The Sabbath

and the Lord's Day

The Law

the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect" (Rom. 4:13, 14).

  This plainly states that the law was not given with reference to the future inheritance. Surely Abraham did not keep the law, which was not given for several hundred years after he died. But Abraham is the father of the faithful, and not simply of those who were "of the law" (Rom. 4:13 16). This point alone ought to open the eyes of those who contend so earnestly for the keeping of the law as necessary to salvation. We are the children of Abraham (Gal. 3:29) and "walk in the steps of our father Abraham, who was never under the law (see Rom. 4:12 16). We are under the covenant of promise made to Abraham four hundred and thirty years before the law (Gal. 2:15 19; 3:15 19), and not under the covenant of the law from Sinai, which is bondage (Gal. 4:21 31).

  Proposition 10. God's eternal law of righteousness existed before the law of Sinai was given.

  This proposition is self evident. Surely God had a law by which to govern his creatures long before Sinai. But "the law," as worded in the Decalog and in the "book of the law," was not given till Moses, 2,500 years after the creation of man. Hence moral obligations did not begin with that law, nor would it cease if that law was abolished. "All unrighteousness is sin" (1 John 5:17); and "sin is the transgression of the law" (1 John 3:4). This text is used by Sabbatarians to prove that every possible sin is always a violation of the Ten Commandments. But, 1. "The law" is the whole Mosaic law, not merely the Decalog. 2. A correct translation entirely spoils this text for them. The word "law" is not in the text in the original. The Revised Version gives it correctly: "Sin is lawlessness." This is the true meaning of the text. Sin is lawlessness, a disregard for some law, but not necessarily the same law.

  Adam "sinned" long before that law was given (see Rom. 5:12 14). Cain sinned (Gen. 4:7). The Sodomites were "sinners (Gen. 13:13), and vexed Lot with their unlawful deeds" (2 Pet. 2:8). Surely none of these violated [65] "the law," which was not given till Moses. To say that they must have violated the principles of that law is not to the point. When the Jews killed Stephen (Acts 7:59), they violated the principles of the law of Michigan which forbids murder; but did they violate the "law of Michigan" ? No; for it was not given for eighteen hundred years after, and they were not under it anyway. So neither Adam, nor the Sodomites could have transgressed the law of Sinai, for it was not yet given. Abraham kept God's laws (Gen. 26:5), but surely not "the law which was four hundred and thirty years after" (Gal. 3:17). All this clearly shows that God had a law before the code of Sinai was given.

  Jesus, under the gospel fifteen hundred years later, in naming the commandments, gives them neither in the same words nor in the same order as found in the Decalog. Further, he mingles them with some precepts from the book of the law as of equal importance with the Ten. Thus: "Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honor thy father and mother" (Mark 10:19). This shows that the mere form and order of the commandments is of no consequence as long as the idea is given. The two editions of the Decalog in Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5 vary much in the wording; yet one is as good as the other.

  In whatever form or manner God chose to communicate his will to men, this would be "his commandments, his statutes, and his laws" (Gen. 26:5). Paul says: "God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers" (Heb. 1:1, 2).

  A disregard for his revealed will would be lawlessness —sin. But to claim that God gave the patriarchs his law in the exact form and words of the Ten Commandments is a proofless assumption, contrary to reason and all the clear testimony of Scripture.

  Proposition 11. The original law is superior to the law of Sinai.

  When asked, "Which is the greatest commandment of the law?" Jesus said: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. [66]

  And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets" (Matt. 22:37 40). Neither of these is in the Decalog; but that law hangs on this higher law, and so is inferior to it. These principles, clad in the armor of eternal immutability, lay back of the Mosaic law and existed as they had existed before and exist now.

  In its very nature this great law of supreme love to God, and equal love to fellow creatures, must be as eternal and everlasting as God himself. This law governs angels, governed Adam, the patriarchs, the pious Jews while "under the law," and governs Gentile Christians now. It is applicable to all God's creatures in all ages and all worlds. This great law might be worded in different ways at different times and yet the same essential idea be preserved. Thus, Jesus stated the second great commandment in another form: "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them; for this is the law and the prophets"(Matt. 7:12). The idea is the same as "thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." Evidently this supreme law must have been known to Adam and to the patriarchs, but in just what form we are not told. To say that it was in the exact words of the Decalog is to affirm what can in no wise be proved.

  Proposition 12. The Mosaic law was founded upon the higher and original law.

  Jesus directly affirms this: "On these two commandments hang all the law." The principles of this great law were interwoven all through the law of Sinai, being the life, "the spirit," or "the righteousness" of "the law" (Rom. 2:26 29; 8:4). As an example, Leviticus 19. Here you have the second great commandment (vs. 18), and the principles of every one of the Ten Commandments. Thus: 1st commandment (vs. 32); 2nd (vs. 4); 3rd (vs. 12); 4th (vs. 30); 5th (vs. 3); 6th (vs. 17); 7th (vs. 29); 8th (vs. 13); 9th (vs. 11); 10th (vs. 35). Mingled among these are commandments about sacrifices (vs. 5); harvest (vs. 9); clothing (vs. 19); priests (vs. 22); first fruits (vs. 23); wizards (vs. 31); Gentiles (vs. 34), etc. All these are founded upon this higher law and can be changed [67] to fit circumstances without affecting the supreme law, which is ever the same.

  Adventists make a great ado over the absurdity of the idea that God should abolish his law at the cross and then immediately reenact nine tenths of it. They say, "As well cut off your ten fingers to get rid of one bad one, and then stick nine on again." So they go on with a whole jumble of absurdities involved in the position that God's moral law was abolished at the cross and a new one given. But this is only a man of straw of their own making, hence easily demolished. We hold no such absurd position. But the Mosaic law from Sinai was only a national one founded upon the principles of God's moral law. Even while it existed it did not supersede God's higher law; and when it ended, it in no way affected God's law, which continued right on, unchanged and unchangeable. To illustrate: The State law of Michigan forbids murder, theft, and adultery. In these items it is founded upon God's moral law. Now abolish the law of Michigan. Does that abolish God's law? No. So with the state law of Israel. Neither its enactment on Sinai nor its abolition at the cross in any way changed God's great moral law by which he will judge the world. The Adventist absurdity grows out of their own false theory, that is all. The particular wording of the law as adapted to the Jewish age was "the letter" or "form" of the law for the time being. If a Jew loved God with all his heart, he obediently circumcised his sons, offered burnt sacrifices, paid tithes, kept the Passover, the new moons, the Sabbath, and attended the temple worship, for this was "the law of the Lord" (2 Chron. 31:3; Luke 2:22 27). But if a Christian loves God he will be baptized (Acts 2:38) take the Lord's Supper (1 Cor. 11:24) wash the saints' feet (John 13:1 16; 1 Tim. 5:10); attend meetings (Heb. 10:25); and observe the law of Christ, which is much different from the law the Jews observed. Hence "there is made of necessity a change also of the law" (Heb. 7:12). Those who make the mere letter of the Jewish law an iron rule, and contend for the exact wording under all circumstances and in all ages, miss the spirit of the gospel, and are in bondage [68]

NEXT