Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Oct 31, 1878
BENEFICENCE
By Ellen G. White
BY MRS. E. G. WHITE.
“Honor the Lord with thy substance, and with the first-fruits of all thine increase; so shall thy barns be filled with plenty, and thy presses shall burst out with new wine.”
“There is that scattereth, and yet increaseth; and there is that withholdeth more than is meet, but it tendeth to poverty. The liberal soul shall be made fat; and he that watereth shall be watered also himself.”
“The liberal deviseth liberal things, and by liberal things shall he stand.”
“Ye are cursed with a curse; for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation. Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the Lord of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of Heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it. And I will rebuke the devourer for your sakes, and he shall not destroy the fruits of your ground; neither shall your vine cast her fruit before the time in the field, saith the Lord of hosts. And all the nations shall call you blessed.”
God is abundantly able to fulfill his promises. Every earthly good comes from his hand. The resources of the Lord are infinite, and he employs them all in accomplishing his purposes. Faithful stewards, who wisely use the goods which God has intrusted to them to advance the truth and bless suffering humanity, will be rewarded for so doing. God will pour into their hands while they dispense to others. He is advancing his cause in the earth through stewards intrusted with his capital. Some there are who, notwithstanding they greatly desire wealth, would be ruined by its possession. God has tested individuals by lending them talents of means. It was in their power to abuse the gift or use it to the glory of God. If they have hoarded or wasted the Lord’s money, the Master finally says to them, “Thou mayest be no longer steward.” They have been tested and proved, and found unfaithful in using that which was another man’s as though it was their own. God will not intrust such with the eternal riches.
Those who make a judicious and unselfish disposition of the Lord’s goods, thus identifying their interest with that of suffering humanity, will be advanced; for they act the part which God designed they should in his own system of beneficence. The first great principle contained in the moral law is supreme love to God. The second is this: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. “On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”
Every good thing upon the earth was given to man as an expression of the love of God. He makes man his steward, and gives him talents of influence and means to use for the accomplishment of his work in the earth. Our Heavenly Father proposes to connect finite man with himself. As laborers they may be his instruments in the salvation of souls. He has accepted those who have consecrated themselves to his service to preach the word to those who have not a knowledge of the truth. But these are not the only ones whom he uses to advance his work in the earth. Every man who professes to be illuminated by the Spirit of God in this time will be required to enlighten others. “No man liveth to himself,” and yet loves God with all his heart and his neighbor as himself. Every one has his station of duty adapted to his capacity in the accomplishment of this great work. Those who walk in the light of truth will emit light to those around them. They are living witnesses for Christ. They will not be like the world, living in moral darkness, loving themselves and the things of the world, and seeking for earthly treasures. They will be “a peculiar people, zealous of good works.”
It will cost much self-denial and self-sacrifice to imitate the pattern, Christ Jesus. In order to become like him, we must cultivate a benevolent disposition. Those who have the most of this world’s goods often manifest a selfish penuriousness in giving to the cause of God. The most liberal donations frequently come from the poor man’s purse, while those with whom God has intrusted an abundance, for the very purpose of supplying the wants of the cause, fail to see where means are most needed, and do not regard the cries of the needy who are in their very midst. These cries go up to Heaven, and are a powerful testimony in condemnation of the unjust, selfish course of the unfaithful stewards. The offerings of the poor, given through self-denial to aid in extending the precious light of saving truth, will not only be a sweet-smelling savor to God, and wholly acceptable to him as a consecrated gift, but the very act of giving expands the heart of the giver, and unites him more fully to the Redeemer of the world. He was rich; but for our sakes he became poor, that we through his poverty might be made rich. The smallest sums given cheerfully by those who are in limited circumstances are fully as acceptable to God, and even of more value in his sight, than the offerings of the rich who can bestow their thousands, and yet exercise no self-denial, and feel no lack.
The poor widow manifested love, faith, and benevolence combined, in contributing her two mites; for she gave all that she had, without questionings or doubts in regard to her uncertain future. Christ represents her little offering as the greatest gift of all that had been cast into the treasury that day. The rich gave of their abundance. They did not need to exercise faith, for they had means enough left to supply all their wants. It was not the value of the coin that was regarded by Christ, but the devoted purity of the motive which prompted the sacrifice. This small gift, with God’s blessing upon it, could become instrumental in accomplishing important results. The widow’s mite, cast into the treasury with thousands of other coins, would appear insignificant, and be lost to human vision, but not to the eye of God. The Source of all riches, the great Benefactor, would make this sincere, genuine offering of the highest value for good. The widow’s mite has been like a stream, small at the source, but continuing to flow through all time, until it has widened, and deepened, and run in a thousand channels, contributing to the extension of the truth, and supplying the wants of the needy. The influence of this small gift has acted and reacted upon humanity in every age of the world, and in every country upon the globe. The tiny rills which have flowed into the treasury of the Lord from the liberal, self-denying poor, have formed a living fountain, and its streams flow forth refreshing the needy, and resulting in the salvation of thousands of souls.
Again, the example of the widow’s mite cannot be estimated in its influence upon the hearts of those who are inclined to selfishly withhold from God the goods he has intrusted to them. Her liberality, her faith and sincerity, are a standing rebuke to the ease-loving, selfish, doubting ones who have means with which they might do good if they would. They are provoked to good works by the unselfish gifts of the poorer brethren. That little deed of benevolence manifested by the widow was but a small light in the beginning; but it has been steadily burning brighter and brighter, and shedding its rays farther and with more intense radiance, and it will still continue to shine brighter and stronger, reaching to all countries and climes. The poor as well as the rich may enjoy the blessed privilege of knowing that they are God’s stewards, and may identify their interests with Jesus Christ, and with suffering humanity, who are the purchase of his blood.
But God would not have rich or poor entertain the idea for a moment that he is dependent upon them, nor that their liberality can in any case supply defects of Christian character. Liberality is but one of the traits which are characteristic of a Christian. The inspired apostle says, “And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity [love], it profiteth me nothing.” Charity is thus defined: “Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; beareth all things, believeth all things, endureth all things. Charity never faileth.” The character of a tree bearing all these fruits may be readily discerned. For “by their fruits ye shall know them.” As followers of Jesus Christ, we must be wide awake to discern with heavenly eyesight the devices of Satan. God has given us his word as a chart to mark out our way to the eternal shore. With the Bible for our guide, aided by our own reason kept clear by strictly temperate habits, we may be able to acquit ourselves like servants of the Master who have duties to perform and eternal interests to secure.
Benevolence is one precious trait of character which needs to be cultivated and strengthened by continual exercise. God is not dependent upon us. He could speak the word, and every mountain would be turned into gold. “For every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills. I know all the fowls of the mountains; and the wild beasts of the field are mine. If I were hungry I would not tell thee; for the world is mine, and the fullness thereof.” These words were spoken as a reproof to Israel, whose hearts were not right with God. They were multiplying their sacrifices, as though to make a compromise with God, while they were separating from him by wicked works. While they multiplied their victims upon the altar of sacrifice, they did not cultivate pure and vital godliness in the heart, which would move them to act constantly in reference to the two great principles of the moral law, love to God and love to man.
Gifts and offerings will not purchase salvation for any of us. The religion of the Bible is that development of our moral natures in which the soul holds converse with God, loves that which God loves, and hates that which God hates. God will not accept your offerings if you withhold yourself. He asks not only for that which is his own in the means intrusted to you, but for his own property in your body, soul, and spirit, purchased at the infinite price of the blood of the Son of God.
God might have made angels the ambassadors of his truth. He might have proclaimed the law from Sinai with his own voice. But he has chosen to take man into his counsel, and connect him with himself, that through the instrumentality of man the mysteries of the cross of Christ might be fully explained in an audible voice. Man has a work to do. And in this work, life will prove a blessing. The real value of life to him is indicated by the character of the work which employs his powers. If the powers which angels possess were given to man they would be of no use unless some new work was given him in which to engage them. All the riches intrusted to man are only a curse unless he employs them to relieve his own daily wants and those of the needy around him, and to glorify his Maker by advancing his cause in the earth. Objects which shall call benevolence into action must be placed before him, or he cannot imitate the character of the Great Exemplar. Man would have no gifts to bestow were they not first given to him. But our Heavenly Father has made every provision for man, that he may be fully tested and proved, and through the merits of Christ perfect a righteous character.
God has made man his brother’s keeper, and will hold him responsible for this great trust. God has taken man into union with himself, and he has planned that men shall work in harmony with him. He has provided the system of beneficence, that man whom he has made in his image may be self-denying in character, like Him whose infinite nature is love. He has appointed man as his almoner to distribute the blessings he has given him. “Ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich.” God has done for our good all that a kind Heavenly Father could do. He appeals to humanity whether he has failed in a single instance to do all that he could do for the highest interest of man. “Judge, I pray you, betwixt me and my vineyard. What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it?”
God has reposed confidence in us in making us stewards of means and of his rich grace. How shall we show our appreciation of his care and love and unparalleled mercy, except in grateful returns to him of our talents of means and ability with faithfulness and integrity. We cannot possibly enrich the Lord by bestowing any favor directly upon him, for he is the giver of all our bounties. But he points us to the poor and suffering and oppressed, and to souls bound in chains of superstition and error, and assures us that if we do good to these he accepts the deed as though done to himself138. Christ identifies himself with suffering humanity. “Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.”
ETERNITY
By N. W. Vincent
O vast Eternity! how little understood! Duration’s deep, unbounded sea, the lifetime of our God!
Year after year shall bring its seasons, one by one:— A thousand thousand fleeting years—the scene is just begun!
The centuries shall roll their stately numbers on, A million million centuries, Eternity’s fresh dawn!
Millenniums shall wheel with solemn jubilee, Their vigintillion cycles run—noon of eternity!
Fixed periods like these all steadily shall pass, As many as earth’s forest trees or tiny blades of grass;
These ages past our thoughts may now be multiplied By what would be the drops if all the sea were dried;
Then by such number high, whose figures would o’erspread As well the orbs beyond the sky as this on which we tread.
This wondrous lapse of time now multiply once more By what the seconds represent in cycles named before.
Think ye whose minds can grasp these thoughts with steady brain, That this eternity is filled with sin, and woe, and pain?
That He who worlds can frame, whose skill divine we trace, Yields this creation to a stain which he cannot erase?
That God whose heart is love—supreme his praises be— Sees millions from his throne above writhing eternally?
Or will the chaff be burned, God’s ground from tares made free, The earth to paradise be turned, a joy eternally?
So shall eternity with gladsome hope be bright; In God’s deep love no change shall be: his ways are true and right.
N. W. VINCENT.
Thayer, Kansas.
THE TWO HEMISPHERES AND THE SABBATH.—NO. 1.
By W. H. Littlejohn
BY ELD. W. H. LITTLEJOHN.
Among the objections commonly presented to the keeping of the definite seventh day of the week as the Sabbath of the Lord, is one which has for its basis the facts that the earth is round and revolves on its axis, thus rendering the identification of the day impossible in any given locality.
It would be difficult to determine where the effects of this doctrine would end, if it could be substantiated.
Those who employ it generally do so because it furnishes a convenient retreat when they find themselves unable to answer the cogent arguments which are brought from the word of God to prove that the Sabbath of the commandment is a particular day of the week.
