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

    THE DISCUSSION

    First Session

    ELD. GRANT’S FIRST SPEECH

    Mr. Chairman, ladies and Gentlemen: The subject that has brought us together is one of some interest, and one that has agitated the public mind in this city for some weeks and months past. We are aware that there are those who think the discussion of religious subject is not profitable. We think otherwise, or we would not be engaged in it. I would like to just read a statement from Dr. Cummings, of London, on the point of religious discussions. He says, “The greatest blessings have been achieved by discussion. Error suffers in the ordeal; truth ever does; the dross only is consumed, while the gold comes out more brilliant more precious, more pure. Many deprecate controversy, and think it fitted for the battle-field; not for the peaceful pastures of the gospel. We think differently. In politics, agitation, in religion, stagnation, is the peril. What we have to fear in religion is, not life—that is, activity, but death, or formality. Give us life—life with its excesses, rather than silence, and with it corruption and death.” We have some worthy examples of discussion. I recollect our divine Master, at twelve years of age, was engages disputing with the doctors. I read that Paul disputed daily in the school of Tyrannus, and sometimes had scenes quite exciting. Luther, Melancthon, and their associates, at the Reformation, did much by discussion. It is true that discussions may be so conducted as to be unpleasant, and unprofitable. Whenever disputants say harsh things to each other—talk unkindly, it is unpleasant and unprofitable. I trust the audience will not be grieved in this way during this discussion.DSQ69 7.1

    The subject, I say, is somewhat important, especially, viewed from our brother’s standpoint. It is thought by some that this Sabbath question is the third angel’s message; and, if so, it is a very important matter; for if we turn to Revelation, we find that those who do not heed the proclamation are to receive the mark of the beast; i.e., those who keep the first day instead of Saturday—the Jewish Sabbath—as a day of rest. So that the question is, whether we shall keep the present day of rest, the first day of the week, so called the Lord’s day, or whether we shall keep Saturday as the Sabbath. So if it is a fact that the proclamation of this seventh day is the third angel’s message, and we do not heed it, then that mark of the beast is upon us; and those with that mark are in a very sad condition. So we say, looking at it from this standpoint, it is time it is investigated.DSQ69 8.1

    The question, as you heard it stated, is this: “Resolved, That the Sabbath was binding only on the Jews and their servants, after their deliverance from Egyptian bondage.”DSQ69 8.2

    We remark here at the outset that we do not find any proof from Scripture that Adam kept the Sabbath. His first day was the Creator’s seventh day, but we find no evidence in Scripture, though he lived 930 years, that he ever was required to keep the Sabbath, or seventh day. If our brother knows a passage that teaches it, he will present it in due time.DSQ69 8.3

    Tertullian, in his discussion with the Jews, challenges them to prove that Adam ever kept the Sabbath. If they cannot prove it, I do not know who can any better than they, for they were certainly familiar with the subject.DSQ69 9.1

    This is also true of Enoch, who walked with God, and was translated. There is no evidence that that good man was required to keep the Sabbath.DSQ69 9.2

    What was true of Adam and Enoch was true of Melchisedec, a very noted person, priest and king, standing high as an example of Christian character and virtue, but there is no intimation that he kept the seventh-day Sabbath.DSQ69 9.3

    With Abraham commences the circumcision; but there is no mention of a Sabbath to him. The same is true of Isaac and Jacob. These are the “fathers,” so declared by the apostles. If they all, up to the time of Abraham, had no Sabbath enjoined upon them, or if they did have a Sabbath enjoined upon them, we may inquire, Why was it not mentioned somewhere? Other duties and commandments are specified clearly and positively. We say, if previous to this time a Sabbath was enjoined upon them, Why is there not some mention made of it somewhere? Let my brother tell us.DSQ69 9.4

    It is also true of Job; and when we come down to Job, we get down to the neighborhood of Moses.Indeed, they were cotemporaries, Job living earlier.DSQ69 9.5

    Now we come to the Israelites, or children of Israel, in Egypt. Thus far we have been able to find no proof that any man was required to keep the Sabbath from creation down to the children of Israel in Egypt, in the days of Moses. Had the Israelites been commanded to keep the Sabbath before they went to Egypt, there is no reason why they would not have kept it, for after their backslidden state arrived, in the days of Antiochus, they endured great afflictions rather than break the Sabbath. So we conclude that if it had been commanded before they went there, they would have observed it in spite of Pharaoh, and taken the consequences. We think Joseph would not have failed to observe the Sabbath, had he learned of it before he went into Egypt. There is no record that they taught it to the Egyptians, or kept it when they might have kept it. If there is such a record, let it come. Now we have got down 2500 years, and there is no mention made of the Sabbath yet as a day enjoined upon man to be kept. And God’s people did not observe it; and if they did, there is no record of it. Why not? Because the event had not transpired that called it forth. It is evident that Israel made no scruple of journeying on the seventh day till the law was given from Mt. Sinai, and that was the eleventh station from Egypt. In the preamble to the Sabbath, in the week before they kept it, they were commanded to gather twice as much manna as usual, on Friday, enough, to last over the Sabbath. This is a sort of preamble then. The commandment had not then been given, and some of them do not understand it, and went out to gather it on the Sabbath day, and did not find it. Previous to that they were to gather only for the day; not to last on the second day; if so, it would decay, and become offensive; but when they came to this time, they were to gather enough on Friday to last over the Sabbath; and it did not decay, as on former times—a miraculous manifestation.DSQ69 9.6

    This resting of Israel was the first sanctification of the Sabbath mentioned in the Bible. We come to the conclusion then that no Sabbath was observed before Moses, the time of the deliverance of Israel from Egyptian bondage; and as there is no evidence that the Gentiles kept the Sabbath therefore we think a part of the, resolution is established any way—that it was binding only on the Jews after they came out of Egyptian bondage.DSQ69 10.1

    After the going forth of the commandment, Moses says, Deuteronomy 5:15, “Remember that thou was a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the Lord thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand, and a stretched out arm, therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the Sabbath day. “Therefore,” for that reason. Why? They had been in bondage as Servants, making brick without straw, an oppressive bondage—work, work, work, no end. He is going to let them have a rest day in commemoration of his taking them out of Egyptian bondage.DSQ69 11.1

