TWENTY-EIGHTH SPEECH

Mr. Stephenson in the Negative.—How much labor a little discrimination would save? How very easy it is to overlook the very point that should be considered; the principal one to give any light on the subject. “Whatsoever is not of faith is sin.” “Sin is the transgression of the law.” And I have called upon my opponent again and again, to show that the ten commandments are called a law, anywhere between the two lids of the Bible, and he has not done it. His system of argument is a system of analysis and induction, and, I might add, assumption. There’s the blood of the covenant, and the book of the covenant, and the book of the law. The very law referred, to, in Gal. is the book of the law. The book of the law contained all the laws given to restrain other actions of the children of Israel—the two were written in the book.PSDS 105.1

In reference to the covenant, I will notice a great many points, or at least, I hope to be able to notice them in my summing up speech. I can show that the same promises were made, and the same blessings conferred for obedience to all the commandments given by God to the children of Israel. My friends of Crane’s Grove, read for yourselves. Remember my positions are unshaken. I have not yielded, I do not yield a single inch of ground, till convinced by plain Bible testimony. I will hang on to this subject till next spring—till grass grows and flowers bloom—before I will have it said that I gave up, or wished to have the discussion closed. I never made the proposition to have this discussion close with to-day. This is the position I will take, I will not close the discussion this afternoon, without an explanation of my friend’s remark that we wished the discussion to stop for our meeting or for anything else.PSDS 105.2

“Nothing but the ten commandments abolished.” By reference to Colossians 2:11 to 16, we find something more abolished. I will stand by the position that the ten commandments are a covenant. In regard to Webster, I know nothing of the definition of contrast, but I am sure the best speakers and writers use it in the sense of comparison; and even if they did not so use it, I have the right of defining it myself, in the sense I wished to be understood. I care nothing for Webster or any one else, in this instance. But to our passage, Colossians 2:14, 15, etc. Here we have the hand writing of ordinances done away. Now, let us read, carefully, Colossians 2:14, 16, 17, and see whether we do not think something more than the ten commandments were abolished. “Blotting out the hand writing of ordinances that was against us, that was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to the cross. Let no man, therefore, judge you in meat or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath days, which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ.” Here the Sabbaths without limitation are represented as sharing the fate of all the other feast days, and Jewish ordinances, viz: “Nailed to the cross and taken out of the way.” This letter was addressed to a church composed of Jew and Gentile. In the absence of one precept to observe any Sabbath, or one reproof for Sabbath breaking, what would the Gentiles, who had not been taught the observance of a weekly Sabbath, any more than the annual Sabbaths, or any of the Jewish feasts think of such language? What would we think under similar circumstances? We would, and could not otherwise, think that all the Sabbaths had been nailed to the cross; and that, therefore, no man had a right to judge us for their non-observance. But it is urged by my opponent that these are past day Sabbaths. Admitted. But the seventh day was a feast day just as much as any of the other Sabbaths. This my opponent has denied, but the Bible must decide where doctors disagree. All who have Bibles, turn with me to Leviticus 23:2-5, and let us hear what the Lord says in reference to this matter.PSDS 105.3

“Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them concerning the feasts of the Lord, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, even these are my feasts. Six days shall work be done, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of rest, an holy convocation; ye shall do no work therein: it is the Sabbath of the Lord in all your dwellings. These are the feasts of the Lord, even holy convocations, which ye shall proclaim in their seasons. In the fourteenth day of the first month, at even, is the Lord’s passover.” Also, verses 6th and 7th, “And on the fifteenth day * * is the feast of unleavened bread, etc. In the first day ye shall have an holy convocation: ye shall do no servile work therein.” Also, verses 13, 14, 21, 24, 32, 37, 29, 30. Here they are all called Sabbaths, feast days, an holy convocation, and were all to continue throughout their generations. Exodus 31:13, 16. And by reference to 2 Chronicles 2:4, we find all these festival Sabbaths called the Sabbaths of the Lord.PSDS 106.1

Any argument, therefore, which would prove that any of the Sabbaths were a shadow, festival or handwriting of ordinance—would prove the same for the seventh day Sabbath. Do away with all the festival Sabbaths and the seventh day Sabbaths passes away with them. Again I endorse my opponents admission that all the festival Sabbaths perished at the cross. My opponent admits that the gospel is the great rule of justification. But according to Paul, it is, also the rule of righteousness, Romans 1:16 and 17. Here the gospel is the power and righteousness of God. It is all that is necessary to salvation.PSDS 107.1

The law of faith is the standard of “righteousness,” “justification” and “salvation,” “without the law.” Chap 3:21, 22, 24, 26, 27, 28. “Justified by faith without the deeds, i.e. doing, of the law.” Verse 21, of the same chapter, is quoted by my opponent to show that the whole world is amenable to the ten commandments. But it remains to be proved that Paul is speaking of the ten commandments, much less that he means all who has never heard of the law, as well as those who have. The original will apply to any nation or people as well as to all nations and peoples. The entire context limits this term to the Jews and Greeks; the one having the written code, and the other having the same law written in their hearts—memories. Chap 2:15. The Jews spoke the Greek language, and were dispersed all over Greece.PSDS 107.2

The Greeks were as familiar with the law of the Jews as the Canadians are with the laws of these United States. But there is another class who sin and perish without law, verse 12. Why should the apostle say “where there is no law, there is no transgression,” if there were none but what had law? Romans 3:31, once more. I would ask, does the fact of the law being confined prove its perpetuity beyond the time of its confirmation, any more than the confirmation of the prophesies prove their perpetuity? verse 21. I have tried to get my opponent to Romans 7, again, but he seems to be afraid of that chapter. I will call your attention again to Hebrews 3:1 to 6, where Moses is contrasted with Christ. Remember, I use the word contrast in the sense of comparison. Here the Church of God, over which Moses and Christ presides, the first as a servant, and the second as a son. That this house was a church appears from verse 6th. The house is the church. But Moses occupies a lower position than that of Christ.PSDS 107.3

Now look at Romans 7:2 to 4. It has been shown that Jesus Christ was to be a law-giver. And here let me remark that man ought not to hold the Bible up to ridicule. There should be more respect for the word of God. This passage terminates the life of the law by the death of the first husband, Moses. As long as this husband lived, the woman to be subject to this law, but if the husband be dead, it clears her from that law. After her husband is dead she is declared to be no adulteress, though she be married to another man. Now for the contrast or comparison. Verses 4, 5, 6, 1st. The woman—the church, is represented as being married to Christ, her second husband, and thereby released from the law of her first husband. 2nd. She is represented as being released by the death of the law of her first husband, verse 6th. Campbell, Whiting and the whole context harmonizes with the textual reading of the 6th verse. Remember that the law and penalty are two entirely different things. Now for the application. Verses 4, 5, 6. Here we have two law-givers presented—Moses and Christ. Moses was the first husband and Jesus Christ is the second husband, and the church is the wife. The first husband being dead, of course the wife is released from his law. But our friends here are not willing to have the wife marry the second husband. They wish, first, to place the dead head of Moses upon the living body of Christ. But Jesus Christ occupies a pre-eminent position in the church. He is the head of the church, and to him, and him alone, should the church look for law. [Time up.]PSDS 108.1