"Five cents a glass!" Does any one think
That that is really the price of a drink?
"Five cents a glass," I hear you say,
"Why, that isn't very much to pay."
Ah, no, indeed; 'tis a very small sum
You are passing over 'twixt finger and thumb;
And if that were all that you gave away,
It wouldn't be very much to pay.
The price of a drink? Let him decide
Who has lost his courage and lost his pride,
And lies a groveling heap of clay,
Not far removed from a beast, to-day.
The price of a drink? Let that one tell
Who sleeps to-night in a murderer's cell,
And feels within him the fires of hell.
Honor and virtue, love and truth,
All the glory and pride of youth,
Hopes of manhood, and wreath of fame,
High endeavor and noble aim,—
These are the treasures thrown away
As the price of drink from day to day.
"Five cents a glass!" How Satan laughed,
As over the bar the young man quaffed
The beaded liquor; for the demon knew
The terrible work that drink would do;
And ere the morning the victim lay
With his life-blood swiftly ebbing away;
And that was the price he paid, alas!
For the pleasure of taking a social glass.
The price of a drink! If you want to know
What some are willing to pay for it, go
Through that wretched tenement over there,
With dingy windows and broken stair,
Where foul disease, like a vampire crawls
With outstretched wings o'er the moldy walls.
There poverty dwells with her hungry brood,
Wild-eyed as demons for lack of food;
There shame, in a corner, crouches low;
There violence deals its cruel blow;
And innocent ones are thus accursed
To pay the price of another's thirst.
"Five cents a glass!" Oh, if that were all,
The sacrifice would, indeed, be small!
But the money's worth is the least amount
We pay; and whoever will keep account
Will learn the terrible waste and blight
That follows the ruinous appetite.
"Five cents a glass!" Does any one think
That that is really the price of a drink?
—Josephine Pollard, in N. O. Christian Advocate.
Sleep and Ruin.
By Hall's Journal of Health
I THINK the intellectual and moral connections of sleeping have not been sufficiently appreciated. Men and boys have been praised for burning the "midnight oil." Now, this "midnight oil" is a delusion and a snare. The student who is fast asleep at eleven o'clock every night, and wide-awake at seven o'clock every morning, is going to surpass another student of the same intellectual ability, who goes to bed after twelve and rises before five. In sleep, the plate on which the picture is to be taken is receiving its chemical preparation; and it is plain that that which is the best prepared will take the best picture.
Men who are the fastest asleep when they are asleep are the widest awake when they are awake.
Great workers must be great resters.
Every man who has clerks in his employ ought to know what their sleeping habits are. The young man that is up till two, three, and four o'clock in the morning, and must put in his appearance at the bank or store at nine or ten o'clock and work all day, cannot repeat this process many days without a certain shakiness coming into his system, which he will endeavor to steady by some delusive stimulus. It is in this way that many a young man begins his course to ruin. He need not necessarily have been in bad company. He has lost his sleep, and is losing his strength and grace.
Here is the outline of the history of a suicide within my own knowledge. A young man, a stranger in New York, in a good situation, in a large boarding-house, has pleasant young companions; spends his evenings out; goes to midnight parties; his nerves become disturbed, then a little drink; a little mistake in business, another drink; reproof from employer, more drink; more mistakes; loss of situation; no help from frivolous companions; money all gone; then credit all gone; then turned out of the boarding-house; wandering in the street; mortification; desperation; shoots himself.—Hall's Journal of Health.
Question Answered.
By Editor
LAST week we promised to answer the following question: "Do you think the real, live Christian will care what the world thinks or says of him?"
We must answer in the affirmative; we think he will. But the subject demands consideration. We have heard professors say that the world has no right to judge the conduct of a Christian; that it has not discernment of Christian principles and motives so that it is qualified to judge the character of the follower of Christ. This is not strictly true. All people, Christians as well as others, are in danger of letting their feelings and prejudices warp their judgment, so as to misconstrue the actions, and misjudge the motives, of their fellow-men. For this error they are responsible. But the question is not whether people pervert and abuse their judgments, but, have they the ability to form a correct judgment? We think they have.
1. The Saviour said, "Ye are the light of the world. . . . Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in Heaven." Matt. 5:14-16. This certainly supposes that the world knows the difference between a true and a false light. If worldly people could not judge between good works and works not good, how would they be led to glorify God by seeing the good works of the Christian? The truth is that God has not suffered the world to depart so far from the light as to have a good excuse for their sins. Of the Gentile or heathen world the apostle Paul wrote thus: "For when the Gentiles, which have not the law [the complete, or written revelation of God's will], do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves; which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the meanwhile accusing or else excusing one another." Rom. 2:14, 15. It is for this reason that he says: "Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest." Verse 1. See also chap. 1:18-20.
If the heathen nations who have not the revelation of the holy Scriptures, are yet without excuse because God has planted sufficient light on the principles of morality in their hearts to enable them to accuse or excuse one another, why should it be thought that in this land, where everybody has heard more or less of the truths of the Scriptures, the people are not qualified to determine the difference between right and wrong? They who thus judge certainly make a mistake.
2. The world proves its ability to judge by finding fault with the inconsistencies of professors of religion. We have had some travel, and observation, and experience in the world, and we were never yet in a community where the worldlings could not pick out a hypocrite or a godly Christian as readily as Christians themselves, where they had equal chances of observing their lives.
In this, however, they condemn themselves. In pointing out the faults of professed Christians they prove that they know what is right—what men ought, and what they ought not, to do. And thus, as Paul says, "they are without excuse."
3. It is with a mistaken idea that professed Christians sometimes say to their neighbors: "Do not look to me for an example; take the Bible, and follow that." Now it is always right to direct people to the Bible, and point out the narrow way on its authority. But, after all, the world will take you for an example of a Christian, and the Saviour has given them a warrant for so doing. When Jesus said to his disciples, "ye are the light of the world," he intended that they should be; that the world should, in their lives, have an illustration of his teachings. And no person who professes the faith of Christ can throw off the responsibility thus placed upon him by the head of the church. If he holds up a false light; if he misleads some trusting soul, and they both together fall into the ditch, woe to the false leader. The blood of the perishing will be upon him. He may ask, like Cain, "Am I my brother's keeper?" but the evasion is in vain. We are all responsible for the welfare of our brother and our neighbor.
4. Paul, in speaking of the qualifications of a bishop, said: "Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil." 1 Tim. 3:7. If a person were set forth as a candidate for this office, and the inquiry were raised as to his reputation before the world, and he should insist that the inquiry should be dropped inasmuch as he did not care what the world thought or said of him, it would be good ground for refusing to accept him; it would at once arouse suspicion that his reputation would not bear close examination. It would certainly be a denial of the rule laid down by the apostle.
5. But all this does not argue that a man should sacrifice his Christian integrity to secure the approbation of his fellow-men. This is not necessary. In the end he will establish the best reputation who best maintains his integrity. And if, in his efforts to maintain his Christian character, he has to come in contact with the feelings and prejudices of his fellow-men, the true Christian will not manifest the "don't-care" spirit, but will have tender feelings both in regard to the truth which is being reproached and to the misguided ones who reproach it.
6. We can only pity those who willfully throw themselves into the way of opposition, and bring needless reproach upon themselves, and then consider themselves persecuted for righteousness' sake. They are laboring under a strong delusion. Their course is always an injury to the cause of Christ. We believe that the gospel of Christ—the whole Bible—is reasonable and sensible. If persons pursue unseemly courses, questionable methods, not in anywise necessary to the gospel work, and are reproached, they have no right to consider themselves martyrs. He who suffers for his folly has no business to lay it to the gospel.
Some members of the "Salvation Army," and "Holiness Band," were lately arrested in San Jose, Cal., for disturbing the peace of that city. A religious paper takes exceptions to the course of the officers, because hoodlums disturb the peace with ungodly noises and are not arrested. But the reasoning is not good. If hoodlums organize for the habitual disturbance of the peace, they would probably be arrested. But, admitting that noisy hoodlums ought to be arrested, is that proof that others equally noisy ought not to be arrested? Our opinion is that if professed religionists disgrace the gospel by acting as hoodlums, they have no right to complain if they are treated as hoodlums ought to be treated, whether hoodlums are treated so or not.
