Review and Herald, Vol. 45, No. 15. (4/8/1875)

Review and Herald

Apr 8, 1875

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Apr 8, 1875

HARMONY BETWEEN THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS

By Joseph Harvey Waggoner

THE LAW OF GOD.—NO. 8.

BY J. H. WAGGONER.

In considering the relation of the two dispensations, and the effect of the change from one to the other, we notice as a very important point the

HARMONY BETWEEN THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS.

1. They have the same author. There cannot be that contrast, not to say conflict, between the two Testaments which some affect to see. It is a great mistake to ascribe the authorship of the Old Testament to the Father, and that of the New Testament to the Son. In all the dispensations, purposes, and revelations of Heaven to and toward man, the Father and Son have been, and are, perfectly united; and in all these the Father has revealed himself only through the Son. The highest evidence of divine authority that God ever offers in his word is that he made all things; and yet he made them by the Son. Heb. 1:1–3. Creation reveals to us the Son as certainly as it does the Father.

Not only in creation, but in the revelation of the Old Testament we behold the Son as clearly as we do the Father. He talked with the patriarchs. He was the Angel of God’s presence in whom he put his name, who led Israel out of Egypt, who communed with Moses, and ordered and arranged the first covenant with Israel. He went with Joshua, as “captain of the Lord’s host,” to bring the Lord’s people into the land of Canaan. He inspired the prophets of old to speak concerning himself, as Peter says the Spirit of Christ testified in the prophets.

And in like manner in the work of salvation, in all the New Testament, do we behold the Father and the Son. They who shut the Son out of the Old Testament and the Father out of the New, represent God as a stern, inexorable, and almost cruel governor, and, in contrast, they represent Christ as loving, kind, and merciful. They find a relief to their feelings in the thought that, as a minister in Indiana said, “their allegiance is transferred from God to Christ.” This is nothing less than a monstrous perversion of the gospel. In it we are told that “God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son”; “the gift of God is eternal life, through Jesus Christ”; “God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself”; “Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us”; in short, that “God is love”; and the richest blessing mankind can enjoy is to have “the love of God shed abroad in our heart.”

2. They have the same object. Ever since the fall of man, since the first promise that the seed of the woman should bruise the head of the serpent, we can see the same ideas and purposes running through all the revelations of God to man. By sin, God’s government was reproached, the earth was cursed, and man lost his dominion and his life. The offering of Abel, and all the offerings of the patriarchal and Levitical ages, looked forward to the same gospel truth, that the Son of God would put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

3. The Levitical system was preparatory to the gospel age. It was introductory, looking in the same direction. We should suppose from the teachings of some that they were in antagonism; but that is not the case. And so, also, the prophets spoke by inspiration of the Spirit of Christ. They not only foretold the glories of the work of grace through Christ, but they looked for it and longed for it.

4. The gospel is built upon the law of the Old Testament. The gospel is remedial—a system of pardon. It was a necessity because sin was in the world. And as sin is the transgression of the law, the gospel is a recognition of law, not merely a recognition of its existence, but a recognition of its claims, and of the justice of its claims. For, as Andrew Fuller forcibly and correctly remarked, “If the law which has been transgressed were unjust, instead of an atonement being required for the breach of it, it ought to have been repealed, and the law-giver have taken upon himself the disgrace of having enacted it.”

5. The perpetuity of the law is essential to the existence of the gospel. This may be shown in many respects, but we will content ourselves with a further quotation from Andrew Fuller, the celebrated Baptist author, on the atonement. He says:—

“Every instance of punishment among men is a sort of atonement to the justice of the country, the design of which is to restore the authority of good government, which transgression has impaired. But if the law itself is bad, or the penalty too severe, every sacrifice made to it must be an instance of cruelty. And should a prince of the blood royal, in compassion to the offenders, offer to suffer in their stead, for the purpose of atonement, whatever love it might discover on his part, it were still greater cruelty to accept the offer, even though he might survive his sufferings. The public voice would be, There is no need of any atonement; it will do no honor, but dishonor, to the legislature; and to call the liberation of the convicts an act of grace, is to add insult to injury. The law ought not to have been enacted, and now it is enacted, ought immediately to be repealed. It is easy to see from hence, that in proportion as the law is depreciated, the gospel is undermined, and both grace and atonement rendered void.”

On the other hand, all can see that if the law were holy, and just, and good, and the rebellion against it wrong; if the authority, the claims, and the penalties, of the law were worthy of the highest regard, then an atonement to the law does honor to the government which enacted the law, and to the principles of justice and right. Truly, as the prophet wrote, the Son of God, in his obedience and death, has magnified the law and made it honorable; and, as the apostle said, we do not make void the law through faith, but we establish the law.

6. The New Testament endorses the Old as a means of instruction in righteousness. Says Paul, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.” 2 Tim. 3:16, 17. This is a most important testimony, and demands careful attention.

(1.) The word “Scripture” is here used as it is generally used in the New Testament; namely, as referring to the Old Testament exclusively. To this the Saviour referred when he said, “Search the Scriptures.” Paul used this as his authority when he “reasoned out of the Scriptures.” And this is rendered certain by Paul’s words to Timothy in the verse preceding the ones quoted: “From a child thou hast known the Holy Scriptures.” Timothy might have known the Old Testament from a child; but not the New, for the very good reason that the New Testament was not yet written when Timothy was a child. Hence all that Paul here says must apply to the Old Testament exclusively. If the Old Testament was for the Jews only, and of no profit in this dispensation, as some teach, then Paul surely knew it, and he would speak accordingly. And how does he speak of it?

(2.) He says of the Scriptures which Timothy knew from a child “that they were able to make him wise unto salvation.” No one can say more than this of the New Testament. Were this our own language, and not that of Paul, we are sure that they who teach that “rightly dividing the word of truth” is to separate the Old Testament to the Jews and reject it as a rule of right and means of instruction for Christians, would accuse us of being fanatical and of teaching error. But the words of this apostle to the Gentiles are a standing rebuke to that system of error which discards the Old Testament from the Christian church.

(3.) Paul says of the Old Testament it is “profitable for doctrine.” Hence on doctrine we are not shut up to the New Testament, and out of the Old, in this dispensation. We have as our book of doctrine all that God has spoken to the human race in all ages. They who accuse us of having a special hobby, or of being narrow and exclusive in our faith, are blind in regard to the instructions of the apostles on this subject, and they lose much of the blessedness and fullness of God’s revelations to his people.

(4.) Paul says the Old Testament, which Timothy knew from a child, is profitable “for reproof and for correction.” Here again we discover the error of those who make the New Testament their sole book of “discipline.” And why not accept the reproofs given by the writers of the Old Testament? They spoke by inspiration of God, even as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. And this is not the only place where Paul endorses them as authority. He says to the Ephesians, who “were Gentiles by nature,” they were “built upon the foundation of the prophets and apostles.” Therefore they who teach that the churches from the Gentiles are to depend on the instructions of the apostles alone are plainly in error. They who accept both the Old and New Testaments as the rule of their faith have a broad foundation on which to build. And this is what Paul calls it: “The foundation of the prophets and apostles.” They who reject the Old Testament, who receive only the teachings of the apostles, have a defective and one-sided foundation. Their whole system needs to be corrected in the light of Paul’s teaching.

(5.) The Old Testament is profitable “for instruction in righteousness.” Says another apostle, “He that doeth righteousness is righteous.” Hence, righteousness consists in right-doing. And thus is proved that the Old Testament is not merely profitable to us theoretically, or as to mere doctrinal points and prophetic declarations, but profitable as laying down rules of right action; as giving us divine instruction for regulating our lives, and forming our characters. This being true, how much is lost to many professors of religion by their neglecting the study of the Old Testament. The Holy Spirit dictated the words written by “holy men of old,” and inspired the apostles to confirm them as a rule of life; and they who reject those words grieve the Holy Spirit of God, and are left to walk in darkness. This is the reason why they who reject the Old Testament are found so generally denying the power of the Spirit of God. Their religion becomes nominal and formal.

