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

    29 THE BIBLE SABBATH

    WE now come to the book of Acts. Those who would follow apostolic example will come with us to this book with peculiar interest. But first we would remark that apostolic example when in harmony with divine precept is clothed with authority. Without precept, it has no real force. Paul and Barnabas had a sharp contention (Acts 15:29), yet no one feels bound to follow their example in this respect. Now if it could be shown that the disciples often assembled in the day-time of the first-day of the week, this would fall far short of proving a change of the Sabbath. But only one text (Acts 20:7) is claimed from the book of Acts for first-day observance, and we have shown from the facts stated in that chapter that the disciples were in meeting the first part of that day - Saturday night - and journeyed the last part - Sunday. We will now show that apostolic example is on the side of the Sabbath.TBI 333.2

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    REVIEW QUESTIONS ON LESSON TWENTY-NINE
    1.When has apostolic example real authority?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    Acts 13:42 “And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next Sabbath.” The Gentiles had no respect for the Sabbath, but, rather, were opposed to the institution honored by the Jews; yet they invited this Christian minister to preach the same discourse to them the next Sabbath. “And the next Sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God.” Verse 44.TBI 334.1

    Chapter 16:13 “And on the Sabbath we went out of the city by a river side, where prayer was wont to be made, and we sat down and spake to the women which resorted thither.” This Sabbath meeting was not held in a Jewish synagogue. Lydia believed, and was baptized, and her household. But was the Sabbath Paul’s regular preaching day? Was this his manner? Let chap. 17:2, answer. “And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three Sabbath days reasoned with them out of the Scriptures.”TBI 334.2

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    REVIEW QUESTIONS ON LESSON TWENTY-NINE
    2. How many texts are quoted to show apostolic example for keeping Sunday?
    3. What does Acts 13:42 show in regard to apostolic example?
    4. What bearing have Acts 16:13, and 17:2, on this question?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    Chap. 18:1-11, contains important testimony on this subject. Paul at Corinth abode with Aquila and Priscilla, and worked with them at tent-making. “And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and Greeks.” Verse 4. How long did he remain at Corinth? “And he continued there a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them.” Verse 11. Here is apostolic example for seventy-eight successive Sabbaths. And it will be seen by verse 5-8, that the apostle occupied the synagogue a part of these Sabbaths, until the Jews opposed and blasphemed, then he went into the house of Justus, where he preached the remaining portion to the Gentiles.TBI 334.3

    That Paul never had, at any time during his ministry, regarded the seventh day of the week as a secular day, and never had regarded the first day of the week as the Sabbath in its stead, is evident from his testimony in the last chapter of the book of Acts, before an assembly of the chief of the Jews at Rome. He addresses them with great boldness thus: “Men and brethren, though I have committed nothing against the people or customs of our fathers, yet was I delivered prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans.” Acts 28:17.TBI 335.1

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    REVIEW QUESTIONS ON LESSON TWENTY-NINE
    5. How many Sabbaths did Paul observe at Corinth?
    6. What is shown by Acts 28:17?
    7. What was the custom of the fathers?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    It was the custom of their “fathers” to observe the seventh day of the week as the Sabbath, concerning which the Jews were very strict in Paul’s day. If the apostle had left the observance of the seventh day, and had given the influence of his teaching and his example in favor of the first day of the week as the Sabbath for Christians, his mouth would have been closed at once after testifying that he done “nothing against the customs of the fathers”. But the closing verses of the book of Acts show that the apostle remained at Rome preaching the gospel with great confidence, unmolested by any one, which could not have been the case had he ceased to be a Sabbatarian. “And Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired house, and received all that came in unto him, preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him.” Verses 30, 31.TBI 335.2

    Here, dear reader, is apostolic example in harmony with that divine precept which was spoken under circumstances of awful grandeur from Sinai, and written with the finger of God, hence it has tremendous force.TBI 336.1

    Christians who take the Bible as the rule of truth and duty freely admit that before Christ, the seventh day of the week was observed in commemoration of the rest of the Creator on the seventh day of the first week after he had complete the six days of creation. This position is fully sustained by the record of the first seventh day, Genesis 2:1-3 and by the Sabbath precept of Exodus 20:8-11.TBI 336.2

