There are as many pamphlets on this Scripture as the categories of their inferiority. “The weak and beggarly principles” “whereunto ye desire to turn again” and “desire to be in bondage” to, they all say, are principally manifested in and represented by keeping of the Seventh Day Sabbath. These “weak and beggarly principles”, they generally allege, show and prove a “return” to “Judaism”, “Judaism” enhancing the “weak and beggarly principles” of which Paul writes. And, mind you, these little masterpieces of draconian law agree that a keeping of the First Day as the “Lord’s Day” sorts not under such religious “bondage” as keeping of the Sabbath does. Strikingly only controversial “expositions”, specifically aimed at attacking the Seventh Day Sabbath, pose such attitudes and arguments, while (rare) treatises of integrity and real scholarship, seldom if ever, reach any conclusions that might incriminate or just implicate the Seventh Day Sabbath in Galatians 4:10. The Church, in any case, as that catholic Body of Christ, has never accepted or tolerated the denial of the Law’s validity – which denial is necessary to propagate such arguments against the Sabbath Day and its observance. Even in its worst mutilated version the Law is confessed as saying, “Remember the Sabbath Day to keep it holy” (The Roman Catholic or Vulgate Fourth Commandment). The Protestant Church has always believed the Fourth Commandment unadulterated. The Church Catholic has always held that the Law’s binding claim constitutes the duty of Christian freedom and worship. The Church has always believed that the fruits of a Spirit-filled life “according to Christ” could never be in conflict with the spirit of the Law – which is God’s Law after all. Christ is more and greater than the Law and Christ’s greatness and superiority is what also elevates and magnifies the Law – which Christ thus and to this end fulfilled: “Lo I come to magnify thy Law o God!” Christ cannot be divided against himself – division is characteristic of the house of Satan. The presupposition of all Paul’s arguments regarding the Law – the nomos, is its validity. If the Law were supposed in the Scripture under consideration, it beforehand would imply that Paul speaks not against the Sabbath. But seeing Paul in no uncertain terms speaks against whatever he speaks about here in Galatians 4:10, it cannot be the Sabbath Day. Paul’s position on the Law in a word is that the Law is “holy”, “spiritual” and “good” – Ro.7:12, 14, 16, and that it “witnesses to the righteousness of God” – which implies the Law’s immutability. But the Law is desecrated and violated “if by the works of the law justification be obtained”, or “if by the law righteousness should come”, Gl.2:16, 21 – which also implies the Law’s immutability. See “Paul and the Law”, Par. 8.3.5. But these arguments and arguers of whom we speak say that God’s Law in so far as God’s Sabbath Day is concerned, has of Christ’s own doing (of Christ’s own “breaking”) become a “weak and beggarly principle” – which to my mind to say stops nowhere before blasphemy. (Says one of these Doctors, “Now that Christ for the believer has earned redemption it is a denial of Christ to keep the Sabbath (Seventh Day)”. The propagators actually reason that man before Christ came, obtained righteousness through the Law and by the works of the Law – as if they needed not the Saviour for the salvation of their souls – which again to my mind to reason stops nowhere before blasphemy. Moreover do they claim, “We are not under the law”, yet they keep their own “Sabbath” – Sunday!