WE have found in our investigation of this question thus far, that the Sabbath is as old as creation; that it was instituted by three distinct acts on the part of the Creator; that it was made for the whole race; that it consisted of the seventh day of the weekly cycle; that its object was a memorial of the creation; a sign between God and his people; and a time to be devoted to his service. Both logic and Scripture abundantly support the above.
Certainly, it would seem that we need no further argument to prove its binding obligation upon all. Nevertheless, this is disputed. Not that there is no evidence to prove its obligation upon all, for there is abundant evidence; but it is very difficult to induce men to depart from established customs, or to relinquish errors when they are more pleasing and require less sacrifice. It is often this way as regards the Sabbath. Some claim that there is now no Sabbath, and that it was made simply for the Jews; others contend that it was changed at the time of our Lord's first advent. What does the word of God reveal concerning this? How has God regarded the Sabbath through all the past?
The Bible presents before us three different phases of priesthood which naturally divide the history of our race since the creation into three dispensations. These are: (1) The Patriarchal, from Adam to the giving of the law from Sinai, during which the patriarch of a family acted as priest; (2) the Levitical, from Sinai to the crucifixion, during which the priesthood was of the tribe of Levi; (3) the Christian, from the crucifixion till our Lord shall come again, in which Christ is our High Priest. How is the Sabbath related to these? or, rather, how is it related to man during these dispensations? Has God the same regard for the holy day in all of these dispensations? Testimony is clear and explicit concerning this.
The record of the Patriarchal dispensation is very brief. It gives only the bare outlines of the times, detailing only those things which manifest God's providential dealings with his creatures, or which present before us solemn warning and precious instruction. Furthermore, the record we have—the book of Genesis—was written after all that it records had taken place. Brief, however, as is the record, it does not leave us in doubt as regards the Sabbath.
First, right at the beginning of this dispensation we have the institution of the Sabbath given a prominence second to no other thing or event. This we have already considered at some length. The Creator rested upon, blessed, and sanctified, or set apart, the seventh day of the weekly cycle for man. Gen. 2:2, 3; Mark 2:27. We have shown that the sanctifying, or setting apart, of the day, is simply saying that God commanded it to be kept; he appointed it. Hence it was a law for man, the transgression of which would be sin.
From the institution of the Sabbath to the closing of this dispensation, we do not find mention of the Sabbath by name, although it is referred to by sacred and profane historians. We mention a few instances:
1. The first reference is Gen. 4:3, 4: "And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord. And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and the fat thereof." Instead of "in process of time," the marginal, literal rendering is given, "at the end of days." Spurrel translates it, "at the end [of the term] of days." Boothroyd renders it, "at the appointed period." Now as we have but one term of days mentioned, but one appointed period set apart for the worship of God, the only logical conclusion to which we can come is that this time when Cain and Abel appeared before the Lord, was the seventh day, the holy Sabbath, when they met together for public worship. Offerings of sacrifice were allowable on the Sabbath. Num. 28:9, 10. The work in connection with these sacrifices was not man's work, but God's. The same period of time—the Sabbath—is evidently alluded to in Job 1:6.
2. The continual recurrence of the number seven throughout the book of Genesis has reference to the creation week and the appointment of the seventh day as the Sabbath. The period of seven days is mentioned in connection with Noah four times (Gen. 7:4, 10; 8:10, 12); the week is spoken of as a recognized period of time in the days of Jacob (Gen. 29:27, 28).
3. As the Sabbath was commanded of God, Enoch, who "walked with God," must have kept it, for how "can two walk together, except they be agreed"? As God's commands are righteousness (Ps. 119:172), and as the Sabbath law was one of God's commands from the beginning, Noah must have preached its obligation; for he was a "preacher of righteousness." 2 Peter 2:5; Gen. 6:9. Abraham, "the father of the faithful," the pre-eminently Christian patriarch, the "friend of God," must have kept the Sabbath; for the Lord says of him that he "obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws." Gen. 26:5.
4. The concurrent testimony of the Gentile world proves that the knowledge of the Sabbath existed apart from the Hebrews. Ancient Chinese records prove that the Sabbath—the seventh day—was once known among them. Assyrian tablets, executed 900 years B. C., recording traditions of 900 years previous to that, prove that they had knowledge of the creation and the Sabbath before the Hebrew records were written. In a "Chart of the Week," prepared by Rev. W. M. Jones, of London, a noted antiquarian, and Prince Louis Lucien Bonaparte, who is a noted linguist, the names of the week and days of the week are given in one hundred and sixty different languages and dialects, fifty-three of which are European, and the remainder Asiatic and African, ancient and modern. All of these are unanimous in establishing the identity of the week in its present order of days, counting Sunday the first day of the week; and one hundred and eight of these languages and dialects recognize the seventh day—our seventh day—as a sacred day. Many of these languages and the names of the days of the week come from remote antiquity. The week existed among all these nations from the beginning of their existence. What does it mean? It can mean nothing less than this: It is most conclusive circumstantial evidence of the verity of the Mosaic record, and proves that the creation week is identical with ours.
5. We come to the closing years of the Patriarchal dispensation. That nation that has served God best has been in bondage over two hundred years, where many of them have become idolaters. The Lord calls them out that they may serve him. Ex. 8:1. They are brought out from bondage. But before they enter into covenant relation with God (Ex. 19), before the beginning of the Levitical priesthood, a reform must take place among them. God must prove them. And how does he do this? By the Sabbath.
We have a record of this in Ex. 16, thirty days before Israel came to Sinai, where the old covenant was made, and where the next dispensation began. The test on the Sabbath came through the fall of the121manna. We read in verse 4: "Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate each day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law or no." The sequel to this is found in verses 27-29:—
"And it came to pass, that there went out some of the people on the seventh day for to gather, and they found none. And the Lord said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws? See, for that the Lord hath given you the Sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day, the bread of two days; abide ye every man in his place, let no one go out of his place on the seventh day. So the people rested on the seventh day."
In connection with this record, notice the following established facts:—
(a) The seventh day is still the Sabbath. This is not a new seventh day, as some claim, but the seventh day of the creation week. It is "the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord," pointing right back to the institution of the Sabbath at creation, the only instance we have of the hallowing of the Sabbath. Gen. 2:2, 3. The Sabbath of Ex. 16 was a day already recognized as the Sabbath.
Those who claim that this seventh day was really the sixth day of creation week, base their whole theory upon assumption, contrary to the positive express words of the Bible. The assumption that a new Sabbath was here given is founded upon nothing but fancy, to support an unscriptural theory. The word of God is positively against it.
(b) The identity of the creation Sabbath is here established. Men may have lost the order of the days of the week since creation, yet it is not irrevocably lost. By the threefold weekly miracle of the manna for forty years, the great Jehovah so marks the Sabbath that it cannot be mistaken. The manna fell on six days; a double portion fell on the sixth; that falling on the sixth day was remarkably preserved over the Sabbath; and this continued for forty years. Ex. 16:35. Thus it is that God preserved that holy institution.
(c) The reform on the seventh-day Sabbath in the close of the patriarchal dispensation, proves that it was binding all through that dispensation. The value of the Sabbath to man may here be seen by the care which the Lord had for it. Dare we reject this evidence? The love of Christ appeals to us to seek the truth, not to turn from it.
We will consider the Sabbath in the Levitical dispensation in our next. M. C. W.
EVIDENCE has already been offered to show that the little horn of this chapter is a symbol of Rome, both Pagan and Papal, and other points will be noticed in the course of the further examination of the prophecy; but before presenting them we will examine an expression which some regard as an objection to this application of the prophecy. The reader will understand that in the prophecy the third kingdom—Grecia—is represented by "a he goat," and that Alexander, the first king, is represented by the horn between the eyes of this goat. This horn was broken,—that is, Alexander died in the height of his power,—and the kingdom was divided; this division is represented by the four horns toward the four winds of heaven.
Referring to these horns, the prophecy continues: "And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land." Daniel 8:9. As before intimated, some profess to find in this an objection to calling the little horn Rome, for say they, How could Rome be said to come out of one of the divisions of the Grecian Empire? The answer, however, is easy: Grecia being, as we learn from both sacred and profane history, a universal empire, any power coming up at that time would of necessity come forth from some part of that empire. That Grecia was universal, and that even Rome acknowledged allegiance to it, is shown by the following extract from "Arnold’s History of Rome," chap. 30, paragraphs 1 and 2:—
"The Lucanians and Bruttians [inhabitants of Italy] are especially mentioned as having sent embassies to Alexander at Babylon." "The Tyrrhenians also," said Aristobulus and Ptolemæus, "sent an embassy to the king to congratulate him upon his conquests." "There is every reason to believe that among the Tyrrhenian ambassadors mentioned by Alexander’s historians, there were included ambassadors from Rome. . . . History may allow us to think that Alexander and a Roman ambassador did meet at Babylon; that the greatest man of the ancient world saw and spake with a citizen of that nation which was destined to succeed him in his appointed work, and to found a wider and still more enduring empire."
This extract would perhaps be sufficient on this point, but we desire to give still other reasons which show that it is eminently proper to speak of Rome as coming out of one of the divisions of Greece. These divisions were Macedon, Thrace, Syria, and Egypt, and, of course, if Rome came from any of these, it must have been from the first, as that was the most westerly division of Alexander’s empire. That this was the case is clearly shown by the following abridged quotation from Prideaux’s Connection, vol. 2, book 3, which we reprint with the accompanying comments from vol. 11 of this paper:—
In the year 168 B. c., Antiochus Epiphanes, then king of the Syrian division, determined to make himself master of Egypt, which was then governed by his nephew and niece, who were very young, and incapable of successful resistance. Says Prideaux:—
"This he most certainly would have accomplished, but that he met a Roman embassy in his way, which put a stop to his further progress, and totally dashed all the designs which he had been so long carrying on for the making of himself master of that country."—Connexion, vol. 2, book 3, An. 168, Ptol. Philometer 13.
The embassy was one which the Roman Senate had sent in response to the urgent request of the young Egyptian monarch for assistance against Antiochus. The reader will not fail to note that only three ambassadors, and not an army, were sent by the Romans to command Antiochus to desist from his intended war upon Egypt. These ambassadors met Antiochus when he was only four miles from Alexandria, on his way to besiege that city. The chief ambassador was Popillius, with whom Antiochus had been intimate while he was in Rome as a hostage. On seeing Popillius, Antiochus reached forth his hand to embrace him as an old friend. "But Popillius, refusing the compliment, told him that the public interest of his country must take the place of private friendship; that he must first know whether he were a friend or an enemy to the Roman State, before he could own him as a friend to himself; and then delivered into his hands the tables in which was written the decree of the Senate, which they came to communicate to him, and required him to read it and forthwith give him his answer thereto. Antiochus, having read the decree, told Popillius he would consult with his friends about it, and speedily give him the answer they should advise; but Popillius, insisting on an immediate answer, forthwith drew a circle round him [Antiochus] in the sand with the staff which he had in his hand, and required him to give his answer before he stirred out of that circle; at which strange and peremptory way of proceeding, Antiochus, being startled, after a little hesitation, yielded to it, and told the ambassador that he would obey the command of the Senate; whereupon Popillius, accepting his embraces, acted thenceforth according to his former friendship with him."
But the point of all this is found in the next two sentences of Prideaux. Says he: "That which made him [i. e. Popillius] so bold as to act with him after this peremptory manner, and the other so tame as to yield thus patiently to it, was the news which they had a little before received of the great victory of the Romans, which they had gotten over Perseus, king of Macedonia. For Paulus Æmilius, having now vanquished that king, and thereby added Macedonia to the Roman Empire, the name of the Romans after this carried that weight with it as carried a terror in all the neighboring nations; so that none of them after this cared to dispute their commands, but were glad on any terms to maintain peace, and cultivate a friendship with them."
Now since it was the conquest of Macedon that gave Rome its prestige among the nations, and made it virtually a universal empire, having the power to dictate to other kingdoms, and to stop their projects by a single word, it is evidently very proper to speak of it as "coming out" of one of the horns of the goat, viz., the Macedonian horn. The historian, in describing the rise of the Roman Empire, could not well employ a more fitting expression than that used by the prophet 370 years before the occurrence. The foregoing quotation shows the immense superiority of the Romans over Antiochus Epiphanes, and thus of itself effectually demolishes the theory held by some, that that pusillanimous king was the "exceeding great" power represented by the little horn.
This makes the evidence on this point absolutely conclusive, and the reader is of course prepared to agree with us when we say that instead of the words, "Out of one of these," etc., being an objection to the application of the prophecy to Rome, they are an additional reason why it should be so applied. The consideration of other points of identity of the little-horn power with Rome, will be considered next week.
It is not to be supposed that Jesus asked his disciples the question, "Whom do men say that I am?" simply from a desire to hear repeated what they had heard concerning him, or because he did not know how men regarded him, but it was, evidently, that he might call forth from them a confession of their faith in him as the Messiah. It sometimes strengthens a man's faith to avow it, and the time was not far distant when the disciples would need decided convictions.122
ANOTHER object of the question seems to have been to secure an opportunity to give them some much-needed instruction relative to himself. In common with their nation the disciples had imbibed wrong ideas of Christ's mission; they supposed that he would within a short time restore the kingdom to Israel, that he would deliver Israel from the Roman yoke and himself take the throne of David, but they were to be bitterly disappointed, and Jesus desired to prepare them for the severe trial of faith which awaited them when he should be crucified.
IN reply to the Saviour's question, they answered: "John the Baptist; but some say Elias; and others, One of the prophets. And he saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? and Peter answereth and saith unto him, Thou art the Christ." "And he began to teach them that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again." It was these things that were to try the faith of the disciples.
WHAT a sad and touching sermon must Jesus have preached to his disciples on that occasion! But they could not understand it, and the impetuous Peter "took him and began to rebuke him." Little did Peter know of the path which his Master was to tread, and of how he was himself to follow him. How the disciples could fail to comprehend the truths which Jesus taught them concerning his death, we can scarcely understand. More than once he told them plainly that he was to be put to death, but they refused to believe that it was possible. Their minds were so full of the popular idea of the Messiah that they could entertain nothing else; and this is probably the reason that Jesus charged them that they should tell no man that he was the Christ.
THE disciples were entirely unfitted to preach Christ, because of their erroneous view of his mission, and the Lord would not suffer them to teach error; they would one day tell men that he was the Christ, but not till after he was risen from the dead, and not till they had been endued with power from on high. Then, and not till then, could they preach "Christ and him crucified."
ANOTHER truth that Jesus sought to impress upon his disciples was that the reward of those who follow him is not given in this life. If they would be his disciples indeed, they must in this world share a cross, not a crown. And as the Master was to give his life for them, so they must willingly give up their lives for others. This does not always mean dying for others; it may mean more; it sometimes means spending and being spent in the cause of God. The Christian and all that he has, his property, his family, his life, are his Lord's; his life is given up to the service of his Master, and like Paul, his sole wish should be to glorify Christ whether by life or by death. By thus giving our lives to him, we save them; for no matter what may be our lot here, we know that eternal life awaits us in the kingdom of God.
MANY, however, are not willing to thus give themselves up to the service of God. They desire ease, comfort, and all the good things of this life; but to such the question comes, "What shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?" No man can gain the whole world, and if he could, the whole of it would not suffice as a ransom for his soul, or life, for that is the meaning of psuchē, the Greek word here translated soul. There is but one way to save the life, that is by hiding it with Christ, giving it to him to be used for his glory and for the good of our fellows. We may be called to lay it down, or it may be his will that we shall use it in his work; but it matters not, if we are indeed the Lord's, our life is hid with Christ in God; and when Christ who is our life shall appear, then shall we also appear with him in glory. Col. 3:3, 4.
SOME may question the statement that "soul" means life in this text, but it is not a matter that admits of doubt. The same Greek word, psuchē, is used in both verses, namely, Mark 8:35, 36, and in the one is translated life, and in the other, soul. The same is true of Matt. 16:25, 26. And in his comment on the latter verse Dr. Clarke says: "On what authority many here translate the word psuchē in the twenty-fifth verse life, and in this verse soul, I know not, but am certain it means life in both places." But even aside from the fact here stated by Dr. Clarke, it is manifest that the word psuchē must be understood to mean life, since to render it soul in Matt. 16:25 and Mark 8:35 would make nonsense of these texts.
THIS lesson teaches us that if we would be saved through Christ, we must not be ashamed to confess him before the world and to proclaim our faith in his words and in his work. The world denies the Saviour, but the Christian must confess him at all times, by his words, by his acts, by his life, and by his death. His daily walk and conversation should be a living testimony for the truth and for Jesus, who is the way, the truth, and the life.
ANOTHER important thought in the lesson is the coming of the Lord, at which time, rewards will be given. In Matt. 16:27 we read these words: "For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works." And to the same purpose is the whole tenor of Scripture. Said the Saviour to his sorrowing disciples when he was about to leave them: "Let not your heart be troubled; ye believe in God, believe also in me. In my Father's house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also." John 14: 1-3.
And when about to submit himself to the hands of the executioner, the apostle Paul wrote: "I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith; henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, shall give me at that day; and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing." 2 Tim. 4: 6-8. And in that day it shall be said by the redeemed host: "Lo, this is our God; we have waited for him, and he will save us; this is the Lord; we have waited for him, we will be glad and rejoice in his salvation." Isa. 25: 9.
Old Testament History.
By M. C. W.
WATER FROM THE ROCK.
(Lesson 10, March 9, 1889.)
1. RELATE the instances already learned, in which God miraculously interposed to deliver his people.
2. After all these deliverances, how should they have felt?
3. Into what straits were they brought in their next encampment, after the giving of the manna?
"And all the congregation of the children of Israel journeyed from the wilderness of Sin, after their journeys, according to the commandment of the Lord, and pitched in Rephidim; and there was no water for the people to drink." Ex. 17:1.
4. What did they do?
"Wherefore the people did chide with Moses, and said, Give us water that we may drink. And Moses said unto them, Why chide ye with me? wherefore do ye tempt the Lord?" Verse 2.
5. With what did they again charge Moses?
"And the people thirsted there for water; and the people murmured against Moses, and said, Wherefore is this that thou hast brought us up out of Egypt, to kill us and our children and our cattle with thirst?" Verse 3.
6. What were they about to do to him?
"And Moses cried unto the Lord, saying, What shall I do unto this people? they be almost ready to stone me." Verse 4.
7. Against whom were they really murmuring?
"And Moses said unto them, Why chide ye with me? wherefore do ye tempt the Lord?" Verse 2, last part.
8. What doubt was indicated by their murmuring?
"And he called the name of the place Massah, and Meribah, because of the chiding of the children of Israel, and because they tempted the Lord, saying, Is the Lord among us, or not?" Verse 7.
9. What did they thereby virtually say about the wonderful miracles that they had witnessed?
10. How did the Lord provide for them on this occasion?
"And the Lord said unto Moses, Go on before the people, and take with thee of the elders of Israel; and thy rod, wherewith thou smotest the river, take in thine hand, and go. Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the rock in Horeb; and thou shalt smite the rock, and there shall come water out of it, that the people may drink. And Moses did so in the sight of the elders of Israel." Ex. 17:5, 6.
11. What graphic description does the psalmist give of this?
"He clave the rocks in the wilderness, and gave them drink as out of the great depths. He brought streams also out of the rock, and caused waters to run down like rivers." Ps. 78:15, 16.
12. Of what was their drinking water from the rock an emblem?
"And did all drink the same spiritual drink; for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them; and that Rock was Christ." 1 Cor. 10:4.
13. What kind of water does Christ give?
"Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water." John 4:10.
14. What will it do for the one who drinks it?
"But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life." Verse 14.
15. While the Jews were at Rephidim, what other trouble did they have?
"Then came Amalek, and fought with Israel in Rephidim." Ex. 17:8.
16. Relate what followed.
"And Moses said unto Joshua, Choose us out men, and go out, fight with Amalek; to-morrow I will stand on the top of the hill with the rod of God in mine hand. So Joshua did as Moses had said to him, and fought with Amalek; and Moses, Aaron, and Hur went up to the top of the hill. And it came to pass, when Moses held up his hand, that Israel prevailed; and when he let down his hand, Amalek prevailed. But Moses' hands were heavy; and they took a stone, and put it under him, and he sat thereon; and Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands, the one on the one side, and the other on the other side; and his hands were steady until the going down of the sun. And Joshua discomfited Amalek and his people with the edge of the sword." Verses 9-13.
17. What was shown by this circumstance? —That they were delivered, not by their own strength, but by the direct interposition of God.
18. What does the prophet Isaiah say of God's tender care for them?
"In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the Angel of his presence saved them; in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; and he bare them, and carried them all the days of old." Isa. 63:9.
19. What beautiful illustration is given to show how the Lord carried them?
"As an eagle stirreth up her nest, fluttereth over her young, spreadeth abroad her wings, taketh them, beareth them on her wings; so the Lord alone did lead him, and there was no strange god with him." Deut. 32:11, 12.
20. Of what may the people of God always be assured?
"Thy shoes shall be iron and brass; and as thy days, so shall thy strength be. There is none like unto the God of Jeshurun, who rideth upon the heaven in thy help, and in his excellency on the sky. The eternal God is thy refuge, and underneath are the everlasting arms; and he shall thrust out the enemy from before thee; and shall say, Destroy them." Deut. 33:25-27.
NOTES.
THE Lord purposely brought his people by the way of the desert to show his loving care and mighty power, and to develop their faith in him. After the deliverance at the Red Sea, and the falling of the manna, it would seem that they would never more doubt. Faith should have said, "The same God who saved us from the plagues of Egypt, who delivered us at the sea from the power of our enemies, who gave us bread from heaven, can surely give us water to drink." But no; they believed not God. Heb. 4:2. Their unbelief led them to murmur against Moses. But in murmuring against the one whom God had sent, concerning whose mission he had given so many extraordinary proofs, they murmured not against the man, the servant; but they murmured against God the Master. In demanding of Moses water, in chiding him for their seeming difficulty, they virtually said that these miracles had been wrought through the power of man, or of magic, as were the miracles of the Egyptian priests. At the most charitable view, they limited in their own blinded minds God's power and goodness and wisdom and justice.123"WHAT then? are we better than they?" Have people more faith now? When God for Christ's sake has delivered us from the Egypt of sin, has covered with his own perfect righteousness our sins of the past, is it not limiting his power and goodness and wisdom and justice, when, meeting with new trials, we become discouraged and falter and fail? Do we not thereby say that God cannot save us? or that he does not love us? or that he has not sufficient wisdom to shield us from hostile environments? or that while he has promised, he is not just to fulfill his promises? With the additional light of the past, if we thus do, are we not more culpable?
FROM every incident of their journeying some lesson is drawn, in the providence of God, for them and others in the future. God mercifully sends them water out of the rock; but lest they should afterwards think that it was because of their goodness that God wrought the miracle, the place was named Massah and Meribah, or "Temptation" and "Strife," or "Chiding." These names were designed to ever after help them to keep humble.
"And did all eat the same spiritual meat [food]; and did all drink the same spiritual drink; for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them; and that Rock was Christ." 1 Cor. 10:3, 4. The manna and the water from the rock were given through the miraculous power of God, and were thus a constant proof of his watchful providence. But they had a higher lesson than that. They were symbols of their true Saviour, the Angel of God's Presence, of whom Jehovah said, "My name is in Him." He it was who supplied the manna, not Moses. John 6:32. And that was but the emblem of the spiritual food which he not only now gives, but then gave, to all true believers. John 6:48-58, 63. The water from the rock at Horeb, and the rock itself, were emblems of the living Rock, the same Foundation of all the faithful in all ages, and the water of life, of which all who drink will never thirst. John 4:13, 14.
THERE is a striking lesson in all the surroundings of this incident. There was a great and helpless company of men, women, and children. They were in a land which could furnish them no food. It was a dry and parched land, in which was no water. The very name of the mountain where the rock was smitten, was Horeb, which means, "dry, parched," "a desert." But it is just here that the mercy, love, and power of God is manifested. The living Bread of Heaven was with the people, therefore all wants could be supplied; for he who could supply the greater, could supply the less. The living Rock, the sure Foundation (1 Cor. 3:11), "went with them" (1 Cor. 10:4, margin), not only to supply the water of this life through the desert journey, but the water of the life to come. That Rock was Christ; in him was all their fullness. He was not only "a root out of a dry ground," but he was a living fountain of water all through the dreary desert. The lesson is that God can, and will, bring to those who trust in him all needed blessings, however forbidding surrounding circumstances may be. Truly could Moses say, "He is the Rock, his work is perfect." Of the enemies of the truth he declares, "For their rock is not as our Rock, even our enemies themselves being judges." And so can all say who have hope in Christ.
AMALEK was a tribe descended from Amalek, a son of Esau. They had, no doubt, gathered around them many others of kin, making them a strong and warlike nation. They were the first to attack Israel, remembering, probably, the prophecies concerning Jacob and Esau, and how Jacob dealt with Esau in the matter of the birthright and blessing. But God had forgiven Jacob's sin, and so also had Esau, evidently (Gen. 32:4-11; 35:29), and now instead of making war, the Amalekites ought to have helped their brethren, the Israelites. It was evidently because of their greater sin in this respect, their cruelty to their kinsmen, that God pronounces upon them utter annihilation. (Compare Ex. 34:14-16; Num. 24:20, margin; Deut. 25:17-19; 1 Sam. 15:1-3; 1 Chron. 4:42, 43.) As Jacob was saved from Esau through the power of prevailing prayer, so Jacob's descendants were saved from those of Esau. It was another token to that people that God was faithful to his promises.
The Missionary.
By George C. Tenney
AUSTRALIA.
WITHIN the past month we have passed through the holiday season; and this has more significance here than it has in America. In some respects the customs of observing the holidays differ in the two countries. There is not such a universal custom of giving presents to friends. A short time ago all public servants expected those whom they served to remember them with a “box,” which is a word for a present of money. But this is fast going out of favor with the public, so that the postman, milkman, nightman, etc., cease to bore their customers in the old style. But everybody must go somewhere. Hence it is a time for excursions and amusements. Christmas-day itself is regarded by the average of church people as a day to be observed religiously. Services are held, and it is accounted by many to be a sin to do business on that day. Not only is this true among the Catholics, but also among Protestants as well. The day following Christmas is called “Boxing-day,” and is a day given up to enjoyments of all kinds. Through the week there is but little business transacted, and no one works unless he is compelled to do so. Watchnight is observed on New Year’s eve quite generally. And the day is zealously observed by the people, who generally seem to regard the holidays as their favorite heritage.
The great exhibition being in progress in Melbourne, thousands of people were drawn there, and every kind of amusement and attraction was produced to attract the crowds, even to an American base-ball team and a Yankee circus. Religious meetings and lectures vied with the theater and the vilest forms of iniquity. It being the warm season, out-of-door attractions were the most popular. As the result, or at least in conjunction with these scenes of revelings, the papers were filled with the most startling accounts of crime, suicides, and calamities that has ever been experienced in the Colonies. The greatly inflated land-boom about this time received a severe puncture by the banks withholding their loans. This bankrupted many pretentious men, and to avoid the disgrace, many resorted to various crimes. One pleasing feature of this time was the performance of Handel’s oratorio, the Messiah, by a chorus and orchestra of over five hundred. It was given five times to immense audiences. Miss Von Finkelstein, a Jewess from Jerusalem, lectured to large audiences on the customs of her people, and the scenes of the Bible. Her lectures were illustrated with costumes and scenery.
The Australian people are notoriously given to amusements. And yet there are many intelligent and thinking people, and among these are many with whom the Bible has great influence. They are strongly attached to the ways of their fathers and to the church in which they have been reared. When these customs, for which they have a genuine reverence, are found to be at variance with the Bible, the struggle becomes a hard one as to which shall be relinquished. I am glad to be able to say that with a goodly number the decision is with the truth of God. And no people have embraced the truth with a greater love for it than these who thus decide for it.
The truth for our times is making progress here, though we could not expect that much would be accomplished in countries where there are no laborers to prosecute its interests. There are in Australia four preachers of the Third Angel’s Message. Two of these are confined in the printing work. One is in Tasmania and one in Adelaide, South Australia. Within the last month about fifty have embraced the truth. The church in Hobart, where Brother Israel is laboring, numbered at its organization in August about twenty. At this time there are about fifty. In Adelaide, Ballarat, and Melbourne there have about ten in each place united with the churches. Among those who united with us here in Melbourne at our quarterly meeting are Captain Muckersey and wife, who embraced the Sabbath and other points of doctrine in California. Sister Muckersey has been doing excellent work at our booth in the exhibition. About 11,000 copies of the Bible Echo have been carefully distributed with much earnest labor, and the fruits are already appearing. One entire family are now in the truth, and in all parts of the country there are many who have become interested in it.
The events which are taking place in America are being closely watched in this country, and we all feel the need of being greatly in earnest in the cause of God. A season of fasting was observed previous to our quarterly meeting, and the blessing of God rested upon us in that meeting in a rich measure.
G. C. T.
Proof That a Better Life Is Possible
If one has lived an hour patiently and serenely, and above the world, he has proof within himself that such a life is possible. Argument is no longer needed in his case; he has experimented and proved by his own experience that the distraction and worldliness of common piety are due to a weakness which ought to be overcome.—Selected.