    It may be objected that there are some other “therefores.” We turn to Deuteronomy 24:17, 18. “Thou shalt not pervert the. Judgment of the stranger, nor the fatherless, nor take a widow’s raiment to pledge, but remember that thou wast a bondman, and the Lord thy God redeemed thee thence; therefore, he commanded thee to do this thing.” Why? You remember you were a stranger and in bondage.DSQ69 11.2

    Then again Leviticus 19:33, and onward: “And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not vex him. But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; foe ye were strangers in the land of Egypt; I am the Lord your God. Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment, in meteyard, in weight, or in measure. Just balances, just weights, a just ephah, and a just hin, shall ye have; I am the Lord your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt. Therefore shall ye observe all my statutes, and all my judgments, and do them; I am the Lord.” You remember you were strangers and bondmen in Egypt; keep these in mind. And the Sabbath, as a commemorative or memorial day of that deliverance, was to be kept by them. The Gentiles were never delivered out of Egyptian bondage, neither were they required to keep the day. The Jews were not required to keep it before that, for the institution could not be established before the event transpired which it was to commemorate. We say it is a memorial day to the Jews. Let me look at this once more. “Remember thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the Lord thy God brought thee out thence with a mighty hand and a stretched-out arm, therefore,”—for this reason—“the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the Sabbath day”—the rest day. Why did he take that day? Because on that day he rested himself, and he chose the rest day that he had, and gave it to them to commemorate their deliverance out of Egyptian bondage.DSQ69 11.3

    Ezekiel 20:10-12: “Wherefore, I caused them to go forth out of the land of Egypt, and brought them into the wilderness. And I gave them my statutes, and shewed them my judgments, which if a man do, he shall even live in them. Moreover, also I gave them my sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the Lord that sanctify them.” “Between me and them” not everybody, not the Gentiles. Who were “them”? The ones to whom the reasons were given: the Jews—they have that advantage.DSQ69 12.1

    In Exodus 31:15, 16; we read: “Six days may work be done, but in the seventh is the Sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord; whosoever doeth any work on the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.” With the law goes the penalty: the penalty is abolished, is the law is still in force? Does my brother claim that the penalty is still in force? We have yet to learn that the law is in force after the penalty is abolished. “Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to observe the Sabbath throughout the generations, for a perpetual convent.” “The children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath.” Does that mean the Gentiles? The Gentiles are never called Israel. To observe the Sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant. I wish to quote a statement from my brother: “When a law is once enacted by proper authority, it must—[Time.]DSQ69 12.2

    ELD CORNELL’S FIRST SPEECH

    Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen: In engaging with my brother in the investigation of the question before us, I am happy to enter into it with this thought, that we are engaging with one who is not a novice in discussion, but one who is considered one of the ablest in the field upon any of those questions which he has investigated, and we shall with confidence look for positive proof to sustain the affirmative of this proposition, if such proof can be found.DSQ69 13.1

    In his first speech upon this question, the affirmative has made many negations. He has asserted that there is no proof of this, that, and the other; that is, he has based an argument on the silence of Scripture. Adam never kept the Sabbath. This is his first position. After a few preliminary remarks, he says: Did Adam ever keep the Sabbath? No. Why not? Because the Scripture nowhere declares that he kept it; there is no account of its being enjoined upon him, no commandment there, no text that says Adam ever kept the Sabbath, and hence the inference is that he did not keep it.DSQ69 13.2

    Now in regard to this argument, we want to examine it a moment, and see whether it will do. That which proves too much, proves nothing. This argument, then, on this point, based upon the silence of Scripture, proves too much; for it proceeds upon the supposition that nothing was obligatory, or believed, in the period covered by the history of book of Genesis, except that which is plainly recorded. This rule would prove that the duty of love to God and our neighbor was obligatory during the first two thousand years, for there is not a single text in the book of Genesis to prove that such precept was in force; there is no record of any such precept. There is no proof that Adam was under obligations to love the Lord with all his heart, or his neighbor himself. Shall we infer, therefore, that he was not under such obligation?DSQ69 14.1

    Then again, notice the matter of sacrifices. There is no mention made of sacrifices from the time of Abel till the deluge, a period of fifteen hundred years. But does that prove that they were not offered?DSQ69 14.2

    Then again, circumcision. We read nothing of circumcision from the death of Moses till Jeremiah, a period of eight hundred years. Was it not performed throughout this time?DSQ69 14.3

    Then again, the ordinance of the red heifer. It is not once noticed from the period of the Pentateuch to the close of Old Testament; but the apostle refers to it, and argues for it, as a write well known and in constant use. We have no account where sacrifices were first instituted; yet no one doubts that they were instituted immediately after the fall. Why, then, deny that the Sabbath was first sanctified at the end of creation week, as we find, in Genesis, second chapter, the record of the institution of the Sabbath in the very beginning? Now, my friend will not deny that sacrifices were obligatory from the very beginning, though we have no record of their institution. But we have a record of the sabbatic institution. We have it plainly recorded in Genesis 2:3, that God rested on the seventh day, and sanctified it, because that in it he had rested. There is the account of the instituting of Sabbath; and when we come down to the fourth commandment, it points right back to the creation week for the reasons for keeping it. It rests right upon that fact: for in six days the Lord made the heavens, the earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and he rested on the seventh day, and hallowed it. The fourth commandment points right back to the creation. The reasons given on Mount Sinai, were reasons that had been in existence from creation. Taking the record of its institution and comparing it with the commandment, we find positive proof that it was instituted from the beginning of the world, though we may not have a positive statement of the matter during that history, for you know the history is exceedingly brief. What if we have not a direct mention of it? Many things we have not a direct mention of. All that we have concerning Enoch, a man worthy to be translated to Heaven, is that “Enoch walked with God; and he was not, for God took him.” If he had lived now-a-days, volumes would have been written; and this shows why many things were not mentioned.DSQ69 14.4

    But again, the Sabbath is not mentioned after the law was given, for a long period of time; yet the affirmative admits that it was binding; but it is not mentioned there for the space of several hundred years. There is no mention made of the Sabbath in Joshua, Ruth, First and Second Samuel, and First Kings, which are so much more detailed than Genesis, and yet it was during the Mosaic law, when, it is admitted, it was in full force.DSQ69 15.1

