Suppose now that the council had confirmed the teachings of these false brethren, and had decreed that circumcision was necessary to justification; what would have been the result? Just this; they would have turned the disciples away from Christ; for the only object in coming to Christ is to receive justification or pardon, and if people can get it without coming to Christ, of course they have no need of Him. But whatever the apostles might have decreed, it would still have remained a fact that circumcision is nothing, and that the disciples could no more be justified by it than they could by snapping their fingers. Therefore, if they had been led to put their trust in circumcision, they would have rested satisfied in their sins; and to lead them to do that would indeed have been to put a yoke upon them. Sin is a bondage, and to teach men to put their trust in a false hope, which will cause them to rest satisfied in their sins, thinking that they are free from them, is simply to fasten them in bondage.

Peter said, “Why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?” Now the fathers had the ceremonial law, and did bear it; they practiced it, and throve under it, as David said: “Those that be planted in the house of the Lord shall flourish in the courts of our God. They shall still bring forth fruit in old age; they shall be fat and flourishing.” Psalm 92:13, 14.

Anyone who reads the Psalms will see that David did not regard the ceremonial law as a burdensome yoke, nor think it grievous bondage to carry out its ordinances. It was a delight to him to offer the sacrifices of thanksgiving, because by it he showed faith in Christ. Faith in Christ was the soul and life of his service. Without that his worship would have been a meaningless form. But if he had been so ill-informed as to suppose that the simple mechanical performance of the ceremonial law would cleanse him from sin, then indeed he would have been in a grievous condition.

There are two yokes,—the yoke of sin (Satan’s yoke), and the yoke of Christ. The yoke of sin is hard to bear,—Satan is a hard master; but the yoke of Christ is easy, and His burden is light. He sets us free from sin, that we may serve Him by bearing His mild yoke. Matthew 11:29, 30.

The fact that the thing here spoken of came to an end by the cross of Christ, should cause us to conclude that the same thing is here spoken of that is spoken of in Eph. 2:15, 16 as having been abolished “in his flesh.” In this text it is said to have been “contrary;” in the other it is called “enmity;” and Peter called it a burdensome yoke. This, Paul says, was “against us.” But the law of God is holy, and just, and good in its requirements. We conclude, therefore, that the “handwriting of ordinances,” which was nailed to the cross of Christ, was the Levitical law. The ceremonies were typical of the sacrifice of Christ, and when that sacrifice was actually made on the cross, the types at the same time ceased.

"... for the only object in coming to Christ is to receive justification or pardon..." Tom, do you agree with this insight? Seems to me there are other reasons, more important, for entering into a relationship with Jesus.

"Sin is a bondage, and to teach men to put their trust in a false hope, which will cause them to rest satisfied in their sins, thinking that they are free from them, is simply to fasten them in bondage." Can a false hope really, truly cause people to rest satisfied in sin?

Also, in what way do you see a difference in Waggoner's thinking?

In one, Waggoner expresses the idea that the ceremonial law was a yoke of bondage. In the other, he argues against this idea (which Butler argued for in his pamphlet).

T:In one, Waggoner expresses the idea that the ceremonial law was a yoke of bondage. In the other, he argues against this idea (which Butler argued for in his pamphlet).

R:No, he doesn't argue against this idea.

(Waggoner)But on page 37 I read:—
“The law of rites had an immense amount of these, so that they constituted a ‘yoke of bondage’ grievous to be borne, which Paul claimed had passed away.”
I cannot harmonize this last quotation with the first two. How can a “yoke of bondage” be considered as “special “circumcision and its attendant privileges,” if he felt it to be a “yoke of bondage grievous to be borne”? This is a minor matter, but consistency should appear in the details of truth. I will not at present take time to give my view of the yoke of bondage, but will consider it later.

(Butler) But I do not agree with you in all that you say in the words immediately following, which I find on page 25 of your pamphlet:—

“Will any Seventh-day Adventist claim that the moral law was the subject considered by that council? Was it the moral law which Peter characterizes as ‘a yoke … which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear’? Were the moral and ceremonial laws all mixed up and confounded in the council? Did the decision of that body set aside the laws against stealing, lying, Sabbath-breaking, and murder? We all know better. The council took no cognizance whatever of the ten commandments.”

(Waggoner)This is an important matter, and right here your whole argument falls to the ground. You very properly connect the book of Galatians with the fifteenth chapter of Acts. You justly claim that in Galatians Paul pursues the same line of argument which was pursued in the council. And you depend on the assumption that the council took no cognizance of the moral law, in order to prove that the moral law does not come into the account in Galatians. But a simple reading of the report of the council shows that the moral law did come in there; and therefore, according to your own argument, the moral law must be considered in the book of Galatians.

Take for a moment the supposition that the ceremonial law alone was considered by the council; then it necessarily follows, as is plainly stated in the “Two Laws,” page 31, that the council decided that four points of the ceremonial law were declared to be binding on Christians.

Now let me ask:

* 1. Is the decision of that council as binding on us as it was on the primitive Christians? If so, then the ceremonial law was not taken away at the cross, and we are still subject to it.
* 2. If the ceremonial law was a yoke of bondage, and that council decreed that a part of it was to be observed by Christians, did they not thereby deliberately place Christians under a yoke of bondage, in spite of Peter’s emphatic protest against putting a yoke upon them?
* 3. If those “four necessary things” were part of the ceremonial law, and were binding twenty-one years after the crucifixion, when, if ever, did they cease to be in force?

(More Waggoner)We have no record that those four necessary things ever ceased to be necessary things; and therefore, according to the theory that the ceremonial law was a yoke of bondage, it is impossible for Christians ever to be perfectly free....Peter said, “Why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?” Now the fathers had the ceremonial law, and did bear it; they practiced it, and throve under it, as David said: “Those that be planted in the house of the Lord shall flourish in the courts of our God. They shall still bring forth fruit in old age; they shall be fat and flourishing.” Psalm 92:13, 14.

Anyone who reads the Psalms will see that David did not regard the ceremonial law as a burdensome yoke, nor think it grievous bondage to carry out its ordinances. It was a delight to him to offer the sacrifices of thanksgiving, because by it he showed faith in Christ. Faith in Christ was the soul and life of his service. Without that his worship would have been a meaningless form. But if he had been so ill-informed as to suppose that the simple mechanical performance of the ceremonial law would cleanse him from sin, then indeed he would have been in a grievous condition.

There are two yokes,—the yoke of sin (Satan’s yoke), and the yoke of Christ. The yoke of sin is hard to bear,—Satan is a hard master; but the yoke of Christ is easy, and His burden is light. He sets us free from sin, that we may serve Him by bearing His mild yoke. Matthew 11:29, 30.

Another point:
No sin can remove itself, neither can it be atoned for by any subsequent good deed. So then there must be some scheme of atonement for sin. Now if sin were imputed for neglect of the ceremonial law, what remedy was provided for that sin? The ceremonial law was simply the ordinances of the gospel. If condemned sinners were still further condemned by the very remedy provided for their salvation, then indeed it must have been a yoke. A man is in a truly pitiable condition when the remedy given him for a sore disease only aggravates that disease.

When Christ was manifest in the flesh, His work was to proclaim "deliverance to the captives," and "to set at liberty them that are bruised." The miracles that He performed were practical illustrations of this work, and one of the most striking may well be considered at this stage of our study.

"And He was teaching in one of the synagogues on the Sabbath. And, behold, there was a woman which had a spirit of infirmity eighteen years, and was bowed together, and could in nowise lift up herself. And when Jesus saw her, He called her to Him, and said unto her, Woman, thou art loosed from thine infirmity. And He laid His hands on her; and immediately she was made straight, and glorified God." Luke 13:10-13.

Then when the hypocritical ruler of the synagogue complained because Jesus did this miracle on the Sabbath, He referred to how each one would loose his ox or ass from the stall, and lead him to water, and then said:--

"And ought not this woman, being a daughter of Abraham, whom Satan hath bound, lo, these eighteen years, be loosed from this bond on the Sabbath day?"

Two features in this case are worthy of special note: The woman was bound by Satan, and she had a spirit of infirmity, or absence of strength.

Now note how accurately this describes our condition before we meet Christ.

1. We are bound by Satan, "taken captive by him at his will." "Every one that committeth sin is the bond-servant of sin" (John 8:34), and "he that committeth sin is of the devil" (1Joh.3:8). "His own iniquities shall take the wicked himself, and he shall be holden with the cords of his sins." Prov.5:22. Sin is the cord with which Satan binds us.

2. We have a spirit of infirmity, and can in nowise lift ourselves up, or free ourselves from the chains that bind us. It was when we were "without strength" that Christ died for us. Rom.5:6. Now these two words, "without strength," are translated from the very same word that is rendered "infirmity" in the account of the woman whom Jesus healed. She was "without strength." To be without strength means to have no strength at all. That is our condition.

What Jesus Does for Us.

What now does Jesus do for us?--He takes the weakness, and gives us in return His strength. "We have not an High Priest which can not be touched with the feeling of our infirmities." Heb.4:15. "Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses." Matt.8:17. He becomes all that we are, in order that we may become all that He is. He was "born under the law, to redeem them that were under the law." He hath delivered us from the curse, being made a curse for us, that the blessing might come to us. Although He knew no sin, He was made to be sin for us, "that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him." 2Cor.5:21.

Why He Does It.

Why did Jesus make that woman free from her infirmity?--In order that she might walk at liberty. Certainly it was not in order that she might continue of her own free will to do that which before she was obliged to do. And why does He make us free from sin?--In order that we may live free from sin. On account of the weakness of our flesh, we are unable to do the righteousness of the law; therefore Christ, who is come in the flesh, and who has power over all flesh, strengthens us with might by His Spirit in the inner man, that the righteousness of the law may be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. We can not tell how He does it; He alone knows how it is done, because He alone has the power; but we may know the reality of it.

Present Freedom.

Pay special attention to the words of Jesus to the woman, uttered while she was yet bound down, and unable to lift herself up: "Thou art loosed from thine infirmity." "Thou art loosed," present tense. That is just what He says to us. To every captive He has proclaimed deliverance. The woman "could in nowise lift up herself;" yet at the word of Christ she at once stood erect. She could not do it, yet she did. The things that are impossible for men are possible for God. "The Lord upholdeth all that fall, and raiseth up all those that be bowed down." Ps.145:14. Faith does not make facts; it only lays hold of them. There is not a single soul that is bowed down with the weight of sin which Satan hath bound on him, whom Christ does not lift up. Freedom is his; he has only to make use of it. Let the message be sounded far and wide. Let every soul hear it, that Christ has given deliverance to every captive. Thousands will rejoice at the news.

Anyway, we have sidetracked in our discussion, because I don't see what Galatians 5:1 has to do with Eph. 2:15 and Col. 2:14.

(More Waggoner)We have no record that those four necessary things ever ceased to be necessary things; and therefore, according to the theory that the ceremonial law was a yoke of bondage, it is impossible for Christians ever to be perfectly free....Peter said, “Why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?” Now the fathers had the ceremonial law, and did bear it; they practiced it, and throve under it, as David said: “Those that be planted in the house of the Lord shall flourish in the courts of our God. They shall still bring forth fruit in old age; they shall be fat and flourishing.” Psalm 92:13, 14.

Anyone who reads the Psalms will see that David did not regard the ceremonial law as a burdensome yoke, nor think it grievous bondage to carry out its ordinances. It was a delight to him to offer the sacrifices of thanksgiving, because by it he showed faith in Christ. Faith in Christ was the soul and life of his service. Without that his worship would have been a meaningless form. But if he had been so ill-informed as to suppose that the simple mechanical performance of the ceremonial law would cleanse him from sin, then indeed he would have been in a grievous condition.

T:In one, Waggoner expresses the idea that the ceremonial law was a yoke of bondage. In the other, he argues against this idea (which Butler argued for in his pamphlet).

R:No, he doesn't argue against this idea.

"The Jews as a nation had laid claim to righteousness above every other people, while they stood out in proud defiance of God. As a people they were self-confident, exalted, selfish, and boastful. ... Israel had perverted the Scriptures, and had taught for doctrine the commandments of men. They made void the law of God through their traditions. That law which they claimed to observe so strictly, they made a yoke of bondage. Satan had put his leaven into the most precious, everlasting truth, to make of none effect God's sacred institution." {ST, February 15, 1899 par. 9}

"Christ's work was to rid the commandments of the traditions and customs placed upon them by the Jewish teachers. The work of covering the law with useless exactions had been planned by the adversary of God, in order that Christ's pure ministry should not harmonize with the teaching of the scribes and Pharisees. The Jewish leaders had yielded to the temptation to depart from the Lord, and while by their forms and ceremonies making the law a yoke of bondage which the people were not able to bear, they failed to follow its great principles. This led Christ to declare, 'Except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.'" {ST, June 5, 1901 par. 9}

Anyone who reads the Psalms will see that David did not regard the ceremonial law as a burdensome yoke, nor think it grievous bondage to carry out its ordinances. It was a delight to him to offer the sacrifices of thanksgiving, because by it he showed faith in Christ. Faith in Christ was the soul and life of his service. Without that his worship would have been a meaningless form. But if he had been so ill-informed as to suppose that the simple mechanical performance of the ceremonial law would cleanse him from sin, then indeed he would have been in a grievous condition.

In one, Waggoner expresses the idea that the ceremonial law was a yoke of bondage. In the other, he argues against this idea (which Butler argued for in his pamphlet).

R:No, he doesn't argue against this idea.