The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, vol. 78

January 22, 1901

“The Faith of Jesus. The Nature of Christ” Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 4, p. 56.

“AND the Word was made flesh.” ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.1

“When the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman.” Galatians 4:4. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.2

“And the Lord hath laid on Him the iniquity of us all.” Isaiah 53:6. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.3

We have seen that, in His being made of a woman, Christ reached sin at the very fountain head of its entrance into this world; and that He must be made of a woman to do this. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.4

And thus all the sin of this world, from its origin in the world to the end of it in the world, was laid upon Him; both sin as it is in itself and sin as it is when committed by us; sin in its tendency, and sin in the act; sin as it is hereditary in us, uncommitted by us, and sin as it is committed by us. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.5

Only thus could it be that there should be laid upon Him the iniquity of us all. Only by His subjecting himself to the law of heredity could He reach beyond the generation living in the world while He was here. Without this there could be laid upon Him our sins which have been actually committed, with the guilt and condemnation that belong to them. But, beyond this, there is in each person, in many ways, the liability, to sin, inherited from generations back, which has not yet culminated in the act of sinning, but which is ever ready, when occasion offers, but which is ever ready, when occasion offers, to blaze forth in the actual committing of sin. David’s great sin is an illustration of this. Psalm 51:3; 2 Samuel 11:2. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.6

In delivering us from sin, it is not enough that we shall be saved from the sins that we have actually committed; we must be saved from committing other sins. And that this may be so, there must be met and subdued this hereditary liability to sin: we must become possessed of power to keep us from sinning—a power to conquer this liability, this hereditary tendency that is in us, to sin. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.7

All our sins which we have actually committed were laid upon Him, were imputed to Him, so that His righteousness may be laid upon us, may be imputed to us. And also our liability to sin was laid upon Him, in His being made flesh, in His being born of a woman, of the same flesh and blood as we are. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.8

Thus He met sin in the flesh which He took, and triumphed over it, as it is written: “God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin IN THE FLESH.” And again: “He is our peace.... having abolished in His flesh the enmity.” ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.9

And thus it is that for the sins which we have actually committed, for the sins that are past, His righteousness, is imputed to us, as our sins are imputed to Him. And to keep us from sinning, His righteousness is imparted to us in our flesh, as our flesh, with its liability to sin, was imparted to Him. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.10

Thus He is the complete Saviour: He saves from all the sins that we have actually committed, and saves equally from all the sins that we might commit, dwelling apart from Him. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.11

If He took not the same flesh and blood that the children of men have, with its liability to sin, then where could there be any philosophy or reason of any kind whatever in His genealogy as given in the Scriptures? He was descended from David; He was descended from Abraham; He was descended from Adam; and, by being made of a woman, He reached even back of Adam, to the beginning of sin in the world. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.12

In that genealogy there are Jehoiakim, who for his wickedness was “buried with the burial of an ass, drawn and cast forth, beyond the gates of Jerusalem” (Jeremiah 22:19); Manasseh, who caused Judah to do “worse than the heathen;” Ahaz, who “made Judah naked, and transgressed sore against the Lord;” Rehoboam, who was born of Solomon, who was born of David and Bathsheba; there are also Ruth the Moabitess, and Rahab; as well as Abraham, Isaac, Jesse, Asa, Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, and Josiah; the worst equally with the best. And the evil deeds of even the best are recorded equally with the good. And there is hardly one whose life is written upon at all of whom there is not some wrong act recorded. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.13

Now it was at the end of such a genealogy as that that “the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us.” It was t the end of such a genealogy as that that he was “made of a woman.” It was in such a line of descent as that that God sent “His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh.” And such a descent, such a genealogy, meant something to Him, as it does to every other man, under the great law that the iniquities of the fathers are visited upon the children, to the third and fourth generations. It meant everything to Him in the terrible temptations in the wilderness of temptation, as well as all the way through His life in the flesh. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.14

Thus, both by heredity and by imputation, He was “laden with the sins of the world.” And, thus laden, at this immense disadvantage, He passed over the ground where, at no shadow of any disadvantage whatever, the first pair failed. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.15

By His death He paid the penalty of all sins actually committed, and thus can justly bestow His righteousness upon all who will receive it. And by condemning sin in the flesh, by abolishing in His flesh the enmity. He delivers from the law of heredity; and so can, in righteousness, impart His divine nature and power to lift above that law, and hold above it, every soul that will receive Him. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.16

And so it is written: “When the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.” Galatians 4:4. And “God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for [on account of] sin, condemned sin in the flesh: that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” Romans 8:3, 4. And “He is our peace, ... having abolished in His flesh the enmity, ... for to make in Himself of twain [God and man] one new man, so making peace.” Ephesians 2:14, 15. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.17

Thus “in all things it behoved Him to be made like unto His brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that He himself hath suffered being tempted, He is able to succor them that are tempted.” ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.18

Whether temptation be from within or from without. He is the perfect shield against it all, and so saves to the uttermost all who come unto God by Him. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.19

“Editorial” Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 4, p. 56.

THE following are the items of the arrangement entered into by Russia and China, concerning the Manchurian province of Shengking, published by Russia a short time ago:— ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.1

1. The Tartar general, Tseng, undertakes to protect and pacify the province, and to assist in the construction of the railroad. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.2

2. He must kindly treat, feed, and lodge Russians engaged in the military occupation and in the protection of the railroad. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.3

3. He must disarm and disband the Chinese soldiery, delivering to the Russians all munitions of war in such arsenals as the Russians have not yet occupied. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.4

4. All forts and defenses in the province not occupied by the Russians, and all powder magazines not required by them, must be dismantled in the presence of Russian officials. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.5

5. New Chwang and other places now in Russian occupation shall be restored to the Chinese civil administration, when Russia is satisfied that the pacification of the province is complete. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.6

6. The Chinese shall maintain law and order by local police under a Tartar general. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.7

7. A Russian political resident, with general powers of control, shall be stationed at Mukden, to whom the Tartar General Tseng must give all information respecting any important measures. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.8

8. In the event of the local police being insufficient for the emergency, General Tseng will notify the Russian resident, and invite Russia to send re-enforcements. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.9

9. The Russian text shall be the standard. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.10

And Russia assures the United States and the other Powers that she will not take any Chinese territory! And the United States assures the world that “the people of Cuba are, and of right ought to be, free and independent,” and that this pledge shall be fulfilled “to the letter”! ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.11

“Some More Ancient and Modern History” Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 4, pp. 56, 57.

OF Rome’s assertion of authority over the Greek states, and of her dealings with them whom she had freed from the oppressions of kings, the ancient history records:— ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.1

The Romans rendered themselves the sovereign arbiters of those whom they had restored to liberty, and whom they now considered, in some measure, as their freedmen. They used to depute commissioners to them.... They soon assumed a magisterial tone, looked upon their decrees as irrevocable decisions, were greatly offended when the most implicit obedience was not paid to them, and gave the name of rebellion to a second resistance.... ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.2

We shall hear one of the chief magistrates in the republic of the Acheans inveigh strongly in a public assembly against this unjust usurpation, and ask by what title the Romans were empowered to assume so haughty an ascendant over them; whether their republic was not as free and independent as that of Rome; by what right the latter pretended to force the Acheans to account for their conduct, in their turn, officiously pretend to inquire into their affairs; and whether matters ought not to be on the same footing on both sides. All these reflections were very reasonable, just, and unanswerable; and the Romans had no advantage in the question but force. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.3

With that bit of ancient history, now read the following bit of modern history as published in the Manila correspondence of the Hongkong Telegraph, in August, 1900. The Mr. Mabini of the account was formerly minister of foreign affairs and premier of the provisional Flilipino government:— ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.4

At four o’clock this afternoon Mr. Mabini was taken to the Ayuntamiento, and introduced to the North American commission. There were present President Taft, two other members of the commission, the interpreter, and a shorthand writer. Mr. Mabini asked for this conference in order that it should not be said that he had confined himself to an imperious position without seeking means of approximation and intelligence, according to circumstances. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.5

When the session was opened, he said: “I have been imprisoned since December last, and not allowed to be set free without previous recognition of the American sovereignty. The word ‘sovereignty’ in international law has not a precise nor fixed definition. So that in the South African trouble England claims to have sovereignty in the two republics, notwithstanding the recognition of their complete independence made by her with respect to their internal administration. My efforts in favor of my country have no other object but to obtain the most solid guarantee for the liberties and rights of the Filipinos. I therefore asked for a conference to find out to what extent American sovereignty will restrain that which naturally belongs to the Filipino people.” ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.6

Mr. Taft, having heard the remarks of his companions, replied as follows: “The American sovereignty has the object of giving the Filipinos a good government. The sovereignty that the United States of America claims is the same as that which Russia or Turkey would claim if they occupied the Philippines, with the only difference that the exercise of this sovereignty will be inspired by the spirit of the Constitution. The commission will endeavor to establish in the Philippines a popular government after the style of that adopted for Porto Rico.” ARSH January 22, 1901, page 56.7

To this Mr. Mabini replied that the principles on which the American Constitution rests declare that the sovereignty rests with the people by natural right; that the American government, by not contenting itself with restraining the sovereignty of the Filipino people, but with completely nullifying it, commits an injustice that sooner or later will demand reparation or explanation; that there can not be a popular government where the people are not given a real and effective participation in the constitution and performance of that government. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 57.1

The commission replied, saying that they were not authorized to discuss abstract matters, as they had orders to make their views prevail by force, when the views of the Filipinos are heard. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 57.2

Then Mr. Mabini said he considered the conference as closed, for he thought it useless to discuss matters and give his views to those who did not want to listen to the voice of reason. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 57.3

Mr. Taft asked him if he wanted to help them in the study of the taxes that may be imposed on the people of the Philippines. Mr. Mabini replied that, considering unjust every tax imposed without the consent of the representatives of those who are to pay it, he could not take part in such study without the representation and command of the people. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 57.4

Mr. Mabini said that he saw the Americans persisted in reducing the Filipinos to the hard alternative of dishonesty or death; and that since this was so, he would prefer to behave himself as an honest man, who puts above all his duties his honor. Between dishonesty and death, it was his duty to prefer the latter. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 57.5

To what pass has the government of the United States come when by its highest possible representative, the personal representative of its president, the chosen standard of comparison in government is “Russia and Turkey”! Is that the government founded by the Fathers? ARSH January 22, 1901, page 57.6

And the commission “are not authorized to discuss abstract matters,” such as “the principles upon which the American Constitution rests”—“sovereignty rests with the people by natural right,” etc., etc.; but have “orders to make their view prevail by force, when the views of the Filipinos are heard”! ARSH January 22, 1901, page 57.7

But from whom did the commission get such “orders” as these? Bear in mind that that commission was not created by Congress: it is the “personal representative of the President.” The commission, not being created by Congress, has not from Congress any “orders” of any kind, nor any instruction of any kind. Being the “personal representative of the President,” all the “orders” the commission could receive, could be only from the President himself. Then from whom did the commission receive “orders” to make their views “prevail by force”? And this without any authority, and instead of any authority, to discuss the principles upon which the American Constitution rests: making these only “abstract matters”—the metaphysical; and “their views prevail by force” the concrete—the practical. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 57.8

That commission, not being the creation of Congress, and so having no instructions or directions from Congress, is not a creature of law. The Constitution being held not of its own force to extend to the Philippines, and it not having been extended there by Congress, the commission is not a creature of law, either statutory or Constitutional. The commission being only the “personal representative of the President,” receiving its “orders” only from him,—and that not from him as commander-in-chief of the armies and navies of the United States, but only as civil executive; because the commission is entirely civil, not military,—this makes the commission only the creature of will, and its government only a government of will, and not of law. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 57.9

And will anybody say that this is not a repudiation by the United States of the principles of its Constitution as a Protestant and republican government? As a matter of fact it is the repudiation of all Constitutional principle clear back to Magna Charta, and even of the principle of Magna Charta itself, which at the time was repudiated by the pope, and resisted by the king. So that, as we have before shown in these columns, the present colonial course of the United States is not merely a going back from American principles to British, it is a leap over and back of all Anglo-Saxon history and principle to the times beyond Magna Charta, and to the Roman only. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 57.10

The issue that brought forth Magna Charta was simply that “a king should rule in England by law, and not by force, or rule not at all.” And this principle written out and signed by the king, in Magna Charta, King John, of England, had to accept, or not be crowned. True, the pope repudiated it, and released the king from his oath and the binding obligation of his signature; but against pope and king, the kingdom of England held the principle, and the Charter. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 57.11

John’s son, Henry III, also rejected the Charter, and thought to repudiate the principle, declaring: “Whensoever, and wheresoever, and as often as it may be our pleasure, we may declare, interpret, enlarge, or diminish, the aforesaid statutes, and their several parts, by our own free will, and as to us shall seem expedient for the security of us and our land.” But he, as John, was firmly met by the kingdom’s insistence upon the right of the people and the supremacy of the law. In answer to the king’s pronunciamento, an English judge, Bracton, set the voice of English law in words that are important to be remembered to-day, and by all generations. He declared: “The king must not be subject to any man, but to God and the law, for the law makes him king. Let the king, therefore, give to the law what the law gives to him, dominion and power; for there is no king where will, and not law, bears rule.” Again: “The king can do nothing on earth, being the minister of God, but what he can do BY LAW: ... so that, if the king were without a bridle,—that is, the law,—they ought to put a bridle upon him.” ARSH January 22, 1901, page 57.12

Upon this it has been well observed: “Let no Englishman, who lives under the rule of law, and not of will, forget that this privilege has been derived from a long line of forefathers; and that, although the eternal principles of justice depend not upon the precedents of ages, but may be asserted some day by any community with whom a continued despotism has made them ‘native, and to the manner born,’ we have the security that the old tree of liberty stands in the old earth, and that a short-lived trunk has not been thrust into a new soil, to bear a green leaf or two and then to die.” ARSH January 22, 1901, page 57.13

“Will Your Church Act?” Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 78, 4, p. 59.

AS a people we are being tested to see if we love God more than the world. We have been told that He is testing us over “Christ’s Object Lessons.” These words are full of meaning: “Have faith in God. He gave me the idea of giving ‘Christ’s Object Lessons’ for the relief of the schools. He is testing His people and institutions in this thing, to see if they will work together and be of one mind in self-denial and self-sacrifice. Carry forward this work without flinching, in the name of the Lord. Let God’s plan be vindicated.” ARSH January 22, 1901, page 59.1

He has told every member of the Church that he would receive a blessing if he would take this book and present it to the people. It is present truth. The Lord has also said that some should receive special preparation, in order that they may carry the truth to the people. “If our church-members were awake, they would multiply their resources; they would send men and women to our schools, not to go through a long course of study, but to learn quickly, and to go out into the field.” ARSH January 22, 1901, page 59.2

The Battle Creek College, realizing that the time to act is just now, will begin a course of study, January 29, extending to April 23, for those who wish to receive a preparation that will enable them to help their home churches, and to carry the book intelligently to a large class of people who are waiting to receive it. Is your church preparing to send some one to receive this special training? If not, why not? Write at once, for special announcement, to the president of Battle Creek College. ARSH January 22, 1901, page 59.3