Earlier text: Rev. Luther Lee, D. D., on the Sabbath; or Strange Inconsistencies and ContradictionsMorality of the Ten Commandments.
WHILE noticing the objections presented against the law, which are strictly human opinions, it may be well to notice the opinions of men, given in a few instances, on the other side. Thus a certain man who was well versed in human law, his profession being that of the law, who was an infidel—an unbeliever in the Bible,—was led to critically examine the ten commandments. The following is the conclusion at which he arrived:— "I have been looking into the nature of that law. I have been trying to see whether I can add anything to it or take anything from it, so as to make it better. Sir, I cannot. It is perfect. "The first commandment directs us to make the Creator the object of our supreme love and reverence. That is right. If he be our Creator, Preserver, and supreme Benefactor, we ought to treat him, and none other, as such. The second forbids idolatry. That certainly is right. The third forbids profaneness. The fourth fixes a time for religious worship. If there is a God, he ought surely to be worshiped. It is suitable that there should be an outward homage, significant of our inward regard. If God be worshiped, it is proper that some time be set apart for that purpose, when all may worship him harmoniously, and without interruption. One day in seven is certainly not too much; and I do not know that it is too little. The fifth defines the peculiar duties arising from the family relations. Injuries to our neighbor are then classified by the moral law. They are divided into offenses against life, chastity, property, and character. And," said he, applying a legal idea with legal acuteness, "I notice that the greatest offense in each class is expressly forbidden. Thus, the greatest injury to life is murder; to chastity, adultery; to property, theft; to character, perjury. Now the greater offense must include the less of the same kind. Murder must include every injury to life; adultery every injury to purity, and so of the rest. And the moral code is closed and perfected, by a command forbidding every improper desire in regard to our neighbor. "I have been thinking," he proceeded, "where did Moses get that law? I have read history; the Egyptian and the adjacent nations were idolaters; so were the Greeks and Romans; and the wisest and best Greeks or Romans never gave a code of morals like this. Where did Moses get this law, which surpasses the wisdom and philosophy of the most enlightened ages? He lived at a period comparatively barbarous, but he has given a law, in which the learning and sagacity of all subsequent time can detect no flaw. Where did he get it? He could not have soared so far above his age, as to have devised it himself. I am satisfied where he obtained it. It came down from Heaven. I am convinced of the truth of the religion of the Bible." No one can point out any defect in this reasoning. And as for his conclusion, it cannot be excepted against, for it is given in the very words of the inspired writer who spoke on the same subject. And it is all a complete vindication of the words of David: "The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul." The following remarks are from Mr. Dobney, a Baptist writer of England. The extract is long, but every sentence is full of meaning, and we had rather quote more than to leave out a single paragraph here given. It is worthy of careful consideration:— "We have then, in the essential character of God, a guarantee that the law which issues from him shall be neither deficient nor superfluous; 'his work is perfect.' And then if he give a perfect law, it must be right to enforce it; and there must be as much wisdom, and even goodness, in his guarding it when given, as there is of those qualities in his giving it at first: and consequently it is as right to punish the violation of law, as it was right originally to enact law at all. "But we will not rest the case on the presumed excellence of the law; we will examine it for ourselves; it invites the investigation of the thoughtful, and it deserves their admiration, for it is beautiful as the laws which God hath stamped on nature, and by which he secures the order and harmony of the universe. "But what do we mean by 'The Law?' We will endeavor to answer the question, and in so doing shall perceive that— "1. The excellency of the law is seen in its very Nature. Generally, we mean by the law that which is commonly called 'the moral law,' presented to us in the shape of distinct commandments, ten in number; prescribing to each one of us concerning God in the first place, and then concerning our deportment to all our fellow-creatures. These are illustrated, and their extensive bearing shown, by many other precepts which are scattered through the Scriptures. But there is not a single injunction or prohibition (of a moral kind we mean, of course, not referring now to the ceremonial law given to the Israelites, which has another explanation) which is not referable to one or other of these commandments, and included in it. "If, however, without any amplification, we wish to have the whole law in a closely condensed form, so that we may bring it under the eye in one view in all its entireness, we can do so. It lies in a small compass as summed up for us by the divine interpreter, 'Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, with all thy mind, and with all thy strength; and thy neighbor as thyself.' Thus it consists of two parts. Let us examine it in both its branches, and see if it be not 'holy, and just, and good.' "As to the first part, is it not well to call on the creature to love, and reverence, and worship, and obey his all-wise and kind Creator, Preserver, and Benefactor, to whom he owes life and breath and all things, and on whom he entirely depends? Must it not be right to love perfect excellence and goodness—to submit to perfect wisdom—to manifest gratitude for kindness? Must it not be right to worship God? and if so, right to worship him in the way which he may see fit to prescribe? And if all this be right, is it not of course right to require it? And if so, would it not therefore be wrong to dispense with it? Then this first part of the law cannot be excepted against. "The second branch is drawn out for us into six particulars; the admirable propriety of which will be the more readily recognized, if we consider ourselves the objects on whose behalf the law is made, rather than the subjects to whom it is given. In the first of which God very wisely and kindly confirms parental authority and dictates to children as to their behavior towards those who gave them birth. They are to love and respect and obey them, kindly cherishing them in old age, if need require, tending them and soothing them to life's latest hour. All parents must approve this requirement; and if in any case the young were disposed to murmur at it, feeling it an irksome yoke, we should appeal from their present to their future selves, when they also shall sustain the parental character, and will be quite prepared to approve it. "The second cannot require any comment: 'Thou shalt not kill.' Who does not feel that his life ought to be inviolate, and the life of those he loves? Who does not decide that if any man should invade his dwelling, and murder his wife, his parent, or his child, severe punishment ought to follow? See then with grateful admiration, how, by an express prohibition to all men, God has guarded your life and the precious lives of all who are dear to you. "Similar is the third: 'Thou shalt not commit adultery,' including in the prohibition every kind and degree of impurity. But to whom shall we appeal? Assuredly not to the violators of this commandment in any form; not to those who would, at any cost, throw the reins upon the neck of their passions, and with base selfishness seek only their own gratification, no matter at what expense to others. From such we turn away, as utterly incapacitated to judge; or we appeal to them in the other characters they may sustain, and as to the relationships of life which they rejoice to own. Who does not wish, above his wish for life, that the sanctity of his own dwelling may ever be most sacredly preserved? Does not every one who answers to the name of brother, husband, father, with a knit brow and a flushed cheek, and in a tone of deepest emotion, assert that his own beloved relatives ought, by every means possible to devise, to be most sacredly guarded from even the slightest harm? Would he not have them protected by the strongest sanctions law can give, shielded as by triple brass, from the faintest breath of the spoiler? How benevolent, then, the law which forbids, under penalty of God's displeasure, every one from blighting the fair blossoms you so sensitively cherish. God himself puts a fence around your dwelling; and in a tone of command that will not be slighted with impunity, warns off every profane intruder, and forbids even the faintest wish to wrong you. Thus is he by this law the kind guardian of your domestic peace. "Similar is the fourth: 'Thou shalt not steal.' Again consider yourself the object in whose favor the law is made, and you will recognize that hereby God sets a hedge about all you have; your possessions are to be your own entirely, and no one is to deprive you of the least portion, or to defraud you in any transaction. So with the fifth. All persons are forbidden to meddle with your fair fame; your character is to be as sacred as your life: God will not hold that individual guiltless who misrepresents you in any way. And knowing that all outward improprieties and positive wrongs begin in the heart,—in the sixth he prohibits all persons from wishing to wrong you in the least degree, or to gratify themselves at your expense. "Thus God decides how all persons shall behave to you; thus kindly does he guard you on