The Yoke of Bondage by S. B. Whitney

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Apr 14, 1874

The Yoke of Bondage.

By S. B. Whitney

One of the most common, and, in some instances, effectual perversions of Scripture used as argument against the present truth is the notion that the ten commandments, especially the fourth commandment, is the yoke of bondage referred to in the 5th chapter of Galatians. That this is a perversion of Scripture we will now attempt to show.

1. Neither the ten commandments nor any part of them constitutes the yoke of bondage. The first Psalm, describing the character of the man that is blessed, says, verse 2, “His delight is in the law of the Lord, and in his law doth he meditate day and night.” Again, Ps. 19:7, 10, 11, “The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.” “More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold; sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb. Moreover by them is thy servant warned; and in keeping of them there is great reward.” And yet again, Ps. 119:45, “And I will walk at liberty; for I seek thy precepts.” Please read this entire psalm. Such language as the above certainly cannot apply to a yoke of bondage.

But has the change of dispensation converted the perfect law of God into such a yoke? Let us see. “But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.” James 1:25. What law is this? Let Chap. 2:10, 12, answer. “For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. For he [margin, that law], that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law. So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.” This testimony clearly points out the law, and includes every point in it; and it is conclusive; for assuredly, the perfect law of liberty cannot be the yoke of bondage.

2. But what is this yoke? The origin of the expression is found in Acts 15, and the circumstances there related evidently gave rise to the language under consideration; and an examination of this chapter will make the matter clear. Verse 5 says, “But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.” In the conference held over this matter, Peter inquires, verse 10, “Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?” And in the letter sent to the churches occurs the following, verse 28, “For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things.” Thus it appears that the yoke, or burden, is the law of Moses, which regulated the office and the ministrations of the Jewish priesthood. And with this agree other scriptures, in which the same law is called “statutes that were not good;” Eze. 20:25; “the ministration of death;” 2 Cor. 3:7; “the enmity;” Eph. 2:15; and is said to be “against us,” and “contrary to us.” Col. 2:14.

That law was given simply to meet an existing necessity, as a “shadow of good things to come.” As the “body,” or substance, is “of Christ,” it follows that when his sacrifice and priesthood, or the good things to come, were reached, that law ceased, and the yoke was lifted off. This being the case, to still continue those observances was to wear the yoke unnecessarily, or by voluntary imposition; while to seek justification by those observances was virtually to reject Christ; for, as those offerings pointed forward to Christ, to still offer them was, in effect, saying that he had not come. Consequently Christ became of no effect unto such, and they were fallen from grace. And so the Jews were said to be in “bondage,” and to have a “veil upon their heart.” Gal. 4:25. 2 Cor. 3:15.

3. From the foregoing considerations we may clearly perceive the relation that the law of Moses and the law of Christ sustain to the law of God and to each other. Standing at the cross, we are impressed with the perfection and perpetuity of God’s law, inasmuch as its transgression requires so infinite a sacrifice to save the transgressor. Extending in opposite directions, we behold two remedial schemes, one typical of the other, in which is offered salvation through the merits of the great sacrifice. Looking backward, we view the Mosaic dispensation, with its typical observances, regulated by the law of Moses, the mediator, pointing toward the bleeding Lamb of God. Looking forward, we view the Christian dispensation, with its commemorative observances, regulated by the law of Christ, the mediator, pointing back to the risen Saviour. The law of God, or ten commandments, as the constitution, or organic law of God’s government, is incorporated into both systems, and salvation is suspended, in the one case, upon obedience to the law of God and the law of Moses, and in the other, upon obedience to the law of God and the law of Christ; the principle, however, being the same in either case, both requiring faith in the all-sufficient sacrifice of the Son of God.

Therefore instead of antagonism, there is harmony, between the two systems; instead of one being all law, and the other all gospel, each is composed of the law and gospel combined; the only difference between them being that which arises from the different relation they sustain to the time of Christ’s death; the latter possessing in reality what the former possessed only in shadow, and accomplishing in fact what the other accomplished only in figure. And so Paul says, speaking of Christ, Heb. 9:15, “And for this cause he is the mediator of the New Testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.” How beautiful and harmonious is truth. S. B. WHITNEY.