Loading...
Larger font
Smaller font
Copy
Print
Contents
  • Results
  • Related
  • Featured
No results found for: "undefined".
  • Weighted Relevancy
  • Content Sequence
  • Relevancy
  • Earliest First
  • Latest First
    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents

    ELDER CORNELL’S SEVENTH SPEECH

    The investigation thus far has brought us to the turning point in the discussion. We are interested.DSQ63 33.3

    My friend thinks the “enmity” in Ephesians 2:15, is the prohibition of fires on the Sabbath day. But if we examine closely we shall find that the not kindling fires had reference only to the cooking of manna while they were in the wilderness of Arabia, a warm climate. It was a mere by-law for that time and place. They were commanded to offer burnt offerings on the Sabbath. See Numbers 28:9, 10. Of course, then, the “kindling of fires” is limited to certain objects and purposes. There is not a word in the fourth commandment about kindling fires. I will now show that is Judea, where the Sabbath was kept many years, they could not life without fires in the coldest winters. And surely, God never required men to freeze in a cold climate, in order to keep the Sabbath.DSQ63 33.4

    When Christ was crucified in the spring of the year, it was so cold that they needed fires to warm by John 18: “And the servants and officers stood there, who had made a fire of coals, for it was cold: and they warmed themselves; and Peter stood with them, and warmed himself.” In the former part of the winter they needed fires also. See Jeremiah 36:22. “Now the king sat in the winter house, in the ninth month: and there was a fire on the hearth burning before him.”DSQ63 33.5

    The psalmist David, in his address to Jerusalem, says: “He giveth snow like wool; he scattereth the hoar frost like ashes. He casteth forth his we like morsels: who can stand before his cold?” Psalm 147:16, 17.DSQ63 34.1

    Dr. Clarke has the following note on this text: “At particular times the cold in the East is so very intense as to kill man and beast. Jacobus de Vitriaco, one of the writers in the Gesta Dei per Francos, says that in an expedition in which he was engaged against mount Tabor, on the 24th of December, the cold was so intense that many of the poor people, and the beasts of burthen, died by it.”DSQ63 34.2

    My friend repeats the assertion that there is no love to God in the law. We still wonder whether he ever read the ten commandments. Let us read a few words of the second commandment: “Shewing mercy unto thousand of them that L-o-v-e me and keep my commandment.”DSQ63 34.3

    When Jesus was interrogated as to what was the great commandment (or principle) “in the law,” he replied, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart,” etc. Matthew 22:36, 37.DSQ63 34.4

    I will now show that my friend is mistaken when he says that no scholar will deny that Colossians 2:16, embraces the weekly Sabbath. I will select witnesses, celebrated for learning, and those, too, who kept his first day Sabbath.DSQ63 34.5

    Dr. Adam Clarke, on this text says, “There is no intimation here that the Sabbath was done away, or that its moral use was suspended by the introduction of Christianity. I have shown elsewhere that Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy, is a commandment of perpetual obligation, and can never be suspended but by the final termination of time.” See Commentary.DSQ63 34.6

    Dr. Justin Edwards says, “The days referred to are those required to be observed in the ceremonial law; days associated by God with meats, drinks, and new moons. The passage does not refer to the Sabbath of the moral law, associated with the commands, forbidding theft, murder, and adultery. This weekly Sabbath was never against men, or contrary to them, but was always for them and promotion of their highest good.” Notes on the New Testament.DSQ63 35.1

    Barnabas and Ignatius are quoted for the first day. Barnabas speaks of the eighth day, but an eighth-day Sabbath must be outside of the week. This witness does not say whether it is the eighth day of the month or of the year. My friend ought to know that both these are spurious testimonies. I affirm that they are both miserable frauds.DSQ63 35.2

    Of the epistle of Barnabas, Mosheim says: “As to what is suggested by some, of its having been written by that Barnabas who was the friend and companion of St. Paul, the futility of such a notion is easily to be made apparent from the letter itself.”DSQ63 35.3

    Neander says: “It is impossible that we should acknowledge this epistle to belong to that Barnabas who was worthy to be the companion of the apostolic labors of St. Paul.” Kitto says “The so-called epistle of Barnabas, probably a forgery of the second century.” Eusebius declares it to be spurious. The Religious Encyclopedia, Milner Domville, Coleman, Killen, Stuart, and many others, give substantially the same opinion of this epistle.DSQ63 35.4

    Of the Ignatian epistles, Prof. C. F. Hudson says: “Of the eight epistles ascribed to him, three are genuine, viz., those addressed to Polycarp, the Ephesians, and the Romans.” The quotation of Bro. Grant was from the epistle to the Magnesians, which is universally admitted to be spurious.DSQ63 36.1

    Dr. Killen thus states the opinion of Calvin: “It is no mean proof of the sagacity of the great Calvin, that upwards of three hundred years ago he passed a sweeping sentence of condemnation on these Ignatian epistles.”DSQ63 36.2

    My friend promises to keep the Sabbath if I will show that it is taught in the New Testament. Now, I ask what kind of proof he will require to satisfy him. He has given a rule to work by, and I will use it. He says the nine commands are taught in the New Testament. Now, if I hate shown or can show that the Sabbath is as plainly taught as several of his nine commands, he is bound to keep the Sabbath. Let us see. For his second commandment he quotes “Neither be ye idolaters,” etc. 1 Corinthians 10:7. But this does not define idolatry in the New Testament. It only refers back to the old dispensation. “Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them,” i. e., Don’t you break God’s law, as they did. Go back to thy second commandment and we learn what idolatry is. Now the Sabbath is brought over in the same manner, i. e., by recognizing it as an existing institution, and referring back to its origin to show why it exists. Mark 2:27. “The Sabbath was made for man.” We go back to find when it was made. We read the fourth commandment, and find if points back to creation for its origin, as well as for the reason for keeping it. The great Teacher says, The Sabbath was made for man. We are men hence it is for us. Shall we reject it? The Sabbath is brought over in the most unqualified manner.DSQ63 36.3

    My friend has tried to destroy the force of the argument we made on James 2:8, by saying that the royal law in Christ’s precept. “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” Let us look at that again. “If ye fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself,” etc. The scripture [Leviticus 19:18] is one thing, and the royal law, which is to be fulfilled according to it, is quite another. We shall find what law is referred to by the connection, verses 10, 11. “For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said, also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law.”DSQ63 37.1

    These commandments stand as a representation of the “whole law” from which they are taken, and unmistakably show that law to be the ten commandments.DSQ63 37.2

    I will now advance another proof that the law of God as a whole is brought into the New Testament. Matthew 5:17-19. “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled. Whosoever, therefore, shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of Heaven.DSQ63 37.3

    [original illegible] enforces every jot and tittle of the law, as obligatory till heaven and earth pass away. No man may violate one of the least of its precept.DSQ63 37.4

    Thus Christ has magnified the law and made it honorable. Why should Bro. Grant, why should any man feel opposed to such a law? Nine of the commandments are admitted good for all mankind, and the Sabbath was made for man, for all mankind. Paul regarded the law as “holy, just and good.” James calls it the “royal law.” Now, we ask, Why have such a law, or any part of it, done away? If a man thought the decalogue had some very obnoxious precepts, that were revolting to his nature, then we could see some reason in opposing it. There is one instance of a man’s feeling opposed to the decalogue when he was ignorant of its meaning. The London Advertiser has the following:DSQ63 38.1

    “A candidate for Parliament, at the recent election, in the course of an electioneering speech was asked, What do you think of the decalogue? Confounded with the inquiry, he turned to a friend and asked, in a whisper. What does that mean? The friend, whose acquaintance with divinity was on par with his own, replied by suggesting that it probably meant flogging in the army.’ Whereupon, the candidate replied, I entirely disapprove of the Decalogue, and will never rest until I see it abolished.’DSQ63 38.2

    I do not wonder that a man should feel opposed to the decalogue, when he thought it meant flogging in the army,” but that any one should oppose it knowing that it means God’s great moral law, is perfectly unaccountable.DSQ63 38.3

    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents