We gave last week testimony from the Christian Palladium, the Religious Telescope, the Philadelphia Sun, the Oberlin Evangelist, the Congregationalist, the Watchman and Reflector, the N. Y. Independent, and the Belfast News-Letter, to show that, from 1844 and onward, a general declension of religion has prevailed in all the churches, and that even the great revivals of 1858 and 9, did not present such fruits as would give evidence of any radical change for the better.
Others have spoken on the same point whose testimony is worthy of consideration.
Dr. Cumming of England, in “Time of the End,” p. 183, says:—
“I believe that one-half of the professors of the gospel are nothing better than practical infidels.”
Henry Ward Beecher says:—
“Thousands of men in good and regular standing in evangelical churches are giving no evidence of piety, are living in open sin, or in practices in business and in public affairs irreconcilably at variance with the spirit of Christianity. I cannot ask such persons to the Lord’s table just because they are regular members of a church.”
Again he says:—
“Gentility has nearly killed our churches.”
A Methodist journal says:—
“Home religion among the Methodists is no longer what it once was. Family praise is almost wholly abandoned. Twenty-five years ago, a Methodist family might be known in any neighborhood by the morning and evening song of praise, in which father, mother, and children took part. Who ever hears such a thing now?”
Dr. A. Barnes, a few years since, said:—
“With the increase of business, and the brightening prospects of commerce and manufactures, there is an increase of worldly-mindedness. Thus it is with all denominations.”
Robert Atkins, in a sermon preached in London, said:—
“The truly righteous are diminished from the earth, and no man layeth it to heart. The professors of religion of the present day in every church are lovers of the world, conformers to the world, lovers of creature-comfort, and aspirers after respectability. They are called to suffer with Christ, but they shrink from even reproach.”
“Apostasy, apostasy, apostasy, is engraven on the very front of every church; and did they know it, and did they feel it, there might be hope; but, alas! they cry, ‘We are rich, and increased in goods, and stand in need of nothing.’”
Mr. O. Scott (Wesleyan Methodist) says:—
“The church is as deeply infected with a desire for worldly gain as the world.”
“The churches are making a god of this world. Most of the denominations of the present day might be called churches of the world with more propriety than churches of Christ.”
The Genesee Evangelist says:—
“Our Zion is in a state of mourning. The Holy Spirit has not visited us as in former years, and we have great cause for deep humiliation, in view of the sins and worldliness and spiritual indifference of most of our churches.”
Mr. Spurgeon says:—
“Reflecting the other day upon the sad state of the churches at the present moment, I was led to look back to apostolic times, and to consider wherein the preaching of the present day differed from the apostles.”
The report of the Michigan Yearly Conference, published in the True Wesleyan of Nov. 15, 1851, says:—
“The world, commercial, political, and ecclesiastical, are alike, and are together going in the broad way that leads to death. Politics, commerce, and nominal religion, all connive at sin, reciprocally aid each other, and unite to crush the poor. Falsehood is unblushingly uttered in the forum and in the pulpit, and sins that would shock the moral sensibilities of the heathen go unrebuked in all the great denominations of our land.”
These churches are like the Jewish church when the Saviour exclaimed, “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites.”
Prof. S. C. Bartlett, of Chicago, in the N. Y. Independent, says:—
“Religion now is in a different position from Methodism then. To a certain extent it is a very reputable thing. Christianity is, in our day, something of a success. Men “speak well of it.” Expresidents and statesmen have been willing to round off their career with a recognition of its claims.93And the popularity of religion tends vastly to increase the number of those who would secure its benefits without squarely meeting its duties. The church courts the world, and the world caresses the church. The line of separation between the godly and the irreligious fades out into a kind of penumbra, and zealous men on both sides are toiling to obliterate all difference between their modes of action and enjoyment.”
