p. 164 | Signs of the Times, Vol. 4, No. 21. (5/30/1878)

THE TWO COVENANTS.

By Uriah Smith

(To be continued.)

"For firding fault with them, he saith, Behold the days come, saith th Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah." Heb. 8:8.

In the prophecy as originally given, and as quoted by Paul, it is plainly stated with whom the Lord would make the new covenant: "Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant," not with the Gentiles, but "with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah." The new covenant, therefore, is made with the very same people with whom the old was made.

Paul elsewhere mentions this fact in a number of places. In Rom. 9:3-5, he says, "For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh." There is no question but Paul is here speaking of the literal seed of Abraham. He continues: "Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; whose are the fathers, and of whom, as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed forever."

These are very important and lofty distinctions conferred upon that people. Let us for a moment consider them. To them pertained "the adoption." God adopted Abraham as his friend, and his posterity as his children, because when all others had apostatized from him, Abraham alone was found faithful; and of him God bore testimony that he had obeyed his voice, kept his charge, his commandments, his statutes, and his laws. Gen. 26:5. So that people were set apart to be the depositaries of God's law, and preserve the worship and the knowledge of the true God in the earth.

And to them pertained "the glory;" that is, the manifestation of God's glory among men. This was exhibited at the giving of the law, when Moses was obliged to put a vail over his face to hide the glory of his countenance; and after that in the visible appearance of God's glory in connection more especially with the ark and mercy-seat.

And to them pertained "the covenants," plural, both of them, the old and the new. He does not say that to them pertained "the covenant" referring to the old, while the new pertained to some other people; but both were theirs. "And the giving of the law." Then the law was distinct from the covenants. "And the service of God, and the promises." All the promises came through the same channel. No promise is made to any one who is not in some sense a member of the Israel of God.

And, finally, our Lord himself, as concerning the flesh, came from that people. Many seem to think that all they need to say about the Sabbath is that it is Jewish; and they look upon anything to which they think they can apply this term with apparent if not real abhorrence. But in what condition should we find ourselves to-day, had not the Jews acted the part they have acted in our world's history? They received the lively oracles to commit unto us. By them truth was kept alive in the world. They were for long ages the only conservators of the knowledge of the true God, and of revealed religion in the earth. And our Lord said that salvation is "of the Jews."

Those things did not become Jewish by being for a time in the charge of that people. The law did not become Jewish, because they alone were found worthy for a long period to be its depositaries; nor was our Lord, merely a Jewish Saviour, because, as pertaining to the flesh, he sprang from that people.

Let us not despise the Jews, but honor them for the high distinction they once enjoyed, pity them that through blindness they rejected the blessings of the gospel, and pray for them, that they may yet, some of them, come to the light and be re-united to the good olive tree.

Away with this cry of Jewish; for the new covenant itself was made with Israel and Judah. How, then, do the Gentiles come in to share in its blessings? Paul explains in Eph. 2:13-15. After speaking of the Gentiles as aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, he says, "But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us, having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances, for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace." In verse 19 he adds, "Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God."

Thus plainly is it stated that through Christ the Gentiles are brought into such a relation to God that they are no longer strangers from the covenants of promise. The middle wall of partition between the Jews and themselves was broken down by what Christ abolished on the cross.

We have already noticed that it was the old covenant that was abolished, and nothing but the old covenant. Now if that covenant was the ten commandments, the text should read, "Having abolished in his flesh the enmity even the ten commandments." But it does not read thus. It does not even intimate a change of those commandments. It reads, "Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances;" and no one who can lay claim to any respectable degree of common sense, will for a moment contend that there was anything in the ten commandments pertaining to ordinances, or that could come under the head of what is here said to have been abolished.

These ordinances point unmistakably to the services and ceremonies of the Jewish worship, which constituted the body and substance of the old covenant. These peculiarities of the Jewish worship, their circumcision, priesthood, and offerings, for a time hedged in that people, as by an impassable wall of separation, from all other nations. This was the middle wall of partition which kept them separate. And this being broken down, what is the result?

Here a most ludicrous and ridiculous blunder is made by some opponents of the Sabbath, even those who claim to be ministers of the word. They assert that the wall of partition was broken down in order that the Jews might come out where the Gentiles were, and partake of their liberty and blessings, the privileges of the gospel, and the first-day Sabbath.

