Your ShelfYour Projects

Precedents in Religion

4%

Seventh-day Adventist Missionary Society · Oakland, California · Jun 22, 1882

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 8, No. 24.

Read the full edition

Precedents in Religion.

THE Lord said (and still says) to his people: "In all things that I have said unto you, be circumspect." Ex. 23:13. To be circumspect is to be watchful, prudent, careful, cautious. To be circumspect concerning God's requirements is to be watchful of what he requires, and to be prudent and careful to do exactly what he requires; neither more nor less. To add to or to subtract from the word of God, in any matter of worship, is to so alter the word as to make it an expression of our will; it is then no longer an expression of the divine will. Obedience to the word of God with such emendations is not acceptable, because it is will-worship; in such cases the fear of God is taught by the precepts of men. Col. 2:18-23; Isa. 29:13.
The offense is not extenuated by the fact that it which is taught has divine truth for its basis; for to amend or to pervert the word of God is as great presumption as to reject it altogether. Therefore the Lord says: "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you." "What thing soever I command you, observe to do it; thou shalt not add thereto nor diminish from it." Deut. 4:2; 12:32. This is spoken with direct reference to the commandments of God. Just what he has said—no more, no less—is that which is required of us. Again he says: "Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar." Prov. 30:6.
But man, in the pride of his heart, is always seeking some other way than that which is pointed out in the word of God. Even while acknowledging the authority of Jehovah, and professing to reverence that authority, he has ever shown a desire to make void the commandments of God by his tradition. Seldom, very seldom is the question raised, What says the word of the Lord? But the inquiry is often raised, What have the Fathers taught? What have our wise men said upon the subject? What has been the practice of past generations?
But our inquiry should not be, What have people done? It should rather be, What ought they to have done? What they have done, and what is established as a precedent or custom, we may find in history; but this indicates no duty—it defines no obligation. What they ought to have done—and what we ought to do—can be found only in the word of God; and this always has the force of obligation, for God shall bring every work into judgment on the authority of his own commandments.
It must not be supposed that customs have been followed and precedents established without reasons. However much they may obscure the word of God; however great the departures from the precepts of the Lord to which they lead, reasons will be found in their favor. There is not a dogma in the whole series of Catholic superstitions for which reasons are not given; and sometimes these reasons are very plausible. Every usurpation has its justification. Every doctrine or observance which cannot be supported by the direct evidence of the Scriptures, is yet found to have a pious intention and a pious use. If they are not strictly in obedience to that which God has spoken, they are yet offered for his glory, and admitted and supported on that ground. But according to the scriptures which we have quoted they are not admissible. We think that Alexander Campbell was right in his declaration that any institution for which men must devise reasons, stands self-condemned. For every scriptural institution, the reason is found in the Scriptures, and that ends, or ought to end, all controversy. When an institution is found in the Scriptures, no human inventions are needed to uphold it; for no amount of human reasonings can strengthen the word of the Most High.
On the subject of circumspection in the service of God, as well as on the nature of precedents, we have a lesson in the case of Uzzah, whom the Lord smote for putting his hand upon the ark of the testimony. King David was startled by this judgment, and, moved by fear, he desisted from his purpose to bring the ark to his own city. Many a reader has wondered at this transaction, and felt that it was needlessly severe to slay Uzzah under such circumstances. And what were the circumstances? The ark was placed upon a new cart. It was a cart which had never been used for any other purpose. This was, probably, as a token of respect to the ark. But the cattle stumbled, and the ark was like to fall to the ground. Uzzah was too reverential—too anxious for the safety of the ark—to bear the thought of this, and he put forth his hand to stay it up, to avert any injury which might befall it. With such a pious intention prompting his action, ought not Uzzah to have been spared?
Before this question is answered let us consider another fact. God had expressly forbidden any one to touch the ark. It was presumption on the part of Uzzah. His piety was no excuse for the action—it was disobedience to God's expressly revealed will. These orders lay back of his action: 1. None but the Levites were to have charge of it; any others coming near to it were to be put to death. 2. The Levites were not permitted to put their hands upon the ark. It was to be moved only by means of the rings which were placed in the sides of it.
It may, indeed, be said that these were but small matters compared to the duty, unexpectedly presented, of preserving the ark from great injury. Here, if ever, was a case where a departure from the merely ceremonial requirement was justified; where an order would be more honored in the breach than in the observance. But not so. However small and unimportant man might consider these rules, they were of sufficient weight to receive the sanction, to be subjects of the direct action, of the Almighty. His word had gone forth; and this is, first of all, and at all times, to be regarded. Uzzah broke the commandment of God, and was slain for his presumption, though his action was, professedly, very pious, and very respectful to the ark; or he was at least very regardful of its welfare and its safety.
One error leads directly to another. Precedent grows out of precedent. There was a wrong lying back of the act of Uzzah. Had there been no previous error there would have been no occasion for Uzzah to act presumptiously. The first error was that of placing the ark upon a cart. The Lord gave direction that it should be moved only by hand—carried by the staves which were run through the rings in its sides. If this commandment had been obeyed; if the ark had been thus borne, the other commandment would not have been broken. But here comes a reason, founded on precedent. It had been done before.
When the ark was in the hands of the Philistines, and they were smitten of God, and their wise men gave counsel to place the ark on a new cart, and to put thereto milch kine, and if the cows left their calves and went to the land of the Israelites, then it should be known that the Lord had smitten them because of the ark. And it was so.
But there is some excuse for this transaction. It is possible that the Philistines did not know how the ark was to be borne, nor who was to bear it. Putting it upon a new cart, made for that purpose, was, no doubt, the highest respect which they could render to it. Nor was it yet clear in their minds that they had been smitten on account of the ark. As heathen, they perhaps did as well as they could under the circumstances.
But for Israel we have not the same excuse. They were the people chosen of God, to whom were committed his oracles, to whom Jehovah had revealed his will. They knew better than to thus follow the example of the heathen; they knew that it was contrary to the commandment which he had given them. But this was the precedent for their action; the custom upon which was based their departure from the law of their God, which had resulted so disastrously to Uzzah. It was not a small matter with Israel to follow the way of the heathen, because that they had the commandment of God with them, and they knew that this precedent of heathen origin was directly contrary to the word of God. These are the facts in the case.
The things which were written aforetime were written for our learning. Rom. 15:4. They are "ensamples, and written for our admonition." 1 Cor. 10:11. We should profit by their disasters, and avoid their errors. And there is an error now existent which is, in many respects, exactly parallel to that in which the children of Israel indulged; and it has become very popular in the Christian world. The parallel is easily traced.
In the beginning God set forth the seventh day as his rest day—the memorial of his work of creation. It was blessed and sanctified, and thereby became "the holy of the Lord." He also cautioned his people against following the ways of the heathen. Deut. 18:9, 12, and others. He directly warned them against worshiping "the sun, the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven." Deut. 4:19, and others.
But the heathen, who "did not like to retain God in their knowledge," did worship the host of heaven. Great numbers of them became worshipers of the sun, and in honor of this bright luminary named the first day of the week "the day of the sun," or Sunday, and consecrated it, or held it as sacred, to the sun. So popular was this superstition of heathendom that Constantine, in the very might of his power, issued a decree in the year A. D. 321, enjoining upon towns-people and tradesmen to rest "on the venerable day of the sun." Dr. Schaff, in his Church History, says that Constantine was a worshiper of Apollo, the sun-god, and this decree was conformable to that worship. All authorities agree that the supposed sacredness of the first day of the week had no other origin than the consecration to the sun which it received from the heathen. Its observance has no basis in the word of God. To the contrary, it is directly opposed to the fourth commandment, which requires the observance of the seventh day—the Sabbath of the Lord God.
And now comes the wonder. With the decalogue in their hands; with the direct testimony of the Most High that the seventh day is his day—his holy Sabbath—the only day which can be enforced by the fourth commandment; with the evidence of the Scriptures that the weekly Sabbath is based entirely upon the facts of creation, and these can be applied to the seventh day alone; with the testimony of all history that Sunday-keeping and Sunday-consecration had their origin in heathen superstition; with all this evidence before them, and without any intimation in the Scriptures that Jehovah has altered or amended his law, or that he requires the observance of the day of the sun, almost the entire Christian world—the professed "Israel of God" of this dispensation—openly depart from the commandment of their God, and follow the way of the heathen! Their wisest men confess that it was of heathen origin; confess that God has never required it in his word which is given as "a perfect rule of faith and practice;" but—somebody did so before them, and they will do so too! They have exactly the same reason for their practice that Israel had for putting the ark upon a cart, with the evidence in their hands that it is contrary to the commandment of God.
Thus far the parallel. Now we will notice some differences, and these will be found to be in favor of the action of the Philistines, and against this modern relic of sun worship.
1. The Philistines trembled before the judgments of God, and their wise men said: "Give glory to the God of Israel." 1 Sam. 6:5.
2. In counseling to return the ark to its place they said: "Make a new cart, and take two milch kine, with which there hath come no yoke." Verse 7. In appropriating both a cart and cattle which had never been used for other service, they showed the highest possible respect for the ark.
3. The order for transporting the ark in a certain manner was but temporary, and a part of the law regulating the Levitical service. After the temple was built it was no longer of use, and must in any event have ceased when the Levitical priesthood ceased.
4. The children of Israel might urge that this practice was a reminder of the subduing of the Philistines before the ark of the Lord; an event worthy to be memorated.
5. On the other hand, the worship of the sun did not originate with any regard to the authority of Jehovah.
6. It was not practiced out of any respect for the law of God.
7. It is not merely in conflict with a temporary or ceremonial law, but with an important precept of the decalogue. It leads to a desecration of that which God sanctified at the creation of the world, and which will continue when "the heavens and earth which are now," have passed away. Isa. 66:22, 23.
8. It was not instituted or enforced as a reminder of any event connected with the service of God. It was instituted, enforced, and perpetuated, as the sun's day; a monument to idolatry, to the worship of "the host of heaven." And all reasons drawn professedly from the word of God in its favor are modern. They were never offered to justify the institution, or as reasons why it was originated. They are the result of an after-thought, given to justify a practice already established on other grounds.
Who will rise up and gainsay these things? Is it a marvel that God, in these last days, should institute means to correct an error so great, so nearly all-prevailing as this? The words of the Psalmist well apply to this time: "It is time for thee, Lord, to work; for they have made void thy law." Ps. 119:126. In the providence of God, and in fulfillment of his "sure word of prophecy," a message is now going forth to all the world, to turn the people away from all false worship, and restore to their proper place "the commandments of God." Rev. 14:9-12. Light and darkness have no communion. Christ and Belial have no fellowship. We cannot unite heathen superstitions with the commandments of God, and truthfully say that we are still keeping his commandments. The message is going. The call is being made: "Who is on the Lord's side?" Not long will mercy linger, for the harvest of the earth is soon to be reaped, when the warning has been given, and the people have been tested by the truth on "the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus." See Rev. 14:9-20. May God remove from our hearts the fear of the world, and a desire to follow its vain customs, and grant us grace to walk in his testimonies, that we may be accepted "in the day of the Lord Jesus."