Your ShelfYour Projects

Review and Herald, Vol. 29, No. 22.

The Sermon
Earlier text: The Sermon

Notes on Genesis.

CHAPTER vi, verse 4. There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
“Violent men of extraordinary stature and strength.” Dutch Ann., Heidegger, Dodd, Rosenm., Calmet, Assemb. Ann., Ainsworth, Patrick, Robertson, Bush, Brown, Orton. “The Greek and Latin historians and poets, and particularly Pliny, relate that there were giants in the first ages of the world; and record that, on opening sepulchers, bodies of men have been found of larger than modern size.”—Gleig.
Verse 14. Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch.
Gopher-wood.] “Cypress. So Calmet, Bochart, and Fuller, because of the similarity of names in the Heb. and Gr., the durability of the cypress, which was very fit for ship-building, and so used, and its abundance in Assyria where Noah built the ark. [So Heidegger.] Avenarius, Münster, Taylor, &c. think it was the pine, its relative gophrith signifying sulphur, brimstone, &c., and no wood produces so much of these as the pine. After all, gopher may be a general name for resinous trees. [So Vossius.]” Calmet, by Robinson.
Verse 15. And this is the fashion which thou shalt make it of: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits.
Ark.] “After the nicest examination and computation, and taking the dimensions with the greatest geometrical exactness, the most learned and accurate calculators, and persons most conversant with the building of ships, conclude, that if the ablest mathematicians had been consulted about proportioning the several apartments in the ark, they could not have done it with greater correctness than Moses has done:” thus this narrative confirms the authority of Scripture, since this accuracy of proportion, in Noah’s time, can be attributed only to inspiration.” Wilkins, Saurin.
“The proportion of the ark is that of the size of a rightly framed man.” Assemb. Ann. “If we reckon the cubit at 21 inches, the ark was 512 feet long, 87 wide, and 52 high; and the internal capacity, 357,600 cubical cubits. If the cubit was 18 inches, the length was 450 feet, width 75, and height 45. The height might be divided into four stories, allowing 3½ cubits to the first, 7 to the second; 8 to the third, and 5½ to the fourth; and allotting 5 cubits for the thickness of the top and bottom, and the floors. The first story, (not reckoned a story by Moses) might be the bottom, or hold, and contain fresh water; the second, a magazine; the third might contain the beasts; and the fourth the fowls.” Calmet. “As to the number of beasts, it is not necessary to suppose that each species now known was represented, for naturalists are generally of opinion that their number has greatly increased, from the influence of climate, food, intermixture of races, &c. Dr. A. Clarke suggests that the genera of animals only was meant; if so, the land animals necessary to be preserved in the ark will number 43 genera of the mammals, (543 species,) 74 genera of birds, (2372 species,) 10 genera of amphibia, 316 land species. [Or, according to Cuvier, about 70 genera of land beasts, (including 5 fossil genera,) and 109 of birds.] Calmet calculates that all the four-footed beasts, including 3650 sheep (if necessary for the food of the carnivorous animals,) would scarcely occupy more room than 120 oxen, 3730 sheep and 80 wolves; and that all the beasts might easily have been lodged in 36 stables, and all the birds in as many lofts, allowing each apartment to be 52½ feet in length, 29 in width, and 13½ in height. The hold might contain 31,174 bushels of water: there was ample room for a much greater number than entered the ark—and for chambers &c. for the family of Noah. ‘This,’ says Boothroyd, ‘Bp. Wilkins has proved, and that a first rate man of war would be capacious enough for the purpose.’ ‘Despite,’ says Rosenmuller, ‘as to the dimensions of the ark are vain, because measures vary so much with time.’”—Jenks.
“No fact that ever occurred in the world is so well attested as the deluge, both by natural and civil history.”—T. H. Horne.
“Heathen writers traditionally describe Noah under the various names of Xisuthrus, Saturn, [Annacus,] Prometheus, Deucalion, Ogyges, Liber or Bacchus, and Janus, &c. In the East the true name of Noah was better preserved; he was there called Noas, Naus, and sometimes contractedly Nous. Throughout the whole kindred family of languages, from India to us, the syllable Na or Nach is one of the fundamental sounds by which water and many ideas connected with it are designated, as navigate, &c. &c.” Calmet, by Rob. and Bryant’s Mythology.
“Of these traditions, that exhibited by Lucian is most correspondent to Moses.”—Jenks.
“The most ancient writers, as Berosus the Chaldean, Abydenus the Syrian, Molo, Jerome the Egyptian, Manæus, and Nicholaus of Damascus, as also Polybius, Lucian and Apollodorus have told of the ark, and the mountains on which it rested. Joseph Acosta and Antony Herrera relate, that traditions of the flood exist among the Cubans, Mexicans, and Nicaraguas. Augustine Corata and Lopez Gomera relate the same of the Peruvians and Mexicans. Martin Martinius states that the Chinese have the same story.” [“And the Brahmins also.” Gill.] Heidegger.
CHAPTER vii, verse 2. Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.
It is probable, that the clean beasts signify such as were not rapacious, and which were exclusively offered in sacrifice by the express appointment of God. The grant of animal food seems not to have been explicitly made before the flood; the distinction of meats could not therefore have been appointed.
Verse 7. And Noah went in, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons’ wives with him into the ark, because of the waters of the flood.
Sons’ wives.]—Though each of Noah’s sons was at this time nearly a hundred years old, and none had children living; and the whole earth was to be desolated: yet no exception, even on this extraordinary occasion, was made to the original constitution of marriage, ‘they twain shall be one flesh;’ a decisive proof that polygamy is contrary to the original institution of marriage, and not at all needful for the increase of the human species, or even conducive to it. Malte-Brun observes, ‘it diminishes population, and deteriorates the human race.’”—Scott*.
Verse 11. In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.
“Every attempt to explain the manner, in which the earth was overflowed, too much resembled the presumption of those who inquired, ‘How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?’ It is no more incredible that God should drown the world, than that he should raise the dead: and, by his almighty power, he caused ‘the waters from above the firmament, and the waters under the firmament,’ which he had before separated, to meet together for that purpose. The patriarchal year began in September.”—Scott.
Verse 19. And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.
“The highest eminence of the earth, every mountain of every region under heaven, where search has been made, all conspire in one uniform, universal proof, that they all had the sea spread over their summits; being found to contain shells, skeletons of fish, and sea-monsters of every kind.”—Greenfield.
“It must be recollected, that the highest mountain—of near 27,000 feet—is but as 5 to 8,000, compared with the diameter of the earth; that is, on a globe of 12 feet in diameter, the highest mountain would rise above the surface but a few lines.”—Jenks.
“Mr. Woodward supposes that the whole earth being dissolved in the waters, a new earth was formed, by different layers deposited according to their gravities. So that plants, and animals, particularly shell-fish, not being dissolved, were enclosed in minerals and became fossils; thus accounting for the shells found remote from the sea, and teeth, bones, petrified fishes, &c. found on the tops of mountains. See Robinson’s Calmet. Besides geological evidences, traditions and coins have preserved the memory of the deluge over the whole earth.”—Jenks.

A FEW LINES

By ANGELIA J. EDMUNDS.

For the Consideration of those who desire to be Christians.
We learn from the second chapter of James that “Faith without works is dead,” and the sacred writer teaches in the next chapter that we cannot be true Christians having much faith and good works, unless our conversation be ordered aright. “Who is a wise man and endued with knowledge among you? let him shew out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom.”
Let us see to it that we have a right feeling in our hearts toward our brethren and sisters when we attempt to add to knowledge temperance. The wisdom ye have descendeth not from above, “that is earthly, sensual, devilish,” “if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts. Glory not and lie not against the truth.” “But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.” If you have aught against a brother, or if you feel that a brother have aught against you, go in a humble manner and be reconciled, then come and offer thy gift. Attempt not to pray with a feeling of bitterness in your hearts. It will do you no good. Ask for strength to do duty. Jesus has clearly pointed out the way. “If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man, and able also to bridle the whole body.” “But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.” We must commence with the heart; for “from the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.” “But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation.”
It is possible for us to become holy; but we cannot in our own strength. “But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot,” that has been spilled for us on Calvary’s height, and now is being offered in the most holy place before his Father for poor sinners, we may, if we look with faith to him, become pure in heart, “laying aside all malice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings.”
We must be holy in all manner of conversation both at home and abroad. “Let the word of God dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord,” and while at home about your work, “speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your hearts to the Lord.”
I remember reading when I was quite small, about a father that told his children always to commence singing so soon as there was the least feeling of contention in their midst. This antidote worked like a charm. They could not sing and be angry at the same time. Let every family try it.
“Is any merry? let him sing psalms.” What a pleasant way for young folks who feel happy to spend a few hours together; but let them say in their hearts, “I will sing with the Spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.” Especially should the young watch and be sober. The prevailing spirit of the day is to make light all “manner of conversation.” They seem to forget that Jesus said “Let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay; for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.” It is in these days as it was in the days of Lot, who was “vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked; for that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds.” Paul says, “But fornication, and all uncleanness or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints; neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient, but rather giving of thanks.” “Young men likewise exhort to be soberminded, in all things shewing thyself a pattern of good works; in doctrine shewing uncorruptness, gravity, sincerity, sound speech that cannot be condemned; that he that is of the contrary part may be ashamed, having no evil thing to say of you.”
Can it be said that we use “sound speech” when every now and then some foolish by-word escapes our lips? “By thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.” Some young persons may say, When we are with unbelievers must we keep still and say nothing? You may find an answer in Col. iv. “Walk in wisdom toward them that are without, redeeming the time. Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man.” “Have salt in yourselves, and have peace one with another.” “Ye are the salt of the earth; but if the salt have lost its savor wherewith shall it be salted?”
My young friends, if there is danger of the salt losing its savor, go to your secret place where none but God can hear, three times a day if need be, and plead with Jesus for a new supply. He will not turn you empty away; but your Father who seeth in secret will reward thee openly.
Some of the young are looking to older ones. They say, “Bro. — jokes.” Perhaps the brother fills some responsible place in the church and should set a better example, or the blood of souls will be found on his garments in the last day. Oh! solemn thought! I would say to that young person, Let others do as they may, there is no excuse for you. Jesus is our pattern. “Let no man despise thy youth; but be thou an example of the believers in word, in conversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity.”
“Likewise ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives, while they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear.”
To all I would say, “Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; for He is faithful that promised; and let us consider one another to provoke unto love and good works; not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another, and so much the more as ye see the day approaching.” “Look up and rejoice knowing that your redemption draweth nigh.” Jesus is soon coming. Happy thought! Then, dear Christian, there will be no more trials and temptations; no more sighing, no more tears shed by you. When this earth is renewed, when she puts on her robes of Eden beauty, oh! how happy we shall be together roving over its extended plains without a thought of parting to shade the smiling brow! “Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God.” “Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace without spot, and blameless.”
ANGELIA J. EDMUNDS.
Ann Arbor, Mich.

The Commentary.

Tell me the meaning of Scriptures. One gem from that ocean is worth all the pebbles of earthly streams.—M'Cheyne.

Glorifying God.

By Editor

“Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.” Matt. v, 16.
These are the words of our Saviour in his Sermon on the Mount. A good comment on the expression “glorifying God,” as confined to the idea that those around us, even sinners, may be led to do this by seeing our good works, is found in Luke xxiii, 47:
“Now when the centurion saw what was done, he glorified God, saying, Certainly this was a righteous man.”
Here, the centurion, considering the character the Saviour had sustained, and the circumstances attending his death, was led to acknowledge that this was a righteous man; and in so doing he “glorified God.” So we are to let our good works be manifested in such a way as to compel all with whom we come in contact, to acknowledge that the religion of Christ is not a dead letter, but a vital principle, moulding the life of its possessor, leading to purity of heart, and the manifestation of every virtue in all the relations of life. And when we so live as to lead others to acknowledge this, even though they may have no saving interest in the religion which we thus honor, they glorify God, and we fulfill the instruction of the Saviour.—Ed.

Revelation xxi, 4.

“And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes: and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain; for the former things are passed away.”
The Greek word ponos, here translated pain, comprehends toil, fatigue and excessive labor of body, as well as vexation and anguish of spirit.

Appropriate Comment.

By G. W. A.

“And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares.” Luke xxi, 34.
The Family Bible, with notes, published by the American Tract Society, has the following appropriate reflection on the above passage:
“Excessive eating and drinking tend not only to produce various bodily diseases, but to blind the mind, stupify the conscience, and corrupt the heart. Christians should not indulge in these sins, which unfit them for the discharge of their duty, and prevent their being prepared for the coming of Christ.” G. W. A.

MORAL BLINDNESS.

By Roswell Fenner Cottrell

ONE of the greatest difficulties to be overcome in the work of human salvation, is moral blindness. If we could see things, and especially ourselves, in the true light, we could be induced to forsake our sins, correct our errors, and come to a saving knowledge of the truth. But our moral sense is perverted, especially in respect to our own depravity; and how can the remedy be applied to our heart and conscience, when we are ignorant of our disease and cannot see that we need anything done for us? The difficulty is that we think we are rich and healthy and have need of nothing, when in fact we are poor and miserable, and wretched, and blind, and naked.
Under such circumstances, what hope can there be of our recovery? A short time since I wrote in respect to the Health Reform:
Treat the body according to reason; and reason will dawn in the mind. But this led to reflections like these: How can men treat their bodies according to reason, while the reasoning powers are perverted, and can only be restored to moral action by thus treating the body? If men had clearness of mind, they would correct the abuses of the body; but these abuses have stifled the voice of reason and conscience. What hope then of a recovery?
I come to the conclusion, that in order to save men from their state of depravity, physical, mental and moral, they must be led, by some means, to have faith in the assurances that come to them from without, and be led to act upon the word of others. The literally blind trust in the eye-sight of others. If the mentally and morally blind only knew their true condition and could be induced to follow implicitly the directions of the True Witness, and those who have, by following the same, got their eyes enlightened by the use of the genuine eye-salve, there would be hope of the recovery of their sight.
Thus we come to the doctrine of salvation by faith. Without faith it is clear that human salvation is impossible. The morally blind cannot see their true state. The insane cannot of himself discover his insanity; and he can hardly be convinced of the fact. So it is with the morally blind. And those who need help the most—those who are the blindest are the last to be convinced that they need anything. The blindest fancy that they see the clearest. Hence it is that but a few of the race can be induced to use the divine eye-salve. And hence it is that those who are induced by faith, to use it, discover more and more, as their sight improves, how terribly blind they were.
The wicked, the blind, object to the plan of salvation, because it proposes to save so few; but the enlightened and recovered only wonder that any of such a vile race could be saved. “The wicked shall do wickedly, and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.”
Now, brethren, let us apply the subject to ourselves. Reproofs are given us to open our eyes that we may see. If instead of humbly receiving them, we find something in us that rises up against them, we may be sure that we need reproof, and that the only reason we do not see the need of it is that we are morally blind. “He that reproveth a scorner getteth to himself shame; and he that rebuketh a wicked man getteth himself a blot. Reprove not a scorner, lest he hate thee; rebuke a wise man, and he will love thee. Give instruction to a wise man, and he will be yet wiser; teach a just man, and he will increase in learning.” Prov. ix. 7-9. “A reproof entereth more into a wise man than a hundred stripes into a fool.” xvii, 10.
“The true Christian loves reproof. ‘Let the righteous smite me; it shall be as an excellent oil, which does not cause a sore head.’ He who enjoys communion with God is not too proudly self-conceited to bear blame and correction; while he keeps up honest prayer, he will let nothing sour him so but that he will welcome reproof from any source as an answer to his prayer for light; and as, in the enjoyment of true religion, he wishes to avoid all sin, he cannot be angry that any of his acts or neglects are blamed. Only ‘he that doeth evil hateth the light, and will not come to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved; but he that doeth truth cometh to the light.’”
If we can receive and profit by reproofs, there is a possibility that we may be saved; if not we are lost.
R. F. COTTRELL.

Weak Brethren.

By Editor

1. THERE are some brethren so physically weak, that they cannot raise their hand as high up as their pockets, and some not quite so weak but that they could do that, who are not able to lift it out again. 2. There are some brethren so weak from the labors of business, that they have not strength to walk to church on the Sabbath, and some not quite so weak, who can get there only once that day. 3. There are some so weak after the toils of the day, that they are not able to walk to prayer meeting; and then, again, others who can get there, are too weak to speak or pray. 4. There are some brethren so weak as to be unable to rise early enough to have family worship before business hours; then there are others, who do rise early, but are too weak to reach down the old family Bible. 5. There are some brethren so weak in talents that they are not able to teach a class in Sabbath School, but who are not quite so weak when a political meeting is on hand.—Ed.

SABBATH EVE.

