HEAR HIM by Dudley Marvin Canright

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Apr 13, 1869

HEAR HIM.

By Dudley Marvin Canright

BY ELD. D. M. CANRIGHT.

TEXT.— “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.” Matt. xvii, 5.

These words were spoken by the great God, the Father, in the mount of transfiguration, in the hearing of the three apostles, who were with Jesus. In this language, God acknowledged Jesus of Nazareth to be his own Son, the promised Messiah, the Christ of God. He was the great Teacher come from God. He had been with God from the beginning, and hence knew his will, and so was well fitted to teach man with regard to God’s will. So the Father says, Hear ye him. And every one who will not hear him, shall be destroyed. Acts iii, 22, 23. It becomes us, therefore, to hear him with the deepest reverence, and do all that he directs. This, every child of God will now do, and this we desire to do.

But some seem to us to make a wrong use of the command, to hear the Son. They seem to teach that we should turn away from Moses and the prophets, and hear Christ. Now while we would hear him, we do not think that he will tell us to turn away from any of God’s servants who came before him. He did not come to destroy the prophets, Matt. v, 17, and overturn all the former government of God. No, no! He came in fulfillment of the prophets, to teach in harmony with them, and to honor his Father’s law and government. Isa. xlii, 21; John i, 45. He says himself, “For I came down from Heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of Him that sent me.” John vi, 38. He came not to teach his own doctrine, but the doctrine of his Father. John vii, 16; viii, 28; xii, 49; xiv, 10, 24. So we may be sure that he will teach nothing contrary to what God had taught before, unless God has changed, which we cannot believe. I have heard ministers exhort their hearers to turn away from Sinai, and hear Christ. What do they mean by this? Why, the ten commandments were given there, and now they do not wish us to hear them, but to hear Christ. But, my friends, who gave that law on Sinai? Some of the prophets? Moses? Angels? No; but the great God himself, with his own voice. Shall we then turn away from God to Christ? That seems to me like blasphemy. “God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself.” 2 Cor. v, 19. Turn away from God to Christ! That is none other than the doctrine of Satan.

But we are perfectly willing and glad to hear Christ on the subject in dispute between us and our opponents; viz., The perpetuity of God’s holy law, and his Sabbath day. We claim that these are as sacred and binding as ever; they deny it. Will they now hear Christ, and abide his teachings? I wish they would. We will submit it all to his teachings. First, let me ask what Christ has said about their first-day Sabbath? Now we are anxious to hear something from him on that point. We listen; what do we hear? Nothing, not one word. He never even deigned to mention it once, to say either good or bad about it. He never told any one to keep it, he never blessed it, he never threatened any one for not keeping it. Why then do they keep it and still cry, Hear ye him. But some will say, We do not hold to the first day, nor any other. The law is abolished, and there is no Sabbath. Very well, let us hear Christ on that point.

When Jesus was about thirty years old, Luke iii, 23, he was baptized, God acknowledged him as his Son, verses 21, 22, and he began his mission by preaching the gospel. Mark i, 14, 15. His was an important work that he was entering upon. So in the very beginning of his ministry, he delivered that wonderful discourse, called the sermon on the mount. When a president, governor, or great officer, begins his administration, he pronounces his inaugural address, in which he lays down the principles on which his administration will be based. So did Jesus; and his sermon on the mount may very appropriately be called his inaugural address. He has there very fully stated the principles and laws by which all his teachings were to be governed. After pronouncing blessings on different ones, he says, Matt. v, 17–20: “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets.” Do not get a wrong idea of my mission. Because I reprove the hypocritical professors of religion, and do not keep their traditions and false doctrines, do not suppose that I have come to destroy the law or the prophets. That is not my mission. “I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.” Well, this is the very subject we are anxious to learn about—the law. What did Jesus do to it, and teach about it? Did he abolish it, or not? It is not his new law which some say he was about to give, that he speaks of. It was the law connected with the prophets, the one that all were familiar with. It was one written in the Hebrew with jots and tittles, verse 18. His teachings were never so written. Then he quotes the sixth and seventh of the ten commandments, verses 21–27, showing what law he meant; viz., the ten commandments. This law he has not come to destroy, but to fulfill. What does destroy mean? “Destroy, to lay waste, to desolate, to kill.” Worcester. “To put an end to.” Webster. The Greek word, katalusai, Greenfield defines thus: “To loose, dissolve, i. e., to destroy, demolish, overthrow, throw down, Matt. xxiv, 2; xxvi, 61, met. to render void or null, abrogate, Matt. v, 17.” We readily understand that when a thing is destroyed it is no more, it has come to an end. Says Jesus, I have not come to do this to the law. Amen. Hear ye him.