They seem to have failed utterly in discovering, first, that the logic which they employ is just as fatal to the Sunday as it is to the Sabbath; secondly, that unless they can first show that the letter of the law is susceptible of the latitudinarian construction which they place upon it, they have unwittingly impeached the God of Heaven by proving that he was ignorant of the rotundity and revolution of the earth on its axis; or, thirdly, that the Bible never emanated from him, and, consequently, that there is now no Sabbath at all. Yet these three conclusions are as inevitably drawn from their position as is the law of gravitation from the fact that a substance thrown into the air always returns to the earth again. A word will demonstrate the truthfulness of this statement. Nay, it is too plain to require demonstration; for at a glance we can perceive—
1. That if you cannot find when Saturday will be reached in a given locality, it will be equally impossible to find when Sunday will dawn upon the same region. Both are alike days; they stand in juxtaposition to each other, the one always preceding, and the other always following, and, therefore, they are so inseparably connected that if you can find the one you can also find the other. That is, if you can find the Sunday, or first day of the week, you know that Saturday, or the last day of the previous week, was the day which just preceded it; the converse being also true that if you cannot find the Saturday it would be equally impossible to find the Sunday.
2. If the Sabbath law is so worded, and if the circumstances attending its proclamation were of such a nature, as to force upon the mind of the candid investigator the conviction that its terms, fairly construed, require the observance of a particular day in all parts of the world, whereas reason and science unite in proving that such a requirement could not be carried out because of the peculiar constitution of the earth itself, then, as God himself wrote the law with his own finger, he either deliberately required men to perform an impossibility, or else he blundered egregiously because he knew less about natural law and the diurnal motion of the earth than does the veriest tyro of the present day. The first of these conclusions would prove God to be a tyrant, and the second would prove him to be grossly ignorant of facts now known to every school-boy. But tyranny and ignorance are alike incompatible with any just conceptions of the character of the Deity. To prove, therefore, (as these men would do) that the Author of the Sabbath law was either tyrannical or ignorant, would be to prove that he was not the God of Heaven.
3. The only escape from the impeachment of the God of nature spoken of under the preceding number, would be found in an utter repudiation of the Scriptures on the ground that they never emanated from him, as proved by the fact that from the standpoint occupied by these individuals they would represent him to be grossly deficient in either virtue or wisdom. When this point shall have been reached, however, we shall be left without any Sabbath whatever, since the only authority which the Sabbath can claim is found in the sacred writings which will have been disposed of in this summary manner.
In view of these considerations, it becomes a matter of no small moment that Christians should move with care and caution in the use of arguments which might be turned with such destructive effects against the whole system of our divine religion.
Even should they find it somewhat difficult from the scientific standpoint to remove all the objections to the definite Sabbath day which are physical in their character and origin, it would be better for them to suspend judgment for a time in order to the acquisition of further light, than it would to hastily adopt a theory which would undermine the very foundations of our faith.
Should they do otherwise, and persist in following the line of argument which we deprecate, they might gain a temporary advantage in debate; but the price which they would pay for it would be larger than either they or the race could afford to give. They might be able to perplex and bewilder by their scientific speculation the humble individual who should insist that the keeping of the first day of the week would not answer the demands of a law which required in express terms the hallowing of the seventh day; but the moment that they should succeed in establishing their lax conceptions of the statute, that moment they would have inaugurated a construction which takes from the Sunday all its claims for special commemoration. In other words, they would have established the seventh-part-of-time theory; i. e., they would have proved that no definite day can be kept the world around, and, as a consequence, that individuals were designedly left by the Author of the law to select for themselves the day which they will hallow. This being true, either Monday, Tuesday, or Wednesday, or any other day of the week, may be selected with perfect propriety by individuals or communities as the day of their worship, and no earthly power could call their action in question.
The result which would follow from the exercise of such a right is at once apparent.
Confusion the most utter and deplorable would inevitably ensue.
The Sabbath, which was designed to be a blessing, would immediately become a curse under this theory of its nature and obligation.