By Mary House

The hallowed day of rest is here, With all its peace and quietude; E'en things inanimate appear, With a sweet influence imbued. Oh! that each spirit worn and pressed, May feel its mild persuasive power, And each emotion of the breast, Be peaceful as this sunset hour.
And in these hours of calm repose, We love to muse upon the plan, That matchless love and wisdom chose, To rescue erring, sinning man; And of the promise—if we tread, The thorny pathway Jesus trod, We shall be heirs with him, our Head, Adopted as the sons of God!
A few more days of conflicts here, Of stormy wind, and beating rain; A few more days of toil and care, Of disappointment, tears, and pain. And then if faithful we'll behold, The glory that for us awaits, The City's matchless charms untold, And enter through the open gates.
But time is passing: soon we meet, Within the house of God for prayer; Our Father, may thy Spirit sweet, Rest down on all that gather there. And as we strive to do thy will, Thy blessing grant as a reward; That strength into our hearts instill, That's promised when we serve the Lord.
And Father, may thy love attend, Our every step along the way, And back to thee our footsteps bend, If to the right, or left we stray. Prepare us, by thy grace to share, In the refreshing from the Lord; And fit us for those mansions where The saints shall see their great reward.
MARY HOUSE.
Battle Creek, Mich.

REMARKS.

On the reception of the foregoing note, we decided to look at some of the points mentioned, with the aid of such helps as we had at hand. The result of our investigations may be stated in brief as follows:
We find in the original but two words to denote the meals in use among the Jews, at the time the New Testament was written. These are ariston and deipnon. The first is uniformly rendered in the New Testament, dinner; and the second is rendered in every instance by the terms supper, or feasts. Both these words are rather indefinite in meaning. The first, ariston, is defined by different lexicographers as follows:
Robinson. “Breakfast, a morning meal, at sunrise (Homer). Later, breakfast, lunch, Lat. prandium, taken about the middle of the day; the principal meal being the deipnon, dinner, taken late in the afternoon or early in the evening, after the heat and business of the day were over, as at the present day in London and Paris.”
Liddell and Scott. “A morning meal, breakfast, twice in Homer, where it is taken at sunrise. Later, breakfast was called akrōtisma, and after it ariston was the midday meal, our luncheon.”
Parkhurst. “Ariston, indefinite, because taken at no certain time; or, rather from eri, early, because this meal was taken early in the morning.” Then he gives as the main definition, “Dinner, a meal eaten in the morning.”
Greenfield. “A meal, or slight refreshment, which among the Jews corresponded sometimes to our breakfast, and sometimes to dinner; being taken sometimes in the morning, or a little before noon, or a little after noon, as circumstances might vary.”
The other word, deipnon, usually translated supper, is defined by the same authorities as follows:—
Robinson. “In Homer, breakfast. In Attic writers and in New Testament, dinner or supper; i. e., the chief meal of the Jews, and also of the Greeks and Romans, taken toward, or at, evening, after the labors of the day were over, and often prolonged into the night. Hence a banquet, a feast in general.”
Liddell and Scott. “A meal, or meal time, used by Homer quite generally, sometimes as the equivalent of ariston, sometimes the same as dorpon. In Attic, certainly the chief meal, answering to our dinner, Latin, coena, begun toward evening, and often prolonged till night.”
Parkhurst. “Deipnon, so called from deisthai epi ponon, men’s wanting it for labor, or to enable them to labor. See Suicer’s Thesaurus on this word. 1. In Homer it generally denotes the breakfast, or morning meal, but sometimes food in general, even that which is taken toward evening. 2. In the latter Greek writers, as in the N. T., a supper, an evening meal, a feast.”
Greenfield. “A morning repast; dinner, Lat. prandium; in N. T. supper, the principal meal of the Hebrews, and taken by them in the evening.”
There is another word the definition of which we will here introduce as throwing some light on this subject, although it does not occur in the New Testament. That word is dorpon, and is defined by Liddell and Scott thus: “In Homer, the afternoon or evening meal, whether called dinner or supper. Lat. coena, the chief meal of the day. It is distinguished as the last of the three meals, ariston, deipnon, dorpon. But the name disappeared from Attic Greek, probably because at Athens it was customary to take only two regular meals, ariston, and deipnon, which latter took the place of dorpon.”
From these definitions the conclusion seems to be very apparent that but two meals a day were generally eaten by the ancients. The first, ariston, by universal consent, denotes a meal taken in the early part of the day. The second, deipnon, denotes the last meal of the day; but the hour at which it was eaten, is not so clear. Liddell and Scott say, “In Attic, certainly the chief meal, answering to our dinner.” This would bring it not far from the middle of the day, as the popular signification of the term dinner as given by Webster is, “The meal taken about the middle of the day; or the principal meal of the day eaten between noon and evening.” Robinson says it was taken “toward or at, evening.” This, considering that evening commenced with the Hebrews, at about 3 o’clock in the afternoon, would not necessarily bring it very late in the day. And Parkhurst says that the word deipnon finds its root in an expression signifying “men’s wanting it for labor, or to enable them to labor.” This is important as showing that the word primarily signified a meal eaten at such an hour as to supply strength for the completion of the labors of the day. This doubtless denotes the first and general character of the meal; for those instances where it was extended into the night were doubtless exceptions to, or corruptions of, the custom. We cannot suppose this latter to have been the general practice; for then it could not be explained why a word should have been taken to denote it, which has a meaning so very different.
In confirmation of this we find the following testimony in the Am. Tract Society’s Bible Dictionary. “The meals of the Jews were generally two, loosely distinguished as dinner and supper, Luke xiv, 12; John xxi, 12. The first meal was usually light, consisting of milk, cheese, bread or fruits, and eaten at various hours from early morning to the middle of the forenoon. In the early history of the Hebrews, the principal meal, corresponding with our dinner, was eaten about noon, Gen. xliii, 25; 1 Kings xx, 16. At a later period, at least on festive occasions, it was taken after the heat of the day was over. This was the ‘supper.’”

THE APPOINTED FAST.

By John Nevins Andrews

THE coming Sabbath has been designated as a fast, that the blessing of God may attend our General Conference, and rest upon our labors in his cause during the year. This is a well-timed act. But what is it to fast in such a manner that God will accept it? Fasting is an acknowledgment of sins, and a public profession of repentance. Those who suppose that a day spent in abstinence from food, and in public humiliation, will square the account of their past backslidings and lack of devotion to God, and that when that day is past they may with less danger than before live as they had been living, are the very persons to whom the prophet refers when he says:—
“Is it such a fast that I have chosen? a day for a man to afflict his soul? is it to bow down his head as a bulrush, and to spread sackcloth and ashes under him? wilt thou call this a fast, and an acceptable day to the Lord?” Isa. lviii, 5.
But did the prophet mean to condemn such acts as this in days of fasting and prayer? Far from it; for, one hundred and sixty years after this, we find Daniel, the man greatly beloved, fasting in precisely this way so far as outward forms are concerned, and God answered him in the most signal manner. See Dan. ix and x.
If we should insert the word “merely,” in the earnest expostulation of Isaiah, we should no doubt express the precise idea of the prophet. We should then have him ask the question: Does God accept that fast in which the sinner expresses great humiliation, and distress for his sins, but for all that when his fast is ended, continues in the same course of life? In other words is it MERELY to “bow down the head as a bulrush and to spread sackcloth and ashes under him?”
No indeed. Fasting is not only an acknowledgment of sins, but a solemn public profession of repentance, and a pledge in the sight of God and man, that we will from this time forth, and forever desist from those acts whereby the Spirit of God has been grieved from us. Fasting, like repentance, with which it is indeed inseparably connected, does not end with the days on which we thus humble ourselves in the sight of God and man. Those are the days in which we make our solemn vows, accompanied by suitable acts of self abasement; but the performance of these vows will require the most faithful action on our part, for the whole period of our lives.
Our coming fast is that we may humble ourselves in the sight of God, for all our backsliding from him, and all our sins in his sight. But let us remember that if we do not in our hearts solemnly promise God, while we thus fast, that we will hereafter desist from these sins, our fast is only a solemn mockery. And let us further remember that if we make this solemn promise, we must devote all our lives to its sacred fulfillment. SUCH a fast God will accept.
J. N. ANDREWS.

THE TWO LAWS.

