Objection:
The apostle John refers to Sunday as the “Lord’s Day” in Revelation 1:10 and indicates that he was in the Spirit on that day. This demonstrates that Sunday serves as the sacred weekly day of rest for the Christian church, and it signifies that the Sabbath has been abolished.
Answer:
The claim is based on Revelation 1:10: “I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet.”
It is important to note that those who advocate for Sunday worship often feel the need to abolish the Sabbath to justify their position. This is understandable, as the Bible explicitly designates only one weekly holy day. Proponents of Sunday worship have consistently sought to establish a biblical basis for their claims. However, even if John referred to “Sunday” when mentioning the “Lord’s Day,” this does not prove that the fourth commandment of the Ten Commandments has been abolished or altered in any way. This distinction should be made clear right from the beginning.
How do those who oppose the Sabbath try to argue that this text refers to Sunday? They claim that the phrase “Lord’s day,” used as a synonym for Sunday, was adopted by early church fathers in their writings shortly after John’s death. Therefore, they argue John must have used the phrase in the same sense.
What are the main facts? Briefly, there are writings attributed to various martyrs and church fathers who lived in the generations immediately following the apostles. Church historians assert that many of these writings are spurious, and of those that are genuine, most have been altered or added to by later writers, making it nearly impossible to determine what portions were originally written by the authors. Furthermore, the tendency for an author’s words to be misquoted, combined with the fact that some of these early fathers used unusual, and at times incoherent, literary styles, has led to significant uncertainty among translators regarding the true meaning of many passages within these works. The church historian Augustus Neander summarizes the issue regarding their value concisely:
“The writings of the so-called apostolic Fathers have unhappily, for the most part, come down to us in a condition very little worthy of confidence. Partly because under the name of these men, so highly venerated in the church, writings were early forged for the purpose of giving authority to particular opinions or principles. And partly because their own writings which were extant, became interpolated in subservience to a Jewish hierarchical interest, which aimed to crush the free spirit of the gospel.” (General History of the Christian Religion and Church (1854), vol. 1, Appendix, sec. 4, p. 657.)
Given these facts, it becomes clear how unreliable any argument is that relies on what the Apostolic Fathers are believed to have said or when they supposedly said it. This is especially true if we ignore the spurious elements and the uncertainty regarding dates that arise from them. Furthermore, if we allow ourselves to indulge in a bit of wishful thinking while interpreting certain jumbled and incoherent passages, we might accept without question the claim that the term “Lord’s Day” began to be used by the church fathers shortly after the death of John. However, we believe there is no clear, indisputable use of that phrase in any writings of the fathers until the late second century. (For historical evidence supporting this statement, see HOW SUNDAY OBSERVANCE BEGAN, PART ONE, PART TWO, and PART THREE.) If this is accurate, then the argument for Sunday based on John’s use of the phrase is considerably weakened; it must stretch over nearly a century, making it too tenuous to support any substantial argument.
Even a garbled or questionable passage can sound convincing to those seeking support, leading some to maintain a belief that the phrase in question was used by church fathers to refer to Sunday shortly after John’s time. Additionally, the fact that John employs a phrase later associated with Sunday can lead people to assume that John intended the same meaning. However, this conclusion is undermined by a significant logical error: it is faulty to assume that because a word has a certain meaning at one point in time, it must have the same meaning in an earlier context. This is a common pitfall when interpreting texts from the past. For instance, just because a second-century writer used the term “Lord’s day” to mean Sunday, it does not follow that John used the same phrase with the same meaning. Language evolves, and words can change or even reverse their meanings over relatively short periods.
Until the seventeenth century, the term “Sabbath” was consistently used by Christian speakers and writers to refer to the seventh day of the week. However, during that century in the British Isles, a significant Puritan revival emerged, emphasizing a need for better observance of Sunday. The Puritans declared that Sunday was commanded in the Ten Commandments, simply shifting the observance from the seventh day to the first day of the week. (We will present historical evidence for that statement when we discuss the Sabbath in Church Creeds.) To align their language with this belief, the Puritan reformers began referring to Sunday as “Sabbath.” Within a single generation, this change took hold, and for a large segment of the population, the term “Sabbath” for “Sunday” has continued to this day.
