Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1879-04-22

commandments WHICH are not TO.
enacted in the new testament are abro-
gated and Of no binding force. The Sab
bath law is not so re-enacted; therefore it Is |
of no binding force. Very well; let us look |
over the ten and see how many are left to |
US. The first commandment: Thou shalt |
have no other gods before me-" is not any
where re-enacted. therefore it goes. The |
second commandment agaist the religious |
use of statues and pictures is not anywhere
re-enacted, and it must go also. The tenth
against coveting is not re-enated, therefore it
goes by the board. The result leaves us six
commandments instead of the ten which
God wrote on the stone tablets. If truth re-
quires it, by all means let US give up four or
ten. Let us give up the bible, too, if truth
requires it. Only when we do it let us be
consistent and candid. Let us cease to talk
about ''the ten commandments" to teach
them to our children, and to offer the beauti-
full prayer when they are read, Lord have
mercy upon us and incline our hearts to keep
this law" For if no longer binding we do not
mean to keep it, and ought not to ask God to
incline us to do it. You may have observed
needless woodman undertake to cut one
great tree In the midst of a beautiful grove.
Without thinking fully he plies the keen ak
to the tree. 1t falls with laundering crash
through the grove Its giant arms are inter-
locked with the others and tear them as it
falls. Its massive trunk strikes upon its broth
ers to bruise and crush them. And the once
beautiful grove is an unsightly scene OF
wreck and ruin. So with this maxim for
effacing God inscription upon the tablets of
the law. Logical consistency is simply duty
10 truth, to the God who framed the laws of
correct thinking. We may not impute all
the consequences of a good mans principles
to him as his fault and his sin. But we may
and should impute such consequences to the
premises and test them thereby. The maxim
works fearful havoc and must be we'll proved
before we receive 1T. Now what is that
proof Upon what authority does it restp
Where did Christ give itP Or, which one OF
his inspired apostles ever Endorsed It? The
answer of the new testament Is convincing.
No such maxim has any place in the gospels
nor in the epistles. Neither Christ nor his
apostles ever taught that everything in the
oil testament is abolished unless re-enacted
in the new. Neither Christ nor his apostles
ever proposed to re-enact any one OF the ten
commandments. There is not shade of a
shadow of proof for such an assumption.
Some of the ten commandments were cited
by our Lord and his apostles. Not, indeed,
to re-enact them. They required no such
superauous legislation. But they were
| named in preaching, just as any
of US might do; named in order to
| specify some popular form of sin-named not
| to give them authority, but as being already
| of authorIty-named ''for doctrine, for re-
proof, for correction, for instruction In right
eousness." The whole maxim is an improved
assumption, which leads to ruinous innova-
| tions, and as such should be peremptorily re-
pudiated. Some regulations In the old testa-
menG were intended to be of temporary dura-
| ton; some things were typical, ceremonial or
political. But these things were carefully
kept out of the decalogue. And we need no
such sweeping maxims as that "All things
not re enacted In the new testament are alb
rogated." Oh, no; we can go to better au-
| thority. Oar Lord abrogated the Jewish the
ocracy as to its political functions, when he
claimed to be the king of Israel and David
heir, and yet refused political power and Of
ice-refused to be crowned by the populace,
and proved the non political character of his
kingdom to PLATE, saying, My kingdom Is
not of this world, else would my servants
fight for me- The ordinance of circumcision
was repealed in express words. And the
apostle, in his letter to the Hebrews, shows
how the typical sacrifices and the typical
| Aaronic priesthood are set aside by the death
OF Christ. These matters are plain. But no
such innovation Is proposed as the drop
ping out of one commandment of the
decalogue. We must have better authority
for such a step thsn doubtful maxims of in
depreciation. Besides, it is not clear that the
preface to the ten commandments does not
apply to me as we'll as to the pious Jew of
old. The deliverance from Egypt was a great
blessing to me. 1t was a necessary step in
securing fer me the old testament scriptures,
the family of the Messiah, and in that way
the salvation of the world. No Jew ever
lived who was more benefited by it than we
are. We are by faith adopted into Abra-
hams family. We are true Israelites and
heirs of the old testament blessings. If the
preface reminded the pious Hebrew of one
special reason for keeping Gods Law, that
reason is in full force with me to day. All
he had is NINE. Again, this reasoning against
the obligation of the Sabbath entirely disre-
CARDS the force of that word Remember" in
the fourth commandment. The word is
sometimes used loosely to call attention to
some fact about to be mentioned for the first
time. But such usage is not proper to the
word. 1t should always be clearly shown in
any particular case. The facts do not re-
quire such improper use here. If we turn to
Elk. xvi, p 30, we shall see that the Hebrews
were already acquainted with the Sabbath be-
fore the ten commandments were given
from Mount Sinai. The fact is incl
dentally introduced in connection with the
rules for gathering mama. There Is no ap-
peardnce of legislation in what Moses says.
Some did not understand why others gath
cred double supply. 1t had not occurred
to them apparently that such a step was
needgul or proper. Some, indeed, even after
Moses explained the matter, did not believe,
and went out to gather on the seventh day.
We know how hard it is to keep people from
doing little secular business on the Sabbath.
Where the Israelites got the idea of Sab
bath is question that ought to be settled, if
at all, by the history. And In reviewing the
history we are led back to the days of inno-
cence and find the Sabbath to be a part of
mans primitive religion Genesis ii, ~.
| This conclusion has been set aside by the
suggestion that Moses does not here record
what really took place SO much as he lndl-
Gates what God meant to do more than two
thousand FIVE hundred years atteFward. But
| the record bears no traces on its face OF such
violent rhetoric as the figure Of "Pr0lep-
Sis" The incidents are all interviewer as a
continuous whole. The past lenses in our
version are the same. The inspired Hebrew
is yet more concatenated, the verbs being in
| that peculiar form (the future with "vaV con-
| versive'') which expresses an unbroken his
| toric narrative. DIR. Hodge, of Princeton,
| than whom no man commands a wider respec'
as a safe exegete, is fully justified in saying
that no man would have dreamed of such a
violent 'prolepsis" IN such an interw ven
| narrative unless he went to holy writ to prove
preconceived theory which unconsclouSly
colors his mind. The word remember in
the fourth commandment looks backward to
this primitive Institution, and enforces the
command to observe one day in seven by
using the same words as we find IN Genesis
ii, 1-3. There is no force whatever in the
suggestion that the days of creation were
not periods of twenty-four hours, but long
ages. SIch may be the fact. We know
that Gods rest from creating has lasted, so
far as this world is concerned at least, many
thousands OF years. But it is not necessary
that picture should be iife-siza. The carte
de Uisite gives US the image of friend. And
so human day of twenty four hours may be
a sufficient representation of divine period
to be a memorial of it. Lastly: We main
tain the perpetuIty of the Sabbath because it
is engraven by the hand of God upon the ma
ture of man, not only of Jew, but of GENTLE
Experience proves it. All men who toll with
hand or brain feel the need of rest day.
The sleep of night does much, but not all we
need. The wearied body seems to cry, "Bless
the good God for the day of rest" The
exhausted brain re-echoes the cry with double
force. NJ. Proudhou, a French political
writer, in 1850 published an able treatise on
the effect OF Sunday observance upon the
public health and morals. He argues that
men are more healthy, live longer, do better
work and more Of it, for day of rest. He
argues to show that just about one day in
seven is the best arrangement. He might
have added that the brutes will do the same.
Experience has proved it over and over again.
| And much more does the higher nature of
man, his moralsand spiritual nature, require
this rest By total change of thought and en-
p!oyment We therefore hold fast to Gods
good gift. 1t has been said that we owe our
strict notions to the Puritans. Well, history