Earlier text: NOAH'S TIME AND OURSDecline of Conscience and the Neglect of God's Law
I believe it is a fact generally admitted that there is much less conscience manifested by men and women, in nearly all the walks of life, than there was forty years ago. There is justly much complaint of this, and there seems to be but little prospect of reformation. The rings and frauds and villainies in high and low places, among all ranks of men, are most alarming, and one is almost compelled to ask: “Can nobody be safely trusted?” Now, what is the cause of this degeneracy? Doubtless there are many causes that contribute more or less directly to it; but I am persuaded that the fault is more in the ministry and public press than in any and all things else. It has been fashionable now for many years to ridicule and decry Puritanism. Ministers have ceased, in a great measure, to probe the consciences of men with the spiritual law of God. So far as my knowledge extends, there has been a great letting down and ignoring the searching claims of God’s law, as revealed in his word. This law is the only standard of true morality. “By the law is the knowledge of sin.” The law is the quickener of the human conscience. Just in proportion as the spirituality of the law of God is kept out of view will there be manifest a decay of conscience. This must be the inevitable result. Let ministers ridicule Puritanism, attempt to preach the gospel without thoroughly probing the conscience with the divine law, and this must result in, at least, a partial paralysis of the moral sense. The error that lies at the foundation of this decay of individual and public conscience originates, no doubt, in the pulpit. The proper guardians of the public conscience have, I fear, very much neglected to expound and insist upon obedience to the moral law. It is plain that some of our most popular preachers are phrenologists. Phrenology has no organ of free will. Hence, it has no moral agency, no moral law and moral obligation in any proper sense of these terms. A consistent phrenologist can have no proper ideas of moral obligation, of moral guilt, blameworthiness, and retribution. Some years since, a brother of one of our most popular preachers heard me preach on the text, “Be ye reconciled to God.” I went on to show, among other things, that being reconciled to God implied being reconciled to the execution of his law. He called on me the next morning, and among other things said that neither himself nor two of his brothers, whom he named, all preachers, had naturally any conscience. “We have,” said he, “no such ideas in our minds of sin, guilt, justice, and retribution, as you and father have.” “We cannot preach as you do upon those subjects.” He continued: “I am striving to cultivate a conscience, and think I begin to understand what it is. But, naturally, neither I nor the two brothers I have named have any conscience.” Now, these three ministers have repeatedly appeared in their writings before the public. I have read much that they have written, and not unfrequently the sermons of one of them, and have been struck with the manifest want of conscience in his sermons and writings. He is a phrenologist, and, hence, he has in his theological views no free will, no moral agency, and nothing that is really a logical result of free will and moral agency. He can ridicule Puritanism and the great doctrines of the orthodox faith; and, indeed, his whole teaching, so far as it has fallen under my eye, most lamentably shows the want of moral discrimination. I should judge from his writings that the true ideas of moral depravity, guilt, and ill-desert, in the true acceptation of those terms, have no place in his mind. Indeed, as a consistent phrenologist, such ideas have no right to be in his mind. They are necessarily excluded by his philosophy. I do not know how extensively phrenology has poisoned the minds of ministers of different denominations; but I have observed with pain that many ministers who write for the public press fail to reach the consciences of men. They fail to go to the bottom of the matter and insist upon obedience to the moral law as alone acceptable to God. They seem to me to “make void the law through faith.” They seem to hold up a different standard from that which is inculcated in Christ’s Sermon on the Mount, which was Christ’s exposition of the moral law. Christ expressly taught in that sermon that there was no salvation without conformity to the rule of life laid down in that sermon. True faith in Christ will always and inevitably beget a holy life. But I fear it has become fashionable to preach what amounts to an antinomian gospel. The rule of life promulgated in the gospel is precisely that of the moral law. These four things are expressly affirmed of true faith, of the faith of the gospel: - “It establishes the law.”
- “It works by love.”
- “It purifies the heart.”
- “It overcomes the world.”
