International Tract and Missionary Society · Oakland, California · Oct 6, 1887
General Articles.
By Mrs. E. G. White
THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD.
BY MRS. E. G. WHITE.
"Ye are," says Christ, "the light of the world." As the sun goes forth upon its errand of mercy and love, as the golden beams of day flood the canopy of heaven and beautify forest and mountain, awakening the world by dispelling the darkness of night, so the followers of Christ should go forth upon their mission of love. Gathering divine rays of light from the great Light of the world, they should let them shine forth in good works upon those who are in the darkness of error.
Do you, my brethren and sisters, realize that you are the light of the world? Do you, in your words and deportment at home, leave a bright track heavenward? What is it to be the light of the world? It is to have God for your guide, to have the companionship of holy angels, and to reflect to others the light that shines upon you from above. But if you fail to exercise Christian courtesy, forbearance, and love in your families, God and holy angels are grieved away; and instead of being the light of the world, you are bodies of darkness.
It is possible, through the grace of Christ, to have control over yourselves at all times. If a dear friend, one whose good opinion you greatly desired, should come into your home, you would not be found fretting and scolding; but you would control your words and actions, and would seek in every way to so conduct yourselves as to gain his respect and confidence. Shall we take more care in the presence of a comparative stranger than in the presence of those who are dear to us by the ties of nature; or in the presence of Jesus and heavenly angels? God forbid; for by so doing we fail to meet the claims of high Heaven upon us.
It is not the will of God that we should be gloomy or impatient; nor that we should be light and trifling. It is Satan's studied plan to push persons from one extreme to the other. As children of the light, God would have us cultivate a cheerful, happy spirit, that we may show forth the praises of him who hath called us out of darkness into his marvelous light. A lady once lived in our family nine years, and during all this time we did not hear an impatient word or a light expression from her lips; and yet she was the most cheerful person I ever saw. Hers was not a life of darkness and gloom, nor of lightness and frivolity. In this respect our lives should be like hers. God would not have us live under a cloud, but as in the light of his countenance.
Some are naturally of a reticent disposition; a smile is seldom seen upon their faces, and they seem more like statues than human beings. Such should open their hearts to the Sun of righteousness, and gather precious rays of light from Jesus, that they may reflect them to others. God wants you, brethren and sisters, to have this light in your hearts, and then you will be channels of light wherever you are. Like the sunflower, which turns its face constantly toward the sun, you must look continually toward the Source of light, that you may catch every ray possible.
Many who profess to be followers of Christ are as worlds without the sun. If these would leave their darkness and unbelief, and press forward in faith, they would become light in the Lord. Who would think of distrusting a dear friend who promised that if we would follow him he would lead us safely through the darkest forest? Much less ought we to doubt the word of Jesus, who has said, "He that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life." He will not leave those who trust in him to fall under the temptations of Satan. This is not his way of dealing with his children: He has promised to lift upon them the light of his countenance.
The law of God is made void in the land, but here is a little company who have come out from the world and are standing in defense of that law. To these Jesus says, "Ye are the light of the world." Now, suppose that you keep your minds dwelling upon self and your darkness; how can you be the light of the world? You keep yourselves in darkness by looking at your own imperfections, instead of the willingness and power of Jesus to save to the uttermost all that come unto him in faith. You hug your darkness so close that there is no chance for the light to get in.
I want to say to those who have been desponding, When Satan comes in to tempt you, and you have no evidence that the Lord accepts you, do not look to see how dark you are, but look up to the light. Begin to praise God for the plan of salvation, and hold every victory gained through Christ. As you repeat the confidence you have in Jesus, Satan will flee; for he cannot bear the name of Jesus. Thus, step by step, you can fight the good fight of faith. Remember that Jesus has borne long with you, and he does not want you to be lost. He says, "Behold, I stand at the door, and knock. If any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me." By this he shows that he wants to take possession of your hearts.
Satan may tell you that you cannot be blessed; but Jesus says that he will come in, if you will open the door of your hearts. Which will you believe? Here is another precious promise that all may claim. It is not addressed to those who are perfect, but to sinners; to those who have wandered away from Christ. "Seek ye the Lord while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near. Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; and let him return unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon." Is there one who dares not claim this promise? Is there one who will say, "I am so sinful that this does not mean me"? Put away such thoughts. Christ will accept you, polluted by sin though you may be, if you will come to him with contrition of soul. He invites all to come into the light of his presence. Then why should you remain away?
The word of God says, "Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you." It will require an effort on your part to walk with God. Jesus said to the man with the withered hand, "Stretch forth thine hand." The afflicted man might have said, "Lord, I have not used it for years; heal it first, and then I will stretch it forth." But instead of this, when Jesus commanded him to stretch it forth, he exercised the power of his will, and moved it just as if it were well. The very exercise of the will power was evidence to Jesus that the man believed; and his hand was healed in the act of stretching it forth. God would have you put away your darkness, and show that there is a power in the Christian religion that there is not in the world. He wants to make you all light in him; he610wants to fill your hearts with love, and peace, and hope. If, then, you continue to cling to your darkness, you dishonor him; for you do not correctly represent to the world a sin-pardoning Saviour. If you are gloomy, desponding, hopeless, you are a poor representative of the Christian religion. Christ died for all. The sacrifice was complete. It is your privilege and duty to show to the world that you have an entire, all-powerful Saviour. It was the Son of the infinite God who died to purchase a full and free salvation for all that would accept it. Then why not take him as your Saviour? He rebukes your unbelief; he honors your faith.
(To be continued.)
"LORD, CAREST THOU NOT THAT WE PERISH?"
O Lord, we perish! Dost thou, then, not care
That the wild waves should o'er thy children
sweep?
Oh, faithless hearts, was he not with you there,
And thought ye He could perish in the deep?
And, lo! he dwelleth with his loved ones still,
Though weak and erring oft they seem to be;
For well he knows all this world's boasted skill
Shall fail to guide them o'er life's stormy sea.
Oh, Christian! of one thing alone make sure,
That Christ is with thee; then speed on thy way;
Thy bark, though frail, shall every storm endure,
For He is there whom wind and wave obey.
—Selected.
WHAT ERROR DRIVES MEN TO.
By Editor
It is a trite saying that "murder will out." And so it is. Sooner or later error will betray itself. In its defense its deformity appears. Since the Sabbath question has come up, and begun to attract the attention of the people, a class of religionists has arisen, advocating the abolition of the law of God. Sabbatarians, from the first, have claimed that this position has been taken, not from a sincere belief that the law itself is bad, but simply to avoid a plain duty enjoined in the law,—that of keeping the only day God has owned and blessed,—and that because they can find no place in the Scriptures where the Sabbath law by itself has been annulled. Like Herod in destroying all the children of Bethlehem to destroy Christ, they have sought to dispose of all the law that is in any way connected with the Sabbath in order to get rid of that institution. But we firmly believe that the Sabbath will escape, as did the Saviour, any such wholesale slaughter. Our attempted Sabbath-destroyers will have to employ weapons upon which finer sight can be taken, or they may rest assured that they will "miss the mark."
Recently two of the international Sunday-school lessons have been directly upon the ten commandments. To follow in the wake, our antinomian friends have taken up the same subject in their Sunday-school Quarterlies, two lessons appearing upon the commandments. They are thus given an excellent opportunity to freely express themselves, and show to the world their honest convictions and real attitude toward God's ten words. Of course, we would expect their Quarterlies to teach just what they, as a people, really believe in regard to the commandments, as the instructions given in them are intended for their own children and people.
Were we to anticipate what their teachings would be, we should expect, to be consistent with their positions taken in debate, that the instructions would start out by relegating the decalogue to the past under such appellations as "yoke of bondage," "abolished," "taken out of the way," and "nailed to the cross." But imagine our surprise, upon looking over the June number of the Christian Sunday-school Teacher, to find such expressions as these: "The law of God;" "I must fear God and obey his words;" "The first table of the law, which came before us last Sunday, defines our duties to God; the second table defines our duties to each other. Both must be kept. The divine law has never been repealed;" "the keeping of these will make all society pure and good."
Think of antinomians teaching the rising generation that the ten commandments are "the law of God"! Think of their making the astonishing statement that these commandments have "never been repealed;" and of the still more astonishing statements that they "define our duties," and they "must be kept"! What can all this mean? Have they changed their position? This is just what Seventh-day Adventists teach, and yet this people assert that they have the only theory that can successfully overthrow Seventh-day Adventism. How can they overthrow it, and take the same position? Belligerent armies usually draw up their forces and point their guns in opposite directions. It must be that our Disciple friends wheel around and take another position when they attempt to overthrow the aforesaid ism. And this we find to be the case. A very different story do we hear about the law when the Sabbath question is up. Perhaps we can better appreciate the wide disparity between the teachings of their Sunday-school works and the arguments resorted to in their anti-Sabbath works, by comparing a few statements from each touching the same points.
ANTI-SABBATH WORKS.
They [S. D. Adventists] affirm that there are two laws—one the ceremonial, and the other the moral law. This is bald assumption. Where can we find this distinction of moral and ceremonial laws?—F. Walden, in the Sabbath Question, p. 22.
Neither of these (the two great commandments. Matt. 22:37, 39) is to be found in the decalogue, and yet they were chief. That is not all; a man might observe every one of the ten, and not keep either one of these.—D. R. Dungan, in Sabbath or Lord's Day, p. 34.
The decalogue was written on tables of stone, by the finger of God. But what has that to do with its perpetuity?—D. R. Dungan, in Sabbath or Lord's Day, p. 33.
The law of which the Sabbath was a part was done away in Christ.—D. R. Dungan, in Sabbath or Lord's Day, p. 38.
Now to my mind, the question resolves itself into this: Are we now under the law of which the Sabbath was a part, or is the Sabbath now binding on Christians? For certain it is, if we are to keep the Sabbath, then we are bound to observe the seventh day of the week.—D. R. Dungan, in Sabbath or Lord's Day, p. 7.
The Sabbath reminded the Jews of their bondage in Egypt.—F. Walden, in the Sabbath Question, p. 38.
SUNDAY-SCHOOL WORKS.
No reader of the Pentateuch can fail to mark the fact that a special importance belonged to the commandments. They were spoken directly by the voice of God, . . . while the other precepts bearing on things civil or ceremonial were communicated through Moses.—Standard Bible Lesson Quarterly, p. 129.
The first four are summed up in the golden text of that lesson; the second table of six, in the golden text of this lesson. (Golden texts: Matt. 22:37, 39.)—The Bible Student, p. 176.
They were written on two tables of stone by the finger of God, thus indicating that they were designed for permanence.—Standard Bible Lesson Quarterly, p. 129.
The divine law has never been repealed. The decalogue is the basis of human law,—"the common law," the world over.—Christian Sunday-school Teacher, p. 183.
The first table of the law, which came before us last Sunday, defines our duties to God; the second table defines our duties to each other. Both must be kept.—Christian Sunday-school Teacher, p. 183.
God speaks, and I must hear;
God calls, I must obey;
Him I serve, and him alone,
All idols put away.
His name I must revere,
And never lightly speak;
His holy day I must observe,
The best of all the week.
—Primary Quarterly, p. 67.
Our God is a royal God, requiring of men the tribute of one day in seven for his service. With a proper keeping of this day are linked the best interests of both society and individuals.—Christian Sunday-school Teacher, p. 178.
To the Jews, the seventh day was a Sabbath—or rest, reminding them of God's rest from the work of creation.—Standard Bible Lesson Quarterly, p. 133.
Sunday-School Lessons and God’s Sabbath
By William A. Colcord
The above extracts are all written by the same people and from works most of which are published by the same house, the Christian Publishing Co., 913 Pine St., St. Louis, Mo. Is it not a little strange that when getting up Sunday-school lessons they can plainly see the distinction between the moral and ceremonial laws; that the ten are “summed up” in the two great commandments; that their being written by God on tables of stone indicated that they were designed for “permanence;” that these have “never been repealed,” but define, not simply the duty of the ancient Jew, but “our duties,” the duties of Christians—converted Gentiles; and that the “royal God,” by virtue of that same law, requires of men, down here in 1887 A. D., the “tribute of one day in seven,” which commemorates “God’s rest from the works of creation” and not deliverance from Egyptian bondage; but that when they make an attack on God’s Sabbath, these things all at once become so obscure, nay, even false? Is it not indeed strange?
What explanation can be made for this diverse and twofold handling of the word of God? The only one that seems possible is that in one instance they are teaching the young what they believe to be good and right, and in the other they are seeking to avoid a plain duty, and to defend a practice based on Papal assumption and a commandment and doctrine of men, to do which they find it necessary to tear down that which they build up and find to be wholesome teaching in the Sunday-school. It needs no argument to show the inconsistency of such a course. A house divided against itself must fall. We presume that it is as difficult to be on both sides of the fence at once now as ever, and those who attempt it only show the dire extremity and desperate lengths to which their false theory drives them. We are reminded of the language of the psalmist: “The heathen are sunk down in the pit that they made; in the net which they hid is their own foot taken.” Ps. 9:15.
So it ever is. A wrong premise invariably leads to a wrong conclusion. One error demands others to support it. Truth never calls for such assistance, but rears a structure of polished stones quarried from the mine of truth, beautiful, symmetrical, and grand. Error seeks to hide its deformity; truth invites the closest scrutiny.
"Truth crushed to earth will rise again;
The eternal years of God are hers;
But error, mangled, writhes in pain,
And dies amid its worshipers."
—W. A. Colcord, in Review and Herald.
GOOD AND BAD CONSCIENCES.
WHEN Peter and John were commanded by the Jewish rulers "not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus," they promptly replied: "Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye. For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard." When these apostles, having disobeyed the command of these rulers, were called to account by them for so doing, they again replied: "We ought to obey God rather than men." Saul of Tarsus, on the other hand, thought that he "ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth," and he did so, not only persecuting his followers in Jerusalem, but pursuing them "even unto strange cities."611Here are certainly two different consciences, leading to opposite courses of action; and the point of their divergence from each other is not in the rightful supremacy of conscience in either case, and not in adherence to what conscience required. Peter and John obeyed their conscience; and Saul of Tarsus obeyed his conscience. The difference between them
consists in the fact that Peter and John had correct consciences, according to the truth and the requirements of God, and that Saul had an incorrect conscience, contrary to the truth and the law of God. Saul had a false conscience. What he thought that he ought to do was sinful in the highest degree; and this fact he afterward freely admitted, and for it he bitterly condemned himself. He did not excuse his conduct or deny its sinfulness on this ground. He spoke of himself as the chief of sinners, because he persecuted the church of God.
It is not enough then simply to obey conscience. That conscience must be correct in what it requires, and must then be obeyed. A man is as really bound to have a right conscience as he is to obey conscience. He cannot excuse a wicked act, or change its nature, by a false conscience. The act is what it is, independently of his conscience; and it is his duty to see it in its true light. Human obligation reaches to right thinking as preliminary to right action. "Woe unto them," says the prophet Isaiah, "that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness, that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!"—Independent.
IF NOT THE LAW, WHAT OF THE PROPHECIES?
By C. E. Walker
THIS is an age of skepticism. Men are willing to let go truth and embrace error if truth is unpleasant to them. The Unitarian un-faith finds a response in many un-Unitarian minds, especially as pertaining to the Old Testament law.
I believe in the "Bible, Old and New Testaments, as the word of God." I am called a fanatic on a good many questions and do not care if the learned world "smiles" for my firm belief in the Old Testament. If I must surrender the law, I cannot keep the promises. If there is no rule of life for man, how may he know how to live? (I speak of the moral law and not of the ceremonial law, which prefigured Christ.)
Law is a rule of life. Then I believe that the law has its existence in the very relation between man and God, and man and man. When Moses received the tables from God with the "Thou shalt not's" to engrave upon the door-posts and upon the minds of men, it was not the first existence of those laws with their tremendous penalties attached.
If the foregoing be correct, then it will not be necessary to spend time and space to prove that the moral law was not given to the Jews alone. Verily it must be that the law was, and is, for all who need the law. Take, as proof, Christ's statement concerning the Sabbath: "The Sabbath was made for MAN." No limit. And for the Jew to violate the seventh commandment could be no worse than for the Gentile. As further proof that the God of the Jew and Gentile alike (Rom. 3:29) made a law (in the nature of the creation of the human family, we take it) which was binding, whether written or unwritten, we will quote from Paul, Rom. 4:15, "Where no law is there is no transgression." Rom. 5:13, "Sin is not imputed when there is no law." The conclusion drawn from these quotations is that if there was at any time no law there could be no sin at such time. But read Rom. 3:23, "All have sinned." Death is the consequence of sin, and in Rom. 5:14 we read that "death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression." These sinned, though not as Adam did. They broke other laws. Therefore we must agree that the law existed before and after the flashes of lightning around old Sinai.
But it is argued that "Christ is the end of the law." Rom. 10:4. True, "for righteousness to everyone that believeth." When a soul sanctified (the "old man with his deeds" removed), filled with the Holy Ghost, and thus robed in the righteousness of Christ, "goeth about doing good," there is no law-breaking done by that soul. A man does not sin while filled with the Holy Spirit, inasmuch as God cannot lead into sin, and Christ has thereby become "the end of the law for righteousness" to him that "is righteous even as he [Christ] is righteous." 1 John 3:7.
"The law was our school-master to bring us unto Christ." Gal. 3:24. The seeker to-day who finds Christ, finds him by reason of the fact that there is a law with a terrible penalty; he has violated the law and must meet the penalty unless a Saviour can interpose for him. He feels condemned and that justly, believing the law reasonable and righteous, and, repenting, implores the Father to give him Christ.
I think, with Paul, "we establish the law." Rom. 3:31. I also think that if you wrest from me my Old Testament with it you may take the New. In the New Testament I read of the historic Christ; in the Old Testament I read of the Messiah of prophecy. As I look upon the historic Christ, I know him, because he is just like the Christ of the prophets, and I can see the truth of the one by the statements of the other. Christ Jesus said he came to fulfill the law and the prophets, but not to abolish the commands he himself had given, nor to make of none effect the prophecies concerning himself.
I love the Bible for various reasons: It is the word of God, and reveals my origin, tells where I am, where I may go, and how I may get there. From Genesis to Revelation inclusive, it shows me "the way, the truth, and the life." Then, skeptics, remove your hands from that sacred Book; tear not from it a single leaf, nor allow a finger-print to soil it. Beware how you mouth it. It is God's word, and is not only precious to the thirsty soul but terrible to the unbeliever and to the ruthless hand.—Rev. C. E. Walker, in Christian Cynosure.
ABOUT THE NEW PREACHER.
“How do you like Brother Jones?”
This was what Solomon Smith asked me, I having accepted his invitation to go and hear the new preacher in Smithville. I replied that I liked him very much, for he preached an earnest, gospel sermon.
“But did you see how awkward he was? Why, he knocked the hymn-book off the pulpit with one of his clumsy gestures. And then he said, ‘you oughter,’ and ‘them folks that does so,’ and used any amount of bad grammar. You did not like that, did you?”
“Of course not. But in spite of those little infelicities of manner and style, he is a grand preacher, and I will tell you why. First of all, he don't preach himself. He seems to forget all about himself. He talks and acts like an ambassador who has been sent on a mission, or who claims attention, not in his own name, or by reason of any skill that he has in presenting his message, but on account of the message itself, and the dignity and claims of the sender. There is nothing so trying to me as self-consciousness in the pulpit. Better any awkwardness than that. In the second place, I like Mr. Jones because he believes in God. You can see that, especially in his prayers. He talks with God just as Abraham did when he stood before him pleading for Sodom. He evidently realizes
that the church is God's house, and that God himself is there in some special manner, to welcome his people, and to hear what they have to say to him. Such prayers make me feel that I am at Peniel, standing by Jacob as he wrestles with the angel of the Lord. It is a great thing, I tell you, for a preacher to have such faith in God's presence as Mr. Jones has, to be able to stand before a congregation so absorbed in communion with God that he forgets all else in the fervor of his devotion.
“I like Mr. Jones, in the third place, because he believes that all men are sinners, and is not afraid to tell them so. How plain and emphatic, and how tender and loving, was his statement ‘that the whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint!’ I tell you, Solomon, unless a preacher is thoroughly orthodox on depravity, he wouldn't do much good. You must make men realize that they are sick before they will apply to a physician. You must convince them of sin before you can get them to welcome a Saviour.
“My fourth reason for liking Mr. Jones is that he believes in the Bible. He is constantly appealing to the law and the testimony. His sermon bristled with quotations. They were not from the theologians, or from the poets, but from the word of God. When he found a ‘Thus saith the Lord’ for anything he was satisfied, and insisted that his hearers ought to be. I am sick of this modern rationalistic style of preaching. We don't want in the pulpit messages from men, but messages from God. I like to hear a preacher who speaks with authority, because he speaks the words of his Master and mine.
“My fifth reason for liking Mr. Jones as a gospel preacher is that he evidently believes in the assurance of faith. He thinks that, if people are converted, they ought to know it, and be happy in the knowledge. He has no patience with the moping, sighing sort of Christians who hope that they have a hope. He evidently knows in whom he has believed, and is persuaded that God is able to keep him, and he thinks that we all ought to have the same knowledge and persuasion.
“I have many more reasons for liking Mr. Jones, but I will give you only one of them now. He is as indignant as Paul was with the Christians who continue in sin that grace may abound. He believes in our showing our faith by our works. He believes that if we love a holy God, we will want to be like him. He believes that we ought to be pressing toward the mark for the prize of our high calling, that we ought to work out our salvation with fear and trembling, to perfect holiness in the fear of God. I tell you, Solomon, we have too many philosophical preachers, too many poetic preachers, too many dramatic and pictorial preachers; what we need in this age of abounding worldliness is plain, earnest, pungent, gospel preaching. And when I hear a man in the pulpit who speaks as if God had sent him to try to save a perishing world, I don't criticise his grammar, or his gestures—I honor him as an ambassador of my Lord.”—Occident.
God Our Last Resource
How often do we look upon God as our last and feeblest resource! We go to him because we have nowhere else to go. And then we learn that the storms of life have driven us, not upon the rocks, but into the desired haven.
Resisting Temptation Through Trust
By Short Arrows
In yielding to one temptation, the way is opened for so many. Nothing will serve us day by day but a humble trust in Him who is able to keep us from falling, and striving to watch as well as pray.—Short Arrows.
BREAD AND BUTTER STUDY IN GERMANY.
By Rev. J. H. W. Stuckenberg
The State appoints the theological as well as the other professors, and there is no guarantee that they will be fair representatives of the spirit of the church, or will devote their efforts to promote its life. Rationalism, pantheism, evolutionism, Ritschelism, and the various shades of orthodoxy, may be represented in the same theological faculty. This state of things is maintained in the interest of what is called scientific freedom, and finds favor even among the orthodox. There is now, however, a strong tendency to secure for the church more power in the appointment of theological professors.
The choice of theology on the part of students is much on the same ground as that of the other professions. Conversion and an ardent desire to promote the cause of Christ are not regarded as essential. It is called a “bread and butter study,” and is frequently pursued because the parents have chosen it, or because it promises a livelihood. The course of theological students at the university is often the reverse of that expected in America. Many are experts at dueling, beer drinking is, of course, common, and the life in general is characterized by the freedom prevalent among German students. One need but know the facts in order to appreciate an address to a ministerial conference in this city by Rev. Braun, on the need of a converted ministry. The address produced a sensation. The author was not only himself keenly aroused to the importance of the subject, but he had also received a number of letters emphasizing the need of its discussion.—Rev. J. H. W. Stuckenberg, of Berlin, in the Homiletic Review.