This is just exactly the opposite of the truth. The Gentiles had no blessings to offer. We have already seen from Paul's testimony that they are without God, without Christ, and without hope, and have no interest in the covenants. The gospel was not theirs, but was preached to Abraham, to Moses, and the Hebrews, all through their history; and all its blessings were included in the new covenant, which, like the old, was made with that people. Gal. 3:8; Heb. 4:2.

No! the middle wall of partition was broken down that the Gentiles might go in where the Jews were, and be partakers of the blessings and promises which they had in their possession. Through Christ they enter in. He hath made both one so far as they will accept of his work and his offering. The Gentiles who thus come in, are then no longer Gentiles, but members of the commonwealth of Israel; no longer far off, but made nigh by the blood of Christ; no longer strangers, but fellow-citizens with the saints.

That the Gentiles are then reckoned as Israel in a certain sense, Paul, elsewhere very clearly shows. Rom. 9:7: "Neither because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children; but in Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, they which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted for the seed."

In harmony with this, he testifies to the Galatians: "And if ye be Christ's then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." Gal. 3:29. All who are Christ's then, are the children of Abraham, not literally but spiritually, and are accounted for the seed. So we hear him saying to the Romans in language still more pointed: "For he is not a Jew which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh; but he is a Jew which is one inwardly, and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter, whose praise is not of men but of God." The inward work of grace, then, in the heart, under the gospel, constitutes one a Jew in reality, and an Israelite indeed.

Nothing need be added to such plain statements of the apostle, yet he uses a figure in Rom. 11, which beautifully illustrates this point, and is entitled to a passing notice. He there represents the Jewish people, while they were the children of God, by a tame olive tree, and the Gentiles by a wild olive tree. The branches of the tame olive tree were broken off, and grafts from the wild olive tree, the Gentiles, were inserted in their places. Did this change the tree and make a Gentile tree of it? No; it was the same tree; but now the Gentiles are brought in to be a part of it, and thus partake of its root and fatness, the blessings of the new covenant, the promises of God through Abraham and his seed.

U. S.

What is Needed.

Not eloquence in the pulpit, nor wealth in the pews, but the reviving influence of the Holy Spirit. Spurgeon says: “The Holy Spirit is able to make the word as successful now as in the days of the apostles. He can bring in by hundreds and thousands as easily as by ones and twos. The reason why we are not more prosperous is, that we have not the Holy Spirit with us in might and power as in early times. If we had the Spirit sealing our ministry with power, it would signify very little about our talent. Men might be poor and uneducated; their words might be broken and ungrammatical; there might be none of the polished periods of Hall or glorious thunders of Chalmers; but if the might of the Spirit attended them, the humblest evangelist would be more successful than the most eloquent of preachers. It is extraordinary grace, not talent, that wins the day. It it extraordinary spiritual power that we need. Mental power fills a chapel but spiritual power fills the church. Oh! we know some before whom we shrink into nothing as to talent, but who have no spiritual power, and when they speak they have not the Holy Spirit with them; but we know others, simple-hearted, worldly men, who speak their country dialect and who stand up to preach in their country place, and the Spirit of God clothes every word with power. Hearts are broken, souls are saved, and sinners are born again. Oh, Spirit of the living God, we want thee! Thou art the life, the soul, the source, of thy people’s success. Without thee they can do nothing; with thee they can do everything.”

A True Life

A TRUE life must be genial and joyous. The man who is not happy in the path he has chosen, may be very sure that he has chosen amiss, or is self-deceived. But not merely happier—he should be kinder, gentler, and more elastic in spirits, as well as firmer and truer.

Thoughts on the Book of Daniel.

CHAPTER XI—CONTINUED.

VERSE 40. And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him; and the king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over.

After a long interval, the king of the south and the king of the north again appear on the stage of action. We have met with nothing to indicate that we are to look to any different localities for these powers from those which, shortly after the death of Alexander, constituted respectively the southern and northern divisions of his empire. The king of the south was at that time Egypt, and the king of the north was Syria, including Thrace and Asia Minor. Egypt is still, by common agreement, the king of the south, while the territory which at first constituted the king of the north, has been for the past four hundred years wholly included within the dominions of the sultan of Turkey. To Egypt and Turkey, then, we must look for a fulfillment of the verse before us.

This application of the prophecy calls for a conflict to spring up between Egypt and Turkey on the one side, and France on the other, in 1798, which we have seen to be the commencement of the time of the end; and if history testifies that such a triangular war did break out in that year, it will be conclusive proof of the correctness of the application.

Is it a fact that at the time of the end, Egypt did push, or make a comparatively feeble resistance, while Turkey did come like a resistless whirlwind, against "him," that is, the government of France? We have already produced some evidence that the time of the end commenced in 1798; and no reader of history need be informed that in that very year a state of open hostility between France and Egypt was inaugurated. The downfall of the papacy, which marked the termination of the 1260 years, and, according to verse 35, showed the commencement of the time of the end, took place on the 10th of February, 1798, when Rome fell into the hands of Berthier, the general of the French. On the 5th of March following, Bonaparte received the decree of the directory relative to the expedition against Egypt. May 3, he left Paris, and set sail the 19th, with a large naval armament, containing 40,000 soldiers and 10,000 sailors. July 5, Alexandria was taken, and immediately fortified. On the 23d, the decisive battle of the pyramids was fought, in which the Mamelukes contested the field with valor and desperation, but were no match for the disciplined legions of the French. Murad Bey lost all his cannon, 400 camels, and 3000 men. The loss of the French was comparatively slight. On the 24th, Bonaparte entered Cairo, the capital of Egypt. Thus the king of the south was able to make but a feeble resistance.

At this juncture, however, the situation of Napoleon began to grow complicated. The French fleet which was his only channel of communication with France, was defeated by the English under Nelson at Aboukir; and on September 2, of this same year, 1798, the sultan of Turkey, exasperated that Egypt, so long a semi-dependency of the Ottoman Empire, should be transformed into a French province, declared war against France. Thus the king of the north came against him, in the same year that the king of the south "pushed," and both at the time of the end, which is another conclusive proof that the year 1798 is the one which begins that period.

Was the coming of the king of the north, or Turkey, like a whirlwind in comparison with the pushing of Egypt? Napoleon had crushed the armies of Egypt; he essayed to do the same thing with the armies of the sultan, who were menacing an attack from the side of Asia. February 27, 1799, with 18,000 men he commenced his march from Cairo to Syria. He first took the fort of El-Arish, in the desert, then Jaffa (the Joppa of the Bible), conquered the inhabitants of Naplous and Zeta, and was again victorious at Jafet. Meanwhile a strong body of Turks had intrenched themselves at St. Jean d'Acre, while swarms of Mussulman gathered in the mountains of Samaria, ready to swoop down upon the French when they should besiege d'Acre. Sir Sidney Smith at the same time appeared before St. Jean d'Acre with two English ships, reinforced the Turkish garrison of that place, and captured the apparatus for the siege, which Napoleon had sent round by sea from Alexandria. A Turkish fleet soon appeared in the offing, which, with the Russian and English vessels then co-operating with them, constituted the "many ships" of the king of the north.

On the 18th of March the siege commenced. Napoleon was twice called away to save some French divisions from falling into the hand of the Mussulman hordes that filled the country. Twice also a breach was made in the wall of the city; but the assailants were met with such fury by the garrison, that they were obliged, despite their best efforts, to give over the struggle. After a continuance of sixty days, Napoleon raised the siege, sounded, for the first time in his career, the note of retreat, and on the 21st of May commenced to retrace his steps to Egypt.

"And he shall overflow and pass over." We have found events which furnish a very striking fulfillment of the pushing of the king of the south, and the whirlwind onset of the king of the north, against the French power. Thus far there is quite a general agreement in the application of the prophecy. We now reach a point where the views of expositors begin to diverge. To whom do the words, "he shall overflow and pass over," refer? to France or the king of the north? The application of the remainder of this chapter depends upon the answer to this question. From this point, two lines of interpretation are maintained. Some apply the words to France, and endeavor to find a fulfillment in the career of Napoleon. Others apply them to the king of the north, and accordingly point for a fulfillment to the events in the history of Turkey. If neither of these positions is free from difficulty, as we presume no one will claim that it is, absolutely, it only remains that we take that one which presents the fewest.