We are fully in accord with the expression of Spurgeon, who, speaking of the actions of the so-called Salvation Army, said that Satan had long tried to make Christianity appear unreasonable, but was now trying to make it appear ridiculous. These apings of military display, and noisy demonstrations, have no more relation to Christianity than has the celebration of a "Chinese New Years." The Lord said to his people: "Let us reason together." Paul said: "We persuade men." We have no right to disgust men with fanatical and nonsensical rantings, and call it the Christian religion.
Paul said that we are, "by manifestation of the truth, commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God." But was any one ever commended to any one's conscience by noise and senseless clamor? Never. We have deeply regretted that some who called themselves Seventh-day Adventists have fallen under the influence of fanaticism in its various forms. We warn our churches to keep clear of it. We believe in spiritual worship; but there is no spirituality in these "bodily exercises" (1 Tim. 4:8) and non-intelligent tumults.
Credulity of Infidelity.
As a rule infidels are the most credulous of all people. The reason of this is evident; infidelity is more a matter of the heart than of the head; it is guided more by natural feeling than by judgment. A man may naturally be a thorough-going infidel; he can be a genuine Christian only by conviction and conversion. Hence it follows that the latter may be expected to be guided by reason and argument rather than the former.
Many of our readers may remember the account given by a traveler, of some Catholics who visited a pagoda for the first time, among Oriental pagans, and who, at first, thought they were in a Catholic Church, when they saw the wax tapers, the incense, the vestments of the priests, etc. But on learning their mistake they concluded that these pagan rites were copied from the church. But on reading the history of the church we learn that many of these rites were borrowed from the pagans by the church of Rome, and converted into Christian ceremonies for the purpose of more readily bringing the multitudes into the communion of the church. As to this we are not left in doubt; there are too many known facts which attest it.
But these rites are altogether distinct from the fundamental doctrines of the Bible; the rites as compared to the doctrines are modern. In their use the pagans have the priority.
Now in some of the Oriental religions are found some resemblances to the doctrines of Christianity, and infidels have been in high glee over the supposed fact that Christianity has copied its facts and doctrines from the heathen religions. But in this249they have drawn their conclusions without research; without diligent inquiry as to which was the original and which the copy. Explorations and investigations of truly scientific men are constantly proving that the Bible is the original source of these doctrines. Christianity rests upon a series of facts from the time of creation to the kingdom of Israel, recorded by "Moses and the prophets." This should be a suggestion to those who, to conciliate the skeptics, are admitting the unreliability of the Mosaic records. They are uselessly and fatally yielding the foundations of the faith they profess.
But our object is to call attention to some evidence recently presented in England that Buddhism has copied many of the peculiarities of its belief from the Bible and from Christianity. Infidels gain nothing at all by tracing resemblances; the question is only settled by the chronology of the two systems. We invite the careful attention of the reader to the following extract:—
At the last large meeting held in February by the Victoria (Philosophical) Institute, 7 Adelphi Terrace, London, a paper was read by the Rev. R. C. Collins, M. A., on Buddhism in relation to Christianity. Referring to the parallels between the persons and characters of Buddha and Jesus Christ, he said: Take, as a prominent instance, the birth stories. I need not here give details, which are to be found in any modern work on Buddhism. The supposed miraculous conception; the bringing down of Buddha from the Tusita heaven; the Devas acknowledging his supremacy; the presentation in the temple, when the images of Indra and the other gods threw themselves at his feet; the temptation by Mara—which legends are embellished by the modern writer I have already quoted, under such as "Conceived by the Holy Ghost," "Born of the Virgin Maya," "Song of the heavenly host," "Presentation in the temple and temptation in the wilderness,"—none of these is found in the early Pali texts.
The simple story of ancient Buddhism is that an ascetic, whose family name was Gautama, preached a new doctrine of human suffering and a new way of deliverance from it. There is no thought in the early Buddhism, of which we read in the Pali texts, of deliverance at the hands of a god; but the man Gautama Buddha stands alone in his striving after the true emancipation from sorrow and ignorance. The accounts of his descending from heaven and being conceived in the world of men, when a preternatural light shone over the worlds, the blind received sight, the dumb sang, the lame danced, the sick were cured, together with all such embellishments, are certainly added by later hands; and if here we recognize some rather remarkable likenesses in thought or expression to things familiar to us in our Bibles, we need not be astonished, when we reflect how great must have been the influence, as I have before hinted, of the Christian story in India in the early centuries of the Christian era, and, perhaps, long subsequently.
This is a point which has been much overlooked; but it is abundantly evident from, among other proofs, the story of the god Krishna, which is a manifest parody of the history of Christ. The Bhagavat-Gita, a theosophical poem put into the mouth of Krishna, is something unique among the productions of the East, containing many gems of what we should call Christian truth wrested from their proper setting to adorn this creation of the Brahman poet, and indicating as plainly their origin as do the stories of his life in the Maha-Bharata; so that it has not unreasonably been concluded that the story of Krishna was inserted in the Maha-Bharata to furnish divine sanction to the Bhagavat-Gita. If, then, as there is the strongest reason to believe, the Christian story, somewhere between the first and tenth centuries of the Christian era, forced itself into the great Hindoo epic, and was at the foundation of the most remarkable poem that ever saw the light in India, can we be surprised if we find similarly borrowed and imitated wonders in the later Buddhist stories also?
Several Home and Colonial applications to join the Institute as guinea subscribers were received, and its object being to investigate all philosophical and scientific questions, especially any said to militate against the truth of the Bible, a discussion ensued, in which Mr. Hormuzd Rassam, Professor Leitner from Lahore, Mr. Coles, an earnest student of the question during twenty-five years' residence in Ceylon, Professor Rhys Davids, and others took part—all agreeing in and confirming the statements of Mr. Collins' paper. Dr. Leitner brought a large number of photographs of early Indian and Tartar sculptures, showing the first introduction of the Christian story into those monuments between about the second and tenth centuries, and he pointed out the value of such additional confirmation of Mr. Collins' statements.
An Interesting Case.
By Editor
A MINISTER in the East, who is now laid up from work by afflictions, by some means came in possession of a copy of the SIGNS, and sent a request for other copies. Our Oakland missionary society supplied him, and in a note recently sent to us he says:—
"I see notice of a forthcoming new book on page 208, the last number of the SIGNS.—'Great Controversy.' I must tell you, my dear brother, I am bound to be intensely interested in all that comes from the pen of that good Sister White. I do want that book. The article, 'Origin of Evil,' must be interesting. Oh, how I desire it. I have a sermon on that subject. I wish you had it for criticism. But if the Lord lets me live and recover from this affliction, you shall hear from me, and money shall be sent for the book, and for the paper. I am thrilled with its spirit and edifying matter. I shall continually pray that the Lord may bless you and greatly prosper you."
May God bless this dear brother. Will the workers remember him in their prayers? It may never be known until we enter the kingdom by what means the SIGNS came into his hands, but we expect to see many rejoicings over such cases when the laborers first see the fruits of their work. Well may they sing now, "'Tis sweet to work for Jesus.'" The thought of the harvest home is enrapturing. Take courage, brother pilgrims; toil on in hope. Your labor is not in vain in the Lord.
Gathered to His People.
By Uriah Smith
THE pleasing doctrine that man can never die, though unfortunate in its parentage, is very tenacious of its life. In treating this subject we find that the record of man's creation brings to view no immortal element as entering into his being; that the Bible in its use of the terms immortal and immortality never employs them to express an attribute inherent in man's nature; that no description of soul and spirit, and no signification of the original words, will sustain the present popular definition of those terms—that the soul and spirit, though spoken of in the Bible, in the aggregate, seventeen hundred times, are never once said to be immortal or never-dying; and that no text in which these words are supposed to be employed in such a manner as to show that they signify an ever-conscious, immortal principle, can possibly be interpreted to sustain such a doctrine.
Behind the obituaries of the patriarchs it seeks to shield itself. It is claimed, for instance, that the death of Abraham is recorded in such a manner as to show that his conscious existence did not cease with his earthly life. We might justly insist on their going farther back and taking the recorded close of the lives of the antediluvian patriarchs as the basis of their argument. One of these, Enoch, was translated to Heaven without seeing death; and all the others, according to popular belief, went to Heaven just as effectually, through death. But how different is their record. Of Enoch it is said that he "was not; for God took him;" while of the others it is said, "And they died." Surely these two records do not mean the same thing, and Enoch whom God took, and who is consequently alive in Heaven, must be, judging from the record, in a different condition from those who died.
But to return to the case of Abraham. The record of his death reads: "Then Abraham gave up the ghost, and died in a good old age, an old man full of years, and was gathered to his people." On this verse, Landis, p. 130, thus remarks:—
"What then is this gathering? Does it refer to the body or the soul? It cannot refer to the body, for while its body was buried in the cave of Macpelah, in Canaan, his fathers were buried afar off; Terah in Haran, in Mesopotamia, and the rest of his ancestors far off in Chaldea. Of course, then, this gathering relates not to the body, but to the soul; he was gathered to the assembly of the blessed, and thus entered his habitation."
To show how gratuitous, not to say preposterous, is this conclusion, we raise a query on two points: 1. Does the expression "gathered to his people" denote that he went to dwell in conscious intercourse with them? 2. Were his ancestors such righteous persons that they went to Heaven when they died? In answering these queries, the last shall be first. It is a significant fact that Abraham had to be separated from his kindred and his father's house, in order that God might make him a special subject of his providence. And in Josh. 24:2, we are plainly told that his ancestors were idolators; for they served other gods. Such being their character, death would send them, according to the popular view, to the regions of the damned. At the time, then, of Abraham's death, they were writhing amid the lurid waves of the lake of fire. And when Abraham was gathered to them, if it was in the sense which the theology of our day teaches, he too was consigned to the flames of hell! Oh! to what absurdities will men suffer themselves to be led blindfold by a petty theory. God had said to Abram, Gen. 15:15: "And thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace; thou shalt be buried in a good old age." Was this the consoling promise that he should go to hell in peace in a good old age? And is the record of his death an assertion that he has his place among the damned? Yes! if the immaterialist theory be correct. Children of Abraham, arise! and with one mouth vindicate your "righteous father" from the foul aspersion. Renounce a theory as far from Heaven-born, which compels you thus to look upon the "father of the faithful."
Does, then, the expression "gathered to his people" mean his personal conscious intercourse with them? If man has an immortal soul which lives in death, it does; and if it does, Abraham is in hell. There is no way of avoiding this conclusion, except by repudiating the idea that man has such a soul, and denying his conscious happiness or misery while in a state of death.
But how then could he be gathered to his people? Answer, he could go into the grave into which they had gone, into the state of death, in which they were held. Jacob said, when mourning for Joseph whom he supposed dead, "I will go down into the grave unto my son mourning." Not that he expected to go into the same locality, or the same grave; for he did not suppose that his son, being, as he then thought, devoured by wild beasts, was in the grave literally at all; but by the grave he evidently meant a state of death; and as his son had been violently deprived of life, he too would go down mourning into the state of death; and this he calls going unto his son. In Acts 13:36, Paul, speaking of David, says that he "was laid unto his fathers." This all must acknowledge to be the exact equivalent of being "gathered to his people;" then the apostle goes on and adds, "and saw corruption." That which was laid unto his fathers, or was gathered to his people, saw corruption. Men may labor, if they choose, to refer it to the immortal soul; but in that way they do it a very doubtful favor; for the success of their argument is the destruction of their theory; and the soul is shown to be something which is perishable and corruptible in its nature.
The New Paper in England.
By George I. Butler
It is well known to our people that it was voted at the last General Conference that a paper should be printed in England. One of the principal objects of my coming to Europe was to bring about this result. Accordingly, soon after our arrival, the workers in England, Elder John, Brother Drew, and Sister Thayer, met at Great Grimsby for consultation with Elder Whitney and our party from America. We spent several days in prayerful consideration of this subject, and in planning for the location of the laborers recently arrived from America.