These are but different forms of affirming that true faith does, as a matter of fact, produce a holy life. If it did not, it would “make void the law.” The true gospel is not preached where obedience to the moral law as the only rule of life is not insisted upon. Wherever there is a failure to do this in the instructions of any pulpit, it will inevitably be seen that the hearers of such mutilated gospel will have very little conscience. We need more Boanergeses or sons of thunder in the pulpit. We need men that will flash forth the law of God like vivid lightning and arouse the consciences of men. We need more Puritanism in the pulpit. To be sure, some of the Puritans were extremists. But still, under their teaching, there was a very different state of the individual and public conscience from what exists in these days. Those old, stern, grand vindicators of the government of God would have thundered and lightened until they had almost demolished their pulpits if any such immoralities had shown themselves under their instructions as are common in these days. In a great measure, the periodical press takes its tone from the pulpit. The universal literature of the present day shows conclusively that the moral sense of the people needs toning up, and some of our most fascinating preachers have become the favorites of infidels, skeptics of every grade, Universalists, and the most abandoned characters. And has the offense of the cross ceased, or is the cross kept out of view? Has the holy law of God, with its stringent precept and its awful penalty, become popular with unconverted men and women? Or is it ignored in the pulpit, and the preacher praised for that neglect of duty for which he should be despised? I believe the only possible way to arrest this downward tendency in private and public morals is the holding up from the pulpits in this land, with unsparing faithfulness, the whole gospel of God, including as the only rule of life the perfect and holy law of God. The holding up of this law will reveal the moral depravity of the heart, and the holding forth of the cleansing blood of Christ will cleanse the heart from sin. My beloved brethren in the ministry, is there not a great want in the public inculcations of the pulpit upon this subject? We are set for the defense of the blessed gospel, and for the vindication of God’s holy law. I pray you let us probe the consciences of our hearers, let us thunder forth the law and gospel of God until our voices reach the capital of this nation, through our representatives in Congress. It is now very common for the secular papers even to publish extracts of sermons. Let us give the reporters of the press such work to do as will make their ears and the ears of their readers tingle. Let our railroad rings, our stock gamblers, our officials of every grade, hear from its pulpit, if they come within the sound, such wholesome Puritanic preaching as will arouse them to better thoughts and a better life. Away with this milk-and-water preaching of a love of Christ that has no holiness or moral discrimination in it. Away with preaching a love of God that is not angry with sinners every day. Away with preaching a Christ not crucified for sin. Christ crucified for the sins of the world is the Christ that the people need. Let us rid ourselves of the just imputation of neglecting to preach the law of God until the consciences of men are asleep. Such a collapse of conscience in this land could never have existed if the Puritan element in our preaching had not in a great measure fallen out. Some years ago, I was preaching in a congregation whose pastor had died some months before. He seemed to have been nearly universally popular with his church and with the community. His church seemed to have almost idolized him. Everybody was speaking his praise and holding him up as an example: and yet, both the church and the community clearly demonstrated that they had had an unfaithful minister, a man who loved and sought the applause of his people. I heard so much of his inculcations and saw so much of the legitimate fruits of his teachings, that I felt constrained to tell the people from the pulpit that they had had an unfaithful minister; that such fruits as were apparent on every side, both within and without the church, could never have resulted from a faithful presentation of the gospel. This assertion would, doubtless, have greatly shocked them had it been made under other circumstances; but, as the way had been prepared, they did not seem disposed to gainsay it. Brethren, our preaching will bear its legitimate fruits. If immorality prevails in the land, the fault is ours in a great degree. If there is a decay of conscience, the pulpit is responsible for it. If the public press lacks moral discrimination, the pulpit is responsible for it. If the church is degenerate and worldly, the pulpit is responsible for it. If the world loses its interest in religion, the pulpit is responsible for it. If Satan rules in our halls of legislation, the pulpit is responsible for it. If our politics become so corrupt that the very foundations of our government are ready to fall away, the pulpit is responsible for it. Let us not ignore this fact, my dear brethren; but let us lay it to heart, and be thoroughly awake to our responsibility in respect to the morals of this nation. Moral Sleep.
