BUT now as evolution is so "directly antagonistic to the doctrine of creation," what do those persons, who pretend to hold to both evolution and the Bible, do with those scriptures which speak of the creation of the world, of man, etc.? Why, that is all set aside as "not historical," "not historically correct," etc. Wm. Hayes Ward, D. D., editor of the Independent, in his issue of February 26, 1880, says:—
"For reasons which almost, if not quite, compel their assent, one of which is the general acceptance of the doctrine of evolution, many believe as I do, that the story of the creation and fall of man, told in Genesis, is no more the record of actual occurrences than is the parable of the prodigal son [italics ours]. Dr. Dorner, the greatest among German evangelical theologians, whose name is honored here as in Germany, holds that this story is not to be accepted as history. So hold perhaps a quarter, perhaps a half, of the educated ministers in our leading evangelical denominations. When Dr. Boardman, of Philadelphia, repeated with great applause and then published a year ago his lectures on the Bible cosmogony, taking this view, I do not remember that a single Baptist paper in the North found any fault."
Nevertheless, Paul doubtless believed that the story of the fall was true historically, and used it as an illustration convenient and pertinent for the purpose he had in mind. But it cannot be proved that God might not properly allow Paul to use the illustration, which occurred to him as being to his purpose, even though it were not an actual verity." But ("be astonished, O ye heavens, at this"!!) "we do know that a commandment given on Sinai assumes as a reason for working six days and resting on the seventh, that God made the heavens and the earth in six days and rested on the seventh; but we know that this statement is not historically correct. The world was not made in six days."
Now is it sufficient to say simply that evolution is antagonistic to creationism? Is it not antagonistic to the whole Bible, and even to the Creator himself, when in reply to the words of Jehovah, spoken with a voice that shook the earth, "In six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth," the evolutionist boldly asserts, "We know that the world was not made in six days"? It is sufficiently astonishing in itself, to realize that a man could be so boldly irreverent as to thus flatly contradict the living God in the only words ever written by his own hand; but our astonishment is increased when we realize that this same man claims to be a Christian, and not only that, but is a "Rev.," a "Doctor of Divinity;" and more, that he is only one of thousands of the same titled gentlemen who hold to the same views.
Again Dr. Ward says in an editorial:—
"But we are told that certain statements—for example, as to the origin, the early history and character, and the age of man—are made in the Bible, and that their acceptance as historical facts is binding upon any one who accepts the Christian system taught in the Bible. To this we have replied that if this is true, Christianity is already gone, and to the educated mind the Bible is already gone, or very soon must go, because the scientific authorities, the only authorities on which we can depend, are now substantially agreed in holding and teaching certain theories about man's origin, as well enough established, which are quite inconsistent with the story in Genesis of the creation of man and woman. This we have stated as a fact, and have concluded that the friends of the Christianity which we so heartily believe in and support, must adopt a theory of the Bible which will not put God's word into direct contradiction with the teachings of our best authorities in science. We have said that we, laymen in science, are compelled to allow the now well-nigh unanimous authority of our best teachers, that man was physically, at least, evolved from irrational animals, and has lived on the earth scores of thousands of years." (This is from the editorial before quoted, entitled, "Deliver Us from Our Friends.")
So, then, it appears from all this that the Bible is of no authority at all, but the "scientific authorities are the only authorities on which we can depend," and to these "authorities," we all, and the Bible, and even the Lord himself, must bow in unquestioning credence; for, as it said in another place:—
"It is so generally taught that it is inevitable that our thinking and scholarly young men will generally accept it on the word of those whose business it is to study the matter."
And by this same token the "inevitable" result is that the word of man supplants the word of God. And right in the face of all this, we are gravely told that "this evolution is held and taught in harmony with Christian faith"!!
If all this can be held and taught in harmony with Christian faith, we should most intensely like to see that form of doctrine which cannot be held and taught in harmony with the Christian faith. And that it is not and cannot be so held and taught, is betrayed by Prof. Francis L. Patton, in an article on this subject originally published in the Interior, and quoted in the "Editorial Notes" of the Independent. He says:—
"Neither the preacher who cries 'infallible Bible' without showing that it is infallible, nor the priest who cries 'infallible church' without giving proof of her claims, will satisfy the man who, with all earnestness in his eye, and all uncertainty in his speech, asks, What must I do to be saved? The church must defend the doctrines she preaches. The pulpit must meet the skeptic with something better than assertion and something more satisfying than earnestness. And if the pulpit has not the time to do this work, and the existing societies have no interest in it or no means of carrying it on, it is not a day too soon for those who know the importance of the controversy to put their heads together to devise a scheme for the preparation of a literature suited to the wants of the doubters of the day." (Italics ours.)
