Sun-Worship the Oldest and Most Widely Diffused Form of
Paganism--Gnostic Antinomianism or Lawlessness--Anti-Judaism,
Mainly of Pagan Origin--Anti-Sabbathism and Sunday Observance
Synchronous--Anti-Lawism and Anti-Sabbathism Unscriptural--Christ’s
Teachings Concerning the Law of God; Paul’s Teachings on the
Same--Destructive Effect of Pagan Lawlessness on Christianity.
The sun-god, under various names, Mithras, Baal, Apollo, etc., was
the chief god of the heathen pantheon. A direct conflict between him
and Jehovah appears wherever paganism and revealed religion came in
contact. As “Baal,” “Lord” of the universe and of the productive forces
in nature and in man, this sun-god was the pre-eminent divinity in
ancient Palestine and throughout Phœnicia. The chosen people of God
were assailed and corrupted by this cult, even while they were in the
desert,[143] being led away by the women of Moab. During the period
of the Judges, Baal-worship was the besetting sin of Israel, which
the most vigorous measures could not eradicate.[144] A reformation
came under Saul and David, only to be followed by a relapse under
Solomon, which culminated in the exclusion of Jehovah-worship under
Ahab.[145] Jehu broke the power of the cult, for a time, but the people
soon returned to it.[146] It also spread like a virus through Judah;
repressed by Hezekiah, but continued by Manasseh.[147]
This worship of the sun-god was a sign of disloyalty to Jehovah, and
formed the certain road to wickedness and impurity.[148]
In its lowest forms it was so closely allied to sex-worship,
Phallicism, that it lent great power to that debasing licentiousness,
which sanctified lust, and made prostitution of virtue a religious
duty. Sun-worship was both powerful and popular in the Roman Empire
when Christianity came into contact with Western thought. It furnished
abundant material for the corrupting process. We have seen in a former
chapter that several minor elements of sun-worship mingled with pagan
water-worship: such as turning to the west to renounce evil, and
turning to the east to promise allegiance to Christ and Light, before
baptism; “Orientation”--building churches with the altar so that
men should worship toward the east--was another element, while the
extinguishing of a torch or a candle in the font, in the preparation
of holy water, was a direct importation from this cult. But these
were of little account in extent or influence, when compared with
the corruption which came through the introduction of Baal’s and
Apollo’s day, “Sunday,” in place of the Sabbath, which had always
represented, and yet represents, Jehovah, maker of heaven and earth.
The introduction of Sunday into Christianity was a continuation of the
old-time conflict between Baal and Jehovah.
The definite and systematic manner in which the corrupting process was
carried forward is clearly seen by the preparatory steps which opened
the way for paganism to thrust the sun’s day upon Christianity. We
have seen how the foundation of God’s authority was undermined by the
gnostic opposition to the Old Testament, and by the allegorizing of
both Old and New; how a false “baptismal-regeneration” theory filled
the church with baptized but unconverted heathens. These were not
enough to complete the corrupting process. While men still had regard
for the Sabbath, they could not entirely give up the law of Jehovah on
which it was based, and thus the fundamental doctrines of paganism were
still held in check.
The Simultaneous Development of Anti-Sabbathism and of Sunday
Observance.
Gnosticism was _antinomian_ from the core. All knowledge, and
hence all authority, was in the heart of the “true Gnostic.” The
“initiated” were divinely enlightened, were a law unto themselves.
This was doubly true when they came into contact with a law
promulgated by the “inferior God of the Jews,” the weak Creator of
matter, and hence a God in league with evil. Such opposition was
natural, was unavoidable, from the gnostic standpoint. Coupled with
the allegorical method of interpretation, it was an easy task for
this opposition to create a violent anti-Jewish prejudice, and a
combined no-lawism, and no-Sabbathism, which became the main factor
in sundering the Jewish and Gentile churches, and introducing the
reign of “_lawlessness_,” of which Paul wrote in the second chapter
of Thessalonians. This anti-lawism and anti-Sabbathism appear in
JUSTIN, the first pagano-Christian writer of whom we have sufficient
definite knowledge to gain a picture of the incipient results of pagan
influence on Christianity. He accepted Christianity after reaching
mature life, but retained his “philosopher’s cloak” as he did many of
his pagan ideas. His theories are a compound of pagan philosophy and
Christianity. He was furiously opposed to all that savored of Judaism.