    Then, there is the resurrection and a future Judgment day. They are not mentioned in the book of Genesis. Shall we therefore infer that they were not believed, because they are not mentioned? Genesis is a book of history, not of law. Moreover, its history is exceedingly brief. Now, if there were no proof that the Sabbath did exist from the beginning, the silence of Genesis would be no proof that it was not in force, for there are many other things, which my friend and myself will agree were in force, that were not mentioned. But we have positive proof that the Sabbath did exist, and the reasons God gave when he gave the commandment on Mount Sinai, had existed from the creation; so the fourth commandment states. So much, then, for the silence of Scripture, which proves too much, and therefore does not prove anything.DSQ69 16.1

    Again he says, which I cannot help thinking is a mistake, that the institution of the Sabbath is not hinted at in the book of Genesis. It does not say the Sabbath, in Genesis, but says the seventh day: “And God rested the seventh day.” What is the Sabbath? God says the seventh day is the Sabbath. It signifies rest. When it speaks of God’s resting on the seventh day; it is the same as if it had said he rested on the Sabbath day, for that made it the Sabbath day. So the Sabbath of the Lord did exist from the end of creation week, and there it is hinted at, and also blessed and hallowed from that time. It was blessed and sanctified because that in it he had rested from his works. First, it was a rest day. Second, he blessed and sanctified it, because that in it he had rested. Therefore you see, when you look at the commandment pointing right back to creation week, that it is certain the Sabbath had existed from creation.DSQ69 16.2

    But again, the affirmative says that this rest of Israel was the first sanctification of the Sabbath. But go back to the second chapter of Genesis. Has he ever read it? Does it say, “Sanctified the seventh day”? Certainly it does. Then that is not the first of its being sanctified. It was sanctified from the beginning. As much as to say, he set it apart to a holy use. To whose use? Man’s use. He set apart the seventh day for man’s, not for his own, use, after he had rested upon it; then he sanctifies and sets it apart to a holy, religious use. If that be the fact, he must have informed his people in regard to it. Though we have no record of the commandment, yet we have the record that such a proclamation was made. We don’t need a record of the proclamation, if we have God’s word that he had sanctified it. That proves that the proclamation was made to man; for in no way can it be set apart for the use of man, except by a proclamation of the fact.DSQ69 17.1

    Now for the argument from Deuteronomy 5:15: “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,” and on the strength of which my brother says the Sabbath was a memorial of deliverance from Egyptian bondage. As we have said before, that which proves too much, proves nothing. The Sabbath could not be a memorial of the departure from Egypt. These words were spoken, by Moses, forty years after the deliverance. This was the final appeal of Moses—an appeal to a people who had so generally violated the Sabbath. Now, is it not very strange, if the Sabbath were a memorial of the deliverance from Egypt, that Moses did not tell them of it till forty years afterward, and when he did mention the coming out of Egypt, he said not a word about the Sabbath’s being a memorial of it? This is purely the inference of my brother. We inquire whether it was not an appeal to their gratitude for such mercies. We may settle the matter, for we have an exact parallel to this text. He has quoted one. Deuteronomy 24:17, 18: “Thou shalt not pervert the judgment of the stranger, nor of the fatherless; nor take a widow’s raiment to pledge: but thou shalt remember that thou wast a bondman in Egypt, and the Lord thy-God redeemed thee thence: therefore I command thee to do this thing.” If the first quotation proves that the Sabbath was a memorial of the coming out of Egypt, this proves that not to pervert judgment, etc., is a memorial of their departure out of Egypt, and that it was not binding before. My brother infers, because of this language, that the Sabbath was not in force before this time. The same argument will prove that this obligation was not in force before this time, for the same language precisely is used with reference to it. If one is a memorial, the other is.DSQ69 17.2

    If such an appeal proves that the Sabbath was not obligatory upon them until they were delivered from Egypt, it proves the same in the other case, that justice, mercy, etc., were not. But if we take the fact that they were an appeal to the gratitude of a rebellious people, all is consistent. God had shown them great favors, and now he required them to show that they remembered what he had done for them, by obeying him in all things.DSQ69 18.1

    We inquire, How did they come out of Egypt? The first-born of the Egyptians were slain, and there was great excitement. Exodus 12:33: “And the Egyptians were urgent upon the people, that they might send them out of the land in haste; for they said, We be all dead men.”DSQ69 19.1

    Thus they came out of Egypt with their stock and luggage at midnight, with one grand rush; and so he makes the Sabbath, a day of quiet and rest, a memorial of a great rush!DSQ69 19.2

    [Time.]

    ELD. GRANT’S SECOND SPEECH

    Touching the last point: the Sabbath is not to commemorate the travel from Egypt, but the labor and the tasks they had to endure there. Not because they came but in a hurry, but because ye were bondmen in Egypt, therefore, I commanded you to keep the seventh day.DSQ69 19.3

    The silence of the Scriptures is thought not to prove anything. Well, really, that is new theology to me. I supposed that what the Scriptures did not enjoin, was not binding upon any body. And I think so still, Mr. Chairman.DSQ69 19.4

    “Nothing obligatory not commanded.” “We are not commanded to love God before we come to Mt. Sinai.” Perhaps he knows, certainly he does, that there was nothing written of that book before you come to Sinai. Moses was the first writer, so there could not be anything written about loving God before there was anything written.DSQ69 19.5

    “There was no mention of sacrifice.” Of course not. Nobody wrote in that till you come to Moses, 2500 years from creation.DSQ69 19.6

    He refers back to Genesis 2:3. God rested on the seventh day, blessed it and sanctified it. It does not say he sanctified all the seventh days, from that time. He sanctified it; he blessed it.DSQ69 20.1

    “The reason for keeping the Sabbath exists from, creation.” Let us see, and look it over again. Deuteronomy 5:15. “Remember”—observe, this is right in connection with the reading of the ten commandments, the preceding verses reading, “Six days thou shalt labor, and do all thy work,” etc. “And remember”—he puts it right in there in connection with that fourth commandment, right by its side, that they might understand and remember the object of it—“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”—therefore; for that reason—“the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the Sabbath day.” Not Adam. Adam was not brought out of Egypt with a high hand, neither was Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, nor Job. “Therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the Sabbath day.”DSQ69 20.2

