Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1910-04-07
PEOPLES PULPIT.
"coURIER VERY LIBERAL"
Editor Of the Courier:

Editor OF the Courier:
On March 8, l noticed an article
from some unknown friend sign
ing as M. M. S. Now as the Courier
is very liberal with the Peoples Pull
pit would be pleased to give short
answer. The first thing he says looks
like the intent is to mislead for sew
eral reasons, First he has not quoted
it as it is on record. He fails to add
the word days in the passage. He re-
fers to Colossians 11-16 but 1t is 2-l6,
and besides the passages has no refer-
ence whatever to the law of ten COM
mandments. Now if he had quoted the
second verse before the one he did
quote it tells what law the verse ne
quotes has reference to. But no, ne
seems to want people to believe that
1t has reference to Gods law OF ten
commandments which cannot be prov
ed, because it plainly tells what law 1t
is Read the fourteenth verse OF the
chapter he refers us to. Can anyone
point out any meats or drinks or
feast days in the law of ten command
ments? No not one. They are plain
positive commandments. Then you
say that Christianity is not religion
of ordinances, which is true; then
why do you refer us to the law OF or
dinances and try to make 1t appear as
part Of the law of ten command
ments? Now he writes over two col
umns and how many scripture refer
ences does he sight us to in support
of his first day observance? Not one.
Absolutely not one. Why? Because
he can not and he knows it. He gives
us argument and assertions and MS
tory Now our question is not what
history says, but what does the Bible
say. II history is more reliable than
the Bible, or nearer the divine Will OF
God, then let us lay aside the Bible
and take history. How many men like
you would be willing to risk your
souls salvation on history and If not
for Gods sake give us something that
you would risk your salvation on, anu
stop teaching so much history? Let
the Bible prove it's own teachings. The
trouble is you cannot prove your hrst
day observance by the Bible, SO you
are compelled to resort to history.
Then you say that Paul at Troas found
the disciples assembled together to
break bread and give them discourse
and then you say standing alone this
single text would warrant no conclu-
sions, but when we find the apostle
making a collection for the poor and
telling them to lay by something for
them on the first day of the week, we
cannot avoid the conclusion that the
church had habit of coming together
as church for some religious pur-
pose on the first day Of the week.
Now let us notice these statements a
moment; yes they had a meeting here
to break bread, Acts 20-7 verse, but
they did not break the bread until
after midnight. Read from the seventh
verse to the twelfth verse. Now 1t
does not say to lay by something for
them on the first day of the week. Turn
to first Corinthians, 10th chapter and
read the first and second verses, and
II plainly forbids a gathering for this
purpose. 1t says to lay by him IN
store that there be no gatherings
when l come. Here you are told not
to have a gathering for this purpose,
but means to lay by at his own nome
or by himself and not at gathering.
Then let me ask where is there any
warrant here for believing they met
for the observance Of the first day?
Not any, and you know it. Now let us
see which day was their habit of COM
ing together to worship. Not let US
look at this same apostle Paul in Acts
Is CHAPTER and ~ verse. They met
to read every Sababth day. Then read
verse AZ and A Of the same chapter
and then the 18th chapter and 18th
verse and now go to the 18th chapter
and 4th verse, and then the 18th verse
and hear this same Paul breaches q
year and half and teaches them
every Sabbath Now go to the 18th
chapter and End verse and see which
day he was in manner of meeting to
teach them. Here he meets with them
three Sabbath days. Now we have 70
Sabbaths they met on to worship. NOW
does all these passages warrant any
conclusions of which day they were
in the habit Of meeting on to worship?
And then 1t was Jesus's habit of teach
ing them on the seventh day, Luke 4th
chapter and 10th verse. And further
on you say to neglect not the assem-
bling together as the manner Of some
is. Very well then, assemble on the
Sabbath and not on the first day as
you wanted to appear without script
ural authority and then you say it not
by direct apostolic institution certain
lily with apostolic approval and sane
ton fixed by them for their weekly
meetings Now how do you know that
the apostles gave all this their ap-
prevail and sanctioned it! Now It this
! is reasonable that they should do all
this and not inform US Of that fact 1t
it is a fact, we know 1t is not a fact,
and we know 1t from other scripture
we have referred to and then he says
this Is all we know from the scripture
Of the Christian festival of the Lord s
day as distinct from the Jewish Sab
bath, but you make some good adj
missions. You say the abstinence from
business on the Lords day meaning
fthe first day of the week in all Chris
ttian countries is matter of civil
statute and not divine law. Then in
the name of high heaven and all that
is sacred, why do so many in our pull
,its try en- hard to make people be-