More Opposition to the Law of God.
By J. H. W.
It was my privilege—if it can be called a privilege—some time since to hear Eld. Wright of Santa Clara, of the Disciple denomination, preach a sermon against the Law and the Sabbath, in Gilroy. Those who oppose the Sabbath do not seem to be learning anything by the light which is spreading in every direction. To the contrary, it seems that they are getting more blind, their prejudice increasing with the increase of opportunites to learn the truth. A few points in his discourse will be of interest to the reader. 1. He very foolishly appealed to prejudice instead of reason by informing his hearers that we are in a new dispensation, and that circumcision is not now necessary. Most of his hearers had recently gone over the evidence that the Sabbath was instituted at creation, and was therefore no more affected by a change of dispensation than was marriage. This effort to mislead the minds of his hearers did him no credit. 2. He said we are under no obligation to observe any law that was given to the Jews! We are sometimes at a loss what to think of the words of preachers when they oppose present truth. Do they really mean what they say, or do they speak at random, without considering the tendency of their language? We hope we shall never be thrown into society with those who do not keep any law that was given to the Jews. What a church he would have if they should all live up to such teachings. 3. He said we are not to go back of the day of pentecost for instruction in anything. It is wrong to refer to Matt. 18 as a rule of church discipline because it was spoken before the day of pentecost. This shuts out Christ as a teacher, and ignores everything he said. Notwithstanding this, he referred to the transfiguration, and said we are now commanded to "hear him." But not a word will they hear from him, because he lived and spoke before the day of pentecost! It would seem that any man of ordinary intelligence would be ashamed to thus slight the head of the church, and openly reject his teachings. He said "we are to follow the inspired apostles." But for this there is no scripture. Jesus said, "follow me," and the apostles themselves held up Jesus as our pattern, and said we ought to walk even as he walked. 1 John 2 : 6. Again we are informed that we are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus himself being the chief corner. Eph. 2 : 20. Peter said we do well to take heed to the sure word of prophecy which holy men of old spake; 2 Peter 1 : 19-21; and Paul said the Holy Scriptures which Timothy knew from a child are able to make us wise unto salvation, and are profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. 2 Tim. 3 : 16, 17. It is truly strange that people who profess to take the teachings of the apostles as the rule of faith will shut their eyes against such testimony. 4. One of the strangest declarations we ever heard was this, that "the conditions of salvation were never given to man until the day of pentecost." He denied that the gospel was contained in the promise that the seed of the woman should bruise the head of the serpent, for, he said the gospel could not be preached until the facts of the gospel existed, and therefore could not be preached before the resurrection of Christ. Faith in a coming Saviour was taught in the sacrifices of the past dispensation as truly as faith in a crucified and risen Saviour is taught by the ordinances of this. The conclusion is evident that if no condition of salvation was given before the day of pentecost, then no one was saved before that day, or if they were saved they were saved unconditionally. Where there is no condition there can be no difference of character. His assertion being true, if any were saved, all were saved. But whether all were saved or all were lost is a question difficult to settle in the light of such assertions. It would seem that all must see at a glance that such teaching is a plain denial of the Scriptures. Yet some consider it pre-eminently "the gospel." Surely light is needed in the darkness of this age. 5. He said the apostles did not command to keep any day holy. This is a good admission against the first day. But we know that God whom the apostles worshiped and served, commanded to keep the seventh day holy, and nothing can add to his authority. But again he said he had no objection to their keeping every day holy. This gives rise to a question. What does he mean by keeping a day holy? All who heard that discourse know that he had strong objection to their keeping the seventh day as a day of rest. Did he mean, as we have heard others assert, that the way to keep every day holy is to live Christian lives every day? And if so, did he mean that the apostle did not command any day to be kept holy, that is, they did not command us to live Christians any day? That must be it, for surely he could not mean to say that he had no objection to their entirely abstaining from doing their own work every day. The no-Sabbath theology is a strange mixture; its best friends cannot give it any appearance of consistency. 6. He said he wanted his hearers to understand that we are saved by grace; but, he added, we must do whatever God commands us to do. Then it appears, after all the talk to the contrary, that obedience to whatever God commands is not inconsistent with salvation by grace. This is just what we have tried to make the people believe, but what the no-law preachers have persistently denied. We believe, with Paul, that we do not make void the law through faith, and we may not sin that grace may abound. Some would make us believe that obedience to the law of God frustrates grace; but Paul shows in Rom. 6 that it is disobedience which shuts us away from the grace of God. Alexander Campbell, enforcing obedience to the gospel, said, "Nor do we in truth, in obeying the gospel, make void either law or gospel, but establish and confirm both."—Baptism, p. 258. This agrees with Paul, but most of the disciples of Mr. Campbell have overlooked this truth.325The theology of the present age is a mass of confusion. "Babylon" is plainly written upon it. The "present truth," the third angel's message with the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus, brings a remedy. Outside of this all is darkness. But "the commandment is a lamp; and the law is light; and reproofs of instruction are the way of life." Prov. 6 : 23. Many see the light, but the cross is too heavy; the way is too narrow; and the world is too dear to their hearts. Instead of regarding it a privilege to be restored to obedience to God, they consider it a hardship. That which the Lord has revealed as a delight, is to them bondage. Darkness is their light, and evil is their good. How merciful is the Lord to send a message of warning and of duty to dispel the darkness, and to bring us into light and liberty. For they who delight in the law of the Lord are blessed, and they who seek his precepts shall walk at liberty. Ps. 1 : 1, 2; 119 : 45.