WHILE by every consideration of the Scriptures it is certain that there is not to be a return of the Jews, it is equally certain that there is to be a gathering of Israel. And this gathering of Israel, and, in this sense, this return of the Jews, is to be, as was quoted in last week's study on this subject, concerning Israel as the good olive tree. Because of unbelief, the branches of that tree were broken, and so the tree stood all marred and incomplete; but from the wild olive tree, branches are taken and grafted into the good olive tree,—and also such of the original branches as abide not still in unbelief,—until all its lost branches are restored, and the tree stands full, complete, and perfect, as originally conceived. “And so all Israel shall be saved.”
And such has been the story of Israel always. It has always been true that “they which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.” Rom. 9: 8. This was so in the family of Abraham, at the very beginning of God's peculiar people. Ishmael was the child of Abraham, but was born after the flesh, and so was not a child of God. Abraham, in his natural affection, thought that Ishmael should be recognized by the Lord as His, according to original design and his original purpose in the gospel; and so exclaimed, “O that Ishmael might live before thee!”
But the Lord said, No. “Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him. And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly. . . . But my covenant will I establish with Isaac.” Gen. 17: 19-21. Isaac was the child of faith, born by the promise of God, “born after the Spirit.” Accordingly, though both were the sons of Abraham, only one was a son of God. This did not utterly exclude from the promises him that was born after the flesh; but he could become partaker of the promises only by himself becoming a child of promise.
And this “allegory,” which was worked out in the family of Abraham, was for the instruction of all people in all ages, that “they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: neither, because they are of the seed of Abraham, are they all children; but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.” Rom. 9: 6-8. It tells to all people, forever, that that which is born of the flesh249is flesh, and can not inherit the things of the Spirit; that, unless one is born of promise, and thus becomes a child of promise, he never can be partaker of the promises.
Yet, although this lesson was worked out to completion in the family of Abraham at the very beginning of the course of Israel; though it was repeated in the family of Isaac—in Esau and Jacob; and though it was written for the instruction of all people afterward, great claim is, and ever has been, made in behalf of them “which are the children of the flesh.” And in spite of all the instruction the Lord has given upon the subject, it is insisted that he is bound, in justice, to recognize as his children those who are children of the flesh. But such a thing never, in justice, can be. Such a thing would undo all righteousness, and would ruin the universe. It is asking that God shall clothe sin with righteousness, that he shall accept sin as righteousness, and exalt it as righteousness, to the place of righteousness. But that is all that Lucifer wanted, in the beginning of sin: that is the secret of the whole controversy from that time when it began in heaven, unto this day, and even to the end of the controversy in the triumph of righteousness over sin, to the complete exclusion of sin.
And so from Abraham’s day until this hour, and unto the end of the world, the children of the promise are counted for the seed of Abraham, in place of the children of the flesh. Forever it is so, and is abundantly shown to be so, that they which be of faith, these only are the children of Abraham, and, as such, alone are heirs of Abraham, of Christ, and of God. And in the gathering of Israel, only these will come,—these who have been, when they lived, or are, while they live, children of the promise,—“they which are of faith.”
Read the story of faith, in Hebrews 11, of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Sarah, and of those that sprang “of one, and him as good as dead, so many as the stars of the sky in multitude, and as the sand which is by the seashore innumerable.” These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth; “because they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly; wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.”
Read on in the story of faith, through Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, and the number of whom the time to tell would fail. “These all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise: God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.” Thus all Israel are to be made perfect together; they are all to be gathered at once.
And that time of gathering all Israel is declared by the word of the Lord in Isaiah: “And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall beat off from the channel of the river unto the stream of Egypt, and ye shall be gathered one by one, O ye children of Israel. And it shall come to pass in that day, that the great trumpet shall be blown, and they shall come which are ready to perish in the land of Assyria, and the outcasts in the land of Egypt, and shall worship the Lord in the holy mount at Jerusalem.” Isa. 27: 12, 13.
This day when “the great trumpet shall be blown,” is the day when “the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise” (1 Thess. 4: 16); and “he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other” (Mat. 24: 31), and “then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.” 1 Thess. 4: 17.
And “as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the Lord, so shall your seed and your name remain. And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one Sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the Lord.” Isa. 66: 22, 23.
This is the gathering of Israel: this is the return of the Jews. And there is no other.
“WHEREFORE the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.”
These two verses are the conclusion of the argument in verses 21–23. Accordingly they are introduced by “Wherefore.” “Wherefore,” signifies “for which cause or reason; in consequence of which; consequently.” It is easy to see that these two verses are the consequence of the preceding ones.