On Sunday, Feb. 5, 1871, fifteen clergymen of the city of Rochester, N. Y., distributed a circular, entitled, “A Testimony” to fifteen congregations of that city. To this circular the Rochester Democrat of Feb. 7, made reference as follows:—
“The ‘Testimony’ sets out by stating that the foregoing pastors are constrained to bear witness to what they ‘conceive to be a fact of our time;’ viz., That the prevailing standard of piety, among the professed people of God, is alarmingly low; that a tide of worldliness is setting in upon us, indicating the rapid approach of an era, such as is foretold by Paul in his second letter to Timothy, in the words, ‘In the last days perilous times shall come.’” These conclusions are reached, not by comparisons with former times, but by applying the tests found in the Scriptures. They instance as proof, ‘the spirit of lawlessness which prevails.’ The circular then explains how this lawlessness (religious) is shown. Men have the name of religion, but they obey none of its injunctions. There is also a growing disposition to practice, in religious circles, what is agreeable to the natural inclinations, rather than the duties prescribed by the word of God. The tendency to adopt worldly amusements, by professed Christians, is further stated in evidence.”
This testimony is very explicit. When men “have the name of religion, but obey none of its injunctions,” they certainly may be said to have a form of godliness, but to deny the power; and when they “practice in religious circles what is agreeable to the natural inclinations, rather than the duties prescribed by the word of God,” they may be truthfully said to be “lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God.” And Rochester is not an exception in this respect. It is so all over the land, as the candid everywhere, by a sad array of facts, are compelled to admit.
Pres. C. G. Finney, of Oberlin College, in an article in the N. Y. Independent of Dec. 4, 1873, entitled “The Decay of Conscience, said:—
“I believe it is a fact generally admitted that there is much less conscience manifested by men and women in nearly all the walks of life than there was forty years ago. There is justly much complaint of this, and there seems to be but little prospect of reformation. The rings and frauds and villainies in high and low places, among all ranks of men are most alarming, and one is almost compelled to ask, ‘Can nobody be safely trusted?’”
He goes on to say that the pulpit is chiefly responsible for this state of things. How has it become responsible? By lowering the standard in the church; and this has its effect upon the world. Sin is not denounced as it used to be; corruption is passed hastily and slightly over; and the world everywhere prevails against the church. Even revivals no longer give assurance of radical reformation. The line of demarkation between the church and the world becomes less and less distinct, and the tide of evil rolls on unrestrained.
This state of things, in which the church stands firmly opposed to the doctrine of the near coming of Christ, and is alarmingly conformed to the world, and sadly degenerate in religious things, was not unlooked for by students of prophecy in ages past. Martin Luther, just before his death, writing on the prophetic periods of Daniel, in his German Bible, said:—
“About the consummation of these periods, this gospel will be shut out of all the churches and confined to private houses.”
When one of Martin Luther’s guests remarked that the world might continue fifty years, he replied:—
“Pray God it may not exist so long; matters would be even worse than they have been. There would rise up infinite sects and schisms, which are at present hidden in men’s hearts not mature. No; may the Lord come at once, for there is no amendment to be expected.”
“Now when he comes will he find faith on the earth? The question implies a strong negative; no, he shall not; he himself foresees it. In general he will find but few good people, few that are really and truly good; many that have the form and fashion of godliness, but few that have faith.”
Dr. Gill, on Rev. 3:20, speaking of the signs of Christ’s coming, says:—
“Which will yet be observed by a few, such a general sleepiness will have seized all professors of religion.”
Mr. Hopkins remarks:—
“There is great reason to conclude that the world, particularly that part of it called Christian and Protestant, will yet make greater and more rapid advances in all kinds of moral corruption and open wickedness, till it will come to that state in which it will be fully ripe.”
Mr. Hartly, a learned and sensible churchman, has remarked as follows:—
“There are many prophecies which declare the fall of the ecclesiastical powers of the Christian world; and though each church seems to flatter itself with the hope of being exempted, yet it is very plain that the prophetical characters belong to all. They all have left the true, pure, simple religion, and teach for doctrines the commandments of men.”
Next week we will present some further acknowledgments of the terrible state of the times upon which we have fallen.
(To be Continued.)
Three Different Kinds of Sins.
By D. T. Bourdeau
SIN is sinful in whatever form it may appear, and under whatsoever circumstances it may be committed. Yet there are three different general classes or grades of sins: First, sins of ignorance; second, sins of weakness; third, sins of presumption.
1. Sins of ignorance. Although this class of sins is less obnoxious to God than the other two classes embraced in this subject, yet its sinfulness is seen in the fact that anciently different offerings were made for it, and that consequently it was among those things which made the death of Christ necessary.
Under the old dispensation, those who sinned through ignorance were called upon to repent and reform as soon as their ignorance was removed, Lev. 4; Num. 15:22; etc., and the same duty exists in this dispensation. Christ came as a light to his people, that they might see their sins, and reform; but they, as a nation, chose darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil; and thus their sins became doubly sinful, and their past sins of ignorance were imputed to them as though they had been committed with a clear knowledge of their whole duty.
Paul obtained mercy because he had sinned through ignorance, and because, when he obtained a clear view of himself as a sinner, he heartily repented and thoroughly reformed; and when he announced to the idolatrous Athenians that God “winked at” the times of their ignorance, he was not negligent to immediately add as a condition, “But now commandeth all men everywhere to repent; because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness.” Acts 17:30, 31.
2. Sins of weakness. These are the sins which are committed through the weakness of the flesh by those who, knowing their duty, are in an unguarded moment overcome by the temptations and snares of the devil. The truly sincere and conscientious who commit these sins are sorry and perhaps discouraged upon being overcome, or when they realize their errors. There is hope for such if they heartily repent and earnestly endeavor to reform. To such, the following words of John are applicable: “My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.” 1 John 2:1.
The great danger of Christians is to be too indifferent in regard to these sins because they are committed more or less by all, and because they are hated by those who commit them. But we show our hatred toward sin by our efforts to overcome it. The heart is deceitful, and if our efforts to overcome are faint, it is pretty safe to conclude that we love sin and cherish it as a sweet morsel. If we did not, we would recoil and shudder at its approach as we would at the presence of a viper preparing to bite us.
Our efforts to overcome sin are generally too faint. We do not strive and agonize to overcome, and are not willing to deny ourselves. We excuse ourselves when God does not excuse us, and are in danger of passing off as sins of weakness those sins which are charged to us in the heavenly records as
3. Sins of presumption. These are the sins that are committed with a clear understanding of duty, but under the false and delusive impression that God will not be particular with us for small deviations from his will. This is the most dangerous class of sins. “Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil.” Eccl. 8:11. But God’s mercy and longsuffering does not make sin less sinful, but rather adds to the sinfulness of sin; for if men will not reform when they have an opportunity, they become guilty of confirming their course of sin, and of sinning against God’s grace as well as against his law. The grace or favor of God is offered to them as a remedy for sin, but they turn away from it, virtually saying, I will not be led to repentance by the goodness of God, but will persist in transgressing his holy law.
Sin is as sinful under this dispensation as it was under the old. May we not rather say that it is more sinful under our present light and privileges than it was anciently? Says the great apostle: “If we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses; of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?” Heb. 10:26–29.
This passage sets forth the highest grade of the sin of presumption. Men do not generally reach the height of the evil here described the first time they presume to disregard God’s authority, but by gradually hardening their hearts through the deceitfulness of sin. It is the small foxes that spoil the vine. Satan sugar-coats the evil he desires to have us perform; and would make us believe that small deviations will not be noticed by the eye of God. But we should tremble at the word of God, and cultivate a tender conscience; and had we no other reason to obey God than the fact that he has spoken, we should cheerfully obey him.
More on this branch of the subject in our next.