Respecting the application of the prophecy to Napoleon, or to France under his leadership, so far as we are acquainted with his history, we do not find events which we can urge with any degree of assurance, as the fulfillment of the remaining portion of this chapter; and hence do not see how it can be thus applied. It must, then, be fulfilled by Turkey, unless it can be shown (1) that the expression, "king of the north," does not apply to Turkey, or (2) that there is some other power besides either France or the king of the north, which fulfilled this part of the prediction. But if Turkey, now occupying the territory which constituted the northern division of Alexander's empire, is not the king of the north of this prophecy, then we are left without any principle to guide us in the interpretation. And we presume all will be agreed that there is no room for the introduction of any other power here. The French king and the king of the north, are the only ones to whom the prediction can apply. The fulfillment must lie between them.

Some considerations certainly favor the idea that there is, in the latter part of verse 40, a transfer of the burden of the prophecy from the French power to the king of the north. The king of the north is introduced just before as coming forth like a whirlwind, with chariots, horsemen, and many ships. The collision between this power and the French we have already noticed. The king of the north with the aid of his allies, gained the day in this contest; and the French, foiled in their efforts, were driven back into Egypt. Now it would seem to be the more natural application to refer the "overflowing and passing over" to that power which emerged in triumph from that struggle; and that power was Turkey. We will only add that one who is familiar with the Hebrew assures us that the construction of this verse is such as to make it necessary to refer the overflowing and passing over to the king of the north, these words expressing the result of that movement which is just before likened to the fury of the whirlwind.

The Sonship of Christ.

By Dudley Marvin Canright

(Continued.)

JESUS CHRIST IS CALLED GOD.

If our position be correct, that Christ is truly the Son of God, begotten of the Father's own substance, then of course it would be proper for him to take the name of his Father, that is God. Hence we find that he is called God in the Bible. "But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever; a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows." Heb. 1:8, 9. Notice the fact that while the Son is here explicitly called "God," yet he is at the same time carefully distinguished from God his Father. "Unto the Son he saith, thy throne, O God," &c. "Therefore, God, even thy God, hath anointed," &c. Because Christ is called God, we must not therefore confound him with God the Father, because the above scriptures plainly show the distinction. Again, in John 1:1, 2, he is plainly called God: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the word was God. The same was in the beginning with God."

The apostle Thomas directly addresses him as Lord and God, and Jesus did not correct him for it. "And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God." John 20:28. Again, "They shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is God with us." Matt. 1:23. In the following scripture Jesus is manifestly called God. "Feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood." Acts 20:28. Other scriptures might be given to the same purpose, though these are probably the plainest. Why should anybody object to calling the Son by his Father's name.

JESUS CHRIST THE SON OF GOD IS NOW TO BE HONORED THE SAME AS THE FATHER.

Christ himself explicitly declares this. "That all men should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He that honoreth not the Son honoreth not the Father which hath sent him." John 5:23. God forbid, then, that we with the unitarians should regard Jesus as merely a man, and forbid to worship him. No he is our Lord and our God, and we will honor him even as we honor his Father.

JESUS CHRIST IS TO BE PRAYED TO AND WORSHIPED.

As strange as it may appear, some have denied this, and called it idolatry to worship Jesus Christ. They claim that it is not lawful to pray to any except the Father. But the Scriptures are against them. Let us read a few texts. In the first place, God has commanded the angels to worship him; and if they worship him, why should not we? "And again, when he bringeth in the first begotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him." Heb. 1:6. Peter makes a similar statement. "Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him." 1 Pet. 3:22. Shall we not worship him whom angels serve?

The wise men of the East worshiped him with myrrh, frankincense and offerings. "And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down and worshiped him; and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto him gifts; gold, and frankincense, and myrrh." Matt. 2:11. The man to whom Christ gave sight worshiped him. "Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God? He answered and said, Who is he, Lord, that I might believe on him? And Jesus said unto him, Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee. And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshiped him." John 9:35-38. Christ did not reprove him for this. The apostles worshiped him immediately after his ascension to heaven. "And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven. And they worshiped him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy." Luke 24:51, 52.