every hand. While in other parts of Scripture, these requirements are explained to be positive in their real meaning, as well as negative: so that persons are not to be content with simply abstaining from doing you harm; they are to do you good as occasion may require; they are to embrace all opportunities of increasing your comfort and happiness, and are to love you as they love themselves. Thus extensively has God cared for your welfare; thus strict is the charge he has given to all men concerning you. "Is not the law, then, holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good? And then is it not quite as excellent when you are the subject, as when you are the object of it? when it is law to you concerning all your conduct towards others, as when it is law to others concerning you. 2. "But observe its excellency in its tendency to make the observer of it happy. "And it has this tendency in many ways. There would be in one who should perfectly keep the law a perfect satisfaction with himself. Conscience would never speak in an accusing tone, but always the language of approval. There would be a sense of God's approbation, which would fill the heart with joy. "It will be admitted by every reflecting person, that happiness does not depend so much on external circumstances, as upon the state of our own minds. We are dependent on ourselves rather than upon others. Take an ambitious, restless, dissatisfied man, and load him with riches, honors, authority; will he be happy? You unhesitatingly answer, No. But why not? Because, you reply, his own disposition will prevent. Take another,—a suspicious, jealous, irritable, and revengeful man; place him amongst the peaceful and amiable; will he be happy? No, his wretched temper will be a perpetual preventive of enjoyment, and if he do not find sources of disquietude, he will make them. On the contrary, let a man of a cheerful, contented, grateful, and benevolent disposition, be brought into painful circumstances, and his situation, though trying, will not deprive him of peace and happiness. Or let a meek and gentle spirit, though sensitive, be exposed to unkindness; still though grieved, the mind is not robbed of its peace. We have a beautiful illustration in the Psalmist,—'Princes did sit and speak against me, but thy servant did meditate on thy statutes.' "We can easily conceive that were an angel to become incarnate, and to dwell amongst us for a time, exposed to hardship, neglect, and insult, none of these things would destroy his peace. His well regulated mind would prevent external things, mere accidents, from affecting his inner self. And so our happiness is not placed at the mercy of outward circumstances, over which we have no control: it is made to depend much more intimately upon ourselves, and the state of our own minds. 'A good man is satisfied from himself:' 'Great peace have all they that love thy law, and nothing shall offend them.' "The law of God is such as, if observed in its spirit as well as its letter, would make us happy in our conformity. It prohibits nothing that is not injurious, it requires nothing that is not advantageous. We know how pleasant to one's self are the feelings of kindness and benevolence. I can confidently appeal to the reader, whether he has not felt an exquisite glow of delight, when, on some happy occasion, his breast has been full of good will to all around him. Oh yes, if we know what it is to look abroad on creation with a kindly eye,—to be glad in the joy that was felt by others, and to wish happiness to the universe, embracing in our benevolence all ranks of creatures, we can bear witness to the fact that such feelings of expansive benevolence to others, when self was for a time lost sight of, have produced a gush of rapturous enjoyment which language is too poor to describe. "Happiness, then, depends on the state of our own minds, and the feelings which are prevalent there. Now the law of God prescribes exactly that class of affections, and that only, which invariably and necessarily produces enjoyment in the existence and exercise of them—Love. 'Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, with all thy mind, and with all thy strength; and thy neighbor as thyself.' And so 'love is the fulfilling of the law.' "Allow the imagination to bring such a state of mind before you as your own; just try the experiment of imagining how you would feel, if every selfish, unlovely emotion had become utterly extinct, leaving no trace behind, and pure love to all beings animated your breast; the heart filled with holy love and reverence for God, so that you exulted in your relation to him, and delighted in all his will; love to God supremely, and to all his creatures subordinately,—why, your cup would be full to overflowing, and you would be ready to shout aloud for joy. Thus admirably is God's law adapted to secure the perfect happiness of every one that observes it. Thanks be to God for such a law! "Its excellency is further seen in its power to secure the happiness of the entire universe. "Poetry is poor, and the imagination altogether inadequate, to exhibit the scene which would, everywhere and always, meet our eye, were the law of God perfectly obeyed by all. Every individual being possessed of those feelings which we have just alluded to, all would possess in themselves a source of unbounded happiness. Moreover, the mind of the individual would not have to depend merely upon itself, but every other being would regard him with perfect love, and would seek his welfare. And thus, all loving and all loved, every heart would be attuned to harmony, and every voice in concert would sweetly swell the universal chorus; for God would be exalted to his proper throne, and would reign supreme over willing and delighted subjects, who were ever yielding the homage of love to a God of love; while the feeling of every heart towards the Great Supreme first, and then towards all fellow-creatures, being precisely that the exercise of which causes exuberant gladness, and this being in such a supposed state uninterrupted, our happiness would meet with no rude check, and being perfect, so would our bliss be perfect also. "What a delightful vision is thus presented to our view. The God whose name is love, sitting on the throne of universal empire, and swaying the scepter of love over all the intelligent creation; the teeming myriads of the universe burning with seraphic love to him, acquiescing, delighting in his will, and dwelling rejoicingly in his presence; their hearts being under the soft control of love, they regard their fellow-creatures with a beaming eye, and the melody of love is heard in every whisper, and in every note. Nor is all this a pleasant fiction. Such is Heaven. Law perfectly observed there—the law of love—secures the happiness of all. And it is nothing but the universal neglect of God's law which has transformed this beauteous earth into the wilderness that it is. Oh, how wretched has the infraction of law made man everywhere! How earth sighs, from her deepest recesses, over the ills which have resulted therefrom, and wherewith humanity is weighed down and crushed. Whenever man causes a sigh to rise from any heart, that sigh is wrung from the bosom by his violation of God's law. Trace up, then, all the misery which has filled the world to this, its proper source, and say whether the beauty of the law is not apparent in the happiness it can cause, and in the wretchedness which its violation occasions." THE State of Connecticut has been famous for the strictness of her laws, especially of those regarding the observance of Sunday. It is just possible that there is existing a misapprehension of the spirit of old Connecticut; we therefore give the following section from her Sunday Law:— “No person who conscientiously believes that the seventh day of the week ought to be observed as the Sabbath, and actually refrains from secular business and labor on that day, shall be liable to the penalties of this act for performing secular business and labor on the Lord’s day, provided that he disturbs no other person while attending the duties of public worship.” But this is not nearly blue enough to suit the very tender consciences of the religious—the very religious—people of California. A friend in a distant city in this State writes to us:— “The preachers, as I have personally witnessed, not only become vehement in word and gesture, but almost frantic, when talking about it. They propose to prevent its repeal, and then have it so amended as to be more stringent in its operation. To this end they have been circulating petitions for the last six weeks or two months.” While the Sunday advocates are pointing with confidence to the Sunday laws of the different States, and saying that what they ask in California already exists in nearly every State of the Union, they entirely conceal the fact that most of the other States have exceptions similar to the above in Connecticut. We do not know that we ought to be astonished at this concealment, however, for, (1) They do not intend to allow any such exceptions to the application of the Sunday Law in this State. And, (2) They have entered upon a religio-political crusade, and it is to be expected that they will adopt the ways and wiles of politicians. Their confidence in their present work does not spring from the consciousness that they have the truth on their side, for they well know that they have to mutilate the commandment of God in order to make it uphold their pseudo-Sabbath. They treat the law of God as Judge Morrison would not consent to have them treat the law of California. Is it any wonder that they so readily seek a refuge in a “police regulation,” in an appeal to patriotism for the “time-honored American Sunday,” and, as a last resort, to the arm of Cæsar? But their object is their “Christian Sabbath” all the same. Their confidence is solely in the belief that they have the majority with them. What if they have? What if they do succeed in the coming election? It was the remark of John B. Finch, in one of the best temperance speeches that ever was made, that nothing is fully settled unless it is settled right. It was said that the Pope of Rome could declare a circle to be a square; it was and is taught that “the church has power to command feasts and holy days under sin,” and the Sunday-Sabbath is produced as evidence of that power. But we have a large degree of confidence, also; it is this: The State election in California can never make it a sin to work on the first day of the week, nor make it right to break the commandment of God which requires us to keep the seventh day. Our “Scripture lesson” for this occasion is the following:— “So I returned and considered all the oppressions that are done under the sun; and behold the tears of such as were oppressed, and they had no comforter; and on the side of their oppressors there was power; but they had no comforter.” Eccl. 4:1. Too Literal to Be Correct.
THE S. F. Bulletin gives a report of a sermon preached by Dr. Robert Patterson at Pacific Grove Retreat on the subject of the Sabbath. In this report is the following paragraph:— “Dr. Patterson then referred to the teachings of physiology, which show that in work there is a constant expenditure of oxygen belonging to the body, and that there is received through the air less than is given out. This drain can only be stopped by resting from labor one day in each week. It is upon this ground, of the vital necessity of the Sabbath for the supply of the deficiency of oxygen caused by work in men and beasts, that the Lord insists upon the Sabbath rest in Exodus 23:12: ‘Six days shalt thou do thy work, and on the seventh thou shalt rest, that thine ox and thine ass may rest, and the son of thine handmaid, and the stranger may take breath.’ Wanephesh our translation renders ‘may be refreshed;’ but God gives more accurately the precise mode by which the working man is refreshed by his Sabbath rest, ‘by taking breath,’ by supplying the deficient breath of life.” The ability of Dr. Patterson is altogether beyond question, but an able man may run his points too fine in aiming at a desired conclusion. There is such a thing as being entirely too literal in the translation of a Hebrew sentence. We have been often reminded of the remark made to us several years ago by the learned Rabbi, the late Dr. Lillienthal, of Cincinnati. He said he found fault with the Christian grammarians in the Hebrew because they tried to bring the Hebrew of the Old Testament to the precision of western languages, which, said he, cannot be done. The language is too brief; it deals too largely in figures. That Dr. Patterson is strictly literal in his translation, no one can dispute. That his rendering is preferable to that of the received Version we must beg leave to doubt. His reasoning and rendering will not apply in the case of the same expression in Exodus 31:17, thus: “In six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed;” literally, “he took breath.” In this text, the words “was refreshed” have a significance; the words “he took breath,” have no significance whatever, except as a figure of speech. In every like instance the received translation is the very best that can be made. We believe there is more implied in the expression than a mere restoration of oxygen to the physical frame. Dr. Clarke very aptly says of Ex. 23:12, “that they may be re-inspired or new-souled.” Eld. Andrews, in History of the Sabbath, makes “was refreshed,” in Ex. 31:17, to represent that the Lord delighted in the work from which he rested. Dr. Clarke also compares Ex. 23:12 with Acts 3:19, “times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord.” And this is justified by the Greek of the Septuagint and of the text in Acts. “Times of oxygenating” would but faintly express the idea of the apostle in Acts 3:19. We think it comes equally short of reaching to the full meaning of Ex. 23:12. There is a strong tendency in these days to make the Sabbath a mere rest from physical labor. This is not the Scriptural idea at all. Third Angel's Message of Rev. XIV.
By John Nevins Andrews
"And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: and the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever; and they have no rest day nor night who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name. Here is the patience of the saints; here are they that keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus." Rev. 14:9-12. The message of the third angel is the latest special message of mercy and of warning to mankind. It is by far the most solemn message in the Bible. We have decisive evidence that the three messages of Rev. 14 belong to the last days. They are immediately followed by the coming of the Son of man to reap the harvest of the earth; verses 14-18; and "the harvest is the end of the world." Matt. 13:39. The words of the third angel so plainly relate to the final conflict that little argument is needed in proof of the fact. Thus we are solemnly warned concerning the image of the beast. But the image is not formed till after wicked men have wrought certain wonderful miracles, among which is the act of bringing down fire from heaven upon the earth in the sight of men. Rev. 13:13, 14. This has never yet taken place, and it never can take place till Satan is permitted to work with all power, and signs, and lying wonders, which will not be till the final conflict. 2 Thess. 2:9, 10; Rev. 3:10. The third angel threatens the worshipers of the beast with the wine of God's wrath. This wine, as we shall show hereafter, is the seven last plagues; and these are poured upon the last generation of wicked men as the means whereby God will desolate the earth. This message is a solemn warning concerning the great time of trouble which comes at the close of our High Priest's work in the sanctuary in Heaven. It relates (1) to the beast which the world is to worship; (2) to the image which is made to this beast; (3) to the mark of this beast; (4) to the wine of God's wrath which the worshipers of the beast will drink; (5) to the fire which will devour them; (6) to the patience of the saints; (7) to the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus. Three great sins are made prominent in this warning: (1) the worship of the beast; (2) the worship of his image; (3) the reception of his mark. It is to be noticed that each of these sins has direct reference to that beast which speaks great words against God and against his truth. The image is made to this beast, and the mark is his mark. The beast is the central, and by far the most prominent, object in this evil group. Three grand purposes are to be accomplished by the third angel's message. (1) To give the church warning of the approaching conflict with the beast and his image; (2) to give the world warning of the seven last plagues; (3) to prepare the people of God for the coming of Christ. The beast, with whom this great conflict is to take place, is described in Rev. 13:1-10, and must be the same as Daniel's fourth beast after the rise of the little horn. That prophet saw four great beasts rise up out of the sea, which were a lion, a bear, a leopard, and a380 terrible beast with ten horns among which afterward arose a little horn with a mouth which spoke great words of blasphemy. Dan. 7. The angel said that these represent the four great kingdoms which should successively rule the world till God's kingdom shall be established. These are Babylon, Persia, Greece, and Rome. He also said that the ten horns are the ten kingdoms which should arise out of the fourth or Roman empire. These are the kingdoms of Europe which once pertained to that empire. The little horn that rises after the ten and that claims authority as representing God upon the earth, must represent the pope. When John had his vision, Babylon, Persia, and Greece, represented by the lion, the bear, and the leopard, had passed away, and only Rome, represented by Daniel's beast with ten horns, remained. Therefore John saw only this terrible beast arise from the sea. But it was presented to him in such a manner as to show that it is the successor to the power and territory of the first three; for it had the body of the leopard, the feet of the bear, and the mouth of the lion. And as Daniel's beast with ten horns had afterward another horn arise in which was a mouth speaking great things, so this beast with ten horns has a mouth afterward given to it which also speaks great words and blasphemies. That this beast after this mouth was given to it is the same as Daniel's fourth beast after the little horn arose upon it, will be seen from the following comparison of the two symbols: 1. The little horn was to be a blasphemous power. "He should speak great words against the Most High." Dan. 7 :25. So, also, was the beast of Rev. 13 :6, to do the same. "He opened his mouth in blasphemy against God." 2. The little horn "made war with the saints and prevailed against them." Dan. 7 :21. Thus the beast of Rev. 13 :7, was also "to make war with the saints, and to overcome them." 3. The little horn had a "mouth that spake very great things." Dan. 7 :8, 20. So, likewise, there was given the beast of Rev. 13 :5, "a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies." 4. Power was given to the little horn of Dan. 7 :25, until a time and times and the dividing of time." To the beast, also, power was given to "continue forty and two months." Rev. 13 :5. 5. The dominion of the little horn was to be taken away at the termination of that specified period. The beast of Rev. 13 :10, who led into captivity and put to death with the sword so many of the saints, was himself to be led into captivity and be killed with the sword, at the end of the forty and two months. With these points of similarity in the two emblems, the little horn and the beast, who can doubt their identity? It is said that the dragon gave his power and his seat unto the beast. Rev. 13:2. From the previous chapter we learn that the dragon represents the power which ruled the world at the birth of Jesus Christ. In other words, the dragon represents imperial Rome. Now it is a remarkable fact that the Emperor Constantine removed the seat of empire from Rome to Constantinople, and that the Emperor Justinian clothed the pope with civil power as head of the church, and gave him the ancient seat of empire, the city of Rome. The seven heads, as we have already seen, are seven successive forms of government in the Roman empire, so that, though John saw them all at once, in fact only one existed at a time. The dragon of chapter 12, and the beast of chapter 13, and that of chapter 17, are each represented as having the seven heads and the ten horns. This shows that these symbols represent the Roman power at different periods of its existence, or, in other words, under different heads in this succession of seven. The ten horns, as has been shown, represent the kingdoms of papal Europe; that is to say, the kingdoms which have been or are now under the especial influence of the papacy. The horns exist at the same time, for they represent the divided Roman empire. But that which chiefly concerns us at this time is with reference to the mouth given to this beast which speaks great words of blasphemy. This must represent the pope asserting his arrogant pretentions to govern the church of God and to determine the doctrines of the Bible. This mouth, as has been shown, is the same as that of the little horn in Dan. 7:8. The papacy, thus symbolized, has thought to change times and laws, and still maintains that pretension, and has spoken and still speaks great words of rebellion against God. It claims to be the vicar of God, and has decreed that itself is infallible. To worship the beast is to yield obedience to his claim in preference to that of the God of the Bible. The mouth speaking great things, which is given to the beast, represents the papacy elevated to a commanding position in the Roman empire, and able to speak great words in the name of that empire and by its authority. From this time we must identify the beast with the papal authority and government. We have decisive proof of this in chapter 17, where we find that the beast cannot represent merely the civil power of the Roman empire; for we read that the ten kings receive their kingdom at the same time with the beast, and that they have one mind and shall give their power to the beast. But the Roman empire did not commence to bear rule when it was broken up into ten parts, nor did the ten kings ever unite and give their dominion back to the Roman empire. But it is true that the papal power gained the ascendency in the Roman empire immediately after that empire was divided into ten kingdoms, and not only has the papal dominion been cotemporary with that of the ten kingdoms, but the ten kings have agreed and given their power to the pope during the period necessary to fulfill the word of God. The harlot, with whom the kings have committed fornication, represents, not the papal government, but, as we have seen, the so-called Catholic church in its several divisions, unlawfully united to the world. It was given to this beast to make war with the saints and to overcome them, and to have this dominion for forty-two months or 1260 days. Rev. 13:5-7. This is the same as the giving of the saints into the hands of the little horn for a time, times and a half. Dan. 7:25. Compare Rev. 12:6, 14. In symbolic prophecy, days represent years. Eze. 4:6. The 1260 years of papal dominion commenced with the enforcement of Justinian's decree, in A. D. 538, and terminated in 1798 with the overthrow of the papal government by the French. This great conflict in which the beast made war upon the saints and overcame them is in the past. But the people of God are to have another conflict with this beast. The third angel gives us warning of this. In the former conflict he overcame them. Rev. 13:7. But in this conflict they are to overcome him. Rev. 15:2; 17:14. That is to say, during the 1260 days they were given into his hands to be destroyed. Dan. 7:25. But those who meet the beast in the final conflict are not to be slain by him but are to triumph over him, for they are like Elijah to be translated. Nevertheless, they will be brought to a terrible extremity before God interposes to deliver them. In the past war of the beast against the saints, those who supported that wicked power thought they were doing God's service in killing his faithful servants. But before the great conflict now at hand, the world is to be warned so that their guilt in worshiping the beast and in persecuting those who refuse to worship him, will be without excuse; and thus they will bring upon themselves the wrath of God without mercy. (To be Continued.) J. N. A.