Foreword

This collection gathers the articles of A.T. Jones and E.J. Waggoner which comment on the Old Testament.

Most of these articles were written either for the Seventh-day Adventist Sabbath School Lessons, or for the non-denominational International Sunday-School Lessons that came weekly to the churches of that time. I have also included other relevant articles. Altogether they cover a span of about 20 years, from 1883 to 1903.

On the introduction page of each Section, I have listed other books by Jones and Waggoner which can provide material for deeper study.

Within these articles, the Everlasting Gospel principles are brought out. They show that God's plan, His "everlasting covenant" has ever been the same. In the past, as well as today, there is only one Gospel whereby men are saved, and one Mediator (Jesus Christ) through whom all these blessings come. There is only one eternal Law whereby all are convicted of sin, and whereby all will be judged.

"And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to Him; for the hour of His judgment is come and worship Him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters. ... Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus." (Revelation 14:6-7,12)

Frank Zimmerman

Chapter 1 - The Sabbath School Work

Note: This is an excerpt from the article, "Visit to Healdsburg." Only the relevant part is included here.

There is a lack of appreciation of the importance of the Sabbath-school work as supporting discipline of mind and a thorough education, in the things of God. There is a lack of thoroughness in Bible study.

The Sabbath-school has been regarded as different from the day-school, and that it was not expected that the lesson should be learned perfectly. There has been such an apparent fear of formalism, and a desire to be able to generalize and state things in our own language, that we have neglected that accurate knowledge of the Bible which alone can enable us to generalize.

The particular is before the general. Before we venture to state a Bible event or truth in our own words, we must be familiar with the words of the sacred text; then, if necessary we can paraphrase. But the instances where it is necessary or proper to change the expression in the least, in order to convey its exact meaning, are more rare than is commonly supposed.

This thoroughness of work depends on the individual members of the schools. The officers and teachers cannot demand a perfect recitation, as they would in ordinary schools, however much they may desire the result; but if each member of the school will realize the importance of being able to think and talk in the language of the Bible, especially in these last days, our schools will be improved a thousand-fold.--Signs of the Times, May 10, 1883.

E.J. Waggoner

Chapter 2 - Our Sabbath-School Department

It has been our aim to make this department of our paper one of general interest. From the very nature of our work the Sabbath-school department of the Signs must be different from that of any other paper.

The Signs is a missionary paper. Devoted to an exposition of the great truths of the Bible, especially those for the last days, and as such it goes to all parts of the world, and is read by all classes of people. Its circulation is not confined to our own people, but thousands not of our faith, and many with no well-defined belief in Christianity, read it with interest.

Of the thousands of readers of the Signs, comparatively few study the Sabbath-school lessons upon which it comments, the great majority using the International series;[1] and those who study the lessons published in the Youth's Instructor, are so widely scattered that many do not get the Signs in time to make the notes of the immediate use in preparing their lesson.

All these things have been taken into account in preparing our Sabbath-school department, and we have endeavored to make the notes and comments of such a nature as will interest the general reader. The mission of the Signs is such that we cannot afford to have any part of it of merely local interest. We have evidence from Sabbath-school teachers and scholars that this department has been useful to them in their work; and we know that it has not been unappreciated by the larger class whom we have had in mind.

But there are many who study the International lessons, who would derive more direct benefit if the Signs contained notes on that series also, and we have decided to meet this want.

As all doubtless know, the International lessons are necessarily non-sectarian, being simply portions of the Bible selected by the Lesson committee. While all the Sunday-schools in the country study the same portion of Scripture at the same time, each denomination or journal may publish its own notes and comments. Since the Signs is a Bible expositor, to comment on these lessons will be directly in the line of our work.

We therefore begin this week to add these to our own Lesson notes. To those unacquainted with this series, we will say now for all time, that there are only twelve lessons in each quarter; each school can use whatever it desires for the thirteenth lesson. There will therefore be no notes next week.

As in the past, we will endeavor to make these notes of interest and profit to all; we shall also get them out in time so that those who desire may use them in preparing their lessons. We believe that this move will be appreciated by all our present readers, and by thousands yet to come.--Signs of the Times, June 5, 1884.

E.J. Waggoner

Note:

1. PP Editor’s note: E. J. Waggoner is referring to the two sets of Sabbath school  lessons: those of the Seventh-day Adventist church, and those put together by an International committee for all denominations of Christians. The Signs contained lesson notes for both sets of lessons, for a number of years.

Chapter 3 - Good Advice for Sabbath-Schools

The advice which we have to give is not our own, but is a bit that we found in a book written more than eighteen hundred years ago. It is contained in the following words of Paul to Timothy: "But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes." (2 Timothy 2:23)

If every school would have this verse engrossed in large letters, suitably framed, and hung in a conspicuous place in the classroom, we believe that it would be to its benefit. There is no school in which is not needed as a warning, if not as a reproof.

We would by no means be understood as deprecating a spirit of investigation, or as advocating the shutting off of questions, except such as are indicated in the verse quoted. They are certain death to spirituality either in the school, the teachers' meeting, or anywhere else.

It is a lamentable fact that among any body of persons there will be some whose minds always grasp the fact that is not under consideration. A text of Scripture always conveys to them a hidden meaning, and they feel called upon to make known their doubts, or their new ideas. Others are always reaching out after the unattainable. They want to know more than is revealed.

The question as to where Cain got his wife is still current. "Who was Melchizedek?" is asked with as much anxiety as though eternal happiness depended on the correct answer. The question, "How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?" is still put in spite of the fact that the inspired apostle has marked the mental ability of the questioner down to zero. (1 Corinthians 15:35-36)

There is no end to these foolish and unlearned questions. We mention (though not without a blush) a case that occurred in a Sabbath-school which we recently visited. In the course of the lesson (Genesis 7:14-15) was quoted as a proof text. At the close of the hour, when the leader inquired if anyone had a question to ask concerning the lesson, one pupil rose and with much seriousness asked to know the difference between a bird and a fowl (!), since both words occur in (Genesis 7:14). It will be said that this is an extreme case, and that so foolish a question is seldom asked. No doubt it is an extreme case, and if the question had been only asked we would not mention it; but there were no less than half a dozen persons who were unguarded enough to offer answers. It was this fact that convinced us that the bit of advice which we have quoted is greatly needed.

In the current lessons in the Signs, on immortality,[1] there is room for an abundance of unlearned questions. Some will want to know how the spirit can return to God. Others will demand, or offer to give, an exact definition of the terms "soul" and "spirit." "How is it that the dead can hear the voice of God?" is a question that worries not a few. "What is life?" will probably be asked until mortals reach the state where they will not dissipate their intellectual powers by employing them on unprofitable questions.