His interpretations of Scripture and his religious opinions are all
strongly colored by this anti-Jewish spirit. His _Dialogue with Trypho
the Jew_, whether Trypho were a real or an imaginary character, is the
special exponent of anti-Judaism. The following examples show how he
confounded the moral laws and the ceremonial code of the Jews, and set
forth baneful no-lawism and no-Sabbathism, which grew in virulence and
destroyed the authority of the Old Testament wherever his influence
was felt. His special anti-Jewish treatise is entitled, _Dialogue
of Justin, Philosopher and Martyr, with Trypho, a Jew_. It opens as
follows:
“While I was going about one morning in the walks of the Xystus, a
certain man, with others in his company, having met me said, ‘Hail, O
Philosopher!’ And immediately after saying this, he turned round and
walked along with me; his friends likewise followed him. And I, in
turn having addressed him, said, ‘What is there important?’
“And he replied: ‘I was instructed,’ says he, ‘by Corinthus, the
Socratic in Argos, that I ought not to despise or treat with
indifference those who array themselves in this dress, but to show
them all kindness, and to associate with them, as perhaps some
advantage would spring from the intercourse either to some such man
or to myself. It is good, moreover, for both, if either the one or
the other be benefited.’
“On this account, therefore, whenever I see any one in such costume,
I gladly approach him, and now, for the same reason, have I
willingly accosted you; and these accompany me, in the expectation of
hearing for themselves something profitable from you.”
This opening shows Justin in his true character, as a philosopher
who has united certain elements of Christianity (see _Dialogue_, ch.
viii.) with his pagan theories, and is now to defend this product as
Christianity. In chapter x., Trypho states his case against Christians
in the following words:
“Moreover I am aware that your precepts in the so-called Gospel are
so wonderful and so great, that I suspect no one can keep them; for
I have carefully read them. But this is what we are most at a loss
about; that you, professing to be pious, and supposing yourselves
better than others, are not in any particular separated from them,
and do not alter your mode of living from the nations, in that
you observe no festivals or Sabbaths, and do not have the rite of
circumcision; and further, resting your hopes on a man that was
crucified, you yet expect to obtain some good thing from God, while
you do not obey His commandments. Have you not read, that that soul
shall be cut off from his people who shall not have been circumcised
on the eighth day? And this has been ordained for strangers and for
slaves equally. But you, despising this covenant rashly, reject the
consequent duties, and attempt to persuade yourselves that you know
God, when, however, you perform none of those things which they do
who fear God. If, therefore, you can defend yourself on these points,
and make it manifest in what way you hope for any thing whatsoever,
even though you do not observe the law, this we would very gladly
hear from you, and we shall make other similar investigations.”[149]
Justin answers Trypho in the next chapter, (chapter xi), which is
entitled: “_The Law Abrogated; The New Testament Promised and Given of
God_.”
Note the following from this, and subsequent chapters:
“For the law promulgated on Horeb is now old, and belongs to
yourselves alone; but this is for all universally. Now law placed
against law has abrogated that which is before it, and a covenant
which comes after in like manner has put an end to the previous one;
and an eternal and final law--namely Christ--has been given to us,
and the covenant is trustworthy, after which there shall be no law,
no commandment, no ordinance.”[150]
“You have now need of a second circumcision, though you glory greatly
in the flesh. The new law requires you to keep perpetual Sabbath,
and you, because you are idle for one day, suppose you are pious,
not discerning why this has been commanded you; and if you eat
unleavened bread, you say the will of God has been fulfilled. The
Lord our God does not take pleasure in such observances; if there is
any perjured person, or a thief among you, let him cease to be so; if
any adulterer, let him repent; then he has kept the sweet and true
Sabbaths of God. If any one has impure hands, let him wash and be
pure.[151]
“For we too would observe the fleshly circumcision, and the Sabbaths,
and in short all the feasts, if we did not know for what reason they
were enjoined you--namely on account of your transgressions and
the hardness of your hearts. For if we patiently endure all things
contrived against us by wicked men and demons, so that even amid
cruelties unutterable, death and torments, we pray for mercy to those
who inflict such things upon us, and do not wish to give the least
retort to any one even as the new Lawgiver commanded us; how is it,
Trypho, that we would not observe those rites which do not harm us--I
speak of fleshly circumcision, and Sabbaths and feasts?”[152]
In many different forms Justin Martyr repeats his theory, that the ten
commandments and the ceremonial economy of the Jews were abrogated,
and that there is no written law regulating conduct on the part of the
Christians.