(6.) Some would be willing to admit that Paul’s indorsement of the Old-Testament Scriptures is correct in some degree; they would accept his words, yet under large limitations. But Paul’s words allow of no limitations; he has been careful to put them out of the way of restrictions. After saying they “are able to make thee wise unto salvation,” that they are profitable for doctrine, for discipline, for instruction in right-doing, he adds, “that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto ALL GOOD WORKS.” However strongly people may doubt that all good works are embraced within the teachings of the Old-Testament Scriptures, there is no room to doubt that Paul says so. And his statement must be approved by all who examine the subject with any care and candor. A sufficient vindication of his words (if they need any) is found in the fact that the law of the Most High God is written in the Old Testament. Concerning this law Jehovah himself said if they would keep it they would be holy. Moses said it was their righteousness and their life to keep those commandments. Deut. 6:25; 30:15–20. David said that law was perfect. Solomon said it contained the whole duty of man. The particular declarations of the New Testament in favor of the law, equally broad and emphatic, will be considered hereafter. It is a very evident truth that a law which can make men holy in obeying it, which is righteous, which is perfect, which contains the whole duty of man, must indeed embrace “all good works.” But this is the nature of the law of God, and this law is written in the Old Testament. And so Paul’s words stand vindicated, that we are “thoroughly furnished unto all good works” in the Old-Testament Scriptures. Had we no other evidence in the New Testament in favor of the perpetuity and perfection of the law of God, we should consider this text amply sufficient; but, having much more equally decisive, we have no hesitation in planting ourselves on this truth, and claiming in its behalf a “full assurance of faith.”

(7.) The perfect harmony of the Old and New Testaments is further found in Paul’s answer to the objection which may be raised against his strong indorsement of the Old-Testament Scriptures. Thus, the objector questions, If the Old Testament is able to make us wise unto salvation, and gives complete instruction in doctrine, discipline, and right-doing, even furnishing us the rules of all good works, what need have we of the New Testament? Is not the Old Testament therein affirmed to be complete and sufficient without the New?

To open this subject more fully to the mind of the objector, we ask in return: If the law of the Lord was perfect, why make any further revelation through prophets and apostles? Is there a complement of moral perfection? or, if the commandments of God contained the whole duty of man, why add the New Testament to them? Does God require man to do more than his whole duty?

The whole difficulty is in the mind of the objector, in that he sees no difference between moral obligation and a remedy for sin. It is a Bible truth that the whole duty of man was revealed in the Old Testament; and it is equally true that man did not do his duty. Having failed in his duty; having subjected himself to condemnation and to punishment, he finds himself utterly helpless, unable to extricate himself from the difficulty and the danger. As a rebellious creature he is subject to the righteous wrath of God, without any means of averting it. God looks down upon him in pity. But the government of God is a right government; his claims on man are just, and cannot in justice be yielded. He cannot in any respect release man from his whole duty without doing violence to his own justice and dishonoring his own government. But in his infinite wisdom he devised a plan, wrought out through his own dear

Son, whereby “he may be just, and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus.” Rom. 3:23–26. Had man done his whole duty he would, of course, have been accepted on his obedience; but now, in addition to future obedience he must receive “remission of sins that are past, by the forbearance of God.” And more than this, his rebellion has so alienated him from God that he is incapable of restoring himself to those privileges and to that allegiance from which he has fallen. Both remission for the past, and obedience in the future are secured through his surety. Thus “being justified by faith we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.” Rom. 5:1. Hence, now, when Paul vindicates the sufficiency of the Old Testament as a divine instructor on morals, he adds the means of restoration, as follows: “From a child thou hast known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.”

Here we have a perfect union of the two Testaments—the Old, containing the law of Jehovah, defining the whole duty of man, and also pointing out his fall, his repeated failures to discharge his duty—the New, revealing the remedy for sin through God’s only Son. Thus we have “repentance toward God” because of transgression, and “faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ,” for remission of sin; past failures forgiven in “being justified by faith,” and future obedience insured by our having “peace with God,” the enmity or carnal mind, which is not subject to the law of God, being taken away.

Long time has error, like a pall of darkness, hung over the Christian world in regard to this important point. Grievous wolves have foisted their heresies upon the church, since the “falling away” foretold by the Spirit of prophecy. And no greater heresy has ever obtained than that which places the Son in antagonism to the Father; which makes void the law of the great God through faith in Jesus Christ; which makes God’s will, as revealed in this dispensation, conflict with his will as revealed in past dispensations. “All his commandments are sure. They stand fast forever and ever, and are done in truth and uprightness.” Ps. 111:7, 8.

THE WILL OF GOD.

By Faber

I worship Thee, sweet will of God! And all thy ways adore, And every day I live I seem To love thee more and more.

I love to kiss each print where thou Hast set thine unseen feet; I cannot fear thee, blessed will! Thine empire is so sweet.

When obstacles and trials seem Like prison walls to be, I do the little I can do, And leave the rest to thee!

I have no cares, O blessed will, For all my cares are thine; I live in triumph, Lord, for thou Hast made thy triumphs mine.

Man's weakness waiting upon God Its end can never miss, For men on earth no work can do More angel-like than this.

Ill that he blesses is our good, And unblessed good is ill; And all is right that seems most wrong, If it be his sweet will. —Faber.

MORALITY OF THE SABBATH AND ITS IMPORTANCE.

By Dudley Marvin Canright

(Concluded.)

Obj. III. (Continued.) The seventh day cannot be kept in all parts of the world; therefore it is not a moral institution.

2. The earth is round. When it is noon here it is midnight in China. A person traveling around the earth in an easterly direction will gain a day, while another going around in a westerly direction will lose a day. This shows that the same definite day cannot be kept all around the world. So says the objector.

It is remarkable that most of those who urge this as a difficulty in our way, do themselves claim to keep the first day of the week holy, in honor of the resurrection of Jesus, which occurred on the other side of our earth. How can they keep the same first day all around the earth? Is the earth round on Saturday and flat on Sunday? If there is any difficulty in the case, then it is just as much against keeping one day as another. Therefore, those who hold to the observance of any day should never urge this objection against the Sabbath.

When God made this round earth, he also made man to dwell on all the face of it; Gen. 1:28; Acts 17:26; and at the same time he made the Sabbath for man. Gen. 2:1–3; Mark 2:27. God would not require an impossibility, hence, all men can keep it. So we find that they do keep it without any such difficulty as this objection supposes. The Jews, who are scattered in every part of the earth and all around it, do keep the seventh-day Sabbath. Starting from Palestine, some have come around the world via Europe and the Atlantic Ocean. Others have come via Asia, China, and the Pacific Ocean. Both have met in America keeping the same day. There is no disagreement among them in any part of the world. This demonstrates that men can travel all around this earth and still keep the same day.

Those who keep Sunday live in all parts of the earth and have traveled all around it both ways. Do they find any difficulty in keeping the first day? Not in the least. This objection is all imaginary; for, practically, no one ever had any such trouble. Seventh-day Adventists and Seventh-day Baptists are scattered nearly around the globe; and yet they find no difficulty in keeping the seventh-day Sabbath.

The facts are these: The day begins at sunset. Gen. 1:5; Lev. 23:32; Mark 1:32. When the sun sets Friday evening in Asia, then the seventh-day Sabbath begins there. A few hours later, the sun sets in Europe. Then the Sabbath has come there. Still later, it sets in New York; and now the Sabbath has come there. Three hours later the sun sets in California; and now the seventh day has arrived here. When the seventh day is in Asia, then those living there can observe it; when it comes to Europe, then those there can keep it; and when it gets around here to America, then we can keep it. It is exactly the same day when it comes to America that it was when it started in Asia, though it comes here later.

A train of cars starts from Chicago at seven o’clock Monday morning and arrives at Omaha five hundred miles west of that city the next morning at the same hour. Is it not the same train that started from Chicago twenty-four hours before? Certainly. Suppose that this is train No. 7. A business man in Chicago has several hired men scattered all along the road between Chicago and Omaha. He orders them all to take train No. 7, which leaves Chicago at seven Monday morning, and meet him at Omaha. Would all these men go down to their different depots at seven Monday morning to take train No. 7? They would not find it there, if they did. But each one waits till the train arrives at his place, and then he gets aboard, and the last one would get on about twenty-four hours later than the first one. But would it not be the same train, No. 7, that started in Chicago? Of course it would.

The Lord commands his servants all around the world to keep the seventh day. Each one is to keep it when it comes where he is, not when it comes where some one else is. When it comes to those in Asia, they can keep it. Several hours later it comes to England and then they keep it, and so on all around the world.

This is sufficient to show that there is no such difficulty as this objection supposes. For a full answer to it, the reader is referred to a tract by Eld. J. N. Andrews entitled, “The Definite Seventh Day,” for sale at the Review Office, Battle Creek, Mich., and at the office of the Signs of the Times, Oakland, California.

Obj. IV. Nature keeps no Sabbath.

