The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, vol. 76

August 15, 1899

“Editorial” The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 76, 33, p. 524.

IN Hebrews 3:7-19 we are told how, through unbelief, Israel failed to enter into God’s rest. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.1

In Hebrews 4:1 we are exhorted, “Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it.” ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.2

And this because “unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.” ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.3

This shows that the rest which, through unbelief, Israel failed to enter, was gospel rest. And we are exhorted not to come short, but to enter into the same rest that Israel, through unbelief, missed, which is gospel rest. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.4

“For we which have believed do enter into rest,” into the very rest that Israel missed, which is gospel rest. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.5

“As we said [that is, he said this same thing]: As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall [“they shall not”] enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.” ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.6

And this gospel rest, which through unbelief Israel failed to enter, and which we are exhorted not to miss, is God’s rest of the SEVENTH DAY. “For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all his works. And in this place again [he spake of the seventh day on this wise], If they shall [“they shall not”] enter into my rest.” ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.7

So, when God said, “They shall not enter into my rest,” he referred to his rest of the seventh day. Therefore it was God’s rest of the seventh day which, through unbelief, Israel missed, and which “we,” Christians, are exhorted not to miss. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.8

But this rest which Israel missed, and which “we,” Christians, are exhorted not to miss, was, and is, gospel rest. That rest was, and is, God’s rest of the seventh day. Therefore it is also as plain as A B C that the true rest of the seventh day is rest in Christ. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.9

The true rest of the seventh day is rest in Christ. Rest in Christ is Christian rest. Rest is Sabbath. Christian rest is Christian Sabbath. The true rest of the seventh day is therefore the true Christian Sabbath. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.10

“There remaineth therefore the keeping of a Sabbath to the people of God.” And, “Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it.” “But exhort one another daily, while it is called To-day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.” ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.11

“Editorial Note” The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 76, 33, p. 524.

ON the book of Galatians a question has been asked that calls for another preliminary study before beginning the study of the book in detail. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.1

The inquiry is: Since the ceremonial law, the moral law, and the general idea of law, are all involved in the argument, what then becomes of the view that has been so long held, and that seems to rest upon authority, that the ceremonial law is the chief subject as to law in the book of Galatians? ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.2

The answer is, It is true. Yet in this answer there must be borne in mind what is comprehended in the term “ceremonial law,” and especially the ceremonial law involved in the book of Galatians. This is worth studying. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.3

That it is not the ceremonial law, as expressed in sacrifices and offerings, that is particularly the subject, is evident from the fact that from the beginning to the end of the book, neither sacrifices nor offering is even once referred to. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.4

That it is the ceremonial law, as expressed in circumcision and its meaning among the “Pharisees which believed,” is evident from the fact that, over and over, circumcision is mentioned. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.5

When, then, was the meaning of circumcision among the “Pharisees which believed”? How much did circumcision cover in that Pharisaic ceremonial system?—Rabbi Jehuda Hakkadosh declared, “So great is circumcision that but for it the Holy One, blessed be he, would not have created the world;” and that “but for circumcision, heaven and earth could not exist.” “It is as great as all the other commandments.” “How great is circumcision, since it is equivalent to all the commandments of the law”!—Farrar’s “Life of Paul,” chap. 15, note to par. 4 from end; and chap. 22, note to par. 5. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.6

By this it is evident that with those “false brethren” (Galatians 2:3-5) who are answered in the letter to the Galatians, circumcision comprehended all the commandments of the law—even all the commandments of the moral law, equally with any other. So that one who was circumcised, in that bore the certificate that he was a keeper of the law. This is also evident from their demand, “Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law;” and from the expression, in Galatians 6:13, “For neither they themselves who are circumcised keep the law.” ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.7

Now it is true that in the mind of God true circumcision did signify the full and perfect keeping of the law. But true circumcision was, and is always, “that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter,” of which the outward circumcision in the flesh was only the sign. Therefore it is written, “The Lord thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul.” Deuteronomy 30:6. And to love the Lord with all the heart and with all the soul, is the keeping of all the commandments. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.8

Wherein, then, were the people wrong, who were bothering the Galatians and all other people to whom Paul preached, in insisting that “ye must be circumcised, and keep the law,” and that circumcision comprehended all the commandments?—They were wrong in this, that with them it was all of works; it was all done to be justified, to be saved—except ye do so, “ye can not be saved.” ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.9

On the other hand, while in the mind of the Lord circumcision also comprehended all the commandments, here is was all of faith. With the Lord, the sign of circumcision was a seal of righteousness of faith (Romans 4:11; Galatians 3:5-7)—“faith which worketh by love.” Galatians 5:6. And as “this is the love of God that we keep his commandments,” it was a faith that keeps all the commandments. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.10

With the “Pharisees which believed,” those “false brethren,” men must perform these works of circumcision and keeping the law in order to be justified. With the Lord and Paul, men are justified by faith without any deeds of any law. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.11

With the “Pharisees which believed,” men must work in order to be justified. With the Lord and Paul, men must be justified in order to work. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.12

With the “Pharisees which believed,” everything was of works, of the flesh, outward, and formal. With the Lord and Paul, everything must be of faith, of the Spirit, inward, and spiritual; and outward only as the manifestation of the new life within. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.13

With the “Pharisees which believed,” everything was ceremonial; because it was outward, of works, of the flesh, of self; everything was done, and must be done, in order to be justified by it, in order to be righteous by it, in order to be saved by it. In this way the moral law itself was made merely ceremonial—the moral law, the ceremonial law, all law, was thus reduced to one vast system of ceremonialism. And of this vast system of ceremonialism, circumcision was the very nucleus. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.14

And it is this system, and this spirit, of ceremonialism, that is combated and repudiated in the book of Galatians. And this is the ceremonial law which, over all and through all, is the great subject as to law in the book of Galatians; and which, as a false gospel, subverted souls, and perverted and opposed the true gospel. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.15

Bear in mind, however, that this is not by any means to say that such is the true ceremonial law. There was nothing true about it; it was ceremonialism entire: circumcision was perverted; the moral law was perverted; everything as to law was perverted by it; and it fought hard to pervert even the gospel. But it could not prevail: the book of Galatians was written to set the ceremonial law, the moral law, and the gospel, in their true and relative positions; and to annihilate ceremonialism forever. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.16

All this will be plainly seen, as we shall study the book of Galatians in detail. In the meantime, let all read the book of Galatians through seven times, with this thought in mind, and they will be the better prepared for the study in detail as it shall be given next week. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.17

“The Cruelty of Infidelity” The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 76, 33, pp. 524, 525.

THE following sketch, in a newspaper despatch, of the scene at the bier of Colonel Ingersoll in the home where he died, is worth reading over and over for the important and impressive lesson that it contains:— ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.1

DOBBS FERRY, N.Y., JULY 25.—Desolation describes the scene to-night at Walstein, within whose walls lies the body of Col. Robert G. Ingersoll, agnostic. About his bier cling three women—his widow and his two daughters. To them the form on the bier is all that is left of that father and husband. They have no hope for future union, no consolation in Christian faith, no solace in religion. The dreariness, the utter loneliness, has overpowered those whom the great infidel has left to mourn him; and they have again refused to surrender to the incinerating urn the one tangible thing between them and the eternity of separation. Therefore the cremation of the body will not take place until some time Thursday—perhaps not then. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.2

This in spite of the fact that the funeral was held this afternoon. It was the most solemn surrender of the dead. Strong men declared that nothing had ever appealed to them so strongly before for religion and Christianity as the utter desolation and hopelessness of that family of mourners. Not a note of consolation, not a soothing note of music, not a prayer for sympathy, or help, or mercy. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.3

Than such a scene what could more strongly appeal for Christianity? Christianity is the assurance that we shall meet, in joy and eternal companionship and blessedness, beyond the tomb. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.4

But even if Christianity were not an assurance, even if it were only a guess, who would not wish for only that as a ground of hope and consolation rather than to think of the dreariness, the utter loneliness, hopelessness, and desolation, that hangs upon the lives of these three mourning women? ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.5

And who shall say that only such a ground of hope would not be to these tender, desolate women infinitely better than the utter emptiness that must press them with unbearable weight at every thought of their loss of him who was all to them? There would be some relief in a hope of again meeting their loved one, even if that hope rested on nothing more substantial than an admission of the mere possibility that it might be so. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.6

The unbelievers do not pretend to know that hope is vain. Colonel Ingersoll himself did not profess to know. He professed only that he did not know. He was a professed agnostic; and “agnostic” signifies “unknowing.” For unbelievers to admit a hope only upon a guess—agnostically, without knowing—would be entirely consistent; because that is precisely the ground upon which they exclude hope. But the exclusion of hope, at the death of a loved one floods the life forever with utter loneliness and desolation; while the admission of hope; even only on a guess, is a positive benefit in that it allows at least some rays of comfort and consolation to enter the life, and relieve the perpetual dreariness and loss. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 524.7

Unbelievers, therefore, exclude from the lives of human beings a positive benefit, when, in perfect consistency with their profession, they could freely admit it. Unbelievers, therefore, arbitrarily persist in holding human beings in utter desolation and hopelessness, when, upon their own principles, they could admit comfort and consolation. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 525.1

What could possibly be more rigid and cruel, or more cruelly rigid, than that is? It is said that the cruel rigidity of Calvinism, in its “horrible decrees,” was the cause of Colonel Ingersoll’s unbelief. Even if that be so, it is certain that he did not escape cruel rigidity of doctrine when he adopted agnosticism instead. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 525.2

But the unbelievers says, “What benefit could it really be to entertain a hope, if the future turns out to be indeed the blank that we suppose it to be?” The answer is that it would be a real benefit in breaking up, even if only by a hope of a hope, the utter loneliness and desolation of these mourning souls while they must live—a real benefit because even if the future were all to turn out the blank that they suppose it to be, that part could never be known. The benefit would be real as long as they lived; and when they died, they would never know that their hope was vain. Consequently the benefit of it would be just as real as if the hope were grounded in absolute certainty. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 525.3

The unbeliever can deny benefit in only such a hope, only on the ground of a possibility that it might be discovered to have been vain. But the admission of a possibility of discovering that even such a hope had been vain, is an admission of consciousness after death, which at once annihilates the denial of ground of hope. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 525.4

Thus it is impossible, on any grounds whatever, consistently to deny to human beings a hope of meeting their loved ones beyond the tomb. And as Christianity supplies precisely the fullest assurance of this hope, in soul-ravishing fruition, it is impossible, on any ground whatever, consistently to deny to human beings the hop that Christianity gives. ARSH August 15, 1899, page 525.5