p. 1 | The Sermon by Stephen Pierce

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Mar 12, 1867

The Sermon.

By Stephen Pierce

I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom. PREACH THE WORD. 2 Tim. iv, 2.

EATING NOT OF FAITH.

BY ELD. STEPHEN PIERCE.

“And he that doubteth is damned if he eat; because he eateth not of faith.” [Margin. And he that discerneth and putteth a difference between meats is condemned if he eat; because he eateth not of faith.] Rom. xiv, 23.

Our principal object in this discourse is, in relation to this subject, to give some of the reasons of our faith. With the light that now shines upon us, we do discern and put a difference between meats, whether we use the word meats in the sense of articles of food, or in its more literal acceptation; for we hold ourselves under obligation to act according to the light that inspiration, taking it altogether, has thrown around us.

Some of us might have discovered, as long ago as we became conversant with our Bibles, from the two first chapters of Genesis, that flesh-meat then did not constitute any part of man's food—that it consisted exclusively of the various kinds of grains, esculent vegetables, and all the vast varieties of fruits. Gen. i, 29; ii, 16, 17.

We might have also discovered that more than 1600 years after, there was given to man every moving thing that liveth to be meat for him, even as the green herb. Gen. ix, 3. Why this additional part of man's diet was then given, we all, doubtless, were unable to tell. But we now understand that it was given, 1. Because of a necessity for food till the first harvest after the flood. 2. Because the appetites of wicked men were unrestrainable. 3. For the express purpose of cutting short men's lives; that they might not have an opportunity to arrive to such a perfection of skill in iniquity and sin, as they otherwise would have done. Gen. ix, 5. Hence, some are satisfied in the belief that the hitherto obscure verse 5 of chapter ix has now found a very clear and satisfactory solution. It is this: The blood is the life of all flesh. Lev. xvii, 14. Therefore, “the blood of your lives,” which is the life of each and all of us, God will require; at the hand of every beast, metaphorically, will he require it; i. e., in proportion as we destroy the life and devour the flesh of animals for food, in a similar ratio will our lives be cut short. This is doubtless a prediction of the effect or consequence resulting from permission to eat this additional kind of food. Certainly this effect was brought about by some means, whether verse 5 develops the true cause or not; and this we know by following the descendants of Noah as far down as Jacob.

The patriarch Shem, who lived ninety-eight years before the flood, obeying all the laws of health according to the original plan of a wise and beneficent Creator, lived to see nine succeeding generations, all but the fourth, pass off into the grave before him, and the eleventh to arrive at the prime of manhood; giving clear evidence, if not strong, philosophical proof, that man's life was cut short by having this article of diet given in addition to the original supply.

What feelings of sorrow on account of the deterioration of his progeny, as well as these unusual bereavements, must have pervaded the mind of this holy man, as he saw so many succeeding generations prematurely passing from the activities of life to the grave, as he doubtless understood the necessity for their blindly transgressing the laws of their being, in order to save them from a more fearful doom of another general desolation of the earth by the interposition of God's displeasure on account of still more rash and palpable sins which they would have committed, had their lives not been cut short by this divine arrangement of things.

What think you must have been the emotions of Abraham the 9th, Isaac the 10th, and Jacob the 11th generation, when they looked upon the gigantic, physical proportions of this venerable father, who had come down to them, from a former state of the world; and more especially when they discovered the immense expansion, and to them the unfathomable depths of his masterly mind?

But what was the secret of his greatness? Some may argue the superiority of the natural endowments of his mind. We admit this had something to do in the matter; but we believe, from the brief history given, that all his faculties were not only undegenerated by his temperate, healthful course of living, but had been growing up for 500 years or more, to such gigantic greatness and strength as made him vastly superior in every sense to all other men then living.

Temperance being one of the principal causes of such greatness and goodness combined, is what makes this distinguished individual, at this time, so interesting to us. We might have reasonably expected that Melchisedec, the priest of the most high God, when Abraham paid tithes to him, would have brought sacrifices, and himself and Abraham participated in their flesh as a repast. But not so. He brought forth bread and wine, which cheereth God and man. Judges ix, 13.

