If Christianity be not all that its Book tells us it is, it is nothing more than a system of "ethics" based on a lie.
If Jesus the Christ is not the Saviour He is said to be, He is an impostor.
If Christianity does not save man from sin and the disposition to sin, its beautiful sentiments lure but to deceive.
If the Bible is not the revealed Word of God to the world, it is worse than no message; "let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die."
If Jesus the Christ does not save from sin by recreative power, there is no hope for the sinner. Evolution is as helpless to save as it was six thousand years ago, and as helpless to save here in America as in India.
If the Bible is not the Revealed Will of God, we have none; for there is none other which lifts above the human, save as the sentiment—not the power—has been borrowed.
Either Jesus Christ was a deceiver, a deceived one, or He was and is the Saviour of men. We can not accept a part of His teaching as divine and reject another part equally His. It is all or nothing. "Whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he can not be My disciple." "And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after Me, can not be My disciple." "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but My words shall not pass away."
Thousands are halting before "ifs" to-day, raised by the infidelity of professed science and the unfaith of professed Christians. Looking to this time the prophet saw "multitudes, multitudes in the valley of decision." The multitudes are there to-day undecided. Not long will they remain there; for undecision as regards Christ is decision against Him and all He will do for them.
Man stands to-day in the enemies' land, a slave of sin and selfishness and death. Christ comes down from above, stoops to conquer and save, and offers man righteousness and life and power if man will only believe.
"But will Christ do this?" "If He only would," and then indecision pauses. Christ has done it all, gave it all to every poor individual mortal when He gave Himself. He asks us to take it, to accept what He died to give you.
"I wish I knew." You may know. You may know. You may know. Here is His test; how simple it is. "If any man willeth to do His [God's] will, he shall know of the teaching, whether it be of God, or whether I speak from Myself." There is Christ's test to you, to all, pure and simple. Yield your whole being to do God's will—to believe, to obey, to wait, to receive, keeping back nothing. You shall know.
Have you not tried sin long enough? What help has it been? What blessing has it brought? What satisfaction has it given? We need not answer. Sin is only and always an enemy. Then why not, why not accept the Saviour from sin?
CHRIST'S ANSWER TO CAVILERS.
WHEN Christ was personally teaching on earth, the Pharisees, and others who wanted to be thought wise, often tried to puzzle Him with hard questions. At one time two prominent classes—the Pharisees and Herodians, two classes that ordinarily had no sympathy with each other—united in an effort to "catch Him in His words." They sent their learned representatives, who introduced their mission by flattery. They said, "Master, we know that Thou art true, and carest for no man; for Thou regardest not the person of men, but teachest the way of God in truth." After this clever bit of eulogy, the like of which would have captivated any one of them, they asked a very cunningly-devised question: "Is it lawful to give tribute to Cæsar, or not? shall we give or shall we not give?"
These artful critics desired and expected that Christ would answer, Yes, or No; and from His answer either way they thought to break His influence. The Jews were especially grieved and chafed because of the tributary tax to the Roman Government; therefore, if Jesus said the tax was lawful, the Jews would not be convinced that He was the Messiah who they supposed would relieve them of that yoke. On the other hand, if He should say the tax was not lawful, they would charge Him before the Roman authorities with teaching treason to the government.
But Jesus, "knowing their hypocrisy," told them to bring Him a penny. When they had brought it to Him He asked, "Whose is this image and superscription?" They answered, "Cæsar's." Then was manifested the wisdom of Christ in answering puzzling questions, as He replied, "Render to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar's, and to God the things that are God's." The men who were trying to "catch Him in His words" recognized their defeat, and were much surprised at His answer.
