Now here is a strange thing. Sunday supporters, with a show of great
triumph, quote Ignatius, Barnabas, Ireanaeus, Clement, Tertullian,
Augustine, and others to prove that first-day observance started early,
because the writings of these men speak favorably of the observance of
the first day of the week. Little do they realize that the Roman
Catholics go to these same writings to prove doctrines which no other
church in the world practices or believes today except the Roman
Catholic Church. So instead of actually proving the first day is the day
to keep, they are proving that the prophecy of Daniel 7:25 and the
prophecy of Paul that the falling away would develop more rapidly
immediately following his departure actually took place. The point is
this: The testimony of these early fathers, instead of proving the first
day is the day to keep, actually proves that it is not; it points out
that Sunday-keeping was adopted from the heathen sun worshipers and is a
counterfeit of the true Sabbath -and this counterfeit witnesses to the
truth of Paul's prediction about the falling away. I notice that all
defenders of first-day observance quote Ignatius (AD 101) as favoring
the first day instead of the seventh. I have before me Cardinal Gibbons'
Faith of Our Fathers. I open the book to the chapter in which he is
trying to prove that the priest turns the bread into God, and that this
bread should be bowed to and worshiped as God. To prove this idolatry
should be practiced, he quotes Ignatius condemning people of his day
"because they confess not that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior
Jesus Christ." - page 297. There is no dogma that the Roman Catholic
Church holds today more strongly than that the wafer over which the
priest pronounces some Latin words is the actual Son of God. Such a
gross error leads me to conclude that the writings of Ignatius witness
to the early "falling away" rather than to the fact that the first day
is the day to be kept. The fact that he endorsed first-day observance is
against it rather than for it-unless we are going to be Roman Catholics.
(Those who quote these early Fathers neglect to inform their hearers
that scholars have grave reason to doubt the authorship of these
writings, especially those credited to Ignatius and Barnabas.)
Where are these writings of the early Fathers to be found? I have before
me quite a large volume called The Lost Books of the Bible. The preface
says these writings were "not included in the authorized New Testament."
On page 172 of this book (which is filled with all sorts of follies and
fables) I find "The Epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians," and it is in
this "epistle" that there is a statement favoring first-day keeping. How
few there are who when this statement is quoted in books and pamphlets
written in opposition to the Sabbath know that it comes from The Lost
Books of the Bible! Preachers will read from this book of fables with
the same show of reverence and respect as though it were the Word of
God. Another early writer often quoted in favor of first-day observance
is Barnabas. I find his writing on page 153 of Lost Books of the Bible.
I am ashamed to quote the things contained in these pages; I shall
merely refer the reader to them, but at the same time I would be far
more ashamed lo read from such a source to prove first-day sacredness!
Those ministers who quote from these sources know there is not one in a
thousand who knows .anything about the "epistle of Barnabas," and they
can take advantage of this ignorance to prove something which they
cannot prove by the Bible!
Justin Martyr is another "authority" that is greatly relied upon to
prove first-day sacredness. On page 297 of Faith of our Fathers Cardinal
Gibbons quotes Martyr to prove that the bread is Jesus Christ: "The
Eucharist is both the flesh and blood of the same incarnate Jesus."
Nobody believes that today except the Roman Catholics. All these
"authorities" prove what Paul meant when he said that after his
"departure," men would arise "speaking perverse things," and the fact
that these writings (supposed to have been done by these men) are
claimed to have been written right after the death of the apostles shows
what Paul meant when he said, "The mystery of iniquity does already
work." Clement of Alexandria is another one of the early Fathers. I find
that he is another one whose writings go to make up The Lost Books of
the Bible. He is supposed to have written his epistles one hundred years
after the death of the last apostle. He says that by that time the
seventh day had "become nothing more than a working day." Thus do we see
that the church to which he belonged was gradually ceasing to observe
the seventh day and leaning more and more toward the day of the sun.
Just how reliable his writings are may be gathered from the following,
which I dare to quote from him:
"There is a certain bird called Phoenix; of this there is never but one
at a time; and that lives 500 years. And when the time of its
dissolution draws near, that it must die, it makes itself a nest of
frankincense, and myrrh, and other spices into which when its time is
fulfilled it enters and dies. But its flesh putrefying, breeds a certain
worm, which being nourished with the juice of the dead bird brings forth
feathers; and when it is grown to a perfect state, it takes up the nest
in which the bones of its parents lie, and carries it from Arabia into
Egypt. And flying in open day in the sight of all men, lays it upon the
altar of the sun, and so returns from whence it came." Think about being
compelled to read from such a source to prove Sunday had become the
Sabbath! Note how he mentions the altar of the sun, from which comes
sun-day and the observance of the first day of the week. No wonder he
had come to recognize the seventh day as no more than a working day. How
natural it was that as he turned from the true Sabbath, he leaned more
and more to Sunday! At the risk of wearying the reader with further
quotations from such writers as we are examining, I have two more to
quote from. I quote from them because they are read from with confidence
in an effort to prove Sunday sacredness. One of these is Tertullian, and
the other is Eusebius. Tertullian is supposed to have lived shortly
after the death of the apostles. Cardinal Gibbons relies to the utmost
on Tertullian to prove some of the absurd Roman Catholic doctrines.
On page 3 of Faith of Our Fathers, Gibbons says:
"It is also a very ancient and pious practice for the faithful to make
on their person, the sign of the cross saying at the same time: `In the
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.' Tertullian,
who lived in the second century of the Christian era, says: `In all our
actions, when we come in or go out, when we dress and when we wash, at
our meals, before retiring to sleep, we form on our foreheads the form
of the cross. These practices are not commanded by a formal law of
Scripture; but tradition teaches them, custom confirms them, faith
observes them.' " Roman Catholics practice these things today. Gibbons
quotes Tertullian again: " `The faithful wife will pray for the soul of
her deceased husband, particularly on the anniversary day of his falling
asleep. And if she fail to do so, she has repudiated her husband as far
as it lies in her.' " You see, Gibbons was trying to prove prayers for
the dead. There is nothing in the Bible about this, so he goes to
Tertullian. This is the same thing that is done in trying to prove
first-day keeping. If this man wrote what is attributed to him, he was
certainly one of the builders of the Roman Catholic Church.
Eusebius, in AD 324, wrote, "We have transferred the duties of the
Sabbath to Sunday."
Who are the "we"? Certainly not the apostles. They could not do so after
the testament was ratified by the death of the Testator on the cross.
When Eusebius says, "We have transferred the duties of the Sabbath to
Sunday," it reminds us again of what Paul foretold about those who,
after his death, would speak "perverse things, to draw away disciples
after them." (Acts 20:30.) This last quotation from these early Fathers
is dated AD 324. Just three years before, in 321, Constantine, half
Christian and half pagan, made the first law to keep the "Venerable day
of the sun." Translated from the Latin, it reads: "Let all the judges
and townspeople and the occupations of all trades rest upon the
venerable day of the sun. But let those who are situated in the country,
freely and at full liberty attend to the business of agriculture.
Because it often happens that no other day is so fit for the sowing of
corn or the planting of vines, lest the critical moment being let slip,
men should lose the commodities of heaven. Given this 7th day of March,
Crispus and Constantine being consuls each of them for the second time."
It will be noted that at that time working on Sunday was the general
rule. It will be noticed that the day was not known by any sacred
Christian title. It was called the venerable day of the sun. Thus do we
see that little by little the true Sabbath was being discarded and
Sunday was coming into recognition.
THE LAW AND THE SABBATH By Allen Walker