The Perpetuity of the Seventh-day Sabbath

THIRTEENTH SPEECH

Mr. Waggoner in the Affirmative.—I am growing quite fond of “logic.” I quoted Scripture to show a distinction; but it appears that my friend has got where he cannot see the distinction. It will not answer for me to go back and notice points several times over, merely because my opponent brings them up; but I will here remark, that I claim Exodus 20. as the chapter from which to take the law of the ten commandments. My friend of the negative will claim Deuteronomy 5. They are nearly the same, but still there is a difference. Compare Exodus 20:12, with Deuteronomy 5:16. My opponent quoted the latter—“in the land ye go over to possess,” but I do not find it so; therefore, his comparison with Ephesians 6., loses its force. There are but three positions to be taken with reference to Ephesians 6. It must be the first commandment absolutely, or it must be— PSDS 55.1

[Through some strange inadvertence or accident, I did not get the rest of the above sentence.—Reporter.] PSDS 55.2

Now it is not the first commandment; and if Abraham had a commandment to go up out of the land, we do not know it. Our Savior has quoted the commandment, but without attaching any promise. If my opponent could only leave out that word “first,” his criticism would be worth something. It is not the first commandment with Christ——When the Apostles had stated the effect of the Gospel after——What was the commandment they gave?——They taught that the promise is to you and your children. Where is it, then, that it is the first commandment with promise? It is in the decalogue. There it is, and you will find it in no other relation except in that code of laws. This is one of the strongest positions proving the perpetuity of the law of the ten commandments as given at Mount Sinai. PSDS 55.3

But about the two promises, (to Abraham). Could not God bless all the families of the earth——I do not see that my opponent helps the case at all. I shall now proceed with the investigation as I commenced. I shall proceed upon the Scripture as near as practicable. Matthew 5. Our Savior here enforces, in every case, the moral principles of these ten commandments, and shows their perpetuity. Some claim that because He used different words, therefore, there are two different laws; but the whole law here enforced, rests on existing obligations, as we see by verses 17, 18, 19. Here is acknowledged the origin of these moral obligations, Matthew 7:21. In the version of——it is “ye that work lawlessness.” Have we got a license for a deal of iniquity here in the ten commandments? Look at the second. Now, that the principle of love is not recognized in the ten commandments, I would like to have my opponent say, after carefully reading them; not before. But my opponent says we have got some left off our card—an important “preface!” I do not think we shall ever get up a card with his preface attached. What is really intended? My opponent says this is a law for the Israelites. Now, my friends, if you have got any different God in the Scriptures, I will put your preface upon the very next card I get up. PSDS 55.4

Isaiah 30:8, 9. I wanted to see what class of people are here described—“children that will not hear the law of the Lord.” Now if there is no better passage than my friend’s preface, I will put it on the very next card I get up. [According to my friend’s position,] we have got the declaration that faith in Christ will not ensure us an entrance into the kingdom of heaven. The fifth commandment we have already noticed. I shall proceed to quote the Apostle Paul. He argues on justification by faith—Romans 2:9, etc.—that there is “no respect of persons with God.” And then we have the two classes introduced—both Jew and Gentile. We have this classification carried still further in the 12th verse. And then here are three verses in parentheses. “The doers of the law shall be justified. The work of the law written in their hearts,” etc. He has further declared they shall be judged “by Jesus Christ.” 16th verse. Then the declaration is made according to the rule of the Gospel. The law and the Gospel run together. 17th verse.—the law of faith? the law of Christ? No. It is one thing to know the law, and another thing to do it. They were those who rested in the law that they did not do. If you want to know the law of God, here it is in verse 21; here is the sixth commandment in verse 22; here is the seventh and also the second—verse 24; here is the third, etc., etc. Still farther on, there is a plain and marked distinction between circumcision and the law. The same is continued in the next chapter. Here is the plainest distinction that can be made. “What advantage, then, hath the Jew?” etc. “Much every way: chiefly because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.” They knew God’s law, and this certainly was a very great advantage. Well, now, beloved friends, these oracles of God must be the rule of the judgment of God. And they are not made void because of justification by faith—(“I speak as a man”)—something necessary in order that the judgments of God should be approved. All unrighteousness is sin, isn’t it? Where is righteousness revealed? If our transgression of the law cancelled the, what then? What is the truth? My Opponent would certainly be on this principle—that our transgression of these principles would not undo our righteousness. “Let us do evil that good may come?” etc. Both Jews and Gentiles are under sin, therefore all are sinners. “There is none righteous, no, not one.” It is singular that this very scripture should prove both Jews and Gentiles sinners. We have the Savior frequently reasoning out of the Scriptures. There were no Gentile Scriptures, and we get no scripture except what we get through the Jews. Here Paul refers to this law in the 19th verse. The law and the gospel work together. The law proves a man a sinner, and the gospel shows the way of justification and redemption. Now, we understand that we are not justified by the law, at all, after we have transgressed it, but by faith in Jesus Christ. Even all have sinned, and Christ suffered for the remission of sin. Have we not shown that unbelief made these oracles of none effect, therefore God would not be just in judging—[Time up.] PSDS 56.1