
We first inquire, when was this covenant made? The covenant is mentioned in Deut 5:2,3 and verse 5, plainly shows where it was made, as follows: "I," says Moses, "stood between the Lord and you AT THAT TIME, to show you the word of the Lord; for ye were afraid by reason of the fire, and went not up into the mount." The "mount" referred to is Mount Sinai; therefore the covenant was made after the children of Israel came into the wilderness of Sinai, on the fifteenth day of the third month. Let this fact be clearly seen, that whatever may be understood by making the covenant in Horeb, it cannot be dated back one day prior to the fifteenth day of the third month.
We now inquire, what was the covenant made in Horeb? M. affirms that it was the ten commandments. To this view we object for the following reasons.
1. Because when the covenant was made, Moses took the words of the Lord and showed them to the people, which was not the case when the ten commandments were spoken from Sinai. God declared them with an audible voice to ALL THE PEOPLE.
2. Because the law of God existed before Israel came to the wilderness of Sinai. Though the ten precepts of that law were not previously written out in the form that they were written on the tables of stone at Sinai, yet to say that God's law did not exist in some form, is virtually saying that sin did not exist until 2,500 years after the fall of man, for St. Paul says, "where no law is, there is no transgression," Rom 4:15. He also says in Ch. 5:13, "For until the law, [when its precepts were written in stone.] sin was in the world; but sin is not imputed when there is no law." "Sin," says St. John, "is the transgression of the law." Therefore, as sin did reign "from Adam to Moses," God's law necessarily existed in some form during that time.
3. We object to M's position, because, if the covenant made in Horeb was the commandments of God, then they were all made there, and the Sabbath could not exist prior to the fifteenth day of the third month after Israel left Egypt. Now go back thirty days before this covenant was made, to the wilderness of Sin, [Ex.xvi.] and there you will see God raining manna from heaven for his chosen people. They gather an omer each day till the sixth day, then the people, gathered two omers of manna for one man. And when the rulers told Moses, he replied, "This is that which the Lord hath said, To-morrow is the rest of the Holy Sabbath unto the Lord." He did not say, the seventh day will be the Sabbath, after the law shall be given at Sinai; but "IS the rest of the Holy Sabbath."
On the Seventh day the heavens gave no manna. But some of the people went out to gather, and they found none. "And the Lord said to Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my COMMANDMENTS and my LAWS? See, for that the Lord hath given you the SABBATH. . . . So the people rested on the seventh day." Ex 16:28-30. Is it said that the people were then wholly ignorant of the Sabbath, and the other nine commandments, and that God made them in the wilderness of Sin? then we would call attention to the manner in which, as it is said, God first introduces them. "How long," says the Law-giver, "refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws? see for that the Lord hath given you the Sabbath." Who can for a moment suppose that God would introduce his law in this manner to a people wholly ignorant of it? This view makes God a tyrant, instead of a tender parent.
Again, if the commandments and laws of God, including the Sabbath, were made in the wilderness of Sin, and if they are the covenant made also in Horeb thirty-two days afterward, then they were certainly made twice! This is much like having the Sabbath abolished twice, first, before Christ began to heal on the Sabbath ("otherwise" he "became a transgressor," says M.) and then again at the cross. See Harbinger of Sept. 27, 1851, page 114, first column.
As the Sabbath was guarded by Jehovah in giving the manna in the wilderness of Sin, observed there by Israel, and as the violation of it was to "refuse" to keep God's "commandments and laws," how absurd the position that the covenant made thirty days later, in another place, was the commandments of God, one of which was the Sabbath! Here M. finds a serious difficulty which he tries to avoid by saying that the Sabbath "was not fully instituted until some days after it was given to the people." He has it "given" at the wilderness of Sin, we suppose, and then "instituted" at Sinai, thirty-two days later.
Query. Were the Israelites so weary, at the time that they did not have to labor for food or clothing, that "Infinite Wisdom" was moved to give them a day of rest thirty-two days before it was made for man? "It was made" says M. "just at the time when we should suppose infinite wisdom would make it, namely, when he saw fit to give a law to his chosen people." Was the law given in the wilderness of Sin? Certainly not; M. will say it was given at Sinai, thirty-two days after the manna was given. Yet he has the Sabbath given to Israel thirty-two days before "Infinite Wisdom" gave the law and made the Sabbath for man.
In another place M. says "that the Sabbath was not instituted until God gave it to the children of Israel." Here he has it instituted when given. And five lines only above this assertion, he states that it was given some days before it was instituted. The fact that the Sabbath was understood, and observed in the wilderness of Sin, is greatly in M.'s way. It is positive proof that his position is incorrect that the Sabbath was made thirty-two days afterward, when the covenant was made in Horeb.
Again, he refers to Neh 9:13,14, where it is said, "Thou camest down also upon Mount Sinai, . . . . . and madest known thy Holy Sabbath." He thinks that this is certain proof that the Sabbath was not "instituted," or "made known," until that time. He then states that the Review contends that they knew all about it, and that it was instituted before that time, and adds, "Which will you believe? the Review, or Nehemiah?"
In trying to array Nehemiah against the "Review," M. evidently arrays the testimony of the prophet of the Lord against plainly revealed facts found in Ex 16. We inquire, When Moses said to the rulers, "To-morrow is the rest of the Holy Sabbath unto the Lord," did they not know something about it? And when they gathered and cooked two omers of manna for a man on the sixth day, that they might have one to eat on the Sabbath, and when they saw that none was given on the seventh day, were they ignorant of the design of God in this thing? And when God said, "How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws? see, for that the Lord hath given you the Sabbath," did not Moses and the people understand the Lord? The following shows that they did well understand the Sabbath. "So the people rested on the seventh day." Verse 30. Let it be understood that all this took place thirty-two days before the Lord came down on Mount Sinai.
The testimony of Nehemiah does not conflict with other portions of the Divine Record, nor the position of the Review. It is evident that the children of Israel understood the Sabbath when they rested on the seventh day in the wilderness of Sin. But when Jehovah descended in awful grandeur upon Mount Sinai, and spake the ten precepts of the "Royal Law," he then made known his Holy Rest-day in a manner calculated to deeply impress them with its importance.
The word of God plainly shows that the Sabbath was understood in the wilderness of Sin; but M. has it "made for man," "instituted," "given," thirty-two days later, when the covenant was made in Horeb. We will not ask which will you believe, M. or the word of God; for we know our readers will all say in the language of the Apostle, "let God be true, but every man a liar."
But what was the covenant made in Horeb? and not with the fathers Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. A covenant is a mutual agreement between two parties, or, according to its second definition, it is a writing containing the terms of agreement. - Webster.
We say that the covenant under consideration, was, according to the first definition, a mutual agreement between God and his chosen people. The proposition on the part of God stands thus. "If ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then shall ye be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people, Ex.xix,3-7. The answer of the people was as follows. "All that the Lord hath spoken we will do." Verse 8.
This mutual agreement between the two parties was the covenant made in Horeb. The ten commandments are also called a covenant, the ark of God is called the ark of the covenant, and the two tables of stone are called the tables of the covenant, because they, according to the second definition of the word, contained the terms of agreement. The Sabbath alone is "a perpetual covenant" that those who keep it may know that the Lord sanctifies them. Ex 31:16.
But M. states with much positiveness, [see Harbinger of Nov. 15.] and offers proof, that the ten commandments were God's covenant, written on the tables of stone, and that it embraced the Sabbath. All this we fully believe. But it by no means proves that the commandments of God was the covenant made in Horeb. What folly to assert that the law of God which embraces the Sabbath, was not made until thirty-two days after it was observed by the people, and its transgression rebuked by the Law-giver!
Let it here be understood that what was written in the BOOK of the COVENANT, [2 Chr 34:30; 2 Ki 23:21; Neh 8:1-3; Deut 31:24-26.] was called the covenant, and that which was written in the TABLES of the COVENANT, [Deut 9:9-11; 4:13; Ex 24:12; 31:18; 34:28,29,] was also called the covenant. One embraced the mutual agreement between God and his chosen people, with all the ordinances of the Jewish religion, while the other embraced only the ten commandments. One was made in Horeb, or at Mount Sinai, consequently not made with the fathers; but the other containing the principles of God's moral government, must have existed parallel with the existence of man; therefore Abraham could keep God's "commandments statutes and laws," as well as Israel in the wilderness of Sin, before the covenant was made in Horeb.
Paul, in Rom 8, is contrasting the old covenant with the new. No one will say that the new covenant here is the ten commandments; neither should they say that they are the old covenant. The conditions of the new covenant are to obey God's laws put in the mind, and written in the heart, while the terms of agreement in the old covenant was to obey them engraven in stones. This faulty covenant made when God led his people out of Egypt was the covenant not made with the fathers. We inquire, were the ten commandments faulty? No one finds fault with any but the fourth, and M. should not find fault with that, seeing as he states, that poor fallen man so much needed a day of rest from toil.
We understand by better covenant, and faulty covenant that the promises on which the old was established are inferior to those on which the new is based. We will now look at some of the promises of the old.
If ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people. Ex 19:5.These promises and many others of the kind, were fault or inferior, because they did not take hold of eternal life. They related only to the prosperity of God's people in Canaan, or in this life. And it will be seen that God's covenant of ten commandments was the terms of agreement in this, the first covenant.If ye walk in my statutes and keep my commandment and do them; Then I will give you rain in due season and the land shall yield her increase, and the trees of the field shall yield their fruit. And your threshing shall reach unto the vintage, and the vintage shall reach unto the sowing time; and ye shall eat your bread to the full, and dwell in your land safely. Lev 16:3-5.
The promises on which the new covenant is established, are indeed better. They bring to view eternal life through the atonement of Jesus Christ. And the law of God, that was written in tables of stone during the old covenant, now written in the heart, and contains the terms of agreement, or is the very foundation of the new covenant.
For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my LAWS into their minds, and write them in their hearts; and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: And they shall not teach every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. Heb 8:10-12; Jer 31:31-34.Jesus is the mediator of the new covenant. When one asked him, "What good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life," he replied, "If thou wilt enter into LIFE, keep the COMMANDMENTS." Jesus then quotes five of the ten, which shows that he referred to the commandments of God.
We may now see that the ten commandments are neither the old nor the new covenant, but the terms, or foundation of both. The covenant made in Horeb was certainly the old covenant. It was not made with the fathers, but after the children of Israel were brought to Sinai. The ten commandments being the foundation of that covenant, or terms of agreement, we see them referred to in Deut 5:7-21, immediately after the statements, that the Lord made a covenant in Horeb, that it was not made with the fathers, and that Moses stood between the Lord and the people at that time, to shew them the word of the Lord. It is true that Moses did take the words of the Lord and shew them to the people when the covenant was made in Horeb, see Ex 19:3-8; 20:18-22, but it is positively untrue that he did so with the words of the ten commandments. The Lord spake them to all the people with an audible voice.
We have not space to notice every particular in the articles of M., neither is it necessary. We have, we think, fully shown his main positions incorrect, and we close by calling attention to his exhortation to those who read the "Review and Herald," and are, as he thinks, in danger of a "fearful fall" from grace, "into irretrievable ruin," by the sin of Sabbath-keeping!! He says, "And so far as any now seek to be justified by that dead law, they are fallen from grace." To this we reply, first, that it is unjust to represent us as teaching the observance of the dead law of Moses. We humbly claim the right to teach and observe that law which Paul called "holy, just, good, spiritual, which he served and delighted in, twenty-nine years after the law of Moses was abolished, See Rom.vii, And, second, we seek for justification alone through Jesus Christ. "Do we make void the law through faith?" says Paul, "God for bid: yea we establish the law." We give a portion of M.'s warning against keeping the fourth commandment as follows:
Pause in your course, and listen to the voice of truth! You may now retrace your steps, and again be established on the rock of truth, the plain word of the Lord. But if you turn a deaf ear to the voice of the Bible, and suffer yourself to be blinded to its clear light, by such darkness as envelopes the Review, and the mistaken theory that gave it birth, you will soon be beyond the reach of recovery, and will stumble into irretrievable ruin. O pause! in your mistaken course, and remember that without faith it is impossible to please God.Here, a professed Minister of Christ, and a Christian Editor, raises his warning voice against keeping the fourth commandment! Certainly, one might think it a great sin to keep all the commandments of God, that has called forth this warning. We are exhorted to pause in our course. Is it wrong to observe a day of rest which, according to M.'s position, poor fallen man so much needed? Why should those who are keeping the commandments of God "pause" and "retrace their steps?" Did not Jesus, the True Witness say, "Blessed are they that do his [his Father's] commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the City?" Is not the fourth commandment one of the Father's? It is.
No, we will not "pause." Our course is onward. We will not "retrace our steps;" for just before us is the Golden City, and the Tree of Life. "If thou wilt enter into Life, keep the commandments." Though the dragon be wroth with the "remnant" "which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ," [Rev 7:17] yet they will overcome. Onward! ONWARD! is their course; for their object is Eternal Life.
It is our settled conviction, however, that no sane man really believes that a Christian will "fall from grace" into "irretrievable ruin" for observing the Holy Sabbath of the Lord our God, in connection with other Christian duties.
Reader, be not deceived by such misrepresentations. We exhort you to obey the word of God. And you are aware that both Testaments enforce the observance of the law of God. Misrepresentation, you know, has ever been a weapon used against unpopular truths of the Bible. We now refer you to the Advent, Sonship of Christ, and Immortality and Eternal Life alone through Christ. You may have stood firmly on the word of God against the opposition and reproach that has arisen from receiving and advocating these precious doctrines, yet you may be in danger of being deceived here, and led astray from the commandments of God. May God save you from the soul-destroying influence of those who violate the commandment of God, and "teach men so."
Last Modified 14 December 1999