"And Moses called all Israel, and said unto them, 'Hear, O Israel, the
statutes and judgments which I speak in your ears this day, that ye
may learn them, and keep and do them.'"
Let us carefully note these four words, so specially characteristic of
the book of Deuteronomy, and so seasonable for the Lord's people at
all times and in all places: "_Hear_," "_Learn_," "_Keep_," "_Do_."
These are words of unspeakable preciousness to every truly pious
soul--to every one who honestly desires to walk in that narrow path of
practical righteousness so pleasing to God, and so safe and so happy
for us.
The first of these words places the soul in the most blessed attitude
in which any one can be found, namely, that of _hearing_. "Faith
cometh by _hearing_, and hearing by the Word of God." "I will _hear_
what God the Lord will speak." "_Hear_, and your soul shall live." The
hearing ear lies at the very foundation of all true, practical
Christian life. It places the soul in the only true and proper
attitude for the creature. It is the real secret of all peace and
blessedness.
It can scarcely be needful to remind the reader that when we speak of
the soul in the attitude of hearing, it is assumed that what is heard
is simply the Word of God. Israel had to hearken to "the statutes and
judgments" of Jehovah, and to nothing else. It was not to the
commandments, traditions, and doctrines of men they were to give ear,
but to the very words of the living God, who had redeemed and
delivered them from the land of Egypt--the place of bondage, darkness,
and death.
It is well to bear this in mind. It will preserve the soul from many a
snare, many a difficulty. We hear a good deal, in certain quarters,
about obedience, and about the moral fitness of surrendering our own
will and submitting ourselves to authority. All this sounds very well,
and has great weight with a large class of very religious and morally
excellent people; but when men speak to us about obedience, we must
ask the question, Obedience to what? when they speak to us about
surrendering our own will, we must inquire of them, To whom are we to
surrender it? when they speak to us about submitting to authority, we
must insist upon their telling us the source or foundation of the
authority.
This is of the deepest possible moment to every member of the
household of faith. There are many very sincere and very earnest
people who deem it very delightful to be saved the trouble of thinking
for themselves, and to have their sphere of action and line of service
laid out for them by wiser heads than their own. It seems a very
restful and very pleasing thing to have each day's work laid out for
us by some master-hand. It relieves the heart of a great load of
responsibility, and it looks like humility and self-distrust to submit
ourselves to some authority.
But we are bound, before God, to look well to the basis of the
authority to which we surrender ourselves, else we may find ourselves
in an utterly false position. Take, for example, a monk, or a nun, or
a member of a sisterhood. A monk obeys his abbot, a nun obeys her
mother-abbess, "a sister" obeys her "lady-superior;" but the position
and relationship of each is utterly false. There is not a shadow of
authority in the New Testament for monasteries, convents, or
sisterhoods; on the contrary, the teaching of holy Scripture, as well
as the voice of nature, is utterly opposed to every one of them,
inasmuch as they take men and women out of the place and out of the
relationship in which God has set them, and in which they are designed
and fitted to move, and form them into societies which are utterly
destructive of natural affection, and subversive of all true Christian
obedience.
We feel it right to call the attention of the Christian reader to this
subject just now, seeing that the enemy is making a vigorous effort to
revive the monastic system in our midst under various forms. Indeed
some have had the temerity to tell us that monastic life is the only
true form of Christianity. Surely, when such monstrous statements are
made and listened to, it becomes us to look at the whole subject in
the light of Scripture, and to call upon the advocates and adherents
of monasticism to show us the foundations of the system in the Word of
God. Where, within the covers of the New Testament, is there any
thing, in the most remote degree, like a monastery, a convent, or a
sisterhood? Where can we find an authority for any such office as that
of an abbot, an abbess, or a lady-superior? There is absolutely no
such thing, nor the shadow of it; and hence we have no hesitation in
pronouncing the whole system, from foundation to top-stone, a fabric
of superstition, alike opposed to the voice of nature and the voice of
God: nor can we understand how any one, in his sober senses, could
presume to tell us that a monk or a nun is the only true exponent of
Christian life. Yet there are those who thus speak, and there are
those who listen to them, and that, too, in this day when the full,
clear light of our glorious Christianity is shining upon us from the
pages of the New Testament.[13]
[13] We must accurately distinguish between "_nature_" and "_flesh_."
The former is recognized in Scripture; the latter is condemned and set
aside. "Doth not even nature itself teach you?" says the apostle. (1
Cor. xi. 14.) Jesus beholding the young ruler in Mark x, "loved him"
although there was nothing but nature. To be without natural affection
is one of the marks of the apostasy. Scripture teaches that we are
dead to sin, not to nature, else what becomes of our natural
relationships?
But, blessed be God, we are called to obedience. We are called to
"hear"--called to bow down, in holy and reverent submission, to
authority. And here we join issue with infidelity and its lofty
pretensions. The path of the devout and lowly Christian is alike
removed from superstition on the one hand and from infidelity on the
other. Peter's noble reply to the council, in Acts v, embodies, in its
brief compass, a complete answer to both.--"We ought to obey God
rather than men." We meet infidelity, in all its phases, in all its
stages, and in its very deepest roots, with this one weighty sentence,
"We ought to _obey_;" and we meet superstition, in every garb in which
it clothes itself, with the all-important clause, "We ought to _obey
God_."
Here we have set forth, in the most simple form, the duty of every
true Christian. He is to obey God. The infidel may smile
contemptuously at a monk or a nun, and marvel how any rational being
can so completely surrender his reason and his understanding to the
authority of a fellow-mortal, or submit himself to rules and practices
so absurd, so degrading, and so contrary to nature. The infidel
glories in his fancied intellectual freedom, and imagines that his own
reason is quite a sufficient guide for him. He does not see that he is
further from God than the poor monk or nun whom he so despises. He
does not know that, while priding himself in his self-will, he is
really led captive by Satan--the prince and god of this world. Man is
formed to obey--formed to look up to some one above him. The Christian
is sanctified unto the obedience of Jesus Christ, that is, to the very
same character of obedience as that which was rendered by our adorable
Lord and Saviour Himself.
This is of the deepest possible moment to every one who really desires
to know what true Christian obedience is. To understand this is the
real secret of deliverance from the self-will of the infidel and the
false obedience of superstition. It can never be right to do our own
will: it may be quite wrong to do the will of our fellow: it must
always be right to do the will of God. This was what Jesus came to do,
and what He always did.--"Lo, I come to do Thy will, O God."--"I
delight to do Thy will, O My God; yea, Thy law is within My heart."
Now, we are called and set apart to this blessed character of
obedience, as we learn from the inspired apostle Peter, in the opening
of his first epistle, where he speaks of believers as "elect according
to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the
Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ."
This is an immense privilege, and at the same time a most holy and
solemn responsibility. We must never forget for a moment that God has
elected us, and the Holy Spirit has set us apart, not only to the
sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ, but also to His obedience.
Such is the obvious meaning and moral force of the words just
quoted--words of unspeakable preciousness to every lover of
holiness--words which effectually deliver us from self-will, from
legality, and from superstition. Blessed deliverance!
But it may be that the pious reader feels disposed to call our
attention to the exhortation in Hebrews xiii.--"Obey them that have
the rule over you, and submit yourselves; for they watch for your
souls, as they that must give account; that they may do it with joy
and not with grief; for that is unprofitable for you."
A deeply important word, most surely, with which we should also
connect a passage in 1 Thessalonians--"And we beseech you, brethren,
to know them that labor among you, and are over you in the Lord, and
admonish you, and to esteem them very highly in love for their work's
sakes." (Chap. v. 12, 13.) And again, in 1 Corinthians xvi. 15, 16--"I
beseech you, brethren, (ye know the house of Stephanas, that it is the
first-fruits of Achaia, and that they have addicted themselves to the
ministry [or service] of the saints,) that ye submit yourselves unto
such, and to every one that helpeth with us and laboreth." To all
these we must add another very lovely passage from the first epistle
of Peter--"The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an
elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker
of the glory that shall be revealed: feed the flock of God which is
among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but
willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; neither as being
lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock. And when
the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory
that fadeth not away." (Chap. v. 1-4.)
We may be asked, Do not the above passages set forth the principle of
obedience to certain men? and if so, why object to human authority?
The answer is very simple. Wherever Christ imparts a spiritual gift,
whether it be the gift of teaching, the gift of rule, or the gift of
pastorship, it is the bounden duty and privilege of Christians to
recognize and appreciate such gifts. Not to do so would be to forsake
our own mercies. But then we must bear in mind that in all such cases
the gift must be a reality--a plain, palpable, _bona-fide_, divinely
given thing. It is not a man assuming a certain office or position, or
being appointed by his fellow to any so-called ministry. All this is
perfectly worthless, and worse than worthless; it is a daring
intrusion upon a sacred domain which must, sooner or later, bring down
the judgment of God.
All true ministry is of God, and based upon the possession of a
positive gift from the Head of the Church; so that we may truly say,
No gift, no ministry. In all the passages quoted above, we see
positive gift possessed, and actual work done. Moreover, we see a true
heart for the lambs and sheep of the flock of Christ; we see divine
grace and power. The word in Hebrews xiii. is, "Obey them that guide
you [ἡγουμενοις]." Now, it is essential to a true guide that
he should go before you in the way. It would be the height of folly
for any one to assume the title of guide if he were ignorant of the
way, and neither able nor willing to go in it. Who would think of
obeying such?
So also when the apostle exhorts the Thessalonians to "know" and
"esteem" certain persons, on what does he found his exhortation? Is it
upon the mere assumption of a title, an office, or a position?
Nothing of the kind. He grounds his appeal upon the actual, well-known
fact that these persons were "over them, _in the Lord_," and that they
admonished them. And why were they to "esteem them very highly in
love"? Was it for their office or their title? No; but "for their
work's sake." And why were the Corinthians exhorted to submit
themselves to the household of Stephanas? Was it because of an empty
title or assumed office? By no means; but because "they addicted
themselves to the ministry of the saints." They were actually in the
work. They had received gift and grace from Christ, and they had a
heart for His people. They were not boasting of their office or
insisting upon their title, but giving themselves devotedly to the
service of Christ, in the persons of His dear people.
Now this is the true principle of ministry. It is not human authority
at all, but divine gift and spiritual power communicated by Christ to
His servants, exercised by them, in responsibility to Him, and
thankfully recognized by His saints. A man may set up to be a teacher
or a pastor, or he may be appointed by his fellows to the office or
title of a pastor; but unless he possesses a positive gift from the
Head of the Church, it is all the merest sham, a hollow assumption, an
empty conceit; and his voice will be the voice of a stranger, which
the true sheep of Christ do not know and ought not to recognize.[14]
[14] The reader will do well to ponder the fact that there is no such
thing in the New Testament as human appointment to preach the gospel,
teach in the assembly of God, or feed the flock of Christ. Elders and
deacons were ordained by the apostles or their delegates, Timothy and
Titus; but evangelists, pastors, and teachers were never so ordained.
We must distinguish between gift and local charge. Elders and deacons
might possess a special gift or not; it had nothing to do with their
local charge. If the reader would understand the subject of ministry,
let him study 1 Corinthians xii.-xiv. and Ephesians iv. 8-13. In the
former we have, first, the _basis_ of all true ministry in the Church
of God, namely, _divine appointment_--"God hath set the members,"
etc.; secondly, _the motive-spring_--"love;" thirdly, _the
object_--"that the Church may receive edifying." In Ephesians iv. we
have the _source_ of all ministry--a risen and ascended Lord; the
_design_--"to perfect the saints for the work of the ministry;" the
_duration_--"till we all come unto a perfect man, unto the measure of
the stature of the fullness of Christ."
In a word, ministry, in all its departments, is _entirely_ a divine
institution. It is not of man or by man, but of God. The Master must,
in every case, fit, fill, and appoint the vessel. There is no
authority in Scripture for the notion that every man has a right to
minister in the Church of God. Liberty for men is radicalism and not
Scripture. Liberty for the Holy Ghost to minister by whom He will is
what we are taught in the New Testament. May we learn it.
But, on the other hand, where there is the divinely gifted teacher,
the true, loving, wise, faithful, laborious pastor, watching for
souls, weeping over them, waiting upon them, like a gentle, tender
nurse, able to say to them, "Now we live, if ye stand fast in the
Lord"--where these things are found, there will not be much difficulty
in recognizing and appreciating them. How do we know a good dentist?
Is it by seeing his name on a brass plate? No; but by his work. A man
may call himself a dentist ten thousand times over, but if he be only
an unskillful operator, who would think of employing him?
Thus it is in all human affairs, and thus it is in the matter of
ministry. If a man has a gift, he is a minister; if he has not, all
the appointment, authority, and ordination in the world could not make
him a minister of Christ. It may make him a minister of religion; but
a minister of religion and a minister of Christ--a minister in
christendom and a minister in the Church of God, are two totally
different things. All true ministry has its source in God; it rests on
divine authority, and its object is to bring the soul into His
presence, and link it on to Him. False ministry, on the contrary, has
its source in man; it rests on human authority, and its object is to
link the soul on to itself. This marks the immense difference between
the two. The former leads to God; the latter leads away from Him: that
feeds, nourishes, and strengthens the new life; this hinders its
progress, in every way, and plunges it in doubt and darkness. In a
word, we may say, true ministry is of God, through Him, and to Him:
false ministry is of man, through him, and to him. The former we prize
more than we can say; the latter we reject with all the energy of our
moral being.
We trust sufficient has been said to satisfy the mind of the reader in
reference to the matter of obedience to those whom the Lord may see
fit to call to the work of the ministry. We are bound, in every case,
to judge by the Word of God, and to be assured that it is a divine
reality and not a human sham--a positive gift from the Head of the
Church, and not an empty title conferred by men. In all cases where
there is real gift and grace, it is a sweet privilege to obey and
submit ourselves, inasmuch as we discern Christ in the person and
ministry of His beloved servants.
There is no difficulty, to a spiritual mind, in owning real grace and
power. We can easily tell whether a man is seeking, in true love, to
feed our souls with the bread of life, and lead us on in the ways of
God, or whether he is seeking to exalt himself, and promote his own
interests. Those who are living near the Lord can readily discern
between true power and hollow assumption. Moreover, we never find
Christ's true ministers parading their authority, or vaunting
themselves of their office; they do the work and leave it to speak for
itself. In the case of the blessed apostle Paul, we find him referring
again and again to the plain proofs of his ministry--the
unquestionable evidence afforded in the conversion and blessing of
souls. He could say to the poor misguided Corinthians, when, under the
influence of some self-exalting pretender, they foolishly called in
question his apostleship, "Since ye seek a proof of Christ speaking in
me ... examine yourselves."
This was close, pointed dealing with them. They themselves were the
living proofs of his ministry. If his ministry was not of God, what
and where were they? But it was of God, and this was his joy, his
comfort, and his strength. He was "an apostle, not of men, neither by
man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised Him from the
dead." He gloried in the source of his ministry; and as to its
character, he had but to appeal to a body of evidence quite sufficient
to carry conviction to any right mind. In his case, it could be truly
said, it was not the speech, but the power.
Thus it must be, in measure, in every case. We must look for the
power: we must have reality. Mere titles are nothing. Men may
undertake to confer titles and appoint to offices, but they have no
more authority to do so than they have to appoint admirals in her
majesty's fleet or generals in her army. If we were to see a man
assuming the style and title of an admiral or a general, without her
majesty's commission, we should pronounce him an idiot or a lunatic.
This is but a feeble illustration to set forth the folly of men taking
upon them the title of ministers of Christ without one atom of
spiritual gift or divine authority.
Shall we be told, We must not judge? We are bound to judge. "Beware of
false prophets." How can we beware if we are not to judge? But how are
we to judge? "By their fruits ye shall know them." Can the Lord's
people not tell the difference between a man who comes to them in the
power of the Spirit, gifted by the Head of the Church, full of love to
their souls, earnestly desiring their true blessing, seeking not
theirs but them--a holy, gracious, humble, self-emptied servant of
Christ; and a man who comes with a self-assumed or a humanly conferred
title, without a single trace of any thing divine or heavenly either
in his ministry or in his life? Of course they can; no one in his
senses would think of calling in question a fact so obvious.
But further, we may ask, What mean those words of the venerable
apostle John--"Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits
whether they are of God; because many false prophets are gone out into
the world"? How are we to try the spirits, or how are we to discern
between the true and the false, if we are not to judge? Again, the
same apostle, writing to "the elect lady," gives her the following
most solemn admonition: "If there come any unto you, and bring not
this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him
Godspeed; for he that biddeth him Godspeed is partaker of his evil
deeds." Was she not responsible to act on this admonition? Assuredly.
But how could she if we are not to judge? And what had she to judge?
Was it as to whether those who came to her house were ordained,
authorized, or licensed by any man or body of men? Nothing of the
kind. The one great and all-important question for her was as to the
doctrine. If they brought the true, the divine doctrine of Christ--the
doctrine of Jesus Christ come in the flesh, she was to receive them;
if not, she was to shut her door, with a firm hand, against them, no
matter who they were or where they came from. If they had all the
credentials that man could bestow upon them, yet if they brought not
_the truth_, she was to reject them with stern decision. This might
seem very harsh, very narrow-minded, very bigoted; but with this she
had nothing whatever to do. She had just to be as broad and as narrow
as the truth. Her door and her heart were to be wide enough to admit
all who brought Christ, and no wider. Was she to pay compliments at
the expense of her Lord? was she to seek a name for largeness of heart
or breadth of mind by receiving to her house and to her table the
teachers of a false Christ? The very thought is absolutely horrible.
But finally, in the second chapter of Revelation, we find the church
at Ephesus commended for having tried those who said they were
apostles and were not. How could this be if we are not to judge? Is it
not most evident to the reader that an utterly false use is made of
our Lord's words in Matthew vii. 1--"Judge not, that ye be not
judged," and also of the apostle's words in 1 Corinthians iv.
5--"Therefore judge nothing before the time"? It is impossible that
Scripture can contradict itself; and hence, whatever be the true
meaning of our Lord's "Judge not," or the apostle's "Judge nothing,"
it is perfectly certain that they do not, in the most remote way,
interfere with the solemn responsibility of all Christians to judge
the gift, the doctrine, and the life of all who take the place of
preachers, teachers, and pastors in the Church of God.
And then, if we be asked as to the meaning of "Judge not" and "Judge
nothing," we believe the words simply forbid our judging motives, or
hidden springs of action. With these we have nothing whatever to do.
We cannot penetrate below the surface, and, thanks be to God, we are
not asked to do so--yea, we are positively forbidden. We cannot read
the counsels of the heart; it is the province and prerogative of God
alone to do this: but to say that we are not to judge the doctrine,
the gift, or the manner of life of those who take the place of
preachers, teachers, and pastors in the Church of God, is simply to
fly in the face of holy Scripture, and to ignore the very instincts of
the divine nature implanted in us by the Holy Ghost.
Hence, therefore, we can return, with increased clearness and
decision, to our thesis of Christian obedience. It seems perfectly
plain that the fullest recognition of all true ministry in the Church,
and the most gracious submission of ourselves to all those whom our
Lord Christ may see fit to raise up as pastors, teachers, and guides
in our midst, can never, in the smallest degree, interfere with the
grand fundamental principle set forth in Peter's magnificent reply to
the council--"We ought to obey God rather than men."
It will ever be the aim and object of all true ministers of Christ to
lead those to whom they minister in the true path of obedience to the
Word of God. The chapter which lies open before us, as indeed the
entire book of Deuteronomy, shows us very plainly how Moses, that
eminent servant of God, ever sought and diligently labored to press
upon the congregation of Israel the urgent necessity of the most
implicit obedience to all the statutes and judgments of God. He did
not seek any place of authority for himself: he never lorded it over
God's heritage. His one grand theme, from first to last, was
obedience. This was the burden of all his discourses--obedience, not
to him, but to his and their Lord. He rightly judged that this was the
true secret of their happiness, their moral security, their dignity,
and their strength. He knew that an obedient people must also, of
necessity, be an invincible and invulnerable people. No weapon formed
against them could prosper so long as they were governed by the word
of God. In a word, he knew and believed that Israel's province was to
obey Jehovah, as it was Jehovah's province to bless Israel. It was
their one simple business to "hear," "learn," "keep," and "do" the
revealed will of God; and so doing, they might count on Him, with all
possible confidence, to be their shield, their strength, their
safeguard, their refuge, their resource, their all in all. The only
true and proper path for the Israel of God is that narrow path of
obedience on which the light of God's approving countenance ever
shines, and all who, through grace, tread that path will find Him "a
guide, a glory, a defense, to save from every fear."
This, surely, is quite enough. We have nothing to do with
consequences: these we may, in simple confidence, leave to Him whose
we are and whom we are responsible to serve. "The name of the Lord is
a strong tower; the righteous runneth into it and is safe." If we are
doing His will, we shall ever find His name a strong tower; but, on
the other hand, if we are not walking in a path of practical
righteousness--if we are doing our own will--if we are living in the
habitual neglect of the plain Word of God, then, verily, it is utterly
vain for us to think that the name of the Lord will be a strong tower
to us; rather would His name be a reproof to us, leading us to judge
our ways and to return to the path of righteousness from which we have
wandered.
Blessed be His name, His grace will ever meet us, in all its precious
fullness and freeness, in the place of self-judgment and confession,
however we may have failed and wandered; but this is a totally
different thing. We may have to say, with the Psalmist, "Out of the
depths have I cried unto Thee, O Lord. Lord, hear my voice; let Thine
ears be attentive to the voice of my supplications. If Thou, Lord,
shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand? But there is
forgiveness with Thee, that Thou mayest be feared." But then, a soul
crying to God from the depths, and getting forgiveness, is one thing;
and a soul looking to Him in the path of practical righteousness is
quite another. We must carefully distinguish between these two things.
Confessing our sins and finding pardon must never be confounded with
walking uprightly and counting on God. Both are blessedly true, but
they are not the same thing.
We shall now proceed with our chapter.
At the second verse, Moses reminds the people of their
covenant-relationship with Jehovah. He says, "The Lord _our_ God made
a covenant with us in Horeb. The Lord made not this covenant with our
fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.
The Lord talked with you face to face, in the mount, out of the midst
of the fire, (I stood between the Lord and you at that time, to show
you the word of the Lord; for ye were afraid by reason of the fire,
and went not up into the mount) saying," etc.
The reader must distinguish and thoroughly understand the difference
between the covenant made at Horeb and the covenant made with Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob. They are essentially different. The former was a
covenant of works, in which the people undertook to do all that the
Lord had spoken: the latter was a covenant of pure grace, in which God
pledged Himself with an oath to do all which He promised.
Human language would utterly fail us to set forth the immense
difference, in every respect, between these two covenants. In their
basis, in their character, in their accompaniments, and in their
practical result, they are as different as any two things could
possibly be. The Horeb covenant rested upon human competency for the
fulfillment of its terms, and this one fact is quite sufficient to
account for the total failure of the whole thing. The Abrahamic
covenant rested upon divine competency for the fulfillment of its
terms, and hence the utter impossibility of its failure in a single
jot or tittle.
Having in our "Notes on the Book of Exodus" gone somewhat fully into
the subject of the law, and endeavored to set forth the divine object
in giving it, and, further, the utter impossibility of any one
getting life or righteousness by keeping it, we must refer the reader
to what we have there advanced on this profoundly interesting subject.
It seems strange, to one taught exclusively by Scripture, that such
confusion of thought should prevail amongst professing Christians in
reference to a question so distinctly and definitively settled by the
Holy Ghost. Were it merely a question of the divine authority of
Exodus xx. or Deuteronomy v. as inspired portions of the Bible, we
should not have a word to say. We most fully believe that these
chapters are as much inspired as the seventeenth of John or the eighth
of Romans.
But this is not the point. All true Christians receive, with devout
thankfulness, the precious statement that "all Scripture is given by
inspiration of God;" and, further, they rejoice in the assurance that
"whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our
learning; that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might
have hope;" and, finally, they believe that the morality of the law is
of abiding and universal application. Murder, adultery, theft, false
witness, covetousness, are wrong--always wrong--every-where wrong: to
honor our parents is right--always and every-where right. We read, in
the fourth chapter of Ephesians, "Let him that stole steal no more;"
and again, in chapter vi, we read, "Honor thy father and mother; which
is the first commandment with promise; that it may be well with thee,
and thou mayest live long on the earth."
All this is so divinely plain and settled that discussion is
definitively closed; but when we come to look at the law as a ground
of relationship with God, we get into an entirely different region of
thought. Scripture, in manifold places, and in the clearest possible
manner, teaches us that, as Christians, as children of God, we are not
on that ground at all. The Jew was on that ground, but he could not
stand there with God. It was death and condemnation. "They could not
endure that which was commanded, 'And if so much as a beast touch the
mountain, it shall be stoned, or thrust through with a dart;' and so
terrible was the sight, that Moses said, 'I exceedingly fear and
quake.'" The Jew found the law to be a bed on which he could not
stretch himself, and a covering in which he could not wrap himself.
As to the Gentile, he was never, by any one branch of the divine
economy, placed under law. His condition is expressly declared, in the
opening of the epistle to the Romans, to be "without law
[ἀνόμως]."--"For when the Gentiles, which have not the law,"
etc., and, "As many as have sinned without law shall perish without
law; and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law."
Here the two classes are brought into sharp and vivid contrast, in the
matter of their dispensational position. The Jew, under law; the
Gentile, without law,--nothing can be more distinct. The Gentile was
placed under government, in the person of Noah; but never under law.
Should any one feel disposed to call this in question, let him produce
a single line of Scripture to prove that God ever placed the Gentiles
under the law. Let him search and see. It is of no possible use to
argue and reason and object,--it is utterly vain to say, "_We think_"
this or that: the question is, "What saith the Scripture?" If it says
that the Gentiles were put under the law, let the passage be produced.
We solemnly declare it says nothing of the kind, but the very reverse.
It describes the condition and the position of the Gentile as "without
law"--"having not the law."
In Acts x, we see God opening the kingdom of heaven to the Gentile; in
Acts xiv. 27, we see Him opening "the door of faith" to the Gentile;
in Acts xxviii. 28, we see Him sending His salvation to the Gentile:
but we search in vain, from cover to cover of the blessed Book, for a
passage in which He places the Gentile under the law.
We would very earnestly entreat the Christian reader to give this
deeply interesting and important question his calm attention. Let him
lay aside all his preconceived thoughts, and examine the matter simply
in the light of holy Scripture. We are quite aware that our statements
on this subject will be regarded by thousands as novel, if not
actually heretical; but this does not move us, in the smallest degree.
It is our one grand desire to be taught absolutely and exclusively by
Scripture. The opinions, commandments, and doctrines of men have no
weight whatever with us. The dogmas of the various schools of divinity
must just go for what they are worth. We demand Scripture. A single
line of inspiration is amply sufficient to settle this question, and
close all discussion, forever. Let us be shown from the Word of God
that the Gentiles were ever put under the law, and we shall at once
bow; but inasmuch as we cannot find it there, we reject the notion
altogether, and we would have the reader to do the same. The
invariable language of Scripture, in describing the position of the
Jew, is, "under law;" and, in describing the position of the Gentile,
is, "without law." This is so obvious that we cannot but marvel how
any reader of the Bible can fail to see it.[15]
[15] The reader may perhaps feel disposed to inquire, On what ground
will the Gentile be judged if he is not under the law? Romans i. 20
teaches us distinctly that the testimony of _creation_ leaves him
without excuse. Then, in chapter ii. 15, he is taken up on the ground
of _conscience_.--"For _when the Gentiles, which have not the law_, do
by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law,
are a law unto themselves; which show the work of the law written in
their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness," etc. Finally, as
regards those nations that have become professedly Christian, they
will be judged on the ground of their profession.
If the reader will turn, for a few moments, to the fifteenth chapter
of the Acts of the Apostles, he will see how the first attempt to put
Gentile converts under the law was met by the apostles and the whole
church at Jerusalem. The question was raised at Antioch; and God, in
His infinite goodness and wisdom, so ordered that it should not be
settled there, but that Paul and Barnabas should go up to Jerusalem
and have the matter fully and freely discussed, and definitively
settled by the unanimous voice of the twelve apostles and the whole
church.
How we can bless our God for this! We can at once see that the
decision of a local assembly, such as Antioch, even though approved by
Paul and Barnabas, would not carry the same weight as that of the
twelve apostles assembled in council at Jerusalem. But the Lord,
blessed be His name, took care that the enemy should be completely
confounded, and that the law-teachers of that day, and of every other
day, should be distinctly and authoritatively taught that it was not
according to His mind that Christians should be put under law, for any
object whatsoever.
The subject is so deeply important that we cannot forbear quoting a
few passages for the reader. We believe it will refresh both the
reader and the writer to refer to the soul-stirring addresses
delivered at the most remarkable and interesting council that ever
sat.
"And certain men which came down from Judæa taught the brethren,
'Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be
saved.'" How awful! How terribly chilling! What a death-knell to ring
in the ears of those who had been converted under Paul's splendid
address in the synagogue at Antioch!--"Be it known unto you therefore,
men and brethren, that _through this Man_"--without circumcision or
works of law of any kind whatsoever--"is preached unto you the
forgiveness of sins; and _by Him_ all that believe"--irrespective
altogether of circumcision--"_are_ justified _from all things_, from
which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.... And when the
Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these
words might be preached to them the next Sabbath."
Such was the glorious message sent to the Gentiles by the lips of the
apostle Paul--a message of free, full, immediate, and perfect
salvation--full remission of sins and perfect justification, through faith
in our Lord Jesus Christ. But according to the teaching of the "certain
men which came down from Judæa," all this was insufficient--Christ was
not enough, without circumcision and the law of Moses. Poor Gentiles,
who had never heard of circumcision or the law of Moses, must add to
Christ and His glorious salvation the keeping of the whole law.
How must Paul's heart have burned within him to have the beloved
Gentile converts brought under such monstrous teaching as this! He saw
in it nothing short of the complete surrender of Christianity. If
circumcision must be added to the cross of Christ--if the law of Moses
must supplement the grace of God, then verily all was gone.
But, blessed forever be the God of all grace, He caused a noble stand
to be made against such deadly teaching. When the enemy came in like a
flood, the Spirit of the Lord raised up a standard against him. "When
therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation
with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other
of them, should go up to Jerusalem, unto the apostles and elders
about this question. And being brought on their way by the church,
they passed through Phenice and Samaria, declaring," not the
circumcision, but "the conversion of the Gentiles; and they caused
great joy unto all the brethren."
The brethren were in the current of the mind of Christ, and in sweet
communion with the heart of God; and hence they rejoiced to hear of
the conversion and salvation of the Gentiles. We may rest assured it
would have afforded them no joy to hear of the heavy yoke of
circumcision and the law of Moses being put upon the necks of those
beloved disciples who had just been brought into the glorious liberty
of the gospel. But to hear of their conversion to God, their salvation
by Christ, their being sealed by the Holy Ghost, filled their hearts
with a joy which was in lovely harmony with the mind of heaven.
"And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the
church, and of the apostles and elders, and they declared all things
that God had done with them. But there rose up certain of the sect of
the Pharisees which believed, saying that it was needful to circumcise
them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses."
Who made it "needful"? Not God, surely; inasmuch as He had, in His
infinite grace, opened the door of faith to them without circumcision
or any command to keep the law of Moses. No; it was "certain men" who
presumed to speak of such things as needful--men who have troubled
the Church of God from that day to the present--men "desiring to be
teachers of the law, knowing neither what they say nor whereof they
affirm." Law-teachers never know what is involved in their dark and
dismal teaching. They have not the most distant idea of how thoroughly
hateful their teaching is to the God of all grace, the Father of
mercies.
But, thanks be to God, the chapter from which We are now quoting
affords the very clearest and most forcible evidence that could be
given as to the divine mind on the subject. It proves, beyond all
question, that it was not of God to put Gentile believers under the
law.
"And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this
matter. And when there had been much disputing" (alas! how soon it
began!) "Peter rose up and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know
how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles
by my mouth should hear," not the law of Moses or circumcision, but
"the word of the gospel, and believe. And God which knoweth the
hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as unto
us. _And put no difference between us and them_, purifying their
hearts by faith. Now therefore _why tempt ye God_, to put a yoke upon
the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able
to bear?"
Mark this, reader. The law had proved an intolerable yoke to those who
were under it, that is, the Jews; and, further, it was nothing short
of tempting God to put that yoke upon the neck of Gentile Christians.
Would that all the law-teachers throughout the length and breadth of
christendom would but open their eyes to this grand fact! and not only
so, but that all the Lord's beloved people every where were given to
see that it is in positive opposition to the will of God that they
should be put under the law for any object whatsoever. "But," adds the
blessed apostle of the circumcision, "we believe that through the
grace of the Lord Jesus Christ," and not by law in any shape or form,
"_we shall be saved even as they_."
This is uncommonly fine, coming from the lips of the apostle of the
circumcision. He does not say, They shall be saved even as we; but,
"We shall be saved even as they." The Jew is well content to come down
from his lofty dispensational position, and be saved after the pattern
of the poor uncircumcised Gentile. Surely, those noble utterances must
have fallen in stunning force upon the ears of the law-party. They
left them, as we say, not a leg to stand upon.
"Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas
and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among
the Gentiles by them." The inspiring Spirit has not thought good to
tell us what Paul and Barnabas said on this memorable occasion, and we
can see His wisdom in this. It is evidently His object to give
prominence to Peter and James, as men whose words would, of necessity,
have more weight with the law-teachers than those of the apostle to
the Gentiles and his companion.
"And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and
brethren, hearken unto me: Simeon hath declared how God at the first
did visit the Gentiles," not to convert them all, but "to take out of
them a people for His name. And to this agree the words of the
prophets;" (here he brings an overwhelming tide of evidence from the
Old Testament to bear down upon the Judaizers,) "as it is written,
After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of
David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof,
and I will set it up: that the residue of men might seek after the
Lord, and _all the Gentiles_," without the slightest reference to
circumcision or the law of Moses, but "upon whom My name is called,
saith the Lord, who doeth all these things. Known unto God are all His
works from the beginning of the world. Wherefore my sentence is, that
we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God."
Here, then, we have this great question definitively settled by the
Holy Ghost, the twelve apostles, and the whole Church; and we cannot
but be struck with the fact that, at this most important council, none
spoke more emphatically, more distinctly, or more decidedly than Peter
and James; the former, the apostle of the circumcision, and the
latter, the one who specially addressed the twelve tribes, and whose
position and ministry were calculated to give great weight to his
words, in the judgment of all who were still, in any measure,
occupying Jewish or legal ground. Both these eminent apostles were
clear and decided in their judgment that the Gentile converts were not
to be "troubled" or burdened with the law. They proved, in their
powerful addresses, that to place the Gentile Christians under the law
was directly contrary to the Word, the will, and the ways of God.
Who can fail to see the marvelous wisdom of God in this? The words of
Paul and Barnabas are not recorded. We are simply told that they
rehearsed what things God had wrought among the Gentiles. That they
should be utterly opposed to putting the Gentiles under the law was
only what might be expected; but to find Peter and James so decided
would carry great weight with all parties.
But if the reader would have a clear view of Paul's thoughts on the
question of the law, he should study the epistle to the Galatians.
There this blessed apostle, under the direct inspiration of the Holy
Ghost, pours out his heart to the Gentile converts in words of glowing
earnestness and commanding power. It is perfectly amazing how any one
can read this wonderful epistle and yet maintain that Christians are
under the law, in any way or for any purpose. Hardly has the apostle
got through his brief opening address when he plunges, with his
characteristic energy, into the subject with which his large, loving,
though grieved and troubled heart is full to overflowing. "I marvel,"
he says--and well he might--"that ye are so soon removed from Him that
called you into"--what? The law of Moses? Nay, but "the grace of
Christ into a different gospel which is not another [ἕτερον
εὐαγγέλιον ὃ οὐκ ἔστιν ἄλλο];
but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of
Christ. But though we or an angel from heaven preach any other gospel
unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be
accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any
other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be
accursed."
Let all law-teachers ponder these burning words. Do they seem strong
and severe? Let us remember that they are the very words of God the
Holy Ghost. Yes, reader, God the Holy Ghost hurls His awful anathema
at any one who presumes to add the law of Moses to the gospel of
Christ--any one who attempts to place Christians under the law. How is
it that men are not afraid, in the face of such words, to contend for
the law? Are they not afraid of coming under the solemn curse of God
the Holy Ghost?
Some, however, seek to meet this question by telling us that they do
not take the law for justification, but as a rule of life; but this is
neither reasonable nor intelligent, inasmuch as we may very lawfully
inquire, Who gave us authority to decide as to the use we are to make
of the law? We are either under the law or we are not. If we are under
it at all, it is not a question of how we take it, but how it takes
us.
This makes all the difference. The law knows no such distinctions as
those which some theologians contend for. If we are under it for any
object whatsoever, we are under the curse; for it is written, "Cursed
is every one that continueth not in _all_ things which are written in
the book of the law to do them." To say that I am born again, I am a
Christian, will not meet the case at all; for what has the law to do
with the question of new birth, or of Christianity? Nothing whatever.
The law is addressed to man, as a responsible being. It demands
perfect obedience, and pronounces its curse upon every one who fails
to render it.
Moreover, it will not do to say that though we have failed to keep the
law, yet Christ has fulfilled it in our room and stead. The law knows
nothing of obedience by proxy. Its language is, "The man that doeth
them shall live in them."
Nor is it merely on the man who fails to keep the law that the curse
is pronounced, but, as if to put the principle in the clearest
possible light before us, we read that "as many as are of works of law
are under the curse." (See Greek.) That is, as many as take their
stand on legal ground--as many as are on that principle--in a word, as
many as have to do with works of law, are, of necessity, under the
curse. Hence we may see at a glance the terrible inconsistency of a
Christian's maintaining the idea of being under the law as a rule of
life and yet not being under the curse. It is simply flying in the
face of the very plainest statements of holy Scripture. Blessed be
the God of all grace, the Christian is not under the curse. But why?
Is it because the law has lost its power, its majesty, its dignity,
its holy stringency? By no means. To say so were to blaspheme the law.
To say that any "man," call him what you please--Christian, Jew, or
heathen--can be under the law, can stand on that ground, and yet not
be under the curse, is to say that he perfectly fulfills the law or
that the law is abrogated--it is to make it null and void. Who will
dare to say this? Woe be to all who do so.
But how comes it to pass that the Christian is not under the curse?
Because he is not under the law. And how has he passed from under the
law? Is it by another having fulfilled it in his stead? Nay; we repeat
the statement, there is no such idea throughout the entire legal
economy as obedience by proxy. How is it, then? Here it is, in all its
moral force, fullness, and beauty: "_I_ through law am dead to law,
that I might live unto God."[16]
[16] The omission of the article adds immensely to the force,
fullness, and clearness of the passage. It is διά
νόμου νόμῳ ἀπέθανον. A wonderful clause, surely.
Would that it were better understood! It demolishes a vast mass of
human theology. It leaves the law in its own proper sphere; but takes
the believer completely from under its power, and out of its range, by
death. "Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by
the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to Him
who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto
God" (which we never could do if under the law). "For when we were in
the flesh"--a correlative term with being under the law--"the motions
of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth
fruit unto death." Mark the melancholy combination--"under the
law"--"in the flesh"--"motions of sins"--"fruit unto death"! Can any
thing be more strongly marked? But there is another side, thank God,
to this question--His own bright and blessed side. Here it is: "But
now _we are delivered from the law_." How? Is it by another's having
fulfilled it for us? Nay; but, "_Having died to that_
[ἀποθανόντες ἐν ᾡ] wherein we were held; that we should
serve in newness of spirit,
and not in the oldness of the letter." How perfect and how lovely is
the harmony of Romans vii. and Galatians ii.! "I through law am dead
to law, that I might live unto God."]
Now, if it be true, and the apostle says it is, that we are _dead to
law_, how can the law, by any possibility, be a rule of life to us? It
proved _only_ a rule of death, curse, and condemnation to those who
were under it--those who had received it by the disposition of angels.
Can it prove to be aught else to us? Did the law ever produce a single
cluster of living fruit, or of the fruits of righteousness, in the
history of any son or daughter of Adam? Hear the apostle's
reply--"When we were in the flesh," that is, when we were viewed as
men in our fallen nature, "the motions of sins, which were by the law,
did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death."
It is very important for the reader to understand the real force of
the expression, "in the flesh." It does not, in this passage, mean "in
the body." It simply sets forth the condition of unconverted men and
women responsible to keep the law. Now, in this condition, all that
was or ever could be produced was "fruit unto death"--"motions of
sins." No life, no righteousness, no holiness, nothing for God,
nothing right at all.[17]
[17] It is needful to bear in mind that although the Gentile was
never, by the dispensational dealings of God, put under the law, yet,
in point of fact, all baptized professors take that ground. Hence
there is a vast difference between christendom and the heathen in
reference to the question of the law. Thousands of unconverted people,
every week, ask God to incline their hearts to keep the law. Surely,
such persons stand on very different ground from the heathen who never
heard of the law, and never heard of the Bible.
But where are we now, as Christians? Hear the reply--"I through law am
dead to law, that I might live unto God. I am crucified with Christ:
nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me; and the life
which I now live in the flesh" (here it means in the body) "I
live"--how? By the law, as a rule of life? Not a hint at such a thing,
but "by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave Himself
for me."
This, and nothing else, is Christianity. Do we understand it? do we
enter into it? are we in the power of it? There are two distinct evils
from which we are completely delivered by the precious death of
Christ, namely, legality on the one hand and licentiousness on the
other. Instead of those terrible evils, it introduces us into the holy
liberty of grace--liberty to serve God--liberty to "mortify our
members which are upon the earth"--liberty to deny "ungodliness and
worldly lusts"--liberty to "live soberly, righteously, and
godly"--liberty to "keep under the body and bring it into subjection."
Yes, beloved Christian reader, let us remember this; let us deeply
ponder the words, "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live;
yet not I, but Christ liveth in me." The old "I" dead--crucified,
buried: the new "I" alive in Christ. Let us not mistake this. We know
of nothing more awful, nothing more dangerous, than for the old "I" to
assume the new ground; or, in other words, the glorious doctrines of
Christianity taken up in the flesh--unconverted people talking of
being free from the law, and turning the grace of God into
lasciviousness. We must confess we would rather, a thousand times,
have legality than licentiousness. It is this latter that many of us
have to watch against with all possible earnestness. It is growing
around us with appalling rapidity, and paving the way for that dark
and desolating tide of infidelity which shall, ere long, roll over the
length and breadth of christendom.
To talk of being free from the law in any way save by being dead to
it, and alive to God, is not Christianity at all, but licentiousness,
from which every pious soul must shrink with holy horror. If we are
dead to the law, we are dead to sin also; and hence we are not to do
our own will, which is only another name for sin; but the will of God,
which is true practical holiness.
Further, let us ever bear in mind that if we are dead to the law, we
are dead to this present evil world also, and linked with a risen,
ascended, and glorified Christ. Hence, we are not of the world, even
as Christ is not of the world. To contend for position in the world is
to deny that we are dead to the law; for we cannot be alive to the one
and dead to the other. The death of Christ has delivered us from the
law, from the power of sin, from this present evil world, and from
the fear of death. But then all these things hang together, and we
cannot be delivered from one without being delivered from all. To
assert our freedom from the law, while pursuing a course of carnality,
self-indulgence, and worldliness, is one of the darkest and deadliest
evils of the last days.
The Christian is called to prove, in his daily life, that grace can
produce results that law could never reach. It is one of the moral
glories of Christianity to enable a man to surrender self and live for
others. Law never could do this. It occupied a man with himself. Under
its rule, every man had to do the best he could for himself. If he
tried to love his neighbor, it was to work out a righteousness for
himself. Under grace, all is blessedly and gloriously reversed--self
is set aside as a thing crucified, dead, and buried; the old "I" is
gone, and the new "I" is before God in all the acceptability and
preciousness of Christ; He is our life, our righteousness, our
holiness, our object, our model, our all; He is in us and we are in
Him, and our daily practical life is to be simply Christ reproduced in
us by the power of the Holy Ghost. Hence, we are not only called to
love our neighbor, but our enemy; and this, not to work out a
righteousness, for we have become the righteousness of God in Christ:
it is simply the outflow of the life which we possess--which is in us,
and this life is Christ. A Christian is a man who should live Christ.
He is neither a Jew "under law" nor a Gentile "without law," but "a
man in Christ," standing in grace, called to the same character of
obedience as that which was rendered by the Lord Jesus Himself.
We shall not pursue this subject further here, but we earnestly
entreat the Christian reader to study attentively the fifteenth
chapter of Acts and the epistle to the Galatians. Let him drink in the
blessed teaching of these scriptures, and we feel assured he will
arrive at a clear understanding of the great question of the law. He
will see that the Christian is not under the law for any purpose
whatsoever; that his life, his righteousness, his holiness, are on a
different ground or principle altogether; that to place the Christian
under law in any way is to deny the very foundations of Christianity
and contradict the plainest statements of the Word. He will learn,
from the third chapter of Galatians, that to put ourselves under the
law is to give up Christ, to give up the Holy Ghost, to give up faith,
to give up the promises.
Tremendous consequences! But there they are, plainly set forth before
our eyes; and truly, when we contemplate the state of the professing
church, we cannot but see how terribly those consequences are being
realized.
May God the Holy Ghost open the eyes of all Christians to the truth of
these things. May He lead them to study the Scriptures, and to submit
themselves to their holy authority in all things. This is the special
need of this our day. We do not study Scripture sufficiently; we are
not governed by it; we do not see the absolute necessity of testing
every thing by the light of Scripture, and rejecting all that will not
stand the test; we go on with a quantity of things that have no
foundation whatever in the Word--yea, that are positively opposed to
it.
What must be the end of all this? We tremble to think of it. We know,
blessed be God, that our Lord Jesus Christ will soon come and take His
own beloved and blood-bought people home to the prepared place in the
Father's house, to be forever with Himself, in the ineffable
blessedness of that bright home; but what of those who shall be left
behind? what of that vast mass of baptized worldly profession? These
are solemn questions, which must be weighed in the immediate presence
of God, in order to have the true, the divine answer. Let the reader
ponder them there, in all tenderness of heart and teachableness of
spirit, and the Holy Ghost will lead him to the true answer.
* * * * *
Having sought to set forth, from various parts of Scripture, the
glorious truth that believers are not under law, but under grace, we
may now pursue our study of this fifth chapter of Deuteronomy. In it
we have the ten commandments, but not exactly as we have them in the
twentieth chapter of Exodus. There are some characteristic touches
which demand the reader's attention.
In Exodus xx, we have history; in Deuteronomy v, we have not only
history, but commentary. In the latter, the lawgiver presents moral
motives, and makes appeals which would be wholly out of place in the
former. In the one, we have naked facts; in the other, facts and
comments--facts and their practical application. In a word, there is
not the slightest ground for imagining that Deuteronomy v. is intended
to be a literal repetition of Exodus xx; and hence the miserable
arguments which infidels ground upon their apparent divergence just
crumble into dust beneath our feet. They are simply baseless, and
utterly contemptible.
Let us, for instance, compare the two scriptures in reference to the
subject of the Sabbath. In Exodus xx, we read, "Remember the Sabbath
day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work;
but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou
shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy
man-servant, nor thy maid-servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger
that is within thy gates: _for in six days the Lord made heaven and
earth, the sea, and all that in them is_, and rested the seventh day;
wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it."
In Deuteronomy v, we read, "Keep the Sabbath day to sanctify it, _as
the Lord thy God hath commanded thee_. Six days thou shalt labor, and
do all thy work; but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy
God; in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy
daughter, nor thy man-servant, nor thy maid-servant, _nor thine ox,
nor thine ass_, nor any of thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is
within thy gates; that thy man-servant and thy maid-servant may rest
as well as thou. _And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of
Egypt, and that the Lord thy God brought thee out thence, through a
mighty hand and by a stretched-out arm; therefore the Lord thy God
commanded thee to keep the Sabbath day._" (Ver. 12-15.)
Now, the reader can see at a glance the difference between the two
passages. In Exodus xx, the command to keep the Sabbath is grounded on
_creation_; in Deuteronomy v, it is grounded on _redemption_, without
any allusion to creation at all. In short, the points of difference
arise out of the distinct character of each book, and are perfectly
plain to every spiritual mind.
With regard to the institution of the Sabbath, we must remember that
it rests wholly upon the direct authority of the word of God. Other
commandments set forth plain moral duties. Every man knows it to be
morally wrong to kill or steal; but as to the observance of the
Sabbath, no one could possibly recognize it as a duty had it not been
distinctly appointed by divine authority. Hence its immense importance
and interest. Both in our chapter and in Exodus xx. it stands side by
side with all those great moral duties which are universally
recognized by the human conscience.
And not only so, but we find, in various other scriptures, that the
Sabbath is singled out and presented, with special prominence, as a
precious link between Jehovah and Israel, a seal of His covenant with
them, and a powerful test of their devotedness to Him. Every one could
recognize the moral wrong of theft and murder; only those who loved
Jehovah and His word would love and honor His Sabbath.
Thus, in the sixteenth chapter of Exodus, in connection with the
giving of the manna, we read, "And it came to pass, that on the sixth
day they gathered twice as much bread, two omers for one man; and all
the rulers of the congregation came and told Moses. And he said unto
them, 'This is that which the Lord hath said, To-morrow is _the rest
of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord_: bake that which ye will bake
to-day, and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over
lay up for you, to be kept until the morning.'... And Moses said,
'Eat that to-day; for to-day is _a Sabbath unto the Lord_; to-day ye
shall not find it in the field. Six days ye shall gather it; but on
the seventh day, which is the Sabbath, in it there shall be none.' And
it came to pass,"--so little were they capable of appreciating the
high and holy privilege of keeping Jehovah's Sabbath--"that there went
out some of the people on the seventh day for to gather, and they
found none. And the Lord said unto Moses, 'How long refuse ye to keep
My commandments and My laws?'" Their neglect of the Sabbath proved
their moral condition to be all wrong--proved them to be astray as to
all the commandments and laws of God. The Sabbath was the great
touchstone--the measure and gauge of the real state of their hearts
toward Jehovah. "See, for that the Lord hath _given you_ the Sabbath,
therefore He giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days; abide
ye every man in his place; let no man go out of his place on the
seventh day. So the people rested on the seventh day." They found rest
and food on the holy Sabbath.
Again, at the close of chapter xxxi, we have a very remarkable passage
in proof of the importance and interest attaching to the Sabbath in
the mind of Jehovah. A full description of the tabernacle and its
furniture had been given to Moses, and he was about to receive the two
tables of testimony from the hand of Jehovah; but, as if to prove the
prominent place which the holy Sabbath held in the divine mind, we
read, "And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, 'Speak thou also unto
the children of Israel, saying, Verily My Sabbaths ye shall keep: _for
it is a sign between Me and you throughout your generations_; that ye
may know that I am the Lord that doth sanctify you. Ye shall keep the
Sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it
shall surely be put to death; for whosoever doeth any work therein,
that soul shall be cut off from among his people. Six days may work be
done; but in the seventh is the Sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord:
whosoever doeth any work in the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to
death. Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to
observe the Sabbath throughout their generations, _for a perpetual
covenant_. _It is a sign between Me and the children of Israel
forever_: for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and on the
seventh day He rested, and was refreshed." (Exod. xxxi. 12-17.)
Now, this is a very important passage. It proves very distinctly the
abiding character of the Sabbath. The terms in which it is spoken of
are quite sufficient to show that it was no mere temporary
institution.--"A sign between Me and you throughout your
generations."--"A perpetual covenant."--"A sign forever."
Let the reader carefully mark these words. They prove, beyond all
question, first, that the Sabbath was for Israel; secondly, that the
Sabbath is, in the mind of God, a permanent institution. It is needful
to bear these things in mind in order to avoid all vagueness of
thought and looseness of expression on this deeply interesting
subject.
The Sabbath was distinctly and exclusively for the Jewish nation. It
is spoken of emphatically as a sign between Jehovah and His people
Israel. There is not the most remote hint of its being intended for
the Gentiles. We shall see, further on, that it is a lovely type of
the times of the restitution of all things, of which God has spoken by
the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began; but this in
no wise touches the fact of its being an exclusively Jewish
institution. There is not so much as a single sentence of Scripture to
show that the Sabbath had any reference whatever to the Gentiles.
Some would teach us that inasmuch as we read of the Sabbath day in the
second chapter of Genesis, it must, of necessity, have a wider range
than the Jewish nation. But let us turn to the passage and see what it
says.--"And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had made;
and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had made.
And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it; because that in it
He had rested from all His work which God created and made."
This is simple enough. There is no mention here of man at all. We are
not told that man rested on the seventh day. Men may infer, conclude,
or imagine that he did so; but the second of Genesis says nothing
about it. And not only so, but we look in vain for any allusion to the
Sabbath throughout the entire book of Genesis. The very first notice
we have of the Sabbath in connection with man, is in the sixteenth of
Exodus, a passage already quoted; and there we see, most distinctly, that
it was given to Israel, as a people in recognized covenant-relationship
with Jehovah. That they did not understand or appreciate it is
perfectly plain; that they never entered into it is equally plain,
according to psalm xcv. and Hebrews iv. But we are now speaking of
what it was in the mind of God; and He tells us it was a sign between
Him and His people Israel, and a powerful test of their moral
condition and of the state of their heart as to Him. It was not only
an integral part of the law, as given by Moses to the congregation of
Israel, but it is specially referred to and singled out, again and
again, as an institution holding a very peculiar place in the mind of
God.
Thus, in the book of the prophet Isaiah, we read, "Blessed is the man
that doeth this, and the son of man that layeth hold on it; that
keepeth the Sabbath from polluting it, and keepeth his hand from doing
any evil. Neither let the son of the stranger, that hath joined
himself to the Lord, speak, saying, The Lord hath utterly separated me
from His people; neither let the eunuch say, Behold I am a dry tree.
For thus saith the Lord unto the eunuchs that keep My Sabbaths, and
choose the things that please Me, and take hold of My covenant; even
unto them will I give in Mine house, and within My walls, a place and
a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an
everlasting name that shall not be cut off. Also the sons of the
stranger," (here, of course, viewed in connection with Israel, as in
Numbers xv. and other scriptures,) "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, and make
them joyful in My house of prayer: their burnt-offerings and their
sacrifices shall be accepted upon Mine altar; for Mine house shall be
called a house of prayer for all people."
Again, "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." (Isaiah
lviii. 13, 14.)