It was a distinguished mark of all the first Christians that they called upon the name of Jesus. This is shown by the following testimony: "And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name." "But all that heard him were amazed, and said; Is not this he that destroyed them which called on this name in Jerusalem." Acts 9:14, 21. The apostle directs his letter to "all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord." 1 Cor. 1:2. In Rev. 5:8-13 John beholds the angels and the living creatures around the throne bowing before the Lamb that was slain, singing praises unto him and ascribing glory and praise to him with the Father, saying, "Blessing, and honor, and glory and power be unto him that sitteth upon the throne and unto the Lamb forever and ever." These scriptures, it seems to us, are too plain, even to need comment. They do certainly show that Jesus is worshiped, both by men on earth and angels in heaven. Listen to the words of Mr. Liddon, a staunch trinitarian:—

"The apostolic worship of Jesus Christ embraced his humanity no less than it embraced his godhead. According to St. Paul his human name of Jesus, i. e., his human nature, is worshiped on earth, in heaven and among the dead. It is not the unincarnate logos, but the sainted humanity of Jesus, which is enthroned and adored in the vision of the Apocalypse. To adore Christ's deity while carefully refusing to adore his humanity, would be to forget that his humanity is forever joined to his divine and eternal person, which is the real object of our adoration. Since he had taken the humanity into God it is an inseparable attribute of his personal godhead. Every knee must bend before it. Henceforth the angels themselves around the throne must adore not his divinity only, the unincarnate deity of the Son, but the Lamb as it had been slain."—Bampton Lectures. Lecture 7, p 379

Christ never reproved any one for worship offered to himself. But says one, If Jesus Christ is a person distinct from the Father, it must be idolatry, a violation of the commandment to worship him. The law says you shall not worship a false God, an image, or an idol; but Jesus is neither one nor the other. He is not a false God; he is not an image; he is not an idol. Christ is the Son of the living God, and hence it is not at all derogatory to the honor of God to associate his own Son with him in his glory, honor, and worship.

D. M. CANRIGHT.

Christian Faith

CHRISTIAN faith is a grand cathedral with divinely pictured windows. Standing without, you see no glory nor can possibly imagine any ; standing within, every ray of light reveals a harmony of unspeakable splendor.

Meeting at Healdsburg.

By James White

SABBATH, May 17, we spoke to the church at Healdsburg from words of our Lord's sermon on the Mount. Matt. 5:16: "Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven." The subject naturally divides as follows:—

1. The true church of Christ has light.

2. She should let that light shine to the world.

3. The words so shine conveys the idea that there is a proper way for the church to let her light shine.

This sermon has properly been termed Christ's inaugural address as it is his first published sermon. As the president of the United States before entering upon his official duties publishes his inaugural address, setting forth the policy he designs to pursue, and also the danger to which his government is exposed, so Christ has set forth the principle of his kingdom of grace in the beatitudes in which he declares blessings upon the meek, the humble mourning ones, and the peacemakers.

This gives force to the words so shine. The church should let her light shine in meekness, humility and mercy to the erring. This is in harmony with the words of the apostle Peter, where he says we should give the reasons of our hope in meekness and fear. Then Christ states the greatest danger to which his government would be exposed. He looked down to our time, and saw the great popular error that the advent, mission, and ministry of our divine Lord destroyed or abolished the moral code, hence his words of warning. Matt. 5:17-19: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets, I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."

No heresy strikes more directly at the very foundation of God's moral government, and the gospel of the Son of God than that which denies the perpetuity of the Law of God. Sin is the transgression of the law. Christ died for our sins. Take away the law, and sin ceases to exist, and there is no need of a Saviour as a sacrifice for our sins and an advocate with the Father. J. W.

Is the Heart Right?

By Roswell F. Cottrell

THIS truly is the great question; for “God looketh on the heart, not on the outward appearance.” A person may appear to men to be righteous, when the heart is not right in the sight of God; but in the soon coming day God shall judge the secrets of men. It is the hidden motive of the heart that weighs in God’s account. Evil men may constrain themselves to do right actions to be seen and praised of men; but the vail of hypocrisy cannot hide the heart from the omniscient Judge.

