Abolished by H. C. Miller

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Aug 22, 1865

Abolished.

By H. C. Miller

"I HAVE every reason to believe the law to have been abolished by Christ at the cross. (See Col. ii, 14.) I think your Sabbath doctrine makes you of that class spoken of by my Saviour, thus: 'Wo unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint, and anise, and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy and faith.'"

Such was the reply of a lady, to me, when I urged upon her the importance of keeping the whole law. And it is asserting much against those who hold the position that the whole law is binding. When she used the "sword of the Spirit," she little thought it sometimes cuts the user. Now let us examine the charge, and see if we are hypocrites.

We profess to love God. So do those who hold the above-named views. Christ says, He that is of God, heareth God's words. Do they hear the fourth command? Do they keep it? The law is abolished they say. They love the Saviour they say. He says, "If ye love me, keep my commandments." Do they do it? No. They profess to know Him. "He that saith I know him, and keepeth not his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him." They break the least, as they are pleased to esteem the fourth command, and teach men so. Therefore in professing to know him, they also break that which forbids lying. Then they do not live up to their profession.

"He that saith he abideth in him, ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked." Christ kept the seventh day as the Sabbath. Do they abide in him?

Who are hypocrites? "Those who put on an appearance of sanctity or virtue which they do not possess."

Sabbath-keeping—keeping the seventh day—is tithing mint, &c., hence ought not to be done, say these professors. Now what says the Saviour, "These things,"—tithing mint, &c.,—"ye ought to have done, and not left the others (the weightier matters) undone." Then we are right in observing the seventh day as the Sabbath, and teaching men so, are we not, even on the view of our friend?

Is the law done away? Says Paul, "Sin is not imputed where there is no law." Rom. v, 13. Now these professors believe in a judgment to come, when all shall stand before the judgment seat of Christ to be judged by law for their sins—"transgression of the law." Well, let us see how this no-law doctrine will work in the day of judgment. We will suppose ourselves at the judgment, and the case of Cain comes up. Charge: Murder. "Are you guilty, or not guilty." "Not guilty," is the response. Why how is that? Did you not kill Abel? Yes; but then the sixth commandment is abolished; and he continues, with a feeling of relief, "where there is no law, there is no sin imputed." But does any one suppose that would clear him? It would, if the law was abolished. Oh, but the sixth is re-enacted, is the reply. Well, that would not help the case; for Cain has not transgressed it since its re-enactment. But we will take another case. There was a man anciently that broke the Sabbath. It was sin then. His case is called. "Are you guilty, or not guilty?" "Not guilty," is the response. "How is that?" "Did you not break the Sabbath?" "I did, but the law has been abolished since then; and sin is not imputed where there is no law." Are the law-abolishers prepared to go this far and abide this consequence of their theory? I venture they are not.

But some will say the law has not been abolished, but the day of the Sabbath has been changed. Suppose we admit this for argument's sake. Does that obviate the difficulty? Can not the Sabbath-breaker still plead that it was the seventh day he broke, and not the one in the law, as it reads in its said-to-be-altered condition? "But wisdom is justified of her children," and they are blessed who keep God's law.

H. C. MILLER.