« AnteriorContinuar »
terly, or an easterly direction, always gains or loses one day in the computation. Two navigators setting sail on the same day, one taking his course to the East Indies, and returning by South America; and the other going by South America, and returning by the Cape of Good Hope; would vary two days in their computation of time: as one would proceed according to the daily course of the sun, and lose one whole day; and the other against the course of the sun, and would have one day over. Now which would be the seventh day of the week, to these two navigators? If the sabbath were only obligatory on the inhabitants of one small country, as Canaan, the difficulty would not be found: but, if extended to all nations, the sabbath would not consist of precisely the same individual hours, in any of the countries, either to the east or to the west.--But, however that may be, it appears to many Christians, provided one day in seven be thus consecrated to the worship and service of God, to the exclusion of all worldly employments, however lawful, if neither necessary, nor connected with piety and charity, that the moral obligation is satisfied. Not that we are to choose the day for ourselves : but that the determining which of the days, by our great Lawgiver, is a matter of positive appointment, and not of moral or immutable obligation. From the creation to the giving of the law, the seventh day was appointed, in commemoration of the creation being completed, “ pronounced very
good," and rested in by the great Creator. And, though the intervention of the fall greatly altered the state of this lower creation, and of man espe
cially, the original appointment continued. It appears to me also, (though this is not undisputed,) that the Mosaic sabbath was instituted on the same day of the seven : but the redemption from Egyptian bondage was added, as one great benefit to be commemorated by Israel on the sabbath ; and this redemption we consider as typical of spiritual redemption by Jesus Christ. We, however, are satisfied, that “the Lord even of the “ sabbath day," Jesus Christ the Son of God, has, by his authority, changed the instituted part of the command, and has appointed the first day of the seven, instead of the last, in commemoration of his resurrection : because that event, as completing his work of redemption, was of far greater importance, and an infinitely greater benefit to fallen man, than creation without redemption would have been. Our observation of the first day, as the Christian sabbath, is not · derived * from what Paul said ;'but from the general language of the New Testament, and the general practice of the primitive Christians, in the apostles”
. days. It is by the apostle John called “ the “ Lord's day:"2 vs Kupraxş quéçã, as St. Paul calls the eucharist, Kuplexòy demovov.3 The same authority which, as we suppose, abolished the other festivals of the ceremonial law, changed the ceremonial part of this law. “ The first day of the week” is, subsequently to our Lord's resurrection, distinguished from other days ;4 and sabbaths are put among those ritual observances which are no longer in force. With this the constant practice of the Christian church accords : and every argument, which proves Christianity to be from God, establishes this change in the day of sacred rest. “ This is the day which the Lord hath made; we “ will rejoice and be glad in it:” for “ the Stone, “ which the builders refused,” on this day arose, that he might “become the head-stone of the “corner.” 2 If indeed God said to the apostles on the mount, as we believe, “ This is
11 Cor. xvi. 2. ? Rev. i. 10. * John xx. 19, 26. Acts xx. 7.
31 Cor. xi. 20. 1 Cor. xvi. 2.
beloved “ Son, in whom I am well pleased; HEAR YE “HIM:” and if he, as it is manifest, made known his will to the apostles concerning this change of the day; then the same authority, which appointed the seventh day, for wise and holy reasons substituted the first in its place. But it pleased God that this change, as some others, should be gradually introduced, rather by apostolical example, than by direct injunction; that no needless stumbling block might be thrown in the way of the Jews.
P. 84. 1. 26. ' Type,' &c.-It is no where in scripture said, that 'the sabbath is a type of the 'millennium :' but, if it were, this would confirm the view which we have of it, namely, that in some respects it was a part of instituted worship. The apostle shews that he considered it as a figure or anticipation of heavenly happiness, when he says,
There remaineth therefore a rest,” (cablatioaós, the keeping of a sabbath,) “ for the people of
P. 84. 1. 31. ^ They have no right to keep holy,' &c.—To have no right to obey, the command of God, seems an uncommon idea or expression.The rest of the paragraph does not require any particular answer. Christians consider the festivals, as well as other parts of the ceremonial law, as abolished; and they judge that the moral part of the fourth commandment is obeyed, by observing the Lord's day, if it be indeed kept as the Lord's day should be.
P. 85. 1. 10. · The day of atonement.'—P. 86. 1. 6. 'A little sanctuary. ---It is rather difficult to conceive how many synagogues, widely dispersed through distant countries, could be “a little "sanctuary."
I have no doubt that believing and humble Israelites of old worshipped God by prayer and praise, with acceptance at the synagogues, wherever dispersed: but this was always with a reference to the tabernacle and temple, where alone sacrifices, atoning sacrifices, were appointed to be offered. The name and perfections of God, ' his grace, and providence, and promises, trusted in by a few prudent, pious Jews, was to them as “a little sanctuary;" when they could not go up to the temple. Their worship was accepted, wherever presented, through the ministrations of the priests, and the atoning sacrifices offered “ in the place which God had chosen
to .place his name there.” 2 But since the coming of the Messiah, and the rejection of him by the Jews, we Christians must think that the
* Is. viii. 13-15.
efficacy of the typical sacrifices has ceased, and that no worship is acceptable from those who reject the substance of all those types.
P. 86. 1. 10. ! Sacrifices.'--We acknowledge that a broken spirit, and some other things, are “ spiritual sacrifices,” of far higher value than any sacrifices of animals burnt on altars, except when these were offered with reference to the great antitype and his atonement: but we consider these spiritual sacrifices as required by the moral law, or as connected with the “gospel of our “ salvation.". Indeed, to speak of synagogues, and the sacrifices of praise and thanksgiving, in answer to the argument that there exists no temple, or any such sacrifices as the ceremonial law prescribed; is merely to evade the conclusion manifestly deducible from the undeniable fact. We simply inquire, Are these the sacrifices appointed by Moses to be offered on the day of atonement? Are they offered in obedience to the ceremonial law? The answer is, ' In our
dispersions we cannot offer these ; and we do what we can.' Be it so: but is not this the very thing that we maintain ; that God, in proof that the ritual law is abolished, has rendered the observance of it, in its most essential requirements, impracticable even to those who would observe it? We allow that the moral law remains in full force: but that the ritual law of Moses, having answered its purpose, is abolished, and in fact cannot be observed. Now to shew that sacrifices required by the moral law, or certainly not appointed in the ritual law, may still be offered