But he says, I have come to fulfill. Then fulfill must mean right the opposite of destroy; for he had come to fulfill, but not to destroy. Yes, says one, he fulfilled the law, and then it came to an end, but he did not destroy it! What profound reasoning! He did not come to destroy the law, but to bring it to an end! I wonder in what theological school they learned such wisdom? I fear they are not so anxious to hear Jesus as they profess.

We think this is not the meaning of the word fulfill, as may be seen by its definition and by its use in other places. “Fulfill, to accomplish, to perform.” Worcester. Its use in the Bible shows the same meaning. When John refused to baptize Jesus, he said to John, “Suffer it to be so now; for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness.” Matt. iii, 15. In this case it cannot mean that all righteousness would cease, or come to an end, when Jesus was baptized. Take a few examples where fulfill is used applying to law. “Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.” Gal. vi, 2. If a law comes to an end, when it is fulfilled, then the law of Christ was done away, as soon as the Galatian church fulfilled it! But no one will take that position. The law of Christ must be fulfilled by us, as well as by the Galatian brethren. If then it does not abolish the law of Christ to fulfill it, neither will it the law of God.

Take another example in Jas. ii, 8: “If ye fulfill the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself, ye do well.” Does he mean that we shall do well if we abolish the royal law? Verse 10 shows what he did mean: “For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.” The word keep, in verse 10 means the same as the word fulfill, in verse 8. But Rom. ii, 25–27 is very clear on this point, showing that to fulfill the law means to keep it. “For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a

breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfill the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law?” Here we have keeping the law, and fulfilling the law, contrasted with breaking the law, and transgressing the law. The meaning is too clear to be mistaken. To fulfill a law is to keep it. Christ came not to destroy the law, but to keep it, and he testifies himself that he did keep it. “If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in his love.” John xv, 10. Christ is our example that we should follow. If we do, we shall keep his Father’s law.

But it may be still insisted, that fulfill does sometimes mean to accomplish, and so bring to an end. For example, when a prophecy is fulfilled, it then meets its accomplishment, and comes to an end. It does not remain to be fulfilled again. I answer, that that depends upon the nature of the prophecy. If the prophecy requires a thing to be done only once, then once fulfilling it will accomplish the prophecy, and it need not be fulfilled again; but if it points out something that must be done continually, then once doing it will not accomplish and end the prophecy. When Jesus was born of a virgin in Bethlehem of Judea, then the prophecy foretelling that event was fulfilled, and never can be fulfilled again. But take another example, Isa. lxvi, 22, 23: “For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the Lord, so shall your seed and your name remain. And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one Sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship, before me, saith the Lord.” How long will it take to fulfill the prophecy? Ans., All eternity. When the saints, on the new earth, shall go up to worship the Lord Sabbath after Sabbath for ten or a hundred Sabbaths, that will fulfill the prophecy. It will do what the prophecy said they should do. But should they then cease to go up on the Sabbath to worship, the prophecy would be broken. Should they do so for many ages, and then cease to do it, the prophecy would be broken. In short, fulfilling it once or twice will not bring it to an end. So with the law. It requires us to keep the Sabbath holy. When we have kept one Sabbath, we have fulfilled the precept of the law, but are we then at liberty to disregard it for the future? The law says, “Thou shalt not kill.” When this precept has been once fulfilled, is it then done away? Christ came to fulfill the law, and he did it. He honored his parents, he did not kill, nor steal, &c. Did that abolish, do away, or bring to an end, those commandments? The idea is absurd. Think of doing away, or bringing to an end, a moral law by obeying it once or any number of times! A theory which will drive a man to such a conclusion will not stand the test of the Judgment. We see, then, that to fulfill a law is to keep it. Christ came not to destroy the law, but to keep it. This he did do.