"... they do gender strifes." (2 Timothy 2:23)

The strifes do not always appear; in fact, we seldom hear of them in Sabbath-school; nevertheless "strifes" are the legitimate result of such questions. The reason is that there is nothing to decide the question at issue. There is nothing to which either party to the discussion can appeal as a final authority. The opinion of one is of as much value as that of another, and none are worth anything. If the discussion of such questions does not lead to strife, it is solely because the parties have enough grace in their hearts to yield a point, or let the matter drop.

As a general thing, the subject matter of the lesson will suffice to fill all the time allowed. If something in the lesson brings to one's mind a text outside of the lesson, which throws additional light upon it, by all means let him speak of it for the benefit of others. The object of every lesson is to stimulate, not to repress, thought. If the leader sees that the text has no bearing, he can state that fact in a few words, and in a manner not to wound feelings of many.

It may chance that the leader's judgment is at fault, and that the text is to the point, but so long as he is leader he must be allowed to direct the course of the lesson. In a company of earnest students there will be no dearth of good thoughts, and it would be better to let one or two be lost, than to have a discussion to no profit. If a theory can be supported by Scripture, it must be good, but guesses concerning the Bible do not amount to much.

As we before said, these questions are usually dropped before they develop into strife; but of what profit are they? Are there not enough glorious revealed truths in God's word to occupy all our powers of mind, without frittering them away on foolish questions, or those to which no answer can be given, and which, even if answered, are of no practical importance? Time is too precious to spend on trifles, and therefore let us always and everywhere heed the apostle's admonition: "Foolish and unlearned questions avoid." (2 Timothy 2:23)--Signs of the Times, November 27, 1884.

E.J. Waggoner

Note:

1. These Lessons are included in Volume 3 of the Fragments series, Life, Death, and Spiritualism.

Chapter 4 - Helps in Studying the Lesson

The question has been asked: "At what time in the study of the Sabbath-school lessons should helps be brought in, and how should they be used?"

To this question it is difficult to get an answer in a few words. In order to have a thorough knowledge of the subject, it would be necessary to have a clear understanding of what is meant by "helps;" but that must be waived for the present. We will suppose it to include the concordance, dictionaries, atlas, commentaries, histories, etc. Some will derive help from that which would be of no service to others. Taking it for granted that the things at hand are such as may be a help indeed, we would mark out, in brief, the following as a good plan for starting the lesson: Having learned from the lesson paper what the lesson is about, and what portion of Scripture it covers, take the Bible at once, there is where you will find the lesson to be studied. Read carefully, several times, all the texts that are quoted, so as to get them well in mind. The next step will be to commit to memory the portion that is to be memorized. This, of course, will not be accomplished at one effort; to commit the text thoroughly will be a work covering the whole week. If the student wishes, and is able, he may commit the whole of the lesson to memory; this is done by some, with profit. But it is not best to attempt too much at once. It is not the desire to tax the memory to such an extent that earnest thought cannot be put upon the matter thus committed.

While thus learning the texts referred to, the student should bear in mind the object for which they are quoted. Very often many things may be learned from a single verse; the question will indicate for what particular thing the verses is quoted. Then after learning the answers to each individual question, the lesson should be considered as a whole, to see the relation of the questions to one another, and what general point is made by the whole lesson. When this has been done, the student is ready to consult outside helps.

In the matter of consulting commentaries, great care and judgment must be exercised, as on doctrinal points they are often misleading. It is not safe for anyone to consult commentaries indiscriminately, unless he is previously pretty well grounded in the truth. Commentaries are more for the learned than the unlearned.

If one has a good general idea of the subject which he is studying, and is anchored to certain fixed principles, so that he can sift the chaff from the wheat, he will learn much from commentaries. It often happens that a positively erroneous exposition will awaken a train of thought in the mind of the careful student, that will be very profitable.

Those, however, who are most familiar with commentaries, know that quite often the text upon which the student most needs light, is the one upon which the least is said. The reasons for this is obvious. It is perhaps needless to suggest that if there is any work bearing on the lesson, of whose orthodoxy you are fully assured, that is the one to be consulted first. It will aid your judgment in your further search.

One "help" should never be neglected. It is that of the Holy Spirit. It is the author of the Bible, (2 Peter 1:20-21; Ephesians 6:17) and can best give light upon it. One of its offices is to guide into all truth, (John 16:13) and it may be had by anyone for the asking. (Luke 11:13; Mark 11:24) The promise, "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that gives to all men liberally, and upbraids not, and it shall be given him." (James 1:5) is given to all. This help should be sought before beginning the lesson, and during all the time of studying it. One thing more: The Saviour has said, "If any man will do His will he shall know of the doctrine." (John 7:17)

He who earnestly and prayerfully studies the word, with a sincere desire to profit by it, cannot fail to be enlightened. Jesus also said: "If a man love me, he will keep my words; and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him." (John 14:23)

Now we read that "God is light, and in Him is no darkness at all." (1 John 1:5)

If then He dwells in us, what an all-powerful, ever-present help we have. Without this help, all others are worthless.--Signs of the Times, November 27, 1884.

E.J. Waggoner

Chapter 5 - The International Sunday-School Lessons

The International Sunday-school Lessons for the first six months of 1887 are in Genesis and Exodus, ending with the ten commandments--Exodus 20. We are glad to see so much of the year given to the study of this portion of the Scripture. And yet we feel well assured that if the lessons are studied according to the guidance of the official "Select Notes" put forth by the Messrs. Peloubet, they will be studied to very little purpose, if indeed to any purpose at all except that of infidelity.

These "Select Notes" are a kind of commentary gotten up by the "Rev. F. N. Peloubet, D.D., and M. A. Peloubet." The Scripture that contains the lesson is printed in both the Old [KJV] and the Revised Version, and then accompanying this are notes of their own with many others selected from all sources which they approve; and are intended to be made the guide especially to the teachers of the International Lessons in the Sunday-schools. These notes perhaps more largely than any other helps, are used in the Sunday-schools throughout the country. And other than these notes, no better evidence is needed to show how thoroughly the modern "scientific theories" pervade the theology of all the Protestant churches.

All the so-called scientific theories, even to evolution itself, of the creation, and of man, of the flood and of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, are here freely admitted if not directly taught.

• Everything must be made to conform to what "science" says.

• All must agree with the decisions of "science."

• "Science" is the standard by which all must be tested, and if it agrees with "science" that is evidence conclusive that the word is inspired.

All this, however, is just the reverse of the true position. The true position is that the word of the Bible is true; that it is given by inspiration of God. That is the sole unerring standard. If scientific deductions agree with the Bible upon matters of which it speaks, it is well; if these deductions do not so agree then the deductions are wrong, that is all, and they, not the Bible, must be revised; they, and not the words of the Bible, must yield, or be re-stated.