    Turn now to our friend’s position—the text which he thinks proves too much. We cannot see but that it is in perfect harmony. Let us read it once more. Deuteronomy 24:17, 18: “Thou shalt not pervert the judgment of the stranger”—mark the point, a stranger—“nor of the fatherless, nor take a widow’s raiment to pledge; but thou shalt remember that thou wast a bondman in Egypt.” Go right back, in harmony with this, to Deuteronomy 5. “Remember that thou wast a servant;” therefore he hath commanded you to do this thing; because you were bondmen in Egypt, therefore hath he given you a day to commemorate that wonderful deliverance, when he brought you through the Red Sea and the wilderness, to Mt. Sinai, to the eleventh station; and I want you to remember what he has been doing for you. Look where you were some weeks or months ago. No wonder God instituted a day to have them remember it—one of the mightiest works God has ever done for his people on this planet. If there are other days to commemorate events of less importance, it seems that this ought to be observed.DSQ69 20.3

    Again, in Leviticus 19:33-37: “And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not vex him; but the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be as one born amongst you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt. I am the Lord your God.... Therefore shall ye observe all my statutes, and all my judgments, and do them.”DSQ69 21.1

    Here is a reminder of their condition in Egypt. Therefore I want you to remember other strangers, and keep this day to commemorate your deliverance. All is in perfect harmony; there is no proving too much about it; it only adds to the proof, because it is a fact the Sabbath is not commanded nor enjoined on a single man from Adam’s first day down to Moses, 2500 years; and yet our brother claims the silence of Scripture as no proof in this matter.DSQ69 21.2

    He says the resurrection is not taught; Christ found it in the writings of Moses, where the angel declared at the bush a certain thing.DSQ69 21.3

    He says there is positive proof that the Sabbath did exist, and that we remarked that there was no proof. Perhaps he misunderstood us. We meant to say that there was no proof that any man was required to keep the Sabbath. We do not dispute that the seventh day was mentioned.DSQ69 21.4

    “The Sabbath not hinted at for 2500 years.” I did not mean that. I meant, not hinted at as an ordinance, or a day to be kept by man. That is the point. My brother has not brought it yet.DSQ69 22.1

    “The first sanctification of the Sabbath at Mt. Sinai.” I said it was the first time it was sanctified for man. He misunderstood again; for he seems to think I ignore the sanctification of the Sabbath at creation. I mean as a rest-day for man, as when in the wilderness they gathered twice as much manna on Friday as on Thursday.DSQ69 22.2

    “No record of such a command.” He says, “Such a proclamation was made to man.” Mr. Chairman, there is no proof. The assertion is made that such a proclamation was made to man; the proof is wanted. Where is the proof? 2500 years afterward is the first mention that he had sanctified it. Is this certain proof that he proclaimed it to one man before Moses wrote it?DSQ69 22.3

    “The Sabbath is not a memorial of their deliverance.” Why, here, we have it—“Remember.” I think it is equivalent to a memorial in the case. Moses said nothing about a memorial; he said, Remember.DSQ69 22.4

    These are the points, so far as I have noted them; and I must confess I do not feel there is any special weight in them. And I may as well remark that on this question my brother is emphatically posted. Probably no man in the United States is better; so it is pleasant to know that the one on the opposite side is well posted; and if he cannot make it plain, no one can. And so it is pleasant; and I think we shall have a pleasant talk about the matter.DSQ69 22.5

    Now we will come down to where we left off before. Exodus 16: “Six days ye shall gather it; but on the seventh day, which is the Sabbath, in it there shall be none.”DSQ69 23.1

    Also Exodus 31:15: “Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the Sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord. Whosoever doeth any work in the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.” I think there is no man that is keeping the Sabbath day in the United States now. Not a man. What constitutes keeping it? Keeping it in harmony with all the requirements. That is what constitutes the keeping of it. And so, I doubt most seriously, whether there is a man or women keeping the seventh-day Sabbath in harmony with God’s requirements. “Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to observe the Sabbath throughout their generations for a perpetual covenant.”DSQ69 23.2

    I want to turn to that statement from my brother again: “When a law is once enacted by proper authority, it must remain in force till the same authority repeals it; and the repeal must be as plainly stated as the original enactment.” Keep that in mind.DSQ69 23.3

    Turn now to Exodus 12:11, 14: “And thus shall ye eat it” (the passover), etc. “And this day shall be unto you for a memorial, and ye shall keep it a feast to the Lord throughout your generations; ye shall keep it a feast by an ordinance forever.” I wish now an express repeal of that, somewhere, as positive as that statement. Otherwise, according to that law laid down by my brother it is in force now. I ask my brother if he keeps the passover? Did it ever belong to the Gentiles to keep it? Did he pass over the Gentiles when he destroyed the first-born? No. It was a feast for the Jews, or a feast day, a memorial day just like the Sabbath. This only teaches another event in their deliverance. Where is it stated that the passover is repealed as plainly as here now enacted?DSQ69 23.4

    Leviticus 23:1: “And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, Concerning the feasts, of the Lord, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, even these are my feasts”—like the one just referred to, the passover, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations—“Six days shall work be done,”—there comes the first, preeminent as indicating the great deliverance—“Six days shall work be done, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of rest, a holy convocation; ye shall do no work therein; it is the Sabbath of the Lord in all your dwellings. These are the feasts of the Lord, even holy convocations, which ye shall proclaim in their seasons.” Now comes the proclamation: “In the fourteenth day of the first month, at even, is the Lord’s passover.” That is one. The same is true of pentecost. That is perpetual also.DSQ69 24.1

    Verses 15-17: “And ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the Sabbath, from the day that ye brought the sheaf of the wave offering; seven Sabbaths shall be complete: even unto the morrow after the seventh Sabbath shall ye number fifty days; and ye shall offer a new meat offering unto the Lord. Ye shall bring out of your habitations two wave loaves of two tenth deals: they shall be of fine flour; they shall be baken with leaven; they are the first fruits unto the Lord.” Verse 21: “And ye shall proclaim on the selfsame-day, that it may be a holy convocation unto you: ye shall do no servile work therein; it shall be a statute forever in all your dwellings throughout your generations.”DSQ69 24.2