That this reasoning on the above language of Christ is correct, is shown by the next verse, where he says, “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled.” Verse 18. He now gives the reason why he had not come to destroy the law. I have not come to destroy it “for”—for what? for it will die of itself shortly? Not exactly. Mark his statement. He uses two tills, or points of time, before which not one jot or tittle will pass from the law. The first till is till heaven and earth pass; the second till is till all be fulfilled. What does this mean? Oh! we are gravely told that Jesus fulfilled it all on the cross, about three years after he had said this, and that then it all passed away, every jot and tittle!

With this interpretation it would read thus: “Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till three years from now.” What a sublime climax that would be! Who ever heard language used so? No; the strongest term of comparison must be put last. To be of any force the last till must reach further than the first. The first till reaches to the passing away of the heavens and the earth the earth. We have not yet arrived at that point. But what of the phrase, “till all be fulfilled?” In this verse the word fulfilled is not from the same Greek word rendered fulfill in verse 17. It is genetai, from ginomai. It does not mean to keep, or obey, as fulfill does in verse 17. Among many other definitions Greenfield gives the following: “to take place, come to pass, happen, occur, &c.” Again, the Greek word panta, rendered “all” does not simply refer to the law as some would have it—till all the law be fulfilled. Nomon, law, is a masculine noun, singular number, while panta, all, is an adjective in the neuter gender, plural number. Hence panta cannot refer to nomon. Greenfield’s first definition of panta is, “all things;” and some translations so render it—till all things be fulfilled. It manifestly refers to all things spoken by the prophets; for he is speaking of them as well as of the law: “Think not that I have come to destroy the law, or the prophets.” When will all the prophets, or all things spoken of by them, be fulfilled? Do not their prophecies reach beyond the passing away of the heavens and the earth? Yes; they have spoken of the new heavens and the new earth, Isa. lxvi, 22, 23, of the eternal age of glory, &c., Rev. xxi, xxii. Hence the second till reaches much farther than the first till—the passing away of the heavens and the earth—even far into the eternal world. No language could possibly state the eternal nature and obligation of the law more forcibly than this language of Christ: “Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled,” that is, till all things foretold come to pass, and the eternal world shall come. Or, as Luke has it, “It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.” Chap. xvi, 17. Before men try to abolish God’s law they had better try to destroy the heavens and the earth; for Christ said, that this would be the easiest; and no wonder; for that holy law is in the ark in Heaven, under the very throne of the Almighty. Rev. xi, 19; Ex. xxv.

But we will hear Christ farther about this law. Verse 19: “Whosoever, therefore, shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven; but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of Heaven.” The words, “whosoever, therefore,” shows this to be a conclusion from what he has been saying. What is that conclusion? Therefore the law is abolished? is done away? will soon come to an end? you need not keep it? you will be cursed, and fall from grace if you do keep it? Not exactly; but whosoever shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven. Is not every commandment in the law included in that declaration? Not one, even the least, of these commandments must be broken. Does not that include the fourth—the Sabbath? Let some read this and tremble; for they are guilty. It is an honorable work to do and teach all these commandments. Thank God for the privilege, whether men will hear or forbear.

In the above language, we hear Jesus Christ, the Son, at the very beginning of his work in the first sermon he preached—in his inaugural address—taking up the law of his Father and endorsing it, and thus ratifying it as a part of the new covenant. First, he endorses it as a whole: “Think not that I have come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.” Second, he endorses every precept, even the least one, in that law. “Whosoever, therefore, shall break one of these least commandments, &c.” Third, he accepted it just as it stood before, without the change of a single letter, or even the corner of a letter. “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” Hear ye him. This being true, the law stands in the gospel of Christ just as it did before, every precept and every letter is the law. Then it must read just as it read before, word for word. Thus we have it brought over into the new covenant by the authority of the Son of God. “And let all the people say, Amen!” There is no possible chance to leave out the fourth commandment, nor to so change it as to insert the first day of the week. More than one jot or tittle would have to be changed to do that. Then we have the law of the Sabbath in the New Testament reading just as it did before: “The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God.” We often hear people asking for New Testament authority for keeping the seventh day. Here we have just that, exactly from the lips of Jesus. Will they believe him?

But let us hear him still farther. In the next verse he says, “For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of Heaven.” It will be said that he gives this as a reason why they must keep every one of the commandments,—“For I say unto you, &c.” But to whom is he talking? To his disciples, to Christians. To us, then, he says, “Except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, &c.” Yes, says one, don’t you see that just keeping the law will not do. The old Pharisees strictly kept all the ten commandments, and yet Christ says that our righteousness must exceed theirs. But where did you learn that the Pharisees kept all the ten commandments? Why, they professed to do it. Oh, yes! but let us hear Christ on that point: “Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees which were of Jerusalem, saying, Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? For God commanded, saying, Honor thy father and mother; and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; and honor not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition. Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophecy of you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoreth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.” Matt. xv, 1–9. That is the way they kept the commandments, simply in profession, but not really. They had made void the fifth commandment by their tradition. Jesus now says to his followers, that except they are more righteous than those men, except they keep the law better than they did, they shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of God.

Others have now made void the fourth commandment the same as those hypocrites back there had this fifth. Where is the difference between them? Will they hear Christ on this point? Then let us obey as well as hear.

Some may claim that righteousness does not mean keeping the commandments. Let us see. Jesus was just speaking about keeping the commandments, and then gives the reason why they must all, even to the least, be kept, thus: “For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of Heaven.” This shows plainly what is meant by righteousness; viz., keeping the law. Moses said, “And it shall be our righteousness, if we observe to do all these commandments before the Lord our God, as he hath commanded us.” Deut. vi, 25. Says Isaiah, “Hearken unto me, ye that know righteousness, the people in whose heart is my law.” Chap. li, 7. Paul says that God sent his Son, “that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” Rom. viii, 4. Then righteousness is keeping or fulfilling the law. So Jesus has informed us that unless we keep the law better than the Pharisees, we shall not be saved. Then it is not abolished, certainly.

But, says the objector, did not Christ give a new law, and yet leave out the Sabbath when he said, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets?” Matt. xxii, 37–40. No, my friend, this law was not first given by Christ, but he quoted it, word for word, from Deut. vi, 5, and Lev. xix, 18.

Here, as ever, he simply quotes from the Old Testament, and enjoins us to obey it. But he did not mention the Sabbath, as he would have done had it been binding. But neither did he mention any one of the commandments; are we, therefore, at liberty to steal, murder, lie, &c.? Certainly not; and yet he did not say anything about either of them separately. He did say, though, that on the two great commandments, which he quoted, hang the law and the prophets. Now, by the authority of the Son of God, we have those two great commandments binding in the New Testament? Certainly. And by the same authority, we have in the New Testament something hanging on those two commandments. What is it? Jesus says it is “ALL the LAW and the prophets.” Does all the law hang there in this dispensation? The Son of God says so, and my soul says, Amen. Hear ye him. Now look over all that law, and is not the Sabbath a part of it? Be honest, friends, and own the truth when you see it. Here, again, we have all the law established in the New Testament on the language of Jesus.

His language to the young man who asked him, “Good Master, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?” is to the same effect: “If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.” Matt. xix, 16–22. No intimation here that they were abolished. But, says the objector, “The young man had kept them all, and yet he was not perfect.” This is a mistake. He had not kept them, though he thought he had. He was very rich, and was selfish, and covetous. He did not love his neighbor as himself, though he said he did.

Jesus soon convinced him of this by telling him to sell and give to the poor. This revealed his heart. It showed what he loved most—his riches. So he went away sorrowful. But it is further objected, that Jesus did not mention the Sabbath among the commandments which should be kept. If it had been essential to eternal life, he would have named it; therefore it is not binding. This reason is not sound, as may easily be shown. It assumes that Jesus named all the commandments which we need to keep.

Now read which he did name: “Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Honor thy father and thy mother, and, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” Here are only five of the ten commandments. Not only the Sabbath, but, Thou shalt have no other gods before me, Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, &c., Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain,—these are not named either. Are we therefore not under obligation to keep them? No one will claim this; yet the same argument, which is used against the Sabbath, will come with equal force against all these. The fact is Jesus was only naming those commandments which relate to duty to our neighbor. Of course neither of the first four commandments came in that list.

In many other places Jesus refers to the law and the commandments, but never once says that they are abolished, done away, changed, or anything of the kind. He always mentions them with the greatest respect and teaches that they should be kept. He kept them himself. John xv, 10. “I have kept my Father’s commandments.” Where did he ever give any one liberty to break any one of them? We are ready to hear him.

But says one, “He never said anything about keeping the Sabbath, while he has all the rest.” I have heard this often asserted, but it is not true. First, Christ never mentioned the first, second, or third commandment. If he did, where is it? Did he not say that we should not swear at all? True, but that refers to vows, not to blasphemy. Matt. v, 33–37. Even allowing this to refer to the third commandment, then the first two are not mentioned by him. But the apostles have mentioned them, and that is just as good. Ah! we were to hear the Son. It is claimed that he has named all the commandments which are binding in this dispensation. Then this position must be abandoned, for nowhere in all his words has Christ named the first or second commandment, to say nothing of the third. When you go to the apostles for them, we will also go there for the law and Sabbath. But we are now hearing Christ. Though even the apostles have not mentioned either of the first four commandments, only by implication.

But did Christ in any way recognize the existence of the Sabbath as a sacred institution in his teaching? If he did, of course we are bound to keep it.

First, he went into the synagogues on the Sabbath and taught. This was his custom. “And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up; and as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up for to read.” Luke iv, 16. This was his custom all through his ministry. Thus he honored the Sabbath.

Second, we have his direct teachings as to the origin, use, and object, of the Sabbath. Hear ye him. “And he said unto them, The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath: therefore the Son of Man is also Lord of the Sabbath.” Mark ii, 27, 28. Here he recognizes the fact that there is a Sabbath-day. He tells us that the Sabbath was made. There must then have been a time and place when and where it was made. That was in Eden. Another very important fact is, that Christ is the Lord of that day. Then we have a Christian Sabbath by the direct authority of the Son of God, and that Sabbath is the one which his Father had made for man. Hear ye him!

Third, Jesus never broke the Sabbath nor told others to do so. But did not the Jews accuse him of breaking the Sabbath? Oh! yes; and they also accused him of being a devil, a glutton, a blasphemer, &c. If you believe one accusation, why not believe them all? No; Jesus kept the Sabbath just as God commanded, but not as their foolish tradition taught. Did not he tell the impotent man to take up his bed and walk, on the Sabbath? Yes, but his bed was only a blanket. See Hist. of the Sabbath. This was no violation of the Sabbath.

Fourth, by the direct authority of the Son of God we have a law requiring us in the N. T. to keep the Sabbath. If this be so it will settle the question with regard to the Sabbath, will it not? Certainly. Well, now, hear ye him. “And behold there was a man which had his hand withered. And they asked him, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath days? that they might accuse him. And he said unto them, What man shall there be among you, that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the Sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it, and lift it out? How much then is a man better than a sheep? Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the Sabbath days.” Matt. xii, 10–12. In this language he recognizes the fact that there is a Sabbath-day. Then he tells what it is right to do on that day, viz., deeds of mercy. But the important point in this language is that he says, “It is LAWFUL to do well on the Sabbath days.” What does lawful mean? It means according, or agreeable, to law. It could not be agreeable to law to do well on the Sabbath if there were no law concerning the Sabbath. A thing cannot be according to law where there is no law on the point; hence there is a law binding in the New Testament, regulating the observance of the Sabbath. Hence also there is a lawful Sabbath for all who will hear Jesus Christ. The only law for the Sabbath in all the Bible says, that the seventh day is the Sabbath. No law for keeping the seventh-day Sabbath in the New Testament! What a mistake! Hear ye him: “It is lawful to do good on the Sabbath days.” “And let all the people say, Amen.”

Come now, you who are so anxious to hear Christ, has he said something about the Sabbath? about what it is for? about keeping it? about what it is lawful to do on that day? about the law of the Sabbath? Yes, verily. Then let us not only hear him, but obey him. In his very last revelation to man, speaking of his Father, he says, “Blessed are they that do his commandments.” May he help us to do it.