Since the "first" or "old"
covenant—the law—that enjoined the observance of the
seventh day, was abolished and ended at the cross, and the
"new" and "better" covenant has taken
its place, what do we find in the New Testament ? Not one
command to keep the Sabbath of the former covenant. Not
one threat against anyone for working on that day. While
over and over long lists of sins are mentioned, covering
every kind of disobedience, not once is Sabbath-breaking
mentioned. In Paul's four. teen Epistles he names the
Sabbath but once, and then shows that it was abolished and
nailed to the cross (Col. 2:14-17). In the Epistles of
James, Peter, John, and Jude, the word "sabbath"
cannot be found. Compare this with Adventist literature,
and note the contrast. They talk and write more on the
Sabbath than on any other theme. It is the life of their
system. The fourth commandment of the "ministration
of death" can nowhere be found in the New Testament.
We are not Jews nor Adventists, but New Testament
Christians, under the truth that came by Jesus Christ; and
since there is not one command in the new covenant, which
is our rule of faith, to keep the seventh day, we are
under no obligations to do so. To find such command,
people must go back to the law; and to observe it because
Moses' law enjoined it is to put our necks into "the
yoke of bondage," to become "children of the
bond. woman" (Gal. 4:21-30); but we who are called
into the liberties of the gospel "are not children of
the bondwoman, but of the free" (vs. 31).
One Adventist minister in our
presence, when nettled by our positive demand for one
command in the New Testament for the observance of the
seventh day, lit upon Matt. 24: 20, and said the language
was equivalent to a command. This shows the desperate
straits to which these people are driven. "Pray ye
that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the
Sabbath Day." On this text we shall remark: 1. The
subject was not the observance of the day. Jesus was
speaking of the destruction of Jerusalem, and the safety
of the Christians in fleeing out of the doomed city. In
the winter the roads would be bad, so that their flight
would be much retarded. On the Jewish Sabbath all the
gates of the cities were closed and locked (see Adam
Clarke or any other reliable authority), and hence escape
would be impossible. That is all there is to the text. 2.
Simply fleeing out of a city or country would not
desecrate the day, as Adventists themselves admit. Then,
there is no proof nor command in the text for the
observance of the day. The Lord was simply providing for
the safety of the Christians.
But it is argued that Jesus kept
the day, and that consequently we too must keep it. This
is a very weak argument. Jesus was born under the law
(Gal. 4:4), and lived under it until its abolition at the
cross (Col. 2:14). He evidently kept it in the main—the
whole law. He was circumcised. Does that bind circumcision
on us? He kept the Passover (Luke 22:7-15). Do
Sabbatarians keep it because Jesus did ? Never. He sent a
man to offer a gift according to the law (Matt. 8:4), and
commanded his disciples to do all that the scribes taught
(Matt. 23:2, 3). Are these things obligatory upon us now?
Adventists themselves admit that they are not. This shows
the fallacy of their argument for Sabbath keeping. While
Jesus lived as a Jew under the Jewish law, he kept that
law—circumsion, Passover, Sabbath, and all. But it ended
at the cross (Col. 2:14).
But the women kept the Sabbath
"according to the commandments" (Luke 23:56).
This is considered strong proof by Sabbatarians. But where
is the argument? The women rested while Jesus was in the
grave and dead. He had not risen. Many things concerning
the law and its abrogation were yet mystified to them.
Christ promised that, when the Holy Ghost should come, he
would teach them many things, and open their
understanding. The fact that certain Jewish women rested
on that day is no more proof that the Jewish Sabbath is
binding on Gentile Christians than the facts that even
after the day of Pentecost many thousands of believing
Jews were "zealous for the law" and that Paul
circumcised Timothy (Acts 21:20; 16:3) or that
circumcision is binding on us today
Every mention of the Sabbath in the
Book of Acts is in connection with Jewish worship. The
Jews kept their Sabbath, and assembled on that day. Paul,
as his custom was, availed himself of this opportunity to
preach the gospel to them, and so reasoned with them on
the Sabbath days. Had he gone to the Jewish synagogue on
any other day, he would have found no congregation to
address. "Wherever the apostles entered the Jewish
synagogue on the Sabbath to preach, it was before the
Christian church was planted in such places." And
even could it be proved that for a time the Jewish
Christians met from custom on the Sabbath for worship,
that would not bind Sabbath keeping on Gentile Christians;
for the Jews that believed, circumcised and kept all the
rest of the law for a time ( Acts 21: 20, 21). But at the
council held at Jerusalem in A. D. 46, as recorded in Acts
15, it was decided not to bind the law on the Gentile
churches. Here again there is no proof in favor of
Saturday keeping.
With great demonstration it is
argued that the term "sabbath" occurs in the New
Testament fifty nine times, and always refers to the
seventh day, and that hence the seventh day must be the
New Testament Sabbath. But the same argument would bring
all the ceremonies of Moses' law under the gospel. Let us
test their reasoning. The Passover is mentioned in the New
Testament twenty eight times, and always refers to the
feast kept by the Jews; therefore that feast must be a New
Testament ordinance. Circumcision is found fifty nine
times in the New Testament; hence, according to Adventist
argument, it must still be in vogue. Such reasoning
betrays weakness. That the feasts, sacrifices, Passover,
sabbaths, circumcision, etc., of Moses' law are frequently
mentioned in the New Testament is no proof that they are
still obligatory upon the people of God.
