Earlier text: THE WARNING VOICEThe idea of the shut door has been received mainly from the following texts of scripture. "And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came, and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage; and the door was shut." Matt. xxv, 10. "When once the Master of the house is risen up, and hath shut to the door, and ye begin to stand without, and to knock at the door, saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us; and he shall answer and say unto you, I know you not whence ye are: Then shall ye begin to say, we have eaten and drunk in thy presence, and thou hast taught in our streets. But he shall say, I tell you, I know you not whence ye are." Luke xiii, 25-27. The phrase "door of mercy" is much used; yet it is not found in the above texts, or elsewhere in the scriptures. It has been handed down to the Advent people by those who have not closely studied the Bible, and it is to be regretted that they should so freely use it. The impression has been made upon most minds, that this so called "door of mercy" would be closed when Christ is revealed from heaven. But the Lord's mercy, strictly, will never close. "His mercy endureth for ever." In all past time, the mercy of the Lord has ceased to men, and to nations, when they have rejected all the means of salvation which the all-wise Creator could, according to his plan of saving men, set before them. The Lord can do no more than this at the period of his Second Advent. But neither of the above texts of scripture apply to the Second Advent of Christ. The first, [Matt. xxv, 10,] is a portion of our Lord's statement respecting an Eastern Marriage. The coming of the bridegroom, mentioned in this text, is not the coming of Christ. It was an event in the marriage, which only represents an event in the kingdom of heaven. "And they that were ready went in with him to the marriage; and the door was shut." This was, also, a literal transaction in the marriage, mentioned by our Lord, and only represents an event in the kingdom of heaven. What is that event? Is it the second appearing of Christ? We answer, that such an application destroys all the harmony of the parable. If these events in the parable be applied to Christ's second coming, then the going in with him to the marriage, must apply to the resurrected and changed saints being caught up to meet the Lord in the air, and entering, with their Lord, the New Jerusalem, or some other place where a door will be closed after they enter. But we would ask, what door will be closed after the Lord has come, and after the saints are made immortal, and enter the New Jerusalem with their Lord? Is it replied that this is the "door of mercy," or "door of salvation for sinners," we answer, that those who apply these points in the marriage to the Second Advent, believe that such a door will be closed at the moment the Son leaves the right hand of the Father; and for this portion of the parable to harmonize with their views, it should read as follows: And while they went to buy, the door was shut, and the bridegroom came, and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage. One difficulty in applying these events to the Second Advent is that the shut door does not come until after the Lord descends from heaven, raises and changes his saints, and they go into the New Jerusalem, or some other place, then the door is shut. But look again. The "man of sin" is to be destroyed by the brightness of Christ's coming 2 Thess. ii, 8. The Lord Jesus is to be revealed from heaven "in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ; who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; when he shall come to be glorified in his saints." 2 Thess. i, 8, 9. This destruction of the entire wicked takes place at Christ's coming, before he enters the New Jerusalem with the immortal saints. Then how absurd is the application of this part of the parable that naturally leads to the position, that after the Lord has destroyed all the wicked, and takes his saints away from the earth, and goes in with them to the marriage, then the door is shut against the wicked although not one of them is in existence! But what follows this going in to the marriage, and the shut door? Answer: "Afterwards came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us."-Matt. xxv, 11. Now if the coming of the bridegroom represents the Second Advent, and if the going in with him to the marriage, and the shut door, is after the saints are made immortal and all the wicked are destroyed, do tell us, who are these represented by those who "afterwards came," "saying, Lord, Lord"?-There is perfect harmony with every part of this parable when correctly applied. And it must all be applied to events that take place prior to the Second Advent, in order for this harmony to be seen. The last events in the parable are, the foolish "saying, Lord, Lord, open to us," and the answer, "I know you not." These must be applied to a period prior to the Second Advent. They cannot be applied to a period after the wicked are destroyed by the brightness of Christ's coming. Those who oppose the Advent faith, dispose of the parable in this way. Say they, "it has no particular application anywhere, only that we should be ready to die!" And some of the Advent brethren dispose of it as easily. Say they, "the object of the parable of the ten virgins is to teach us the importance of being ready for the coming of the Lord. That is, the different parts of the parable spoken by our Lord mean nothing in particular. Such a position really seems to be an insult on the Lord Jesus Christ. When we take the view of this parable that has been taken by the Advent body, a harmony will be189 seen. The ten virgins represent those who participated, more or less, in the Advent movement. The going forth with lamps, represents the movement of 1843, occasioned by the study and proclamation of the Word. "Thy word is a lamp." Ps. cxix, 105. The tarrying followed, with the slumbering time. The midnight cry in the parable, represents the powerful and glorious movement, and work of God on the hearts of his people, in the Autumn of 1844. And here we would say that Advent papers, and preachers taught the position we here take, up to the great disappointment, in 1844. And probably no Advent brother would now object to this application, were it not for difficulties they find with the remaining portions of the parable. And many throw the whole away, as having little or no meaning. But what are these difficulties? We will look at them. 1. If the parable all applies prior to the Second Advent, it makes the coming of the Lord spiritual.