It is said that all nature goes right on just the same upon the seventh day as upon other days. Birds and beasts keep no Sabbath; it rains and snows, the sun shines, water runs, grass grows, &c., &c., upon that day as upon others. Hence, nature teaches no Sabbath.

Answer. This objection is founded upon an entire misapprehension of the design of the Sabbath. “The Sabbath was made for man” the same as were the other moral laws. He needs it and can be benefited by it. Inanimate nature neither feels, thinks, nor reasons; hence it needs no Sabbath. The animals which do not labor need no rest-day. They are not capable of worshiping God, and hence need no day for that purpose. They cannot appreciate God’s power and authority as Creator, and therefore need no sign to remind them of it. But the commandment does provide rest for all working animals.

The same mode of reasoning would set aside all the commandments. Thus, neither fish, fowls, nor beasts, worship God. Neither do water, fire, grass, nor trees. Therefore, men should not worship him! It is a remarkable fact that every thrust against God’s Sabbath strikes with equal force against the other moral commandments, showing that they are inseparably bound together. Take another commandment, “Thou shalt not commit adultery.” None of the animals below man regard this precept, but they have promiscuous intercourse. Shall men, therefore, appeal to nature, and practice the same? Once more: “Thou shalt not kill.” Beasts regard not the lives of their fellows. Shall we appeal to this to show that this command is not founded in nature? Certainly, if we go to the same witnesses for proof against the Sabbath. Again: “Honor thy father and thy mother.” Beasts pay no regard to this precept. As soon as they are grown they forget all relations and treat all alike.

Therefore an appeal to the practice of dumb animals and inanimate nature will not help the case of our no-Sabbath opponents, unless they are prepared to go against all moral laws. Thus we have answered all the objections urged against the position that the Sabbath is a moral precept. We believe that it has been fully and clearly shown that the Sabbath deserves a place in the moral law, and that God did not make a mistake in placing it there.

THE IMPORTANCE OF THE SABBATH.

From the foregoing we see that the Sabbath is an institution of the greatest importance to man physically, mentally, morally, and spiritually. It has been plainly shown that men absolutely need such a day of rest from physical or mental labor. The man who does not obey this law of nature, sins against himself, and will inevitably suffer loss in the end. The social benefits of the Sabbath in promoting friendly intercourse, moral culture, and refinement of manners, are beyond all estimation, even if only this life be considered.

But it is in the holy work of religion, in man’s duties to his Creator, that the highest importance of the Sabbath is seen. It sets apart a definite, regular, and oft-recurring day of rest from all worldly employments, upon which men can be free to attend to the worship of God. No other law can compare in importance with the Sabbath in preserving and promoting the knowledge and worship of the true God. We have seen that it is the sign which distinguishes the true God from all false gods. It is the memorial of the great work of creation. It is the seal to the moral law of Jehovah, without which that law would be of no authority. This fact alone elevates the Sabbath in its importance above any other precept. We have seen that it is a moral precept in every sense of the term. Every argument against it falls with equal weight against one or more of the other commandments of the moral law.

Our great and constant danger is that we shall become “choked with cares and riches and pleasures of this life,” Luke 8:14, and so bear no fruit for the Lord. To obviate this, the Lord has interposed the Sabbath after six days of labor, to break up this tide of worldliness and call man’s attention back to God. If it were not for this, the business of the world would absorb all man’s attention, and God would soon be forgotten. Man needs a constant reminder of his duty to God, an oft-recurring test of his own spiritual condition. For this purpose no other precept is like the Sabbath.

We have before shown that the principle involved in the violation of all the other commandments is also involved in the violation of the Sabbath. A man covets his neighbor’s property. This leads him to steal it. So a man covets God’s time for his own work; hence, he proceeds to take it and use it for himself, and thus rob God. A man who will knowingly and deliberately use God’s holy day for his own worldly, selfish purposes, will also steal, if he could do it with the same impunity. If a man will steal from his Creator, will he not from his fellow-men? I know that men do not like to regard it in this light, but it is true, notwithstanding.

