In Defense of the Faith

Chapter 5 — When and to Whom Was the Sabbath Given?

Mr. Canright the Baptist bitterly attacks the seventh-day Sabbath, which is kept by Seventh-day Adventists. He says: DOF 80.1

“The Sabbath is not mentioned by name in the book of Genesis, nor till the time of Moses.”—Seventh-day Adventism Renounced, p. 249. DOF 80.2

“The Sabbath was given to the Jews.” —Ibid., p. 258. DOF 80.3

“‘Thou came down also upon Mt. Sinai.... and made known unto them Thy holy Sabbath.’ Nehemiah 9:13, 14. This implies that it was not known before.”—Ibid., p. 255. DOF 80.4

Now, these bold statements were made by Mr. Canright after he had repudiated the Ten Commandments and had become an advocate of that no-law doctrine which has brought upon the religious world an era of lawlessness and revolt against God. DOF 80.5

While Mr. Canright was still in the Adventist faith, and, like David of old, still delighted in the law of the Lord, he wrote profusely on the subject of the Sabbath as well as on the law, and it may be of interest to the reader to compare his arguments of that time on the Sabbath question with those set forth in his book in which he attempts to refute his former teachings. Fortunately these former writings of his are available for reference. We will therefore draw largely from these earlier publications by Mr. Canright, in replying to his later refutation of them, thus permitting the reader to observe how completely his former arguments devour his subsequent denials of them. DOF 80.6

In a pamphlet entitled “The Morality of the Sabbath,” written by him in 1875, fourteen years before he renounced Seventh-day Adventism, Mr. Canright said: DOF 81.1

“The principle of every moral precept existed before the fall, and would have existed if man had never fallen. This is true of the Sabbath. But all ceremonial precepts were introduced after the fall, to shadow forth redemption. DOF 81.2

“Here again we find that true of the Sabbath which is true of all moral commandments, viz., that it was a primary institution existing before the fall of man. But this is not true of any ceremonial statute. Idolatry, image worship, profanity, lying, stealing, etc., would all have been as morally wrong if committed before the fall as after. Hence, moral duties may be defined as those resting upon primary principles, or those which did exist before man fell, or before any remedial system was instituted. Ceremonial precepts are those which came in consequence of the fall, and which would never have existed but for sin. They grew out of the creature’s action as a sinner, and shadowed forth his coming redemption. This is a plainly marked and undeniable distinction between moral and ceremonial precepts. Now we only have to ask to which of these two classes the Sabbath belongs, in order to determine whether it is a moral or a ceremonial precept. DOF 81.3

“Only one answer can be given to this. Every fact and principle upon which the Sabbath ever was based did exist before Adam sinned. Creation’s work was ended, and the Lord’s rest upon the seventh day was in the past. God had placed His blessing upon the seventh day and had set it apart to a sacred use. Thus the record reads: ‘Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had made; and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it; because that in it He had rested from all His work which God created and made.’ Genesis 2:13. DOF 81.4

“This is a plain, chronological narration of what occurred in Eden. God worked six days, rested the seventh day, blessed it, and then sanctified it. ‘Sanctify’ is thus defined by Webster: ‘To separate, set apart, or appoint, to a holy or religious use.’ Then the Lord did set apart to a holy use the seventh day in Eden. Every reference afterward to the origin of the Sabbath points back to Eden. (See Exodus 16:23; 20:8-11; 31:17; Mark 2:27.) The Sabbath is a memorial of creation.... and hence became necessary as soon as creation week was ended. But for what were types, and shadows, and ceremonies? To point to redemption through Christ who was to come. Colossians 2:17; Hebrews 10:1. But these were not given until man needed redemption; and he did not need redemption till after he had sinned. But the Sabbath was given before man sinned, and hence was not a typical or ceremonial institution. So we find that the Sabbath is a primary institution, all the reasons for which, like those for every moral precept, existed before the fall.” Pages 9-11. DOF 82.1

