8
1
8
download/literature/watchtower/1910-18.pdf
../literature/watchtower/1910/18/1910-18-1.html
VOL.
XXXI
BROOKLYN,
N.
Y.,
SEPTEMBER
15,
1910
PRESENT
TRUTH-RE
ADVOCATE
AND
MEDIATOR
No.
18
A
grntleman
who
fancies
himsrlf
commissioned
to
he
the
Advocate
of
the
New
Covenant,
but
who
ha~
not
vet
come
to
see
that
the
New
Covenant
could
not
be
the
Old
Covenant,
takes
us
to
task
saying:
"Four
years
ago
it
was
present
truth
that
the
Eclitor
of
THE
\V
ATCH
TOWER
nrcclrd
a
Mediator
be
tween
{lad
and
Himself.
Three
years
ago
it
become
present
trnth
that
hr
dors
not
need
a
Mecliator
bctwren
God
and
him
sdf.
Did
the
Editor
of
'I'm,
WATCH
TOWER
leave
the
present
truth
?"
We
rrply,
No,
the
Editor
of
THE
WATCH
TOWER
did
not
leave
the
prrspnt
truth.
He
kPpt
all
the
trnth
that
he
then
ha,1
and
has
adclrcl
to
it.
The
lig-ht
has
scattered
some
more
of
thC1
darkness,
so
that,
with
the
very
same
thonght
that
he
had
fonr
~'pars
ago.
he
now
spps
that
he
used
the
wrong
word
In
exprpssing
that
thong-lit.
He
now
sees
that
he
should
have
usrd
the
SPriptural
tprm
Advocate
instead
of
the
word
J\ledi
ator.
He
110W
secs
that
himself
ancl
othprs
in
the
past
have
nSf·d
language
too
carelessly,
ber;an~c
of
the
general
eonfu~ion
aIHI
mix-np
handp[l
down
from
the
dark
ages.
He
now
spes
that
the
Scriptures
nowllPre
say
that
the
church
has
a
Mediator
or
cvpr
will
have
a
J\Iediator,
and
that
they
nowhpre
say
that
the
Covpnant
of
sacrifice.
under
which
the
church
is
developcd,
has
a
Ml'diator.
The
Eclitor
of
THE
\~·.\TCII
TOWER
is
lparning
day
hy
day
more
clearly
to
rightly
diVIde
the
\Vord
of
Trnth
and
to
use
Scriptural
terms
only.
Tlw
Scriptnres
do
say,
"\Ve
have
an
Advocate
with
the
Fa
tllPr."
(1
.J
ohn
2:
I)
They
do
not
say
anywhere,
\Ve
have
a
Mediator
bctwpcn
God
and
us.
The
Editor
of
THE
\VATCH
TOWER
is
trying
to
as,ist
God's
people
to
think
and
speak
eorrpdly
rpsppcting
the
great
work
of
Atonempnt
for
sin,
the
merit
of
which
lips
in
the
sacrifice
of
.Jesus
and
the
privilege
to
share
in
which
is
granted
to
the
elect
during
this
Gospel
agp.
The
same
critic
innoccntly
asks
for
any
Bible
text
to
show
that
thc
f'll1lreh,
the
hriflc
of
Christ,
cloes
not
IH'ed
a
Mediator.
How
foolish!
])ocs
thr
Bihle
unclprtake
to
say
all
the
things
that
are
not
w?
One
would
think
that
no
special
abIlity
wouIeI
he
lIl'cessary
to
discern
that
there
is
no
need
of
a
J\lefliator
betwern
r'ri('J1cls,
\Ve
nevpr
had
this
thought!
\Vhen
we
uspd
the
won
I
as
resppcts
the
ch\ll'eh
we
used
it
thought
lessly,
just
as
our
opponpnts
are
using
it
now;
we
used
it
without
notirillg'
that
the
Bible
nowhere
intimates
a
Mediator
]wtween
the
Fathl'r
ancl
the
church.
It
is
because
present
truth
is
progres,ive
that
we
have
e]earer
light
on
the
same
facts
than
we
had
four
~'rars
ago,
eVf'n
as
we
then
had
clearer
light
than
we
pnjoyecl
year"
before
that.
The
Editor
of
THE
\VATCII
T()WEI~
has
IH'liPVPd
in
.Jpsus
as
his
Redeemer
from
childhood.