D. T. BOURDEAU.
The Bible
By Jos. Clarke
Is truly a wonderful book, whether we consider its history or its influence. Holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. This book has a self-impelling power, and acts defensively and offensively. When the murderers of Jesus would use its power in their own justification, it turned its batteries against them, and consigned the nation to destruction. When the papacy thought to take this book into its own care, it burst the doors of its prison, and soon appeared in all the great cities of Europe, and every effort made by the papists to put down the Bible has resulted in its more complete freedom.
The great preparation for the spread of present truth has been going on for many years. The Bible has been printed in different languages and widely circulated; the American Bible Society has, since its organization, issued twenty-nine millions, nine hundred and eighty-two thousand volumes, in thirty-nine languages, representing about sixty different languages and dialects. These Bibles have penetrated everywhere, China and Japan not excepted. The British and Foreign Bible Society has issued above sixty-eight millions of volumes since its first establishment; and it was stated at the sixty-ninth anniversary of this society (May 7, 1873) that no less than two hundred and four versions of the Bible are now issued.
The day of God's preparation is upon us. Shall we meet it nobly, heartily, and liberally? Schools are everywhere doing their work, and the masses are learning to read, and improved methods of labor are affording leisure to the people for investigation. Railroads and other facilities for traveling are bringing the messenger of the truth to every locality; and even the blind may find the precious volume in raised letters for their improvement; and many a grateful soul has sent up to Heaven its heartfelt and tearful accents of praise for this last gift to the blind.
All the world is evidently waiting for this last message of God to man; and while this age is so prolific in improvements, and so rich in privileges, the masses are growing rapidly worse; and in the churches a false idea is on the wing, that the conversion of the world is to follow all this wonderful progress and privilege.
Universal toleration, to a great extent, exists as never before; yet bigotry is assuming new and most dangerous forms, and threatening future trouble; while spiritualism promises to unchristianize Christendom; and all this while, the second advent of the Messiah draws on apace.
The sixth seal has been opened, and the great earthquake and the signs in the sun, moon, and stars, have all occurred; and now we wait the accomplishment of the prophecy. The Bible has nearly finished its mission of love, and its last work is to be the most magnificent and glorious of all.
Great nations never prospered as just before their final disaster—just before their glory has been laid in the dust. Thus with Christendom: she lauds the Bible, and sends it to far-off lands, but, like ancient Jerusalem, she knows not the day of her visitation. Jos. CLARKE.
Who Shall Judge ?
By R. F. Cottrell
The Lord instructs his people to be circumspect in all that he commands. Who shall say that some things which he requires are of little or no importance? Yet many, professing to be loyal to the King of Heaven, treat his word in this way. And it always happens that those things they are disposed to do are, in their estimation, important; but those things they are inclined to neglect they esteem of little or no importance.
Baptists are astonished at those who can profess the Christian name, and yet neglect to obey Christ in the institution of baptism, a duty so plainly taught in the Scriptures. But at the same time they can neglect and evade the fourth commandment of the decalogue in the same manner in which Pedo-Baptists do immersion, by something else substituted for that which is commanded, and feel easy. With them baptism, precisely as it is taught in the Scriptures, is essential and highly important. They deny the right of men to substitute sprinkling for immersion. They appeal to what is written by inspiration on the subject. But they can accept a man-made change of the Sabbath, calling a day by that sacred title that God never rested on, blest, nor sanctified, and trample the day that God claims as his rest-day, because he rested on it, under their feet, profaning that which God has sanctified and blest, and giving its title and honor to another day, one that God never bade us esteem as sacred to him.