Notice verse 21: the law is not against the promises of God; but, instead, is an aid in attaining unto the promises. And we know that all the promises of God are in Christ. Then, since the law is an aid in attaining unto the promises; and all the promises are in Christ, evidently the law is an aid in men’s attaining unto Christ.
Next, notice verse 22: “The scripture hath concluded [shut up] all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.” Plainly, then, the law is a means of bringing men to Christ and to the promises by faith in him.
Next, verse 23: “Before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.” As we were “shut up unto the faith,” and “were kept under the law, shut up,”—it was the law that shut us up, and it shut us up unto the faith,—plainly the law brought men to faith. But faith is always Christ, and Christ is always faith, for he is “the author and finisher of faith.” And since the law brought men to faith, and Christ is the substance of all faith, in the nature of things the law brought men to Christ. And, so, verse 24 states the fact, as the consequence of all this: “The law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.”
But the great question with most persons is, What law is that? It is a fair enough question, because, since whatever law it is, it brings men to Christ; and if men take the wrong law, it will not bring them to Christ.
But it can easily be known what law it is. Read again the text: “The law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.”—we are no longer under the law. Now, what is it to be under the law?—It is to be under the dominion of sin; for it is written: “Sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law.” Rom. 6: 14. Then, whoever is under the law, is under the dominion of sin, and this because “sin is the transgression of the law.” And what law is it?—It is the moral law—the law which says: “Thou shalt not covet;” for it is written: “I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.” Rom. 7: 7. And this is the very thought that is before us in Gal. 3: 24, 25, and in the verses preceding, of which verses 24, 25, are only the conclusion.
Verse 22 says: “The scripture hath concluded [shut up] all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe;” and verse 23 says: “We were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.” There can be no manner of question that these expressions “under sin” and “under the law” are identical in meaning, and therefore it is plain that to be “under the law” is to be “under sin.” And being “under sin,” being “shut up under sin,” and thus “kept under the law, shut up unto the faith,” it is certain that it is the law by which is the knowledge of sin,—the law which says, “Thou shalt not covet,”—which is the schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. And this is the more evident by the fact that after faith is come, after we are justified by faith, we are no longer under the law; we are no longer under the dominion of sin; we are no longer shut up; because we have attained unto the very thing which is the object of the law, which is Christ. For “Christ is the end [the object, the aim, the purpose] of the law for righteousness to everyone that believeth.” Rom. 10: 4. Notice again: for what purpose is it that men are brought to Christ?—“That we might be justified by faith.” This is the same as in the preceding verses: “We were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith.” “The scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.” Plainly, therefore, whatever law it is, it is a law that brings men to faith.
Now, it is not true, and it never was true, that the ceremonial law of sacrifices and offerings ever brought anybody to faith. It was faith that brought them to that law. “By faith Abel offered unto God a . . . sacrifice. Did the sacrifice, or the offering of it, bring Abel to faith?—No. Faith brought Abel to the sacrifice. That sacrifice was a lamb, and, in Abel’s faith, it was Christ. The offering of that sacrifice was the expression of the faith that he already had in Christ. And by the faith of Christ, in which he offered that sacrifice, “he obtained witness that he was righteous.” Thus he attained to righteousness by faith; to justification by faith. Thus faith brought him to that ceremonial law of sacrifices and offerings.
But what brought him to the faith that brought him to the law of sacrifices and offerings?—The knowledge of sin brought him to the faith. And what brought him to the knowledge of sin?—The moral law, to be sure—the law that says, “Thou shalt not covet”—the law by which alone is the knowledge of sin.
Cain brought an offering; but it was not brought in faith, and therefore was not accepted; and consequently sin still lay at his door. Gen. 4: 7. Cain had no faith in Christ, and therefore his offering was of no avail. And even though an offering were made of a lamb, if there was no faith in Christ in him who offered it, it would not avail. The faith must be there before he brings his offering at all, or else it is of no avail.
Thus, by every consideration, it is certain that, instead of the ceremonial law of sacrifices and offerings bringing men to the faith, it was faith that always brought men to the sacrifices and offerings. And it must be faith that would do that, or else the sacrifice and the offering was nothing.
PAST MIRACLES—PRESENT LESSONS.
By Uriah Smith
The great issue before the present generation is the Sabbath question. This is so, because on this question the long controversy between truth and error, righteousness and rebellion, a controversy which spans the closing six thousand years of human probation, comes to its climax and conclusion. Therefore everything tending to throw light on the principles involved in this controversy, and show the right way, is of interest,—is “present truth.” Especially do those incidents connected with the Sabbath institution, which men make use of to try to invalidate its claims, become important themes of study, that their true significance may be clearly understood. One such incident is the giving of the manna to the Israelites after their deliverance from Egypt. From the statements of this case it is strenuously urged that the Sabbath was only a Jewish institution, given to that people alone, therefore not to be kept or taught by the people of to-day. Matt. 5: 19. Let us therefore consider the occurrence, and notice the lessons that are to be drawn therefrom.
The greatest of all miracles recorded, excepting, of course, the creation, the flood, and the incarnation of our Lord, is, perhaps, this very occurrence of the giving of the manna to Israel. Indeed, it was not merely one miracle, but a wonderful combination of many miracles, covering a period of forty years. In it was involved a manifestation of at least eleven distinct features of miraculous power. It was miraculous in the following particulars:—
1. In that the manna was a new production. The other kinds of food which that people had had to use, had been seen and known before. This never was seen till that time.
2. In the source whence it came. All other kinds of food come up from below. This came down from heaven.250
3. In the place in which it fell. It was confined to the camp of Israel. It did not fall on other nations, and in other countries, but fell only in that one camp, and moved when that moved, and rested when that rested.
4. In the quantity that was provided; enough falling each night to fill many hundred thousand mouths for an entire day. It was not the so-called “honeydew,” which oozes from certain plants in some portions of Arabia, by which the skeptical sometimes try to discount the whole miracle, accounting for the manna on natural grounds; for the supply of the honeydew, so far as has ever been known, falling throughout an entire season, would not furnish a thousandth part of enough substance to meet the wants of that Israelitish host for a single day. The limited supply of the honeydew makes the suggestion to account for the miracle of the manna on that ground, utterly preposterous.
5. In its composition: round like coriander seed, transparent like dew, sweet like honey cakes; a combination of features unknown in any substance of nature.
6. In its quality, as shown in the way it was affected by surrounding conditions. Heat of one kind, like that of the sun, would melt it; while another kind, the artificial heat used in cooking, would harden it.
7. In the uniform variation of the amount falling at stated intervals; the quantity falling on the sixth day of every week being just twice as much as fell on each of the five preceding days.
8. In the regular times in which it ceased to fall entirely; for while a certain quantity fell on the first five days of each week, and a double quantity on the sixth day of every week, not a particle fell on the seventh day of each week. In this most marked and specific manner was the Sabbath singled out and set apart from all other days.
9. In the manner of its preservation or corruption. God rebuked the natural tendency of the human heart to accumulate and store up the good things of life for selfish purposes, by commanding that no manna should be kept over from day to day but that it should all be used on the day on which it fell. And if anyone through fear that none would fall the next day, or from a desire to have a little more than others around him, did attempt to keep it over, it immediately bred worms, and utterly spoiled.
10. There was a miracle in that it kept sweet and pure, when kept over the Sabbath, a length of time when, on any other day, it would become putrid.
11. In the fact that the manna ceased to fall just as soon as the people reached the promised land, where they could by their own efforts supply their daily food. This was as much as to say that there is no further need of a miracle when we have means that we can use to our own support. But the same God who is the God of the miracle, is the God of the means also.
The circumstances of the falling of the manna were calculated to promote in the people the constant exercise of faith. That mighty host all lay down to sleep every night with absolutely no provision on hand to meet their necessities on the morrow. They had to trust continually the providence of God to bring their necessary food for the coming day.
We learn from the manna how necessary it is for man to co-operate with God, in order that he may receive the good that God has intended for him. God provided the manna, and let it fall into their camp; but the people had to go out and gather it, and prepare it in suitable ways to be used as food, and then partake of it, by their own exertions. They could not produce the manna, and God would not gather and prepare it for them. The first was God’s work; the second was theirs. Thus man must be a co-worker with God. Though God provided the manna ever so freely and bountifully, it would have done them no good if they had not performed their part,—gathered it and prepared it for use.
No manna fell on the Sabbath. What did this proclaim for that time, and for all time?—It proclaimed that the Sabbath is a divine institution, and a pre-existing institution. The first mention of the Sabbath in the chapter before us (Exodus 16)
is in verse 23; and then it is said, not, “To-morrow shall be the Sabbath, or, Every seventh day hereafter is to be the Sabbath; but, ‘To-morrow is the rest of the Sabbath.’” This shows that the Sabbath was previously instituted, and was so understood. “This,” as J. Stacy, D. D., well remarks, in his “Day of Rest,” “is the language of the historian, not the legislator; it is the familiar method of speaking of something already in existence.”
Moreover the statement is not that they should cease from all their work every seventh day, but only from the gathering of the manna; which shows again that the institution was already in existence, but was here made especially applicable to the gathering of the manna. And this is still further confirmed by the declaration of verse 29: “See, for that the Lord,”—now “gives you a Sabbath”?—No, but—“hath given you the Sabbath;” and the manna is not to interfere with that arrangement. By no possible legerdemain can the record be so manipulated as to favor the idea that the Sabbath was here instituted.
That the Sabbath was not instituted at the giving of the manna, is further shown by the statement, in verse 4, of the object of the giving of the manna. It is not, I will rain bread from heaven for you, and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may establish a Sabbath for the people, but, “They shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law or no.” This was the object of the manna. It was not to establish a Sabbath, but to prove the people whether they would walk in God’s law or not. What law? and how would this prove them?—Clearly the law of the Sabbath, which was already in existence, and which if they would keep, they would, for the same reason, show their loyalty to all the other precepts of the law also.
In the giving of the manna we have also a wonderful exhibition of the keeping of the Sabbath by the Lord himself, as our example. It is not so much the resting of the people that impresses one as it is the cessation of the divine power every seventh day, by which the manna was produced on the other days. The manna was the direct production of God’s power, furnished for them each day. But every seventh day that power ceased to work in this manner; and there were over two thousand Sabbaths that were thus spent before they reached Canaan, with this wonderful manifestation before them every week. Thus for over two thousand Sabbaths God rested from producing the manna for them, thus giving them a divine example for rest on that day: and the people of course rested from gathering it. Weston says, “Time and the world may be searched in vain for another series of events by which it would be possible to impress the idea of a Sabbath upon the minds of the people as effectually as by this.” If it could be found where any divine being had rested on over two thousand Sundays, what a long-felt want it would supply to that embarrassed institution!
We have, also, in this history of the giving of the manna, a striking illustration of how men, long committed to error, will misconstrue facts, pervert reason, and juggle with the Scripture record itself, to bolster up a tottering institution. Some who, in opposition to the Sabbath, seek to prove that it originated in the wilderness, at the giving of the manna, claim, first, that the manna began to fall on the day when Israel came into the wilderness of Sin, the fifteenth day of the second month. Then they endeavor to figure the record so as to show that on the Sabbath before, the Israelitish hosts were on their journey, and not keeping the day at all. But this is all assumption; for we do not know, and there is no record to show, how long it was after they came to the wilderness of Sin before the manna began to fall. The necessary conclusion is that it must have been several days; for the whole congregation fell to murmuring, and had to be reproved therefor (Ex. 16: 2, 3), which would not have taken place until they had been there long enough to begin to feel the pangs of hunger.
Secondly, and stranger than all, they claim that the sixth and seventh days there mentioned, are to be reckoned, respectively, from the falling of the
manna; and that the seventh day means every seventh day from that time, without reference to any weekly cycle from creation, and that was to be their Sabbath. If this be true, then the sixth day would mean every successive sixth day from the same point of time; and then there was to be a double portion of manna given by the divine power. Let us see how this would work even in a very short space of time. The second sixth day from the beginning would be the twelfth day, and the second seventh day would be the fourteenth; the third sixth day would be the eighteenth, and the third seventh day the twenty-first; the fourth sixth day would be the twenty-fourth, and the fourth seventh day the twenty-eighth, and so on. Thus the day on which a double portion was to be given, and the day on which there would be none, would be further and further apart, each week, for six weeks. But this would ruin the whole scheme; for the manna would not keep from one week day to another, but only from the last day of the week, over the Sabbath; and at the end of the seventh week the days would come together—one on which there should be no manna, and the other on which there should be a double portion; and then what condition would that arrangement be in? Why will men stultify their logic in preference to reforming their religious life?
The manna ceased just as soon as Israel reached the land where they had the facilities for providing themselves with food. This shows us that we are to avail ourselves of all the means within our reach to help ourselves; and when these fail us, God stands by with his miraculous power to help us, according to the well-known adage, that “man’s necessity is God’s opportunity.”
Another point of constant application is this: The manna had to be gathered fresh every morning. Christ says that he is the true Manna, the Bread which came down from heaven. And so we are to seek and receive from him fresh supplies of his grace each day. We can not live upon an old experience. We can accumulate no extra amount of spiritual supplies to be laid away for future use. Like the manna, it must be gathered fresh every morning. When we experience a time of special blessing, let us guard against the mistake of resting down upon our oars awhile, depending upon what we have already received. The supply is not exhausted. God will furnish fresh supplies to all who will receive it and appropriate it. Thus we may go on from strength to strength; and the Sabbath will be a delight. U. S.
THE KING OF BABYLON EXALTS HIMSELF ABOVE GOD.
By William W. Prescott
A PERIOD of more than twenty years separates Nebuchadnezzar's dream of the great image, as recorded in the second chapter, from his setting up of the image, as given in the third chapter. In the dream and the interpretation the God of heaven had revealed to him the truth concerning the history of the world, with special reference to what should be “in the latter days,” and had thus shown him that all earthly kingdoms, including his own, would pass away one after the other, and that the kingdom of God was the only one that should “stand forever.” Nebuchadnezzar seemed to accept the message thus delivered to him, and acknowledged God as “a God of gods, and a Lord of kings, and a revealer of secrets.” But the course of years had added to the glory and the power of the kingdom of Babylon, and the king evidently first doubted, then disbelieved, the predictions of the Hebrew captive, and then determined to express in the most positive and public manner his own ideas concerning the kingdom question.
11“Nebuchadnezzar the king made an image of gold, whose height was threescore cubits, and the breadth thereof six cubits: he set it up in the plain of Dura, in the province of Babylon.”
No dimensions are given of the image that the king saw in his dream. It is simply stated that it was “a great image.” Evidently Nebuchadnezzar desired that the image which he set up should make the same impression upon the minds of the people that the one in the dream had made upon him, and so he made it over one hundred feet in height. The very measurements are suggestive of the interpretation to be given to his act. The image is six cubits broad, ten times six cubits high, and six kinds of instruments are specified (Dan. 3:5) as being used to summon to its worship. The triple six marks the number of the beast (Rev. 13:18), against whose worship there is such a fearful warning proclaimed throughout all the world. Rev. 14:9–11. This is “that man of sin, . . . who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped.”
In setting up this image Nebuchadnezzar was expressing his own idea in direct opposition to what the God of heaven had revealed to him. He was exalting himself above God. In the dream he saw an image whose head only was of gold, while the other parts were of inferior metals, signifying that other kingdoms would succeed Babylon; but now he made an image all of gold to express his confidence that Babylon would endure, and that the history of the world from that time would simply be the history of Babylon. Although Nebuchadnezzar did not so intend it, and did not himself understand the full significance of his act, yet he was teaching a great truth. Kingdoms known in history by different names have succeeded each other just according to Daniel's interpretation of the dream, and Babylon of the Chaldees long ago passed away; but the real Babylon is still here, and will remain until “she shall be utterly burned with fire.” This will appear more clearly in our later studies.
“Then Nebuchadnezzar the king sent to gather together the princes, the governors, and the captains, the judges, the treasurers, the counselors, the sheriffs, and all the rulers of the provinces, to come to the dedication of the image which Nebuchadnezzar the king had set up. Then the princes, the governors, and captains, the judges, the treasurers, the counselors, the sheriffs, and all the rulers of the provinces, were gathered together unto the dedication of the image that Nebuchadnezzar the king had set up; and they stood before the image that Nebuchadnezzar had set up. Then an herald cried aloud, To you it is commanded, O people, nations, and languages, That at what time ye hear the sound of the cornet, flute, harp, sackbut, psaltery, dulcimer, and all kinds of music, ye fall down and worship the golden image that Nebuchadnezzar the king hath set up; and whoso falleth not down and worshipeth shall the same hour be cast into the midst of a burning fiery furnace. Therefore at that time, when all the people heard the sound of the cornet, flute, harp, sackbut, psaltery, and all kinds of music, all the people, the nations, and the languages, fell down and worshiped the golden image that Nebuchadnezzar the king had set up.”
A careful reading of the record shows that Nebuchadnezzar purposed that this image and its dedication should be his answer to the dream and its interpretation. Daniel had declared that other kings should follow Nebuchadnezzar, and that “in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed.” Nebuchadnezzar now showed his view of the matter. The contrast was between what “the God of heaven” sets up, and what “Nebuchadnezzar the king hath set up.” The question at issue was, Who is right, God or Nebuchadnezzar? Who is the “everlasting king”? What kingdom shall stand, the kingdom of God or the kingdom of Babylon? The same questions are before the people of the whole world to-day, and the final decision is soon to be made; “for the hour of his judgment is come.”