Hp
did
not
lIncIe'rqbnd
the
philosophy
of
the
divine
plan
of
thp
agps
thpn,
hllt
nevertheless,
his
simple
faith
was
a
sllflic·ipnt
hasis
for
a
ponsprration
of
his
all
to
the
Lord.
and
a
Sllf!iC·jpTlt
hasis
for
thp
flivine
apppptance
of
the
sacrifice
and
thc~
hrgdhng
of
tll('
holy
~pirit.
SIIll'e
then
the
light
of
this
han-pst
tilllP
has
h,'pn
shining
more
and
more
dearly
as
the
~·
..
ars
go
h~'.
The
light
of
presrnt
trllth
dops
not
contradict
th
..
light
of
past
trlllh,
Imt
ponfirms
it
and
further
clarifies
0111'
vision
an']
in(,],l'a'ps
Olll"
hope
an<1
Ollr
joy.
And
is
not
this
tnlP
of
all
of
(;ot!'s
l)(,o)llp
now
walking
ill
the
narrow
way?
Those
who
arr
now
"waking
up"
to
a
realization
of
the
faet
that
for
spvpntPPIl
y
..
ars
they
have
been
in
darkness
arc
ac·knowle<1ging
that
th
..
y
han·
not
heen
walking
for
those
sPvl'Tltepn
years
in
tIl<'
"path
of
the
just,
which
shineth
more
and
morp
unto
tho
pprfcct
day."
For
the
past
seventeen
years
of
thrir
liYf's,
thr
spvpntrpn
yean'l
of
their
best
Christian
exprripn('e,
thr~'
helirvpd
that
the
Vine
and
the
branches
are
onp-that
thp
Head
amI
his
J\TemlJ('n;
are
one;
that
the
sutrer
ings
of
The
Christ
arr
one-that
the
church
fills
up
that
whi.·h
is
IJPhind
of
thp
alllictions
of
Christ-that
the
death
of
Christ
is
onp-that
the
church
bccomes
dead
with
him
sacri
fiejally.
aft('r
having
hc('n
justifirt!
through
faith
in
his
blood,
his
sarrificr.
For
spyrnl('rn
yrars
they
helieved
that
the
Prophet
spake
of
the
sufferings
of
Christ
(Head
and
body)
and
thr
glory
that
shall
follow;
that
to
he
dead
with
him
signifies
to
he
haplizpcl
into
his
sacrificial
death
as
in
contrast
with
Adam's
ppnalty-death.
AmI
to
drink
of
his
cup
signi
firs
a
share
of
hi,
sufTerings
and
that
thr
hope
before
all
such
is,
that
"if
we
he
dpa<1
with
him
wp
shall
also
live
with
him"·
and
"if
we
suffer
with
him.
w~
shall
also
reign
with
himJ,
For
seventeen
years
thrse
frirnfls
told
us
that
they
believed
and
rejoieed
in
Rt.
Palll's
sentiments
of
Phi!.
3:9-11,
the
hope
to
be
found
in
Christ
(mf'mhrrs
of
his
hocly).
not
havin'"
their
own
righteousnpss,
whirh
j,
of
the
Law
(Covenant),
b:t
that
which
is
through
faith
in
Christ,
the
righteousness
whieh
is
of
God
by
faith
(not
by
the
New
(Law)
Covenant),
that
we
might
know
him
amI
the
power
of
his
resurrection
(sharing
his
resurrrction
as
his
membprs)
an<1
the
fellowship
of
his
sufferings
(being
partakers
of
the
suffrrings
of
Christ),
being
made
eon
formable
unto
his
death
(not
a
different
death
from
his,
but
a
similar
one-not
a
death
as
a
sinnpr,
but
a
sacrifi
cial
one),
if
by
any
nll'ans
I
might
attain
unto
The
resurrec
tion
of
The
deae!.
\Ve
are
not
nmrlllllring
nor
('omplaining
against
these
friends
because
of
the
grpat
loss
which
they
han
sllstained
the
loss
of
spiritual
sight
into
the
deep
things
of
God-into
"the
mystery,
which
is
Christ
in
you
the
hope
of
glory."
\Ve
compassionate
their
loss
and
remrmhrr
the
J\laster's
wor<1s,
"If
the
light
that
is
in
thce
herome
darkn('ss.
how
great
is
that
darkness!"