“The Sabbath precept, like all moral precepts, applies equally well to all nations, in all countries, and at all times. DOF 82.2

“All moral laws are of universal application. They are not restricted to one nation or to one country, nor do they change with circumstances; but, on the other hand, merely ceremonial precepts are, from their very nature, restricted in their application to certain persons, times, and places. Here, again, we find evidence of the morality of the Sabbath. As we have shown already, God instituted the Sabbath at creation in Eden before the fall. From this fact several important conclusions necessarily follow: DOF 82.3

“1. It is not a type. Types were given after the fall to shadow forth redemption; but the Sabbath points back to creation, not forward to redemption. (See Exodus 20:11.) DOF 82.4

“2. The fact that the Sabbath was given in the Edenic state indicates that it was designed to be a perpetual institution. Hence we read that when the curse shall be removed from this old earth, and the new earth state shall he brought in, then the Sabbath will still be observed, and that forever. Isaiah 66:22, 23. DOF 82.5

“3. It is not a Jewish Sabbath. The simple fact that it was given at creation, twenty-three hundred years before such a distinction existed proves this. DOF 83.1

“4. A Jew is a descendant of Judah, one of the twelve tribes. But Judah himself was not born till nearly twenty three hundred years after creation. Hence it is absurd to call it a Jewish institution. It is never so called in the Bible, but it is ever designated as God’s holy Sabbath. DOF 83.2

“The Sabbath was given to Adam, who was the representative head of the whole human race, the father of all men and all nations. Acts 17:26. In giving it to him, God thereby gave it to man as a race; hence Christ says truly, ‘The Sabbath was made for man.’ Mark 2:27. He does not say it was made for the Jew man, nor for the Gentile man, nor for the Christian man; nor does He limit it in any manner; but He puts it on the broad basis that it was made for man. It is a rule in grammar that a noun unlimited by an adjective is to be taken in its broadest sense, as, ‘Man is mortal,’ meaning all men, the race. So in this case; Christ does not limit it to one class of men, but says that it was made for ‘man,’ that is, the race. DOF 83.3

“In this language, he points us back to the time when the Sabbath was made, and says that it was made for man. When was the Sabbath made? It was made at creation. God rested on the seventh day, blessed it, and sanctified it. This is how and when it was made. For whom was it made? Christ’s language is definite. It ‘was made for man.’ Being given to Adam, the father of the Gentiles as well as of the Jews, it was thus given to all nations; for Paul says that God ‘hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth.’ Acts 17:26.”—Ibid., pp. 43-45. DOF 83.4

Thus in Mr. Canright’s former publication he points out very clearly that the Sabbath as well as every moral precept existed in Eden before the fall. That it was instituted at the close of creation week, that it was set apart to a holy and religious use, and that it was given as a memorial of creation, was blessed and sanctified of God, and given to Adam to be kept. He shows that every reference to the Sabbath after that time clearly points back to Eden. He buttresses all these facts by a “Thus says the Lord” from Scripture. He clearly points out the fact that the Sabbath “is not a type”; that it is “a perpetual institution”; that it “is not Jewish”; that it was made for man; and that in giving it to Adam, who was the representative head of the entire human race, it was thus given through him to all humanity. DOF 83.5

Strange that fourteen years later, when Mr. Canright leaves the Seventh-day Adventist Church, he should so completely forget all this evidence of the existence of the Sabbath from the time of creation, and should boldly declare that the Sabbath was not known until Sinai. How, we ask, is it possible for a man who is truly led by the Spirit of God, so evidently to turn away from the clear teachings of the Word of God inspired by His Spirit? Does the Spirit thus teach one thing through inspiration and another through Mr. Canright? Is God thus divided against Himself? Or is this additional evidence that Mr. Canright had wandered into the darkness, turning away from the Word which David declared to be a lamp unto his feet and a light unto his path? DOF 84.1

From Mr. Canright’s pamphlet “The Morality of the Sabbath,” written before he repudiated the moral law and while he was still an Adventist, we quote: DOF 84.2