The Atonement-No. 5 by Joseph Harvey Waggoner

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Mar 3, 1874

The Atonement.—No. 5.

By Joseph Harvey Waggoner

We have seen that reason and the plainest principles of government call for an atonement which shall honor the government and maintain the authority of its law. And if the teachings of the Bible be found to be strictly in harmony with these principles there can be no reason why it should not be accepted as the revelation of God's will to man. And again, if the Bible is the word of God, if it contains the rules for the government of men and the means of recovery from sin, it must be in harmony with reason and justice. If our interpretations of the Bible place its teachings in conflict with these principles our interpretations must be wrong.

It is unfortunate for the world that theories of religion have sprung up which contradict these principles, and, in effect, make the gospel a system of license rather than of righteousness. All such theories are misrepresentations of the Bible and perversions of the gospel.

As we recognize the existence of God, of a supreme being who is “Judge of all,” both reason and reverence must accord to him the attribute of justice. And when we speak of the justice of God, we cannot attach to the word precisely the same idea that we do when we speak of a just man. Man may be just to a certain degree, but the attributes of God admit of no degrees. He is infinite in every perfection, and eternally and unchangeably so.

And it is not possible that God should possess any attribute which does not manifest itself in his government. As God is just, justice must be a principle of his government. As God is love, love must pervade his government. As God is immutable, the principles of his government must be unchangeable. And as law is the basis of government, whatever applies to his government applies also to his law. The nature of the law and the nature of the government are necessarily identical, and the government is a sure manifestation of the character of the governor, therefore the attributes of God are, and must be, revealed in his law. For his law being an expression of the divine will must be an outgrowth of the divine attributes. To suppose otherwise were to suppose that his will were not in harmony with himself, which is absurd.

The following thoughts are here presented for the consideration of those who argue that God has, through Christ, abolished the law to which the subjects of his moral government were amenable before the time of Christ:—

It is a reproach and a disgrace to any government to abolish its law while there exists a rebellion against it. For,

1. If the law were just and right, to abolish it would be to abolish or set aside justice and right to accommodate the government to the circumstances of rebels. That, of course, would compromise justice and abet treason, which is a disgrace to any government.

2. If the government did right in abolishing its law, that is, if the law ought of right to be abolished, it is because the law was unjust and not good. And then opposition to it is justifiable, and the government must take to itself the shame of having enacted a law which was unworthy to exist. And this would prove that the rebels had a higher sense of right than the law-giver, as he gave a law which was found to be unworthy to exist, and they justly repudiated it. This, again, would be a deep disgrace to the government.

3. If the law of God was not holy, and just, and good, it was a disgrace to him to enact it. But if it was holy and just, then justice requires that it be strictly maintained, that its authority be fully vindicated, by causing the rebels to return to perfect obedience and to seek pardon for past offenses, or to be properly punished.

But Paul says in Rom. 7: 12, that the law is holy, and just, and good; and in Rom. 3: 24–26 that God set forth Jesus Christ to be a propitiation that God might be just and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus. Now justice clearly requires that a just law be maintained and preserved, and properly vindicated in case of rebellion. Therefore they who teach that God abolished his law deny the justice of God and bring disgrace upon his government. Men may pretend, by such a course, to exalt the mercy and grace of God; but as there is perfect harmony between all the attributes of God, his mercy and love could develop no plan of salvation but such as his justice could approve. Mercy, though infinite, cannot rise above infinite justice. And he has plainly condemned the idea of doing evil, that good may come, or of sinning, which is transgressing the law, that grace may abound.

In the beginning, God communed with man face to face, and revealed his will directly. But man's rebellion separated between him and God, and the children of men grew worse and worse, so that but

very few sought to hold communion with God or inquire to know his will. When the world had far departed from him, and the nations had almost forgotten that there was one who was Creator of heaven and earth, God chose the seed of Abraham to make them the special depositaries of his will.

And while he made known, through prophets and teachers, civil and circumstantial duties, he taught us to look with peculiar reverence upon the moral code, by proclaiming it with his own voice and writing it with his own finger. That men have been wont to consider the ten commandments a moral code is not strange, considering the teachings of the sacred word on that point.

When God brought Israel out of Egypt, he entered into an agreement or covenant with them, promising to regard them as a peculiar treasure above all nations, if they would obey his voice and keep his covenant. This they readily promised to do. Ex. 19: 5–6. “Obey my voice,” and “keep my covenant,” are two expressions used by the Lord referring to the same thing; for when they heard his voice, the third day after the covenant was made with them, he declared his covenant which he commanded them to perform. This was the ten commandments. Deut. 4: 12, 13. The expression, “keep my covenant,” refers to the “covenant commanded,” and not to the covenant or agreement made with them. He said also that if they would obey this they would be a holy nation. Now it is an acknowledged truth that character is formed by our actions in reference to law; and the nature of the character is determined only by the nature of the law. Obedience to a bad law can never make a good character. It is hence evident that the character of the actor is the exact counterpart of the law obeyed. But we have the Lord's own testimony that if they would keep the ten commandments, they would be holy; that is, they would thereby form holy characters; and as their characters would be but a copy of the law, we have herein the word of the Governor of the universe that this is a holy law.

As law is the basis of government, and as God's government or law is a certain exposition of his attributes, and as man's character is as the nature of the law obeyed, to obey the law is to attain unto the righteousness of God, or true holiness. This leads to the conclusion that the holiness derived from obedience to the ten commandments is that growing out of the divine attributes, pure and changeless as Heaven itself.

As there cannot be diverse or unlike attributes of Deity, so there can be only one rule of holiness growing out of those attributes—one moral law for his government. And upon obedience or disobedience to this law must all good and evil, life and death, be suspended. Therefore the following declarations apply to these commandments, or this law, and to no other:—

Lev. 18: 5. “Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments; which if a man do, he shall live in them.”

Deut. 30: 15, 16. “See, I have set before thee this day life and good, and death and evil; in that I command thee this day to love the Lord thy God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commandments and his statutes and his judgments.” See verses 19, 20; chap. 11: 26–28.

Isa. 51: 7. “Hearken unto me, ye that know righteousness, the people in whose heart is my law.”

Ps. 19: 7. “The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.”

Ps. 40: 8. “I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart.” Also Ps. 119.

Eccl. 12: 13. “Fear God, and keep his commandments; for this is the whole duty of man.”

Matt. 19: 17. “If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.”

Rom. 2: 13. “The doers of the law shall be justified.”

Gal. 3: 12. “The law is not of faith; but the man that doeth them shall live in them.”

1 John 3: 4. “Sin is the transgression of the law.”

Rom. 6: 23. “The wages of sin is death.”

Rom. 7: 12. “The law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.”

Verse 13. “For we know that the law is spiritual.”

This law is also referred to in certain scriptures, wherein it is called God's holy covenant and the covenant commanded.

Deut. 4: 13. “He declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments.”

1 Chron. 16: 15–17. “Be ye mindful always of his covenant; the word which he commanded to a thousand generations; even of the covenant which he made with Abraham, and of his oath unto Isaac; and hath confirmed the same to Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant.”

Gen. 26: 3–5. “I will perform the oath which I swear unto Abraham. . . . Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.” For breaking this “everlasting covenant,” the inhabitants of the earth will be desolated with a curse and burned up. Isa. 24: 5, 6.

By indignation against the “holy covenant,” was the man of sin, the abomination that maketh desolate, set up. Dan. 11: 28, 30.

Besides the moral law of God, to which the above declarations apply, there were types and shadows, or ordinances necessarily limited in duration by their nature. They were not of original obligation, and were introduced only because man had failed to observe the moral law, which was of original obligation, and which rested on no contingency. As these are sometimes confounded, the distinction of laws will be briefly noticed.

The system (not the law) under which the people of God lived in the past dispensation was complex; its elements were moral, civil, and ceremonial. The moral was the basis of all, existing prior to, and independent of, the others, and was from the beginning the standard of duty to God and to our fellow-men. The civil enforced the moral, especially in their relations to their fellow-men, making application of its principles to everyday life. The ceremonial expiated the violations of the moral, and had especial reference to their relations to God. But both the ceremonial and civil were merely typical, looking forward to the priesthood of Christ and to his kingdom; and therefore illustrate the true relation we sustain under Christ to the law of God, the moral rule, in this dispensation.

This distinction of the two laws, moral and ceremonial, is shown in the following scriptures:—

Jer. 6: 19, 20. “Hear, O earth; behold, I will bring evil upon this people, even the fruit of their thoughts, because they have not hearkened unto my words, nor to my law, but rejected it. To what purpose cometh there to me incense from Sheba, and the sweet cane from a far country? Your burnt offerings are not acceptable, nor your sacrifices sweet unto me.” Here one was kept and the other rejected; but the observance of the ceremonial was not acceptable when the moral was disregarded. That this was illustrative of our position in this age is proved by Matt. 7: 21–23, and John 7: 16, 17, where the efficacy of faith in the Son, and of the knowledge of his doctrine is dependent on obedience to the will or law of the Father.

Jer. 7: 22, 23. “For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices. But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice.” We have seen that to obey his voice was to keep his covenant, the ten commandments; and this shows that when God gave his law, which himself declared to be the rule of holiness, the ceremonial law of burnt offerings and sacrifices was not included.

The Saviour himself explicitly declares that he came not to destroy the law; yet we know he did set aside the ceremonial law, by introducing its antitype.

The same is proved by Paul in his letter to the Ephesians and Romans. In one, he speaks of a law which Christ abolished (Gr. katargeō), Eph. 2: 15, and in the other, he speaks of a law which is not made void (Gr. katargeō), by faith, but rather established. Rom. 3: 31. J. H. WAGGONER.