    But it is asserted that the work of redemption is greater than the work of creation, and that Christians should no longer observe the seventh day in commemoration of the completion of the work of creation: but they should now observe the first day in commemoration of the completion of the work of redemption at the resurrection of Christ on the first day of the week. These assertions sound out well from Sunday pulpits, and read smoothly in print to those who wish them true; and if they were sustained by the Bible, the Christian world could safely received them. But what spoils this pleasing fable is the fact that there is not a single text in all the word of God to sustain it.TBI 336.3

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    REVIEW QUESTIONS ON LESSON TWENTY-NINE
    8. Then what did Paul’s statement show him to be?
    9. What assertion is made respecting creation and redemption?
    10. Where are the texts of scripture to sustain this?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    Redemption greater than creation? Our first day friends themselves are compelled to admit that God has never said this. What right, then, has any man to make such an assertion, and then base the change of the Sabbath upon it. But suppose that redemption is greater than creation, who knows that we should observe a day of the week to commemorate it? God has not required men to keep any day as a memorial of redemption.TBI 336.4

    But if it were a duty to observe one day of the week for this reason, most certainly the crucifixion day presents the strongest claims. It is not said that we have redemption through the shedding of his blood. “And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof; for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood, out to every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation.” Revelation 5:9. “In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace.” Ephesians 1:7; Colossians 1:14; Hebrews 9:12, 15. Then redemption is through the death of the Lord Jesus; consequently the day on which he shed his precious blood to redeem us, and said, “It is finished,” John 19:30, is the day that should be kept as a memorial of redemption, if any day should be observed for that purpose.TBI 337.1

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    REVIEW QUESTIONS ON LESSON TWENTY-NINE
    11. What right then has any one to assert this?
    12. But if redemption is greater than creation, then what?
    13. If we should keep a day to commemorate redemption, what day should it be?
    14. What was the most remarkable day in the history of the first advent of our Lord?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    Nor can it be pleaded that the resurrection day is the most remarkable day in the history of the first advent of our Lord. It needs but a word to prove that in this respect, it is far exceeded by the day of the crucifixion. Which is the more remarkable, the act of the Father in giving his beloved and only Son to die for a race of rebels, or the act of that Father in raising that beloved Son from the dead? There is only one answer that can be given: It was not remarkable that God should raise his Son from the dead; but the act of the Father in giving his Son to die for sinners was a spectacle of redeeming love on which the universe might gaze, and adore the wondrous love of God to all eternity. Who can wonder that the sun was veiled in darkness, and that all nature trembled at the sight! The crucifixion day, therefore, has far greater claims than the day of the resurrection. But God has not enjoined the observance of either. And is it not a fearful act to make void the commandments of God by that wisdom which is folly in his sight? 1 Corinthians 1:19, 20.TBI 337.2

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    REVIEW QUESTIONS ON LESSON TWENTY-NINE
    15. Is redemption yet finished?
    16. What text from Paul proves this?
    17. What other texts show the same thing?
    18. When will redemption be finished?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    The learned and godly Paul lived, and preached, and wrote after the resurrection of Christ. And he is so far from teaching that the first day of the week should be observed to commemorate redemption that he exhorts the church in view of a future day of redemption. “And grieve not the Holy Spirit of God whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.” Ephesians 4:30. And Christ speaks of his second coming, and the signs of that event, in these words: “And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with power and great glory. And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and left up your heads, for your redemption draweth nigh.” Luke 21:27, 28. The day of redemption is still future. But when the Lord shall appear the second time to finish the plan of redemption to give immortality to all his saints, to remove the curse from the earth, and “make all things new,” then if it please God that the redeemed family shall observe the first, or any other day of the week, to commemorate the completion of redemption, those who observe the Bible Sabbath here will be very happy to take part in that grand celebration. But meanwhile we will be content, while waiting for the day of redemption, to celebrate the Rest of the Lord on the day in which the Creator rested from his work of creation. Our Sunday friends are just one dispensation ahead of time.TBI 338.1

    But if Christians would commemorate our Lord’s death and resurrection, the great events which lie at the very foundation of the plan of human redemption, there is no need of robbing the Lord’s rest-day of its holiness in order to do it. God has provided us with memorials, bearing his own signature; and these we may observe with the blessing of Heaven. Would you commemorated the death of our Lord? You have the Lord’s supper. 1 Corinthians 11:23-26.TBI 339.1

    Would you commemorate the burial and resurrection of the Saviour? You need not keep the first day of the week. The Lord ordained a very different and far more appropriate memorial, in the ordinance of baptism. Romans 6:3-5; Colossians 2:12.TBI 339.2

    The Catholic and Protestant churches have changed this ordinance to sprinkling, so that this divine memorial of the Lord’s resurrection is destroyed. And that they may add sin to sin, they lay hold of the Lord’s Sabbath and change it to the first day of the week, this destroying the sacred memorial of the Creator’s rest, that they may have a memorial of the Christ’s resurrection.TBI 339.3

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    REVIEW QUESTIONS ON LESSON TWENTY-NINE
    19. How much ahead of time, then, are Sunday-keepers?
    20. What true memorials has God given us of the death and resurrection of Christ?
    21. What have both Catholic and Protestant churches done?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    But here we are met by a certain class of opponents of the primeval Sabbath with the assertion that only nine of the ten commandments are given in the New Testament, and that the Sabbath is purposely left out. This view is expressed in different terms. It is sometimes stated that “every other precept of the decalogue is re-affirmed in the New Testament excepting the Sabbath.” And it is not unfrequently the case that ministers will so far presume upon the ignorance and credulity of the people as to affirm that nine of the ten commandments are give verbatim in the New Testament is carefully kept out of the New.TBI 339.4

    We freely admit that the fourth commandment is not given verbatim, that is, word for word, in the New Testament. And it is just as true that only the three short commandments are thus repeated. The sixth, seventh and eighth only are repeated in the New Testament. Does this fact release men from keeping the first, second, third fourth, fifth, ninth and tenth? No, indeed. :Thou shalt not kill; thou shalt not commit adultery; thou shalt not steal,” are the only precepts of the decalogue which are repeated word for word in all the New Testament. Let the most critical eye search this matter fully. We state the facts in the case.TBI 340.1

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    REVIEW QUESTIONS ON LESSON TWENTY-NINE
    22. What assertion do we sometime meet in reference to the commandments?
    23. How is this sometimes expressed even by ministers?
    24. How many commandments are given verbatim in the New Testament?
    25.From what does this release us?
    26. To what must we attribute the above mentioned assertion?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    What, then, can be said of those ministers who will state to audiences hasting to the bar of God to be judged by the moral law, and in the very face of Heaven, that nine of the ten commandments are given verbatim in the New Testament? Their egregious assertions must be attributed either to inexcusable ignorance of the subject, or to the custom of handling the word of God deceitfully. If they are so grossly ignorant of the subject as to shield them from the charge of clerical trickery, and uttering deliberate falsehood in the house of God, they have no business meddling with the subject, until they have studied it.TBI 340.2

    The ten precepts of the moral code did exist from the days of fallen Adam, and were binding on the people before they were spoken from Sinai, and written upon the tables of stone. This is evident from the fact that the Bible contains a record of the very sins which are the violation of each one of the ten commandments, as existing before the law was declared in the hearing of the people at Sinai. Where there is transgression there must be law. Remove law, and sin ceases to exist. “For where no law is, there is no transgression.” Romans 4:15. The sin of Sabbath-breaking was rebuked as early as thirty days before the ten commandments were spoken from Sinai. This fact is fully established by comparing Exodus 16:1, 23-30; 19:1.TBI 341.1

    And there is no intimation in all the Old Testament that God would at any time change any of the precepts of his moral code. That law being in its nature changeless as the very throne of heaven, once written in the Old Testament, accompanied with the record of the circumstances of awful grandeur that attended its rehearsal at Sinai, the Lord has not seen fit to have it written a second time in the New testament. The Holy Ghost never undertook to give the divine law over again on a new account in the New Testament.TBI 341.2