In these "Select Notes" on the creation, we read: God may have made use of second causes, as, "Let the waters bring forth." "Let the earth bring forth." This does not decide the question of the truth of the development theory or of evolution, but shows that God had a plan of development in His own mind, or made creation so that, under His control, it unfolds as an acorn unfolds into an oak. God states the fact that He created all things; He does not state how He created them. God makes a tree as really when it grows in the field as if He had sent it ready made from Heaven. Let scientists discover how.

Very well but has science discovered how? Can science tell how a tree grows in the field? If God should send a tree ready made from Heaven, and should set it right alongside of one that had grown in the field, we should very much like to see the scientist who could tell how the one came any more than the other. There is not a scientist in all the world who can tell that thing, and there never can be one. For the simple truth is that he would have to be equal to God to do it. All this technicality, this shifting of changes, upon the point that God states that He created all, but does not tell how, is a sheer contrivance to save appearances. Those who use it are so far advanced in the "advanced science," and the "advanced theology" of the day, that even the appearance of believing the Scriptures can be kept up in no other way.

Suppose the Creator, beside telling us that He did create the oak, had also chosen to tell us how He did it. Suppose He had told us that He placed an acorn in the earth, that the earth was wet, that then He caused the sun to shine upon it, that the acorn sprouted and took root and grew and became an oak. Would that help the matter a particle? Would not the question still be, "How?" Still the scientific doubter would say: God states the fact that He did thus and so, but He does not state how He did it. He states the fact that He placed the acorn in the earth, but He does not state how He did it; He states the fact that He caused the sun to shine upon it, but He does not state how; He states the fact that the acorn sprouted, but He does not tell how; He states the fact that the acorn took root and grew, but He does not state how. Let scientists discover how.

But for scientists to discover how the oak came from the acorn is not enough. They must then discover how came the acorn. If God should state the fact that He created it, still the advanced science doubter would say,

True, God states the fact that He created it; but He does not state how He created it. Let scientists discover how.

But can scientists discover how? We have never yet seen or heard of the scientist who had discovered which was first, the acorn or the oak. We wish Mr. Peloubet or some one else would give us "the latest assured verdict of science" on this point. Then we shall ask them how it was first, and how it was at all. Then, too, it will be time enough for them to tell how.

The truth is that the Creator, in stating the fact that He created all things, has told all that can be told on the subject. At the point of creation we touch the infinite, and the finite cannot fathom it. There is one way and only one in which the finite can get beyond that word "how." That only way is by faith. For thus says the Lord: "Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear." (Hebrews 11:3)

It is by faith alone that we can understand the creation of God. Faith alone can connect the finite with the infinite. Mark it, "the things which are seen were not made of things which do appear ... the worlds were framed by the word of God." (Hebrews 11:3)

"He spoke and it was; He commanded and it stood fast." (Psalm 33:9)

And "through faith we understand" it.

Again says the Select Notes: If it should be proved that the theory of evolution is true to a large extent (not evolution instead of God, but evolution under God's control with God as Creator and Guide of all), the story of creation as told in Genesis would not be inharmonious with such evolution.

But "the latest assured verdict of science" is that "the doctrine of evolution is directly antagonistic to that of creation." Now if Mr. Peloubet or any of the teachers of the International Lessons can explain just how the story of creation in Genesis would not be inharmonious with such evolution; that is, if he can tell just how that story can be in harmony with a theory that is directly antagonistic to it, we should like very much to see how it can be done. Have scientists yet discovered how this can be?

Again we read: That the DAYS are not days of twenty-four hours, is clearly seen by the use of the word in these chapters. It is used of three days before there could have been any such days, as the sun did not appear till the fourth day.

Is it one of "the latest assured verdicts of science" that the earth did not rotate on its axis till the fourth day? If the earth did rotate, did it not do so once in twenty-four hours, as it still does; or did it then go so slow that it took it ages upon ages to make one rotation? The latter cannot be so, as we believe that it is "the latest assured verdict of science" that it is entirely to its rotary motion that the earth owes its oblate-spheroidal form. If that motion had been so slow as to consume ages in turning once then the earth would not be the shape that it is. But instead of the rotation being then so slow, it is the "assured verdict of science" that "one hundred million years ago" the rotary motion of the earth was actually nearly three-quarters of an hour faster than it now is. Therefore "the latest assured verdicts of science" prove that the days of creation were not more than twenty-four hours long.

As to there being any difference in the days before and after the sun shone on the earth, there was none. The first day, "God said, Let there be light. And there was light. ... And God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. And the evening and the morning [the darkness and the light] were the first day. (Genesis 1:3,5)

And so it was the first day, and the second day, and so it has been every other day, and so it is now. Causing the sun to shine did not make the day. God made the day--the light--the first day. Thus day was upon the earth before the sun shone on the earth, and then when God made the greater light, it was to rule--not make--the day.

"And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night, He made the stars also." (Genesis 1:16)

It is singular that the advanced theology has not found out that there was light on the first day and that God called that light Day.

Again says Mr. Peloubet, of the creation of man, if the theory of evolution, believed by so many scientific men, should prove to be true so far as relates to man's body, and it should be shown (though it has not been proved as yet) that the physical man was developed from monkeys and the lower order of animal life, yet that would not contradict the statement that man was made from the dust of the earth. It would only explain how he was made of the dust--an explanation which the Bible nowhere gives, but leaves men to discover.

But the extreme height of this theologico-scientific nonsense and absurdity, is reached when he comes in his select notes to the creation of woman. He says: Woman was created from man by taking a rib (not merely the bone, but a piece of the side), and forming it into a woman. This is strictly in accordance with the processes of life as revealed by modern scientific research. ... God chose the only method in existence among His creatures which the nature of the case rendered possible.

So then this "method" was already "in existence among His creatures" was it? It is a great comfort, however, to know that science has kindly left us the privilege of thinking that the Creator was wise enough to choose "the only method ... which the nature of the case rendered possible."

Again: So from a portion of Adam, He made a woman. A miracle, indeed (as all creations are miracles), but a miracle conforming, as far as the conditions admitted, to methods already in use.

"Methods already in use"! By whom, we should like to know? Was that the "method already in use" in the making of women, before ever there was a woman made? Was that "the method already in use" in the making of women, before God made the woman? If so who made them? and if so, then where was the miracle?

And this is the stuff that the children are to be taught in the Sunday-schools throughout the land! This is the way that faith in God and respect for His word are to be implanted in the minds and hearts of the young! And this is to be called Christianity! Parents, is it so that such senseless jargon as this shall be taught to your children as the word of God? Is this the way that they are to be taught to remember their Creator in the days of their youth? (Ecclesiastes 12:1)

That such things as these should be put forth to be taught, yea, as part and parcel of the essential teaching, in the Sunday-schools throughout the English speaking world, is, to him who respects the Bible as the word of God, a most startling thing. For it shows how all-pervading this scientific infidelity has become. For infidelity it is and nothing else. If it is not, then there is no such thing as infidelity. If these things can be held consistently with sound belief in Christianity and the Bible as the word of God, then there is no such thing as unbelief. If this be faith there can be no such thing as doubt.

"Keep that which is committed to your trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called, which some professing have erred concerning the faith." (1 Timothy 6:20-21)

"When the Son of man comes shall He find faith on the earth?" (Luke 18:8)

For, "Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear." (Hebrews 11:3)--Signs of the Times, December 16, 1886.

A.T. Jones

Chapter 6 - Teachers and Teaching

A  very interesting meeting of the International Sabbath-school Association was held on Sunday afternoon. At this meeting the following-named persons were elected officers of the association for the coming year: President, C.H. Jones; Vice-President, W.C. White; Secretary and Treasurer, Winnie E. Loughborough; Executive Committee, C.H. Jones, W.C. White, E.J. Waggoner, F.E. Belden, E.W. Farnsworth, Winnie Loughborough, R.S. Owen. At a subsequent meeting, the constitution was changed so as to make unnecessary the election of a Publishing Committee, and to allow of the election of a corresponding secretary.

Mrs. Jesse F. Waggoner gave an interesting talk upon the subject of "Teachers and Teaching," the following synopsis of which may be as interesting and profitable to the readers of the Signs as the talk was to those who listened: A teacher, [she said,] is one who causes another to know something that he did not know before. A Sabbath-school teacher is one who causes another to know the way to Heaven; and the successful teacher will also cause others to walk in that way. But in order to do that, the teacher must himself be walking in the way to Heaven.

She suggested that some might be discouraged because of their imperfections, but said that we need not be discouraged. She said that while crossing the Sierras recently, she had noticed flumes for conducting water for mining and irrigating purposes. In many places these flumes were so imperfect that they leaked badly, and she wondered how any of the water ever reached the destination, but concluded that it was because it flowed so swiftly over the bad places.

The application was this: though imperfect, if we receive the waters of divine truth fresh from the Fountain-head, and are constantly conveying them to others so that the stream does not become stagnant, we may by the blessing of God accomplish much good notwithstanding our imperfections. We must be constantly receiving supplies from the Fountain-head. We sometimes notice the hills when they are all dead and dry and there is scarcely a green spot to be seen anywhere, and again we see lawns that are constantly green; the former have not received a supply of moisture; the latter have water every day. Just so if we teachers would be green and fresh we must be watered by divine grace daily.

Perhaps the most interesting facts presented were those upon the model teacher. The successful artist studies his model, so the successful teacher must study Christ, for He is the model Teacher. He was in love with His work, and so the successful Sabbath-school teacher must be in love with his work. Christ studied his scholars and knew all about them, and so we must study our scholars and learn all we can of their disposition and surroundings. All must not be treated alike. What would be good for one would spoil another, and if we would be successful we must adapt ourselves to each child and use illustrations which each will understand.

Christ always had something important to say. The way for us to have something important to say is to read, study, think, and PRAY. Anciently the sacrifice had to be prepared before God would accept it, and so we must be prepared if we would have divine help and sustenance.

Christ always gained the attention of His scholars; we, too, must follow our Model in this. To do this, we must be prompt, quiet, and reverent. The teacher should get close to his scholars, and make them feel that he is not afraid of them.

Christ was careful to make himself understood. Just so the successful teacher must make himself understood. The teacher should crack the nuts at home, and bring only the kernels to Sabbath-school. Do not use big words, and do not use any words that the children do not understand. Sometimes very simple words have to be explained to children; for instance, a child who has always lived in the city may not know anything about wells, springs, and woods, while the country child knows nothing about those things that are familiar to those in the city.

It was also suggested that care be exercised in asking questions. Questions should be plain and definite, and yet not leading. For instance, the question,

"What was David?" would admit of a dozen correct answers, and yet no one of them be the one that the teacher had in mind and wishes to draw out, while the question,

"Was David a good man or a bad man?" Admits of but one answer, and yet requires the child to exercise some thought.

Christ made use of all helps in His reach. He used illustrations and gave object lessons. The world is full of objects that may be used as illustrations. In every lesson have a point, stick to your point, and make your point.--Signs of the Times, December 1, 1887.

E.J. Waggoner

Chapter 7 - An Important Study

We hope that none of the readers of the Signs will skip the "Notes on the International Lesson," for the reason that they may not be studying those lessons.

The notes are designed to be of a practical nature, and of no less importance to the general reader than to the Sunday-school scholar.

All who are interested in the consideration of Bible truth should read these notes.--Signs of the Times, February 10, 1888.

E.J. Waggoner

Chapter 8 - About the International Sunday-School Lesson

Just a word concerning the article that appears each week with a footnote indicating that it deals with the International Sunday-school lesson.

We know that many Sunday-school teachers make use of these articles in preparing their lessons; but they are not written solely for the benefit of the comparatively few Sunday-School teachers among the thousands of Present Truth readers.

If the articles were of value only to those few, we should hardly feel justified in devoting so much space to them; but the case is this, that the articles are as general in their nature, and as much designed for the general reader and Bible student as for teachers.

Those who have no connection with any Sunday-school can read them with as much profit as those who do. We simply take advantage of the fact that some are especially interested in a certain portion of Scripture at a certain time, to provide matter of value to all.--Present Truth, February 13, 1902.

E.J. Waggoner

Chapter 9 - The Gospel in the Old Testament

The Gospel of God to which the Apostle Paul declared himself to be separated, was the Gospel. "Which He had promised afore by His prophets in the Holy Scriptures." (Romans 1:2) Literally, the Gospel which He had before announced or preached. This shows us that the Old Testament contains the Gospel, and also that the Gospel in the Old Testament is the same Gospel that is in the New. It is the only Gospel that the apostle preached.

That being the case, it should not be thought strange for men to believe the Old Testament, and to refer to it as of equal authority with the New Testament. We read that: "[God] preached beforehand the Gospel unto Abraham, saying, In you shall all nations be blessed." (Galatians 3:8)

The Gospel preached to the people when Paul lived, was the same Gospel that was preached unto the ancient Israelites.

"For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them." (Hebrews 4:2)

Moses wrote of Christ; and so much of the Gospel is to be found in his writings that a man who does not believe what Moses wrote, cannot believe in Christ.

