“Profaned the Holiness of the Lord.”
By J. H. WAGGONER
EVERY word of the Bible has a meaning; and as “whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning,” and “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable,” we must believe the meaning of every text may be learned if we diligently, prayerfully, and humbly seek for it. All admit that one of the best methods of learning the sense of the Scripture is to compare one part with another. In this manner the Bible is its own interpreter. While it should be our endeavor to avoid unnecessary inferences and forced conclusions, we should consider it not merely a privilege, but a duty, to learn what is taught in the sacred word. In reading the prophecy of Malachi recently, my attention was attracted to the expression at the head of this article, and my mind for some time was filled with thoughts of ascertaining what this can mean. First, we consider the connection. What is the nature of the reproof given in this chapter? It speaks much of their disregard of the law; thus, “The law of truth was in his mouth;” verse 6; “For the priest’s lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth;” verse 7; “Ye have caused many to stumble at the law;” verse 8; “Ye have been partial in the law.” Verse 9. From this connection, from our knowledge of the importance of the law of God as the instrument by which sin is known, as containing the whole duty of man, and being the rule of the final judgment, we might reasonably conclude that this profaning the holiness of the Lord has a close relation to their stumbling at the law, or their being “partial in the law.” We know the law itself is holy; it is a rule of holiness. But this does not seem to be sufficiently definite to answer to the text. Applied to the law the word holy is descriptive; but holiness is a substantive. Now it is true that there is something in the law which is called holiness; something, too, at which many are caused to stumble in the law, in regard to which many show themselves “partial in the law.” For if men confess that the whole law is perpetually binding; that all is holy; that as a whole it is the great moral rule by which man shall be judged; and yet select a certain part and heap reproach upon it, say that it was only “Jewish” and not fitted for the service of Christians, we must say they manifest wonderful partiality in the law. But this is exactly what is now done in respect to the law and to the fourth commandment. It is also true that the Sabbath of the fourth commandment—the despised seventh-day Sabbath of the Lord, over which so many are caused to stumble—is, by the Lord himself, called holiness; not holy, merely, but holiness. In Ex. 31:15, the words spoken to Moses by Jehovah are as follows: “Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the Sabbath of rest, holiness to the Lord.” The margin is literal according to the original. Also Ex. 35:2. “Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you holiness, a Sabbath of rest to the Lord.” The same idea is contained in Ex. 16:23. This seems to offer a solution of the text; one in harmony with the context, and not dependent on any forced conclusion, but based on the direct declaration of Jehovah. As the Sabbath of the Lord is holiness, and God is dishonored by its profanation, how careful should we be in its observance. A strict observance of the Sabbath often brings the displeasure of formalists; laxity in this respect they prefer, because it is more in unison with their own spirit of disobedience. Our work, our pleasure, and our words, should be shut out from the Sabbath—“the holy of the Lord.” Isa. 58:13, 14. The words of our mouth and the meditation of our heart should be acceptable in the sight of Jehovah. Ps. 19:14. Short of this our service is formal, and we are lukewarm. Zeal in the cause and worship of God is indispensable. Without this we shall be spewed out of the mouth of the faithful and true Witness.