We have already seen the difference between him who was temperate in all things, and those who were not; not only in respect to longevity, but in respect to their exalted position and moral excellence. Abraham, even when he had heavenly guests, gave them the flesh of a calf, with butter and cakes baked on the hearth; but not so with Melchisedec when he had but earthly guests; he gave them no meat. We admit that Abraham was a man of great moral worth; but Paul informs us, in respect to this, that “the LESS was blessed of the BETTER.” Heb. vii, 7.

But the objector inquires, “Did not God give them permission in Noah's day to eat animal food?” He did; and told them the consequences. Further, “Did not inspiration by Paul seem to enforce the same idea upon us here in the gospel age?” 1 Tim. iv, 1–4. We admit all this. But we mourn over the necessity for man's life to be cut so short, and also for the necessity for keeping it so through all the ages of the world. But a gracious Creator knowing the turpitude of the human heart, after having tested their disloyalty for 1600 years, saw it would be better for sinful man to be continually disturbed by the prospect of death, and finally death itself, than it would be to have nothing to prevent him from sinking to such depths in sin; so he made this arrangement. But from the beginning it was not so. For the hardness of their hearts he gave these precepts. The heart of man is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked, and who can know it?

If in the age of Noah, wicked men and seducers waxed worse and worse, and one of the principal causes of the earth's being filled with violence, was the perfection of the human system and the powers of the human mind, perverted, and the extreme longevity of the antediluvians adapted them to bring into fearful execution all their plans of wickedness, and men's lives had in the future been prolonged, how many times, think you, God would have been under the necessity of destroying the world for its wickedness? How long are there would have been no righteous man like Noah to survive the dread calamity and again propagate the human species?

In such a case, without a new creation, the earth must have remained desolate; yea, the glorious New Jerusalem and the new earth must forever have remained without human inhabitant, with the exception of a few antediluvians. And the immense sacrifice for the redemption of the lost, would have proved effectual only in these few instances. And all the unspeakable, immeasurable bliss of that innumerable company redeemed

out of every kindred, people, nation and tongue, under heaven, would never have been realized.

Some are fearful that it would be impeaching the wisdom and goodness of God to believe that he designed to cut short man's life, especially by such means as permitting him to live in a course of sin by transgressing the laws of his being. But by its being otherwise, we have just seen the privation of being, and loss of incalculable bliss, to an innumerable company through numberless cycles of eternity; the deprivation of earth and Heaven of its population, and the robbing of God of an important part of his intelligent creation.

Now, which do we reasonably suppose infinite wisdom and goodness would prefer: to have man sin so rashly as to produce all these destructive evils, or to sin much less by using some articles of food unadapted to longevity, and by this means cut short his own life, in order to prevent many evils unspeakably greater?

We understand by the teachings of Christ respecting the law of divorce, and from Eze. xx, 24, 25, that it is impossible to make a good law, regulation or arrangement, for the benefit of the incorrigible transgressor of God's perfect law—the ten commandments; for the reason that this good law covers the whole ground of all moral principle. Hence, there can be no good addition, though the necessity of the case may require some additional regulation. Therefore he takes into consideration the general interests of the great whole, then manages his overruling principles of government accordingly. Being infinitely good, he will do the best that in justice can be done, for all his creatures. For “he is long-suffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” 2 Pet. iii, 9; Eze. xxxiii, 11.

But the objector will say, “Paul has brought this flesh diet down to the latter times; and, of course, it must continue through it.” But we reply, If we have come almost down through the last generation of men, as we fully believe, and this diet was given to cut short human life, has it not already accomplished the object and done its work? We say it has; for if probation should continue five or ten years longer, the most rigid observance of the laws of health would not now so unduly protract our lives as to produce any evil.

But many are afraid that these stringent expressions of Paul are in the strictest sense imperative. If so, what shall we do with the marginal reading of the text? He that discerneth and putteth a difference between meats is condemned if he eat. Then if one is so unfortunate as to discern the truth on this point, he must be condemned either way. Paul to the Romans will condemn him if he eat; and Paul to Timothy will condemn him if he does not eat.