But the reply of Christ was more than a shrewd parry to disconcert His enemies. It forms the foundation of a very important doctrine, namely, the separation of church and state. It was easy for Christ to see that the union of church and state would be a very effective means employed by the adversary for perverting the plan of salvation. If this answer of Christ to the representatives of the Pharisees and Herodians had always been heeded by the church, none of the unholy alliances with human governments, that have so demoralized both church and state, could ever have taken place. If men would always render to God His full due, and to the state no more than its due, the God-designed principle of religious liberty would always have recognition. This is the lesson we learn from the Lord Himself, and surely His professed disciples ought to heed it, whether the world does or not.
God's plan is that the Gospel should be taught to the world by His disciples, through persuasion. 2 Cor. 5:11. When, however, the church delegates its mission to the state and asks the state to do any part of its work by compulsion, God and His cause are dishonored. Jesus says to His disciples: "All power is given unto Me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, . . . teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you; and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world."
Now if Christ be with the church unto the end, and He has all power in heaven and in earth, what more can be added in the way of power? To seek any other power, is to deny His omnipotence; it is to say that His power is not sufficient for His work. Moreover, Christ imparts His power through His Spirit, and not through the state. And any attempt to "catch Him in His words," and make Him appear to teach something else, is to act the part of the Pharisees and Herodians.
G.
WHY CALLED THE "NEW COVENANT."
By G.
We learn from 1 Tim. 2:5 that there is "one mediator between God and man, the Man Christ Jesus." We also learn from Heb. 12:24 that He is "the mediator of the new covenant." According to the Standard Dictionary, a mediator is "any agent that stands or goes between; especially, one who interposes between parties at variance in order to reconcile them." Two parties at variance are God and the world, the variance being caused by sin—by man's departure from God through disobedience. And the plan of salvation was devised that the world might be reconciled unto God, this reconciliation being through Christ the mediator. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the "word of reconciliation." See 2 Cor. 5:17-21; Eph. 2:8-18.
When did Christ become a mediator?—Evidently when the Gospel was first proclaimed, or just as soon as a mediator was needed. Before man sinned he had been formally notified of the consequence of disobedience; so the moment he did disobey he was under sentence of death. Then what alone could save him from eternal execution?—Only the interposition of a mediator. The Gospel of salvation, the "word of reconciliation," was immediately put into action. So Christ's work as mediator of the covenant began as soon as there was variance between God and man. The sin of the first man opened the way for sin and death to lay hold upon all his posterity, and "God so loved the world [from Adam down], that He gave His only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life."8
Then the moment that Christ's mediatorship began, that which is called the "new," or "second," covenant went into effect; for Christ never was a mediator of any other covenant. Men were saved back there, and they could not have been saved by the "old" covenant,—first, because it was not in existence until the exodus from Egypt; and secondly, there could be no salvation under it alone, as all its service was only typical and could make nothing perfect, as its power of performance on man's part was merely human. See Hebrews 9.
Why, then, is this covenant, by which alone men could be saved in any age, called the "new" or "second" covenant, in contradistinction from the "first" or "old" covenant, which did not exist until the people of Israel were delivered from Egypt?—The reason is, that it was second in ratification. It was ratified by the blood of Christ. The death of Christ made good all that had been done under it from the beginning. All that had been done of worth during the time of the old covenant was subject to, and dependent upon, the "better promises" of the new covenant. Christ "is the mediator of the new testament [covenant], that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance." Heb. 9:15.
The old covenant stood only in the blood of animals and on the promises of a vacillating people. Its service was a temporary system of symbolic object-lessons for the instruction of the people. Nothing that was done under it availed anything for salvation only as those for whom the service was performed were actuated by faith in the promises of the new covenant, which had been made before. But this covenant, altho it could not fail because it was backed by the word of God, was not deemed complete until the death of Christ. "For where a testament [covenant] is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead."
In the case of men, however, "it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth." This is because that while fallible men are alive, they may change their testament, or will; so there is no certainty as to what it will finally be until they are dead, then the last will is of force. But in the case of the covenant of which Christ is the mediator, it was just as sure when first uttered as it could be, because it was based upon the immutable promise of the Father and the Son that it would be ratified by the death of Christ. Yet the death of Christ was necessary because that was the voucher of the faith of all who had or should become parties to the covenant.
