human
For this deviation from the course prescribed, God pronounced him a transgressor, and visited him in judgment, declaring that
gpt
So when God instituted a weekly Sabbath, and specified the seventh day for that purpose, assigning a special and appropriate reason, it was manifestly his will that that particular day should be observed; and the substitution of another day, without subsequent instruction to that effect, cannot be reconciled with a due regard for his supreme authority. It is
human
which constituted the enmity or separation between Jews and Gentiles, was abolished by the death of Christ--that
gpt
But the same course cannot be successfully pursued with respect to the seventh-day Sabbath. The Decalogue in which this is found was not included in the abrogated ritual. It is altogether a distinct thing, wherefore the Jews cannot be met in the same way with regard to the weekly Sabbath as they can with regard to the typical observances which had their accomplishment in Christ. Hence the stumbling-block remains. And yet those who observe the first day are generally praying for and expecting the conversion of the Jews, and, in connection therewith, the millennial glory of the church. What an inconsistency is this! While they are praying for their national conversion and return to the land of their forefathers, and are beginning to use some other means for that end, they, by their palpable violation of the law of the fourth commandment, place a most formidable obstacle in their way, and pursue a course calculated to augment their prejudices, confirm their unbelief, and retard the approach of millennial glory. To bring Jews and Gentiles together in the observance of the Sabbath, the one party or the other must materially change their practice. And which is it most reasonable to expect will ultimately be compelled to make the change--the _Jews_, who have the authority of God's example and express precept to sustain them, or the _Gentiles_, who can claim no such authority for a first-day Sabbath? Surely, we need not be at a loss for an answer. It is confidently believed, that this subject has no inconsiderable bearing upon the condition and prospects of the Jews. If a few conversions are now effected among them, what might be expected if Christians would remove the stumbling-blocks which their own errors have placed in their way? Would we enter an effectual plea in behalf of this wonderful and long-neglected people, we know not how we could do it better than to plead for the observance of the Sabbath of the fourth commandment. Let those whose
human
like Paul's,
gpt
there is much in the carnal views and inclinations of men to oppose it, to resist its restrictions, and to thwart its purposes. Hence powerful considerations and inducements are necessary to suppress its desecration, and insure its proper observance. Not only the _unbelieving world_, but _Christians_, in their present imperfect state, need to have this institution thoroughly guarded to prevent its abuse. If it be considered as resting upon _doubtful authority_; if it be viewed as sustained merely by _inference_, and the _premises_ from which the inference is drawn be at best questionable, and do not _necessarily_ authorize it; if the principal argument for it be founded on a supposed apostolic example of meeting for public worship on the first day of the week, which is sustained only by _two_ passages, while those _very passages_ fail to mark it as _a Sabbath_, or to give the least intimation of its having been introduced as _a substitute_ for the former Sabbath, and even fail to imply, necessarily, that meetings of this description were _stated_ and _general_ in the churches in the apostolic age; and if it be found, from subsequent ecclesiastical history, that the first day, called Sunday and Lord's day, was not regarded by Christians in the first centuries after the apostles as _a Sabbath_, nor as _substituted therefore_, but only as a _festival_ in commemoration of the resurrection--a _festival_ observed in connection with the Sabbath, but not accompanied with a _resting from worldly labor_, till the time of Constantine the Great; yea, if but a part of those who are considered experimental Christians, look upon it _now_ as properly _a Sabbath_, or day of _holy rest_, while others regard it merely as a day for _public worship_, and even such as call it a Sabbath conceive, in many instances, that the _strict_ observance formerly required is somewhat _modified_; we can easily perceive, that it wants that _explicit sanction_--that _high_ and _overpowering authority_--which will be likely to awe the public into obedience--which is necessary, indeed, to give Christians themselves a proper sense of its sanctity, and of the evil of its desecration--to induce them