TERTULLIAN also taught the temporary character of the Decalogue, and
no-lawism, as the following shows:
“Whence we understand that God’s law was anterior even to Moses, and
was not first [given] in Horeb, or in Sinai, and in the desert, but
was more ancient; [existing] first in paradise, subsequently reformed
for the patriarchs, and so again for the Jews, at definite periods;
so that we are not to give heed to Moses’ law as to the primitive
law, but as to a subsequent, which at a definite period, God has
set forth to the Gentiles too, and, after repeatedly promising so
to do, through the prophets, has re-formed for the better; and has
premonished [men] that it should come to pass that, ‘just as the
law was given through Moses,’ at a definite time, so it should be
believed to have been temporarily observed and kept. And let us not
annul this power which God has, which reforms the law’s precepts
answerably to the circumstances of the times, with a view to man’s
salvation. In fine, let him who contends that the Sabbath is still to
be observed as a balm of salvation, and circumcision on the eighth
day because of the threat of death, teach us that, for the time past,
righteous men kept the Sabbath, or practised circumcision, and were
thus rendered ‘friends of God.’ For if circumcision purges a man,
since God made Adam uncircumcised, why did he not circumcise him,
even after his sinning, if circumcision purges? At all events, in
settling him in paradise, He appointed one uncircumcised as colonist
of paradise. Therefore since God originated Adam uncircumcised,
and inobservant of the Sabbath, consequently his offspring also,
Abel, offering Him sacrifices, uncircumcised and inobservant of the
Sabbath, was by Him commended; while He accepted what he was offering
in simplicity of heart, and reprobated the sacrifice of his brother
Cain, who was not rightly dividing what he was offering. Noah, also,
uncircumcised,--yes, and inobservant of the Sabbath--God freed from
the deluge. For Enoch, too, most righteous man, uncircumcised and
inobservant of the Sabbath, He translated from this world; [Enoch]
who did not first taste death, in order that, being a candidate for
eternal life, he might by this time show us that we also may, without
the burden of the law of Moses, please God. Melchizedek, also,
‘the priest of the most high God,’ uncircumcised and inobservant
of the Sabbath, was chosen to the priesthood of God. Lot, withal,
the brother of Abraham, proves that it was for the merits of
righteousness, without observance of the law, that he was freed from
the conflagration of the Sodomites....
“Therefore, since it is manifest that a Sabbath temporal was shown,
and a Sabbath eternal foretold, and a circumcision carnal foretold,
and a circumcision spiritual pre-indicated; a law temporal and a law
eternal formally declared; sacrifices carnal and sacrifices spiritual
foreshown; it follows that, after all these precepts had been given
carnally, in time preceding, to the people of Israel, there was to
supervene a time whereat the precepts of the ancient law, and of
the old ceremonies would cease, and the promise of the new law, and
the recognition of spiritual sacrifices, and the promise of the New
Testament, supervene; while the light from on high would beam upon us
who were sitting in darkness, and were being detained in the shadow
of death. And so there is incumbent on us a necessity, binding us,
since we have premised that a new law was predicted by the prophets,
and that not such as had been already given to their fathers, at
the time when He led them forth from the land of Egypt, to show and
prove, on the one hand, that that old law has ceased, and on the
other, that the promised new law is now in operation.”[153]
These examples must suffice, since all who are familiar with
Patristic literature know that its general trend, and its openly
avowed opposition to Judaism and all things connected with the Old
Testament and the Decalogue, place it beyond controversy, that
the prevailing type of Christianity during the third, fourth, and
succeeding centuries, was anti-Sabbatic, and antinomian. There were
practical exceptions among the more common people, but the prevailing
thought, and hence the strong tendency, was away from the Sabbath, and
from Sabbathism. He who questions this shows himself ignorant in the
premises. This growing disregard for the authority of the Sabbath law,
and the steady development of anti-Sabbathism, prepared the way for a
vast system of semi-religious pagan days, with the Sun’s day at their
head.
Antinomianism and Anti-Sabbathism Unscriptural.
Before we inquire how Sunday was introduced, it will be well to
consider the unscriptural and destructive nature of the theories by
which the Decalogue and the Sabbath were dethroned, through false
teachings.
Christ is the central figure in both dispensations. If new expressions
of the Father’s will are to be made in connection with the work of
Christ on earth, they must be made by the “Immanuel,” who is thus
“reconciling the world unto himself.” Did Christ teach the abrogation
of the Decalogue, of which the Sabbath law is a part? Let His own words
answer:
“Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets. I came not
to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, till heaven and
earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away
from the law, till all things be accomplished. Whosoever, therefore,
shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men
so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whosoever
shall do and teach them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of
heaven.”[154]
When Christ speaks of the law (τὸν νόμον) in these emphatic words, He
cannot mean the ceremonial code, for these ceremonies were typical of
Him and must pass away with His death. Besides this, the word fulfil
(πληρῶσαι) means the opposite of destruction (καταλῦσαι). Christ
fulfilled the law by perfect obedience to it. He corrected false
interpretations, and intensified its claims. He taught obedience to
it in the spirit as well as the letter, and urged obedience from love
rather than fear. Such a work could not have been done in connection
with the dying ceremonies of the Jewish system. Such a work Christ did
do with reference to the Decalogue. In connection with the passage
above quoted Christ immediately refers to two laws from the Decalogue,
explains and enforces their meaning in a way far more broad and deep
than those who listened to Him were wont to conceive of them.
