We have seen that in speaking of justification by faith, or of the exercise of grace through the blood of Christ for the remission of sins past, the apostle clearly divides between faith and works, and excludes works entirely. It is faith only—works not at all. But when he speaks of the future life of the justified, he speaks in a different manner. Then he teaches to "work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." Phil. 2:12. This is evangelical truth as well as the other; but it is an order which could not be given or obeyed relative to justification for past offenses, of which he is speaking in Rom. 3; for no one could work out a justification for a past offense.
But can it be that God regards future sin with any more favor than he does past sin? We think not. And if he does not, it would be reasonable to expect that his plan of salvation contemplated prevention as well as cure; and so we find it. Jesus saves from sin; puts away sin by the sacrifice of himself; says to the justified one, Go, sin no more; he is not a minister of sin, but of righteousness; therefore we shall not continue in sin that grace may abound. Both are in the gospel plan. Thus, man is under condemnation for sin; he also has a carnal mind, which is enmity against God, and not subject to the law of God; Rom. 8:7; by position, a sinner—in disposition, sinful. It would not be sufficient to forgive past transgression and leave the sinful disposition, as we should become again involved in sin and brought under condemnation. Nor would it be sufficient to remove the sinful disposition and leave the burden of past sin upon us, for that would condemn us in the Judgment. Therefore Christ becomes a Saviour to us in both respects. He freely forgives our past sins, so that we stand free and justified; and he takes away the carnal mind, which is enmity against God, and not subject to his law, and makes us at peace with God—subject to his law; he writes it in our hearts so that we may delight in it. Then "the righteousness of the law" is "fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh," the carnal mind, "but after the Spirit." Rom. 8:4.
The following remarks by Andrew Fuller are pointed, and worthy of careful consideration:—
"An atonement has respect to justice, and justice to the law or rule which man has violated."
"If the doctrine of the atonement leads us to entertain degrading notions of the law of God, or to plead an exemption from its preceptive authority, we may be sure it is not the Scripture doctrine of reconciliation. Atonement has respect to justice, and justice to the law, or the revealed will of the Sovereign, which has been violated; and the very design of the atonement is to repair the honor of the law. 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 lawgiver have taken upon himself the disgrace of having enacted it. 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. It is the law as abused, or as turned into a way of life, in opposition to the gospel, for which it was never given to a fallen creature, that the sacred Scriptures depreciate it; and not as the revealed will of God, the immutable standard of right and wrong. In this view the apostles delighted in it; and if we are Christians we shall delight in it too, and shall not object to be under it as a rule of duty, for no man objects to be governed by laws which he loves."
These remarks are just, and well worthy the consideration of all. We close our examination of this subject by quoting the emphatic language of inspiration as to the effect of justification by faith: "Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid; yea, we establish the law." Rom. 3:31.
Death of Christ Vicarious.
By Editor
THE question, Was the death of Christ vicarious? has received much attention in the theological world, and apparently troubled many minds. It is a question of great importance, as the subject of the efficacy of the Atonement is involved in it. Perhaps we might more correctly say, it involves the possibility of there being any atonement. We think the nature of an atonement is such that it must be effected by vicarious death; vicariousness is an essential element in such a transaction. That which is done for another is vicarious; and as Christ died for us, his death was vicarious. He who suffers for his own sins makes no atonement. True, he satisfies the demand of the law, but he is lost. Had all the world been left to perish, the penalty would have been inflicted and justice honored, but there would have been no atonement. An atonement can only be made by one who suffers for another, or others; and this shows the remark to be just, that there can be no atonement where there is no vicariousness.
Those who deny a vicarious death generally reason thus: Justice would not admit of the penalty being inflicted twice for the same offense; therefore if Christ suffered vicariously, or in our stead, we must be released as a matter of justice; and not of pardon or favor; for where the law takes its course there is no pardon.
But this reasoning is defective in every respect. It might apply if mercy were the sole object; but where justice and mercy unite there must be conditions, whereby we avail ourselves of the benefits of his death. But his death was voluntary; and unconditional; a free-will offering to justice in our behalf. He honors the law whether we will honor it or not; and if we will not accept him we must bear the consequences. He has made an offering to the divine law. We did not make it, nor will it avail for us unless we accept it, and by faith appropriate the benefits thereof to ourselves. On this point the reader is requested to consider again the remarks in a former article, on the conditions of pardon.
Again, in such reasoning the true nature of substitution is not considered. If a man commits a crime worthy of death, and another dies in his stead, he does not necessarily remove the guilt of the criminal thereby. So the death of Christ makes salvation possible by vindicating the law in man’s behalf; and opening the way for pardon without infringing on justice. But his death does not make the salvation of any man necessary, as will be seen from the fact that pardon is offered through faith in him. But if his death was in the nature of the payment of a debt which could not be collected a second time, or of suffering a penalty in such sense that they for whom he died could not justly suffer it, even if they persisted in rejecting him, then there would be no room for pardon. All men might then demand their release on grounds of justice! But that is not the system of the gospel. That would amount to an indiscriminate and unconditional pardon which, as we have seen, is subversive of justice and of Government.
But if Christ did not suffer in our stead, how is justice vindicated in case we are pardoned? If he did not suffer the penalty in our behalf, and we do not suffer it because he sets us free, then the penalty is never suffered, and the law is not honored, for justice is robbed of its due. Some affect to think that this is the gospel plan; but only because they lose sight of the great gospel truth that Christ is set forth as a propitiation, that through faith in his blood we may receive the remission of sins that are past, that God may be just, and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus. Rom. 3:23-26. No one can imagine that Christ bore our sins on the tree except in the sense of suffering in his death the desert of our sins, for death is that desert. “He hath made him to be sin for us”—not that he was a sinner, for he “knew no sin,” but he was counted a sinner—sin was imputed to him, if you please, for our sake, “that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.” 2 Cor. 5:21. We cannot imagine how he was made sin for us, except by his bearing our sins, which he did, and standing in our stead before the violated law.
The sacrifices of the Levitical law, typified the offering of Christ; and what their death was in type his must surely be in fact. The forms prescribed in that law show plainly their intent. The requirement to lay their hands upon the heads of their offerings, was peculiarly significant. “If any man of you bring an offering to the Lord, . . . he shall put his hand upon the head of the burnt offering; and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him. Lev. 1:2-4. See also 3:2, 8, 13. If the priest sinned, he was required to bring a bullock for a sin offering; “and he shall lay his hand upon the bullock’s head.” Chap. 4:4. If the whole congregation sinned, then “the elders of the congregation shall lay their hands upon the head of the bullock.” Verse 15. Also verse 24; chap. 8:14; 2:2.
The object of this action is made clear in chap. 16:21, where the same thing is done over the scape-goat. The high priest was there acting in behalf of all the people. “And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat.” This could be the only object in all like transactions. Thus the sin was transferred from the sinner to the object or offering upon which his hands were laid. And this opens to us the full sense of Lev. 1:4, and parallel passages. “He shall put his hand upon the head of the burnt offering,”—thereby transferring his sin to the offering, so that it bore the sin of the man—“and it shall be accepted for him.” Of course it was accepted—as an offering to the broken law, in his stead, for it had his sin.
While the action of the priest in Lev. 16:21 is conclusive as to the object of laying one’s hand upon the head of his offering, to put his sins upon the head of the sacrifice, it does not confound the scape-goat with the sin offering, as some have imagined. Of this we shall speak at length in another place.
The same is fully shown by the following: Although the sinner was required to lay his hand on the head of the offering, the priest made the atonement for him; Lev. 4:20, 26, 31, 35, and others. The atonement was made with the blood of the offering. It was early revealed to man that the blood was the life. “But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.” Gen. 9:4. “Be sure that thou eat not the blood; for the blood is the life; and thou mayest not eat the life with the flesh.” Deut. 12:23. “For the life of the flesh is in the blood.” “For it is the life of all flesh.” “For the life of all flesh is the blood thereof.” Lev. 17:11, 14. Therefore when the Lord said, “Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed,” it was equivalent to saying, Whoso taketh man’s life, by man shall his life be taken; for he said again, “Your blood of your lives will I require.” Gen. 9:5.
Now “the wages of sin is death,” and “without shedding of blood there is no remission.” Rom. 6:23; Heb. 9:22. That is to say, the sinner has forfeited his life, and the law dishonored cannot be satisfied or vindicated without the shedding of blood, or taking life, for life is its due. This plainly shows that the penalty of the law is executed by shedding blood, or taking life; and also that the remission of sin, or its penalty, to the sinner, does not relax the claims of the law; for when his sin was transferred to the offering, that was accepted for him, and its blood or life taken for his. “For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.” Lev. 17:11. So the sin was remitted or forgiven the sinner, and laid upon another, who suffered its penalty. With these facts before us, we notice that all those scriptures which speak of Christ’s blood being shed, are a confirmation of the fact that he died, or suffered the penalty of the law. The wages of sin is death—the life is in the blood; he shed his blood—he died for sin. How plain the truth; how reasonable the plan appears when freed from the perversions and “doctrines of men.”
THE fifth chapter of 1 Corinthians is devoted to a scandalous offense that had been committed by a number of the Corinthian church. From the first verse we learn that the apostle did not always receive his information concerning the needs of the church direct from the Spirit, but often from other sources. The fact that he often depended upon credible reports, does not in the least detract from his character as an inspired apostle. God does not tell men that which they can find out as well for themselves. In this case Paul charges the church to purge itself, lest the single sin should corrupt the whole body. Verses 6, 7. Strict discipline is what the church owes to the steadfast members, no less than to the disloyal ones. The church at Corinth, however, was puffed up, not because of this sin, but in spite of it. While the whole body should have been mourning the shame that had come upon them, and making efforts to remove it, they were congratulating themselves on their prosperity. Indeed this sin may have served to make manifest their pride, because it is likely that many were Pharisaically boasting because they had not walked disorderly, not thinking that by tolerating sin in the church, they themselves became responsible for it. It has been well said that "Men are always elated and proud when they have the least occasion for it." When church members feel a tendency to complacence and boasting, it is time to examine themselves to find out what is wrong.
"I WROTE unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators." 1 Cor. 5:9. The apostle here refers to a previous epistle, which has not been preserved. After briefly considering the supposition that the reason why it was not preserved was that it was not inspired (a thing not very probable), Barnes says: "If inspired, they may have answered the purpose which was designed by their inspiration, and then have been suffered to be lost—as all inspired books will be destroyed at the end of the world. It is to be remembered that a large part of the discourses of the inspired apostle, and even of the Saviour himself (John 21:25), have been lost. And why should it be deemed any more wonderful that inspired books should be lost than inspired oral teaching? Why more wonderful that a brief letter of Paul should be destroyed than that numerous discourses of him who spake as never man spake should be lost to the world? We should be thankful for the books that remain, and we may be assured that all the truth that is needful for our salvation has been preserved and is in our hands. That any inspired books have been preserved, amidst the efforts that have been made to destroy them all, is more a matter of wonder than that a few have been lost, and should rather lead us to gratitude that we have them, than in grief that a few, probably relating to local and comparatively unimportant matters, have been destroyed."
"BUT now have I written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner, with such an one no not to eat." Verse 11. This is by many regarded as equivalent to saying that they should not partake of the Lord's Supper with members of the church who were guilty of the above-mentioned sins; but the connection seems to strongly indicate that the prohibition extends to ordinary meals. Of course this would shut off communion, for they could not commune with one with whom they could not eat a common meal. To say that they shall not eat with a certain class is a far greater restriction than to say that they must not commune with them. Now in his former epistle Paul had said that they were not to company with fornicators. Of course that would effectually shut off partaking of the Lord's Supper with them. Still they were not to abstain absolutely from all dealings with such men, for that would necessitate, as Paul says, a removal from the world. But now he is more rigid than before, and says that if one who professes to be a Christian is guilty of such practices, they are to show their abhorrence of his course, by refusing even to eat with him. The reason for this is readily seen: If a man made no profession, but was known to be a heathen, no one would think of holding the church responsible for his crimes, even though its members had dealings with him. But should the members of the church associate with one who had been, and perhaps still professed to be, one of their own number, and who was notoriously licentious, the world would think that the church still recognized him as a Christian. So they were not to be seen in his company at all. This course was to be followed, not in a spirit of harshness, but for the reputation of Christ's cause. And this restriction would not prevent them from relieving the wants of any who might need aid.
THE violation of the tenth commandment is quite generally regarded as a comparatively venial offense, but Paul places the covetous man in no enviable position. Covetousness, the use of abusive language, and extortion, are classed with drunkenness and adultery. The Greek word for covetous is defined by Liddell and Scott as "one who has or claims more than his share." If Paul's injunction were strictly obeyed, what a thinning out there would be in many churches. There are few churches in which there are not some who are so desirous of having more than their share that they will even rob God of his portion.
"Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more the things that pertain to this life?" 1 Cor. 6:2, 3. This language will allow of no other interpretation than that the saints will have some part to act in apportioning the amount of punishment due to wicked men and angels. Some have taught from this text, that the people of God will ultimately gain the ascendancy in this world's affairs, so that all public offices will be filled by them; but this cannot be true, for a plain distinction is made between the judgment which the saints are to exercise, and "the things that pertain to this life." Christ himself taught the same thing to his followers when he said to them: "In the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel." Matt. 19:28. This is at the last day,—the time when Daniel says that judgment is to be given to the saints of the Most High. Dan. 7:22.
It remains for the prophet John to fix definitely the time when the saints will engage in this work of judgment. We have already learned that it is when Christ comes, and that is when the righteous dead are raised. 1 Thess. 4:16. In Rev. 20:4 we read: "And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given to them; and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshiped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years." The next verse shows that this thousand years commences with the resurrection of the righteous (at Christ's coming), and ends with the resurrection of the wicked, who will be raised to suffer the second death, which is described in the succeeding verses. From this it is plain that when the saints are made immortal, they at once enter upon the work of judging. Just how much of the work is allotted to them, we cannot of course tell, but it will have to do simply with the fixing of the sentence, and not with the execution, for that is committed to Christ. See John 5:26, 27. If Christians could only realize that they must be ready, when Christ comes, to take part in such a work as this, their minds would not be so much taken up with light and frivolous things that do not elevate and strengthen them.
WHEN Paul says, "Dare any of you, having a matter against another go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?" he must not be considered as giving any sanction to litigation, for he says in verse 7, "Now there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?" Their cause might be just, yet rather than engage in strife, they should suffer themselves to be defrauded. Paul had no sympathy with the idea that men must stand up for their personal rights, although he was very jealous for the honor of God's cause.
"Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me." Chap. 7:1. Although this epistle was an answer to a letter Paul had received from the leaders of the Corinthian church, making earnest inquiry about certain questions, he devotes six chapters to matters they had said nothing about, but which he deemed more important than the things they seemed to be exercised about. There were practices of the vilest nature concealed from him by those who wrote to him, but of which he learned from other sources. How often this same disposition has been manifested in other churches, and by individuals. They worry and contend over the smaller concerns, and overlook greater interests. It is equivalent to a tithing of "mint, cummin, and anise," while neglecting "the weightier matters of the law." They "strain at a gnat and swallow a camel." There will be a great commotion about somebody's marriage, or some other one's property, while the general worldly-mindedness, pride, covetousness, and neglect of spiritual advice on the part of the main body, is a matter of cold indifference, or treated as something to be hidden from view. It often happens that the things God would have us know, as a body and as individuals, are the very last things to cause our deep concern or earnest inquiry.
"CIRCUMCISION is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God." Chap. 7:19. This does not sound much like an abolishment of the commandments. That "circumcision is nothing" had been decided by the apostles at Jerusalem years before, through the interposition of the Holy Spirit in the experiences of several of their number. Paul was present at that council, and was instrumental in bringing about the decision. But his language here is equally emphatic in support of the commandments, the importance of which is placed in direct contrast with the nothingness of circumcision. The following sentences from "Sketches from the Life of Paul," are to the point: "The apostle in his labors encountered a class who claimed that the moral law had been made void, with the precepts of the ceremonial system. He vindicated the law of the ten commandments, and held it up before the people as a rule of life. He showed that all men are under the most solemn obligation to obey that law, which Christ came to make honorable. He taught that Christ is the only one who can release men from the consequences of breaking the divine law; and that it is only by repentance for their past transgressions, faith in the atoning sacrifice of Christ, and a life of obedience, that men can hope to receive the favor of God."
Errorists and Surmisers
ERRORISTS and surmisers are on a par—both are blinded by Satan. A well-balanced mind takes no pleasure in error. Wisdom sifts carefully the chaff from the grain.
SABBATH-SCHOOL HELPS.
Clarke's Commentary, 6 vols .................................................... $24 00
Barnes' Notes, 14 vols.......................................................... 21 00
Smith's Comp. Dictionary, sheep ................................................ 6 00
“ “ “ “ cloth. ....................................................... 5 00
History of Reformation ......................................................... 5 00
“ “ “ (condensed)..................................................... 1 50
“ “ Romanism, cloth,.................................................. 4 00
Young's Concordance............................................................. 3 00
Cruden's “ ............................................................. 2 00
Whiston's Josephus, large....................................................... 3 00
“ “ “ small.......................................................... 1 75
Hand Book of Bible Geography ................................................... 2 50
“ “ “ “ Manners, etc................................................ 2 50
Dictionary of Bible ............................................................ 1 75
Smith's New Testament History .................................................. 1 75
Geikie's Life of Christ, large.................................................. 1 75
“ “ “ “ “ small ...................................................... 75
Blunt's Coincidences............................................................ 1 50
Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress..................................................... 1 50
Sketches of Jewish Social Life.................................................. 1 25
The Temple and its Services .................................................... 1 25
From Exile to Overthrow......................................................... 1 25
Life of Apostle Paul (C. and H.)............................................... 1 00
Sketches from the Life of Paul (Mrs. White)..................................... 80
Giant Cities of Bashan ......................................................... 1 00
Address, PACIFIC PRESS, Oakland, Cal.
Death of Eld. J. N. Andrews.
By Editor
IN hope of receiving particulars respecting the death of Bro. Andrews, which occurred in Bale, Switzerland, Oct. 21, 1883, we did not give further notice of that event last week. Feeling assured that many of our readers are waiting with much anxiety, we will delay no longer, and give further particulars in the future if thought necessary.
John Nevins Andrews was a native of Poland, Maine; born in 1829, and was 54 years of age when he died. At what time he embraced the Advent faith we cannot say, but it was when he was a mere youth, as he was but 15 when "the time" passed in 1844. His mind was early matured, and the Bible was his book of study from his boyhood. He not only loved the Advent truth, but he understood the reasons of the faith. After the time passed, he was among the first of those who saw the "Third Angel's Message" of Rev. 14, and that the commandments of God there brought to view pointed out the obligation of the Sabbath. He thus became early associated with Brother and Sister White, who were natives of the same State, and with Brother Bates, and was well considered one of "the pioneers in the cause."
When we commenced the observance of the Sabbath in the winter of 1851-2, the first number of the Advent Review and Sabbath Herald which we saw contained part of an able article from his pen, being a review of a "no-Sabbath" writer. Having no knowledge of Bro. Andrews, we were much interested in the masterly manner in which he refuted the objections of that writer, and defended the truth. Our interest was increased when we learned that he was yet so young. We next saw a pamphlet from his pen entitled, "Thoughts on the Sabbath and the Law of God," which increased our regard for him as a thoughtful, judicious expositor of Scripture. Although we were associated with him as "Corresponding Editor" of the Review and Herald from the fall of 1855, we had not the pleasure of his acquaintance until more than two years afterward. Close association with him in labor led us to esteem him as highly as a man, as a personal friend, as we appreciated him as a writer. He was genial as a companion, eminently kind-hearted, courteous and respectful to all. As a preacher he was marked for earnestness and solemnity of deportment; and, both as a speaker and writer, always did full justice to the positions of opponents.
He did very much toward developing the faith of the Seventh-day Adventists. His thoroughness in the investigation of all questions of Bible truth peculiarly fitted him to bring out the light of the prophecies, as well as of the Sabbath and law. His early labors on the subjects of the Sanctuary and the Messages of Rev. 14, as well as on other points, were of great service to the cause, and stand to-day as text-books on those doctrines. Time has not detracted from the value of those writings.
He early commenced gathering materials for a "History of the Sabbath." This was the special work of his life. His conscientiousness prevented his taking any advantage of facts which were not generally known, and as a consequence his history bears the test of the closest criticism, being the most complete and trustworthy work of the kind in existence. That part of it devoted to the history of the first day of the week contains such exposures of popular errors as had never before been given on those subjects.
In 1874 he was selected to go to Europe as a missionary, and he took up his residence in Switzerland. In 1876 he commenced the publication of a monthly paper in Bale, in the French language. Of this paper he had charge until his death. It was respected as an ably-conducted journal, and its influence was felt among the educated classes wherever the French language was read. In this work he was materially assisted by his two children, Charles and Mary. The latter died in Battle Creek, Mich., in November, 1878.
His home life was marked by the most tender kindness to his family. He was married to Miss Angeline S. Stevens, in 1856. She died in 1872. He was always feeble after the death of his daughter, who died of consumption. His constant attendance upon her seemed to develop the disease in his system, and thenceforth he labored "in weariness and painfulness." His mother went to Switzerland in June last, and was therefore with him in his last sickness. This was a satisfaction to all his friends, as it was a comfort and consolation to him.
We shall never forget the impressive manner in which he related to us, in one of our last interviews with him in 1878, his experience in a sickness through which he passed in Switzerland. In reviewing his life, not his greatest failures, his seasons of greatest indifference, or most manifest short-comings, but his most earnest efforts, and sermons, and prayers, seemed to be held up to his view in the light of the "first great commandment," to love God with all the heart; and they came so far short of this commandment that he was filled with sadness and confusion. "Only the blood of Jesus" was his trust. He sleeps in Jesus now. This rest from his labors we trust will be brief. Soon the Lord for whom he looked and waited will come to call him forth to enter the glorious rest which he is gone to prepare for his people. We pray that we may meet him there.