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    REVIEW QUESTIONS ON LESSON TWENTY-NINE
    27. How far back were the precepts of the moral code binding?
    28. What shows this?
    29. What is the statement of Romans 4:15?
    30. How long before Sinai was Sabbath breaking rebuked?
    31. What change of the moral code is intimated in the Old Testament?
    32. Was it necessary that is should be written again in the New Testament?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    The apostles in their writings long years after the death and resurrection of Christ appeal to the moral code as given in the Old Testament as the highest living authority in heaven, or on the earth. They state moral duties and obligations, and refer to the precepts of the moral code to sustain their propositions. If it had been left to Paul, Peter James, John and Jude, to give the moral code, or nine-tenths of it over again in the New Testament, those faithful men would have done it, and we should be able to read those precepts word for word in their writings.TBI 342.1

    Our opponents see as clearly as we do that it is necessary to their position that nine of the ten commandments should appear in the New Testament, word for word. Hence the temptation before the minds of those ministers who feel that they must preserve the unity of their flocks to give a false impression to quiet the minds of the people upon the Sabbath question.TBI 342.2

    This fact crops out in the statement of those opponents who manifest more regard for party than a clear conscience in the statement that nine of the ten commandments are given verbatim in the New Testament. They see the need that it should be so; and feeling it important that the people should view the matter thus, on order that they be shielded from the claims of the fourth commandment, they seem to adopt the policy of the Roman church, that “the end justifies the means,” and give themselves up, even in the house of God, to the utterance of a deliberate untruth.TBI 342.3

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    REVIEW QUESTIONS ON LESSON TWENTY-NINE
    33. To what did the apostles appeal long after the death of Christ?
    34. If the re-enactment of the law had been left to the apostles, what should we find?
    35. What is necessary to the position of our opponents?
    36. What temptation does this put them under?
    37. What acts does it lead them to?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    We stand upon the grand old moral code, the only document in the universe that has the honor to have been spoken by the voice of God in the hearing of the assembled people, and to have been engraven with his finger on the tables of stone. Do our opponents declare that moral code revised, so that only nine of its precepts should be observed by Christians? Then we inquire: What apostle has recorded the fact that this has been done? The Bible is silent upon the subject. No such revision of the moral code has taken place.TBI 343.1

    Do any still urge that the apostles have revised the moral code so as to release men from the claims of the fourth commandment? Then we again inquire: Where is the revised code? What scribe ever copied it? What printer ever printed it? What book-seller ever sold it? What colporteur ever carried it about the country to throw into the laps of the dear children to impress them with the fact that there are nine commandments, and only nine, for Christians to observe?TBI 343.2

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    REVIEW QUESTIONS ON LESSON TWENTY-NINE
    38. Upon what do we stand?
    39. What must our opponents show to move us?
    40. Do those who claim a revision of the moral code, believe in any such revision?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    We are at this time dealing with plain facts in a pointed manner. And, may be, we shall be pardoned by the candid public for inquiring: Do these men who have the moral code revised, or changed in some way, so as to release Christians from the observance of the Sabbath or the fourth commandment, really believe that any such revision has taken place? If they do why not produce a copy of the revised code? Please pass it in, gentlemen. When you will produce the new code, brought into existence by as good authority as that which originated the old, we will be happy to accept it as the moral law for Christians, and cease to agitate the public mind with the Sabbath question. But until you do this, we shall cling to the original document, and plead for the observance of all its precepts by Christian men.TBI 343.3

    Again we inquire: Do these men believe what they say, when they tell the people that the fourth precept of the moral code has been revised, or so changed that Christians are released form the observance of the last day of the week? We make this pointed appeal with the fact in full view, known everywhere, that in the several branches of the mammoth Sunday-school institution the old moral code of ten commandments has been throw into the laps of a million of the dear youth of our land, printed word for word as God spoke it from Sinai, and as he wrote it on the tables of stone. If the divine law has been revised, why do not the managers of the American Tract Society, which has the support of nearly a score of the leading denominations of our land, published the new code for all the Sunday-schools? Why not print the revised code, make a correct impression on the minds of the youth, and free the subject from present embarrassment, if they believe what they teach?TBI 344.1

    It will appear evident to every candid mind that these religious bodies who are printing and circulating the original moral code do not really believe that it has been revised. To say the least, want of faith in the revision doctrine has kept them from getting the several precepts of the revised code together in due form, and publishing it to the Christian world. And so they continue to print the ten commandments just as they read in Exodus 20. We give the two codes side by side:-TBI 344.2

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    REVIEW QUESTIONS ON LESSON TWENTY-NINE
    41. If the ten commandments have been revised and changed, why are they still printed in their old form?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    ORIGINAL CODE.