But upon this great truth, that God judges from the secret motives of the heart, Satan has constructed a sophistical argument by which thousands are deceived to their everlasting ruin. All are inclined to think favorably of their own heart; and from the fact that God knows the heart and judges accordingly, they infer that all will be well, though they be not very particular as to outward acts and observances. These amount to nothing, say they, God looks upon the heart; and God knows my heart, that I want to be saved.

My friend, you may desire life, and yet not love the way that leads to life. We may all learn this truth, if we will: That though outward acts of obedience can avail us nothing unless the heart is right, yet it is vain to think that the heart can be right, while there is not a willing obedience to all the outward acts required in the revealed will of God. The heart cannot be right with God, while we are unwilling to obey him; and to obey him we must do just what he says, and not offer him a substitute for what he has commanded.

Our duty is made plain in the word of God. To say it is not, is to impeach its Author. If the reader cannot understand what I am saying in this article, the fault is either in my expression, or in his education. The fault may be mine, for I am not infallible. But when men, out of so-called charity, look with complacency upon the conflicting creeds of men, all said to be founded upon the revelation which God has given, and say that each and every one is right, or just as good, if the heart is only right, they derogate from the character of that revelation, while they do not benefit men, but only aid them in their self-deception, and encourage them in the way to ruin.

And yet it is thought to be a real virtue to say of outward acts of obedience: “It is non-essential; one way is as acceptable as another, if the heart is only right.” You may be sprinkled, poured, immersed, or not baptized at all, if the heart is only right. You may keep the Sabbath on which God rested, and which he sanctified and commanded to be kept holy, or the one that the doctrines and commandments of men have put in its place, or you may say that there is no Sabbath in this dispensation, if the heart is only right.

To the question why Abel and his offering were accepted of God, the answer is, “Because his heart was right; and the evidence that his heart was right was, that he did just what God had instructed him to do. He obtained witness that he was righteous—that he was pardoned and accepted—God testifying of his gifts. He had the testimony of God concerning the gifts he offered, a bloody sacrifice, a type of the promised Christ, and doing exactly according to his instructions he was accepted. Cain’s substitute was not accepted, though it may have been fully equal to, or even exceeding, in value the offering of Abel.”

“Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness.” But he did something more than merely to say that he believed. Faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect. And God commended Abraham, “Because,” said he, “that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.” Gen. 26:5. He did the very things which God required. On the contrary Saul, when sent to destroy utterly the Amalekites and all that they had, took the liberty to vary a little from his specific instructions, by saving alive some of the sheep and oxen, and this for the pious reason of offering them in sacrifice to God. He may have fancied that his heart was right and therefore that a trifling variation from the strict letter of his instructions was a matter of no essential importance. But what was the word of God to him? “Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams;” and, “Because thou hast rejected the word of the Lord, he hath rejected thee.” Neglect to obey the revealed will of the Lord is proof positive that the heart is not right in his sight. Reader, “Keep thy heart with all diligence; for out of it are the issues of life.”

The Spirit has testified, “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; who can know it?” Said Jesus, “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils, and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you; depart from me, ye that work iniquity.”

Many, he assures us, will come to that fearful moment to be undeceived too late. What shall be done to avert so terrible a fate? When Jesus was asked the way to eternal life, he replied, “If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.” See Matt. 19:16-19. He referred the inquirer to the ten commandments, repeating five of them. As recorded by another witness, he said, “Thou knowest the commandments.” Dear reader, we also know them; and we know that the same moral code says, “Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy.” “The seventh day [not the first], is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God.” With the Bible in our hand, and all the light beaming from it in these last days of the nineteenth century, we have no excuse for longer following the dictates of an apostate church, instead of the clearly expressed will of God. Do not, I beseech you, be deceived with the glaring sophistry, that the heart can be right with God, while living in disobedience to his known requirements. “Little children, let no man deceive you; he that doeth righteousness is righteous.” Right acts may be performed, while the heart is wrong; but it is impossible for our heart to be right, while we neglect to do a single thing which God commands.

R. F. COTTRELL.

Continue reading: Keeping Silence