the next morning. Thus the following conclusions are fixed. Christ was crucified and entombed on the fourth day of the week^ commonly called Wednesday. He lay in the grave ''three days and tJiree niglits'' and rose ''late in the Sabbath,'' at an hour correspond- ing with the hour of his entombment, at ichich time two of the luomen came to see the sepulchre. There is certain circumstantial evidence which corroborates these conclusions : 1. Since Christ gave the length of time he should lie in the grave as a sign of his Messiahship, any failure in the fulfillment of that sign would have been noted and published by his enemies. The fact that no such charge has ever been made, and only the puerile story of the stealing of the body invented, is evidence that the prophecy was exactly fulfilled. 2. On the day following the crucifixion the Jews went to Pilate, sought a guard for the tomb for three days, and attended to the setting of it. This they would not have done on the weekly Sabbath ; but they would not shrink from doing it on the Passover Sabbath which they observed less strictly. 60 SABBATH AND SUNDAY. 3. The guard was set to cover a time three vclays from the entombment. Until that time expired not even the disciples, much less two lone women, would attempt to reach the tomb to look after the body. Henre the women spoken of in Matthew tioenty- eighth^ came to the tomb with the evident design of being present the moment the guard should be re- moved. On the other hand if the popular theory be correct, Christ was laid in the grave late on the sixth day of the week, the guard was set on the seventh day, and on that same day, scarcely twenty-four hours after the entombment the women are found at the sepul- chre, and Christ is risen. Such conclusions contra- dict the plain statements of the Word, and are out of accord with all the circumstances in the case. A circumstantial "objection " to the explanation here given is made on the claim that the two women would not be likely to make a second visit to the sepulchre on the followin^: mornin