God First!

Continued

March 7, 1897

The Apostasy of Israel. - No. 5.

(Sunday Evening, March 7, 1897.)

Now the Lord says of us that has delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son. The kingdom of God is established again among his people, and "the kingdom of God is within you," and it is among you by being within each one and all. Now then, the kingdom of God is a perfect kingdom, because the king is a perfect king, because the law of that kingdom is a perfect law. Then is a perfect king, and a perfect law, and a perfect kingdom, sufficient for you? Is it? Is that enough for a man?-O yes, assuredly! Ought it to be enough for a man? 

And if all that is not enough for a man, is the trouble with the kingdom, or with the man?-

You know that the trouble can be only with the man. But suppose the man professes to be a Christian. Is the trouble still with the man, or with the kingdom? 

(Voices) With the man. 

Suppose he professes to be a Seventh-day Adventist, and the kingdom of God is not sufficient for him; suppose you get a crowd of them together, and the kingdom of God is not sufficient for them, but they must have a kingdom of their own, another kingdom; they must set up a government, must tax themselves, choose off rulers from among themselves to govern themselves; are they God's children? Is God's perfect kingdom enough for them? Do they belong to the government of God? Is God's government enough for them? Is the kingdom of God in them? Is it? How can it be, when the perfect kingdom, and the perfect king, and the perfect law, is not enough for them? 

You see, then, that separation of church and state, even among Seventh-day Adventists, begins in the heart; and it must begin there with every man, everywhere, or there can be no separation of church and state where he is. If no man in the fourth century, in the Roman Empire, had had a union of church and state in his own heart, there would not have been a papacy formed in the fourth century. If he had had only the church, the church alone, in his heart, and none of the state, none of principles of the state, only the church,-God, his kingdom, his law, his righteousness, he alone ruling there,-could there ever have been a papacy? 

(Voices) No. 

Then what is the thing that is essential always to avoid?-Any union of church and state in the heart. What, then, is the only sure safeguard against a papacy? It is to love God with all the heart, and all the soul, and all the mind, and all the strength. It is to "get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house." It is to turn your back upon Egypt. It is to "dwell alone, and not be reckoned among the nations."

 

I read now from "Empires of the Bible," page 152 and onward, some quotations that I inserted there from "Patriarchs and Prophets," with scriptures, upon this very connection. First I read some of my own words; but I will tell you when I read the words of "Patriarchs and Prophets:"- 

"Lo, the people shall dwell alone, and shall not be reckoned among the nations." The Lord never intended that his people should be formed into a kingdom, or state, or government, like the people of this world. They were not to be like the nations around them. They were to be separated unto God "from all the people that were upon the face of the earth." "The people shall not be reckoned among the nations."

Now if I reckon myself as belonging to the state of Germany, then am I reckoning myself among the nations? If I reckon myself as belonging to the government of England, a part of it, a loyal and patriotic citizen, who would fight for the flag, am I reckoning myself among the nations? And if I fight for that flag, my flag, my British flag, and my Seventh-day Adventist brother over here belongs to the United States, and is loyal and patriotic, and the two nations get into war, and he must repel invasions, and there is a conflict, then I am on one side, and my brother is on the other, and brother is fighting against brother. Has God ordained that?-You know that he has not. Then did he ever mean anything when he said that the people shall dwell alone, and shall not be reckoned among the nations? 

I read on a little of my own writing in "Empires of the Bible:"- 

Their government was to be a theocracy pure and simple-God their only King, their only Ruler, their only Lawgiver. It was, indeed, a church organization, beginning with the organization of "the church in the wilderness;" and was to be separated from every idea of a state. The system formed in the wilderness through Moses, and continued in Cainaan through Joshua, was intended to be perpetual. 

Now I read from "Patriarchs and Prophets:"- 

The government of Israel was administered in the name and by the authority of Jehovah. The work of Moses, of the seventy elders, of the rulers and judges, was simply to enforce the laws that God had given. They had no authority to legislate for the nation. 

Who had no authority to legislate for the nation? 

(Voices) The church. 

How many composed the church? Did that take in one, or two, or ten, or twelve, or any fifty?-Yes. Then did they, or any of them, have any authority to legislate for the rest, or even for themselves?-They did not. 

Hearken, O Israel, unto the statutes and unto the judgments, which I teach you, for to do them, that ye may live, and go in and possess the land which the Lord God of your fathers giveth you. Ye shall not add aught unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish aught from it. 

Quoting again now from "Patriarchs and Prophets:"- 

This was, and continued to be, the condition of Israel's existence as a nation. 

Then when Israel departed from that, and took the step to-The loss of existence. Do not forget that. 

Now another paragraph which I have written, and which I want to repeat now:- 

The principles of the government of Israel were solely those of a pure theocracy. In any government it is only loyalty to the principles of the government on the part of the citizens, that can make it a success. 

That is universally held to be so. What government are we considering here? The government of God. Of what government were they citizens?-The government of God. Then loyalty to the principles of that government was the only thing that could make that government and that rulership a success, even with God. 

It was only by the constantly abiding presence of God with Israel, that the government there established could possibly be a success. Loyalty to the principles of that government, therefore, on the part of the people demanded that each one of the people should constantly court the abiding presence of God with himself, as the sole King, Ruler, and Lawgiver, in all the conduct of his daily life. But "without faith it is impossible to please Him." It is "by faith" that God dwells in the heart and rules in the life. Therefore the fundamental principle, indeed the very existence, of the government of Israel, lay in a living, abiding faith on the part of the people of Israel. 

Continued…