Review of Objections to the Seventh-day Sabbath

ANSWERS

1. We have never said that the keeping of Sunday as a festival, began with Constantine, or originated from the law which he enacted in its behalf. On the contrary, we believe that the Papal apostasy as stated by Paul, began even in the days of the apostles. 2 Thessalonians 2. Hence we are not surprised that some time after the days of the apostles, men began to pay some regard to Sunday, as also to good Friday and to holy Thursday. Dr. Chambers says, “It was Constantine the Great who first made a law for the observance of Sunday.” But whether such a law had been made before his time or not, it is a fact, obvious to every reader of the New Testament, that Christ and his apostles never established such a precept. Not the first word was ever uttered by one of the apostles, enjoining Sunday-keeping. Hence the first-day Sabbath is a human institution which has usurped the place of the Lord’s Sabbath, and which has nothing divine or apostolic about it. ROSS 8.7

2. The statement to which the objector refers was made in the “History of the Sabbath” published by the American Sabbath Tract Society. Here it is: ROSS 9.1

“To give the more solemnity to the first day of the week, (as we learn from Lucius’ Ecclesiastical History.) Sylvester, who was bishop of Rome while Constantine was Emperor, changed the name of Sunday, giving it the more imposing title of Lord’s day.” ROSS 9.2

We understand the above extract to teach that Pope Sylvester, by formal act christened Sunday with the name of Lord’s day. But the same writer speaks of certain, who before the days of Constantine, regarded Sunday, not in the place of the Lord’s Sabbath, but as a festival under the name of Lord’s day, and who kept as equally sacred, good Friday, and holy Thursday. ROSS 9.3

3. If Sunday was observed 150 years before the edict of Constantine, this would only extend as far back as A. D. 171, eighty or one hundred years this side of the apostles. Whoever then observed it, did it as the writer has well expressed it, “voluntarily;” for they were doing what God had never required. Those who then kept Sunday as a festival, were careful to observe the Sabbath. Hence we cannot refer to such cases as a justification of those who now coolly violate the fourth commandment in order to keep a day which God never enjoined. And to say that the apostles gave a commandment for Sunday-observance which was not recorded, but which was handed down by tradition, is to say that the Bible does not contain all the commandments of God necessary to salvation and to assert the right of men to supply from tradition that which the Bible lacks, and to correct by tradition that which is not right in the Word of God. As an instance take the fourth commandment, which men without hesitation correct by the tradition of the elders. In other words, this work begins by adding tradition to the Bible, and ends with correcting the Bible by tradition. This is the earliest and leading principle of the Papal apostasy. ROSS 9.4

4. The councils which have made canons respecting the change of the Sabbath, were engaged in a fearful work. They had no warrant from God to justify them in corrupting the fourth commandment, or to sanction their acts of bolstering up that which God had never ordained. ROSS 10.1

5. The following from the “History of the Sabbath” may be to the point:- ROSS 10.2

“We will notice but one more of these misinterpreted citations, and this is from Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, who lived a little after Justin. His letter to Soter, bishop of Rome, is cited as saying, ‘This day we celebrated the holy Dominical day, in which we have read your epistle.’ As given by Eusebius, it is thus: ‘To-day we have passed the Lord’s holy day.’ etc. The only ground upon which this phrase can be referred to the first day of the week is, that this day was at that time known by the same title that God has given to the Sabbath, [Isaiah 58:13.] of which there is no proof.” ROSS 10.3

6. The Lord’s Sabbath is none the less sacred because that men have never made laws to enforce its observance. Neither is Sunday-keeping a divine institution, because the edicts of emperors and the canons of councils can be produced in its favor. A stream can never rise higher than its fountain. The command for keeping Sunday originated this side of the apostles: hence it follows that, although its observance should continue ten thousand years, it would never become apostolic or divine. J. N. A. ROSS 11.1