-Not so. The bridegroom in the parable literally came, and that merely represents the event that took place with our High Priest, at the end of the 2300 days, as he entered upon the antitypical tenth day atonement. This event is also symbolized in Dan. viii, 13, 14. Mark this: The Son of man coming to the Ancient of days, and brought near before him, does not mean his leaving the right hand of the Father, and coming into this world. 2. A second objection to applying the parable to a period prior to the Second Advent, is, that none have gone in with the Lord, and cannot, till made immortal. To this we reply, that in the marriage, they that were ready went in with the bridegroom, and a literal door was shut. Who believes that our Lord is to bolt or bar a literal door? No one. In the marriage, ten virgins walked forth with literal lamps, had literal oil, literally slept, and woke, and five of them walked in with the bridegroom, and a literal door was shut. Not so in the kingdom of heaven. And when it can be shown that this parable designs to teach that a body of christians are to take literal lamps and oil, walk forth, literally sleep and wake, then, and not till then, will we agree, that the going in with the bridegroom must represent immortal saints entering the New Jerusalem with their Lord. But if the lamp represents the Word, and if the going forth of the virgins, represents merely a movement on the manner and time of the Lord's Advent, why may not the going in of the five, be applied in a similar manner, to the faith and feelings of the real Advent believer at the seventh month, 1844? Where were we as a people? Answer: Entirely separate from the world, and all its interests. An unseen hand had moved us away from the world, and our sympathy was with the Lord, and with his waiting saints. Then where are we? What is our real position? Answer: "Watch, therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh." Matt. xxv, 13. "Let your loins be girded about, and your lights burning; and ye yourselves like unto men that wait for their Lord, when he will return from the wedding." Luke xii, 35, 36. It is emphatically the waiting, watching time. Mark this: When our Lord comes to earth the second time, he returns from the wedding. This places the wedding prior to the Second Advent, and confirms the view that the eastern marriage was designed to represent a series of events to take place before Christ comes. The event represented by the five foolish afterwards coming, and saying, "Lord, Lord, open to us," we think, is in the future, and will be seen at the commencement of the day of the Lord, when the last plagues begin to be poured out. The ten virgins represent only those who participated in the Advent movement. Those who were not in the movement, and did not reject its light, stand on the same ground for salvation, as though such a movement had never taken place. Those, therefore, who are now looking for the Lord, and are obeying the present truth, may now rejoice in the true application of the parable of the ten virgins, as well as those who shared in the past great and glorious movement. But what is represented by the shut door in the parable? We have shown the absurdity of applying it to the Second Advent. We can see no other application of the shut door, that will harmonize with other parts of the parable, and with other scriptures, than to our High Priest entering upon the antitype of the ancient tenth day of the seventh month atonement, at the end of the 2300 days, in the Autumn of 1844. His work, performing the antitype of the daily ministration, then must cease in the Holy place of the True Tabernacle, in order for him to enter the Most Holy place to cleanse the Sanctuary. And as his work closed in the Holy, it commenced in the Most Holy. We think the following, addressed to the Philadelphia church, applies to this subject. "These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth; I know thy works; behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it; for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name." Although there is a shut door which excluded those represented by the foolish virgins, (those moved by the proclamation of the Advent, who had none of the grace of God, no real faith,) and also those who were foolish and wicked enough to reject, and fight against the glorious news of a soon coming Saviour, yet we rejoice to publish to those that have an ear to hear, that there is an Open Door. "Behold," says the True Witness, "I set before thee an open door." O, that precious souls would come to this open door, and share the Saviour's pardoning love. Reader, come along with us to this open door, and see what we will show you. You recollect that the ark containing the ten commandments was placed in the Holies of the earthly Sanctuary, and was not seen only when the high priest entered to cleanse it. And what does John see, down the stream of time, amid the scenes of the seventh angel? "And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament." Rev. xi, 19. Do you see it? God help you to see this open door, and by faith, view the ark, and see the law of God in all its strength and glory. "ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF THE SABBATH."