So much by way of illustration; now let us make the application. As a people, we claim to have a special message, and, as a consequence, special light and guidance, which is taught and promised in the word of God. We have been enlightened both in regard to moral and physical law. We have been taught how to care for our bodily health so that we might have sound minds in sound bodies, and prepare ourselves for the trying times which lie between us and the coming of the Lord. We acknowledge the health reform to be important. But there are many particulars embraced in this subject, and each one thinks that some of these particulars are important, and therefore reduces them to practice, while other particulars, as plainly expressed, are not heeded. These are made non-essential. Now when we discriminate and judge between two things taught by the Spirit of God, accepting the one and neglecting the other, do we not follow our own light, and not the illumination of the Spirit? We do the one because we think it best; we neglect the other because we do not deem it important. In all this we have followed our own mind—we have been guided by ourselves. Wherein have we obeyed God?—what have we done, with the sole intention of yielding to his superior wisdom? In this course, have we not taken our own counsel?
While the Lord requires circumspection in all he has taught, who shall judge which should be accepted, and which rejected?
R. F. COTTRELL.
Outward Adorning.
By R. F. Cottrell
Whoever undertakes to correct the evil of pride in dress, as exhibited in the wearing of gold and trinkets, and vain and foolish ornaments, will find a difficult, a Herculean, task. Yet every one who faithfully preaches the gospel must strike against these things, as all have in the past, from the first of the apostles down to the present time. Wesley did a noble work in this direction, and accomplished much good in his day; but mark those who profess the faith that he did at the present day, and you will discover that his labor is lost upon this generation, as well as that of Paul and Peter.
But still the voices of the faithful servants of God are raised against this crying sin, and must be, though the vain and foolish heart still clings to this folly, a thing only fitting to heathenish barbarity, unbecoming to enlightened worldlings, much less to professors of the cross-bearing religion of the lowly Nazarene. The evil will continue, even with those who profess faith in the last message of mercy to man, till God, by his avenging vials, shall “take away the bravery of their tinkling ornaments.” “And it shall come to pass, that instead of perfume there shall be putrefaction; and instead of a girdle, a rope; and instead of a mantle, a girding of sackcloth; and a fire-scar instead of beauty.”
As long as this evil is in the heart it will manifest itself. We may warn, but it is useless to try to tear off the excessive foliage. When the bearer of it dies to sin, it will drop off, like leaves after a frost of autumn. Oh! that all might repent of this folly before it is too late to find pardon.
R. F. COTTRELL.
Movements of Russia.
THE gigantic preparations which Russia is making for future military operations are attracting the attention of the world. Since the first of January of the present year, the Emperor of Russia has issued a proclamation which abolishes all the existing exemptions from military service. This sweeps at once every male adult into the army, and it is said that under this law, the army and reserve will number two million men. Russia has evidently some important scheme to carry out in the near future.
Of the significance of Russia’s movements in Asia, a late European paper thus speaks:—
ENGLAND OVERREACHED.—
Most of the English papers comment strongly upon what they call the breach of the Czar’s promise made some twelve months since, that he had no intention of permanently occupying Khiva, or of adding it to his dominions. By the treaty which has just been concluded by the Emperor of Russia and the Khan of Khiva, the latter declares himself the obedient servant of the Emperor, renounces the right of entertaining direct relations, commercial or other, with neighboring sovereigns or chiefs, or of engaging in hostile operations against them without the sanction of Russia. He is to give Russia the most ample facilities for the construction of harbors, piers, magazines, etc., on the left bank of the Amu, the left being already in the hands of the Russians, and finally is to pay 2,200,000 roubles to Russia as a fine. This treaty is regarded as a positive breach of the Russian promise to England. The Standard says that by the treaty the Russian dominions are brought some three or four hundred miles nearer to the Indian Empire of England, and the last physical obstacle to the march of a Russian army toward India has been annihilated. It is evident that England has been again overreached.—Cork Herald.
Our Heresy.
By J. S. Osborne
I FIRST heard the Advent doctrine preached by Bro. R. J. Lawrence and T. J. Butler at Clinton, Kansas, one and a half years ago.
I did not accept the truth at first, but before they left that place, I began to believe that they were correct in the views they presented. My elder brother and I came to Leavenworth the following September for the purpose of attending school.
We still kept Sunday, but every time the Sabbath (seventh day) came, I felt condemned for working on it. My brother had the same feelings. About a month after we came here, as we were going from the boarding hall to our room, I said to him: “This is the last Sunday I intend to keep.” He thought we ought to be sure we were right, and then he would do likewise. The next Sabbath we both laid our school books aside and tried to keep it. We have been doing so ever since.
We soon received a letter from the pastor of the Presbyterian church at Clinton (of which church we were both members), stating that our names had been erased from the church book, “on the ground of heresy.” My brother replied to the letter, giving him the reasons for our change in opinion.
We received another letter in answer, in which was the following: “When you have taken a regular theological course of some five years, and a classical course of some three years, I will be ready to converse with you on these great subjects.”
The minister made no reply to the passages of Scripture to which my brother cited him as the foundation of our belief, but merely answered as quoted above.
We are now members of the S. D. A. church at Big Springs, Kansas.
J. S. OSBORNE.
The Atonement.—No. 5.
By Joseph Harvey Waggoner
We have seen that reason and the plainest principles of government call for an atonement which shall honor the government and maintain the authority of its law. And if the teachings of the Bible be found to be strictly in harmony with these principles there can be no reason why it should not be accepted as the revelation of God's will to man. And again, if the Bible is the word of God, if it contains the rules for the government of men and the means of recovery from sin, it must be in harmony with reason and justice. If our interpretations of the Bible place its teachings in conflict with these principles our interpretations must be wrong.
It is unfortunate for the world that theories of religion have sprung up which contradict these principles, and, in effect, make the gospel a system of license rather than of righteousness. All such theories are misrepresentations of the Bible and perversions of the gospel.
As we recognize the existence of God, of a supreme being who is “Judge of all,” both reason and reverence must accord to him the attribute of justice. And when we speak of the justice of God, we cannot attach to the word precisely the same idea that we do when we speak of a just man. Man may be just to a certain degree, but the attributes of God admit of no degrees. He is infinite in every perfection, and eternally and unchangeably so.
And it is not possible that God should possess any attribute which does not manifest itself in his government. As God is just, justice must be a principle of his government. As God is love, love must pervade his government. As God is immutable, the principles of his government must be unchangeable. And as law is the basis of government, whatever applies to his government applies also to his law. The nature of the law and the nature of the government are necessarily identical, and the government is a sure manifestation of the character of the governor, therefore the attributes of God are, and must be, revealed in his law. For his law being an expression of the divine will must be an outgrowth of the divine attributes. To suppose otherwise were to suppose that his will were not in harmony with himself, which is absurd.
The following thoughts are here presented for the consideration of those who argue that God has, through Christ, abolished the law to which the subjects of his moral government were amenable before the time of Christ:—
It is a reproach and a disgrace to any government to abolish its law while there exists a rebellion against it. For,
1. If the law were just and right, to abolish it would be to abolish or set aside justice and right to accommodate the government to the circumstances of rebels. That, of course, would compromise justice and abet treason, which is a disgrace to any government.
2. If the government did right in abolishing its law, that is, if the law ought of right to be abolished, it is because the law was unjust and not good. And then opposition to it is justifiable, and the government must take to itself the shame of having enacted a law which was unworthy to exist. And this would prove that the rebels had a higher sense of right than the law-giver, as he gave a law which was found to be unworthy to exist, and they justly repudiated it. This, again, would be a deep disgrace to the government.
3. If the law of God was not holy, and just, and good, it was a disgrace to him to enact it. But if it was holy and just, then justice requires that it be strictly maintained, that its authority be fully vindicated, by causing the rebels to return to perfect obedience and to seek pardon for past offenses, or to be properly punished.