But, as before stated, it was not deemed completed until the ratification, when it was reckoned as "new" because of the passing away of the "old." Again, that which is faulty, and of no value in and of itself, must of necessity become old in the sense of wearing out; while that which is infallible is always practically new. Like all the mercies of the Lord the "covenant of sacrifice" is "new every morning." G.
THAT PEACE CRY.
By G.
"PEACE, peace," is a notable cry in these last days, and no doubt many of those who so loudly advocate universal peace among the nations really expect such a consummation. But we see no action on the part of the great nations that indicates official expectancy in that direction. The nations that could do the most in that direction are the very ones whose vast armaments, and vast increase of appropriations for such purposes, indicate a different prospect.9
For instance, Lord Roberts, head of the British army, has issued a manifesto urging that a three or four months' drill be made in every public school, and that every man during certain years of his life be made legally liable, in any national emergency, to be called out for service.
Some such system is in vogue in every European nation of prominence, and the greater oriental nations are manifesting a like purpose. In our own country the military spirit is encouraged, from the primary school up, under the guise of "patriotism;" and everybody knows that the ultimate of popular patriotism is war. If the people really wanted to inculcate peace in the minds of the rising generation, they would entwine the olive branch around the flag on the schoolhouse, and some peaceful design would take the place of gunpowder and the military parade in the celebration of our liberties. What is liberty but a name, if it be dependent upon war? The Prince of Peace, who came to proclaim peace to the earth and good-will to men, employs no physical force, yet he says, "If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed." And real peace can come from no other source.
But from the standpoint of the world's nations the prospect of universal peace is not very brilliant. The very last view the Word of God gives of their condition is that they are all gathered together in battle. Whatever else one might gather from this prophecy, it is certain that these nations "of the whole world" are not imbued with the spirit of peace. And how could it be otherwise, if the people are to have war-training from their earliest school days to manhood?
G.
THE "NATIONAL REFORM" DELUSION.
By G.
FOR over forty years the National Reform Association has been carrying on a work designed to establish religious domination in the government of the United States. It had its rise in one denomination—one of rather limited influence, too; but to-day its influence and its support may be styled interdenominational. One of its constitutional purposes is "to promote needed reforms in the action of the government touching the Sabbath," etc. Another expression of purpose is, "The association constantly presents God as the source of authority in civil affairs, Jesus Christ as King of nations, and the Bible as the supreme law-book in the civil-moral sphere."
To the casual reader these expressions of purpose might, and evidently do, appear to be the utterances of an "angel of light." Not so, however, when given a little closer consideration.
1. The Sabbath reform which the movement advocates is the establishment, in the "law-book" of the nation, of a Sabbath entirely unknown to the Law-book of God. It would stamp out the Sabbath which the Creator hallowed in the beginning, and which the Saviour honored even when resting in death—the only weekly Sabbath recognized in all the Bible—and would set up in its place, with human pains and penalties attached, a man-made counterfeit, the Sunday institution. To promote such a "reform" is to squarely stultify all claim to regarding the Bible as the "supreme Law-book."
2. To present "God as the source of authority in civil affairs," and then to set up an association of men having political ambition to control the action of government, and to urge their authority because they profess to be religious, is another gross stultification of principle. God's manner of influencing men to do right is by His Spirit impressing their minds. Over and over heathen rulers have been moved in this manner to do God's will; while, on the other hand, the centuries of Dark Ages, the darkest in this world's history, were the result of that species of "national reform" that nominally recognized God's "authority in civil affairs" by putting the church in charge of the government. And the men who brought about that consummation were just as pious and just as sure that they were reforming the nation as are the most ardent National Reformers of to-day. Nor were those ancient "reformers" any more mistaken than are those of to-day. The same means will produce the same effect to-day, just as surely as that human nature is the same.
