Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1888-03-07
&eadingfur the Sabbath*
CONDUCTED BY
REV. ROBERT LATHAM.
[Original..
THE MARRIAGE FEAST.
Matthew, % :1--14.

In many particulars modern civilization
is very different from ancient. The insti-
tuition of marriage has existed since the
creation of man. From the brief but in
teresting..history of Adams creation, con-
tanned in the first and second chapters Of
Genesis, we learn that in the first act of
creation, God made all the animals, male
and female. Adam, the last creature
brought into existence, was made vicar
lord of everything pertaining to the plan
ct on which he was placed. He, more
over, seems to have been Immediately
indicted into Office, and to have entered
promptly upon the discharge of his du-
ties. The first act, and only act, so far
as is recorded, which he performed before
the fall, was the naming of the other ami
mate creatures. Up to this moment Adj
am seems not to have discovered that he,
of all the creatures on the globe which he
was to inhabit, was alone without a mate.
The purpose, however, to create Eve was
from all eternity. In fact, Eve was crea-
ted in Adam. After Adam had finished
naming the other creatures, and God had
accepted his work, he discovered that he
was without a mate. Symbolically, God
taught Adam that, although he had been
greatly honored, still he was only a crea-
ture under authority, and Immediately
and continually dependent IN his maker.
Eve was ma2chrGod, and by God brought
to Adam, and by God Adam and Eve were
constituted husband and wife. This was
the first marriage in our world and the
only one in Paradise.
Very soon after the marriage of Adam
and Eve, probably the very same day, they
sinned, and probably before the Sabbath
began, were driven out of "the garden
IN cfxr w. ri -, E1or - 1,hioh God bod nro-
pared for them. Out of this primeval
abode, prepared by God himself for their
home, they took nothing saw the mar
riage relation. Adam forfeited his do
minion yer the other creatures. He soon
discovered his bodily and spiritual naked
ness. In sorrow, as a sinner, he left the
place prepared for him as a sinless creature.
He began to experience regret, remorse
and shame, but although resting under the
curse of God he still remained the hus-
band Of Eve, and Eve continued to be his
wife.
The marriage relation still exists, andi it
will exist so long as man remains here on
earth. Among the Jews, marriage was
regarded as a sacred obligation. Various
were the waysin which marriage contracts
were formed. The early patriarchs were
exceedingly careful with regard to the
ildllloSCo VI VlCl SllllulCu, dlu AuPGIOl
ceremonies were generally celebrated with
great pomp and splendor. In the New
Testament we find frequent reference to
these marriage feasts. The marriage feast
of a kings son is made the framework Of
one of the most beautiful and instructive
parallels in the Bible.
"The Kingdom of Heaven" says our
Saviour, sis like INTO a certain king who
made a marriage for his son." The King
dom of Heaven, or Kingdom of God, is a
phrase of frequent occurrence in the New
Testament. Itdoes not always denote the
identical same thing, butitalways denotes
some phase of the scheme of mercy re-
vealed in the Scriptures. In the parable
of the marriage feast the reference, prima-
rily, is to the offer Of the gospel to the
Jews. The certain King in the parable is
God, the sou is Jesus Christ his son, and
offered to the Jews first, and then, because
they rejected it, to the Gentiles.
In the Interpretation of a parable we
must not spiritualize everything. In eve
ry parable there is something strictly nat
ural, and there is something which is
strictly spiritual. These are like each 9TH
er, and this likeness constitutes the para
BILE. We must Be careful, however, not to
s%piritualize the natural, and be on our
guard lest we degrade the spiritual into the
mere natural.
A parable differs from a fable in that the
natural part of a parable either is or may
be a fact, while in a fable dumb animals
and even inanimate things are made to
perform the part of reasonable and intelli-
gent creatures. Hence a fable cannot be a
fact.
In the parable of the marriage feast, the
s,x,;taI or,,aofc rri M r;1xy 1ornfn tho ToUrc
Gods ancient people. The refusal of the
invited guests to attend the marriage feast
denotes the manner in which the Jews
treated the peculiar privileges which they
enjoyed from the time God called Abraham
from Ur of the Cbaldees, and especially
the refusal of the Jews to accept of Jesus
Christ, the long promised Messiah.
In the parable of the marriage feast
there are q number of things suggested,
worthy of careful study. We are not to
conclude that because the parable was pri-
marily addressed to the Jews, it has no ap-
plication to US Gentiles. The Jews were
a typical people. They constituted the
Old Testament Church, of which the
lament Church-is but a development. It
is indeed a grand and glorious develop
ment, but still only a development. Such
being the case, we Gentiles may properly
inquire whether or not the parable is ap-
plicable to us, or, more correctly, whether
we are treating Jesus Christ as the Jews of
old treated him.
We instinctively inquire, Why did the
Jews not accept of Jesus Christ? Why
did they refuse to attend the marriage
feast ? These questions are answered and
answered very plainly. One went to his
own farm, another to his own merchandise
and the rest took the servants who were
sent to bid them come to the feast, and af-
ter insulting them, slew them. They
made light of the invitation, regarding
their own carnal pleasures of far greater
importance than the service of the Lord.
Prophets for many hundred years had pre-
dicted the coming of the Saviour, but
when he did come, and come as the proph-
cts had foretold, the rulers of the Jews re-
iected him and actually put him to death.
The offer of peace and pardon being re-
jected by the Jews it was made in all its
fullness and freeness to the Gentiles. The
servants were sent out in every direction
to gather up the good and the bad. What
a wonderful display of divine mercy and
grace! We are not to conclude that some
persons are really morally good, w%hileoth-
ers are morally bad. Such is not the case.
All are bad, but all are not equally bad.
There is naturally nothing good in any of
the human family. All are conceived in
sin and brought forth in iniquity, but
some persons by nature are worse than
others. In reality, the reference here is
not to the moral condition or state of men,
but to those distinctions made and observ-
ed by men. Thus, some are born heirs to
large estates and honorable positions in So
ciety, while others are the children of
squalid poverty and the inheritors of in
fanny and disgrace. To all these, rich and