    1. Thou shalt have no gods before me. 2.Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them; for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me, and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments. 3. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain. 5. Honor thy father and thy mother, that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord God giveth thee. 6. Thou shalt not kill. 7. Thou shalt not commit adultery. 8. Thou shalt not steal. 9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor. 10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s house; thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife, nor his man-servant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighbor’s.TBI 345.1

    REVISED CODE.TBI 345.2

    1. Get thee behind me, Satan; for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. Luke 4:8 2. Then Paul stood in the midst of Mar’s hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all the things ye are too superstitious. For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you. God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of Heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands. Acts 17:22-24. 3. But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by Heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath; but let your yea be yea, and your nay, nay, lest ye fall into condemnation. James 5:12. 5. Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. Honor thy father and mother, which is the first commandment with promise, that it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth. Ephesians 6:1-3. 6. Thou shalt not kill. Romans 13:9. 7. Thou shalt not commit adultery. Romans 13:9. 8. Thou shalt not steal. Romans 13:9. 9. Thou shalt not bear false witness. Romans 13:9. 10. Thou shalt not covet. Romans 13:9.TBI 345.3

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    REVIEW QUESTIONS ON LESSON TWENTY-NINE
    42. In the revised code what is the first commandment?
    43. What scripture is appealed to for the second?
    44. What for the third?
    45. The fifth?
    46. The six, seventh, eighth, ninth and tenth?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    Before calling special attention to the questions which are said to constitute the new code for Christians, we wish to make some general remarks: l.. There is general agreement among our opponents as to the passages in the New Testament which constitute the new code of nine precepts as we have given them. If, however, any feel dissatisfied with these, they are urgently invited to make improvements as shall please them. We are anxious to meet the real positions of opponents.TBI 345.4

    2. All talk about the “re-affirming of the nine commandments,” and the “revised moral code,” is on the supposition that the ten commandments, were abrogated at the death of Christ. Mark this: The position is that all ten of the commandments were in full force up to the time of the death of Christ, and that, with the death of the world’s Redeemer; the moral code also died.TBI 346.1

    3. As the decalogue was the living moral code throughout the entire ministry of the Son of God until the hour of his death upon the cross, it would be more than childish to quote any of Christ’s words spoken during his public ministry, as re-affirming any of its precepts. Whatever, therefore, may be claimed from the New Testament as re-affirming nine of the precepts of the decalogue, must be found in the Acts and Epistles of the apostles.TBI 346.2

    4. But, bad for their theory, this gives a period between the death of the moral code at the cross and the re-affirming of the nine precepts by the apostles, in which there is no law. And “where no law is, there is no transgression”. Romans 4:15. This view gives a sinless period to the world of more than twenty long years. Not sinless however because of any change in men; but because of the supposed decease of God’s Moral Detector, “For by the law is the knowledge of sin.” Romans 3:20.TBI 346.3

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    REVIEW QUESTIONS ON LESSON TWENTY-NINE
    47. If the decalogue was ever abrogated, when was it done?
    48. Where then must we look for a re-affirming of that law?
    49. According to this how long a period intervened between the abolishing and re-enactment?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    Beginning with the first, we now briefly notice the passages which these gentlemen who have the divine law abolished, and a part of it re-enacted, would have the Christian world believe are the new code for the Christian age. For their first commandment they cite Luke 4:8 The reader will please notice the passage as we have placed it in juxtaposition with the original first commandment of the decalogue. But right here these gentlemen face fearful absurdities.TBI 346.4

    1. According to their position, the first commandment for the Christian church was addressed to the devil. We naturally inquire whether this Christian precept was given for the especial benefit of his Satanic majesty? Or did the great Head of the church give the second edition of the first commandment to the Christian church through the devil?!TBI 347.1