3. To advocate Jesus Christ as King of nations has two very illogical features: (a) It is a position He utterly ignored when on earth. When the people essayed to take Him and make Him a king, He took Himself out of their way and sought solitude in the mountains, to escape the results of such a foolish action. Again, when questioned by Governor Pilate concerning His kingdom, He plainly declared that it was "not of this world." His Word ought to settle that question with people who claim to take the Bible as the "supreme Law-book." (b) When Christ comes to establish His kingdom, it will not be as King of any nation then existing. True, these will be given to Him, but for what purpose? For answer, read the prophetic declaration recorded in the second psalm:
"I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto Me, Thou art My Son; this day have I begotten Thee. Ask of Me, and I shall give Thee the heathen for Thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth [not the United States] for Thy possession. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; Thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel. Be wise now therefore, O ye kings; be instructed, ye judges of the earth."
This is what will become of the nations of earth when the Lord sets up His kingdom. This is plainly indicated by Nebuchadnezzar's dream of a great image, recorded and explained in Daniel 2. The image represented the kingdoms of earth until the end of time, when a "stone," representing the kingdom of Christ, fell upon them and broke them to pieces. So complete was the demolition, that all parts of the image "became like the summer thrashing-floors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them; and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth." So it is said of Christ's kingdom: "The kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever." And we are emphatically assured that "the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof is sure."
Christ has a spiritual kingdom in this earth, of which He is the Priest-King, reigning in heaven (Eph. 1:19-21; Heb. 1:1-4; 12:1, 2; Rev. 3:21); and His subjects are in every nation and kindred and tongue and people, in the world but not of the world, even as He is not of the world. And when He shall fully establish His glorious kingdom it will not be in this sin-cursed earth, which is to be destroyed by fire; but it will be upon the "new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness." See 2 Peter 3. Then will be brought to pass the saying, "The meek shall inherit the earth." Ps. 37:9-11, 28, 29.
The present National Reform movement is a delusion and a snare of ever-increasing dimensions and influence.
Question Corner
By Editor
1898.—Mistakes in Copy and Conception.
Please harmonize 2 Chron. 22:1, 2 with chapter 21:20. These Scriptures show that the son was two years older than the rather. S. A. B.
The mistakes have evidently been made in copying. A mere dot or a dash sometimes makes a great difference. Very few of these have crept into the Scriptures as compared with other ancient works, yet doubtless there have been some mistakes of this kind made. 2 Kings 8:26 reads instead of "forty and two years," "two and twenty years," which is probably the correct reading.
2. In the reference to the three days and three nights in the heart of the earth, would say that the term "day and night" is a common expression in Jewish parlance for a day. There is no reason for thinking that three days and three nights meant absolutely three full days and three full nights. Look up the various expressions concerning the trial and crucifixion of our Lord. Note where one evangelist uses "the third day," or "on the third day," or "this is the third day," and another uses the expression "after three days," and these are all parallel. Again, there is no reason for contending that "in the heart of the earth" meant in the grave. We have no right to say just what it does mean, inasmuch as that is the only place where it is used. The power which controlled the earth at that time was the Roman power. Up to the very time of Christ's betrayal, no power on earth could have any control over Him; but when He was apprehended by the Romans, He declared: "This is your hour and the power of darkness." Then He was delivered of the Father to the power of evil, and that extended until He broke the power of the sepulcher and went forth in the glorious liberty of the resurrection. If His betrayal were upon Thursday evening, the three days would include the night of Friday and the day of Friday, the night of the Sabbath and the day of the Sabbath, the night of Sunday with the early morning; and so we read that His own disciples declared on that first day, Sunday, "To-day is the third day since these things were done." The common usages of the language it is well worth while to consider.
Is this the seventh-day Sabbath as spoken from Mount Sinai, or is it a ceremonial Sabbath? Is the Sabbath as spoken of in Lev. 26:34 the same as 2 Chron. 36:21? B.