    Where is it said the feast of pentecost was done away, or abolished, in as plain language as here stated? Does my brother keep this feast? Where is there one positive declaration that it is abolished?DSQ69 24.3

    26th verse, and onward: “And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Also on the tenth day of this seventh month there shall be a day of atonement: it shall be a holy convocation unto you; and ye shall afflict your souls, and offer an offering made by fire unto the Lord. And ye shall do no work in that same day: for it is a day of atonement, to make an atonement for you before Lord your God; for whatsoever soul it be that shall not be afflicted in that same day, he shall be cut off from among his people. And whatsoever soul it be that doeth any work in that same day, the same soul will I destroy from among his people. Ye shall do no manner of work: it shall be a statute forever through-out your generations in all your dwellings.”DSQ69 25.1

    Perpetual again. Does my brother observe this feast? Where, let me ask, is an express annulling, or abolishing, of that law? So with the feast of tabernacles, Verses 33-41:DSQ69 25.2

    “And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, The fifteenth day of this seventh month shall be the feast of tabernacles for seven days unto the Lord. On the first day shall be a holy convocation: ye shall do no servile work therein. Seven days ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the Lord; on the eighth day shall be a holy convocation unto you, and ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the Lord: it is a solemn assembly; and ye shall do no servile work therein. These are the feasts of the Lord, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, to offer an offering made by fire unto the Lord, a burnt offering, and a meat offering, a sacrifice, and drink offerings, every thing upon his day; beside the Sabbaths of the Lord, and beside your gifts, and beside all your vows, and beside all your freewill offerings, which ye give unto the ‘Lord. Also in the fifteenth day of the seventh month, when ye have gathered in the fruit of the, land, ye shall keep a feast unto the Lord seven days on the first day shall be a Sabbath, and on the eighth day shall be a Sabbath. And ye shall take you on the first day the boughs of’goodly trees, branches of palm trees, and the boughs of thick trees, and willows of the brook; and ye shall rejoice before the Lord your God seven days. And ye shall keep it a feast unto the Lord seven days in the year: it shall be a statute forever in your generations.”DSQ69 25.3

    I would remark that the word rendered perpetual, is the same as the word rendered forever. When it is applied to the Sabbath and to all the feasts, it means the same thing. Does my brother observe the feast of tabernacles? [Time.]DSQ69 26.1

    ELD. CORNELL’S SECOND SPEECH

    Mr. Chairman Ladies and Gentlemen: We have a question before us, and it is well enough for us to understand when we are arguing to the point “Resolves That the Sabbath was binding only on the. Jews, and their servants, after their deliverance from Egyptian bondage.” This is what must be proved. It does not devolve upon us to prove anything, unless we choose. We are to examination the proof that is offered by the affirmative. If he fails to prove this, the question is lost.DSQ69 26.2

    There are two points in the question. First, that the Sabbath was binding only on the Jews and their servants; second, that it was binding only after their deliverance from Egyptian bondage. If he fails in proving either one of these, he has lost the question. These two points we are to keep before our minds. Has there been point any proof yet offered that the Sabbath was binding only on the Jews? Where is the text that says the Sabbath was binding only on the Jews? Have any of these texts quoted said that the Sabbath was binding these texts quoted said that the Sabbath was binding only on the Jews? He has quoted texts to prove it was, but where is the proof that it was not binding on some one else? If he has brought such proofs, we have failed to see it. We will try and keep the point to be proved before us.DSQ69 26.3

    He has read a great many passages of Scripture; but what does it amount to? He must show that the Sabbath; was not binding on any one else but the Jews; but to show that it was binding on the Jews does not prove anything. That is not the question. The proposition is, it was not binding on any one else.DSQ69 27.1

    Now my brother explains his position in regard to the memorial day: he did not mean to be understood that it was a memorial of their travel, but a memorial of their work, their burden, their tasks, in Egypt, before they came out. Worse and worse! A Sabbath of rest a memorial of their work! Isn’t that strange—rest a memorial of work and labor? It seems to me that is exactly as far from the point as it can be. Now the Sabbath we understand to be a memorial of God’s rest; out rest on the Sabbath from our labors, a memorial of God’s rest; a rest to commemorate a rest. The Sabbath day is God’s rest day, and he sanctified the rest day to a holy use, and commands us to keep his rest—DSQ69 27.2

    a memorial not of his work, but of his rest from all his works.DSQ69 27.3

    He says there was nothing binding that is not commanded. But I suppose a great many things were binding on the people in the time covered by the history of Genesis, that we have no record of being commanded. We have said there is no record, that men were then to love the Lord with all their heart, or their” neighbor as themselves. We do not deny that the obligation was on the people. My brother believes it was I the duty of Adam to love God and his neighbor; but he cannot show a record of it. If the argument that we have no record of the enforcing of the Sabbath upon man, proves that it was binding upon man, it proves too much; it proves that it was not a duty to love God either.DSQ69 27.4

    But again, he says it could not be a commandment given till the time came to give it. How does he know God did not command Adam to keep the Sabbath? He must find the text that says there was no such thing, or else ho proves nothing at all. To call on me to prove there was such a commandment, proves nothing. It was instituted there at creation; we have the record; and then 2500 years afterward, in the commandment, God points right back, for a reason for keeping it, to what he did in Eden. My brother quotes the specific: reason why they were to keep “Remember that thou wast a bondman in” Egypt etc., therefore keep the Sabbath day. They ought to do it from love to God, in gratitude to him for what he had done for them; and not only that, but everything else. In an other place they were commanded to have just balances and just weights, etc., because they had been bondmen in Egypt. Don’t you see that all God’s commandments are required to be kept for the same reason, because he brought them out of Egypt? Are all memorials of coming out of Egypt? If the Sabbath was a memorial, these words would prove that all his statues were memorials of coming out of Egypt. Are the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and all the rest, memorial of coming out of Egypt? One just as much as the other. That which proves too much, we say, proves nothing at all.DSQ69 28.1

    My brother says Christ found the resurrection revealed in the time of-Moses, when the Lord appeared to, him in the bush. What I said was, that there was no account that the people believed in resurrection. I suppose they did; but there is no record of it.DSQ69 29.1

    Again he says, “God sanctified the day for the first time after they came out of Egypt.” I cannot help thinking he has made a mistake; for I go to Genesis, and I find it was sanctified the seventh day. Now if it was sanctified after they came out of Egypt, I want the proof. Give us the chapter and verse.DSQ69 29.2