Exactly! the literature of the Bible is not suited to the wants of the scientific doubters of the day, and therefore the evolutionists must devise a scheme to prepare something that will suit them. And what a blessed scheme that will be, of man's devising, and above all, when he is an evolutionist! It will suit though. And then when the man, not with all "earnestness" in his eye and "uncertainty" in his speech, but with all pride in his eye, and all arrogance in his speech, asks, What must I do to be saved? the answer comes from that splendid scheme, Believe in evolution; deny the plain statement of positive facts of the Bible, flatly contradict the words of the Lord, although spoken with his own voice, and written by his own blazing finger on tables of stone; and instead accept evolution "on the word of those whose business it is to study the matter," and hold them as "the only authorities on which you can depend," and thou shalt be saved. Yea, evolution and Darwinism shall be the stability of thy times and strength of salvation; and great shall be the peace—of the apes.
That will suit them every one and every time. And even if it should not, all that will be necessary is simply to "devise" another "scheme" "suited to the wants of the doubters" of this.
But not to treat them cavalierly, we will examine that other form of evolution known as "Theistic Evolution;" that is, a form of evolution which acknowledges God; and inquire where in the theory this acknowledgment comes in, and why. It is plain from all that has gone before that this acknowledgment of God, especially as a Creator, does not lie at the beginning; because, as has been often stated, "evolution is opposed to creationism," is "directly antagonistic" to it. And as evolution is opposed to creation generally, or once for all, so biology, its chiefest handmaid, is opposed to special creations; i. e., of any interference of a creator after the process has started. And in this, evolution and biology are both plainly consistent, and reasonably so, too, because it is certainly a reasonable position before quoted from Prof. Huxley, that:—
"If all living beings have been evolved from pre-existing forms of life, it is enough that a single particle of living protoplasm should once have appeared on the globe as the result of no-matter-what agency. In the eyes of a consistent evolutionist any further independent formation of protoplasm would be sheer waste."
Further he says:—
"If the hypothesis of evolution be true, living matter must have arisen from not-living matter; for by the hypothesis the condition of the globe was at one time such that living matter could not have existed in it."
Now surely, upon this basis, it is no more than reasonable and consistent, to suppose that if living matter could arise entirely of its own evolutionary power from not-living matter, and start onward in its progress without a creator, it certainly could keep itself a-going just as easily without him.
Then what is it that impels these other gentlemen to the adoption of theistic evolution, i. e., that God has interfered in a certain place? There is just one thing, and that alone, and herein is the pivot upon which turns the whole theistic process; and that one thing is, the immortality of the soul. Believing as these men do, in the immortality of the soul, it is impossible to adopt such an idea, or doctrine, as that immortality should be evolved from materiality, and therefore God must have interfered in the process just at the place where the immortal soul was bestowed upon man. But the moment that view is adopted, there appears the inconsistency also; for theistic evolution, holding, in common with evolution "straight," the antagonism to the doctrine of creationism; when it admits the interference of God in behalf of the immortal soul, it therein admits the doctrine of creation; for assuredly the bestowal of immortality upon that which has been evolved from apes and lower forms of animals is nothing short of a creative act, or volition, of God. And the inevitable consequence is, the doctrine is inconsistent with itself.
The Perils of Prosperity
By S. S. Times
It is more common to pray for strength to endure through times of adversity and suffering than for strength to endure through times of prosperity and gladness. Yet it is these latter times of buoyant self-reliance that are most full of peril. It is not in those perilous ways when every step gives fresh evidence that without our Leader we are lost, that we are most likely to turn away from Him. That supreme peril comes rather when we walk in the open plain, and have forgotten the serpents that lurk among the flowers. For every soul that is harmed by adversity, ten are harmed by prosperity. Yet you will find a hundred persons who pray against that adversity which so often brings men closer to God, where you will find one who prays against that pleasant prosperity which too often allures men away from God and from their own best future.—S. S. Times.
The Mission Fund as a Thermometer
The mission fund in a church is to a great extent a thermometer. It expands and contracts in exact ratio with the rise and fall of Christian interest and enthusiasm. It is an excellent test by which to measure the Christian character and tone of any church.—Christian at Work.
Forsake Sin.
By Charles S. Pomeroy, D. D.
EVERY man, be he boor or philosopher, skeptic or atheist even, will have a theology—that is to say, his views about religion. Felix had his. And, whether a man wishes it or not, he must be systematic in his theology. His views held on one point will shape his views upon the others. His opinion of sin will inevitably color his opinion of the atonement and of repentance, as truly as a man's belief whether it is going to rain or not will control his carrying an umbrella. True conviction of sin is only one feature of a proper self-knowledge—not a technical prescription of something to be suffered in the way of conversion, not a mere blind, excited fear, but an intelligent consciousness of facts in our own being that need to be acted upon. A painful consciousness no doubt at first, like the discovery of fire in your dwelling or a disease in your system, that must be known before the one can be extinguished or the other cured. Why should such multitudes fight off the conviction? or, what is just as bad and senseless, endure its suffering with no action for relief—no penitence, no prayer, no trust in the Redeemer?
We do not learn that Drusilla the Jewess trembled, though Felix the heathen did. But no life confronts the truth with stiffer resistance than one who has sinned against light and privilege. When Christ's gospel enters, as a general rule it makes disturbance. The peace he comes to bring—peace of conscience, peace with God—is a conquered peace, a victory over selfishness and sin. People who reject him may not be exceptionally bad—not nearly as bad as Felix. They are only determined, like him, to have no interference with their customs or their lives. Conscience makes cowards of them. The first impression of their case is disagreeable and alarming. They act on it as a tenant in a decayed building might shut out the inspector who came to report danger and counsel repairs—as a sick man might bolt his door against the doctor in fear of something nauseous in his prescriptions.
Christ cannot come to men and remain a mere ornamental appendage. He touches our life. He takes control. He and willing sin cannot live together. If he stays, the sin must vacate the premises. There is no help for it. Let the demons bestir themselves, for he comes to expel them. If they go not quietly, they must go with a battle. He knew what widespread disturbance firm standing by the truth would make; not the truth's fault, neither. The Jews used to call the disciples "those who turned the world upside down." They meant it for a calumny. Yet it was true, because the world was wrong side up, and Christ's gospel came to set it right. Many can endure religious teaching when it runs in the line of their views and habits, but when it corrects and criticises by divine authority, probes their consciences, counsels a new life, says "Thou art the man," they get vexed, and are sure to think the minister is going out of his sphere. They prefer such abstract religious truths and theological discussions as will allow their consciences to sleep, and feed them with soothing syrup, and put no hand upon their passions, and never touch their business relations, and send them away tranquilized and good-natured to their old tricks again. Our Master never preached like that, neither did his apostles. Some people like religion well enough as a plow upon the shelf. But when it does the work it was meant for, rips up the soil of their selfishness, opens to the light their refuges of unbelief for the planting of gospel seed, they had rather let their souls go fallow and fruitless to judgment than submit to the gracious processes of Christ's husbandry. When you pull down the shade in a dusty room, it seems cleaner when sunbeams are excluded. But it is only the revelation you shut out, not the dust. Don't try to pull down a curtain over sins; it does no possible good to hide them. What God wants is confession, cleansing, not concealment.
The Social Idea in the Church.
By Presbyterian Review
It has come to be asked often whether a church is "social;" and the meaning is that to merit this character it must be given to encouraging merry-making of one sort or another. These entertainments run through all grades, from the so-called "sociable"—which is generally anything but really social—to the dancing party or the full-fledged dramatic representation. Then there comes the fair for raising money, a device too often perilously near substituting gain for godliness, a combination of sham business and sham charity, which would be ridiculous if it were not sad.
The tendency of all this is to drive out the spirit of devotion. The desire for merry-making and the religious spirit cannot be successful partners in business. We do not mean to say that social life is not desirable, nor that social entertainments should not be sought. We do not deny that, within wise limits, the church may make a legitimate use of social forces. The church does not build its success upon a social foundation, but upon its religious worship and religious work. This is very different from expecting the church, as such, to furnish either distinctively social life or social amusements.
It is never found that amusements, or other forms of social life in a church, are much sought during a revival season. While this by no means stamps legitimate social pleasures as evil, it is clear evidence that the proper work of the church, and the work that should absorb its energies, is that which in one way or another tends to the promotion of religion. There are many ways of promoting the influences and the power of the church in a community, which are not yet by any means worked for what they are worth. They might far better call out the energies of church people than the various entertainments which so often ask for so much labor to so little profit.
Another evil tendency here is to put into undue and unwise prominence the young when they ought to be learners, and the more light-minded and frivolous when they ought to be kept under the control and care of the wise and earnest.
Is it not about time we ceased running our churches distinctively in the interests of "the young people"? Let us not be misunderstood here. There is a plain difference between being interested in the young people, profoundly and absorbingly interested, and running the church simply with a view of keeping them engaged. The young are indeed the hope of the church; but it is only as they are grounded in the faith and set their faces toward active life with true principles as their motive and guide. The catering to their uninformed and youthful ideas does not tend to ground and settle them in principles which will stand the shock of life. They do not know as much as they will later. Their parents and elder friends have more wisdom than they, and ought to have more voice in the control of things.
To provide for their best possible development is a very different thing from submitting to the dictation of their immature judgments. The church will hold them best by doing for them that which is wise, and not necessarily that for which they may clamor. And this course will help to make men and women of them rather than overgrown children.
And is it not time that we recognize the fact that if the giddy and worldly are not attracted by the real graces and solid worth of religion, they are not likely to be captured by church entertainments? The offering of social entertainments as a bribe, "to make religion attractive," is too much like the gift of a chromo in a tea shop to every purchaser of a dollar's worth of goods. In the church and all that concerns it, let the full, strong throb of vital religion be felt, and then we shall not need to depend on entertainments for a meretricious display of prosperity and of false ideas of success.—Presbyterian Review.
The "Seven Churches."
THE candles were long ago removed from the seven Asiatic candlesticks, and yet a few of the faithful are there, as was discovered by the venerable Dr. Somerville, of Glasgow, who continues his evangelistic labors in the East, where he has been visiting the sites of the "seven churches" of Asia. At Thyatira, we are told, the people attended a service in large numbers and were most attentive. Utter desolation and ruin prevail at Sardis, where only a few Mohammedan huts are to be seen. A meeting was, however, held in the house of the Sheik, attended by his wives and the neighbors, numbering twenty-six in all. Philadelphia is a thriving place, and a goodly number of the people was got together to hear the memorable epistle explained. The famous temple of Minerva, founded by Alexander the Great, was also visited. In the open air, on the floor of the temple, the people assembled. Sankey's hymns were sung in Greek, and "instead of the worship of the goddess of war," writes one who was present, "we had the gospel of the Prince of Peace." Dr. Somerville and his party passed along the road undoubtedly traversed by the Ephesian elders, when they went to meet Paul, leaving the isle of isles, Patmos, to the right. Colossæ has disappeared, and in vain they looked for any trace of Philemon's house or Epaphras's church. At Ephesus they saw the theater into which Paul wished to go to quell the infuriated mob. There was neither house nor hut even at Laodicea. Pergamos was the only site of the "seven churches" not visited, its distance being too great to suit the convenience of the party. Dr. Somerville's meetings in Smyrna have extended over several weeks, and efforts were being made to organize a Christian Ladies' Association there, also a Young Men's Christian Association.—Sel.
The Holy Ghost, Teacher of Truth
By H. Clay Trumbull
The Holy Ghost is, and always has been, the great teacher of spiritual truths. He it was who directed in the preparation of every type and symbol of Christ under the old dispensation. He it was who inspired the prophets to foresee and foretell the glory of the coming Messiah. He it was who gave power and wisdom to the apostles and evangelists of the early Christian church. He it is who alone can make clear to you and to me the teachings of the Old Testament and the New concerning Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, and to-day, and forever. "When he, the Spirit of truth, is come," said that same Jesus, "he will guide you into all truth. . . . He shall glorify me; for he shall receive of mine, and shall show it unto you." When we would know the meaning of a Bible lesson, we must look to the Holy Spirit to make its meaning clear to us. We ought to expect and to get more help in the explaining of the types and figures and the dark sayings of Scriptures from the Holy Ghost than from all the commentaries and lesson-helps together; for he who dictated the writing and directed the typifying can best tell what was signified thereby.—H. Clay Trumbull.
Faith Rests on God's Word
In order to have faith we must be in communication with God. We must know what he says. Then we must accept it as true, not because we have discovered outside evidence corroborating it, but because he said it. Believers do not wait for the event to verify his word; his word is verified to them by their confidence in his absolute power and truth and love.—Sel.
The Sabbath-School.
By Ellet Joseph Waggoner
LESSON FOR THE PACIFIC COAST—JULY 18.
Inheritance of the Saints.—Continued.
AN EARTHLY KING CHOSEN.
1. Give two proofs that the partial possession of Canaan by the Israelites was not the fulfillment of the promise.
2. If the possession of the land had been complete, would that have been a complete fulfillment of the promise?
"And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised; that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also." Rom. 4: 11.
3. When the Lord brought them from Egypt, what did he promise to make of them?
"Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people; for all the earth is mine; and ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel." Ex. 19: 5, 6.
4. How were they governed for many years after that time?
"After that he gave unto them judges about the space of four hundred and fifty years, until Samuel the prophet." Acts 13: 20.
5. Who was the last of the judges?
"And Samuel judged Israel all the days of his life. And he went from year to year in circuit to Beth-el, and Gilgal, and Mizpeh, and judged Israel in all those places. And his return was to Ramah; for there was his house; and there he judged Israel; and there he built an altar unto the Lord." 1 Sam. 7: 15-17.
6. In his days what did the Israelites demand?
"Then all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together, and came to Samuel unto Ramah, and said unto him, Behold, thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways; now make us a king to judge us like all the nations." 1 Sam. 8: 4, 5.
7. What did the Lord say they had done in making this demand?
"And the Lord said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee; for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them." 1 Sam. 8: 7.
8. Then under whose immediate authority must they have been up to this time?
9. What did the Lord say that Samuel should do?
"And the Lord said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee; for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them." "Now therefore hearken unto their voice; howbeit yet protest solemnly unto them, and show them the manner of the king that shall reign over them." "And the Lord said to Samuel, Hearken unto their voice, and make them a king. And Samuel said unto the men of Israel, Go ye every man unto his city." 1 Sam. 8: 7, 9, 22.
10. Who was chosen as their first king?
"And afterwards they desired a king; and God gave unto them Saul the son of Cis, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, by the space of forty years." Acts 13: 21.
"And when Samuel saw Saul, the Lord said unto him, Behold the man whom I spake to thee of! this same shall reign over my people." 1 Sam. 9: 17.
11. By whom was Saul chosen as king over Israel?
"Now the Lord had told Samuel in his ear a day before Saul came, saying, To-morrow about this time I will send thee a man out of the land of Benjamin, and thou shalt anoint him to be captain over my people Israel, that he may save my people out of the hand of the Philistines; for I have looked upon my people, because their cry is come unto me." 1 Sam. 9: 15, 16.
12. Had the Lord, then, utterly rejected his people because of their rejection of him?
No; this is shown by the fact that he chose their king for them.
THERE is a seeming discrepancy between Acts 13: 20 and 1 Kings 6: 1. The latter text says that Solomon began to build the temple in the four hundred and eightieth year after the exode, which would not allow four hundred and fifty years of government by judges. The explanation which seems the simplest is that which connects Acts 13: 20 with the first part of the 17th verse of the same chapter, and regard the expression, "about the space of four hundred and fifty years," as explanatory of the words "and after that." Thus: The God of this people of Israel chose our fathers, . . . and about the space of four hundred and fifty years after that he gave unto them judges, until Samuel the prophet.
E. J. W.
Blackboard Illustrations.
By G. H. B.
THEIR USES AND ABUSES.
THE legitimate uses of blackboard illustrations in Sabbath-school may be many and various, but the one all-important use is that of gaining and holding the attention to what the teacher is presenting. True, the teacher must rely mainly on word-pictures; yet a little timely assistance from the crayon or the pencil is often valuable. Lessons for children, on whatever subject, should be mainly narrative. Children appreciate a truth much better when brought out in a narrative than they do when it is presented in any other way. Their love for story-telling is given them by a Creator who knows how to adapt means to an end. Hence it is that children receive more moral and spiritual culture from the stories of the Bible than they do from its precepts.
Curiosity and imagination are especially active in childhood; and whoever would hold the attention of a child must give room for the exercise of those faculties on the subject he is presenting, or they will immediately fall into employment on some other subject. A healthy child can be made to see, in imagination, all the scenes and surroundings of a narrative almost as clearly and vividly as though they were presented to him in vision. How important, then, that the first presentation of a subject be as nearly perfect as possible; since first impressions are lasting, and can seldom be effaced or changed. I would recommend, therefore, that a lesson for small children be first presented by the teacher, or by some person equally skillfull, and studied afterward.
To this end the teacher might devote the first part of the time to the recitation of the lesson that had been studied during the week, and the last part of it to teaching the lesson that is to be studied during the coming week, and recited the next Sabbath. In some cases it might be better to take the time of "general exercise," and present the lesson to an entire division.
Teaching a lesson is very different from hearing a lesson. In teaching a lesson, the first thing is to get the lead of all the minds in your class,—to get them all to think and talk about some one thing, and then to follow you from one thing to another until you come directly upon the subject of the lesson. This is generally best done by means of questions, and does not usually require more than a minute or two. Strike in somewhere, and ask a question that will be sure to bring an answer; let that answer determine what the next question shall be; and so on.
The drawing should proceed no faster than the story. Thus the curiosity of the class is all the while in exercise, not only to know what you are going to tell next but also to see what you are going to make next. In order not to take too much time, the drawing must necessarily be very rude; but the quick imagination of the children will make up great deficiencies. A lady who was teaching about the battle with the Amalekites, remarked, after having drawn Moses, Aaron, and Hur on the top of the hill, "Now the armies fought on this plain, but there were so many men that I cannot make them," when the children at once cried out, "We'll help you; straight marks will do well enough for men." So the little hands went to work, and in a few seconds the plain was covered with men "armed to the teeth, and ready for fight." When she came to tell how the Amalekites were beaten, and fled, she said, "We cannot make these men run," when one of the children immediately replied, "Rub 'em out, and that'll show that they've gone!"
Be careful not to draw too much; just enough to keep the attention, and stimulate the imagination. Remember that the object to be gained is to cause the children to see the events as though they were really taking place before their eyes at the moment. Thus when you come to review, a series of pictures, or rather scenes, will present themselves in succession, until by and by the learner can call up the entire drama of sacred history from Genesis to Revelation.
No picture made beforehand, be it ever so fine, can so well answer the purpose as this off-hand work; for in that case the child's curiosity is at once satisfied; and his imagination, if it works at all, will be employed on plans reaching beyond your present purpose, and foreign to what you wish to teach. Sometimes, however, the principal features of a landscape may be drawn beforehand, and the events to be represented upon it be illustrated while teaching the lesson.
The necessary skill on the part of the teacher will soon be acquired by those who are earnest and enthusiastic in the work. Success depends more upon invention than upon execution. Those who are original and inventive soon learn to execute.
Be careful not to let your drawing take the place of talking. Remember that you must depend mainly upon the tongue, rather than the hand. The latter must serve the former. Crayon marks are a poor substitute for the subtle power of language, which cannot only make the strongest pictures, but at the same time give them a coloring that will move the affections and touch the hidden springs of action. Do not, then, give up talking for the sake of drawing, but use the latter to allure wandering minds, and bring them where your words may take full effect.
With reference to the abuses, or misuses, of illustrations, it may be sufficient to say that whenever they serve merely to excite curiosity or admiration; whenever they serve to draw the attention to the skill of the performer, or his aptness in getting curious combinations of words or figures; or whenever they tend in any way to divert the mind from the leading theme of the lesson, they seem to be turned from their natural use; and there is danger that while they accomplish a small good, they will do a greater harm.—G. H. B., in S. S. Worker.
Speaking the Truth in Love
“SPEAKING the truth in love” is a duty enjoined upon us by the apostle. There are some unpleasant truths that sometimes must be told, but they should not be rendered still more unpleasant by the manner of telling them.—Sel.
American Sunday-School Union Work
DURING the year closing March 1, the missionaries of the American Sunday-school Union in the northwest district established 471 new Sunday-schools, and brought 1,796 teachers and 15,466 scholars into them. They also aided old schools in 1,378 cases, where there were 7,411 teachers and 68,447 scholars. They distributed 4,950 Bibles and Testaments, held 2,492 meetings, labored 8,121 days, traveled 143,259 miles, and visited 10,970 families. Four years ago there were sixteen mountain counties of Kentucky that contained but a single school; now there are in those sixteen counties 323 Sunday-schools, with several resultant churches, very largely due to the Union's work. The grand total of the American Sunday-school Union's work for the three-score years of its activity, represents over seventy-six thousand Sunday-schools founded, into which 3,192,179 scholars have been gathered.—Sel.
THE “fight,” not a battle, but a game or public contest. “I have striven in the good game” would be a nearly literal rendering of the clause. The apostle had in mind the Greek games, which comprised foot-races, chariot-races, wrestling, boxing, and the pancratium or rough-and-tumble contest. The Olympian games were a spectacle for the whole Greek nation. Only freemen were allowed to be present, and of these only those who had not been branded with dishonor by the State, and who had not incurred the wrath of the gods. In addition, those who were about to contend, had to prove that they were of pure Greek blood, and had undergone the prescribed training. The contest was one in which there was a free field and no favor. The competitors were arranged by lot, and when the contest commenced, each man knew that the eyes of all free-born Greece were upon him, and that the silent, purple-robed judges were watching every success and every failure. The signal to commence was given by the judges, after an address in which they exhorted each competitor to struggle nobly and manfully.
The only prize given to the victor was the crown of wild olive. Triumphal palms were also placed in his hands. But the victor won undying fame, in the records of Greece, not only for himself, but for his parents and his native place, whose names were proclaimed to all Greece. And when he returned home, he was welcomed with a triumphal procession, and with songs of victory.
Perhaps there is a touch of sarcasm in Paul's words: “A crown of righteousness.” If we may trust Pausanias, competitors were often detected in attempts at bribery of fellow competitors, for the purpose of winning the crown for themselves. The crown which awaits Paul is not one gained in this manner. It is one which the just Judge shall give, who sees and knows all.—Sel.
Sunday-Schools in Bohemia.
It appears that Bohemia contained just one Protestant Sunday-school in the year 186. In the next dozen years, nine more were opened; and it is only during the last four years that the schools have rapidly multiplied, until they now number 131, with 342 teachers and 4,000 children. The need of lesson helps for lesson-study is felt in Bohemia even more than elsewhere, because there the schools, being to an exceptional degree schools of the common people, taught by many who have had but slight education, and who are consequently in constant want of suggestion and instruction, lose in interest and power when the lesson papers cease to circulate. The Bohemian language is spoken by seven millions of people, yet it thus far contains no Bible dictionary, no Bible atlas, no Bible concordance, and only an antiquated and meager Bible commentary,—facts which again add to the importance of the lesson periodicals, to which teachers must, of course, look for needed information, inaccessible elsewhere.—Sel.
Knowing Your Scholars' Ignorance.
TEACHERS who live in homes fragrant with the atmosphere of Christianity, where, with their earliest breath, they received religious impressions, find it difficult to realize the dense ignorance of pupils who have grown up without Christian teaching.
Some time ago, a lady took charge of a primary class in a mission school in New York. The children intrusted to her care were bright, quick-witted people, belonging to the tenement-house population, mostly of foreign origin, but, like all children in the city, talking English. But not one child in a class of forty-six could tell her who Jesus was, nor seemed to have the faintest idea concerning him, though questioned with the utmost care. They were not afraid of their teacher, and spoke with great willingness on many other subjects, but were utterly ignorant with regard to the Saviour. Finally, one little boy—a beautiful, curly-haired child—held up his hand and said, "Teacher, I know what Jesus is!"
"That is good," said the teacher. "I knew that some one could tell us. Well, what is Jesus?"
Said the little boy, "It's swearing!" The only use which he knew of that name was in an oath! The lady was so touched by his answer, and its revelation, that she could scarcely teach more on that day. The next week she tried to tell them about Jesus, and taught them to repeat, over and over again, this sentence, "Jesus came to save us from suffering and sin," until every child knew it. On the Sunday after, she asked, "What did Jesus come for?" and one little girl answered, "He came to cry for poor little children." That was the way she understood it, and that was something, to know that there was one who could feel for her.
This was more than a year ago. At Christmas time, not one of the children could tell her anything more about Christmas than "They hang up greens!" They did not know what the greens, nor the gifts, nor the star, were intended to symbolize. But they have learned all about it since, under the earnest instruction of that enthusiastic teacher. At last Christmas, every child not only received the symbol-gift of a star, but could tell the story of Bethlehem, and they knew well who Jesus is and for what he came.
We cannot place at too low a measure our estimate of many children's knowledge of sacred truths. We cannot be too careful nor too simple in telling the story of the gospel, nor can we repeat it too often.—The Study.