The Truth Found- Contents
- TABLE OF CONTENTS
- THE SABBATH
- WHAT IS THE LAW?
- THE FOURTH COMMANDMENT
- ORIGIN OF THE SABBATH
- THE SABBATH WAS NOT JEWISH
- THE SEVENTH DAY IS THE SABBATH OF THE LORD THY GOD
- THE SABBATH WAS NOT A TYPE
- OUR SAVIOUR DID NOT CHANGE THE SABBATH
- THE SAVIOUR KEPT THE SABBATH
- THE APOSTLES KEPT THE SABBATH
- THE EARLY CHURCH KEPT THE SABBATH
- THE WALDENSES KEPT THE SABBATH
- SUNDAY-KEEPING A HUMAN ORDINANCE
- CLAIMS OF THE SEVENTH DAY AND FIRST DAY COMPARED
- THE LAW AND THE GOSPEL AGREE
- THE LAST DAYS
- A SHORT ARGUMENT FOR THE SABBATH
- I. WHAT DOES GOD’S WORD TEACH CONCERNING THE SABBATH?
- II. WHAT DOES THE NEW TESTAMENT TEACH CONCERNING THE FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK?
- Weighted Relevancy
- Content Sequence
- Earliest First
- Latest First
I. WHAT DOES GOD’S WORD TEACH CONCERNING THE SABBATH?
We should remember that the Author of the Bible is the Supreme Ruler of the universe; therefore the teachings of the Bible define our obligation to the highest authority. In it we are taught that,TFNOS 44.6
It is a fact that God made the world in six days, also that he rested the seventh day; and these declarations will forever remain facts. They can never, in the untold ages of eternity, be any less truths than on the day when God finished his work and rested. God’s rest, or Sabbath, was on the seventh day, and the seventh can never cease to be the Sabbath, or rest-day, of God, even as it can never cease to be a fact that God rested on the seventh day. From these declarations we draw the followingTFNOS 45.6
CONCLUSION:—The Sabbath institution is based on fixed and unalterable facts, which, from their bearing, must be removed in order to remove, abolish, or change, the Sabbath; which is, of course, impossible.TFNOS 45.7
In the account of the creation week, we are told that God made the world in six days, therefore he did not rest on any other day than the seventh; and as it will always remain a fact that he rested on the seventh day, so it can never become a fact that he rested on any other day. Hence, as the seventh day can never cease to be the rest-day, or Sabbath, of the Lord, so no other day can ever become his rest-day, or Sabbath; from which facts we draw anotherTFNOS 45.8
God blessed and hallowed the seventh day; and it cannot cease to be a fact that he blessed and hallowed the seventh day, so it must remain a sanctified day, unless it can be shown to be also a fact that God has removed or withdrawn the sanctity from it. But the fact of its having been sanctified is a plainly revealed truth—an express declaration of the infallible word. It is also plainly declared in the word that God has removed the blessing and sanctity from the seventh day? It is not. And there is not a passage from which even an inference to that effect could be drawn; but were there such a passage, the inference would not be admissible, inasmuch as an inference cannot destroy a plain declaration. From these truths, I expect all to concur in the followingTFNOS 46.2
Here we have presented another fact; and it will always remain a fact that God commanded the observance of the seventh day. Will the obligation to keep it holy also remain as long as the fact remains that God so commanded? It surely will unless it can be shown to be equally a fact that he has annulled or revoked the commandment. But the fact that its observance was commanded, is very plainly revealed in the word. Does the word of God also plainly state that the commandment has been repealed? It does not; but its repeal has been inferred from certain texts which certainly do not state in plain terms that it has been repealed, nor do they contain anything resembling a repeal. But the commandment is a plainly expressed precept, and the inference is therefore inadmissible. And the inference is not only unnecessary, but in opposition to many scriptures showing the perpetuity of the law.TFNOS 46.5
It will be admitted that commandments or laws, as they impose obligation, should be most definitely and clearly stated. Any ambiguity or vagueness of expression in a law is inexcusable, necessarily leading to confusion and injustice. And it is just as necessary to a correct understanding of the obligation we are under to the lawgiver that the repeal, or amendment, of a law should be plainly stated, as that the original enactment should be. The commandment enforcing the observance of the seventh day, like the other parts of God’s law, is as definitely and clearly expressed as language can be made to express ideas. But no repeal can be produced. Hence we can have no hesitation in adopting the followingTFNOS 47.1