By Dudley Marvin Canright

Many claim that the law of God has been abolished. They can read many passages that a law has been done away. Thus they claim that there was but one law in the Old Testament, hence it has all gone by the board. If there was but one law, their argument is sound. But this is a mistake. There are two laws brought to view in the Old Testament. 1. There is the law of God, the ten commandments. This was spoken by God himself, written with his own finger, on tables of stone, and placed in the ark. See Deut. xii, 13; Ex. xxiv, 12; Deut. x, 1–5. 2. The law of Moses. Moses himself spoke this law to the people, wrote it himself in a book and placed it in the side of the ark. Deut. i, 5, 6; xxxi, 9, 24–26. This distinction is preserved throughout the Old Testament. Thus in 2 Kings xxi, 8, “Only if they will observe to do according to all that I have commanded them, and according to all the law that my servant Moses commanded them.” Here is a plain distinction between the law that God commanded and the law that Moses commanded. Again Nehemiah ix, 13. “Thou camest down also upon Mount Sinai and spakest with them from Heaven, and gavest them right judgments and true laws, good statutes and commandments.” Here is a law that is called right, true, and good. It is said that God declared this law from mount Sinai. Now we read of quite a different law in Ezekiel xx, 24, 25. “Because that they had not executed my judgments, but had despised my statutes, and had polluted my Sabbaths, and their eyes were after their fathers’ idols, wherefore I gave them also statutes that were not good, and judgments whereby they shall not live.” Here is a law that is not good, and by which they could not live. This must be a different law from the one which is good, right, and true. The same distinction is preserved in the New Testament. Rom. vii, 7. “What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid; nay, I had not known sin, but by the law, for I had not known lust except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.” Here he quotes one of the ten commandments, showing what law he means. In verse 12, he says of this law, “the law is holy and the commandments are holy, and just and good.” Verse 14, he says, “the law is spiritual.” Verse 22, he calls it, “the law of God.” James ii, 9–12. James quotes two of the ten commandments and calls that law the “law of liberty;” hence, there is a law in the New Testament which is holy, just and good, a spiritual law, a law of liberty, the royal law, the law of God; and Paul said that he delighted in that law. We find also quite a different law in the New Testament. It is called the law of Moses. Acts xv, 5. “But there arose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees, which believed, saying, that it was needful to circumcise them and to command them to keep the law of Moses. Speaking of this law in verse 10, he says, “Now therefore why tempt ye God to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear.” Here this law of Moses is called a heavy yoke which none are able to bear. In Heb. vii, 14, we read of a law of a “carnal commandment,” and verse 19, says that this “law made nothing perfect.” It seems as though none could fail to see that these different characteristics do not belong to the same law. Now let us see what law is done away. In Ephesians xi, 15, we read, “Having abolished in his flesh the enmity even the law of commandments contained in ordinances for to make in himself of twain one new man so making peace.” So of the law of which Peter spoke, calling it the law of Moses, and saying it was a grievous yoke to bear. In Col. ii, 14, we read, “Blotting out the hand writing of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to the cross.” Here again the law which is done away, is very particularly described. 1. It is the law of hand writing. 2. It is the law of ordinances. 3. It was against us. 4. It was contrary to us. This law was nailed to the cross. Now we read of the law of God thus, “Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid. Yea, we establish the law.” Rom. iii, 31. Jesus himself says, “Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets, I am not come to destroy but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled. Whosoever, therefore, shall break one of these least commandments and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven.”
Thus we find one law written by God himself, which is called holy, just, and good, a spiritual law, law of liberty, royal law, and the delight of the saint. Paul says that this law is established, and Jesus says that not one jot or tittle shall pass away from it, &c. We have found another law which was written by Moses in a book. It is called a law that is not good, a carnal law, law of ordinances, a heavy yoke to bear, a law that was against us, contrary to us, the enmity, &c. It is said that this law was nailed to the cross. From the above we conclude that there were two laws, one of which was abolished at the cross, and the other is to last till heaven and earth pass away.
D. M. CANRIGHT.

The Review and Herald.

“Sanctify them through thy Truth; thy Word is Truth.”
BATTLE CREEK, MICH., THIRD-DAY, MAY 7, 1867.
URIAH SMITH, EDITOR.

SUPPER.

By James White

The Scriptures speak of supper about ten times. And is not this proof that the Lord and his disciples took three meals a day? And, consequently, that only two meals a day are unscriptural and wrong? Some ask this question with that confidence which would lead one to suppose that they thought they had an objection which would forever settle the matter. But a few inquiries will expose its weakness.
1. Who knows that the disciples took supper at night, a short time before sleeping. Evening, or even, be it borne in mind, sometimes means the latter part of the day.
2. Who knows that they dined at 12 o'clock, or what is now called noon?
3. Who knows that they took breakfast about 6 o'clock in the morning?
4. Who knows that they ate what is now called breakfast at all?
5. Who will find the word breakfast in the Bible? Finally,
6. Who will show us that they ate more than two meals? Dinner about seven or eight in the morning, and supper at one or two o'clock?
JAMES WHITE.
Continue reading: LABORS IN NORTHERN MICH