Consider the word “Sabbatarian.” For many years, even until the early twentieth century, this term referred to someone who advocated for the strict observance of Sunday, often supporting civil laws to enforce this practice. Today, however, “Sabbatarian” is commonly used to describe a Seventh-day Adventist who observes a different day as the Sabbath and opposes civil legislation regarding Sabbath observance. This reflects a complete reversal of meaning within a relatively short period of time.
Consider another significant shift in the meaning of a word, which is notable for both its stark difference and rapid change. As late as the 1840s in America, the term “spiritualist” referred to someone who interpreted Scripture in a non-literal way or held very spiritual beliefs. However, within less than a decade, the term began to be associated with those who became involved in the Hydesville rappings of 1848, which marked the beginning of the modern cult of spiritism.
To understand how the meanings of words change over time, one only needs to consult an unabridged dictionary, which provides countless examples of such shifts in definition. After examining this, one might become justifiably skeptical of any argument that attempts to impose the later meanings of words onto the writings of someone from an earlier time.
For instance, why should we interpret a reference to “spiritualists” in a theological journal from 1840 as describing individuals who believe in departed spirits? Similarly, how can we conclude that a report about a gathering of “Sabbatarians” in an 1890s newspaper necessarily refers to a group of Seventh-day Adventists? And why should we infer from John’s mention of the “Lord’s Day,” written around AD 90, that he was referring to Sunday as we understand it today?
We can accurately interpret a writer’s words based on the meanings those words had at the time they were written. However, it is not safe to read into their words meanings that the words may have acquired in subsequent years.
According to historical accounts, John wrote the Book of Revelation around AD 90. Prior to this, the Bible writers had never referred to Sunday as the “Lord’s Day.” Instead, they consistently described it simply as “the first day of the week.” Even more notable is that John himself, in his Gospel—which is generally believed to have been written several years after Revelation—still refers to Sunday using the same neutral term that other Bible writers used: “the first day of the week.” (See John 20:1, 19).
There is only one day referred to in the Bible that can truly be called the “Lord’s Day,” and that is the Sabbath. The Ten Commandments describe it as “the Sabbath of the Lord” (Exodus 20:10). Isaiah instructs us to refer to this day as “the holy of the Lord” (Isaiah 58:13). Furthermore, Christ stated that He is “Lord also of the Sabbath” (Mark 2:28). John, having heard the Savior utter these words, was also familiar with the Ten Commandments and the verses from Isaiah. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that when he mentioned the “Lord’s Day,” he was referring to the Sabbath.
Some may argue that if John used the term “Lord’s Day” to refer to the Sabbath in Revelation, he would have naturally used the same term in his Gospel. However, in his Gospel, he consistently uses the term “Sabbath.” While we may not know exactly why he chose to use “Lord’s Day” in this particular instance, it is clear that (1) the interpretation of “Lord’s Day” as something other than the Sabbath does not hold up under scrutiny, and (2) the most reasonable interpretation of his words is that he meant “Sabbath.”
However, the history surrounding John’s day provides an intriguing explanation for why he referred to the Sabbath as the “Lord’s Day” in the book of Revelation. During this time, Christianity was increasingly coming into conflict with pagan Rome. The Caesars were often regarded as deities, and Christians were sometimes compelled to offer incense to them or face death. There were days designated to honor the emperor, such as the emperor’s birthday, which took on a religious significance due to the merging of state and church. Whenever a Caesar visited a city, that day would subsequently be marked as a holiday, known by translation as a worshipful day, a day worthy of reverence. The emperor Domitian was known to refer to himself and be called “Lord and God.”
John, who was banished to Patmos likely during Domitian’s reign, received special revelations about Christ’s coming kingdom and glory. As Patmos illuminated with the glory of the Lord, John described Him as “King of kings and Lord of lords.” This title held deep meaning for the persecuted Christians who, at the cost of their lives, refused to acknowledge Caesar as “Lord and God.” In Revelation 1:10, John introduces his first vision of Christ’s glory. Considering the Christian conflicts with Rome, it is entirely understandable for him to declare that, if this vision occurred on the Sabbath, he “was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day,” which reflects the true Lord, whose lordship is evidenced by His role as Creator, as commemorated by the Sabbath. (See Rev. 4:11; 10:6; 14:7.)