While
not
attempting
to
jlHlgr
the
hearts
of
any
who
have
gone
out
from
us,
we
may
be
confiflent
that
the
Lord
did
not
allow
them
to
go
alit
without
a
sufli,cient
reason.
We
r('garcl
their
loss
of
spiritual
sight
as
a
divine
judgment
upon
them,
just
as
truly
as
we
regard
the
opening
of
the
eyes
of
their
nnderstanding
as
a
mark
of
divine
favor.
Remember
ing
that
the
Lord
is
not
dealing
arbitrarily
either
in
receiving
his
people
into
the
light
nor
in
casting
some
out
of
the
light,
we
are
bound
to
suppose
that
there
were
conditions
of
heart
in
these,
our
friends,
with
which
the
Lord
was
not
well
pleased.
The
lesson
to
us
is
that
we
must
walk
in
the
light
and
that
we
must
put
away
from
anI'
hearts
and,
as
far
as
possible
from
our
flesh.
everything
contrary
to
the
divine
standards
of
meekness,
gentleness,
purity,
justice.
love,
"if
hy
any
means
we
would
attain
unto
The
resurrection
of
The
Dead."
Bdore
dismissing
this
subject
we
must
answpr
another
foolish
que~tion,
namely,
\\'hat
answer
do
we
make
to
the
follo'wing
:-
A
certain
sister
owning
property
in
hpr
own
name
found
that
her
husband
had
taken
possession
of
it,
rents,
monies,
all,
and
that
he
ignored
her
entirely
in
the
matter.
Upon
her
request
to
have
some
of
her
own
money
and
property
given
her
by
her
father,
the
husband
became
angry
and
sought
out
some
of
our
opponents.
The
latter.
after
the
usual
course,
partially
misrepresented
our
teachings
respecting
the
atone
ment
for
sin.
The
husband
replied,
That's
what
my
wife
says.
She
says,
"Jesus
didn't
die
for
you;
he
died
for
me-but
not
for
you;
I
will
die
for
you."
What
will
we
answer
to
this?
\Ve
answer
that
we
would
not
believe
a
man
on
oath
who
was
trying
to
cheat
his
wife
out
of
her
own
money.
\Ve
do
not
believe
that
the
wife
said
anything
of
the
kind,
nor
that
she
has
any
such
idea.
We
believe
that
the
husband
misrep
resented
his
wife's
statement.
just
as
our
opponents
uni
formly
misrepresent
THE
\V
ATCH
TOWER
statements.
A
half
truth
may
be
an
untruth,
if
it
gives
a
misconception
and
is
intended
so
to
do.
A
truthful
statement
would
not
serve
the
purpose
of
our
opponents,
for
the
truth
is
logical
as
nothing
else
is.
St.
Paul
remllrked,
"\Ve
he
slanderously
reported."
The
same
is
true
today.
The
self-contradictions
of
our
opponents
are
remarkable.
In
one
hrrath
thry
tell
us
that
they
have
been
deceived
by
us
for
sevrnteen
years.
In
the
next
thpy
say
that
we
have
changcd
within
the
last
three
years.
In
thp
nrxt
thpr
afiirm
that
they
are
in
aecord
with
everrthing
in
the
RCRTPTURE
STUDIES,
and
yet
they
arr
oppo,
ing
thpm
as
best
they
are
able.
Oh,
inronsistpnc~',
thou
art
not
a
jewel;
nor
dost
thou
reflect
beauty
or
crpdit
upon
any
hody!
A
COVENANT
BY
SACRIFICE
NOT
THE
NEW
COVENANT
In
all
of
our
writings
for
thE'
past
thirt~·
years
we
have
pointed
out
the
New
Oovenant
as
eoming
fully
into
operation
at
the
close
of
this
Gospel
age.
We
have
pointed
out
that
it
is
the
covenant
under
which
restitution
blessings
are
to
come
to
the
world
of
mankind.
",
e
pointed
it
out
as
the
Keturah
Covenant-separate
and
distinct
from
the
Hagar
Covenant.
under
which
natural
IsraE'1
was
developed,
typified
by
Ishmael
and
separate
and
distinct
also
from
the
original
Abrahamie
Covenant,
typified
by
Sarah,
whose
seed
Isaac
typified
The
Christ,
Head
and
body.
We
saw
and
pointed
out
to
others,
so
that
they
saw,
that
the
antitypieal
Isaac-The
Christ,
Head
nnd
body-is
the
Melehisedee
priest,
of
which
Jesus
is
the
Head
and
the
church
his
body-the
great
Pripst
under
whom
the
New
Covenant
is
to
be
mnde
effective
to
Israel
and
to
the
world
of
mankind
through
hrael.
\Ve
pointed
out
also
that
thp
elpet
chureh
of
this
Gospel
age,
a
"royal
priesthood."
must
all
offer
sacrifice;
as
the
Apostle
declares.
"Every
priest
i,s
onlainrd
of
God
to
offer
hath
gifts
and
saerifiees
for
sin."
We
pointf'd
out
that
our
Lord
Jesus
is
the
great
High
PrieRtt
of
our
profrssion
and
that
he
offered
himself
in
sacrifice
anci
(291-292)
[46801
Vou. XXXT BROOKLYN, N. Y., SEPTEMBER 15, 1910 No. 18 PRESENT TRUTH—RE ADVOCATE AND MEDIATOR A gentleman who fancies himself commissioned to be the Advocate of the New Covenant, but who hay not vet come to see that the New Covenant could not be the Old Covenant, takes us to task saying: “Four years ago it was present truth that the Editor of Tiare Warcn Tower needed a Mediator between God and Himsclf. Three years ago it become present truth that he does not need a Mediator between God and himself. Did the Editor of Tum Watci Tower leave the present truth?” We reply, No, the Editor of Tme Watcn ‘Tower did not leave the present truth. He kept all the truth that he then had and has added to it. The light has seattered some more of the darkness, so that, with the very same thought that he had four years ago, he now secs that he used the wrong word In expressing that thought. He now sees that he should have used the Seriptural term Advocate instead of the word Mediator. He now sces that himself and others in the past have used language too carelessly, because of the general confusion and mix-up handed down from the dark ages, He now sces that the Scriptures nowhere say that the church has a Mediator or ever will have a Mediator, and that they nowhere say that the Covenant of sacrifice, under which the church is developed, has a Mediator. The Editor of THE Watcn Tower is learning day by day more clearly to rightly divide the Word of Truth and to use Scriptural terms only. The Seriptures do say, “We have an Advocate with the Father.” (1 John 2:1) They do not say anywhere, We have a Mediator between God and us, The Editor of THe WarcH Towrr is trying to assist God’s people to think and speak correctly respecting the great work of Atonement for sin, the merit of which lies in the sacrifice of Jesus and the privilege to share in which is granted to the elect during this Gospel age. The same critic innocently asks for any Bible text to show that the church, the bride of Christ, does not need a Mediator, How foolish! Does the Bible undertake to say all the things that are not so? One would think that no special ability would be necessary to discern that there is no need of a Mediator between friends. We never had this thought! When we used the word as respects the church we used it thoughtlessly, just as our opponents are using it now; we used it without noticing that the Bible nowhere intimates a Mediator between the Father and the church, It is because present truth is progressive that we have clearer light on the same facts than we had four years ago, even as we then had clearer light than we enjoyed vears before that, The Editor of THE Waren Towrr has believed in Jesus as his Redeemer from childhood, He did not understand the philosophy of the divine plan of the ages then, but nevertheless, his simple faith was a suflicient hasis for a consecration of his all to the Lord. and a sufficient. basis for the divine acceptance of the sacrifice and the hegetting of the holy Spirit. Since then the light of this harvest time has heen shining more and more clearly as the years go by. The light of present truth does not contradict the light of past truth, but confirms it and further clarifies our vision and increases our hope and our joy. And is not this true of all of God’s people now walking im the narrow way? Those who are now “waking up” to a realization of the fact that for seventeen vears they have been in darkness are acknowledging that they have not heen walking for those seventeen years in the “path of the just, which shineth more and more unto the perfect day.” For the past seventeen years of their lives, the seventeen years of their best Christian experience, they believed that the Vine and the branches are one—that the Head and his Members are one; that the sufferings of The Christ are one—that the chureh fills up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ—that the death of Christ is one—that the church becomes dead with him sacrificially, after having been justified through faith in hig blood, his sacrifice. For seventeen years they believed that the Prophet spake of the sufferings of Christ (Head and body) and the glory that shall follow; that to be dead with him signifies to he baptized into his sacrificial death as in contrast with Adam’s penalty—death. And to drink of his cup signifies a share of his sufferings and that the hope before all such is, that “if we he dead with him, we shall also live with him”; and “if we suffer with him, we shall also reign with him.” For seventeen years these friends told us that they believed and rejoiced in St. Panl’s sentiments of Phil, 3:9-11, the hope to be found in Christ (members of his hody). not having their own righteousness, which is of the Law (Covenant), but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is (291-292) of God by faith (not by the New (Law) Covenant), that we might know him and the power of his resurrection (sharing his resurrection as his members) and the fellowship of his sufferings (being partakers of the sufferings of Christ), being made conformable unto his death (not a different death from his, but a similar one—not a death as a sinner, but a sacrificial one), if by any means I might attain unto The resurrection of The dead. We are not murmuring nor complaining against these friends because of the great loss which they have sustained— the loss of spiritual sight into the deep things of God—into “the mystery, which is Christ in you the hope of glory.” We compassionate their loss and remember the Master’s words, “Tf the light that is in thee become darkness, how great is that darkness!” While not attempting to judge the hearts of any who have gone out from us, we may be confident that the Lord did not allow them to go out without a sufficient reason. We regard their loss of spiritual sight as a divine judgment upon them, just as truly as we regard the opening of the eyes of their understanding as a mark of divine favor. Remembering that the Lord is not dealing arbitrarily either in receiving his people into the light nor in casting some out of the light, we are bound to suppose that there were conditions of heart in these, our friends, with which the Lord was not well pleased. The lesson to us is that we must walk in the light and that we must put away from our hearts and, as far as possible from our flesh, everything contrary to the divine standards of meckness, gentleness, purity, justice. love, “if by any means we would attain unto The resurrection of The Dead.” Before dismissing this subject we must answer another foolish question, namely, What answer do we make to the following :— A certain sister owning property in her own name found that her husband had taken possession of it, rents, monies, all, and that he ignored her entirely in the matter. Upon her request to have some of her own money and property given her by her father, the husband became angry and sought out some of our opponents. The latter, after the usual course, partially misrepresented our teachings respecting the atonement for sin. ‘The husband replied, That’s what my wife says. She says, “Jesus didn’t die for you; he died for me—but not for you; I will die for you.” What will we answer to this? We answer that we would not believe a man on oath who was trying to cheat his wife out of her own money. We do not believe that the wife said anything of the kind, nor that she has any such idea. We believe that the husband misrepresented his wife’s statement, just as our opponents uniformly misrepresent THE WaAtcH ToWER statements, A halftruth may be an untruth, if it gives a misconception and is intended so to do. A truthful statement would not serve the purpose of our opponents, for the truth is logical as nothing else is. St. Paul remarked, “We be slanderously reported.” The same is true today. The self-contradictions of our opponents are remarkable. In one breath they tell us that they have been deceived by us for seventeen years. In the next they say that we have changed within the last three years. In the next they affirm that they are in accord with everything in the SCRIPTURE STUDIES, and yet they are opposing them as best they are able. Oh, inconsistency, thou art not a jewel; nor dost thou reflect beauty or credit upon anyhody! A COVENANT BY SACRIFICE NOT THE NEW COVENANT In all of our writings for the past thirty years we have pointed out the New Covenant as coming fully into operation at the close of this Gospel age. We have pointed out that it is the covenant under which restitution blessings are to come to the world of mankind. We pointed it out as the Keturah Covenant—separate and distinct from the Hagar Covenant. under which natural Israe] was developed, typified by Ishmael and separate and distinct also from the original Abrahamic Covenant, typified by Sarah, whose seed Isaac typified The Christ, Head and body. We saw and pointed out to others, so that they saw, that the antitypical Isaac—The Christ, Head and body—is the Melchisedec priest, of which Jesus is the Head and the church his body—the great Priest under whom the New Covenant is to be made effective to Israel and to the world of mankind through Israel. We pointed out also that the elect church of this Gospel age, a “royal priesthood.” must all offer sacrifice; as the Apostle declares, “Every priest is ordained of God to offer both gifts and sacrifices for sin.” We pointed out that our Lord Jesus is the great High Priest of our profession and that he offered himself in sacrifice and [4680]
To enhance your experience on our website, we use cookies and similar technologies. Some cookies are essential for the core functionality of our site and cannot be declined. You can choose to accept or decline additional cookies. We want to assure you that none of this data will be sold or used for marketing purposes. You can adjust your preferences at any time by accessing the Privacy Settings from the footer of the page. For more information, please refer to our
Privacy Policy
Terms of Use
.