By C. A. Osgood
THERE is a state of moral stupor which persons often fall into which resembles sleep, and is sometimes called so in the Bible. Literal sleep is both necessary and useful. But this indifference to our spiritual interests is never a benefit, but always hurtful to those who indulge in it. When people fall into a state of sound sleep they become insensible. They are not sensible of their own condition. They have no idea of what is passing around them. There may be scenes of the most joyful kind passing around them, but they know nothing of it. So there may be scenes of the deepest sorrow going on within their own dwellings which would excite their sympathies in a wonderful manner if they were awake; but they are not moved in the least, because they are in a state of profound slumber. The robber may be at their bedside ready to take their lives if they should show the least sign of awaking; but they are not at all alarmed, because they are asleep. So when men are spiritually asleep; they have no just sense of the truths the Bible reveals; no right sense of the “exceeding sinfulness of sin,” or of the awful danger of those who live and die in their sins. They are not sensible of the goodness of God, who “daily loadeth them with benefits.” They are insensible to the amazing love of Christ. They are not really sensible of the fact that their friends and neighbors are on the high road to perdition. They do not realize that their spiritual foes are secretly lying in wait, ready at any moment to shoot them. As men in literal slumber are not aware how fast time flies, and are astonished on awaking to find that it is so far advanced, so moral sleepers have no idea how soon their day of probation will be over, and the great day of God come on. Sleep is a state of forgetfulness. However active and earnest a man may be in the labors of life during the day, when night comes on and he has fallen into a sound sleep, he forgets all the toils of the day; he forgets his joys and sorrows and anxieties, also the success or want of success that has attended his labors during the day. These interest him no more till he awakes. So, in a spiritual sense, when persons sleep, they forget many important things that have occurred in their past history. They forget the “wormwood and the gall” they tasted, when they felt their “iniquities going over their heads,” as a heavy burden too heavy for them to bear. They have forgotten, too, the joys they felt when first the Saviour’s pardoning blood was applied to their hearts. It may well be said to them now, “Where is the blessedness ye spoke of?” The apostle Peter had in his mind the case of such when, writing of the Christian graces, he said, “He that lacketh these things is blind, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins.” And John, writing to one of the seven churches, said, “Thou hast left thy first love. Remember from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works.” Rev. 2:4, 5. They had forgotten the high place to which they had been raised by the grace of God, and so were called upon to remember it. Many are very forgetful now. They have left their first love. They have but a feeble idea of the joys of communion with God. They walk in darkness. Again, sleep is oftentimes a state of misapprehensiveness. This is when people dream. Them seem to themselves to see and hear and act, but really they sleep. Sometimes they think themselves rich and happy, when really they are poor and miserable. So it is spiritually with people who are dreaming. They suppose themselves to be rich and increased in goods, having need of nothing; when in truth they are “poor and miserable and blind and naked.” They think they are in a good condition, when the True Witness threatens to spue them out of his mouth, so loathsome are they in his sight. They are not aware of their true condition, nor of the condition of their dearest friends, their children, nor of the world at large. They act as if this world was worth more than the world to come; as if the approbation of men was of more value than the approbation of God. They feel more anxious to have their children become respectable in the eyes of their fellows, and fashionable in their attire, than to have them adorned with “the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.” They are ready to invest much money in worldly enterprises, but only a little in the cause of God and humanity. As they are in this dreamy state, they seem to feel that the enjoyment of things seen by the natural eye are of more importance than the “eternal weight of glory,” which God has promised to those who love him. Finally, persons when asleep are not prepared to engage in the active labors of life. Just so it is in the cause of God. Those who are in a sleeping or sleepy condition are unprepared to labor successfully in the cause of truth. If they talk of these things, it is with so little earnestness that it produces no feeling. If they undertake to warn the world of its coming doom, it is done so easily that no one is alarmed. God’s servants are called upon to “Cry aloud and spare not, to lift up their voice like a trumpet,” to “show the people their sins.” It is high time now to awake out of sleep. The predicted signs of the Lord’s coming have been seen. The last message of mercy to mankind is being given. The harvest of the earth will soon be reaped. Oh! how applicable to us the words of the Saviour, “What I say unto you I say unto all, watch.” C. A. OSGOOD. The Decay of Conscience.
