Untitled article | AdventAI

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Third-day, July 16, 1867

CHAPTER II.

WHAT RELATION DO WE SUSTAIN TO THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD?

Thus far, we have been engaged in an honest endeavor to prove the perpetuity of the law of God. As we believe that the arguments presented have been of such a nature that they should satisfy every unprejudiced mind, it now becomes in the highest degree important to understand the relation which we, as individuals, sustain to it. In order that we may do this satisfactorily, it will be necessary to remember that in the gospel age, there are but two classes, one of which is made up of those who practically reject Christ, and the other of those who receive him as their Saviour. They are usually denominated the believing and the unbelieving world. That at least one of them is under the law has already been shown. That the other is not in the fullest sense of the term, we propose to admit; and then show that such an admission is not equivalent to an acknowledgment of their right to transgress it.

That there should be a necessity for this labor, is incomprehensible. Nothing but the fact that we have to meet it at every turn, could satisfy us that any considerable body of Christians would secretly indulge, much less openly avow, such a theory. It would naturally be expected, that they, being professedly the children of the Highest, would look upon any rule of conduct, emanating from him, as the object of their most profound regard and purest affection. And that we should hear from their lips, sentiments like the following, which abound in the writings of David, Paul and John.

“Blessed is the man that walketh not in the way of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful. But his delight is in the law of the Lord; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.” Ps. i, 1 and 2. “I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart.” Ps. xi, 8. “The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple.” Ps. xix, 7. “For I delight in the law of God after the inward man.” Rom. vii, 22. “For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments; and his commandments are not grievous.” 1 John v, 3.

How sad then is our disappointment when instead of echoing the foregoing sentiments we hear learned ministers, in the presence of approving audiences, laboring with tireless energy to bring the commandments of God into contempt, by representing them as an imperfect code, adapted only to a barbarous age, and by applying to those who are conscientiously endeavoring to keep them, every opprobrious epithet. Leaving such in the hands of that God whose forbearance toward them furnishes us with an impressive lesson as to the manner in which we should treat one another, let us determine in the light of his word, if possible, the estimate which he puts upon those who are patiently laboring to vindicate his law. It may be after all, that he has provided for them in this emergency, a balm which will heal every wound thus inflicted. Perhaps they can, with propriety, appropriate to themselves the consolations of that sweet benediction of Christ: “Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.” Matt. v, 11.

1. The first Scripture which we shall use for this purpose will be found in Matt. v, 19, and reads as follows: “Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of Heaven.”

By a careful reading of the context, we shall learn that the commandments here spoken of are those of the decalogue; for in the same chapter he refers to the two respecting murder and adultery, showing that instead of being relaxed, they were, by his teachings, made more comprehensive than ever before; or, at least, more so than they were in his time understood to be; since he plainly declares that they can be broken without the commission of the overt act; as they reach even to the intents of the heart. Again, it will be seen that the antecedent of “therefore,” as used above, was the statement which he had just made, that “till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in nowise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” In other words, “therefore,” as used in this connection, is equivalent to the expression, for this reason; i. e., the Saviour designed by this word to teach that whoever broke one of these least commandments and taught men so, should be considered least in the kingdom of Heaven, because of the fact, which he had just uttered, that “till heaven and earth should pass not one jot or one tittle should pass from the law until all be fulfilled.”

We have in the above a plain declaration that the status of every individual in the kingdom of Heaven is, or will be, determined by the respect which he or she has shown, or has taught others to show, to the commandments of God. There has been, and is yet, a wide difference of opinion as to where the boundary lines of this kingdom are to be found. Fortunately it is not necessary for the purposes of this argument, that we should split hairs in this matter. Take whichever of the commonly-accepted views you please, and the result will be the same. No theory of the time or place of the setting up of this kingdom, can dull the point of this testimony. Locate it in Heaven if you wish and send the saint to glory at death—he will then find there, no room for the despiser of God’s law. Place it in the new earth, and make up its subjects from the resurrected dead and the changed living, and it will then be equally true. Let it have its rise on or before the day of Pentecost and reach as far as the time “when many shall come from the east and the west, and sit down with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of Heaven,” and it will then cover our day, and whether we are ready to acknowledge it or not, our relative position among its subjects depends upon whether we are ourselves breaking and teaching men to break one of these least commandments, or whether we are striving both to “do and teach them.”

2. “Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.” Rom. vii, 12. Think you that the author of the above could consistently rise from the penning of such an unqualified endorsement of the holiness, justice and goodness, of the law of God, and proceed to a deliberate disregard of its requirements? Before giving an affirmative answer please bear in mind,

First. That the words “holy, just and good” as here used, are expressive of the purity and equity of the law, and the fact that it is adapted to our necessities and the accomplishment of the end for which it was made. That end he had previously declared to be life.

Second. That the encomium here pronounced, applies to the whole, and not merely a part of the law. So that the apostle, when judged by his own words, could not break any of its requirements, without violating every principle of right, and every dictate of interest. If you think that he was capable of doing this, you have greatly underrated his moral worth, and will do well to study it in the light of the following eloquent appeal to the Philippians, to be mindful of the very things which, according to your view, he himself set at naught. Hear him!

“Finally brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report: if there be any virtue and if there be any praise, think on these things.” Phil. iv, 8.

(To be continued.)