Loading...
Larger font
Smaller font
Copy
Print
Contents
  • Results
  • Related
  • Featured
No results found for: "".
  • Weighted Relevancy
  • Content Sequence
  • Relevancy
  • Earliest First
  • Latest First
    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents

    January 29, 1884

    “Impossible” Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 61, 5, p. 68.

    BY ELD. A. T. JONES

    WE are all familiar with the true saying of Alexander Campbell, that the Sabbath could not be changed “unless creation were gone through with again.” It is conceivable that by that means the Sabbath could be changed to another day. But I conceive, or think I do at least, that we may go a step farther, and inquire whether there is any one day of the week to which the Sabbath could not be changed, or upon which the Sabbath could not be placed.ARSH January 29, 1884, page 68.1

    Let us begin with Alexander Campbell’s conception, that creation is to be gone through with again for the purpose of changing the Sabbath, and that the present creation is relegated again to chaos. The Lord proceeds to create again. He might employ more than six days, or more than seven, in the work of creation; then if he should rest on the eighth or ninth day, that eighth or ninth would be the Sabbath, the rest-day; or however large the number of days which he might employ in the work, when he should finish and rest, the day upon which he should rest would be the Sabbath, whether it be the tenth, the hundredth, or the thousandth day. Or, he might employ five days in creation, and rest the sixth; then the sixth would be the Sabbath; or employ four days, and rest the fifth, or three days, and rest the fourth, or two days, and rest the third, or one day, and rest the second, then the fifth, the fourth, the third, or the second day, as the case might be, would be the Sabbath, the rest-day. But suppose, to please the orthodox of the present day, it be desired to change it to the first day, can it be done? It cannot; for the day on which creation was performed, would of consequence and necessarily be the first day, and the same day cannot be both a working day and a rest-day. It matters not how small a portion of the day might be employed in the work, however small it might be, it would effectually destroy the possibility of its being made a rest-day. For, to be a rest-day, the whole of the day would have to be spent in rest. Therefore, upon the hypothesis of creation being gone through with again, we can conceive a change of the Sabbath. But even upon that hypothesis we cannot conceive of a possibility of changing it to the first day.ARSH January 29, 1884, page 68.2

    In a great many instances we think the papal church has outdone every other system in the absurdity of its errors. But in this she has fairly outdone herself in absurdity. For of all days which can be conceived of, she has chosen the very one, and the only one, which is entirely shut out from all conceivable possibility of ever being made a Sabbath (I write it with reverence) even by the Lord himself. For, as it is impossible for God to lie (Titus 1:2), he cannot say that he rested a day upon which he had worked even a part of the day.ARSH January 29, 1884, page 68.3

    Consequently here again the man of sin has exalted himself above God, in adopting and passing off, solely upon his own authority (because all other authority is excluded), an institution which cannot by any possibility be true, and therefore how appropriately that one thing is pointed out as the “mark of the beast,” and how well those are described as worshipers of the beast who, contrary to Scripture, reason, and all persuasion, will observe the institution above all else. And so God is just in declaring against them, and visiting upon them the plagues of his wrath; because the very thing that by ever possibility is excluded, the beast has adopted, and they with pains and penalties have enforced.ARSH January 29, 1884, page 68.4

    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents