MRS. MARY A. WOODBRIDGE, recording secretary of the Woman's Christian Temperance Union, and vice-president of the National Reform Association, made the principal National Reform speech at Chautauqua Assembly, on National Reform Day, July 23, last year. Among many other such like things in her speech, we find the following:—
"Shall we not amend our National Constitution, that the world shall know that we acknowledge Christ as Ruler? as the Head of our nation? and in his name, and for his glory, shall not 'We, the people, in order to form a more perfect union,' thus 'ordain'? While we render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, shall we not render unto God the things that are God's?"
To render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's and unto God the things that are God's, is eminently sound and practical Christian doctrine. But the practice of that principle is not at all what the National Reformers want the people of this nation to do. The National Reformers not only want us to render to Caesar that which is Caesar's but they want to compel us to render to Caesar that which is God's. This we, under Christ, deny their right to do; and by his help, it is what we will never submit to do.
In these words Christ established a clear distinction between Caesar and God, between that which is Caesar's and that which is God's; that is, between the civil and the religious power, and between what we owe to the civil power and what we owe to the religious power. We owe to Caesar, the civil power, that which is civil: we owe to God, the religious power, that which is religious. This is the distinction which God, in Christ, has absolutely fixed. Whoever seeks to confound this distinction is against God and against Christ; to join, or to seek to join, the religious with the civil power is to confound the distinction; and to join the religious with the civil power is precisely what the National Reform party proposes to do. The logical conclusion from this is clear, and we do not hesitate to say that it is strictly according to Scripture, and, therefore, perfectly true.
For the State to enforce religious duties it thereby demands that to Caesar shall be rendered that which is God's, and therefore it usurps the place of God, and so far as it is obeyed, it destroys the true worship of God. We know the claim that these men make, as of all of their kind in the dreadful history of persecution everywhere, that is, that it is the true worship of God and of Christ which they ask that the civil power shall enforce, and this according to the Bible. But no such thing can be done. Christ did not say that we should render to Caesar that which is God's; neither did he say that we should render to God by Caesar that which is God's. That which is God's is his, and we are to render it to him direct, without504any of the meddling mediumship of Caesar. When we have rendered to Caesar that which is Caesar's we have rendered to Caesar all his due, and he has no right to demand any more. And when he has so received his just due on all his proper claims, then what business is it of Caesar's how we render to God that which is God's, or whether we render it at all or not? It is just none of his business. And when he seeks to make it his business he is meddling with that which in no wise concerns him. One of the unbecoming and irreverent results of such action is well expressed by Gibbon, in speaking of Constantine and his sons:—
"Those princes presumed to extend their despotism over the faith, as well as over the lives and fortunes, of their subjects; . . . and the prerogatives of the King of Heaven were settled, or changed, or modified, in the cabinet of an earthly monarch." Decline and Fall, chap. 21, par. 16.
Could anything possibly be more incongruous! It is just such incongruity that these words of Christ are intended forever to prevent. Yet history is full of it, and while our own Government has escaped it so far, now the National Reform party seeks by the subversion of the Constitution to inflict it upon this great nation.
Whenever the civil power steps between a man and God and proposes to regulate just what shall be rendered to God, and just how it shall be rendered, then Caesar is entirely out of his place. George Washington was a man for whose opinions we suppose there is yet remaining some respect on the part of Americans, and he said:—
"I have often expressed my opinion that every man who conducts himself as a good citizen is accountable alone to God for his religious faith, and should be protected in worshiping God according to the dictate of his own conscience."
We say again, that in the words, "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things which are God's" (Matt. 22:21), Christ separated forever the civil from the religious power. And the National Reform party, in its endeavor to join them, clearly sets itself against the word of Christ.
But the National Reform idea of the work of the gospel is as crude as its idea of the relation of the civil and the religious power. Mrs. Woodbridge says further:—
"An Amendment to the National Constitution requires the indorsement of two-thirds of the States to become law. Although the action must be taken by State legislative bodies, let such an Amendment be submitted, and it would become the paramount issue at the election of legislators, and thus God would be in the thought, and his name upon the lip of every man. May not this be the way opened to us? How to bring the gospel of Christ to the masses has been, and is, the vexing problem of the church. Would not the problem be solved? . . . In considering the submission of such an Amendment, we may use the very argument used by Moses, in his song containing these words of Jehovah, 'For it is not a vain thing for you; because it is your life; and through this thing ye shall prolong your days in the land.' How prayerfulness would be stimulated! Conscience would press the words, 'If the Lord be God, follow him; but if Baal, then follow him!' Then would there be searchings of heart, as David's, of which we learn in the fifty-first psalm. Prayer would bring faith and the power of the Spirit; and when such power shall rest upon the children of God, there will be added to the church daily such as shall be saved."
Oh, yes; to be sure! What a most excellent method of bringing the gospel (?) to the masses! Most assuredly the problem would be solved. This scheme has been tried, and the problem solved, before, and in much the same way. By making the subject of the Trinitarian controversy a national and governmental issue the name of God and of Christ was "upon the lip," clubs, stones, or military weapons in the hands, and murder in the heart, of every man. Thus the gospel was brought to the masses, and so there were added to the church daily such as should be —. Especially in the city of Rome, by this means, the masses became so devout that in the most exciting and decisive moment of a horse-race, the whole multitude in the vast circus could in an instant turn their minds to the gospel (?) and shout, "One God, One Christ, One Bishop." And,
by the way, the women were among the leaders, and were the main help in bringing about this triumph of the gospel among the masses at a horse-race in the Roman circus. Thus, in that age, was the gospel brought to the masses; thus, then, was the problem solved. And "history repeats itself," even to the part the women play in the political project of bringing the gospel to the masses. (See Gibbon's Decline and Fall, chap. 21, par. 35.)
But illustrations are hardly needed to show how entirely foreign to the gospel of Christ are such propositions and such arguments as we here present from the Chautauqua National Reform Speech.
Such stuff needs but to be read to be condemned utterly by everyone who has any respect for the gospel or for its Author. But if the reading of this is not enough to condemn both it and the cause in behalf of which it must be used, then we shall insert just one more sentence from the very midst of whence these are copied. Immediately following the words, "Would not the problem be solved?" are these:—
"Yea, Christ would then be lifted up, even as the serpent in the wilderness, and would we not have right to claim the fulfillment of the promise, that 'He will draw all men unto himself'?"
To think of a political campaign managed by ambitious clerics, political hypocrites, ward politicians, and city bosses, and call that bringing the gospel of Christ to the masses, and the means of adding to the church daily such as shall be saved, is certainly a conception of the gospel of Christ which is degrading enough in all conscience. But when to cap such a conception, it is avowed that such would be the lifting up of Christ, even as the serpent in the wilderness, and the fulfillment of the promise that he will draw all men unto him, the whole idea becomes one that is vastly nearer to open blasphemy than it is to the proper conception of the gospel of Christ. But such, and of such, is the gospel of National Reform.
J.
PUNCTUATION AND INSPIRATION.
By W.
Nor infrequently we find people who seem to think that everything which may be bound between the lids of the Bible is inspired. Some people think that the references under the verses are a sort of inspired comment, forgetting that they only serve as a miniature concordance, and were never put into the Bible until A. D. 1611, and the last of them not till 1785. There are others who think that Usher's Chronology, which is placed in many Bibles, is inspired, and who would think it heresy to teach that Christ was crucified in the year 31, when the date in the margin of the Bible says 33. Indeed, we have seen some who seem to think that the pictures in the large family Bibles are inspired, and who cannot be made to believe that when Jacob fled from home he was an old man nearly eighty years old, because in the family Bible illustration of Jacob's dream he is represented as a curly-headed little boy sleeping upon a rock.
But the most common error of this sort is in supposing that the punctuation of the Bible is inspired. A friend who writes to us from Illinois seems to labor under this misapprehension. He says that he has been reading the Signs for some time, and has had the most implicit confidence in it until he read the article in the Signs of May 26, entitled, "What and Where Is Paradise?" In that he found that in our quotation of Luke 23:43, we placed the comma after the word "to-day," whereas in the ordinary version it is after the word "thee." Again he notices that in 2 Cor. 12:2-4 the Revised Version and King James's Version each have the text punctuated differently, while the text as we quote it is punctuated differently from both. Consequently, our correspondent says, "Now if you are right, it will be easy for you to explain; if you do not explain, the conclusion will be that you have punctuated it to bring out your own idea regardless of truth."
We are very happy to explain for the benefit of our brother and others who may be similarly troubled. We will consider the last text first. On this he can certainly have no more fault to find with us than with the revisers, for, as he himself says, the punctuation is not the same in the two versions.
We will quote the text just as it is in both of the versions and just as it appeared in the Signs; for thereby a point may be illustrated. King James's Version has it as follows: "I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such a one caught up to the third heaven. And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) how that he was caught up into Paradise," etc.
The Revised Version has it thus: "I know a man in Christ, fourteen years ago (whether in the body, I know not; or whether out of the body, I know not; God knoweth), such a one caught up even to the third heaven. And I know such a man (whether in the body, or apart from the body, I know not; God knoweth), how that he was caught up into Paradise," etc.
Although there is some difference in the marks of punctuation used in those two verses, there is no difference in the sense. Punctuation marks are not used so freely as they were formerly, and the colon is seldom used in ordinary sentences. According to modern usage when words are inclosed in parentheses, the necessary marks of punctuation are placed after the marks of parentheses, and not within, and so the New Version conforms to this usage. All the other difference is that the New Version has a comma, instead of a semicolon, after the parenthesis as in the Old. The text as it appeared in the Signs was punctuated the same as in the New Version with the exception of the semicolon being used after the parenthesis instead of the comma. But this change was simply incidental, and it was not known at the time that there was any difference; but the matter is of no consequence anyway, as the meaning is not affected in the least by the difference in the punctuation.
All the readers of the Bible should understand that at the time that the Bible was written, there were no marks of punctuation, and the words in the sentences were not separated by spaces as we now have them. For example, the first verse of the book of John was something like this:—
The American Encyclopedia says: "The modern points came into use very gradually after the invention of printing, the comma, parenthesis, notes of interrogation, and period, being the earliest introduced, and the note of exclamation last. It was not till sixteen centuries that an approach was made to the regular system by the Manutii of Venice."
Modern punctuation has been a thing of growth. The marks have been invented and placed where the sense seemed to require them, to make it easier for the reader, and it follows, therefore, that punctuation would vary in some instances according as those who translated the Bible differed in their ideas of its meaning. In some instances the punctuation has been changed. Heb. 10:12 was formerly punctuated thus: "And this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins, forever sat down on the right hand of God." This would indicate that after making a sacrifice for sins, Christ sat down at the right hand of God never to leave that place. But this idea is contradicted by the whole tenor of the Scriptures, which teach that Christ is going to stand up and come to this earth again, and finally to reign upon this earth; therefore the punctuation has been changed so as to present the true idea, namely, that when Christ had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, that is a sacrifice once for all, he sat down at the right hand of God. This change has been made not to conform to anyone's theory of truth, but to the plainly expressed truth of the Bible.
Again, Matt. 19:28 was once in some Bibles punctuated thus: "Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, that ye which have followed me in the regeneration, when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel." This punctuation would make the text mean that the disciples had followed Christ in the regeneration, that is, that505they had followed Christ in being born again; but such an idea is monstrous, as it would indicate that Christ, like the disciples, had been a sinner and had been obliged to be born again, and so in our version the comma is placed after the word "me" instead of after "regeneration," so that the text expresses what Christ meant, that those who had followed him, should in the regeneration, when Christ comes, that is, when all things are made new, sit upon twelve thrones.
So in quoting Luke 23:43, we placed the comma after the word "to-day," not to bring out our own idea regardless of truth, but to make the text express what is evidently the truth, and make it consistent with the plain declarations of Scripture. As it stands in the Authorized Version, it seems to indicate that Christ told the penitent thief that he should be with him in Paradise that very day on which they were hanging on the cross. But this would be to make Christ contradict himself, because three days later he said (John 20:17) that he had not yet ascended to God, and he would not receive the adoration of Mary until he had ascended; but God's throne is in Paradise, therefore, when Christ said that he had not ascended to the Father, it was equivalent to saying that he had not ascended to Paradise. But since he had not ascended to Paradise, it is very evident that he could not have told the thief that he would meet him there three days before, because he could not tell an untruth.
Perhaps it will be less objectionable if, instead of saying that we change the punctuation of the verse, we imagine ourselves living before the art of punctuation was invented. Let us strike out all punctuation from the verse, and then we shall have it just as it was written by the inspired historian. Literally thus:—
Now we read it through, and, being acquainted with the teaching of the Bible, namely, that Christ did not ascend to Paradise until three days after the crucifixion, and, moreover, that he could not have ascended until the third day, when he rose from the dead, because the dead know not anything and have no power of locomotion, we know better than to place the comma after the word thee. We therefore consider the circumstances under which the words were uttered. We consider that Christ was hanging upon the cross, condemned as a malefactor, despised by almost everybody, and his teachings doubted even by his own disciples, with no earthly prospect that any of his predictions could ever be verified, and we see how natural that Christ in making the promise to the thief should put emphasis upon the word "to-day." Verily I say unto thee to-day, notwithstanding these untoward circumstances, and that all my hopes and predictions seem to have come to naught, even to-day, I say unto you, that ye shall be with me in Paradise. But this, the only natural and consistent view of the text, would force us, in punctuating it, to place the comma after the word "to-day," because the voice, following the obvious meaning of the passage, makes a pause there whether one is indicated or not.
It is unfortunate that the translators of the Bible did not have a perfect and consistent view of its teachings. And yet we do not know but that it was providential, for there are only a few passages where the meaning is in any way obscured by the translation or by the punctuation, and the meaning of those few can be easily determined from parallel passages; and the fact that the nature of man, the sleep of the dead, the seventh-day Sabbath, and similar unpopular truths, stand forth in bold relief in a Bible translated by those who believed none of those truths, makes it far more evident that they are unquestioned Bible truths, than if the Bible had been translated by men predisposed in favor of them.
W.
NEW ZEALAND.
By A. G. Daniells
It has been some time since anything has appeared in the Signs relative to the work in this corner of the great harvest-field. At the time our last letter was written we had decided to build a church edifice. The blessing of God has been with us in this enterprise, and now we have a neat, creditable place of worship, 32 by 55 feet. We have had but little trouble in getting the amount that was promised before we began the work; and a considerable amount has been added to it.
It has been a surprise to people that we could in so short a time build a house with so little effort for money. We believe the hand of the Lord has been in the work. The house was greatly needed, and we ventured out by faith that God would be our helper. One man who is not with us, in practice at least, promised us $25 at first. In a few days he came to pay, and added $5.00 to it. Each week he has added until he has given $45. Besides this we have received about $7.00 each week at our Sunday evening services. In all this we recognize the hand of the Lord and give him the honor and glory.
Our dear brethren at Kaeo have donated all the timber for the seats, which is a great help. They also offer to give us timber to build a house by the side of the church for a mission house and for the office of the Tract and Missionary Society, as soon as it is needed. This is evidence that the same spirit that actuates the people who believe this truth in America, has found its way into the hearts of the people in New Zealand. This is the spirit of the Master, who gave all he had to save a perishing world.
As we continue our work here, the work increases and presses us on every hand. New openings present themselves all around us. By invitation I have been out in the country about forty miles from Auckland and given a temperance lecture. At the close, the trustees of a nice, commodious church building invited me to return and preach to the people. This I very much desire to do if possible. There are a great many towns and settlements within a radius of fifty miles of this city, in which meetings might be held with profit, if there was anyone to do it. The people have read a great deal in the Auckland papers about our work, and are anxious to know about it. They have not yet heard very much to prejudice them; but we are confronted with that old, distressing fact that there are no laborers to go among them. What a pity! People ready and anxious to receive the truth, but no one ready to give it to them. May the Lord arouse the indifferent to action.
Our Tract and Missionary Society, which has a membership of over forty members, is taking hold to spread the truth the best it can. Papers and tracts are being sent to different parts of the colony, and some encouraging letters are being received. The Kaeo Society is also putting forth earnest efforts. After sending a few copies of the Bible Echo to about a hundred people, they wrote to them asking them what they thought of the paper, and if they would not like to become subscribers. Of course they received some very curious replies; but among them there were some good, encouraging letters, which gave evidence that the truth was finding its way to some hearts. In this way we are endeavoring to do what we can. I am often deeply impressed with the power and vitality of the truth of God.
The opponents of truth are doing what they can to hinder the people from accepting, but their efforts only advertise us, and cause many to ask who we are and what we believe that is so strange. One minister wrote a long article on the Sabbath question, and had it published in a paper that has a circulation of 1,500 in the colony. A reply of equal length in defense of the truth has been put in the same paper, thus bringing the Sabbath question before hundreds whom we could not reach in any other way at present. Another minister has just published a little pamphlet on the same question, and is having it sold in the city. I have announced to review it in a few nights, and there is reason to believe our church will be crowded full.
We were never of better courage and faith in the Third Angel's Message than at the present. We cannot doubt but that this field should have been entered years ago during its greater financial prosperity. What could have been done then with comparative ease must be done now with more of a struggle. We find difficulties and obstacles in the way, but as one after another gives way it gives us more determination to press the battle to the gates.
A few have given up the Sabbath, but others have filled up the ranks, so that our number holds good. This week we begin a series of meetings in the church, to continue several weeks. Our intention is to go over the principal points of our truth about the same as we would in a series of tent-meetings. By this effort it is hoped quite a number who are now halting will take their stand with us. This is a matter of great anxiety to us at present. In our next letter we shall be able to tell what success shall have attended the effort. We still desire to be remembered at the throne of grace. A. G. DANIELLS. Auckland, N. Z., July 17, 1887.
Withhold Not Good
"WITHHOLD not good from them to whom it is due, when it is in the power of thine hand to do it." Prov. 3:27.
The Missionary.
DROPPING SEED.
The land was still; the skies were gray with weeping;
Into the soft brown earth the seed she cast;
"Oh! soon," she cried, "will come the time of reaping—
The golden time when clouds and tears are past!"
There came a whisper through the autumn haze,
"Yea, thou shalt find it after many days."
Hour after hour she marks the fitful gleaming
Of sunlight stealing through the cloudy lift;
Hour after hour she lingers, idly dreaming,
To see the rain fall, and the dead leaves drift.
"Oh! for some small green sign of life," she prays,
"Have I not watched and waited 'many days'?"
At early morning, chilled and sad, she hearkens
To stormy winds that through the poplars blow;
Far over hill and plain the heaven darkens,
Her field is covered with a shroud of snow;
"Ah! Lord," she sighs, "are these thy loving ways?"
He answers—"Spake I not of many days?"
The snow-drop blossoms; the purple violet glistens
On banks of moss that take the sparkling showers;
Half-cheered, half-doubting yet, she strays and listens
To finches singing to the shy young flowers.
A little longer still his love delays
The promised blessing—"after many days."
"Oh, happy world!" she cries, "the sun is shining!
Above the soil I see the springing green;
I could not trust his word without repining,
I could not wait in peace for things unseen;
Forgive me, Lord, my soul is full of praise;
My doubting heart prolonged thy 'many days.'"
—Selected.
The Necessity of Supernatural Religion
A SUPERNATURAL religion, proved by miracles, and involving the gift of inspiration, is not a work of supererogation on God's part, but rather a charity of divine grace to instruct men in the great matter of their own salvation. They cannot, by the simple light of nature, answer the question: How shall man, being a sinner, be just with God? God himself must answer this question, or it will not be answered by any sufficient authority.—Sel.
"Ye cannot serve God and mammon." "Mammon is a Syriac word meaning riches. It is riches personified." The meaning therefore is, "Ye cannot serve God and riches." Ye cannot trust in God and trust in riches. Yet, although the word is so abundant, so strong, and so explicit on this subject, there are many who do attempt to serve God and riches both, and multitudes more who serve, and trust in, riches alone. There are multitudes who rejoice because their wealth is great and because their hand has gathered much. There are multitudes more who grieve because their wealth is not great, and because their hand has not gotten much, and so make gold their aim, their hope, and their confidence. Their trust is in riches and not in God.
But God's charge to one class of these, those who are rich, is this: "Charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not highminded, nor trust in uncertain riches, but in the living God, who giveth us richly all things to enjoy; that they do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communicate; laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life." 1 Tim. 6:17-19.
To the other class God says: "They that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition. For the love of money is the root of all evil; which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows." 1 Tim. 6:9, 10. But to all who would fear God he says: "But thou, O man of God, flee these things; and follow after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness. Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life." For "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God." 1 Tim. 6:11, 12; Mark 10:25.
But says everyone on his own behalf, "I do not trust in riches." Try yourself and see. Apply to yourself the test that Jesus put upon the young man, and see whether you love God or your riches most. "Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in Heaven; and come, take up the cross, and follow me." If that were demanded of you personally to-day by the Master, how would you stand the test? Would you stand it any better than the young man did? If not, then is your trust in God or in your wealth? Luke says that when that young man heard this, "he was very sorrowful; for he was very rich." Notice, his sorrow seems to have been graduated on the scale of his riches. He was very sorrowful, because he was very rich. Perhaps if he had simply been rich, he would only have been sorrowful, yet even in that case his trust in his riches would have denied the God who is above. While had he been poor, as Matthew the publican, or as the fishermen who plied their nets on the waters of Galilee, he doubtless would have been glad of the call of the Saviour, and would have followed instantly.
The Saviour gave us a parable on this very subject (Luke 12:15-21) when he told of that rich man whose ground brought forth plentifully, and he had no room to bestow his fruits and goods; and he said he would pull down his barns and build greater, and there bestow his goods, and then would say to himself, "Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry. But God said unto him, Thou fool, this night thy soul shall be required of thee; then whose shall those things be, which thou hast provided?" What was it that God said to him? "Thou fool." What is it the fool says? "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God." Exactly. This man was saying, in effect, that there is no God. He was trusting in his riches, and denying the God that is above. "So is he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God." Therefore, "take heed and beware of covetousness," for "covetousness is idolatry," and "a man's life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth."
Nor yet do we want to run to the other extreme and unmeasuredly denounce riches, and money, and whatever bears any semblance to means. It is not in money that the evil lies. Human society cannot exist without money of some sort. There must be some circulating medium. It may be silver or gold, paper or leather, brass or copper, with some device stamped upon it. But whatever it is, it is money; and in the place where it is used, he who has the most of it will be the richest. Money is not the root of all evil. Of itself it is not an evil at all. It is the love of money that is the root of all evil. It is not a sin to have money; it is a sin to love it. It is not a sin even to have much; it is a sin to love, or to trust in what we have, whether it be little or much. It is not the rich alone who fall into temptation and a snare, and into foolish and hurtful lusts; but it is "they that will be rich"—they who all the time have their aim at being rich, who have their eyes on that, and who tend all their efforts toward that, who lie awake nights scheming for it, who spend their lives to attain the unattainable; for "he that loveth silver shall not be satisfied with silver, nor he that loveth abundance with increase."
It is not a sin to be rich. Abraham, the friend of God, "was very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold." Gen. 13:2. Job likewise was one of the richest men of his day. Yet neither of these holy men trusted in their riches, nor rejoiced because their wealth was great. They trusted in the living God, and remembered that it was he who gave them power to get wealth. Read in the thirty-first chapter of Job, how he looked upon his wealth—always as only a means of blessing the poor, the needy, the fatherless, and the widow. The sin is not in being rich; it is in trusting in it, putting confidence in it, rejoicing in it, and being proud of it, and highminded because of it. That is to deny the God that is above. "Beware that thou forget not the Lord thy God," "and thou say in thine heart, My power and the might of mine hand hath gotten me this wealth. But thou shalt remember the Lord thy God; for it is he that giveth thee power to get wealth." Deut. 8:11, 17, 18. Trust not in uncertain riches, but in the living God, holding all subject to his call, ready to distribute, willing to communicate. For thou shalt love no other god but him, and him with all the heart, and all the soul, with all the mind, and with all the strength.