    2. The original first commandment was announced from Sinai by the voice of the Lord, as the trembling people stood before the burning, quaking, mountain. The scene was awfully grand. But in this case the first commandment was re-affirmed in the wilderness of temptation when but two beings were present; one the Son of God in his humility; the other the devil! :Be ye astonished, O ye heavens, at this! Right here, in the desolate wilderness, we are told, the first commandment of the divine law was re-affirmed to the Christian church through the devil!!TBI 347.2

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    REVIEW QUESTIONS ON LESSON TWENTY-NINE
    50. What was the condition of the world during this period?
    51. According to the revised code, to whom was the first commandment addressed?
    52. How long was it before the original first precept was abolished?
    53. How many commandments then were there during that period?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    3. But as the very climax of all absurdities, the position of these gentlemen has the first commandment re-affirmed at the commencement of Christ’s ministry, at least three years and a half before the supposed decease of the ten at the close of his ministry. This gives eleven commandments for the period of three and a half years! And if, according to our law-abolishing friends, all the precepts of the divine law were swept by the board at the cross, clean work was made, not only of the ten, but of the one prematurely re-affirmed to Satan, leaving the Christian church but eight precepts in the new moral code, instead of nine, and the devil not one!TBI 347.3

    So much for the first precept of the new code. And of the second re-affirmed precept we will here state that it is simply a record of facts in Paul’s visit and labors in Athens that is given in Acts 17:22-24, having no form of a precept whatever. Neither can the second precept of the decalogue be found in any of the books of the New Testament. Reference is made to the sin of violating the second commandment, and Christians are warned against it; but we search in vain for the second precept of the decalogue in the New Testament.TBI 348.1

    When the second commandment has been urged against the images of the Romish church, Papists have proudly trampled it under their feet as a Jewish precept, declaring that it was not in the New Testament. Hence the second commandment is left out of their numerous catechisms. And now a host of Protestants use the same old papal argument to excuse their practice relative to the fourth commandment. When we urge the claims of the Sabbath law upon Protestants, they in their turn reply, “The Sabbath precept is not given in the New Testament.”TBI 348.2

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    REVIEW QUESTIONS ON LESSON TWENTY-NINE
    54. And then what took place at the cross?
    55. What is the so-called second precept in the revised code?
    56. What is the position of the Romish church on the second commandment?
    57. How does the position of some Protestants on the fourth commandment compare with this?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    But if it be still urged that Paul did re-affirm the second precept of the decalogue from Mar’s Hill for the Christian church, then we reply that there is no evidence that there was a single follower of Christ in the city of Athens to hear it. Read Acts chapter seventeen. It was when Paul’s attendants had returned to Berea, leaving the apostle alone, that he addressed the people. And did the great apostle then and there re-affirm the second precept of the decalogue for the Christian church through the curious, Christless crowd of that city wholly given to idolatry, and not one Christian present?TBI 348.3

    And further it may be worthy of note that Paul’s speech at Mar’s Hill was full twenty years after the death of Christ. If, therefore, the decalogue was abrogated at the cross, and the second precept was really re-affirmed in the apostle’s memorable address at Athens, all men were released from the second commandment for the space of twenty years!TBI 349.1

    We pass to the third commandment, and again call the reader’s attention to the old moral code, and to those passages supposed to constitute the new Christian code, as we have placed them side by side on page 345. Please read the two, and then answer the inquiries. Has the apostle James re-affirmed the third commandment in the text quoted? If he has, why change the language employed? Has the apostle improved upon the style of the High and Holy only? The Friends, and thousands besides, hold that the apostle here opposes the judicial oath. He probably refers to that which is forbidden by the third commandment, but it is preposterous to say that the apostle is here resurrecting the third commandment, and giving it over a second time for the Christian church.TBI 349.2

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    REVIEW QUESTIONS ON LESSON TWENTY-NINE
    58. How many followers of Christ were there in Athens to hear Paul’s revision of the second commandment?
    59. What may be said of the revised third commandment from the book of James?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    The apostle claimed no such thing; but in the same epistle he says: “There is one Lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy.” If the work of revising, or re-affirming the moral code, was left to the apostles, then there were twelve lawgivers instead of one, as affirmed by the apostle. James 4:12. He wrote A.D. 60. Was there no third commandment for more than a quarter of a century?TBI 349.3

