That the Lord's day is a different day, and of a different character, from the Sabbath, will hardly be questioned by any for whom this little article is intended. The Sabbath was the seventh day of the week; the Lord's day is the first.
The Sabbath commemorated God's rest from His work of creation, and is a type of the eternal rest that remains for Him and His people, when He will again have ceased to work-a rest founded on redemption, and to be realized when sin will have been completely removed from God's dominions. This will be in the new heavens and the new earth. See Heb. 4:1-11; Rev. 21:1-7.
The Sabbath was also a "sign" between Jehovah and Israel, of the covenant He made with them, and was incorporated in the law of the ten commandments, with the penalty of death attached for its violation. See Exod. 31:12-18; Eze. 20:12. Nor is there any evidence that it was ever given to any other, or that it was ever observed before the Christian era by any except those within the sphere of Judaism.
The Lord's day celebrates the resurrection of our blessed Lord, and is a day known alone to Christianity. There is no specific command given to keep it as a day of rest, or to observe it in any way. But it does not, therefore, follow that there is no obligation, for Christianity is not a system of legal commands and declared penalties, but a revelation of truth from God which ought to command the obedience of every subject and loyal heart-"the obedience of faith." See Rom. 1:5; 16:26.
Let us now see how the day is characterized in Scripture.
As already stated, it is the day on which our blessed Lord arose from the dead-the day that declared before the universe His triumph over death and the grave, and over all the power of Satan. Surely this is a fact of deepest importance for our souls. At the cross the whole question of good and evil was brought to an issue; and the resurrection of the Lord Jesus revealed the triumph of good. It was life out of death, the bringing in of a new creation where the old had been condemned in the judgment of God. Such was the victory of the Lord Jesus; and His resurrection on the first day of the week proclaimed the completeness of the victory. It was thus also the bringing in of a new era, in which are unfolded to faith the deep, eternal counsels of God, and all the blessings of Christianity founded on redemption, and this is made good to us through the death and resurrection of Christ.
It is the day on which the Holy Ghost descended from heaven, inaugurating the full character of Christianity. The two great characteristic truths of Christianity are redemption, and the presence of the Holy Ghost on earth, while Christ holds His session at the right hand of. God. The first day of the week is the witness of these two things. For the proof of the latter, see Lev. 23:15, 16. "And ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the sabbath, from the day that ye brought the sheaf of the wave offering; seven sabbaths shall be complete: even unto the morrow after the seventh sabbath shall ye number fifty days; and ye shall offer a new meat offering unto the Lord." This was the feast of Pentecost, and it began on "the morrow after the sabbath"; that is, on the first day of the week. Acts 2 shows that this was the day on which the Holy Ghost descended.
It is the day on which the saints habitually met together to break bread in remembrance of the Lord Jesus. Of this Acts 20:7 is the proof. The record would seem to show that Paul and those with him arrived at Troas on Monday. There they remained seven days, as we may believe, to be with the saints at their assembly meeting on the Lord's day. Then we are told that, "upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached," etc. It is not that they came together to hear him preach. But the brethren coming together, as their custom was, to break bread, the Apostle took this opportunity of discoursing to them in the things of God. The passage shows that it had become the settled custom of the saints to break bread on that _day. And the day is thus marked. The fact also that the Lord Jesus appeared to His disciples on the first day of the week, both the day of His resurrection and the next first day, when they were assembled together, and presented Himself in the midst of them, is also significant, and points in the same direction. So also is the fact that the Apostle instructed the saints at Corinth to lay by in store on the first day of the week, to make up a certain collection for the saints. All goes to show that the first day was the weekly day of assembling together.
In the last place, we find it called "the Lord's day" in Rev. 1:10. John was "in the Spirit" on that day, and received communications from the Lord for the saints in Asia. I would call special attention to this expression. In 1 Cor. 11:20, we get the expression, "the Lord's supper." Can anyone question what is the meaning of this? Is it not clearly the Lord's supper in contradistinction to every one eating his own supper in verse
21? Now when the clay IS spoken of, precisely the
same word is used-"the Lord's day," "the Lord's supper." It is peculiarly His day, and His supper-a day and a supper which He claims as His. His supper too was observed on His day.
Neither the day then nor the supper are common. Shall we treat them as common? What would we think of a man who held that he could treat the Lord's supper as his own? This is the very thing the saints at Corinth were doing, and for which the Lord was rebuking them. Weakness and sickness and death were there as the result of their course. It was the Lord's judgment. The very thought of treating the Lord's supper as our own may well shock every heart sensitive to His glory.
But it is His day as well as His supper, and if we are not at liberty to treat the supper as our own, are we at liberty to treat His day in this manner? I appeal to the reader's sense of what is right and fitting in the light of these scriptures. I would ask, Is it either right or fitting that we should take that day which He calls His and use it for our own pleasure, or temporal advantage? If His supper is devoted entirely to a holy and joyful remembrance of Him in His death and sufferings for us, and not for the gratification of our appetites, or for the satisfying of our hunger, shall we not as carefully observe the day as devoted to Him and His things?
Not infrequently we find saints (we will admit it may be under pressure of circumstances) accepting positions of secular employment which require them to work habitually on the Lord's day. And they plead their liberty to do so because there is no command not to do so. While not wishing to condemn any, I am perfectly satisfied that this is not of faith. And Scripture says,
"Whatsoever is not of faith is sin" (Rom. 14:23). Does not this make it very serious? If those who are tempted to such a course would say, "No, come what will, I will not dishonor the Lord," would not He make a way for His faithful disciples? Has He not said, "Them that honor Me I will honor"? (1 Sam. 2:30.)
But it is to be feared that many, and that too where no pressure of circumstances has place, think that if they go to the meeting on that day and break bread, when the meeting is over, then they are free to spend the remainder of the day as they please-visiting in a social way, conversing of secular affairs and interests, reading the newspapers, pleasuring, etc., etc. I ask, Is this devoting the day to Him? Is it giving the Lord the honor which is His due?
I do not say the day is a day of rest like the Sabbath, and that we are to cease from our labors, and simply do nothing. But the Lord claims the day, and it is but right that we should cease from our ordinary labors, and devote the day to Him in a way in keeping with its character, occupying ourselves with spiritual things which will be for profit to our own souls and the souls of others.
But there is no command, it is pleaded. I am aware. But why should you wish a command? Has He not told us it is His day? Why should you rob Him of His due? Besides, He has proved HIS love to us in laying down His life for us, going through a sea of unfathomable sorrow in order that we might be brought into blessing which only infinite love could conceive; and He counts upon our hearts responding to His love, and yielding loving and joyful obedience to His will. And shall we willingly, knowingly, disappoint Him, and grieve the heart that has trusted us, without putting us under the bondage of law, and saying,
"Thou shalt," and "Thou shalt not"? Alas! it only shows what and where our poor hearts are. He has not the first place in them; His claim is ignored; and He is practically shut out by self-interest and worldliness.
He does not lay upon us as a legal exaction to observe the day, any more than He does to observe the supper, but He has not left us in the dark as to what is pleasing to Him, and our own blessing is bound up in obedience to His will. We cannot disregard His will in this, or in anything else, without loss to our own souls, becoming a stumblingblock to others, and bringing dishonor upon His name.
May the Lord give to both the reader and the writer to be sensitive to all that affects His glory, and to prove the blessedness of faithful and loving obedience to all His revealed will.