But Paul says in Rom. 7: 12, that the law is holy, and just, and good; and in Rom. 3: 24–26 that God set forth Jesus Christ to be a propitiation that God might be just and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus. Now justice clearly requires that a just law be maintained and preserved, and properly vindicated in case of rebellion. Therefore they who teach that God abolished his law deny the justice of God and bring disgrace upon his government. Men may pretend, by such a course, to exalt the mercy and grace of God; but as there is perfect harmony between all the attributes of God, his mercy and love could develop no plan of salvation but such as his justice could approve. Mercy, though infinite, cannot rise above infinite justice. And he has plainly condemned the idea of doing evil, that good may come, or of sinning, which is transgressing the law, that grace may abound.
In the beginning, God communed with man face to face, and revealed his will directly. But man's rebellion separated between him and God, and the children of men grew worse and worse, so that but95very few sought to hold communion with God or inquire to know his will. When the world had far departed from him, and the nations had almost forgotten that there was one who was Creator of heaven and earth, God chose the seed of Abraham to make them the special depositaries of his will.
And while he made known, through prophets and teachers, civil and circumstantial duties, he taught us to look with peculiar reverence upon the moral code, by proclaiming it with his own voice and writing it with his own finger. That men have been wont to consider the ten commandments a moral code is not strange, considering the teachings of the sacred word on that point.
When God brought Israel out of Egypt, he entered into an agreement or covenant with them, promising to regard them as a peculiar treasure above all nations, if they would obey his voice and keep his covenant. This they readily promised to do. Ex. 19: 5–6. “Obey my voice,” and “keep my covenant,” are two expressions used by the Lord referring to the same thing; for when they heard his voice, the third day after the covenant was made with them, he declared his covenant which he commanded them to perform. This was the ten commandments. Deut. 4: 12, 13. The expression, “keep my covenant,” refers to the “covenant commanded,” and not to the covenant or agreement made with them. He said also that if they would obey this they would be a holy nation. Now it is an acknowledged truth that character is formed by our actions in reference to law; and the nature of the character is determined only by the nature of the law. Obedience to a bad law can never make a good character. It is hence evident that the character of the actor is the exact counterpart of the law obeyed. But we have the Lord's own testimony that if they would keep the ten commandments, they would be holy; that is, they would thereby form holy characters; and as their characters would be but a copy of the law, we have herein the word of the Governor of the universe that this is a holy law.
As law is the basis of government, and as God's government or law is a certain exposition of his attributes, and as man's character is as the nature of the law obeyed, to obey the law is to attain unto the righteousness of God, or true holiness. This leads to the conclusion that the holiness derived from obedience to the ten commandments is that growing out of the divine attributes, pure and changeless as Heaven itself.
As there cannot be diverse or unlike attributes of Deity, so there can be only one rule of holiness growing out of those attributes—one moral law for his government. And upon obedience or disobedience to this law must all good and evil, life and death, be suspended. Therefore the following declarations apply to these commandments, or this law, and to no other:—
Lev. 18: 5. “Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments; which if a man do, he shall live in them.”
Deut. 30: 15, 16. “See, I have set before thee this day life and good, and death and evil; in that I command thee this day to love the Lord thy God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commandments and his statutes and his judgments.” See verses 19, 20; chap. 11: 26–28.
Isa. 51: 7. “Hearken unto me, ye that know righteousness, the people in whose heart is my law.”
Ps. 19: 7. “The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.”
Ps. 40: 8. “I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart.” Also Ps. 119.
Eccl. 12: 13. “Fear God, and keep his commandments; for this is the whole duty of man.”
Matt. 19: 17. “If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.”
Rom. 2: 13. “The doers of the law shall be justified.”
Gal. 3: 12. “The law is not of faith; but the man that doeth them shall live in them.”
1 John 3: 4. “Sin is the transgression of the law.”
Rom. 7: 12. “The law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.”
Verse 13. “For we know that the law is spiritual.”
This law is also referred to in certain scriptures, wherein it is called God's holy covenant and the covenant commanded.
Deut. 4: 13. “He declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments.”
1 Chron. 16: 15–17. “Be ye mindful always of his covenant; the word which he commanded to a thousand generations; even of the covenant which he made with Abraham, and of his oath unto Isaac; and hath confirmed the same to Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant.”
Gen. 26: 3–5. “I will perform the oath which I swear unto Abraham. . . . Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.” For breaking this “everlasting covenant,” the inhabitants of the earth will be desolated with a curse and burned up. Isa. 24: 5, 6.
By indignation against the “holy covenant,” was the man of sin, the abomination that maketh desolate, set up. Dan. 11: 28, 30.
Besides the moral law of God, to which the above declarations apply, there were types and shadows, or ordinances necessarily limited in duration by their nature. They were not of original obligation, and were introduced only because man had failed to observe the moral law, which was of original obligation, and which rested on no contingency. As these are sometimes confounded, the distinction of laws will be briefly noticed.
The system (not the law) under which the people of God lived in the past dispensation was complex; its elements were moral, civil, and ceremonial. The moral was the basis of all, existing prior to, and independent of, the others, and was from the beginning the standard of duty to God and to our fellow-men. The civil enforced the moral, especially in their relations to their fellow-men, making application of its principles to everyday life. The ceremonial expiated the violations of the moral, and had especial reference to their relations to God. But both the ceremonial and civil were merely typical, looking forward to the priesthood of Christ and to his kingdom; and therefore illustrate the true relation we sustain under Christ to the law of God, the moral rule, in this dispensation.
This distinction of the two laws, moral and ceremonial, is shown in the following scriptures:—
Jer. 6: 19, 20. “Hear, O earth; behold, I will bring evil upon this people, even the fruit of their thoughts, because they have not hearkened unto my words, nor to my law, but rejected it. To what purpose cometh there to me incense from Sheba, and the sweet cane from a far country? Your burnt offerings are not acceptable, nor your sacrifices sweet unto me.” Here one was kept and the other rejected; but the observance of the ceremonial was not acceptable when the moral was disregarded. That this was illustrative of our position in this age is proved by Matt. 7: 21–23, and John 7: 16, 17, where the efficacy of faith in the Son, and of the knowledge of his doctrine is dependent on obedience to the will or law of the Father.
Jer. 7: 22, 23. “For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices. But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice.” We have seen that to obey his voice was to keep his covenant, the ten commandments; and this shows that when God gave his law, which himself declared to be the rule of holiness, the ceremonial law of burnt offerings and sacrifices was not included.
The Saviour himself explicitly declares that he came not to destroy the law; yet we know he did set aside the ceremonial law, by introducing its antitype.
The same is proved by Paul in his letter to the Ephesians and Romans. In one, he speaks of a law which Christ abolished (Gr. katargeō), Eph. 2: 15, and in the other, he speaks of a law which is not made void (Gr. katargeō), by faith, but rather established. Rom. 3: 31. J. H. WAGGONER.
BE NOT SATISFIED WITH GLEANING.
Be not satisfied with gleaning
Scanty measures for thy soul,
When His pastures smile with blossoms,
And thou may'st enjoy the whole.
Rest not satisfied with sipping
From the wayside rills of love;
Oh! drink freely from the Fountain!
This thy happiness will prove.
As His child, thou art a pilgrim,
And thy Lord doth give thee here
Bread of Heaven thy heart to strengthen,
And his wine of love to cheer.
Be not satisfied with leaning
Lightly on the Saviour's breast:
Little trust brings fears and faintings,
And will rob thy soul of rest.
Canst thou not lean firmly on Him,
Him on whom thy sins were laid?
Will he keep thee at a distance,
Now thy debts are fully paid?
Nay, thou knowest he will rather
Round thy soul his love entwine,
Till, in childlike trusting fondness,
Thou dost on his breast recline.