We, however, will show further examples from the Bible to prove that this class of scriptures which give us flesh to eat are not imperative. Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, requested to be relieved from being polluted with the king's meat and wine, and have nothing but pulse to eat and water to drink. They are examples. After ten days' trial, their countenances being fatter and fairer in flesh than those who ate of the king's meat, they were permitted to have the diet of their own choosing. And what was the result of this living? Dan. i, 20: “And in all matters of wisdom and understanding that the king required of them, he found them ten times better than all the magicians and astrologers that were in his realm.”

Now, if eating flesh is obligatory upon us, then these four worthies were transgressors of divine requirements. And if they were transgressors, it is a little remarkable that God wrought for them such notable miracles to save their lives, when under the sentence of death by the highest civil authorities. It is also very strange that by their influence three of the greatest universal monarchs of antiquity were converted from heathenism to the service of the true God. It is still more remarkably strange that to one of these sinners he gave such remarkable views of the great future events of this world's history in advance, as were not given to any other of all holy prophets. And more remarkable still, that the angel Gabriel should at two different times say he was a man greatly beloved.

But we leave these thoughts for the reflection of the candid. And though we do not forbid to marry, nor command to abstain from meats, we will introduce Num. xi, to show that under certain circumstances it was displeasing to God for the Israelites to eat flesh. And while we keep this in view, we will see from 1 Cor. x, 11, that the Israelites in the wilderness were ensamples or types of us, on whom the ends of the world have come. And if it was displeasing for the type to eat flesh; must it not be more so for the anti-type? And that, too, after it is so late in earth's history that there is no further call for the observance of those precepts which cut short the lives of men? We think this must be clearly evident to all.

Though the Israelites in the desert did not have all varieties of food, we are informed by inspiration that God rained down manna upon them to eat, and gave them the corn of Heaven; and that they did eat angel's food. He sent them meat to the full. Ps. lxxviii, 24, 25. After all this, they lusted after flesh to eat. Num. xi, 4. So he rained flesh upon them as dust, for they were not estranged from their lust. Ps. lxxviii, 30. But while their meat was yet in their mouths, the wrath of God came upon them, and slew the fattest of them. Verse 31. For all this, they sinned still. Verse 32. Now, if it was sin for them to lust after flesh, would it not be for us? That it was sin for them, we have the testimonies of both Moses and David as proof. There are greater reasons for abstaining from a flesh diet now, than at any former period of time since it was given to man.

It has invariably been the case when persons have been exposed to contagious diseases, that physicians have enjoined upon them dieting as soon as the exposure was known. And this consisted in abstinence from all kinds of flesh-meats: all kinds of rich, greasy or highly-seasoned, exciting food or drink. The result was, instead of being affected by the exposure, as would have been the case without such a course, but little inconvenience was experienced from it.

We also are dieting for four different objects:

1. That we may attain to the mastery by being temperate in all things; that the body may be sanctified as well as soul and spirit; that we may lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness. Why we impute filthiness to a flesh diet is, because in the purest atmosphere known to us, it soon begins to decay. But not so with any of the grains, nuts, and many vegetables. And though the pulpous kinds of fruit do, after a time decay, they are not attended with that disgusting savor or those putrescent exhalations which decaying flesh emits. This evinces to us the unhealthiness of such a diet.

2. That we may be prepared to meet the last famine earth will experience without murmuring. When the famine of Joel i, 18–20 will be experienced by all the cattle, and it will be unsafe to eat flesh, for various epidemics will then prevail to sweep them off the earth. Zeph. i, 3. When our diet will be reduced to bread and water. Isa. xxxiii, 16.

3. We are dieting for the pestilence that walketh in darkness; when a thousand shall fall at thy side, and ten thousand at thy right hand. Ps. xci, 6–7.

4. We are trying to bring ourselves back to the course of living practiced in Eden; in preparation for the heavenly Eden, where there will be no beasts slain for the gratification of carnivorous appetites; where the wolf shall dwell with the lamb, the leopard shall lie down with the kid, the calf and the young lion and the fatling together. Isa. xi, 6. There shall be no more death, neither sorrow nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain; for the former things are passed away. Rev. xxi, 4. And then will have come the time when every creature which is in Heaven and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, will be heard saying, blessing and honor and glory and power be unto Him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb forever and ever. Amen.