Barnabas--Pliny--Ignatius--The Church at Smyrna--The Epistle to
Diognetus--Recognitions of Clement--Syriac Documents concerning
Edessa.
TESTIMONY OF THE EPISTLE OF BARNABAS.
In his second chapter this writer speaks thus:--
"For he hath revealed to us by all the prophets that he needs
neither sacrifices, nor burnt-offerings, nor oblations, saying
thus, 'What is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me, saith
the Lord? I am full of burnt-offerings, and desire not the fat of
lambs, and the blood of bulls and goats, not when ye come to appear
before me: for who hath required these things at your hands? Tread
no more my courts, not though ye bring with you fine flour. Incense
is a vain abomination unto me, and your new moons and Sabbaths I
cannot endure.' He has therefore abolished these things, that the
new law of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is without the yoke of
necessity, might have a human oblation."
The writer may have intended to assert the abolition of the sacrifices
only, as this was his special theme in this place. But he presently
asserts the abolition of the Sabbath of the Lord. Here is his fifteenth
chapter entire:--
"Further, also, it is written concerning the Sabbath in the
decalogue which [the Lord] spoke, face to face, to Moses on Mount
Sinai, 'And sanctify ye the Sabbath of the Lord with clean hands
and a pure heart.' And he says in another place, 'If my sons keep
the Sabbath, then will I cause my mercy to rest upon them.' The
Sabbath is mentioned at the beginning of the creation [thus]: 'And
God made in six days the works of his hands, and made an end on
the seventh day, and rested on it, and sanctified it.' Attend, my
children, to the meaning of this expression, 'He finished in six
days.' This implieth that the Lord will finish all things in six
thousand years, for a day is with him a thousand years. And he
himself testifieth, saying, 'Behold to-day will be as a thousand
years.' Therefore, my children, in six days, that is, in six
thousand years, all things will be finished. 'And he rested on the
seventh day.' This meaneth: when his Son, coming [again], shall
destroy the time of the wicked man, and judge the ungodly, and
change the sun, and the moon, and the stars, then shall he truly
rest on the seventh day. Moreover, he says, 'Thou shalt sanctify it
with pure hands and a pure heart.' If, therefore, any one can now
sanctify the day which God hath sanctified, except he is pure in
heart in all things, we are deceived. Behold, therefore: certainly
then one properly resting sanctifies it, when we ourselves,
having received the promise, wickedness no longer existing, and
all things having been made new by the Lord, shall be able to
work righteousness. Then we shall be able to sanctify it, having
been first sanctified ourselves. Further, he says to them, 'Your
new moons and your Sabbaths I cannot endure.' Ye perceive how he
speaks: Your present Sabbaths are not acceptable to me, but that is
which I have made [namely this], when, giving rest to all things,
I shall make a beginning of the eighth day, that is, a beginning
of another world. Wherefore, also, we keep the eighth day with
joyfulness, the day, also, on which Jesus rose again from the dead.
And when he had manifested himself, he ascended into the heavens."
Here are some very strange specimens of reasoning. The substance of
what he says relative to the present observance of the Sabbath appears
to be this: No one "can now sanctify the day which God hath sanctified
except he is pure in heart in all things." But this cannot be the case
until the present world shall pass away, "when we ourselves, having
received the promise, wickedness no longer existing, and _all things
having been made new_ by the Lord, shall be able to work righteousness.
Then we shall be able to sanctify it, having been first sanctified
ourselves." Men cannot therefore keep the Sabbath while this wicked
world lasts. And so he says, "Your present Sabbaths are not acceptable
to me." That is to say, the keeping of the day which God has sanctified
is not possible in such a wicked world. But though the seventh day
cannot now be kept, the eighth day can be, and ought to be, because
when the seventh thousand years are past there will be at the beginning
of the eighth thousand the new creation. So the persons represented
by this writer, do not attempt to keep the seventh day which God
sanctified, for that is too pure to keep in this world, and can only
be kept after the Saviour comes at the commencement of the seventh
thousand years; but they "keep the eighth day with joyfulness, the day
also on which Jesus rose again from the dead." Sunday, which God never
sanctified, is exactly suitable for observance in the world as it now
is. But the sanctified seventh day "we shall be able to sanctify" when
all things have been made new. If our first-day friends think these
words of some unknown writer of the second century more honorable to
the first day of the week than to the seventh, they are welcome to
them. Had the writer said, "It is easier to keep Sunday than the
Sabbath while the world is so wicked," he would have stated the truth.
But when in substance he says, "It is more acceptable to God to keep a
common than a sanctified day while men are so sinful," he excuses his
disobedience by uttering a falsehood. Several things however should be
noted:--
1. In this quotation we have the reasons of a no-Sabbath man for
keeping the festival of Sunday. It is not God's commandment, for there
was none for that festival; but the day God hallowed being too pure to
keep while the world is so wicked, Sunday is therefore kept till the
return of the Lord, and then the seventh day shall be truly sanctified
by those who now regard it not.
2. But this writer, though saying what he is able in behalf of the
first day of the week, applies to it no sacred name. He does not call
it Christian Sabbath, nor Lord's day, but simply "the eighth day," and
this because it succeeds the seventh day of the week.
3. It is also to be noticed that he expressly dates the Sabbath from
the creation.
4. The change of the Sabbath was unknown to this writer. He kept the
Sunday festival, not because it was purer than the sanctified seventh
day, but because the seventh day was too pure to keep while the world
is so wicked.
TESTIMONY OF THE EPISTLE OF PLINY.
Pliny was the Roman governor of Bithynia in the years 103 and 104.
He wrote a letter to the emperor Trajan, in which he states what he
had learned of the Christians as the result of examining them at his
tribunal:--
"They affirmed that the whole of their guilt or error was, that
they met on a certain stated day [_stato die_], before it was
light, and addressed themselves in a form of prayer to Christ,
as to some God, binding themselves by a solemn oath, not for the
purposes of any wicked design, but never to commit any fraud,
theft, or adultery; never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust
when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it
was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to eat in common
a harmless meal."--_Coleman's Ancient Christianity_, chap. i. sect.
1.
The letter of Pliny is often referred to as though it testified that
the Christians of Bithynia celebrated the first day of the week. Yet
such is by no means the case, as the reader can plainly see. Coleman
says of it (page 528):--
"This statement is evidence that these Christians kept a day as
holy time, but whether it was the last, or the first day of the
week, does not appear."
Such is the judgment of an able, candid, first-day church historian of
good repute as a scholar. An anti-Sabbatarian writer of some repute
speaks thus:--
"As the Sabbath day appears to have been quite as commonly observed
at this date as the Sun's day (if not even more so), it is just
as probable that this 'stated day' referred to by Pliny was the
_seventh_ day, as that it was the _first_ day; though the latter is
generally taken for granted."--_Obligation of the Sabbath_, p. 300.
Every candid person must acknowledge that it is unjust to represent
the letter of Pliny as testifying in behalf of the so-called Christian
Sabbath. Next in order of time come the reputed epistles of Ignatius.
TESTIMONY OF THE EPISTLES OF IGNATIUS.
Of the fifteen epistles ascribed to Ignatius, eight are, by universal
consent, accounted spurious; and eminent scholars have questioned the
genuineness of the remaining seven. There are, however, two forms to
these seven, a longer and a shorter, and while some doubt exists as
to the shorter form, the longer form is by common consent ascribed to
a later age than that of Ignatius. But the epistle to the Magnesians,
which exists both in the longer and in the shorter form, is the one
from which first-day writers obtain Ignatius' testimony in behalf of
Sunday, and they quote for this both these forms. We therefore give
both. Here is the shorter:--
"For the divinest prophets lived according to Christ Jesus. On this
account also they were persecuted, being inspired by his grace
to fully convince the unbelieving that there is one God, who has
manifested himself by Jesus Christ his Son, who is his eternal
Word, not proceeding forth from silence, and who in all things
pleased him that sent him. If, therefore, those who were brought up
in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new
hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance
of the Lord's day, on which also our life has sprung again by him
and by his death--whom some deny, by which mystery we have obtained
faith, and therefore endure, that we may be found the disciples of
Jesus Christ, our only master--how shall we be able to live apart
from him, whose disciples the prophets themselves in the Spirit did
wait for him as their teacher? And therefore he whom they rightly
waited for, being come, raised them from the dead." Chaps. viii.
and ix.
This paragraph is the one out of which a part of a sentence is quoted
to show that Ignatius testifies in behalf of the Lord's-day festival,
or Christian Sabbath. But the so-called Lord's day is only brought in
by means of a false translation. This is the decisive sentence:
#mêketi sabbatizontes, alla kata kyriakên zôên zôntes#; literally: "no
longer sabbatizing, but living according to Lord's life."
Eminent first-day scholars have called attention to this fact, and have
testified explicitly that the term Lord's day has no right to appear
in the translation; for the original is not #kyriakên hêmeran#,
Lord's day, but #kyriakên zôên#, Lord's life. This is absolutely
decisive, and shows that something akin to fraud has to be used in
order to find a reference in this place to the so-called Christian
Sabbath.
But there is another fact quite as much to the point. The writer was
not speaking of those then alive, but of the ancient prophets. This is
proved by the opening and closing words of the above quotation, which
first-day writers always omit. The so-called Lord's day is inserted
by a fraudulent translation; and now see what absurdity comes of it.
The writer is speaking of the ancient prophets. If, therefore, the
Sunday festival be inserted in this quotation from Ignatius he is
made to declare that "the divinest prophets," who "were brought up in
the ancient order of things," kept the first day and did not keep the
Sabbath! Whereas, the truth is just the reverse of this. They certainly
did keep the Sabbath, and did not keep the first day of the week. The
writer speaks of the point when these men came "to the newness of
hope," which must be their individual conversion to God. They certainly
did observe and enforce the Sabbath after this act of conversion. See
Isa., chaps. 56, 58; Jer. 17; Eze., chaps. 20, 22, 23. But they did
also, as this writer truly affirms, live according to the Lord's life.
The sense of the writer respecting the prophets must therefore be
this: "No longer [after their conversion to God] observing the Sabbath
[merely, as natural men] but living according to the Lord's life," or
"according to Christ Jesus."
So much for the shorter form of the epistle to the Magnesians. Though
the longer form is by almost universal consent of scholars and critics
pronounced the work of some centuries after the time of Ignatius,
yet as a portion of this also is often given by first-day writers to
support Sunday, and given too as the words of Ignatius, we here present
in full its reference to the first day of the week, and also to the
Sabbath, which they generally omit. Here are its statements:--
"Let us therefore no longer keep the Sabbath after the Jewish
manner, and rejoice in days of idleness; for 'he that does not
work, let him not eat.' For, say the [holy] oracles, 'In the sweat
of thy face shalt thou eat thy bread.' But let every one of you
keep the Sabbath after a spiritual manner, rejoicing in meditation
on the law, not in relaxation of the body, admiring the workmanship
of God, and not eating things prepared the day before, nor using
lukewarm drinks, and walking within a prescribed space, nor finding
delight in dancing and plaudits which have no sense in them. And
after the observance of the Sabbath, let every friend of Christ
keep the Lord's day as a festival, the resurrection day, the queen
and chief of all the days [of the week]. Looking forward to this,
the prophet declared, 'To the end, for the eighth day,' on which
our life both sprang up again, and the victory over death was
obtained in Christ," etc. Chapter ix.
This epistle, though the work of a later hand than that of Ignatius,
is valuable for the light which it sheds upon the state of things
when it was written. It gives us a correct idea of the progress of
apostasy with respect to the Sabbath in the time of the writer. He
speaks against Jewish superstition in the observance of the Sabbath,
and condemns days of idleness as contrary to the declaration, "In the
sweat of thy face shalt thou eat thy bread." But by days of idleness
he cannot refer to the Sabbath, for this would be to make the fourth
commandment clash with this text, whereas they must harmonize, inasmuch
as they existed together during the former dispensation. Moreover,
the Sabbath, though a day of abstinence from labor, is not a day of
idleness, but of active participation in religious duties. He enjoins
its observance after a spiritual manner. And after the Sabbath has
been thus observed, "let every friend of Christ keep the Lord's day
_as a festival_, the resurrection day, the queen and chief of all the
days." The divine institution of the Sabbath was not yet done away,
but the human institution of Sunday had become its equal, and was even
commended above it. Not long after this, it took the whole ground, and
the observance of the Sabbath was denounced as heretical and pernicious.
The reputed epistle of Ignatius to the Trallians in its shorter form
does not allude to this subject. In its longer form, which is admitted
to be the work of a later age than that of Ignatius, these expressions
are found:--
"During the Sabbath, he continued under the earth;" "at the dawning
of the Lord's day he arose from the dead;" "the Sabbath embraces
the burial; the Lord's day contains the resurrection." Chap. ix.
In the epistle to the Philippians, which is universally acknowledged
to be the work of a later person than Ignatius, it is said:--
"If any one fasts on the Lord's day or on the Sabbath, except on
the paschal Sabbath only, he is a murderer of Christ." Chap. xiii.
We have now given every allusion to the Sabbath and first-day that
can be found in any writing attributed to Ignatius. We have seen
that the term "Lord's day" is not found in any sentence written by
him. The first day is never called the Christian Sabbath, not even
in the writings falsely attributed to him; nor is there in any of
them a hint of the modern doctrine of the change of the Sabbath.
Though falsely ascribed to Ignatius, and actually written in a later
age, they are valuable in that they mark the progress of apostasy
in the establishment of the Sunday festival. Moreover, they furnish
conclusive evidence that the ancient Sabbath was retained for centuries
in the so-called Catholic church, and that the Sunday festival was
an institution entirely distinct from the Sabbath of the fourth
commandment.
TESTIMONY OF THE CHURCH AT SMYRNA.
The epistle of Polycarp makes no reference to the Sabbath nor to the
first day of the week. But "the encyclical epistle of the church at
Smyrna concerning the martyrdom of the holy Polycarp," informs us that
"the blessed Polycarp suffered martyrdom" "on the great Sabbath at the
eighth hour." Chapter xxi. The margin says: "The great Sabbath is that
before the passover." This day, thus mentioned, is not Sunday, but is
the ancient Sabbath of the Lord.
TESTIMONY OF THE EPISTLE TO DIOGNETUS.
This was written by an unknown author, and Diognetus himself is known
only by name, no facts concerning him having come down to us. It dates
from the first part of the second century. The writer speaks of "the
superstition as respects the Sabbaths" which the Jews manifested, and
he adds these words: "To speak falsely of God, as if he forbade us to
do what is good on the Sabbath days--how is not this impious?" But
there is nothing in this to which a commandment-keeper would object, or
which he might not freely utter.
The "Recognitions of Clement" is a kind of philosophical and
theological romance. It purports to have been written by Clement of
Rome, in the time of the apostle Peter, but was actually written
"somewhere in the first half of the third century."
TESTIMONY OF THE RECOGNITIONS OF CLEMENT.
In book i., chapter xxxv., he speaks of the giving of the law thus:--
"Meantime they came to Mount Sinai, and thence the law was given to
them with voices and sights from heaven, written in ten precepts,
of which the first and greatest was that they should worship God
himself alone," etc. In book iii., chapter lv., he speaks of these
precepts as tests: "On account of those, therefore, who by neglect
of their own salvation please the evil one, and those who by study
of their own profit seek to please the good One, ten things have
been prescribed as a test to this present age, according to the
number of the ten plagues which were brought upon Egypt." In book
ix., chapter xxviii., he says of the Hebrews, "that no child born
among them is ever exposed, and that on every seventh day they all
rest," etc. In book x., chap. lxxii., is given the conversion of
one Faustinianus by St. Peter. And it is said, "He proclaimed a
fast to all the people, and on the next Lord's day he baptized him."
This is all that I find in this work relating to the Sabbath and the
so-called Lord's day. The writer held the ten commandments to be tests
of character in the present dispensation. There is no reason to believe
that he, or any other person in that age, held the Sunday festival as
something to be observed in obedience to the fourth commandment.
TESTIMONY OF THE SYRIAC DOCUMENTS CONCERNING EDESSA.
On pages 35-55 of this work is given what purports to be "The Teaching
of the Apostles." On page 36, the ascension of the Lord is said to have
been upon the "first day of the week, and the end of the Pentecost."
Two manifest falsehoods are here uttered; for the ascension was upon
Thursday, and the Pentecost came ten days after the ascension. It is
also said that the disciples came from Nazareth of Galilee to the mount
of Olives on that selfsame day before the ascension, and yet that the
ascension was "at the time of the early dawn." But Nazareth was distant
from the mount of Olives at least sixty miles!
On page 38, a commandment from the apostles is given: "On the first
[day] of the week, let there be service, and the reading of the holy
Scriptures, and the oblation," because Christ arose on that day, was
born on that day, ascended on that day, and will come again on that
day. But here is one truth, one falsehood, and two mere assertions. The
apostles are represented, on page 39, as commanding a fast of forty
days, and they add: "Then celebrate the day of the passion [Friday],
and the day of the resurrection," Sunday. But this would be only an
annual celebration of these days.
And on pages 38 and 39 they are also represented as commanding service
to be held on the fourth and sixth days of the week. The Sabbath is
not mentioned in these "Documents," which were written about the
commencement of the fourth century, when, in many parts of the world,
that day had ceased to be hallowed.