The Perpetuity of the Law of God
By W. A. S.
In order to make clear their position concerning the commandments of God and the observance of the seventh-day Sabbath, it became necessary for those who first proclaimed the third angel’s message to answer the claim of the opposers of the truth that the law of God had been abolished, and that Christians were under no obligation to conform to its precepts. Accordingly we find in the early issues of the REVIEW AND HERALD articles upon this general subject. In Nos. 5 and 6 of Volume I of this paper, printed in Paris, Maine, in January and February, 1851, there appeared a continued article written by J. N. Andrews, which sets forth so clearly the Christian’s relation to God’s law, and answers so satisfactorily the objections brought forward at the present time, that we are sure it will be read with interest. We quote the following paragraphs:— But there is another strong objection existing in the minds of many, which we will now examine. It is this: “The world is under the law, but the Christian is under grace, and not under the schoolmaster.” This view admits the fact that the law of God is not abolished, but attempts to show that the Christian is not under obligation to obey it. Nay, that if he should keep its precepts, he would be in danger of falling from grace! We say that this view is based on the fact that the law was not abolished at the crucifixion, for an abolished law can not hold men under it, neither can it convince men of sin as its transgressors, after it has ceased to exist. The fact that the law is our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ, shows conclusively that it has not been abolished; because an abolished law can never show men that they are condemned and must perish without a Saviour. This view, then, is distinct from the idea that the law was abolished at Christ’s death; for if it was abolished at that time, then the world is not under it. If the world is under the law, then it has not been abolished. Let us examine the testimony on this subject. Gal. 3: 23-26: “But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterward be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. For ye are all the children of God by faith in Jesus Christ.” Rom. 6: 14, 15: “For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.” What is it to be under the law then? Hear the testimony of the Bible. Rom. 3: 19, 23: “Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. . . . For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.” Then, in the sight of God, the whole world is condemned and become guilty before him, as transgressors of his law. The sentence of condemnation is just and righteous, so that every mouth is stopped. Where is there hope of salvation then? Surely, man in this state is lost. How is the law a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ? Answer.—The law shows our guilt and just condemnation, and that we are lost without a Saviour. Read Paul’s account of this school in Rom. 7: 7-25. “By the law is the knowledge of sin.” Rom. 3: 20. “I had not known sin, but by the law.” Rom. 7: 7. Then the instruction of the law is absolutely necessary, that we may know ourselves to be sinners in the sight of God. We find ourselves sinners by past offenses, and unable to render present obedience. The just penalty of the law hangs over our heads; we find ourselves lost, and fly to Jesus Christ for refuge. What does he do to save us from the curse of the law? Does he abolish the law, that he may save its transgressor? He tells us that he did “not come to destroy” it; and we know that the law, being holy, just, and good, can not be taken back without destroying the government of Him who gave it. Does the Saviour modify its character, and lessen its requirements?—Far from it. He testifies that not one jot or tittle shall “pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” Matt. 5: 18; Luke 16: 17; James 2: 10. And he shows that those who in heart commit any act of iniquity, are transgressors of the law. Matt. 5: 22, 27, 28; 1 John 3: 15. If the Saviour did not abolish or relax the law, how can guilty man hope for salvation? What, then, does the Saviour do?—He gives himself to die in our stead. He4offers his own ‘life a ransom for many.’ Matt. 20: 28. ‘God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.’ John 3: 16. We now lay hold on Jesus Christ as the great atonement for our transgressions, and receive a full and free pardon of all offense. A way has now been laid open by which man, though justly condemned by the law of God, can yet be saved without dishonoring, or making void, the law. God can be just, and yet ‘the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.’ Rom. 3: 25, 26. Need we inquire further what it is to be under grace? We have already seen in what manner we are saved, notwithstanding the law condemns us, and yet the claims of the law are not made void. When we were lost and ruined by transgression, and had no way to escape the just sentence of the law, God gave his own Son to die for us. The law can then allow mercy to enter and offer pardon to all who will accept it by faith in Jesus Christ. In his person mercy and truth meet together. The law justly condemns us; Jesus bears our sins in his own body on the tree; faith in him justifies and saves us. The law brings us to faith; faith does not make void the law, but establishes it. Those who are under sin are under the law; those who have been pardoned are under grace. Two states, then, are brought to view in the New Testament: (1) under the law; (2) under grace. Those who are under the law are condemned; those who are under grace are pardoned. We ask, Does Christ come and die to redeem us from the just sentence of the law, that he may bring us to a state where we may at pleasure violate its precepts? Is the law of a character so sacred that it must needs have the death of the Son of God for its atonement, and when the sinner has obtained pardon, is it then ‘relaxed, or slacked up,’ so that it is at his option whether to obey it or not? Does this state of grace give us license to violate the law of God? In answer to these inquiries, we are told that ‘that part of the law which Christ quoted is certainly binding on us; but those precepts which he did not quote are not to be regarded, for they ceased at his death.’ We answer, There is an end to this part of the controversy then, for the law which brings us to Christ for salvation must most certainly be that law which condemns us; and no part of the law can condemn us, save that which is now in existence. And if it be admitted that we are not at liberty to violate any part of that law which brings us to Christ, we leave this part of the subject, and inquire whether a part of the law was left out by Jesus. For the question we are examining turns on this point: Did our Lord re-enact a part of the law, and leave the remainder to expire, or be abolished, at his death? Let us examine the facts in the case. At no one time did our Saviour quote all the commandments. And indeed we may say that he never quoted the first, the second, or the fourth commandment. And still further, he does not re-enact those precepts which he quotes, but refers to them as a part of the law of God. But one of two views can be taken of this subject: (1) Christ meant that those commandments which he quoted were the only ones which should henceforth be binding, or (2) he appealed to the law of God as to the highest authority, and cited those commandments which were particularly adapted to the cases of those persons with whom he conversed. If the first view be correct, then Jesus meant to teach that henceforward they were not under obligation to obey the first, second, or fourth commandment! And this in the face of the fact that they were all to continue till the crucifixion, when, as some say, they were all abolished. Further, it is assumed, not proved, that he re-enacted those precepts which he quoted. For, to say the least, the idea is a very strange one that he should re-enact a law which was already in force. But if the other position be correct, namely, that by quoting a part of the law he sanctioned its high authority, and left it on its own basis, as the law of his Father, then are we correct in saying that the whole law as such brings us to Christ, and when we are justified by faith, we are by no means at liberty to violate one of its precepts. The fact that the law is our schoolmaster, to show us the just claims of God, and our own just condemnation, shows plainly that it has not been abolished; hence, though we have been pardoned through God’s free grace, we can never violate its precepts without being ‘convinced’ by it ‘as transgressors.’ That we are justified by grace through faith is evident (Eph. 2: 8), and yet faith does not ‘make void the law.’ For the whole plan of salvation is based on the justice of God’s law, and the sufficiency of Christ’s atonement. The law stands out before us to show us our transgressions. ‘The gospel of the grace of God’ shows us how we may be pardoned. We are justified by grace through faith. Faith works by love. ‘This is the love of God, that we keep his commandments.’ Thus love is the fulfilling of the law. Heb. 8: 6-13. The promises on which the two covenants were based are here noticed. The first required perfect obedience to the law of God (Jer. 11: 4, 5; Ex. 19: 5, 6), but did not contain those clear and gracious promises of pardon through Jesus Christ that were needed by fallen, guilty man. Hence it was not faultless, though the law of God on which it was based as its condition is pronounced by both testaments to be perfect, holy, just, and good. Psalms 19; Romans 7. The covenant ‘waxed old,’ because its conditions were broken; hence the new covenant, based on better promises, was introduced. This covenant shows us the great atonement from whence we may expect pardon, reveals to us the fountain of grace, from whence we may receive strength to yield obedience, and places the law of God in our hearts. Jer. 31: 33; Heb. 8: 10; 10: 16. The transition from the old covenant to the new is marked by the death of the Testator. Heb. 9: 15-17; 1 Cor. 11: 25; Gal. 3: 19. But if the law of God was abolished at that time, then no law was in existence to place in the hearts of the people of God! Nor can this point be met fairly by saying that Christ brought forward a part of the law by quoting it, for it would be absurd to believe that he re-enacted part of a law which was already in force, or rather that he re-enacted part of a law, and then abolished the whole! Those who adopt this idea are bound to explain why Christ should omit the first, second, and fourth commandments. Or rather, they are bound to prove that he re-enacted those commandments which he quoted, for their argument is mere assertion till this is done. We repeat, There is but one Lawgiver, and this is not the Son, but the Father. James 4; Exodus 20. James 2. The royal law is here enforced by James in an unmistakable manner. Had he believed that it was abolished, or that it was a ‘yoke of bondage,’ he would never have said, ‘If ye fulfil the royal law, . . . ye do well.’ Nay, he would never have asserted that if they had respect to persons, they would commit sin and be convinced of the law as transgressors; for an abolished law can never convince a man of sin. Rom. 4: 15. The sixth and seventh commandments of this law are then quoted. And we are shown that the transgressor of one precept is guilty of breaking all (Macknight); which is not unlike the words of our Lord, that ‘one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.’ Then if one part be in force, it is all in force. If one commandment be broken, all are broken. Such is the testimony of James. How can those who violate the fourth commandment meet this in the judgment? See James 2: 12. But the fourth commandment is evaded thus: The Sabbath has been changed, and good men in past ages have kept the first, instead of the seventh day. Are we not safe in following them? We offer to yield the first point when one text is brought which testifies that the Sabbath has been changed, or that the first day was ever sanctified by God, or that we are required to keep it holy. Further, we reply that every man is accountable to God for the light which shines before him. The fact that God has given us light on this subject, shows that we have no excuse for further disobedience—no cloak for our sins. Certainly we can not plead the right to make void the ‘commandment of God’ that we may keep ‘the tradition of the elders.’ Mark 7: 9. The fourth commandment is definite, requiring us to keep that day holy which God himself rested upon and sanctified. . . . 1 John 3: 3, 4. ‘Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.’ Notice these striking thoughts. The definition of sin is ‘the transgression of the law.’ Every sinner is a transgressor of the law. In Christ was no sin, hence no transgression of the law. Jesus was manifested to take away our sins. How does he do this?—He dies for us that we may be delivered from the just sentence of the law; its execution is stayed, that mercy may be permitted to enter, and offer pardon through the blood of Christ. The refusal of pardon offered at such an immense cost greatly enhances the guilt of the transgressors; for they have not only violated the law of God, but by this act they tread under foot his Son, who died to redeem them. From these testimonies we conclude that the New Testament teaches the perpetuity of the law of God, and for that reason does not re-enact any part of it.5 Ripening the World’s Harvest The reapers are the angels, and “the harvest is the end of the world.” The whole world will be reaped together. The proclamation of the advent message is to ripen the harvest. It rose in New England, and went westward. Now in its strength it is coming eastward again. Throughout the Northern States it has a strong representation. But the work in the North can not be finished until the work in the South is also done. All the field must be reaped together. Therefore, it behooves us in the North to join in hastening on the work in the South. We shall find that the sooner the message has been cried out to both races in the South, the sooner the fields in the North will ripen for the final harvest. We in the North gain by sharing men and means with the South. And the work, North and South, in the home land of the message, will not be finished until Europe has also heard the warning. And Europe and America can never see the final steps taken in binding off their own work, until Africa has heard, and Asia, and South America, and the islands of the sea. There is a divine law of adjustment by which the work in the fields where most has been done is brought to fruition only by the effort to pass the word of life to others. When all the fields have the witnesses supplied and a representation of believers ready to show the light, we shall see the Lord suddenly ripening all the world for the angel reapers. There is strength in working to one common plan. Let us keep the general mission funds steadily rolling in; for there is a steady movement forward in all the world-wide field dependent upon this. Then when a recognized appeal is made for special help in a given place, let us lift with a will quickly and altogether, and then be ready for the next call. The calls will come, just as Nehemiah’s men, in building their wall, had now to resort to one point and now to another, as the trumpet sounded the cry of special need. And all the time the whole wall was being pushed steadily forward. There is tremendous gain in system and concert in working out a common plan of campaign. For a time it was a call for special help for Washington. Now it is to roll up the Southern field fund. Next it is a lift at the October collection for the colored work. Then follows the annual missionary offering for all the fields. We can lift hard every time, and still be strong to lift again. The Lord has promised it. It is good in this cause to give till we feel it, and then to go on giving till we do not feel it. Nothing is worth while in these days but the hastening forward of this message in every neglected field. And united action will do it—common consent as to the general calls to be made, and then one grand effort together each time to see the point achieved. It is not every field for itself, but all the fields for every other field, and the Lord leading the work forward in even lines. Thus the ripening of all the world’s harvest will be hastened on. W. A. S.