When put in operation, the State and the church would alike perish; for the former could not exist without courts, legislative bodies, and schools; and neither of these could be successfully administered while legislators, judges, jurors, clients, witnesses, teachers, and scholars, were allowed to select, according to the caprice of each, the day which they individually would celebrate. The latter also could not continue in its collective capacity for any length of time, since its existence depends so largely upon general union in Sabbath worship that, without it, it would cease to be.
Should it be replied that each State could regulate this for itself, and would be led to do so by the dictates of self-interest, we reply, first, this would relieve the situation somewhat; but as states which possess a complete autonomy of their own lie in close proximity to others equally well supplied for the work of self-government, confusion would necessarily arise in the mutual business intercourse of their citizens unless all should unite in enforcing the observance of the same day of rest; and, therefore, that the only perfect system of regulation upon this subject would be one which would give to the world at large the same Sabbath day. Secondly, that should we grant—as we do most cheerfully—the existence of a social necessity for a uniform Sabbath of strength so great as to exert a powerful influence upon States and princes in the direction of conformity in the matter in question, then we have found a strongly presumptive argument that the law of God—which undertook to make a Sabbath for mankind—has met the requirements of the case in providing just such a Sabbath as they need. In other words, that it has furnished a Sabbath which men in different parts of the world can celebrate on the same day of the week.
In order, therefore, to decide this question, whether the God of Heaven has displayed that wisdom which should characterize a being of his attributes in providing a Sabbath which accords in every respect alike with the highest good of society and the laws of nature, let us examine the following points: 1. Does the fourth commandment require the commemoration of a definite day of the week? 2. Can such a day be celebrated the world around?
We think that a very few considerations can be offered which are of such a nature as to furnish a satisfactory answer to the first of these queries.
As the more natural and direct source of information, we appeal to the statute itself. Its phraseology is simple and explicit.
Not only does it enforce the commemoration of a Sabbath, but it also particularizes so far as to make mention of the fact that the one to be kept was the one known as the Sabbath of the Lord. If, therefore, we can determine when that occurs, we shall be able to decide what our duty will be.
In this matter, however, we shall experience no difficulty.
Thirty days previous to the promulgation of the commandment, Moses, from the standpoint of the sixth day of the week, said to the people, “To-morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord.” Such a declaration was definitive in its character, and located beyond all question the Sabbath of the Lord as the day which follows the sixth day of the week, and, therefore, as the seventh or last of that cycle.
The commandment, enforcing the same obligation which Moses sought to inculcate, employs the same title, i. e., the Sabbath of the Lord thy God, as well as the secular one employed by him, namely, the seventh day. In doing so, the identification of the day to which both Moses and Jehovah alluded is settled beyond controversy. But the Sabbath law, as if to be even more explicit in particularizing the day which it commanded to be observed, still further identified it by declaring that it is the one upon which God “rested,” and which he also “blessed and hallowed.” In furnishing this statement it establishes two facts: 1. That we are to keep the Sabbath of the Lord; 2. That when we find it, we shall be able to recognize its true character in the facts that God rested upon, blessed, and hallowed it.
The conclusion, therefore, is unavoidable that we can meet the requirements of the fourth commandment only by setting apart to the purposes of rest and worship a period of time of which all the facts predicated of the Sabbath of the Lord will be true.
Proceeding now in our search for hallowed time, we inquire, first, Will Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday meet the demands of the case?
The answer, obviously, must be in the negative.
Neither one of them can be said to be the Sabbath of the Lord, because it is not nor ever was true of either of them that God ever rested upon, blessed, or hallowed it.
Advancing, therefore, in our search, we scrutinize closely the claims of the seventh or last day of the week, which is Saturday; and we immediately discover that the result of our investigation is to be very different from what it was in the former cases; for by turning to the first, second, and third verses of the second chapter of Genesis, we may learn that God, having completed the work of creation, rested on the seventh day, and blessed and sanctified it, because that in it he had rested from all his work.
As a result of this discovery, we are forced to the conclusion that this day, and this alone, is the one which will meet the demands of the law; since it is the only one which can justly lay claim to the honor which belongs to the Sabbath of the Lord.
Without pausing to elaborate more fully an argument which seems at once to be both simple and conclusive, we pass from the consideration of the subject from the standpoint of God’s word to that of his providence.
THEREFORE
By C. W. Stone
That is to say, for this reason. For what reason? For, or in consequence of, something previously stated. A speech, or letter, or any address, can never begin with the word therefore; for whenever that word is used there must be a statement of some fact, a premise, before it. And there is always a logical connection between the premise before the therefore and the conclusion after it, otherwise the statement involves an absurdity.
For example: The State prohibitory liquor laws are repealed, therefore we may sell or use intoxicating liquors without fear of judgment. Here we have a premise before a therefore, and the conclusion that follows it is perfectly natural and logical.
Now take one of the other kind: The State law prohibiting trout fishing between October and May is abolished, therefore we may sell and drink all the liquor we please without fear of being fined. This is an absurdity; for the premise has no relation to the conclusion.
In speaking on the law of God not long ago, at Springfield, Ohio, I was very forcibly struck with the power of the word therefore in Col. 2:16. Here is the premise that precedes it: “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.” This, say the opponents of God's law, was the ten commandments; they were abolished at the cross.
Not stopping to question this assertion, we look at the conclusion that follows the therefore, which is this: “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days, which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ.”
Now I inquire, Is there any logical connection between the premise and the conclusion? The no-law advocate says, The ten commandments are abolished, therefore let no man judge you in meat or in drink. But pray tell us which one of the ten says anything about meat or drink. Here is the first: “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.” That is abolished, says our no-law teacher, therefore let no man judge you in meat or in drink. Supposing it is abolished, how does that affect any ceremony relating to meat or drink?
Here is the third commandment: “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.” That is abolished; therefore let no man judge you in meat or in drink. Here is the sixth: “Thou shalt not kill.” That is abolished; therefore let no man judge you in meat or in drink. “Thou shalt not bear false witness.” Oh! that was abolished at the cross; let no man therefore, because that precept is abolished, judge you in meat or in drink. Again I ask, What connection is there between the premise and the conclusion? What relation has the law of ten commandments to meats and drinks? None whatever. Try any of the ten, and you will find the result the same. Therefore, unless Paul put language into a form which conveys no meaning, and is illogical, nonsensical, and absurd, he had no reference to the ten commandments.
But you ask me to try the fourth commandment and to quote the latter part of Paul's conclusion. I will do so. “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. . . . The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God. . . . For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth . . . and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it.” You say, “That precept is abolished, therefore let no man judge you in meat or in drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days, which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ.” Is there not a logical connection between the reason and the conclusion? No. You state as a reason, or premise, that the law for the seventh-day Sabbath of the Lord, the memorial of creation, is abolished; and ask me to accept as Paul's conclusion this: that no man shall judge us in respect of the sabbath days which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ. Now what has the Sabbath of the Lord to do with these sabbaths? It is just as foreign from them as the Fourth of July is from Washington's birthday. The Sabbath of the Lord points back to creation; but there were numerous139annual sabbaths connected with meats and drinks which pointed forward to Christ. It is to these that Paul refers.
