Waggoner's Understanding of the
Doctrine of the Covenants
For Butler, Smith, Dan Jones, and
later, R. A. Underwood, the main conflict with Waggoner and A.T. Jones
over the covenant question was the statement, "that the old
covenant consisted mainly in the promises of the people."79
They believed that God had purposed to give the old covenant as a hedge
to separate Israel from the heathen nations and for doing this they
would be rewarded with wealth, prosperity, and honor.80 These men
believed that the people had made a mistake when they thought they could
obey the law of God in their own power, not that the whole covenant was
wrong as did Waggoner and Jones. The key to the differences between the
two sides is how God determined to make the people special. For Butler
and his supporters it was by an act of a contract where God promised
blessings if the people would keep His statutes.80
Waggoner did believe that the old
covenant was a covenant that the people arranged due to the response
they gave to God, "Whatever God says we will do." He saw that
the people had tried to establish their own righteousness not only in
the sense that Butler's group understood it. The people were in error in
more of a basic nature, namely, they truly did not comprehend the type
and quality of covenant relationship God wished to have with them.
Waggoner put it this way;
God said, 'If ye will obey my voice
indeed, and keep my covenant, (my commandments) then ye shall be a
peculiar treasure unto me above all people … and ye shall be unto me
a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation.' God did not say that he
would make them such, but that they would be such a people if they
obeyed his commandments. It could not be otherwise. The keeping of
God's law would constitute them a holy people; and as such they would
indeed be a peculiar treasure, even as are all who are zealous of good
works. All that was set before them was simply what would result from
obedience to the law, and that covenant contained no promise
of help in doing that. Therefore the first covenant was a promise on
the part of the people that they would make themselves holy. But this
they could not do. The promise was a good one; with it alone there
could be no fault; the fault lay with the people. The promise was
faulty, through the weakness of the people who made it; just as we
read in Rom. 8:3, that the law was weak through the flesh.81
The contrast between Waggoner and the
other group is now quite clear. The brethren were convinced that God had
deliberately decided to make Israel a special people for a given time
with special blessings that would elevate them above all nations. God
was offering a contract; God would bless if the people would obey. God
needed to keep the lineage of the Seed (Christ) pure until He came and
was able to bring in a more effectual system of salvation than the
figurative system of the ceremonies and rituals in the Old Testament
times. At that time God could bring full salvation to all. Waggoner
understood the event at Mt. Sinai as being an opportunity for the people
to become the children of God through adoption by the transformation of
their hearts, yielding their allegiance to Him instead of another lord.
|