    Now my brother says that no man in the United States can keep the Sabbath, or does for he has to keep everything pertaining to it. If no man can keep it now, could anybody at any time? Could anybody ever, or did keep the Sabbath, and point out the reason why we cannot keep the Sabbath now as well as then.DSQ69 29.3

    Now we come to positive proof. I call your attention to some positive proofs in regard to this matter, to show that the law of God was binding on the Gentiles. The question turns upon this proposition: Did the Gentiles have the chance, as individuals or nations, if they would, to form characters of holiness by obedience to law? And if so, what law did they have? One of three things must be true in the case: First, they were not subjects of law, or secondly, they had a law specially provided for them different from that given to the Jews; or thirdly, they were under obligations to obey the same law that was given to the Jews. We will pass by the first two propositions, and proceed to established the third; for, in establishing the third, we disprove the other two. Now if we prove this point, that both Jews and Gentiles were subjects of the same law, and under obligations to keep the same law, then my friend on the affirmative has lost his question.DSQ69 29.4

    Exodus 12:48, 49:“And when a stranger shall sojourn with thee, and will keep the passover to the Lord, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as one that is born in the land; for no uncircumcised person shall eat thereof. One law shall be to him that is home-born, and unto the stranger that sojourned among you.”DSQ69 30.1

    The Gentiles that lived among the tribes of Israel, not servants, but who sojourned and lived there—there should be one law for both classes.DSQ69 30.2

    Leviticus 17:8-10:“A thou shalt say unto them, Whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers which sojourn among you, that offereth a burnt offering or sacrifice, and bringeth it not unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, to offer it unto the Lord; even that man shall be cut off from among his people. And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people.”DSQ69 30.3

    The same with the Gentiles that it was with the Jews.DSQ69 30.4

    Numbers 15:14-16:“And if a stranger sojourn with you, or whosoever be among you in your generations, and will offer an offering made by fire, of a sweet savor unto the Lord; as ye do, so he shall do. One ordinance shall be both for you of the congregation, and also for the stranger that sojourned with you, an ordinance forever in your generations: as ye are, so shall the stranger be before the. Lord. One law and one manner shall be for you, and for the stranger that sojourned with you.”DSQ69 30.5

    This proves my position, that the same law that was binding upon the Jews, was binding upon the Gentiles.DSQ69 31.1

    I will now bring another testimony from Jeremiah, that the Gentiles were required to learn and keep the ways of Israel. Mark the proposition. My brother says the Sabbath was binding only on the Jews, and never was binding on the Gentiles before or since, nor on the Jews before they came out of Egypt. I will now disprove this proposition from this text:DSQ69 31.2

    Jeremiah 12:14-17:“Thus saith the Lord, against all mine evil neighbors [the Gentiles around] that touch the inheritance which I have caused my people Israel to inherit; Behold, I will pluck them out of their land, and pluck out the house of Judah from among them. And it shall come to pass, after that I have plucked them out, I will return, and; have compassion on them, and will bring them again, every man to his heritage, and every man to his land. And it shall come to pas if they will diligently learn the ways of my people, to swear by my name, The Lord liveth; as they taught my people to swear by Baal; then shall they be built in the midst of my people. But if they will not obey, I will utterly pluck up and destroy that nation, saith the Lord.”DSQ69 31.3

    This text proves this, as we understand it: that God said to the nations around Israel, if they would learn the ways of his people and obey them, then he would build them up in the midst of his people; but if they would not obey him, then he would pluck them out, and would utterly destroy that nation. This text we regard as a triumphant disproval of the affirmation made to-night, that the Sabbath was binding only upon the Jews and their servants. The Sabbath was a part of the “ways” of the Jewish people, and God calls upon the Gentiles as nations, that if they will learn these ways and keep these commandments, “then shall they be built up in the midst of my people.”DSQ69 31.4

    I will introduce one more argument: Jesus says, “The Sabbath was made for man;” not the Jews alone but for man. My brother dare not deny that it was binding upon all for whom it was made. If it was made for the Jews, it was binding only upon the Jews. “The Sabbath was made for man;” or, as the article is in the Greek, “The Sabbath was made for the man.” If we leave it out, it is just as plain. And so, in order for my brother to prove that the Sabbath was not made for the Gentiles, he must prove that they were not men.DSQ69 32.1

    [Time.]

    ELD. GRANT’S THIRD SPEECH

    Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen: We do not think the Sabbath was made for beasts or animals, certainly; but the proof is wanting that it was binding on any but the Jews and their servants.DSQ69 32.2

    Our brother thinks that Jeremiah 12:14-17, proves positively that it was binding upon the Gentiles.DSQ69 32.3

    “Thus saith the Lord against all mine evil neighbors, that touch the inheritance which I have caused my people Israel to inherit; Behold, I will pluck them out of their land, and pluck out the house of Judah from among them. And it shall come to pass, after that I have plucked them out I will return, and have compassion on them, and will bring them again, every man to his heritage, and every man to his land. And it shall come to pass, if they will diligently learn the ways of my people,” etc.DSQ69 32.4

    It does not say a word about keeping his commandments, that I can find, though my brother said, “Obey them;” but I do not find it here. It is, “Swear by my name, the Lord liveth,” (as they taught my people to swear by Baal), if they will stop that, and acknowledge me I will let them live around there where they did before; but if, they will not obey I will utterly pluck them up. Learn what? This point, Swear by the Lord, instead of Baal.DSQ69 33.1

    Leviticus 17:10, and Numbers 15:14 refer to strangers sojourning with Israel, which is in keeping with the resolution—while sojourning with them as servants, they must keep the regulations.DSQ69 33.2

    He says we must find an express commandment that the Sabbath was not made for all men. That is asking a little too much. We are not to prove both a negative and an affirmative. Let him bring a negative commandment. The Sabbath was not binding till they came out of Egypt. We think that is settled till the negative prove that the seventh-day Sabbath was required to be kept by those living before Moses’ time.DSQ69 33.3

    “There is; no proof that it was not binding on any one else.” Let him prove, I say, the negative.DSQ69 33.4

    He says we have quoted a great many passages of Scripture. That is encouraging. We cannot bring half of them.DSQ69 33.5