Yet why is it that men will not trust in the Lord entirely and always? Why is it that people will go on in anxious care about what they shall eat or what they shall drink, or wherewithal they shall be clothed? It is because they have not faith in the heavenly Father. But why is it that they have no faith in him? Is it because he has given no assurances of his faithfulness? Oh, no; for what greater assurances could he give? Here is his word by Peter, chosen for the golden text of this lesson, "Casting all your care upon him; for he careth for you." He wants no one burdened with care. He wants all to cast all their care upon him and let him do all the caring, while we dwell safely under the shadow of his wings rejoicing. Here is another consideration presented by Paul, and it is one of the strongest encouragements to faith in all the Book. "He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things." Notice the question is not, "How shall he freely give us all things?" but, "How shall he not?" The argument is, that if in his great love for us, he would freely give up his dear Son, how shall he not with him freely give us everything else. But more than this: It was while we were yet enemies that God gave his Son to die for us, and those who will obey him he calls his friends. Now if he would give up his own dear Son to die for his enemies, how shall he not with him freely give all things to his friends?—how can he keep from doing it? Oh, that men would trust the Lord and praise the Lord for his goodness and for his wonderful works to the children of men!
It seems that the Lord has done his very best—he has exhausted the language and every other resource—in his effort to convey to men the idea of his love and care for them; so that by the prophet he exclaims, "What more could have been done that I have not done?" Here he gives a lesson from "the fowls of the air," Luke says "the ravens." "Your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?" And if he so feed them, will he not much more feed you, who are "much better than they?" Next he cites the lilies of the field, which he clothes so gorgeously that even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of them. But if he "so clothe the grass of the field, which to-day is, and to-morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith." If he so care for the grass of the field, which is but for a day, shall he not much more care for you whom he has made for eternity if you will but have it?507In another place the Saviour brings up this point again, and tries to convey to his people the deep care that he has for them. In Matt. 10:29, he says: "Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father. . . . Fear ye not, therefore, ye are more value than many sparrows." Two sparrows for a farthing. Four farthings make one penny, English money, and one penny English money equals two cents of our money. As therefore four farthings make two cents, one farthing would be one-fourth of two cents, which is one-half a cent. But two sparrows were sold for a half a cent, therefore one sparrow would be worth but a half of a half a cent, which would be but a quarter of a cent. It seems that this was the highest price too, if they took more they would get them for less, for Luke says five sparrows were sold for two farthings: so the phrase would be "two for a farthing or five for two." Now the lesson conveyed in this is that, as one sparrow, worth but a quarter of a cent, shall not fall on the ground without our heavenly Father, so, likewise, nothing shall befall a child of God, even to the value of a quarter of a cent, without our heavenly Father. The care of our heavenly Father for his children, extends even to things as small and of as little consequence as the value of a quarter of a cent.
Nor does even this express the extent of our heavenly Father's care for us; for immediately the Saviour says, "The very hairs of your head are all numbered." And being given in this connection it shows that the care of our heavenly Father for us extends lower yet than to things of the value of a quarter of a cent. It extends even to things of the value of a hair of our heads. And he means to tell us that nothing even to the value of a hair, shall befall the child of God without the care of our heavenly Father. He means to tell us that our heavenly Father's care for us is greater than can possibly be our care for ourselves. Then why should we not trust him rather than ourselves, or riches, or anything, or anybody else? His care for us is so great, why not let the care be his, as it is his, and we trust him wholly, and so trusting rest in the peace which passeth all understanding? It is only thus that that promise can ever be realized, because this is the basis upon which the promise rests. See: "Be careful for nothing; but in everything by prayer and thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God. And the peace of God which passeth all understanding shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus." Phil. 4:6, 7.
Nor yet do these lessons express the abundance of the far-reaching care of our heavenly Father for the children of men. For he "is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us." Eph. 3:20. The only power that can possibly work in us, to connect us at all to God, is the power of faith.
Therefore as his care is so great in all these directions, how much more exceeding abundantly will it be towards you, O ye of much faith. "Lord, increase our faith." Trust in the Lord and do good, and verily thou shalt be fed. "Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is stayed on thee: because he trusteth in thee. Trust ye in the Lord forever: for in the Lord Jehovah is the rock of ages." Isa. 26:3, 4, margin. J.