Labors in Iowa by B. F. Snook

Publishing Committee · BATTLE CREEK, MICH. · Aug 7, 1860

Labors in Iowa.

By B. F. Snook

I LEFT my family the 6th inst. and started for the Eastern Iowa tent, and arrived at Rome, the seat of labor on the 10th inst. I there joyfully met for the first time with Bro. and sister Cornell. I was much fatigued aud worn down when I made my arrival, and to meet with such warm-hearted and devoted followers of Christ was to me as refreshing and encouraging as the shadow of a great rock in a weary land is to the wearied traveler in Arabia's cheerless desert. I soon learned from Bro. C. how the prospects appeared for success. There was a good and growing interest. Everybody seems to be wide awake, deeply engaged, and much interested. Many were rejoicing that good was going to be effected in Rome. But soon we were informed that there was opposition on the ground. This was not strange news; for the Devil is surest to rally where the greatest good is being done.

Elder Lucas (a Campbellite), was our opponent. Not feeling very pugilistic, we did not give the Heenan-like Elder a very warm reception. But he wanted to try his skill against the law of God, to see if he could not show that it was abolished. We heard him and then reviewed his discourse. He stated that the seventh day of the week was the only weekly Sabbath. We thanked him for this admission, and made it tell heavily against his no-Sabbath doctrine.

His next position was that the ten commandments were the Sinaitic covenant, not made with the fathers, but the Israelites only, who were alive that day.

We replied, first, that according to his position the law was binding only on those in the covenant. Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and all the other patriarchs were out of this covenant; for it was made only with their children; therefore they could all get to heaven in the violation of the ten commandments.

Secondly, this covenant was not made with David, Solomon and the prophets, and therefore was no more binding on them than on the fathers. He next stated that the ten commandments being the old covenant, their abolition was represented and proved by Gal. iv, and adduced the bond woman and her son as his evidence. This was fatal to his cause. He acknowledges nine of the ten to be binding, hence by his own showing, his own system instead of being exclusively Christian as many think, is composed of nine-tenths of Hagar the bond woman. He did not sustain a position against the law of God, but left unanswerable evidence behind him that the carnal mind is not subject to God's law, and that the dragon is wroth with the remnant for keeping the commandments of God and faith of Jesus.

From this time our meeting passed on without interruption, and we had peace and harmony until last Sunday. Early we learned that Eld. McConnell of Marion was in town, and it was probable that he wished an appointment to oppose God's holy law. I preached a discourse at half past ten o'clock on the two covenants, and for his benefit exposed his system in its native deformity.

At the close of our meeting, he announced an appointment for an opposition meeting. We then offered him the tent, which he accepted and preached against us. Here I must confess my disappointment. Never before did I hear such thunder with so little lightning. Well, thought I, this is one of Jude's clouds without water. He spent some time trying to convince the people of what we all believed, that all morality had its source in God. He argued that God was not dependent on creation for existence, else he could not exist without creation.

In my review I observed that this was all correct—admitted that he had thus proved God a moral being. Now for the application. If the Sabbath of the Lord is dependent on law for its existence, then it cannot exist without law. But the Sabbath did exist before the proclamation of the law. Ex. xvi. Therefore according to the Elder, the Sabbath is a moral institution.

He stated that moral principle could no more be abolished than God could be abolished. Also that the ten commands were legal enactments, merely designed to illustrate the moral principles which existed before. To this I replied, first, If his position be true, then there are ten moral principles. Hence if the ten commands are not now binding, either one of these moral principles is abolished, or it has no legal enactment to illustrate it. But he says it cannot be abolished. Therefore the moral obligation of the Sabbath yet exists in full force. Second, I replied that if God required ten legal enactments once to illustrate ten moral principles, he requires the same yet, unless some one can show that his desire is changed. He said also that the decalogue favored slavery; but he forgot that Christ said, "As ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them; for this is the law and the prophets." We reminded him of this in our review. He also tried to make it appear that the decalogue was not a perfect code of laws. Here we introduced him to David with whom he joined issue immediately. For David declared the law of the lord is perfect. Great men will differ!!

We closed the review to the satisfaction of all present, except a few of his antinomian friends. The people almost universally say that his points were well met, and his objections successfully answered. Oh when will men cease to wage war against their own best interests. Our meeting closed in good humor and triumph on the side of truth. B. F. SNOOK.