On another occasion[155] a certain shrewd lawyer sought to entrap the
Saviour by asking “which is the greatest commandment in the law.” The
question has no meaning unless it be applied to the Decalogue. Christ’s
answer includes all the commandments of the Decalogue, and thus avoids
the trap designed by the questioner, who sought to lead Him into some
distinction between laws known to be equal in their nature and extent.
In the sixteenth chapter of Luke,[156] Christ again affirms in the
strongest language, that “It is easier for heaven and earth to pass,
than one tittle of the law to fail.” Language could not be plainer than
that which is used in these statements.
These sentiments accord fully with the practice of Christ relative to
the Sabbath. He boldly condemned the unjust requirements which the Jews
had attached to the observance of it, and taught that works of mercy
were to be freely done on that day; that it was made for man’s good,
and not his injury. But He never taught that because it was “made for
man” therefore it was to be abrogated, or unsanctified. Neither did
He delegate to His disciples any power to teach the abrogation of the
law, or of the Sabbath. On the contrary, their representative writings
contain the same clear testimony in favor of the perpetuity of the law,
and show the same practical observance of the Sabbath. Paul, the great
reasoner among the Apostles, after an exhaustive discussion concerning
the relations between the law and the Gospel, concludes the whole
matter in these words:
“Do we then make the law of none effect through faith? God forbid!
Nay, we establish the law.”[157]
Again in the same epistle[158] he presents a conclusive argument,
starting from the axiom that “where there is no law there is no sin.”
Showing that since death, which came by sin, reigned from Adam to
Moses, therefore the law then existed, and, by the same reasoning that
if there be no law under the Gospel dispensation, there can be no sin;
if no sin, then no Saviour from sin, and Christ died in vain, if by
His death he destroyed the law. In another place Paul contrasts the
Decalogue with the ceremonial code, and declares the worthlessness of
the one and the binding character of the other, in these words:
“Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the
keeping of the commandments of God.”[159]
Thus, in a plain and unequivocal way, Paul teaches as his Master taught.
In view of Christ’s words, and Paul’s sharp logic, the following
conclusions are unavoidable. They annihilate the no-law theory.
1. If the Decalogue was abolished by the death of Christ, then Christ
by His death prevented the possibility of sin, to redeem man from which
He died.
2. “Sin is not imputed where there is no law,”[160] hence the
consciousness of sin which men feel under the claims of the Gospel is
a mockery, and all faith in Christ is a farce. It only increases the
difficulty to say that the law is written in the hearts of believers.
If that be true, then:
3. None but believers in Christ can be convicted of sin, for no others
can know the law which convicts of sin. Therefore those who reject
Christ become, at least negatively, _righteous_ by refusing to come
where they can be convicted of sin. Thus does the no-Sabbath theory
make infidelity better than belief, and _rejection of Christ the only
means of salvation_. It leads to endless absurdities, and the overthrow
of all moral government. It contradicts the plain words of God, and
puts darkness for light. Its fruitage in human life has been only
bitterness and ashes.
FOOTNOTES:
[143] Numbers xxv.
[144] Judges ii., 13; iii., 7; vi., 25 ff.; x., 6; 1 Sam. vii., 4;
xii., 10.
[145] 1 Kings xvi., 31 ff., and xix., 10.
[146] 2 Kings x., 18-28, and xvii., 16.
[147] 2 Kings xviii., 4, and xxi., 3.
[148] When Joshua, the servant of Jehovah, commanded the sun to stand
still, there was given an ocular demonstration of the power of the God
who made the heavens and the earth, over the sun-god, in whom the pagan
enemies of Israel trusted.
[149] _Dialogue with Trypho_, chap. x.
[150] _Ibid._, chap. xi.
[151] _Ibid._, chap. xii.
[152] _Dialogue_, etc., chap. xviii.
[153] _Against the Jews_, chapters ii. and vi.
[154] Matthew v., 17-19.
[155] Matthew xxii., 35-40.
[156] 17th verse.
[157] Romans iii., 31.
[158] Romans v., 13, 14.
[159] The example of Christ and His Apostles concerning Sabbath
observance is discussed in detail in _Biblical Teachings_, etc., by the
writer, pp. 26-44.
[160] Romans v., 13.