    We pass to the fifth precept. Paul states a moral duty, and cites the fifth commandment as his authority. He is not re-affirming the fifth precept of the decalogue in his letter to the church at Ephesus, therefore does not repeat it verbatim and entire. See page 345. This epistle was written A.D. 64. Did the fifth commandment lie dead, from the blow it received at the death of Christ, for more than thirty years?TBI 350.1

    The sixth, seventh and eighth precepts are repeated in Paul’s epistle to the church at Rome verbatim. And why? Is it because the apostle is re-affirming them, or giving them over again on a new account? No! He is doing no such thing! If this work of re-affirming nine of the precepts of the decalogue had been left to the trusty men who wrote the New Testament, we should find all nine precepts in the New Testament word for word.TBI 350.2

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    REVIEW QUESTIONS ON LESSON TWENTY-NINE
    60. How many lawgivers does James set forth?
    61. Why does not Paul to the Ephesians give the fifth commandment verbatim?
    62. Where are the sixth, seventh and eighth precepts found verbatim?
    63. Why are they thus given?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    These three short precepts only of all the ten are quoted verbatim, because of their brevity. The writers of the New Testament state moral duties, and appeal to the moral code, which was to them in the first century, and is to us in the nineteen century, the highest authority in all heaven and earth. Paul’s letter to the Romans was written A.D. 60. Were the precepts against murder, adultery and theft lying dead more than twenty-five years?TBI 350.3

    We now come to the last, the tenth. What difference between the two! See page 345. There is in the old edition the sum of thirty-three good words. But in what is supposed to be the new, re-affirmed precept, there are only the first four words of the old. Was the Lord too lengthy in the first edition, making it necessary for the learned apostle to improve upon his work? Or, was “the law of the Lord perfect” as it came from its Author, and was Paul unfaithful to duty? These inquiries are made on the supposition that it was left to Paul to re-affirm the tenth commandment for the benefit of the Christian church. But no; the apostle assumed no such position as belonging to a fraternity of lawgivers. He simply cites the tenth precept of the decalogue, quotes enough of it to be understood, and honors it, a quarter of a century after the death of Christ, as resting on its original, immutable basis, the highest living authority in the universe.TBI 351.1

    Driven from the position that all the precepts of the divine law, excepting the fourth, are re-affirmed in the New Testament, this class of opponents are compelled to admit that in the case of the second commandment reference is made only to the principle or facts upon which the precept is based. This is all they can possibly maintain. When fairly and squarely on this ground, then we are prepared to say to them that the term “Sabbath,” in the singular number, which expresses the very institution sustained by the fourth precept of the moral code, is mentioned fifty-nine times in the New Testament.TBI 351.2

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    REVIEW QUESTIONS ON LESSON TWENTY-NINE
    64. In the tenth commandment, old edition, how many words are there?
    65. How many in the new?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    So that when it comes to this, that in some of the nine precepts reference is made by the apostles to only the principle or fact which gave rise to the precept, then it will be seen that Sabbatarians are ahead, having fifty-nine references to the Sabbath of the fourth commandment in the New Testament. Can as many references be shown from the New Testament to any other one of the ten precepts of the decalogue? Search and see.TBI 352.1

    But why labor to dodge the point? The Sabbath is either abrogated, or it is not. The Sabbath is not partly right and partly wrong. It has either been changed from the seventh to the first day of the week, or it has not been changed. We should observe the first day of the week as the Christian Sabbath, or we should not. We should observe the seventh day, or we should not.TBI 352.2

    Where is the plain proof from the New Testament that the Sabbath has been abrogated or changed? What prophet of God has declared that the moral code of the Infinite One should be abolished, or changed? And what apostle has stated in plain terms that anything of this kind has taken place? But Christ, in his memorable sermon on the mount seems to anticipate the discussion of the law question in the Christian church, and as a rebuke of wrong positions upon the subject, and as a guide to correct thoughts, says: “Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets; I am not come to destroy but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” “And let all the people say Amen.”TBI 352.3

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    REVIEW QUESTIONS ON LESSON TWENTY-NINE
    66. What conclusion does this lead to?
    67. What advantage do Sabbath keepers still have in reference to the Sabbath?
    68. What language of Christ should guide us on this subject?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------

    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents