Not Done Away | AdventAI

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jan 2, 1872

Not Done Away.

We affirm, on the authority of the Sacred Scriptures, that the ordinance relative to eating the flesh of swine, Deut. 14:8, is not done away. We design to prove that the command, “Ye shall not eat of their flesh,” is as really binding upon Christians as the precept, “Thou shalt not steal.” This we shall make appear evident from a careful examination of the two kinds of law given in the books of Moses.

In the Pentateuch there is one kind of laws, properly termed moral, which relate to man's duty to God, to his fellows, and to himself. These grow out of existing relations between God and man, and man and his fellow-men. And these must continue so long as the relations exist. Of this class of moral precepts, the ten commandments are pre-eminent. They are the grand constitution of God's moral government of fallen man. And, in strict accordance with this constitution, the Old Testament abounds in moral teachings and minor precepts, inculcating justice, mercy, cleanliness, health, and the love of God. These cannot cease while God's moral government in this mortal state shall remain. Change of dispensation can no more affect these than it can change the character of God, or that of fallen men.

The books of Moses contain another kind of ordinances, which are simply shadowy ceremonies, given to serve a certain purpose, during a limited period of time. These were the shadows, or types, pertaining to the Jewish religious services, which find their substance, or antitype, in the good things of the Christian age.

“The law,” says Paul, “having a shadow of good things to come,” &c. Heb. 10:1. The apostle illustrates the subject with the familiar figure of a shadow, and the body which casts the shadow, as in the case of a monument, tree, or a building. The death of Christ, his priesthood, or ministry, and the good things he does for his people in this age, cast their shadows back into the Jewish age, as the monument before the rising sun casts its long shadow back to the west. The Jewish sacrifices, where blood was shed, were the shadow, the death of Christ the body that cast the shadow. The Jewish priesthood was the shadow, the priesthood of the Son of God in Heaven in this dispensation is the body that cast the shadow. And as we would follow down the shadow to the base of the monument, where the shadow must cease, so the Jews, in their services, followed down to the death, resurrection, and ascension, of Christ, where these shadowy ordinances ceased by limitation. This is expressed by the apostle in these words, “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.” “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days, which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.” Col. 2:14–17.

The cessation of shadowy ordinances of the class of these mentioned, the apostle expresses by the terms, “blotting out,” and “nailing it to his cross.” And let the reader mark well this qualifying passage, “which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.” This shows that shadowy ordinances only were done away at the crucifixion of Christ. These shadows having served the purpose for which they were designed, could exist no longer, being superseded by the body that cast them.

Now, we affirm, without fear of contradiction, that the ordinance forbidding the use of swine as food, does not belong to this class of ordinances. These were shadows of things to come. But the ordinance relative to swine's flesh is no more a shadow than the precept, “Thou shalt not bear false witness.” The death of the Son of God, and the change of dispensation, could therefore no more abolish the precept forbidding the use of the swine as food, than it could change the precepts forbidding adultery and murder.

This is a question worthy of a candid and thorough discussion. We will give any of the swine-eating clergy a reasonable amount of space in this journal to sustain their practice in this respect, from the Bible. Candid and brief articles will be given in connection with a review. If our position upon the swine is incorrect, some one will confer a great favor in showing where we err. But if our position is correct, that the prohibition of swine's flesh is not a shadowy ordinance, and not done away, then it should be acknowledged, and obeyed, by at least all Bible Christians.—Health Reformer,