By G. W. A.
HERE is a vigorous, searching article from Eld. Chas. G. Finney, president of Oberlin College. It deals unsparingly with the wishy-washy theology of the day which ignores the holy law of God, and has a sort of “love and honey” religion drawn especially from the gospel. The article is from a late issue of the Independent. The Falsehood Concerning Dominicum Servasti.
By John Nevins Andrews
The fourteenth chapter of the History of the Sabbath (first edition) exposed the famous falsehood that the martyrs of the second century were tested by the question whether they had kept the Sunday Lord’s day. The particular form of expression was said to be “Dominicum servasti?” and the interpretation was given thus, “Have you kept the Lord’s day?” This is one of the most prominent and most highly esteemed first-day arguments. The Sabbath History showed that this oft-repeated story is simply a falsehood. 1. That there is no instance at all resembling this statement till we come to the fourth century. 2. That there is then only one instance in which anything like this occurs. 3. That this does not refer to the observance of any day, but to the celebration of the Lord’s supper. To show this, we give AN ANALYSIS OF CHAPTER XIV.
EXAMINATION OF A FAMOUS FALSEHOOD.
1. Were the martyrs in Pliny’s time and afterward tested by the question whether they had kept Sunday or not? Was the question, Dominicum servasti? addressed to them? 2. Argument in the affirmative quoted from Edwards. 3. Mr. Gurney traces this story to Dr. Andrews, bishop of Winchester, who claimed to have taken it from the Acta Martyrum. 4. Sir Wm. Domville testifies that no question, at all resembling this, is to be found in the Acta Martyrum till nearly two hundred years after Pliny’s time. 5. The only question in any wise similar thereto, was that addressed to Saturninus and others, A. D. 304: “Celebrate Dominicum?” or “Agere Dominicum?” occurring in their examination. 6. Sir Wm. Domville adduces high authorities to show that the word Dominicum, as here used, signifies either a place of worship or the Lord’s supper, and cannot refer to any day of the week, the first of these authorities being the compiler of the Acta Martyrum, himself. 7. Mosheim testifies that the Acta Martyrum itself, as a historical work, is, generally speaking, entitled to no sort of credit whatever. This falsehood here shown up is too valuable an argument to be lightly surrendered by those who are determined to sustain first-day sacredness at any cost. Elder Preble, when preparing his answer to the Sabbath History, had the misfortune to fall in with the work of James Gilfillan, entitled, “The Sabbath.” He was filled with admiration at this book, calling it (First-day Sabbath, p. 408) a “highly important work;” and on page 411 he calls it “the celebrated work of Gilfillan.” He found, as he shows on page 408, that Gilfillan had read Domville, and so must have seen his statements exposing the story that the martyrs were tested by the question whether they had kept Sunday. He had no fears to follow where Gilfillan should lead. He discovered that Gilfillan had reproduced this story and given as his authority, not the Acta Martyrum, but the Ecclesiastical Annals of Cardinal Baronius. Hereupon he is delighted. Now he has got the story from a source that must command respect for it. He is astonished that the author of the History of the Sabbath could pay any regard to the popish editor of the Acta Martyrum, and to the Benedictine monks who give the meaning of the word Dominicum. Yet he forgets that the story itself comes wholly from the Romanists, and that when he goes from these to Cardinal Baronius, he merely turns from one body of Romanists to another. But inasmuch as Ruinart, the editor of that edition of the Acta Martyrum which Domville consulted, was not born till after Bishop Andrews’ death, Eld. P. thinks verily Domville did not consult the same work that Bishop A. quoted. But the truth is, the Acta Martyrum was compiled by the friends of the martyrs from age to age, and Ruinart edited the most complete and valuable collection of these legends that has ever been published. Domville did, therefore, go to the most proper edition of that work, and his testimony concerning the Acta is therefore decisive. But it is time to follow Eld. P. to Gilfillan’s quotation of Baronius. He quotes from Gilfillan at some length, ending with the following statement which is all that G. says on this point:— “The Romans, though they had no objection on this score, punished the Christians for the faithful observance of their day of rest, one of the testing questions put to the martyrs being, Dominicum servasti? HAVE YOU KEPT THE LORD’S DAY?” (Baron. An. Eccles. A. D. 303, Num. 35, etc.) Quoted in Eld. P.’s First-day Sabbath, p. 412.