After careful consideration, it was decided to issue a sixteen-page monthly paper, about the size of the Signs of the Times, to commence the first of April if possible. The name chosen for this journal was The Present Truth. This was selected after examining the list of the names of the papers in Great Britain. There were so many "Heralds" and "Reviews," and one called the Signs of our Times with a large circulation, that we thought best to take a name peculiar to our work and expressive of its nature. For the present the management of this paper, as far as its publication is concerned, is placed in the hands of a committee of three: Eld. M. C. Wilcox, Eld. A. A. John, and Miss Jennie Thayer; managing editor, Eld. M. C. Wilcox; corresponding editors, Eld. J. H. Waggoner, Eld. Uriah Smith, and Eld. B. L. Whitney.
The question as to where the paper should be published was one of some perplexity. Our depository and the headquarters of our work had been in Southampton ever since the mission started. Our English Supplements to the Signs of the Times have been printed there. It would involve some250difficulties to move it, and change the address of the depository, etc. But there seemed to be important reasons why a change should be made. We found that the cost of printing in Grimsby would be much less than in Southampton. Its location is more central. More interest in the truth is kindling in the vicinity of the former than in that of the latter. When we looked around for a suitable place to rent in which to carry on the work, we found a new building with very suitable rooms, and at a moderate rent. We could not have secured a place more suitable for our present wants. The way seemed to open before us in an exceedingly favorable manner, far more so than any of us had expected. We all felt that the finger of the Lord was in it, preparing the way before us.
Great Grimsby has about 40,000 inhabitants, and is quite a pleasant place. Rent and expenses will be less here than in larger places, and there will be some friends of the cause here to manifest an interest in the work. We could see no light in striking out into a new place where we were wholly unacquainted. All in the council felt very clear that for the present, at least, the paper should be printed in Great Grimsby. We also secured excellent terms for press-work and other work we could not do ourselves. Eld. John and family will move into this building, and Sister Thayer will have rooms in it for the depository connected with the mission, and will render important assistance on the paper. Eld. Wilcox will spend a portion of his time in editing the paper, and will labor in the field what he can besides.
The price of the paper, single subscription, per year will be two shillings and sixpence, or about sixty cents; in clubs of five and upwards, two shillings, or forty-eight cents; in clubs of twenty-five and upwards, one shilling and sixpence, or about thirty-six cents. Most of the papers circulated in England are not subscribed for by the year as with us, but are sold from the news stands, because they can be obtained cheaper that way by saving postage. These news stands are in almost every depot. These terms are made favorable to those taking large clubs, hoping to encourage missionary effort, and a large circulation. The rates are low; but after long consideration of the many perplexing questions connected with fixing the price of the paper, we all came to the above conclusions.
At the close of our consultation a small meeting was held to see how many copies would be paid for the first year by those present. Only fourteen persons were in attendance, and half of these were our ministers and workers present from America. The matter was set before the company, and all were invited to participate; in a short time over 1,000 copies were subscribed for, one brother residing in Grimsby taking over 500. Since that we have visited Southampton, and one or two hundred were taken by those living there. We felt that this was very encouraging from such a small beginning. We all feel to thank God that our new enterprise of starting the paper in England is moving off so well. Material is being purchased, and the paper will soon be brought out, and one more Seventh-day Adventist journal will be heralding the notes of warning to the world. So the work continues to move forward all along the line.
It was thought best that Eld. J. H. Durland should locate for a time at Southampton in the house already rented for the depository, which will not now be used for that purpose. This arrangement may not be permanent.
And now we give our friends in America a cordial invitation to help circulate the new paper printed in England, The Present Truth. We should be glad to have their personal subscriptions for their own reading, and we should be glad to have them pay for clubs to be used in the missionary work.
Bro. Drew says he shall want at least 1,200 per month to use in the ship work in Liverpool alone.
We expect to have an excellent paper, and we want it to go by thousands of copies to all this great empire. We are greatly behind in our work in this country, but we expect to see a great advance in the near future. May God greatly bless the mission in England.—G. I. B., in Review and Herald.