Objections.

Objections to the Truth.

*******

THE PRESENT TRUTH.

PUBLISHED, SEMI-MONTHLY, BY JAMES WHITE.

Vol. I.] OSWEGO, N. Y. DECEMBER, 1849. [No. 6

POPULAR OBJECTIONS ANSWERED.

It is not uncommon for those upon whose attention the claims of the seventh day are urged, to attempt to escape the force of truth by a variety of objections. This is often done by such as are convinced that the Scriptures require the observance  of the seventh day and not the first. It is a remarkable feature of these objections, that they  are totally unlike and destructive of each other. But as they are often presented and much relied on, we will mention a few of them.

1. "The original Sabbath cannot be observed in different parts of the earth, as the day begins at different points of time."

This objection, if it were of any force, would affect the observance of the first, or any other day of the week, equally with the seventh. It is, therefore, an objection, to the appointment of any particular day, and of course charges God with folly in giving the commandment. All that can reasonably be inferred from the difference of time, is that the original Sabbath was not observed at exactly the same time in all parts of the world. And since all the nations_ of the earth agree in the numbering of the days of the week, no practical difficulty could ever arise from this.—The same may be said in regard to "sailing around the world." If it is really an objection, it lies against the appointment of any day. Those, therefore, who acknowledge the wisdom of God, should be slow to make such an objection to his commandment. Those who object to the seventh day because they can gain or lose a day by sailing around the world, may consistently with themselves call two nights and; an intermediate dark day one night. The truth does not require that men should thus " put darkness for light," and so " wrap it up." A cause which demands it, ought for this reason to be abandoned.

2. "The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Jews."

It is not uncommon, in discussions on this subject, to speak contemptuously of the seventh day as the Jewish Sabbath. An enlightened person, however, will look upon this as the fruit of ignorance or malice.- The Sabbath was given long before the existence of the Jewish nation, and is in the Scriptures often called the Sabbath of the Lord, never the Sabbath of the Jews. It is true, we are told by one of the prophets that the Lord made known to Israel his holy Sabbath ; but if this makes a Jewish Sabbath, then, the other nine precepts of the decalogue are Jewish, and may with the same propriety be reproached as such. This conclusion would reach still further, make the Scriptures Jewish, and the Saviour of men and his salvation Jewish. Such, therefore, as consider this an objection to the seventh day, to be consistent with themselves, should reject the religion of Jesus altogether. But how does it correspond with the spirit of Christ thus to reproach and speak contemptuously of a people to whom we are so deeply indebted, and of whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ came 1 " Boast not thyself against the branches; for if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee2_' - We ought to labor for their salvation by manifesting towards- them the spirit of the' Messiah,,  rather than to increase their prejudices by speaking contemptuously of things they hold dear.

3. "-The first day of the week is so generally observed"

It is-often said, If the first day be not the Sabbath,-why do so many observe it? With equal pertinence might we ask, If all the systems religion which heathen men have lived and died by are false, why have they been suffered so to abound as to swallow up almost every vestige of true religion? Why have the disciples of Mahomet been suffered to exceed in numbers, the professors of Christianity? Why is the purest denomination of Protestants permitted to bear such a disproportion to the church of Rome? The reason is obvious; truth is not more easily propagated than error, and pure religion has always been connected with persecution and reproach. If we are to determine between truth and error by the " show of hands," we shall be compelled to adopt the greatest absurdities. The number of those who observe the first day, therefore, can be no evidence for or against its claims.

4. " Whether Christians ought to observe the seventh day or not is a doubtful question; and therefore inquiry on the subject is unprofitable and ought to be avoided."

It would be wrong for disputants to cherish an unchristian spirit in the discussion of this question, and it would be equally wrong to neglect honest and thorough inquiry on the subject. To consider both sides of a question involving a religious duty, with moderation and candor, is safe and profitable. The fact that some doubts are' connected with it, is the very reason why it should be-examined. That which at first seemed doubtful may thus become clear and certain. The noble Bereans were commended for their spirit of inquiry., and in this respect they should be an example for us The assertion that inquiry in -regard to things revealed is unprofitable, implies that we ought not to concern ourselves about what is our duty, and is contrary to the exhortations of Scripture to add knowledge to faith and virtue, and to grow in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour. " Buy the truth, and, sell it not," is the advice of the Word of God.  We should not, therefore, be hindered from our inqueries by any earthly considerations.

5. When the claims of the original Sabbath are plainly presented, many seem to be convinced of their justness, but, at the same time, think that a general return to the seventh day is impracticable.

They alledge that  custom of keeping the first day has been so long and, generally maintained—that it is so intimately wrought into the habits, calculations and business of life—that it has received such explicit sanction from the civil powers, and is so often and ably vindicated by ministers and commentators, that it is in vain to expect a change, and that the cause of Sabbathkeeping is rather retarded than promoted by efforts to promote a change. The, principle of expediency here acknowledged is at war with the Bible, and extremely dangerous. When men can gravely question whether it is better to follow their own customs than to return to the law of God, their ease is critical. God delights not in such. He will dwell only with those who " tremble at his word." Not those who say, " Lord, Lord," but those who " do his will," are accepted of him.—Again, if the views here expressed had been adopted if other cases, what would have become of reforms which have already blessed the world? What would have become of the whole subject of Protestantism? There is nothing more impracticable in a Sabbath reform, than in any other reform. In other cases, difficulties which at first seemed insurmountable, have given way to laborious and prayerful effort; so may they in this. At any rate, we ought to "obey God rather than man."