By Editor
THE discourse of the Rev. Dr. Smith upon this subject, in the Jane-st. Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, on the 13th inst., was one of those specimens of theological charlatanry, of which there have been oft repeated exhibitions for the last three hundred years. We say this without the least disposition to impeach his sincerity; on the contrary, we suppose he meant well, and it is quite likely, that he thought he had made himself master of the subject. It is a pity, however, that men of good intentions and respectable talents should be so blind to the irreconcilable contradictions of their own system. Full half of the discourse was occupied in refuting the argument of Paley, that the Sabbath was first instituted, not in Paradise, but in the Wilderness of Sin. Ex. 16. It was well to take some notice of the argument, perhaps, but we thought that the speaker spent entirely too much time upon it. We judge that some of his sleepy hearers thought so too. Paley's argument serves to prop a falling creed, but it has a very slight hold upon the convictions of sober, common-sense people. The plain, unsophisticated reader, finding it written, "God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it," naturally concludes that these words mean something; he believes the meaning to be, that God set apart the day for a holy use, and rendered it a day peculiarly happy for man. For it were contrary to all reason to suppose, that God proposed to render homage to himself, or to bless himself. And though Paley argue, that God's resting on the seventh day, at the close of creation, was the reason why he blessed and sanctified it for the Israelites in the wilderness, a man of common sense cannot very well understand why that reason was not just as good in the beginning, as it was twenty-five hundred years afterward. Paley's argument is as flimsy as a cobweb, and finds no response in the conscience of a God-fearing man. After disposing of Paley, and glancing at the scriptural allusions to the Sabbath in the Patriarchal Age, the lecturer dwelt upon the institution as embodied in the Jewish Dispensation. He brought it down to the Christian Era, and showed that our Saviour himself honored the institution, holding him up in this respect (so we thought) as an example for his followers. But lo! a new tack is suddenly taken. His followers, instead of imitating his example, are found, immediately after his resurrection, in the observance of the first day of the week! And, according to the lecturer, they continued to do so from that time onward. One would have supposed, from his statements that the observance of the seventh day became suddenly obsolete, and that the numerous references to it as the Sabbath, in Acts of Apostles, (Chaps. xiii. 14, 27, 42, 44; xvi, 13; xvii, 2; xviii, 4,) meant nothing at all. True, the lecturer spoke of the first day of the week as if it were identical with the old Sabbath, differing from it only in a small circumstance; but, in so doing, he not only placed himself at variance with truth, and with all just rules of logic, but appropriated to the first day of the week a name which the above-mentioned passages uniformly appropriate to the seventh. Does open, honest-faced truth, require such craftiness? If the references in the Book of Acts to the Sabbath are to the day which had always been observed as such, then Sabbath is the inspired name given to the seventh day of the week, notwithstanding the resurrection is past. And when man robs the seventh day of this inspired name, and appropriates it to another day, he exhibits a presumption which deserves rebuke. The advocates of Sunday sanctification, however, dare not conform their language to the inspired pattern; it would be fatal to their cause. Had they never given the name Sabbath to the first day of the week, the Sunday observance would not now be any more strict in Great Britain and America, than it is in the most purely Catholic countries. Had they always given it to the seventh day according to the Scripture pattern, there would be twenty Sabbatarians where there is now one. We repeat it, they dare not conform their language to the Scriptures. All their hope of success rests upon keeping up the cheat that the190 designation of Sunday as the Sabbath rests upon inspired authority. They dare not tell the people to the contrary. But why did not the Rev. Doctor tell his auditors something about the observance of the seventh day of the week by Christians? Can he who undertook to give the "Origin and History of the Sabbath," be ignorant of the fact, that Christians did observe the seventh day, even for hundreds of years after the Lord's resurrection? He was very careful to give as copious quotations from the old Fathers as possible, showing that Sunday had obtained an honorable distinction among their Church Festivals—a thing that no well-informed person disputes—but the quotations that might have been made in behalf of the Sabbath were wisely let alone. Well, we trust the day will come when the teachers of the people will be willing to look at both sides of the question. The next lecture of the course, as given in the programme which we published last week, will be "The Jewish and Christian Sabbath," by the Rev. Dr. Potts. It will have been delivered before our paper goes to press, but we shall not be able to furnish any notice of it this week. We intend to hear it, if possible.—Sabbath Recorder. In the last REVIEW we gave an article from the Sabbath Recorder, in which it was stated that a series of eight discourses relative to the Sabbath were to be delivered in the city of New York, by different ministers. The articles in this number from the Recorder, relative to the first two of these discourses, will be read with interest. Our readers will also be edified and instructed by the History of the Sabbath, prepared by Bro. Andrews, a portion of which is given in this number. These are subjects of the deepest interest to the Bible Christian, and of the greatest importance to the remnant who are keeping the commandments of God. They should be clearly understood. Invitation for Lectures at Georgetown
By Henry C. Crumb
Dear Bro. White:—I can truly say that I have perused the Review with a great deal of pleasure. I think that it is well calculated to do good. I feel to rejoice that I ever became acquainted with Bro. S. W. Rhodes, and as there is a door open for him at Georgetown, Madison Co. N. Y., I wanted that you should insert a notice in your paper, in hopes that it would meet his eye, for him to send me word when he would attend a course of lectures at that place. There appears to be a favorable opportunity to do good, as the doors of the Union Chureh are thrown open, and the minister says that he has lectured some, and is three fourths of an Adventist himself. Yours, Henry C. Crumb.
De Ruyter, N. Y., March 20th, 1853. Postponed Western Appointments
By Editor
Bro. J. N. Loughborough wishes us to say that he is obliged to defer his appointments West, for two weeks, at least. He will not meet with the Brethren in Fredonia as appointed in the last REVIEW. His appointments can be given in the next. Departure for the West
By Editor
We hope to be able to leave for the West about the 10th of May. Shall give appointments as soon as we can fully determine when we can leave. "JEWISH AND CHRISTIAN SABBATH."
By Editor
WHOEVER attended the lecture of the Rev. Dr. Potts, on the evening of the 20th inst., in the expectation of hearing a discussion of the questions naturally involved in his subject, was most egregiously hoaxed. We must say, that we were never more thoroughly disappointed. His text was, "The Son of Man is Lord also of the Sabbath," [Luke vi, 5.] and we did expect some attempt at showing how the Son of Man, in the exercise of his authority as Lord, instituted a Sabbath of his own, to take the place of the one which had always been observed by the Jews. Certainly, this was what the announcement of his subject virtually promised. But, in our opinion, he took the most effectual method he possibly could have taken to show, that the Sabbath is now just what it was from the beginning. "In supporting the authority of the Christian Sabbath," said he, "I plant myself upon the morality and immutability of the fourth of the moral laws of God." "I take my stand upon the original, absolute, and immutable nature of the law itself. Moses did not originate it, but merely republished it. I claim for it all the authority which belongs to its associate laws, all of which have been held as universal by true, as suitable, and as binding, as if there had never been a Jewish nation or a Jewish economy." "Like all the other laws found in company with it, the design and operation of this law proves its moral, perpetual, and obligatory character." "The Christian Church is bound by the sabbatical law, and that law has not been abrogated by any authority. There is no principle of limitation. It was recognized by Christ, and observed by the apostles, and has been transmitted to the Church of all ages." Certainly, principles like these would lead any logical mind to the inference, that the popular distinction of Jewish and Christian Sabbath is a mere fiction—a distinction which has no real existence. If the Sabbath which binds the Church is the Sabbath of the Decalogue, then it never was Jewish, nor is it now Christian; and the most charitable thing that we can say of those who are always mouthing these epithets is, that they use terms without meaning any thing by them. For if the terms do mean any thing, they must mean that the Jewish Sabbath is not the Christian Sabbath. For whatever analogy or similarity there may be between them, they are as different as a sour apple is different from a sweet one, or as a green apple is different from a ripe one. Two apples may correspond to each other very closely in appearance, size, weight, color, and structure; yet they are certainly different apples; one is sweet, the other sour—one is ripe, the other green. And even Dr. Potts himself might demur, if we should argue, from a law binding him to eat the sweet one, that he was therefore bound to eat the sour one, or, from a law binding him to eat the ripe one, that he was under obligation to eat also the one that was green. He certainly would, if the fruit were persimmons instead of apples. We say, the Sabbath never was Jewish, nor is it now Christian. It would be more correct to say, it is Human; for it was made for man. Strange it is, that our Puritan Divines will plant themselves upon the Saviour's declaration, and contend like giants that the Sabbath was made for the human race—for man as man, not as Jew, or as Christian—and then immediately face about, and talk of a Jewish Sabbath, and of a Christian Sabbath! True, their meaning is, that Jews had one day for Sabbathing, and that Christians have another; and by making a distinction between the holy rest itself and the day which is appropriated for it, they fancy that they avoid all inconsistency.