The Sabbath in Lev. 26:34 included all the Sabbaths. It was God's design that every seventh year should be a Sabbath of the land. It was man's duty to keep every seventh day. So man's Sabbath upon the land was every seventh day, God's weekly rest day. Besides this there were several ceremonial Sabbaths which occurred yearly. See Leviticus 23. Then there were the Sabbaths of the land, as before mentioned, coming every seventh year. The Sabbath of 2 Chron. 36:21 is evidently the same as that of Lev. 26:34. It is well to remember, however, that the Sabbath of the land depended upon man's keeping faithfully God's Sabbath. Had man been faithful to God in the weekly rest day, there would have been no question but that he would have been faithful to God in the Sabbath of the land.
In Matt. 4:2 it says: "When He had fasted forty days and forty nights, He was afterward an hungered." Are we to understand from that that He was not hungry until the termination of the forty days and nights. And did he have water to drink? ONE UNCERTAIN.
Christ's agony in wrestling with the temptations of the evil one during the forty days seems to have been so great as to make Him forget all bodily needs and longings. But physical powers could not always be denied. When victory came at the close of the period of forty days, a keen hunger-sense returned. Then came again the devil with, "If Thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread." Doubtless He was faint and weary all through the forty days, but He did not feel as He did afterward. Whether He had water or not, I can not say. Probably not. Read the accounts in Mark 1 and Luke 4.
1901. The Book of Esdras.
Can you tell me why the Books of Esdras were rejected from the Canon? There seems to be a remarkable prophecy concerning the latter days in Second Esdras. J. M. P.
Because in language (Greek) and chronology (long after Malachi) they were similar to the other books of the Apocrypha. The word "Esdras" is another form of "Ezra." In some versions they are called the third and fourth books of Ezra, Nehemiah being reckoned the second. Some scholars have counted them both canonical. Second Esdras is altogether different from First Esdras. It is supposed by some critics to be a translation from the Hebrew or Chaldee. The date of the books is placed from B.C. 100 to A.D. 100. There are those who believe it to be predictions of the last days.
Please explain Matthew 13:38: "The tares are the children of the wicked one." Would this imply that there are certain people who are created by the devil? Of course, we know that the devil himself is a created being. See Eze. 28:13. H. A. D.
Not at all. If you will call to mind, you will note that those are called children of various personages who are like them in character. For instance, Jesus said that the devil was father of the disobedient Jews (John 8:44); "children of Belial," we continually read of (1 Sam. 10:27; 1 Kings 21:13, etc.), "children of disobedience," etc. (Eph. 2:2, 3). "The tares are children of the wicked one," drinking in from him their elements of wicked character. Satan can create nothing; he can only pervert what God has created; and when responsible souls turn from their Creator and choose Satan and his service, they thereby become his children.
1903. The Beginning of the Law.
Did the law of God, the Ten Commandments, exist before the world was made? R.
God gives no law for the moral conduct of His children which is apart from Himself. He could not do it if He would. All His commandments are righteousness. "Holy and righteous is He." He does not have two standards of righteousness; He says, "I am Jehovah, I change not." His law therefore in any, in every, age is the expression in words of His own character. What that law enjoins in one age, it enjoins in every age. What it requires in one age, it requires in every age. The Ten Commandments are the reflect of God's character in a largely negative form to the children of men. The great original is in heaven. God's great Gospel purpose is to write in living characters on the hearts of His children what He wrote with His own finger on tables of stone. Every one of the precepts of the Decalogue is referred to as existing and binding before we come to the speaking of the Decalogue from Mount Sinai. Read the book of Genesis and Exodus with this thought in mind.
1904. Uniting Believers and Unbelievers.
Is it right for Christians to marry those who are not Christians? If it is not, is it right for a Christian minister to perform such a ceremony? A. D.
As to the first question, read 2 Cor. 6:14, 15: "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers; for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? And what communion hath light with darkness? and what concord hath Christ with Belial? and what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?" Surely, this is clear and explicit. Such marriages are everywhere condemned in God's Word, and almost invariably work out ill. The second question is answered by the first. We do not see how a Christian minister can join together what God has said should be kept separate.
Will you please explain Rev. 13:16, 17? Does this mean a real mark in the forehead or in the hand? C. E. O.
We have not space in this department for a full explanation of this prophecy. It should be studied with Rev. 14:1-5 and chapter 7. God's children are sealed with His seal in their forehead; they have the Father's name in their foreheads. This is one and the same thing. It does not mean a literal mark, but that as the forehead stands for the seat of the intellect, the mind, His children are subject to His will, have His law written in their mind, and are as truly bond-slaves of His infinite love and service as were ever branded slaves in the Roman galleys the slaves of those whose brands they wore. "The mark of the beast" is that by which the worshipers of the beast are distinguished from the worshipers of God. It makes the difference between the law of God and the law of the beast, or church and state. The seal of God centers in the Sabbath; the mark of the beast will center in the man-made counterfeit or Sunday as enforced by law. Some will yield their full assent to this, and receive it in their minds; they will have the mark in their forehead. Others will yield to it simply because it is human law, and render that law their service, as expressed by the hand, the chief instrument of service. In the mania for badges, marks, labels, uniforms, etc., humanity may devise some literal mark for church-and-state adherents, just as we have numbered teamsters and union cards.
Power and Authority to Cure Disease
By William Samuel Sadler
HEALING POWER. NO. 1.
"Bless the Lord, O my soul, and forget not all His benefits; who forgiveth all thine iniquities; who healeth all thy diseases." Ps. 103: 2, 3.
THE power that forgives sin heals disease. God is just as surely and truly the healer of disease as He is the forgiver of sin. He "forgiveth all thine iniquities," and "healeth all thy diseases." Many who would shudder at the thought of seeking forgiveness of sin and healing of soul at the hands of man, will go to a doctor in full confidence that he is able to heal their diseases and save them from the results of physical transgression.
There is but one divine Law-giver. Spiritual and physical sin are transgressions of laws from the same source. There is but One who can save us from the results of sin, whether physical or spiritual. To be forgiven and healed either physically or spiritually, requires the life-giving ministry of Him who died that we might live. The same power that forgives sin, heals disease; and just as surely as God only can forgive sin, so He only can truly heal disease.
Doctors, nurses, medicine, treatments, have in themselves no power to heal disease. At best they are simply means that may be intelligently utilized to co-operate with the healing power of God which, to a certain extent, is constantly operating within the body.
Power and Authority to Cure Disease.
"Then He called His twelve disciples together, and gave them power and authority over all devils, and to cure diseases." Luke 9: 1.
The power and authority to cure disease,—to heal the body,—has the same source and channel as the power and authority over wicked spirits. The power that heals the sick is the power that saves from sin. It11is the same power manifesting itself in a different sphere of human need.
If you should find an unsaved soul in moral peril, and succeed in leading him to recognize his lost condition, and then pass through the blessed experience of seeing him born into the kingdom of God, would you for a moment think that you had forgiven his sins, or healed his soul? Not for an instant would you entertain such a thought. You were simply a willing instrument used by Providence to point out the way of life to an erring fellow, as did John the Baptist who cried, "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." John 1: 29.
You brought the sin-sick soul to Jesus; his sins were forgiven; his soul was healed. Your prayers and words were simply a means in the hand of God, and under His blessing, of leading this erring one back to the path of obedience to God's law. Here is another sufferer, a different kind of sinner; one out of harmony with God physically; one who has violated the laws of health and begun to suffer the consequences. He needs physical forgiveness and healing, just as the other soul needed spiritual healing. A physician comes along and helps this physical sufferer by telling him what he did that made him sick, and how to get back into physical harmony with God. He labors with him, as it were physically, and helps him to return to the divine way of living. The man ceases to transgress the laws of life, begins to cultivate health, and by and by gets well. Who healed the sick man,—the doctor, or the power of God?
It is evident that the physician did for this one physically no more than the minister did for the other spiritually; that is, he simply pointed out the cause of his troubles, told him of the forgiving and keeping power of God, and helped him, by means of advice and treatment, to get back into harmony with Nature's laws, just as the minister helped the sinner, by his counsel and prayers, back again into harmony with God and the moral law. In either case, it was by way of the same cross and through the blood of the same Jesus, that pardon and peace were secured.
The Nature of True Healing.
"Heal me, O Lord, and I shall be healed; save me, and I shall be saved." Jer. 17: 14.
Real healing of disease must proceed from God. Powerful drugs may paralyze the nerves, remove symptoms, and deceive the patient, but when the sick recover, either by the ordinary healing process of Nature, or by miraculous means, it is the man himself who has been healed, not merely his malady modified.
The forgiveness of sin (and after all, sin is the real cause of all affliction) is a matter wholly in the hands of God; likewise the healing of disease, which is but the effect of sin, is the work of God, a thing that God only can perform. Divine healing is a transformation by the aid of God's power, from the sphere of disobedience to that of obedience; from the realm of sin and death to that of righteousness and life.
Healing is a process whereby man is able, both physically and spiritually, to get out of a wrong state into the right one, after having secured a disposition to make the change. The healing power is from the same source, whether manifested mentally, morally, or physically. To the Christian, divine healing is but a continuation of the miracle that was wrought when the soul returned to God, and first tasted the sweets of Heaven's healing grace.
W. S. SADLER, M. D.
"INTO EACH LIFE SOME RAIN MUST FALL."
If this were all; O! if this were all,
That into the life some rain must fall,
There were fewer sobs in the poet's rhyme,
There were fewer wrecks on the shores of time.
But tempests of wo pass over the soul,
Since winds of anguish we can not control,
And shock after shock we are called to bear
Till the lips are white with the heart's despair.
The shores of time with wrecks are strewn,
Unto the ear comes ever a moan—
Wrecks of ships that set sail with glee,
Wrecks of love, sinking silently.
Many are hid from the human eye;
Only God knoweth how deep they lie;
Only God heard when arose the cry;
"Help me to bear; O, help me to bear!"
"Into each life some rain must fall;"
If this were all; O, if this were all!
Yet, there's refuge from storm and blast,
Gloria Patri! we'll reach it at last!
Be strong, be strong, to my heart I cry,
The pearl in the wounded shell doth lie,
Days of sunshine are given to all,
Tho "into each life some rain must fall!"—Anon.
Influence and Responsibility of Mothers
By Mrs. L. D. A. Stuttle
By MRS. L. D. A. STUTTLE.
TRAINING TO BEAR RESPONSIBILITY.
"Jack can never be a child but once,—he will have to bear the responsibilities of life soon enough,—do let the boy have a good time while he is young."
Aunt Ellen looked up from her sewing, and quietly replied:
"Do you call it giving him a good time, sister, to allow him to grow up with no sense of responsibility—and with no serious thought or care for any one else than himself? I'm sure you don't want Jack to be selfish, do you?"
"Why no, of course not,—and he isn't,—Jack's the most lovable, unselfish boy I ever saw; but I can't see what you mean, Ellen, just because the boy came in from school, and threw his cap and books into the corner on the floor, you are pleased to term a little thing like that, selfishness." And Mrs. Wilson gave her sister a grieved look as she carefully placed the offending books on a shelf.
"I don't think Jack is naturally a selfish boy, but surely the commonest form of selfishness is a desire to gratify one's self at the expense of others."
Aunt Ellen said no more, for just then the door opened, and in rushed Jack like a whirlwind:
"Mother, mother, Charlie Jones has come for me to go fishing with him. I wonder where my rod is. I'm in such a hurry,—where did Willie put it? I told him to take care of it for me yesterday."
"Here it is,—I put it away in the back shed myself, Jack," smiled Aunt Ellen; "but, my dear," she continued, "will you be back in time to bring in the night's wood and to fill the water pail for your mother?"
"Me, why I hardly ever do that; Willie does—or some one—I don't know who; but I don't believe I'll have time."
The next day grandma wanted some potatoes dug for dinner. "Where's Jack?" she called. "I asked him to dig a basket of potatoes yesterday, and now there isn't one."
"Dear me!" cried Jack. "I forgot all about it; you see Willie most always does that; it isn't my business—that is, it's his business just as much as it is mine."
"Yes, and what is everybody's business is nobody's business," quoted grandma.
As a result of this, dinner was late, and Jack was obliged to go to school without any to avoid a tardy mark. He started off in a bad temper and without his usual cheery "good-by," for he was quite hungry.
As he marched on rudely slamming the door behind him, Aunt Ellen glanced at mama, and quietly remarked that it was all right so long as Jack was having a good time, with no responsibilities.
It is only just to add that Mrs. Wilson was sensible enough to admit that she was wrong. She very wisely made up her mind that it is only kindness instead of severity which lays upon children a reasonable share of the responsibilities of life. And Jack soon learned that it was not only useless to undertake to shirk his tasks, but that there was great satisfaction in performing them faithfully and promptly.
"But," you protest, "all this sounds very well, and looks well in print; but I tell you, children don't like to bear even the slightest responsibility—they like to play—that's about all, and I don't see how you can put old heads onto young shoulders. Now there's my Jennie, she's a regular little butterfly."
Wait, my friend; we do not believe in trying the foolish task of putting old heads onto young shoulders. What an unnatural and ridiculous hybrid we should have, indeed! But I know that Miss Jennie Butterfly can be taught that there is a beauty and satisfaction in the performance of even the humblest task. She may be taught—so may her brother—that a reasonable amount of labor faithfully done is as satisfying as play.
Children should never be allowed to perform any task, however menial, carelessly and slightingly. If Mary blacks the stoves, teach her to delight in doing it well. If John milks the cows, he must be taught that "cleanliness is next to godliness," and that a lot of filth in the bottom of the milk pail shows a carelessness that is not only disgusting, but almost criminal. After a while he will learn to take an honest pride in the care of old Brindle and the stable.
Let me tell you what I saw the other day: It was my privilege to enter the bedroom, playroom all in one, of a little girl of only ten years. "Privilege!"—Yes, so I considered it. This is what I saw: A little white bed neatly made; a carpet carefully swept, a tiny table daintily laid with "play dishes," and a bureau containing a neat wardrobe for Dolly,—all the work of the carefully-trained little fingers. And I said to myself, This child will grow up to be neat and useful. She will not be a mere idle butterfly, dependent upon mother to do her mending and sewing, and to coddle her into a life of uselessness. Sensible mother; fortunate child. She has probably been taught to heed the command: "Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God."
OCEAN TRANSPORTATION OF CATTLE.
The transportation of cattle across the ocean is said not to be free from painful incidents. It is probable that the cattle on the best lines of steamers get across in fairly comfortable conditions, but here is a record of one winter voyage on a line of steamers going out from Boston. In a storm seven hundred sheep were washed overboard, and seventy-five steers fell and broke their legs and were thrown overboard alive. For three days the storm was so bad that neither food nor water could be given the cattle and sheep, and when they were landed some were too weak to walk, some were lame, all were stiff from standing, in cramped positions, in a wash of icy water for ten or twelve days. One sheep was seen to drop dead when taken from the vessel.
Cruelties even worse than these were reported to the editor of this magazine by a young man of undoubted reliability who went across in care of the sheep and who can never forget the suffering he witnessed and was powerless to prevent. Can we call ourselves humane or a Christian people while such treatment of our "fellow mortals" is allowed?—Our Four-footed Friends.