A list of them is found in Lev. 23. In the first and second verses the Lord proposes to enumerate the feasts to be observed by Israel. In the third verse he pauses to put them in remembrance of his holy, weekly Sabbath. Then in the fourth he commences anew, or proposes anew, to enumerate the feast days, and he mentions the passover, the waving of the firstfruits, the memorial of blowing of trumpets (verse 24), which was the first day of the seventh month, the atonement sabbath ten days after (verses 27–32), and the feast of tabernacles five days after that. Verse 34. These were all annual sabbaths,—holy days coming on a different day of the week every year,—and they were connected with meats and drinks. “These are the feasts of the Lord, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, to offer an offering made by fire unto the Lord, a burnt offering, and a meat offering, a sacrifice, and drink offerings, everything upon his day.” Verse 37. And to what did these offerings point? To Christ. These annual sabbaths were indeed shadows, the body of which is Christ. And when Christ came, the shadows of course ceased. These sabbaths are clearly distinguished from the weekly Sabbath in the very next verse which continues thus: “Beside the Sabbaths of the Lord.” These annual feast days, called sabbaths, were to be observed beside the Sabbath of the Lord, with which they had no connection. Hence the law of the weekly Sabbath of the Lord, instituted at creation, before sin, has no relation whatever to the sabbaths instituted centuries after on account of the existence of sin, and connected with meats and drinks pointing to the cross of the Redeemer; and Paul's therefore is entirely out of place if by the “handwriting of ordinances” he means the ten commandments. It would be like using it thus: The laws of our land relating to Sunday are all abolished; therefore let no man judge you in respect to the observance of thanksgiving day.
The great apostle does not use language in that way. There is no difficulty in understanding Paul's conclusion, and now let us look for a logical explanation of his reason. It is now very evident that “the handwriting of ordinances” does not include a single precept of the decalogue. To say that it does, makes utter nonsense of Paul's words. To what does it refer? Look again at the conclusion, and you will see that it must refer to a law enforcing the observance of meats and drinks, and of shadowy sabbaths connected with them; for because it is abolished, Paul says these things need not be observed. Was there such a law? Yes. Every offering had its law. “This is the law of the burnt offering.” Lev. 6:9. “This is the law of the sin offering.” Verse 25. “This is the law of the burnt offering, of the meat offering, and of the sin offering, and of the trespass offering, and of the consecrations, and of the sacrifice of the peace offerings.” Lev. 7:37. Where were these offerings made? At the sanctuary, where the altar was, and where the priests ministered. In what did the services of that sanctuary consist? Paul says it “stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances [ceremonies, margin].” Heb. 9:10. Then the law governing those ceremonies was a ceremonial law, and it was “imposed on them until the time of reformation,” the same verse says; that is, till Christ came. Then it ended. This is what Paul says also in Eph. 2:15: “Abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances.”
Now let us try the therefore. The handwriting of ordinances, the ceremonial law, which Moses wrote, that law which commanded the observance of several annual sabbaths, and of meat offerings and drink offerings, was abolished at the cross; therefore, for that reason, let no man judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of the sabbath days which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ. That is sensible, logical, truthful. I pity that person whose intellect is too small to grasp the force of this argument; and I have little respect for the honesty of an intelligent man who will try to evade it, or will not see it. C. W. Stone.
SOON
By L. D. Santee
Soon shall we be beyond earth's wasting fever,
Soon, soon repose in endless joy and rest;
Our wandering done, our warfare ceased forever,
Resting in peace upon the Saviour's breast.
Across the rocky waste, o'er hills so dreary,
We journey on with garments soiled and torn;
Our sorrows many, and our joys but cheary,—
A rainbow wreathed upon the brow of storm.
Long have we wandered on in gloom and sadness,
With weary feet we've trod life's devious ways;
But soon with joyful hearts and full of gladness
We'll greet the coming King with songs of praise.
Since morning light we've scattered seed with weeping,
Patient we've toiled beneath the glare of noon;
But deepening shadows o'er the earth are creeping,
The night is coming, and the darkness soon.
Soon shall we pass beyond the time of weeping;
Soon shall we bid adieu to all earth's wrong;
Soon shall we greet the saints who now are sleeping,
And tears be followed by the victor's song.
Then let us toil one little moment longer,
Bring to our careworn features hope's glad smile;
Oh! let our confidence and hope grow stronger,
Jesus is coming in a little while.
Welcome, then, pain, and toil, and tribulation,
Each coming evening brings us nearer home;
Let each day witness deeper consecration,
For crowns are given when the Lord shall come.