same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut
where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood
in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you." John xx, 19. "Afterward he
appeared unto the eleven, as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their
unbelief, and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen
him after he was risen." Mark xvi, 14. Then it is a fact that the disciples were not
engaged in commemorating the resurrection of the Saviour, for they did not
believe that that event had taken place. Certain it is that the disciples did not
entertain the most distant idea of a change of the Sabbath. At the burial of the
Saviour the women who had followed him, prepared spices and ointments to
embalm him; the Sabbath drew on; they "rested the Sabbath-day according to
the commandment;" and when the Sabbath was past, they came to the sepulchre
upon the first day, to embalm Jesus. Luke xxiii, 53-56; xxiv, 1. Then there is not
even a plausible inference, in this case, for perverting the fourth commandment.
The disciples kept the Sabbath according to that precept, and resumed their
labor upon the first day of the week.
3. But after eight days Jesus again met with the disciples, (John xx, 26,) and
this must have been upon the first day of the week.
Were it certain that this occurred upon the first day of the week, it would be
very slight evidence that that day had become the Sabbath; for there is not even
an intimation of the kind. But who knows that "after eight days" means just a
week! Certainly it would be nearer the literal construction of the language to
conclude that this was upon the ninth day. As an illustration, read Matt. xvii,1.
"And after six days, Jesus taketh Peter, James and John," etc. Now turn to Luke
ix, 28. "And it came to pass about an eight days after these sayings, he took
Peter, and John and James," etc. Then after six days is about eight days. But if
after eight days means just a week, it would then
8
bring this appearing of Christ upon the second day of the week. For the week
must be reckoned from the evening, at the close of the first day, (John xx, 19,)
and the day itself closes at six o'clock. As the day was far spent when the two
disciples were at Emmaus, [Luke xxiv,] and as they returned to Jerusalem, a
distance of seven and a half miles, before Christ appeared to the assembled
disciples; [Mark xvi, 12-14;] it is evident that Christ's first appearing to the eleven
[Luke xxiv, 33-36] must have been in the evening which followed the first day,
and with which the second day commenced! But granting that Christ's appearing
on this occasion was actually upon the first day of the week, would that
appearing make a Sabbath of the day! The appearing of Christ is sufficient to
constitute a day a Sabbath, or it is not. If it is sufficient, then the fishing day on
which he next showed himself to his disciples, and on which he miraculously
aided them to take fish, was a Sabbath! John xxi. But if it was not sufficient to
constitute the day of its occurrence a Sabbath, then his appearing to several of
his disciples on the first day of the week, and to all of them on the Thursday of
his ascension, (Acts i,) did not cause those days to become Sabbaths. If it be
asked, how the disciples could be found together, (John xx, 26,) unless they had
some special object, we answer, that they had one common abode, as may be
learned from Acts i, 13. Who can help regretting that such reasons as we have
examined, should be deemed sufficient authority for violating one of the ten
commandments? But are there no other and better arguments for the change of
the Sabbath than those which have been examined? We answer, there are
several other reasons urged as proof of this. Whether they are better than those
we have already examined, we shall soon learn.
4. The Holy Ghost descended upon the disciples on the day of Pentecost,
which was the first day of the week. Therefore the first day of the week is the
Christian Sabbath. Acts ii, 1, 2.
One can hardly refrain from feelings of indignation that grave Doctors of
Divinity should found their first-day Sabbath upon such a basis as this. The
disciples had been engaged in earnest prayer for ten days. For the day of
Pentecost was fifty days from the day of Christ's resurrection, and forty of those
days, the Saviour spent with his disciples. Acts i, 3. Forty days from
9
the resurrection day would end on Thursday, the day of his ascension. A period of
ten days after the ascension on Thursday, would include two first days. If the
design of God had been to honor the first day of the week, why did not the Holy
Ghost descend upon the first of those first days? Why must the day of Pentecost
come before the Holy Spirit could descend! The answer is obvious. It was not the
design of Heaven to honor the first day of the week, but to mark the antitype of
the feast of Pentecost. The slaying of the paschal lamb, on the fourteenth day of
the first month, had met its antitype in the death of the Lamb of God, on that day.
Ex. xii; John xix; 1 Cor. v, 7. The offering of the first fruits, on the sixteenth day of
the first month, had met its antitype in the resurrection of our Lord on that day,
the first-fruits of them that slept. Lev. xxiii; 1 Cor. xv, 20, 23. It remained that the
feast of Pentecost, fifty days later, should also have its fulfillment. Lev. xxiii,
15-21. The fulfillment of this type is what the pen of inspiration has here
recorded. As God has spoken nothing in this place respecting a change of the
Sabbath, those who contend that he has, are cited to Prov. xxx, 6. "And thou not
unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar."
5. Paul once broke bread upon the first day of the week. Therefore the first
day of the week is the Christian Sabbath. Acts xx, 7.
We answer, that at one period the apostolic church at Jerusalem broke bread
every day. Acts ii, 42-46. Hence, according to this view, every day of the week is
a Christian Sabbath! If a single instance of breaking bread at Troas, upon the first
day of the week, was quite sufficient to constitute it a Sabbath, would not the
continued practice of the apostolic church in breaking bread every day, be amply
sufficient to make every day a Sabbath? Moreover, as the act of the Great head
of the church in breaking bread must be quite as important as that of his servant
Paul, must not the day of the crucifixion be pre-eminently the Christian Sabbath,
as Christ instituted, and performed this ordinance on the evening with which that
day commenced? 1 Cor. xi, 23-36. And as the breaking of bread commemorates
the crucifixion of our Lord, and not his resurrection, would not
10
the crucifixion day be as appropriate for the breaking of bread, as the
resurrection day?
But on what day of the week did this act of Paul occur? For if it is of sufficient
importance to make the day of its occurrence the future Sabbath of the Church,
the day is worth determining. The act of breaking bread was after midnight. For
Paul preached to the disciples until midnight; then healed Eutychus; then
attended to breaking the bread. Verses 7-11. If, as time is reckoned at the
present day, the first day of the week terminated at midnight, then Paul's act of
breaking bread took place upon the second day of the week, which should
henceforth be regarded as the Christian Sabbath, if breaking bread on a day
makes it a Sabbath. But if the Bible method of commencing the day, viz: from six
o'clock P.M. was followed, it would appear that the disciples came together at the
close of the Sabbath for an evening meeting, as the Apostle was to depart in the
morning. Paul preached until midnight, and then broke bread with the disciples
early in the morning of the first day of the week. Did this constitute that day the
Sabbath! If so, then why did Paul, as soon as it was light, start on his long
journey to Jerusalem? If Paul believed it to be the Christian Sabbath, why did he
violate it? If he did not believe it to be sacred time, why should you? This text
affords direct proof that the first day of the week is not the Sabbath. And it is
indeed quite remarkable that this single instance of religious worship on the first
day, should be urged as proof that the Sabbath of the Lord has been changed,
while this same book gives the account of religious worship on at least eightyfour
Sabbaths. Acts xiii, 14, 44; xvi, 13; xvii, 2; xviii, 4, 11.
6. Paul commanded the church at Corinth to take up a collection on the first
day of the week. Therefore the Sabbath must have been changed to that day. 1