—But this distinction is purely imaginary; it is borne out neither by Scripture, nor by good reason. All that we know about a Sabbath at all—all the reason we have for saying that one was ever instituted—is found in the fact, that God sanctified a certain definite and clearly specified period of time. That period was the seventh day of the week. Destroy this fact, and we have no Sabbath. Destroy it, and the Fourth Commandment means nothing. The sanctification of a rest, without including the particular period of time occupied by it, is an impossibility. Rest necessarily includes the portion of time through which it extends; and in order to secure the rest, the time itself must be sanctified. Now, if any one looks attentively at the inspired record, he will find that God's rest occupied the last day of the first week of time. That day was, on that account, constituted holy in its weekly returns. The blessing of God did not fall upon the rest, but upon the day. "God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it, because that in it he had rested from all his work, which he had made." That he blessed the holy rest, apart from the day, is not in the record. And as it was for man's sake that the blessing was given, it must have been given to, or taken effect upon, something of which man could avail himself. To avail himself of rest distinctly—that is, of rest without time—is impossible. It appears, then, that the distinction between the holy rest itself, and the particular day on which it is to be observed, is a mere abstraction; practically, it is out of the question. Our Puritan Divines do not, and cannot, by this abstraction, relieve themselves of inconsistency. If the Sabbath is perpetual, it is perpetual because the time which was originally sanctified is holy still. For as the sanctification of the time was what gave existence to the Sabbath in the first place, so the continued holiness of that time is what renders the Sabbath perpetual. The holiness of the time being destroyed, the institution itself is destroyed. For these reasons, we consider that the great body of Dr. Potts' discourse was a complete refutation of his own practice, and of all he said, or possibly can say, in behalf of the so-called Christian Sabbath. But as he tells us that the Sabbath is perpetual, and insists upon it, it must be that, when he talks of Jewish and Christian Sabbath, he does not mean what he says. He must mean Jewish day of the Sabbath, and Christian day of the Sabbath. But as "day of the Sabbath" and "Sabbath-day" are terms so nearly synonymous that we cannot see the difference, it would seem to follow that, in contending for the Sabbath as a perpetual and unchangeable institution, Dr. P. does not mean to contend for the Sabbath-day, but only for the Sabbath's rest. Does he contend for the Fourth Commandment, then? For that says, "Remember the Sabbath-day, to keep it holy." A pretty spectacle, truly! A Rev. Doctor of Divinity contending with all his might for the Sabbath's institution, and yet not contending for the Sabbath-day!—for the holy rest, and yet not for the Fourth Commandment which says "Remember the Rest-day!" We must give Dr. P. the credit, however, of so far noticing the question involved in his subject, so to say, that "whoever objected to the Christian Sabbath, on the ground that the day was different from that of the old Sabbath, offered a very trifling objection, and one that was justified neither by the letter nor the spirit of the Fourth Commandment." We do not pretend to give his precise words as we took no notes, and have to rely wholly on our memory; but we think this was his language substantially. If he really believed what he said, (and he seemed to,) we have heard nothing in saying, that the Rev. Doctor never thoroughly investigated this question. He averred that even the letter of the commandment required nothing but the consecration to God of one day in seven, or the seventh part of time. But let him look at the commandment again. It requires the commemoration, in its weekly returns, of "the Sabbath-day," that is, of the Rest-day. Of what rest-day? "Why, of that rest-day which God has appointed," you will answer. No, sir, that is not the meaning. The language points definitely to that particular day upon which God himself rested, as the day to be remembered and kept holy in its weekly return. Whoever makes the language refer to any other day, wrests it from its proper meaning. The attempt to make it refer to the first, or to any other day of the week except the last, is an attempt to make the Fourth Commandment utter a lie. "Remember the Sabbath-day, to keep it holy," means simply this: "Remember the day of the week on which Jehovah the Creator rested, to keep it holy in its weekly returns." One thing we took notice of; the Rev. Dr. seemed to be somewhat vexed, that there was a class of persons so unreasonable as to demand an express law for every observance imposed upon them. Indeed, his feelings waxed quite warm while discussing this point. And, conscious, probably, that the great body of his hearers were thorough-going Pedobaptists, he took good care to avail himself of the ad captandum argument, found in their prejudices against those who reject infant baptism. This was a master-stroke, and was, no doubt, considered very conclusive. All we have to say is, that when we are called to practice that which involves downright disobedience to a plain law of God, we shall demand "an express law." Infant sprinkling has led to the displacement of believer baptism, as far as it has obtained currency, and is therefore, downright rebellion against the law of Christ's house. So has Sunday keeping led to the rejection of the Sabbath, and is such a manifest rebellion against "the fourth of the moral laws of God," that no efforts to promote Sabbath reformation can be of lasting benefit, so long as it continues. When we are called upon to keep holy the first day of the week, we feel that we are called upon to disobey the law of the Sabbath, and we do demand an express warrant for it.—Sabbath Recorder. DEAR BRO. WHITE:—I take the liberty to address a few lines to you, giving a short account of my experience, for the encouragement of those who are laboring to spread the present truth. About thirteen years ago, I made a public profession, and in a time when there was no religious interest, but soon after the Lord revived his work in power. My soul was drawn out after my fellow men, and the Lord called me to go into all the world and preach, and not be confined to any circuit, station or place, and form no societies. But I was young, had but little education and less experience. Aged ministers held out inducements to join the Methodist P. Church, telling me that I would be more useful and have better opportunities for improvement. The Spirit withstood me by night and by day, and for four years, while I remained in the church, I felt like a man in prison. The Lord showed me the state of the nominal Church, how fallen, and how little of the spirit of primitive Christianity they possessed. It was my settled opinion that the people of God might enjoy the same gifts and blessings that they did in the days of the apostles. I ventured to preach it, but soon discovered the dragon power and felt the iron rod of oppression. Measures were taken to gag me, and put a stop to my preaching such doctrines. But my foundation was on the word of God and not to be moved. Creeds and disciplines must fall before the Word. I withdrew from the church, renouncing all human creeds for the Scriptures, as a sufficient rule of faith and practice, and have stood so for six or seven years. My prayer has been, Lord, revive primitive holiness. I saw no sect that bore the image of Christ, or possessed the apostolic spirit and power. Deadness was apparent on every hand. After being confined191 at home for some time, I started out to hold meetings in the vicinity of Jackson. Being invited, I called on Mr. Holford who was keeping the seventh day, called seventh-day Adventist. But I looked upon the whole body of the Millerites as a set of enthusiasts, and supposed that they had done much harm in the world, and perhaps the principal cause of so much coldness in the church. Yet I knew nothing of their doctrines, only as my information was derived from opposers. Though there was a band in Jackson, near by, my prejudice prevented me from enquiring after them. But Sister Holford said there were several classes of Adventists. The seventh-day Adventists believed in having the same spirit and power that the early Christians had, and did not employ physicians when sick. She told of some that had been cured in answer to prayer. This information removed some prejudice, for I had believed for years the same. I could not object to the Sabbath of the Lord very hard; for my mind had been enlightened sufficient to know that the first day was not the Sabbath of the Bible, but supposed that there was no Sabbath. However, my mind was soon made up to enquire after the seventh-day people. On my way home I stopped in Jackson, and called at Bro. Russel's shop, where I found Bro. Case, and several others of the same faith. They were ready to give me information, and handed me some books. Bro. Case invited me to stay and attend a Conference with him in Sylvan the next Saturday and Sunday. Every move was watched to ascertain to my satisfaction, if they were the people of God. Bro. Case exhibited his Chart and gave a brief exposition of the Sanctuary, which was very striking to me. My prejudice began to give way, and I was much pleased with the brotherly love that appeared among the brethren and sisters. Attended the Conference, heard the lectures on the Sabbath and Sanctuary, while a flood of light broke in upon my mind, and those Scriptures which once appeared dark were clear to my mind. My heart now rejoices in the present truth. The commandments, how pure, how perfect. My heart is fixed, O God, my heart is fixed to keep thy commandments. The second volume of the Review and some pamphlets which the brethren gave me, have been read with much interest. Those who are believing in the present truth are occupying holy ground, and if anything will cause a coming out from the world, or Babylon, this will. May the Lord give me help to walk in the light as he is in the light. Yours in the patient waiting for Christ,
S. T. CRANSON.
Tompkins, Mich., March 20th, 1853. Confidence in the Prophetic Vision
By Eliza A. Miller
Dear Bro. White:—While I take a retrospective view of the past and the dealings of God with his people in former days, I am encouraged to believe that God will have a remnant that will stand in the final conflict with the beast and his image, shielded with truth, ready to meet the Lord when he shall return from the wedding. I love to call to remembrance the former days, in which, after being illuminated, we endured a great fight of afflictions. While we became a gazing stock, by reproaches and affliction, we took joyfully the spoiling of our goods; for we felt that our treasure was in heaven, from whence we looked for our Saviour. In the midst of our disappointment and trials, we are exhorted to "cast not away our confidence, which hath great recompense of reward." And to hold fast whereunto we have attained, lest any one take our crown. I do rejoice in God that his dear people are so soon to realize the consummation of their hope. For he that is to come will come and will not tarry. Now the just shall live by faith. The vision has been made plain upon tables. Many that have read it have run to and fro, and knowledge has been increased. I still retain a confidence that the vision has spoken and has not lied. I trust, brethren and sisters, we are not of them that draw back unto perdition, but of them that believe to the saving of the soul. What is it, but going back to perdition, to deny that we were influenced by the Spirit of God in giving the former messages. I do feel that the proclamation of the hour of God's judgment is come, and fall of Babylon, are waymarks in our advent history, that we all must admit, was accompanied by the Spirit and power of God. That there was, in some, a spirit aside from this, we will not deny. But the main principle, that moved the advent body, was pure love to God, a heart to know and do his will. O, that I could now see more of this heavenly principle, that then pervaded the advent ranks. But to the reverse of this, we see anarchy, and confusion in their midst; in consequence of which, God's people have been scattered in a cloudy and dark day. Truth has fallen in the streets, and equity cannot enter. This trouble some attribute to one cause, and some to another. Some would fain think, that those that are teaching the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus, are the ones that are troubling Israel. But what says Elijah, that holy man of God when he was interrogated by one of the prophets of Baal, who said, Art thou he that troubleth Israel? Elijah answers: I have not troubled Israel, but thou, and thy father's house, in that ye have forsaken the commandments of the Lord. And thou hast followed Baalam. Forsaking the commandments of God, always has, and always will bring trouble upon Israel. But living in accordance with them, will secure peace and joy, and finally, eternal life. I believe truth is destined to triumph, though her enemies are apparently strong. But when brought to the test, they will fail as did the prophets of Baal, when Elijah called upon God to answer by fire. It was soon determined that Elijah's God was the only living and true God. The psalmist David, has said, Thy law is the truth. This standard is now being raised for God's people. The powers of darkness are receding, and the law is being sealed among the disciples. To the law and to the testimony, If they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. But the path of the just is as the shining light that shineth more and more unto the perfect day. Brn. Edson and Loughborough have recently visited this place. It was truly refreshing to hear the word preached. We were strengthened and encouraged by the meat given in due season. I want to say, the way looks plain that leads to the kingdom. It is true (as the Saviour has said) a straight gate, and a narrow way that leadeth unto life, and few there are that find it. Keeping the commandments of God will ensure us a right to the tree of life, and an entrance through the pearly gates of the New Jerusalem. It is my desire that I may shun the broad road that so many love, for it is the way to death. To do as the multitude would dictate, is most congenial to the carnal heart that is not subject to the law of God. I often hear the expression, I would as quick keep the seventh day as any other, if all would do so. As though it was a matter of little consequence, to know and do as God requires. It is my prayer that we may all realize the importance of obeying God. Yours in the blessed hope,
ELIZA A. MILLER.
Laona, March 22d, 1853.