Gilfillan here asserts the truthfulness of this story, and assigns as his authority the Annals of Baronius at the year 303. And Eld. P., who never for a moment supposes that Gilfillan would falsify, makes the following comment:— “This shows that Domville did not consult the proper authorities for correct information. If he had done so, he might have saved himself labor, and his readers from a great amount of error.” p. 412. No doubt Eld. P. supposed when he wrote these words that Baronius actually makes the statement which Gilfillan says that he makes. Yet the truth is, Gilfillan has deliberately falsified respecting Baronius. He had read Domville’s exposure of the story as quoted from the Acta Martyrum, and had seen that Domville proved that the test related not to a certain day of the week, but to “the sacred mysteries,” that is, to the Lord’s supper. Seven times does Baronius define the word Dominicum with reference to this very case, and every time precisely as it is defined in the Acta Martyrum. As Gilfillan must have known this, he is guilty in this case of inexcusable fraud. The reader will find this fully shown up in the new edition of the History of the Sabbath, pp. 249–258. If he wishes to trace this famous falsehood in behalf of Sunday to its pretended source, let him consult Baronius, and he will see that the story is an inexcusable falsehood. The Annals of Baronius are in the Boston Public Library. Eld. P. thinks that I have too poor an opinion of doctors of divinity. But he will hardly maintain that the case of Gilfillan is very well adapted to raise my estimation of this class. Domville called this story respecting the Sunday test of the martyrs a “daring misstatement of facts.” Can Eld. P. give it a better name? Eld. P. quotes Domville’s statement respecting the “distress” of the Sabbatarians, as though it bore against the observers of the seventh day. But Domville speaks expressly of those who maintain the so-called Christian Sabbath by scriptures which relate to the seventh day. This is precisely the position and work of those who sustain the modern first-day Sabbath. The “distress” belongs to them, and is in no wise shared by those who hallow the Sabbath of the Lord. J. N. A. Time of the Judgment of Rev. 14:7.
By Uriah Smith
It was shown last week that a preliminary work of Judgment must take place before the Lord comes; and that this is something connected with the work of Christ, as it constitutes, at the time the message of Rev. 14:6 is given, the burden of the everlasting gospel which the angel had to preach. In all that is revealed concerning the work of our Saviour for us, is any such preliminary Judgment work brought to view? Paul, in Heb. 8: 4, 5, states plainly that the priests who ministered under the Mosaic or typical dispensation, prefigured in their ministry the work of Christ, our great High Priest under this dispensation. Read Hebrews, chapters 7, 8 and 9. Those priests performed their service in connection with a sanctuary. This sanctuary consisted first of the tabernacle erected by Moses, Ex. 25: 8, and onward; and secondly, of the temple erected by Solomon, to which the movable structure of Moses gave place. 1 Kings 8: 1-11. This, Paul says, Heb. 9: 1-7, was the sanctuary of the first covenant. This sanctuary had two apartments, the first or holy place, the second or most holy, in which was the ark of God’s testament. In the first, a daily ministration was carried on through the year; in the second, went the high priest alone once every year. Heb. 9: 6, 7. This last day was the day of atonement, or of putting away of sin. It closed the yearly round of service, and was the cleansing of the sanctuary. Lev. 16. In Dan. 8: 14, a great prophetic period is given, and in connection with that, the sanctuary and its cleansing is brought to view: “Unto two thousand three hundred days, [years] then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.” In Dan. 9: 24, 25, we are told that only seventy weeks, or 490 years of the 2300, are allotted to Daniel’s people, that is, to the Jews and to old Jerusalem. Then the remaining 1810 years have their application in the present, or gospel dispensation. The sanctuary of which we have spoken, was the sanctuary of the first covenant. That covenant came to an end when Christ established the new at his first advent; Heb. 8: 6-13; and with that covenant, the sanctuary of that covenant also ended. But the 2300 years, as we have seen, extend down 1810 years into this dispensation; and at the end of these days, the angel assured Daniel the sanctuary was to be cleansed. This dispensation, therefore, has a sanctuary; and what is it? Paul, in Heb. 9: 9, 23, 24, plainly states that the earthly sanctuary was a pattern, figure, type, of the true sanctuary in Heaven. In Heb. 8: 1, 2, he states that Christ, in his ascended position of glory and majesty in the Heavens, is a minister of that sanctuary, the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched and not man. In Heb. 9: 23, 24, he states that it was necessary that the holy places made with hands, the earthly sanctuary, which was a pattern of the heavenly, should be cleansed with the blood of the earthly offerings, calves and goats, but the heavenly sanctuary itself must be cleansed with the blood of a better sacrifice, which is the blood of Christ. Many people overlook the blood of this dispensation. Without shedding of blood is no remission. Precious blood of Christ! Knowing that Christ has shed his blood; and that thereby we have forgiveness of sin, they have no idea of anything further. How this blood becomes efficacious for us, or in what way it is ministered, they have no conception. The types of the former dispensation bring out this matter in beautiful clearness. As the blood of the typical offerings was ministered in the service of the typical sanctuary, so the blood of Christ, the antitype, is employed in the service of the antitypical, or true, sanctuary in Heaven. As the blood of the earthly offerings cleansed the typical sanctuary, the blood of Christ cleanses the true; as that took away sin in figure, this takes away sin in fact. A round of service was completed in the earthly sanctuary once every year. The tenth day of the seventh month of every year was devoted to the work of cleansing the sanctuary, and was called the day of atonement. Lev. 16: 29, 30. Christ, since he ever liveth, performs his service once for all. Heb. 9: 25, 26. When our Lord appears in the clouds of heaven at his second advent, his work as priest is done; for then he assumes the robes and crown of a king and conqueror. Rev. 19: 12-14. But the closing part of his work as priest, must, according to the type, be a work in the most holy of the heavenly sanctuary, to make atonement for his people, and cleanse the sanctuary, not from any physical impurities, but from the imputed sins of those who have sought forgiveness through his blood. And this work he accomplishes just before his second coming. The reader will now see that this is the very work of preliminary Judgment which it has been shown must be performed before Christ comes. For the atonement, or putting away of sin, involves the examination of character and decision of cases, according to the records in the books above. The close of Christ’s priestly work will determine forever who are his and who are not. And upon all who have secured the forgiveness of their sins through his mediation, immortality is conferred “in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye,” at his second coming. When, then, does this work of cleansing the sanctuary, or this preliminary Judgment, commence? At the end of the 2300 days of Dan. 8: 14; for so the angel assured Daniel. All now hangs upon the termination of this one period of time: can we tell when those days end? Dan. 9, being an explanation of Dan. 8, informs us that they date from the going forth of a commandment to restore and build Jerusalem. In Ezra 7, we find the commandment referred to; and it went forth in the 7th year of Artaxerxes, king of Persia; Ezra 7: 7; and the 7th year of this king is determined by Ptolemy’s canon, to be the year 457 B. C. Dating from the latter part of that year, Ezra 7: 9, they would extend to the same point in the year 1844 A. D. But that identical year witnessed the very height of the great Advent movement, which, as we have seen, was in fulfillment of the message of Rev. 14: 6, 7. That movement was founded principally on the interpretation of the great prophetic period of 2300 days. The message brought us to the hour of God’s judgment; and the prophetic period on which it was based brought us to the cleansing of the sanctuary. The hour of God’s Judgment and the cleansing of the sanctuary involve, therefore, the same work and occupy the same time. This work has been in progress since the ending of the days in 1844. It occupies a brief but indefinite period just preceding the coming of Christ. It is a work we have shown to be necessary as the closing up of the work of Christ as priest, and as the preliminary Judgment work which must just antedate his appearing. It cannot from the very nature of the case be long extended; and the coming of Christ immediately follows. Candid reader, think of these things. U. S. White Robes.
By James White
PAUL COMPARES THE TWO MINISTRATIONS, BUT DOES NOT CONTRAST THEM.
In the third chapter of second Corinthians, the apostle compares the Jewish and Christian ministrations. He does not contrast them. The false statement frequently repeated in sermons and in articles from the religious press that the two ministrations are held in contrast by Paul is deceptive in its influence, and is calculated to strengthen fundamental errors in many honest minds. There are degrees of comparison of character, as good, better, best, bad worse, worst; while things properly held in contrast are of opposite character. There are comparative degrees of heat, and also of cold; while heat and cold are opposite in nature, and are properly held in contrast. We compare the light of the heavenly bodies, the sun, moon, and the stars; while light and darkness are opposite, and are held in strong contrast. In the development of the plan of salvation through Jesus Christ in all the ages, from the time that hope first dawned upon fallen Adam to the crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension of Christ, and the glory of pentecost, there have been degrees of light and glory. Hence the comparison of the dispensations. The Councils of high Heaven have not devised three plans by which to save men; one for the patriarchal age, one for the Jewish age, one for the Christian age. The great plan is one, unfolding with degrees of increased light and glory in the successive ages. Paul compares the ministration of the Jewish and Christian ages in the third chapter of second Corinthians. Please read the chapter and notice with especial care the clearness and strength of the expressions of the great apostle which we here give side by side, not for contrast, but for | Jewish Ministration. |
Christian Ministration. |
|---|
| “Was glorious.” Verse 7. |
“Rather glorious.” Verse 8. |
| “Be glory.” Verse 9. |
“Exceed in glory.” Verse 9. |
| “Was made glorious.” Verse 10. |
“Glory that excelleth.” Verse 10. |
| “For if that which is done away was glorious.” Verse 11. |
“Much more that which remaineth is glorious.” Verse 11. |
And why should the two ministrations be held in contrast? They both came from the same Divine Source, in behalf of the same race of sinners, to perfect that holiness of character in all the saved from all the ages, necessary for the same holy Heaven. Hence John in prophetic vision, looking forward, saw them all gathered to the immortal shores, from the time of the holy martyr Abel down to the last ransomed sinner near the close of the Christian age, “a great multitude which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues.” He heard them all unite in the same hallowed acclamation, “Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb.” Rev. 7: 9, 10. Why should there be a wide contrast between ministrations under which the unit family of the immortal world find eternal redemption? Why? God is the one father of all the adopted sons and daughters of grace from the Patriarchal, Jewish, and Christian ages; and Christ is their only Saviour and Redeemer. “Neither is there salvation in any other. For there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” Acts 4: 12. Angels that excel in strength are the holy guardians of the obedient and faithful of every age, and the Holy Spirit their sanctifier. The pious dead of all the ages sleep in the one Jesus; 1 Cor. 15: 17, 18; and his voice will awaken them all at his coming. John 5: 28, 29. They will all be caught up together to meet the Lord in the air, and upon the sea of glass all will receive the crown of glory and the palm of victory from the hand of Jesus. And the numberless multitude from all ages wear robes of dazzling brightness, washed and made white in the blood of the Lamb. Then why should there be a wide contrast between God’s moral government of fallen men, or the plan of his saving grace, in the dispensations? J. W. A Specimen.
By Uriah Smith
THE Watertown (N. Y.) Morning Dispatch, of Dec. 19, 1873, gives us the benefit of the following notice:— “Battle Creek, Mich., has a society of Second Adventists who are expecting the end very soon; and yet they have provided against all contingencies by laying up a vast deal of treasure on earth. They own the largest publishing house in the State, which does a business of $200,000 annually, and their other properties are numerous and valuable. They have just held a ‘world’s conference,’ at which they affirmed their confidence in the ‘third angel,’ one Mrs. White, who knows very exactly when the end is coming, and who manages the finances of the concern. These people are pilgrims and strangers, they are; they can’t tarry but a night or so.” If our publishing house does a business of $200,000 annually, as is here stated, its friends and patrons must be very numerous; there must be a large number of persons somewhere, who are in sympathy with the views we promulgate, and on whose patronage the business is run up to so high a figure. Now, is it not a little singular that so many persons, scattered all over the land, can be made, in this age of gospel light, to believe that a woman, “one Mrs. White,” is an angel? Besides, if she knows so exactly when the end is coming, why does not this paper, or some other, state when it is? Papers are not usually slow to publish any item of that kind. Or is this a profound secret that she is keeping all to herself? And again, if she manages the finances of a concern which is in so prosperous a condition as to do a business of $200,000 annually, she possesses financial ability which certainly entitles her to some respect. But let us take out of that paragraph all the incorrect statements, and see if enough of it will be left to be visible to the naked eye. 1. If the writer means by “society” a community, that statement is entirely false. There is no community here, any further than any church organization, of Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, &c., is a community. 2. If this society has “laid up a vast deal of treasure upon earth,” we would like to have some one show it to us. We can find an excellent use for a great deal more than we know now where to lay our hands on. 3. Instead of our business amounting to $200,000 annually, we regret to say that it has not yet reached quite half that sum. 4. We never held a “world’s conference.” Our General Conference, in November last, was a most encouraging occasion; but 5. We did not on that occasion affirm confidence in the “third angel.” And 6. We did not affirm that “one Mrs. White” was that angel. 7. Mrs. White does not know, nor pretend to know, when the end is coming. Seventh-day Adventists are not the kind who set times for the advent of Christ. We have never done that, and do not believe the time is ever to be preached. “Of that day and hour knoweth no man.” 8. Mrs. White has nothing whatever to do in managing the finances of the concern. The Publishing Association is a legally incorporated institution, managed by a board of seven trustees, chosen at each regular annual meeting of the stockholders. Of these trustees, Mrs. W. is not, and never has been, one. And now, having taken thus much of wholesale and downright untruth out of the paragraph, there is but a small residuum left; and even of that, all we can say is, that we wish it was truer than it is. U. S. Falling Behind.
By Uriah Smith
THE popular churches hold up prominently before the people that their object and their mission is to evangelize the world. If this is a divinely appointed mission, and is ever to be fulfilled, these churches should be able to show an increase of membership relatively greater than the increase of population. The facts in the case, however, seem to show just the reverse of this. D. Dorchester, in an article entitled, “Methodism in the Large Cities,” in the Methodist of Dec. 27, 1873, makes the following exhibit. He compares the number of Methodists with that of Presbyterians in sixteen given cities, and shows that in these cities there were in 1840, one Presbyterian to 32 inhabitants, one Methodist to 23. In 1850, it stood, Presbyterians 1 to 40, Methodists 1 to 33. In 1860, Presbyterians 1 to 50, Methodists 1 to 38. In 1870, Presbyterians 1 to 53, Methodists 1 to 41. Then the writer adds:— “It will be seen that both denominations have fallen behind the population in each decade; but the Methodists relatively less than the Presbyterians.” This may do very well for the Methodists as compared with other denominations. But how about the wider and more important comparison between the churches and the world? On this the real issue hinges. And if matters go on in this way, the population in the most enlightened portions of the globe all the while distancing in numbers the slowly growing membership of the churches, how long before all the world, with its civilized corruptions, and its heathen darkness, will be converted to God? But the Bible gives us no such dark and discouraging problem to solve. We nowhere read that the gospel was designed to convert the whole world. It was to be preached for a witness to all nations, Matt. 24:14, and was to gather out a people for his name. Acts 15:14. And when this work is accomplished, as it will be when the limits that God fixed are reached, the present course of this world with all its crimes and evils will be arrested; the masses of the incorrigible will be given over to the destruction which they have willfully courted, and the redeemed be put into the possession of a new heavens and new earth, wherein the righteous and righteousness alone shall dwell. 2 Pet. 3:13. U. S.