When we come to look at the claims and sacredness of the Sabbath day in a proper light, it must be seen that it is no slight offense to disregard the Sabbath. I cannot conceive how a man could set at naught God’s authority in so defiant a manner as this. Look at the facts a moment. The omnipotent God whose glory fills all Heaven, whose hands have made the universe, has created our earth, ourselves, and every blessing around us which we enjoy. To commemorate this great work, he has set apart, as sacred to himself, the Sabbath day. With a voice that shook the earth, he has forbidden us to use this day in doing our own work. With a full knowledge of these facts before him, with the law of God pointing out his duty, with the eyes of Jehovah upon him, a man arises Sabbath morning and deliberately proceeds to use this holy time in his own business. How must such an act appear in the eyes of God? How will it appear on the record in the Judgment? What act could puny man perform which would more deliberately set at naught the law and authority of the great Creator? Reader, we beseech you to stop and think seriously of this matter, and consider whether the observance of the Sabbath is not of greater importance than you have hitherto considered it.

On several important occasions when God wished especially to test the people touching their loyalty to him, he has chosen the Sabbath as best adapted to this purpose. The children of Israel, during their long sojourn in Egypt, had largely apostatized from God. Before the Lord would entrust them with his law, he tested them, to see whether they would respect it or not. Thus he says: “Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law or no.” Ex. 16:4. How does he do it? He selects the Sabbath for that purpose. See Ex. 16:23–29.

The Lord gave them manna from heaven six days, and commanded them to prepare twice as much on the sixth day as on other days; and told them not to go out on the seventh day. But they hearkened not to the Lord. This brought from the Lord the sharp rebuke: “How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws?” But they did refuse, and rebelled time after time, till the Lord sware that he would destroy them in the wilderness. Their continued violation of the Sabbath was one chief cause for which God shut them out of the promised land, and slew them in the wilderness. This fact is plainly stated by Ezekiel. Chap. 20:12, 13.

On another occasion just before the Babylonish captivity, when the people had become very corrupt and disobedient, God made to them this remarkable proposition: “If ye diligently hearken unto me, saith the Lord, to bring in no burden through the gates of this city on the Sabbath day, but hallow the Sabbath day, to do no work therein; then shall there enter into the gates of this city kings and princes sitting upon the throne of David, riding in chariots and on horses, they, and their princes, the men of Judah, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and this city shall remain forever.” Jer. 17:19–25.

Upon this remarkable passage Justin Edwards remarks: “This is true. A man who will conscientiously and sacredly observe the Sabbath day will not have a heart to commit any other crime. In the above passage the Lord shows his appreciation of the Sabbath by placing the Sabbath in the light he has.” Fearing they would not obey him, the Lord added this warning: “But if ye will not hearken unto me to hallow the Sabbath day, and not to bear a burden, even entering in at the gates of Jerusalem on the Sabbath day; then will I kindle a fire in the gates thereof, and it shall devour the palaces of Jerusalem, and it shall not be quenched.” Verse 27. But they did not obey him nor keep his Sabbath day, and therefore he sent them into captivity. 2 Chron. 36:16, 17.

That the violation of the Sabbath was one of the chief things for which God sent them into captivity is thus confessed by Nehemiah when he found some of them again breaking the Sabbath after their return. He says: “Then I contended with the nobles of Judah, and said unto them, What evil thing is this that ye do, and profane the Sabbath day? Did not your fathers thus, and did not our God bring all this evil upon us, and upon this city? Yet ye bring more wrath upon Israel by profaning the Sabbath.” Neh. 13:17, 18. A proper consideration of the above passage will give us some idea of how important the Sabbath is in the estimation of God.

Again, when the Lord calls the Gentiles to serve him he makes to them this promise: “Also the sons of the stranger that join themselves to the Lord, to serve him, and to love the name of the Lord, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the Sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant; even them will I bring to my holy mountain.” Isa. 56:6. Obedience to the Sabbath is the thing named by the Lord as the condition of their acceptance with him. Would God have accepted them if they had gone on worshiping idols, murdering, coveting, stealing, &c.? Of course not; and yet the Lord does not mention any of these things, but simply says, if they will keep his Sabbath, he will accept them. The reason is that the Sabbath is a test truth. All others are implied in it. If they would keep the Sabbath, they would obey him in other things.

At another time the Lord made this proposition to the Jews: “If thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day; and call the Sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, honorable; and shalt honor him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words; then shalt thou delight thyself in the Lord; and I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth, and feed thee with the heritage of Jacob thy father; for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it.” Isa. 58:13, 14. What a wonderful promise this was, and yet the one condition named is that of obedience to the Sabbath. Thus it will be seen that on many occasions the Lord has chosen the Sabbath as the precept with which to test the people. Is it anything remarkable, then, that in these last days, when people have apostatized from God, the Lord should again bring up his holy Sabbath as a testing truth with which to select out a people prepared for translation? To me it seems very reasonable.

Finally, obedience to the Sabbath does convert men to God in other respects. Our opponents find fault with us because we urge the Sabbath so strongly. They represent us as preaching that if a man will only keep the Sabbath it is all he need do to be saved. This is false, as all know who are acquainted with our teachings. We teach that men must obey all the law of God, repent of their sins, and believe in Jesus Christ for their remission. But we have found by a long experience that the man who will conscientiously keep the Sabbath will also keep all God’s commandments. Indeed, before a man decides to step out in opposition to almost

everybody, and sacredly observe the Sabbath to the Lord, he must decide in his own mind to give up the world and become a servant of the Lord. Hence, we have found that almost invariably, however wicked a man has been before, as soon as he commences the observance of the Sabbath, he also commences to be a praying, Bible-reading, God-fearing man. This is only a legitimate result of Sabbath-keeping, as we have previously shown.

On the other hand, those who will not keep the Sabbath day, seldom obey God in anything else. With all of these facts before us, we appeal to the reader’s judgment and conscience as to whether or not the Sabbath is of so little importance as its opponents are wont to represent it! Is it not, on the other hand, the key-stone to God’s great moral law, without which that law would have no strength to stand? Dear reader, as you value your soul and the favor of your Creator, do not pass by the light which God in his providence is now causing to shine out so clearly upon the subject of his holy, but down-trodden, Sabbath day. May the Lord help you to turn away your feet from the Sabbath, and call it “a delight, the holy of the Lord, honorable.”

D. M. CANRIGHT.

An Old Woman's Advice.

By Mrs. M. F. Butts

What's the use o' stewin', and fum'in', And fussin', and frettin' round? You won't make things any better, Nor smoother, I'll be bound.

Your husband and children ain't perfect, Of course that's very true; But Martha, think a minute, Think seriously—be you?

And s'pose they're a good deal ailin', Like plants that don't half grow, What'll you do with 'em, Martha— Keep 'em covered with snow?

S'posin' the boys are careless, And don't do as you say, You've got to win 'em by lovin', There ain't any other way.

Not love that's all wish-washy— That ain't any love at all— But love that is strong and sunny, Like a southern garden wall.

If you don't make home as happy And bright as a place can be, Them boys will be discontented, And go outside, you see.

For you can't manage human creatures, As if they was made of dough; They've got God's breath in 'em, Martha, And they're bound to stretch and grow.

There was Jim Bowles, you remember, Full of frolic and fun, But as fine a natur' in him As there is beneath the sun.

He was mighty good at playin', But just as good at work; If you set him goin' rightly, He didn't know how to shirk.

He had the kind o' timber That God likes when it's grown, And I b'lieve he'll save him fin'ly, And make him one of his own.

Well, Miss Bowles hector'd and scolded, And wanted him to go The very way she p'inted, Whether he could or no; And the consequence he married A well-enough little thing, But no more fit for Jimmy Than a house-maid for a king.

He was fairly driv from his mother, And so got tangled there, And then he was too true-hearted Not to stay in the snare.

What do you think mothers are giv' for— To fry, and bile, and bake, And wash, and sew for nothin' But the dyin' body's sake?

They're give to nuss the sperit, And make it strong and true, And to do that nussin', Martha, Your own must be strong too.

An' you've got to make it a business To find out the best way, Or your work will turn upon you Like a sarpint, some fine day.

It's very well to be careful— I ain't ag'in bein' neat— And clo'es has their own valy, And so has things to eat;

But God looks out for the in'ard, And let the outside come Nateral like and easy— The child, and then the home.

Bringin' up child'en, Martha, Is like any other thing— Easy, if only you handle The natural end of the string.

But we must allus remember They don't belong to us— God is their rightful Father, And they're given out to nuss.

He knows the little creaturs, And will tell us about our task, And, Martha, it's my opinion That you'd better go and ask. —Mrs. M. F. Butts.

Continue reading: By Their Fruits