W. W. P.
(This study to be concluded next week.)
SOUTH CENTRAL AFRICA.
By F. L. Mead
RAILROAD connections with Cape Town have been cut off since the opening of the war in the Transvaal, so we are quite isolated. For some time after the war began, we were without any mail, but we now get it at irregular intervals via Beira and Fort Salisbury.
Owing to a close censorship on the press, we know practically nothing of the progress of the war, or of its future prospects.
While we are comfortable, and have provisions for the present, we can begin to realize what prices will soon be unless the railroad is opened for the transportation of freight. Sugar is thirty-six cents a pound; kerosene oil, $1.75 a gallon; flour, $25 a barrel; potatoes, $15 a bushel; beans, $6 a bushel; butter, $1 a pound. Provisions are completely sold out in many of the smaller stores, and soon some of the largest wholesale stores will be entirely out of goods of all kinds.
We are now having our “rainy season,” and the roads are very bad. Some of our crops, which looked quite promising, have been killed by an overabundance of water; others are being destroyed by bugs and white ants; some of the crops are doing well, and give signs of a fair harvest. The curse rests heavily upon this country and people. While the mission family are comfortably well, there is much sickness among the natives.
The week of prayer readings reached us January 26, and we are studying them with much interest. The Lord has come very near to us, and has helped us in our need, for which we praise his name.
F. L. MEAD.
Bulawayo, Jan. 30, 1900.
CHILE
By G. H. Baker
I REMAINED ten days in Lima. There were a few interested ones who were regular in their attendance at the services; but in all these Roman Catholic countries it is difficult to make the people see and feel the great importance of a new life in Christ, of a regeneration of heart, mind, soul, and spirit manifested in the daily life. The idea of the new birth seems almost as strange to them as it did to Nicodemus. And why should it not? Poor creatures! they have been fed on fables so long that facts seem useless and strange. For centuries they have fed their souls only upon such rubbish as the invocation of dead sinners, who know not anything; auricular confession to living sinners, who seem to forget that they must die and account for their deeds; and other similarly absurd doctrines. One's heart goes out in sympathy to see them so self-sufficient and even boastful in their folly. Such teaching can but have a deadening effect upon the higher sensibilities. Some are beginning to awake to the truth. Others, seeing the falsity of the Church of Rome, drop all religious inclinations, and go into outspoken infidelity; and not a few “seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto the wizards that peep, and that mutter;” but, alas, how very few seek unto their God!
Several in Lima manifested a very friendly interest. Brother Escobar, our Chilean brother who is trying to carry on a self-supporting propaganda, has awakened considerable interest among some thinking people of Lima. One especially bright young lawyer is studying the truth with the greatest avidity. He expressed a strong desire to unite with Brother Escobar, and preach the gospel to his fellow Peruvians. He is a man well known, and would make an unusual stir in that ignorant, fanatical country. Let all the people of God pray for this man, and for our work here in general. One sister wished to be baptized, but as she waited until the day before we left before asking for baptism, we left that for Brother Escobar. She is from Quito, Ecuador, and was anxious that we should go there to give her people the message; but this was not possible.
Now the question arises, How long is it going to be before some one from the United States will feel a burden for this long-forsaken land of the equatorial sun? Now, dear soul, do not get frightened at the thought, and imagine yourself a second Shadrach passing through the fiery furnace in order to be a missionary to Ecuador. While I have not been there myself, I have the most reliable authority for saying that you will not be roasted alive. While it is warm in Guayaquil, the principal port of that republic, it is by no means beyond endurance. Ambato is said to be a most lovely climate, exceptionally good for lung diseases; and in Quito the disease known as consumption is not found.
The government is liberal now, even more liberal than the government of Chile. Anybody has a right to preach his religion without let or hindrance.
While at Lima I received word from Iquique to stop on my return trip south, and that others were demanding baptism. The hall we had before could not be secured, but a man from the aristocratic circles of Santiago invited us to use two rooms of his house. I asked him if he had given the matter full consideration, and warned him that it might molest him and his family. He replied that he was glad to be able to help us. We continued the meetings about two weeks, and baptized him and his wife along with six of the common people. I make special mention of this case because it is the first time that we have been able to reach the upper circle. We hope they may prove true to God, and thus keep the door open for the message to go to those12who would not hear it from one of the common people.
After an absence of about three months I returned home, having baptized twenty-four persons. May the Lord bless them. G. H. BAKER.
