I have before me an article, signed L. P. Judson, purporting to contain "forty-one reasons why we are not under the law." Now I do not know of any Sabbath-keeper who does not believe that we "are not under the law, but under grace;" but I conclude from the "reasons" that the writer does not know what Paul means by that expression. His fifth "reason," founded on Gal. ii, 19, 20, is as follows: "He says he was dead to the law, crucified with Christ, &c. And he furthermore says, "that the law has no more claims on a Christian than it has on a dead man." When did Paul become dead to the law? Not till he believed. Why did he die to the law?—Because he was a transgressor, and the law had dominion over him as long as he lived. When he died to the law did he remain dead? No: he was crucified with Christ, and as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so also he was raised to walk in newness of life. If his death was caused by his sin, could he walk in newness of life and continue in sin or transgression? He was dead to sin, and could not live in it, but if he sinned, he ceased to be under grace, and was again the servant of sin, as he was when under the law at first, before he was freed from it by death. Rom. vi, 1, 2, 14-16. How did he regard the law when he walked in new-
ness of life? It was his delight; and he confessed that it was holy, just, good and spiritual. What law was it that he delighted in, that he called holy, &c.? The same that he died in, as shown in Rom. vi, vii. If man had always delighted in it, and not transgressed it, he would not have been condemned by it, and need not have died to it.
"Reason" No. 11 is founded on Gal. iii, 10:—"Those who are under the law, are under the curse. So that, if the law is in force, the curse must be." Can it be possible that this was written in sober earnest?—Does the writer truly think there is no curse? Can he warn his fellow men to flee from the wrath to come—tell them they are under condemnation as sinners—that the wages of sin is death—and yet there is no curse! Would he contend that they were by nature, not under the law, not children of wrath, but children of grace? Eph. ii, 3. Does Mr. Judson believe that he was freed from the curse of the law while in a state of unbelief? See. Rom. iii, 23-26. If there is neither law nor curse, why are the commandment-keepers so often declared to be under the curse.
Another "reason" is drawn from Gal. v, 22, 23:—Against those that have in their lives, the fruits of the Spirit specified "THERE IS NO LAW." Is not this a perversion of the scripture? 2 Pet. iii, 16. Why did Mr. J. separate the two first, which are the qualifying words of the last sentence in verse 23, from the last four words, and place the latter part of the sentence as a separate question in capitals? The Apostle enumerates the works of the Spirit, and says, "AGAINST SUCH there is no law," and every Sabbath-keeper believes this. The quotation as he gives it, is calculated to deceive, though it may not have been the intention of the writer.
Again he says: "Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, and as the curse and law are necessarily united, we have nothing to do with either."
Blind indeed must be the minds of any that can be deceived by such reasoning. The law and the curse are not necessarily united. Does the law curse or condemn an innocent man? Paul says, the law was ordained to life; [Rom. vii, 10:] the man that doeth them shall live in them; [Gal. iii, 12:] the doers of the law shall be justified; [Rom. ii, 13:] but all have transgressed the law, and are under it, subject to the judgment of God, and therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified. Rom. iii, 9-20. If God has ever given a law for man's observance, and "necessarily united" a curse to it, so that those who keep the law are condemned or cursed, is not God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? Rom. iii, 5.
But what is the testimony? The oracles of God are effectual, or else he cannot judge the world; [Rom. iii, 2-6:] because by the law is the knowledge of sin, [verse 20,] and sin is not imputed when there is no law; [Chap. v, 13:] hence, the strength of sin is the law; 1 Cor. xv, 56. All have sinned, [Rom. iii, 9-20:] and the wages of sin is death. Chap. vi, 23. But those who cease to sin, or transgress the law, and become the servants of righteousness, receive the gift of God, eternal life, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Rom. vi, 1, 2, 13-18, 23. But can it be shown that the wages of keeping the law is death?
Now I would ask, does Paul speak of more than two states or conditions, in any of his writings on this subject, namely: under the law; and under grace? Are we not under the law until we are through Christ brought under grace? But if we fall, from grace, what is our condition then, if there is no law, which we can again be brought under? Will some no-law friend answer? But if there is a law which we can again be brought under, by falling from grace, or disobedience, may not those who transgress it be under it now, and not under grace? And lastly, is it not a strong delusion of these last days to try to make void the law through faith, when God's word says it is established thereby? See 2 Thess. ii 11, 12; God shall send them strong delusion that they should believe a lie, that they all might be15damned who believed not the truth, [thy law is the truth. Ps. cxix, 142,] but had pleasure in unrighteousness. And all unrighteousness is sin; 1 John v, 17;] and sin is the transgression of the law; [Chap. iii, 4.] hence they believed not the truth, but had pleasure in the transgression of God's law.
Dear Brethren, let us gird ourselves anew to the conflict, and put on the whole armor of God, prepare to meet spiritual wickedness in high places. Be faithful and victory is sure.