"For had you believed Moses, you would have believed me, for he wrote of me. But if you believe not his writings, how shall you believe my words?" (John 5:46-47)

"To Him gave all the prophets witness, that through His name whosoever believes in Him shall receive remission of sins." (Acts 10:43)

Paul had only the Old Testament when he went to Thessalonica, "and three Sabbath days reasoned with them out of the Scriptures, Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead." (Acts 17:2)

Timothy had nothing in his childhood and youth but the Old Testament writings, and the apostle wrote to him: "Continue in the things which you have learned and have been assured of, knowing of whom you have learned them; And that from a child you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus." (2 Timothy 3:14-15)

Then go to the Old Testament with the expectation of finding Christ and His righteousness there, and you will be made wiser unto salvation. Do not discriminate between Moses and Paul, between David and Peter, between Jeremiah and James, between Isaiah and John.--Present Truth, June 21, 1894.

E.J. Waggoner

Chapter 10 - Contrasts That Do Not Exist

In a prominent religious journal of recent date, we find the following: It is at once the peculiarity and the glory of the New Testament that it enunciates principles, not arbitrary laws. No Sabbath day's journey is here laid out, which man may not exceed; his duties are not prescribed in rigid forms or gauged by a yard-stick. Instead, two underlying principles are laid down--love to God first, love to man next. On these two hang all the law and the prophets.

The meaning of the preceding paragraph, so far as it has any meaning, is that while the Old Testament binds men to the performance of special duties, the New Testament deals only in vague generalities, leaving men to draw their own conclusions as to what they may and may not do.

Such a view as this would commend itself quite readily to the world, who would not find it very difficult to conform to a religion that had no fixed rules. When the development of principles is left to men, there are few things which they may not be made to include.

But the references which are brought forward in proof of this assertion are very unfortunate. It is said of the New Testament that: No Sabbath day's journey is there laid out, which men may not exceed; by which it is implied that such a thing is marked out in the Old Testament. But the fact is that instead of a "Sabbath day's journey which men may not exceed" being laid down in the Old Testament, such a thing is not mentioned. The term does not once occur in the Old Testament. The only place in the Bible in which it is found is in the New Testament in (Acts 1:12). So much for that attempt to depreciate the Old Testament.

Again, of the New Testament it is said that in it man's duties. Are not prescribed in rigid forms, or gauged by a yard-stick. Instead, two underlying principles are laid down--love to God first, love to man next.

What a pity it is that the one who wrote that did not read the Old Testament through at least once, before contrasting it with the New. Had he done so, he would have found in Deuteronomy these words: "And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might." (Deuteronomy 6:5)

There is love to God in its fullest extent. Again in Leviticus he would read as follows: "You shall not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of your people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself." (Leviticus 19:18)

How much that sounds like New Testament language. We hope that none who despise the Old Testament will reject that text when they find that it is original in that book. For our part we do not know of any more appropriate motto to be hung up for constant reference. If a copy were in a conspicuous place in every house, and read carefully every day, it would improve the manners and customs of this world wonderfully.

Any attempt to find antagonism between the Old and New Testaments, will prove a failure. A house and its foundation are not more closely joined than they. In fact, that is just the relation they bear to each other. The Old Testament is the foundation; the New is the superstructure. There is not a principle laid down in the New Testament that is not in the Old.

These statements about love to God and love to man are direct quotations from the Old Testament.

"And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted Him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? He said unto him, What is written in the law? how do you read? And he answering said, You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself. And He said unto him, You have answered right, this do, and you shall live." (Luke 10:25-28)

Our Saviour and the apostles quoted continually from it. Indeed, there was nothing else from which they could quote. If all the references to, and quotations from, the Old Testament were taken out of the New, there would be but little left. The New Testament is the Old Testament explained.

And now let us make a little investigation to see if it is true that simple principles alone are laid down in the New Testament; to see if it is true that the Old Testament contains only threatenings of judgments against sin, while the New has only mercy and love. In the preaching of the gospel we find a command at the very outset: "Repent and be baptized every one of you." (Acts 2:38)

This is as plain as anything could be. In (Matthew 5:17-48), the decalogue itself is nearly all repeated, and instead of any of its provisions being made less definite, they are enlarged and made to appear more strict than ever.

And then as to the idea that the New Testament contains only love and mercy. The threats against the sinner are as terrible as any in the Old Testament. In Romans 2 we read that God will render. "Unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, Tribulation and anguish upon every soul of man that does evil." (Romans 2:8-9)

Again Paul says that: "The Lord Jesus shall be revealed from Heaven with His mighty angels, In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction." (2 Thessalonians 1:7-9)

Some of the strongest threatenings in the Bible come from the lips of our Lord himself. In Revelation 14:9-12, which is the revelation of Jesus Christ, (Revelation 1:1) we read that they who worship the beast, and receive his mark,

"... shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of His indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb." (Revelation 14:10)

On the other hand, we find in the Old Testament some of the most tender expressions of mercy that are to be found in the Bible. Even in the decalogue itself we learn that God shows mercy to those that keep His commandments: "Showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments." (Exodus 20:6)

What expression of love could be stronger than this: "Like as if a father pities his children, so the Lord pities them that fear Him." (Psalm 103:13)

Again, "the mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting. The Lord is merciful and gracious, slow to anger and plenteous in mercy." (Psalm 103:17,8)

Nehemiah says that "[He is] a God ready to pardon, gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness." (Nehemiah 9:17)

And, finally, we have this broad principle laid down as the sum of all duty: "What does the Lord require of you, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God." (Micah 6:8)

Here is as broad a principle as is found in the New Testament. We do not exalt the Old Testament above the New, but we would place them on a level. They are one; and this is why we protest against decrying the Old. Undermine the confidence of the people in that, and reverence for the Bible and Bible truth will be a thing of the past.

And it would not be to the glory of the New Testament if it could be proved that specific duties are not there prescribed. We need rigid rules, that our lives may be correct. When man is left to himself, he invariably goes wrong. Now if the Bible dealt in vague terms, leaving us to interpret them to suit ourselves, we would be no better off than if we had no revelation at all.

If we but have the principle of love to God in our hearts, we will love all His word, so that we can say with the psalmist: "Your word is true from the beginning; and every one of your righteous judgments endures forever." (Psalm 119:160)--Signs of the Times, May 24, 1883.

E.J. Waggoner

Chapter 11 - Real Forgiveness

The Old Testament is full of promises of forgiveness. When one of the people sinned, he was to make the proper sin-offering, and the promise was, "and it shall be forgiven him." (Leviticus 4:26)

So the prophet Isaiah said: "Seek the Lord while He may be found, call upon Him while He is near: Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; and let him return unto the Lord, and He will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for He will abundantly pardon." (Isaiah 55:6-7)

Some have thought that pardon before the death of Christ was not real but only typical, though what sort of a thing a "typical pardon" might be, they have not told us. But the pardon which David received was so real as to cause him to exclaim: "Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered. Blessed is the man unto whom the Lord imputes not iniquity." (Psalm 32:1-2)

The forgiveness which David received was such as took away the sin so that the Lord did not any longer account him guilty. If that was not actual forgiveness, we should like to have someone tell us what more than that actual forgiveness could do for a man.

This blessedness was Abraham's when his faith was counted for righteousness. Abraham was the father of the faithful, for he, "against hope believed in hope." (Romans 4:18)

He had faith in Christ, who, it had been promised, would be descended from him, when he had no child, and when it was utterly impossible, humanly speaking, that he should ever have one. He is called the father of the faithful, because he exercised stronger faith than any other man who ever lived.

But faith nowadays always brings the fullness of pardon, and Abraham's greater faith must have brought the same thing to him. And so it did, as the Scriptures plainly declare.

Abel likewise, by his sacrifice of faith, "obtained witness that he was righteous." (Hebrews 11:4)

But if he was righteous, he had been cleansed from sin, for no man can be righteous before his sins are forgiven.

Of Enoch we read that he "walked with God." (Genesis 5:22)

That is the same as saying that he was at peace with God; for two cannot walk together except they are agreed. (Amos 3:3) But peace comes only after the faith which brings pardon. (Romans 5:1-2) Enoch could not have walked with God, if his sins had been upon him; but if his sins were not actually forgiven, then they were actually upon him.

Forgiveness must precede a righteous life; therefore to say that there was no actual forgiveness before Christ came, is the same as saying that there were no men who were actually righteous before the resurrection of Christ, but that all were hypocrites. Thus the theory of typical or pretended pardon dishonors both God and men.

There is, however, a real difficulty in the minds of some who have no notion of denying God's word, which declares that from the earliest ages men were actually forgiven, and were actually righteous. That difficulty is this: All the blessings that come to men, come by virtue of what is called the "second covenant," (Hebrews 8:6-7) of which Christ is mediator; but that covenant was not ratified until the death of Christ, and Paul says: "For a testament is of force after men are dead; otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator lives." (Hebrews 9:17)

Then how was it possible for men before the days of Christ to receive the blessing of forgiveness, which is promised only in the second covenant? A verse in the 4th chapter of Romans will serve to answer this. The apostle, after telling how Abraham received the righteousness of faith, says that he believed God,

"... who quickens the dead, and calls those things which be not as though they were." (Romans 4:17)

God can make a thing that is not just as real as though it actually existed. How is that? The answer is in: "For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he swore by himself, Saying, Surely blessing I will bless you, and multiplying I will multiply you. And so, after he had patiently endured, he obtained the promise. For men verily swear by the greater: and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife. Wherein God, willing more abundantly to show unto the heirs of promise the immutability of His counsel, confirmed it by an oath: That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us." (Hebrews 6:13-18)

The promise which God made to Abraham was confirmed in Christ. His faith was counted for righteousness, by virtue of the Seed which was to come. And although God cannot lie, He confirmed His immutable promise by an oath, and so made it doubly unchangeable. So although all pardon is granted solely by virtue of the blood of Christ, after Christ had been promised it was the same as though he had actually been slain. So sure is the promise of God, that Christ is called, "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world;" (Revelation 13:8) for the promise that was made to Abraham was nothing more than the promise made to Adam. There is but one plan of salvation.

"Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, and today, and forever," (Hebrews 13:8) is the center of that plan, and the grace of God through Him has been equally abundant in all ages since sin entered into the world.

"For the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon Him." (Romans 10:12)--Bible Echo, June 15, 1890.

E.J. Waggoner

Chapter 12 - One Book

A great many people who would be shocked at the suggestion that they are infidels, imagine that faith is entirely consistent with a disbelief of many of the records of the Bible, especially of the Old Testament.

They think that they believe the Gospel, yet they make no scruple of pulling the Old Testament record of that Gospel to pieces. There are many portions of the Bible that they are very doubtful about; and as for the story of Jonah, and the account of the flood, they can scarcely have patience with anyone who professes to believe them. The Bible account of the creation of the earth, they regard as at the best only a beautiful fable.

Can one believe the Gospel, and disbelieve the Old Testament? Let us see. The Apostle Peter speaks about the salvation of our souls, and says, "Of which salvation the prophets inquired and searched diligently who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: Searching what or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. Unto whom it was revealed that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things which are now reported unto you by these which have preached the Gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven." (1 Peter 1:10-12)

Read the above text carefully, and you will see that it states that the prophets of old ministered the very same things that are announced by those who preach the Gospel. Then the prophets must have written the Gospel. When Peter was preaching Christ in the house of Cornelius, he said, "To Him give all the prophets witness, that through His name whosoever believes in Him shall receive remission of sins." (Acts 10:43)

And the Apostle Paul said, "Having therefore obtained the help that is from God, I stand unto this day testifying both to small and great, saying nothing but what the prophets and Moses did say should come: How that Christ must suffer, and how that He first by the resurrection of the dead should proclaim light both to the people and to the Gentiles." (Acts 26:22-23, RV)

Therefore whoever says that the Old Testament does not contain the Gospel, says that the Apostle Paul did not preach the Gospel.

Suppose the position be taken that the story of creation, and of the fall of man, is only a fable. If that were so, then there would be no Gospel at all. For if there were no fall of man, there need be no redemption. So that if the account of the fall were imaginary, then we have the entire Gospel built on a fable. And besides, if the story of creation and the fall of man be a fable, how can we know that the whole Bible is not the same? We must either accept the whole Bible, or reject it all. We cannot pull it into pieces.

Take the account of the prophet Jonah. Many people would feel almost insulted if it were intimated that they were so simple as to believe it. They say that it never really happened that the great fish never swallowed Jonah, and that it would have been impossible for him to live three days in its belly. But Christ said, "As Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale's belly, so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." (Matthew 12:40)

Now if Jonah was never in the whale's belly, and could not have been, then we have the Saviour likening His death and resurrection to an impossibility. Therefore to deny the story of Jonah, is to deny the foundation of the Gospel.

It will not do in this case to say as so many of the "higher critics" do, that the Saviour spoke of the things that were currently reported among the Jews, as illustrations, taking the people on their own grounds, without stopping to explain that those things were really fables. If the story were not true, the Lord knew it; yet He said that just as Jonah was in the belly of the whale so He should be in the heart of the earth. If the story of Jonah were not true, then we have Christ saying that He would not be in the heart of the earth at all.

Is it not better to believe a thing that we cannot understand, than to throw away the entire Gospel? Who dare say that it is of no importance whether or not we believe all the records of the Old Testament?

The saddest part of this matter is that the people have not been led to this loose way of regarding the Bible by professed infidels, but by professed ministers of the Gospel. It is they who are responsible for the current of unbelief that is carrying so many away. Indeed, one can scarcely pick up a religious journal without seeing more or less about the controversy that is now going on over the Bible.

There is a controversy, for there are many ministers who stand for the truth of the Bible; yet there are so many ministers of high standing and influence, who seem to be actuated by intense fear that the people will really believe too much of the Bible, that it is necessary to raise a voice of warning. We need not pass sentence of condemnation upon those ministers, but simply warn the people to beware of them as false teachers.

Lessons from the Flood

We have just seen a sermon on the flood, which instead of seeking to strengthen the faith of the weak, is almost wholly devoted to an attempt to prove that there never was any such thing. Here are some of the statements. We give them because doubts in regard to the flood are becoming quite common. The preacher says: "No student of science is able to believe that any such flood as that recorded in the early chapters of Genesis ever took place in the history of the human race."

"We are not to take the account of the deluge for history infallibly inspired and rigidly accurate in all its details."

That view he tells us, "is no longer held by persons of ordinary education."

How easy it is to brush aside a proposition with the statement that no one of ordinary education believes it. A false fear of being called ignorant is at the bottom of a large part of the infidelity of these days.

But what about the flood? May we throw it aside as a myth, and still hold fast our faith in the Gospel, and in the Bible in general? Let us see. Christ used the flood and its time as an illustration of the last days.

"As it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all." (Luke 17:26-27)

In the book of Hebrews we are informed who the "all" were who were destroyed by the flood.

"By faith Noah being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear; prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith." (Hebrews 11:7)

It was the world that was condemned by the preaching of Noah, because they did not believe it; and it was the world that was destroyed by the flood. Christ in person, and also through His chosen apostle, bears witness to this.

Again the flood is put in the same list as the creation of the world, and the general judgment. The Apostle Peter says that they who scoff at the promise of the coming of the Lord, are willingly ignorant of the fact that "by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men." (2 Peter 3:5-7)

Whoever discounts the story of the flood, thereby discounts the story of creation, and also the promise of the coming of the Lord to judge the world. The same word that brought the flood upon the earth, created the earth, and will make it new again. The Scriptures, from Moses onward, testify of Christ, and they cannot be rejected without rejecting Christ.

Still further, if the story of the flood is a myth, then there is no comfort in the Gospel. It is upon that fact, and the things connected with it, that the Lord gives us assurance that He will not forget us. Speaking to Jerusalem which is above, and is the mother of us all, which is now desolate, mourning the absence of her children, God says: "For this is as the waters of Noah unto me, for as I have sworn, that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth; so have I sworn that I would not be wroth with you, nor rebuke you." (Isaiah 54:9)

Her joy and glory will be the restoration of her children, by the salvation of the righteous; therefore the assurance that God will save His people is no greater than the assurance that there was a flood in the days of Noah.

"As I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth so have I sworn that I would not be wroth with you." (Isaiah 54:9)

But if there were no flood, then the Lord did not swear that the waters of the flood should no more go over the earth; and so in that case we have no assurance that He will remember to save His people. Again, we read the words of inspiration through the Apostle Peter: "For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly; ... The Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished." (2 Peter 2:4-5,9)

If the Lord did that, He knows how to deliver the godly out of temptations; but if He did not do that, what then? the only conclusion is that He does not know how to deliver the godly out of temptations. And so those who deny the story of the flood throw away all the consolations of the Gospel.

More might be said in the same line, but this is sufficient to show that no one can lightly deny any part of the Sacred Record. It all stands or falls together. No, that is not correct: it all stands together; it does not fall, notwithstanding the assaults of men.

"For ever, O Lord, your word is settled in heaven. ... Your word is true from the beginning; and every one of your righteous judgments endures for ever." (Psalm 119:89,160)

We have written this to call attention to what is involved in setting aside any portion of the Bible, and to enable the reader more clearly to see that: "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

It is all profitable, and all necessary.--Present Truth, July 6, 1893.

E.J. Waggoner

Chapter 13 - Judaism and Christianity

Many people speak about "Judaism," who have very faint ideas of what it is. When they hear of some who keep the Sabbath according to the fourth commandment, they speak of them as "Judaizing," because they think that Judaism means the religion enjoined in the Old Testament. But that is a great mistake.

Judaism means the religion of the Jews; but neither in the days of Christ and the apostles, nor since that time, have the Jews understood and believed the teaching of the Old Testament. If they had, they would have been Christians; for the religion of the Old Testament is Christianity.

Jesus said to the unbelieving Jews: "Had you believed Moses, you would have believed me; for he wrote of me. But if you believe not his writings, how shall you believe my words?" (John 5:46)

From these words we learn that the Jews did not believe the writings of Moses. Therefore it is evident that the religion of the Jews--Judaism--was not and is not the religion taught by Moses. The religion taught by Moses was that which he received directly from the Lord, and it set forth Christ and Him only.

The Apostle Paul says that in his earlier days he made great progress in "the Jews' religion, ... being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers." (Galatians 1:14)

The Jews' religion, therefore, or Judaism, consisted in following tradition. But this was directly opposed to Old Testament teaching, for Jesus told them that by their traditions they made void the commandments of God,--"But He answered and said unto them, Why do you also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?" (Matthew 15:3)--and said of them: "In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." (Matthew 15:9)

Here again we see that Judaism is the rejection of the Old Testament, instead of the acceptance of it. No man, therefore, who faithfully follows the religion of the Old Testament, can be called a Judaizer. On the contrary He is a Christian.

Again, the Apostle Paul tells us that a veil was upon the hearts of the Jews, even in the days of Moses, so that they could not understand what Moses delivered to them.

"And not as Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not steadfastly look to the end of that which is abolished: But their minds were blinded: for until this day remains the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ. But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart. Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away." (2 Corinthians 3:13-16)

He says, "Even unto this day, when Moses is read, the veil is upon their heart." But he adds that when the heart turns to the Lord the veil is taken away. This shows still further that the religion of the Old Testament is Christianity, and that the Jews, who reject Christ, do so solely because they do not really believe the writings of Moses. What then is Judaism? It is the rejection of the Gospel, as set forth in the Old Testament, and a following of tradition.

When therefore we find people who know that the fourth commandment requires the observance of the seventh day of the week, commonly called Saturday, and who keep Sunday instead of that day, although they know that the Scriptures nowhere sanctions it, either in the Old Testament nor the New, but that Sunday observance stands wholly on tradition and custom, we may know that they are following the essential principles of Judaism, which consists in substituting tradition for the commandments of God. They may differ from the Jews in regard to the tradition which they follow, but they are one with them in principle.

Further: we have read the words of Jesus to the Jews, telling them that they could not believe Him, because they did not believe Moses. The reason is that Moses wrote of Christ. It is evident, therefore, that they who do not see Christ in the Old Testament, even in the writings of Moses, do not understand and believe the Old Testament. But they who do not believe the Old Testament, including the writings of Moses, do not really believe in Christ. Therefore they who reject the Old Testament writings, do really also reject the New Testament. They are in precisely the same condition as the Jews, for both fail to see Christ in the Old Testament.

Every word of God is pure and true, and has life. A person, therefore, who knows only a very small portion of the Bible, may know and believe in Christ. But it is impossible for any to be real believers in Christ, when they reject any portion of the word which He has spoken, and which testifies of Him. And it was His Spirit that testified in all the writers of the Old Testament.

"Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow." (1 Peter 1:10-11)

Let no one fear that by keeping the commandments of God, as set forth in the Old Testament, he will be a Judaizer. He cannot keep those commandments except by faith in Christ. They are in Christ, and Christ is in them.

The keeping of the commandments of God, by the faith that appropriates the life of Christ, is true Christianity. He kept the commandments,--If you keep my commandments, you shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in His love. (John 15:10)--and He is the same today that He was when on earth in the flesh.

"Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever." (Hebrews 13:8)

All that He did on earth was in order "that the requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us." (Romans 8:4, NASB)

"He that says he abides in Him ought himself also so to walk, even as He walked." (1 John 2:6)--Present Truth, June 7, 1894.

E.J. Waggoner 

Chapter 14 - "Jewish" and Christian

The Cincinnati Weekly Enquirer, of January 2, quotes the Rev. Mr. Dabb, a Protestant clergyman of New York City, as affirming in a recent discourse that the Sabbath institution is not Christian, but only a part of the ancient "Mosaic code," with which it passed away at the death of Christ.

The Jewish law, [he said,] was given to the Jewish people and never to any other people. It was binding upon them, but never on Christians, or any other race.

The assertion would not be worth noticing did it not express an idea quite generally entertained by professors of Christianity. There is nothing which casts more confusion over the Sabbath question than this. Were it not for the idea that the Sabbath originated as a "Jewish" institution, and that what was Jewish is necessarily separate and distinct from what is Christian, the Sabbath question would not be today the difficult and perplexing one that it is to the people generally.

We desire, then, to call the attention of as many as possible to two important facts, implied in the foregoing statements:

1. The Sabbath--the seventh-day rest--is not and never was "Jewish," and

2. Whatever was given by God to His people of old, pertained to Christianity as truly as do any of the ordinances enjoined upon the Church by Christ and His apostles.

The idea has in some way taken possession of the mind of Christendom that there is an antagonism between the "old dispensation" of "the law and the prophets," and the "new dispensation" of the preaching of Christ and His kingdom; that the "new dispensation" with its ordinances and precepts, necessarily superseded and abrogated that which pertained to the former times. This idea is as far from the truth as anything could be.

God did not have one plan and purpose for the world in Old Testament times and another plan and purpose for the world in this dispensation. He has had but one purpose, and that is: "The eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord;" (Ephesians 3:11) namely, "That in the dispensation of the fullness of times He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are in earth." (Ephesians 1:10)

This one great purpose He has steadily carried forward since the fall of man. Salvation through Christ was the theme of "the law and the prophets." (Matthew 22:40)

The Old Testament is as truly the word of Christ as is the New Testament; for Peter tells us that it was the Spirit of Christ that testified through the prophets.

"Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow." (1 Peter 1:11)

"Unto us, [writes Paul,] was the gospel preached as well as unto them;" (Hebrews 4:2)

--that is, to the ancient Israelites who went out from Egypt with Moses.

The gospel, we are told by the same writer, "is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believes." (Romans 1:16)

And in the 11th chapter of Hebrews we are pointed to the ancient worthies who through faith "subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, Quenched the violence of fire." (Hebrews 11:33-34)

People in their day had faith in Christ, as truly as people have faith in him today. The power of God unto salvation, through that faith,--in other words, the gospel,--was preached to them as truly as it is to us. The gospel ordinances and ceremonies of their day, very largely, pointed forward to Christ, and as such necessarily passed away when Christ's death upon the cross became an accomplished fact. Since that time the Christian Church has had ordinances and ceremonies pointing back to that event. But whether before or after Christ's death, they pointed to Him as the sacrifice for the salvation of mankind, and as such were the means of expressing faith in Him.

The seventh-day Sabbath is never in the Scriptures called "Jewish," but is termed "the Sabbath of the Lord." And it is today, as it was then, the Sabbath of Jehovah,--the memorial of His creative power, which is also the power by which He redeems the sinner.

Abraham is called in Scripture the father of the faithful.

"To Abraham and his seed were the promises made." (Galatians 3:16) 

And we read, "If you be Christ's, then are you Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." (Galatians 3:29)

Abraham was as truly a Christian as was Peter or Paul. And all those in every age who have believed on Christ for salvation, have been Christians in fact, whether known by that name or not.

Because the law of God was spoken to the Israelites from Sinai, it does not follow that that law was not for Christians. For, as we have seen, a very large number of those to whom it was spoken were Christians. As Christians, they observed God's Sabbath,--the seventh day; and that day was, and still is, the Sabbath for all Christians.

Jesus Christ himself was a Jew, and His apostles were Jews. And we also, if we are Christ's, are Abraham's seed, and therefore Jews in the true spiritual sense of the word; "For, [we read,] he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of man, but of God." (Romans 2:29-30)

To say, therefore, that the law of God spoken from Sinai, "was given to the Jewish people and never to any other people," and was never binding "on Christians," simply betrays a fundamental misconception of the purpose and scope of the gospel. If Christendom would shake off this misconception, the whole question of the nature and obligation of the Sabbath, the foundation upon which it rests, and the proper means for securing its observance, would be wonderfully simplified.

Seen in the light of the plain statements of Holy Writ, we find no difficulty in knowing what is our own proper attitude toward the Sabbath, and what course we should pursue toward others with respect to its observance. But without that light, men can but fall deeper and deeper into error, both of belief and practice.--American Sentinel, January 23, 1896.

A.T. Jones

Chapter 15 - Old and New Testament

The Old Testament is often spoken of by thoughtless people as a yoke of bondage. But if the Old Testament be a yoke of bondage, the New must be also. Its requirements are at least as difficult.

Christ did not introduce a lower standard of conduct in His Sermon on the Mount. The one who takes the New Testament as his standard has got as hard a master as the Jew who found a yoke of bondage in the Old Testament.

The man who accepts them both and lives by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God, instead of trying to live up to some of them, finds in both Old and New Testament the power of God unto salvation.--Present Truth, November 22, 1900.

E.J. Waggoner