    “The Sabbath a memorial of work.” How differently people look at the same thing. The Declaration of Independence to represent bondage and servitude The Sabbath day a memorial of work; a rest day the opposite of work; independence the opposite of bondage. Memorials are opposites.DSQ69 33.6

    “Nothing binding except commanded.” I might suppose they were, and I might suppose they were not; but it will hardly be taken as evidence in the case. There may have been commandments, but proof, proof! If he can bring such a passage, then it would be proof. He says there were no commandments to love God. I repeat there were none given. How could they be given before one was written?DSQ69 34.1

    Each commandment a memorial? No. The commandment to keep the Sabbath is a memorial. “Therefore” he commanded them to keep the Sabbath.DSQ69 34.2

    He says we suppose there was a belief in the resurrection before Moses’ time. There is no proof of it needed.DSQ69 34.3

    Again, there seems to be a misunderstanding in reference to the Sabbath’s being sanctified for the first time. I said that the first time it was set apart for the keeping of the children of Israel was at the time they first gathered manna—the first time it was set apart to be kept by any man, that we have any record of.DSQ69 34.4

    “No one can keep the Sabbath.” I said no one is keeping it, according to what constitutes the keeping of it. I do not know a man who keeps it in harmony with the way the Jews kept it.DSQ69 34.5

    Then comes the point, the law of God binding on the Gentiles—Jews and Gentiles subject to the same law. We looked over that first. And also, “The Sabbath was made for man.”DSQ69 34.6

    We will go on with these feast days, including the Sabbath, which was to be a perpetual covenant, then the passover, then the feast of pentecost, then the feast of atonement, then the feast of tabernacles, and all of them in that list of feast days, or memorial days, are to be perpetual, or forever; the same word in the original, rendered perpetual and forever. We will read it once more: “And ye shall take you on the first, day the boughs of goodly trees, branches of palm trees, and the boughs of; thick trees, and, willows of the brook; and ye shall rejoice before the Lord your God seven days. And ye shall keep it a feast unto the Lord seven days in the year. It shall be a statute forever in your generations.” It was a perpetual covenant. Then if they all are perpetual, there must be an express command annulling, or abolishing, them, or they are still binding. Let my brother bring one express command to show that they are abolished, otherwise they run out by limitation. When is that? When we; get down to the new covenant, when the Jews should be married to another, and divorced from the law. I will remark in conclusion on this point, the Sabbath is never enjoined on the Gentiles, unless servants, or sojourning and stopping in their families. We come to the point where these run out by limitation, and that is at the new covenant—two covenants like two constitutions. There may be a constitution of your State, and another constitution be formed afterwards, and the last one is binding. But two constitutions could not properly exist together in the same State.DSQ69 34.7

    Hebrews 8:7; “For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.” What first covenant?DSQ69 35.1

    Galatians 4:2:“Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bond-maid, the other by a free-woman. But he who was of the bond-woman was born after the flesh; but he of the free-woman, was by promise. Which things are an allegory”— allegorized is a better expression of the original—“for these are the two covenants; the one from the Mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.”DSQ69 35.2

    1 Kings 8:9: “There was nothing in the ark save the two tables of stone”—look now for the first covenant—“which Moses put there at Horeb”—that is in connection with Mt. Sinai—“when the Lord made a covenant with the children of Israel, when they came out of the land of Egypt.” That seems to be definite. That is Israel, not the Gentiles; not Abraham, not Isaac, nor Jacob, nor Melchisedec, nor any of those worthies back there. 21st verse: “And I have set there a place for the ark, wherein is the covenant of the Lord, which he made with our fathers when he brought them out of the land of Egypt.” That is the time he made it; he did not make it before. At Horeb is the spot. Deuteronomy 5:2: “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 here alive this day” He did not make it before the time of those then living and standing there. That is the covenant of Horeb. That is one. Paul says it genders to bondage. That is the covenant to which he refers, we think, when he says, “If it had “been faultless,” etc.DSQ69 36.1

    Deuteronomy 5:4-6: “The Lord talked with you face to face in the mount, out of the midst of the fire”—that is where he gave the covenant—“(I stood between the Lord and you at that time, to show you the word of the Lord; for ye were afraid by reason of the fire, and went not up into the mount,) saying, I am the Lord thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt.” There is the point brought to view again. Then he gave them the commandments. And in the 15th verse he says, “Therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the Sabbath day”—because he brought thee out of Egypt 36.2DSQ69 36.2

    In the 22nd verse of the same chapter we read, “These words”—referring to the ten commandments—“the Lord spake unto all your assembly in the mount, out of the midst of the fire, of the cloud, and of the thick darkness, with a great voice; and he added no more. And he wrote them in two tables of stone, and delivered them unto me.”DSQ69 37.1

    Again, in Deuteronomy 4:13: “He declared unto you his covenant which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.” The ten commandments were the covenant. This looks very plain. But Paul says one of these covenants genders to bondage. “Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?”—the same expression—law—“for it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bond-maid, the other by a free-woman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the free-woman was by promise. Which things are an allegory; for these are the two covenants; the one from the Mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.” That is the whole. Deuteronomy 9:9-11: “When I was gone up into the mount to receive the tables of stone, even the tables of the covenant which the Lord made with you, then I abode in the mount forty days and forty nights.”DSQ69 37.2

    I will take that up again. [Time.]DSQ69 37.3

    ELD. CORNELL’S THIRD SPEECH

    Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen: We will notice a moment now what has been said in the last speech of the affirmative. An attempt was made to answer our positive proof that the Gentiles were required to learn the ways of Israel, and that blessings were pronounced upon them if they did them. Of course, they were not asked to believe a mere theory; for he never blesses anybody except in obedience. To learn what is right, is one thing; to do it acceptably to God, is another. It is equivalent for them to learn and to obey. Then they should be built up in the midst of Israel; but if they would not, he would utterly destroy, that nation from among them. Now we will bring a parallel. The Gentiles and strangers were to learn the ways of Israel, and we will now bring proof to show that the Sabbath was a part of the ways of Israel.DSQ69 38.1

    Isaiah 56:1: “Thus saith the Lord, Keep ye judgment, and do justice; for my salvation is near to come, and my righteousness to be revealed. Blessed is the man—not blessed is the Jew that doeth this, but blessed, is the man—that doeth this, and the son of man that layeth hold on it; that keepeth the Sabbath from polluting it, and keepeth his hand from doing any evil.” But, says my friend, that means only the Jew.DSQ69 38.2

    Verses 3 and 4: “Neither let the son of the stranger, that hath joined himself to the Lord, speak, saying, The Lord hath utterly separated me from his people: neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree. For thus saith the Lord unto the eunuchs that keep my Sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant,” etc.DSQ69 38.3

    Here we have positive proof that the Gentiles are meant—the strangers—he will not deny that the strangers the Gentiles (see Ephesians 2). First, his people, then, “neither the strangers”—they are not utterly cut off; for he says if they will join themselves to the Lord to serve the Lord, if they keep the Sabbath from polluting it, then he will bring them in and bless them. If this is not positive proof that the, Gentiles are required to keep the Sabbath, then I do not know what would be proof. It does not say, The strangers that are servants in Jewish families but, The strangers that join themselves to the Lord, not to Jewish families: to serve Sabbath, he will “give in mine house, and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters.” We have it now positively: these are the ways of the children of Israel. What were the ways of his people? The ways they walked in. They walked in the ways of God—the ways of God were their ways, If they came in and learned the ways of the people, he would build them up. The Sabbath was one of these ways; so we read in Isaiah 56. He there mentions the Sabbath as one of the things that the Gentiles were to do that they might serve the Lord and receive his blessing.DSQ69 38.4

    “How could there be a command to love God, till Moses wrote?” He does not deny the duty; but there is no record of it till Moses. Of course not. Then my brother will admit that the duty to love God was obligatory. Still, there is no record of it in the book of Genesis. So there is no record of a command to keep the Sabbath, yet there might have been a command. He admits one; but what is true of one, is true of the other also. But one thing he fails to notice, though I have called his attention to it, that the Sabbath was instituted at the end of creation week, and that the fourth commandment, where it gives the reason for the obligation, points right back to what God did at the end of creation. He sanctified the day, and hallowed it, because that in it he rested when he made the world. That is the reason. The reason had existed from creation. Did not the obligation exist? Most certainly, it must have existed from creation.DSQ69 39.1

    I will now read an extract from the Crisis, inserted, as stated in that paper, with a slight variation of a few words, to suit the occasion:DSQ69 40.1

    “The following is from the London ‘Quarterly Jour nal of Prophecy,’ as quoted by the Advent Herald, April 1, 1854, with a slight variation of a few words and phrases, in order to meet our present needs:DSQ69 40.2

    “‘Reasons for the observance of a Sabbath. These reasons are, 1. Man’s need of rest. Is this reason gone? Does man need rest no longer? Is the world now so calm a scene, and earth so serene a region, that no sev enth-day’s rest is needed? If not—if the reason still exists—must not the day still remain?’”DSQ69 40.3

    Now I call that good. It came from the World’s Crisis. There are a good many good things in the World’s Crisis. Long may it live. Now, if the reason still exists, and the day of rest remains because of the reason, the obligation must still remain. If the reason existed from creation, the obligation existed, from creation. God says it did exist from creation.DSQ69 40.4

    Now we come to three points. First, I said that Christ taught that the Sabbath was made for man. My brother replied that it was made for man, not for beasts. That is no answer at all. The argument was this: Je sus said the Sabbath was made for man, not for the Jews. What does it mean? It covers the whole race of mankind. The Gentiles are men. Christians are men. Therefore, it was made for the Gentiles. In order to evade our argument, our brother must prove that the Gentiles are not men. Who is right?DSQ69 40.5

    The second point: The disciples rested on the seventh, day according to the commandment. That points right back to Sinai; now go to Mt. Sinai, and that points right back to creation. The whole arch is spanned. If this does not prove it is a world-wide institution, what would prove it? The disciples in the New Testament rested on the seventh day according to the commandment. The commandment points right back to what he did at the end of creation week. So we have a connected chain down to this time. He will have to notice it in order to evade the conclusion. If he says it means only the Jew, and not the Gentile, we will take another scripture: “The woman was made for the man” If the Sabbath being made for man, meant only for the Jew, then woman being made for man, meant only for the Jew. But this proved too much. My brother would rebel against that in a moment. The Sabbath was made for all. The woman was made for the man—all men. The Gentiles have as good a right to the marriage institution as the Jews, exactly. On this point, we have a very interesting article from the Crisis, by T. M. Preble, one who has had the most’ to say in regard to the Sabbath of any one, perhaps, in the country, except those who believe in keeping the seventh day. This is published in the Crisis, and approved by the editor, I suppose:DSQ69 41.1

    “And that the Sabbath is still binding on all mankind, is proved by the fact that Christ “is Lord also of the Sabbath.” And can a thing, of which he is Lord, for the benefit of mankind, ever cease to be while he is Lord? And we have his divine sanction that “the Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath.” Yes; the Sabbath, or rest-day, was made “for man”—for the good of man. And in the same way, the apostle speaks of another institution—the institution of marriage. He says, “Neither was the man created for the woman, but the woman for the man.” As, therefore, the woman was created for the good, or benefit, of man—all mankind—so was the Sabbath made for the good, or benefit, of manall mankind. When, therefore, the institution of marriage shall cease by divine authority, then, also, let the institution of the Sabbath cease, and not until then.”DSQ69 41.2

    I say, Amen, to that. This is very good. I will read on:DSQ69 42.1

    “Why is it that men, who are such close students of the Bible on other points, are so indifferent to the all-important subject of the Lord’s Sabbath, in these days of peril, corruption, and sin? Until more regard is paid to the sacredness of the Sabbath, we need not be surprised at the increase of crime in the land. Oh! how Christ, the Lord of the Sabbath, is dishonored by the desecrations of this holy institution which “was made for man.”DSQ69 42.2

    I might go on and introduce several other arguments, but the time is nearly up, and I prefer to release the congregation, and not introduce another argument. We shall have something of interest and point to-morrow evening. And we bespeak for the discussion to-morrow, the hearing of all; for the tug of war is coming, and we will try to find out to-morrow evening whether the Sabbath is binding on the Gentiles, as well as the Jews.DSQ69 42.3

    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents