Earlier text: Affront None—but ForgiveA BRIEF REVIEW OF PASSING EVENTS
Those who have been readers of the Review for three years past know that, from the day that Cuba fell under the power of the United States, by the defeat of Spain, we have never had a particle of confidence in any representation that was made by the United States respecting the declared right of Cuba to be free and independent. The declaration of war against Spain by the United States was made April 18, 1898. That same day the Congress of the United States officially declared, in a joint-resolution, that “the people of the Island of Cuba are, and of right ought to be, free and independent.” In the declaration of war that day made by the United States, it was also declared “that the United States hereby disclaims any disposition or intention to exercise sovereignty, jurisdiction, or control over said islands, except for the pacification thereof, and asserts its determination, when that is accomplished, to leave the government and control of the island to its people.” Yet, for all this, all the readers of the Review for these last three years know that we have never believed for a moment that these promises would be kept, that Cuba ever would be free and independent. Before the war between the United States and Spain was ended, under the heading of “Passing Events,” we called attention, July 12, 1898, to the “New World-Power” that was arising in the prospect of a world-career that was opening to the United States, through her victories so far over Spain. Among other things, we then said: “The only republic that ever went over this ground before was the republic of Rome. And when Rome once became imperial in territory, it was but a little while before she became both imperial and imperious in spirit, and then it was but a little while before she became imperial in government.” July 19, 1898, touching further the same subject of “Imperial America,” we said: “All these things are worthy of thoughtful consideration; for no one knows what ‘manifest destiny’ may produce. And if we mark events as they pass, we shall be able better to understand each new phase that may open to the world. These are times in which the world moves rapidly, and much may occur in a day. And all these events are laden with solemn meaning to every one who is waiting and watching for the coming of the Lord. ‘Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments.’” In the Review of Aug. 2, 1898, under the general heading of “Passing Events,” we cited “A Little Ancient History, Which Is Also Modern.” In that article we said: “In considering the new and ‘imperial’ career that is opening before the United States, and being sanctioned by so many in high169 positions, we have remarked that there was one republic that passed over this ground once before in the history of the world. That republic was Rome. It is interesting to read the statements made to-day concerning this ‘colonial policy’ and ‘colonial career’ that is opening up before ‘Imperial America,’ and compare it with what has long been written of the course of Rome as she passed over the same ground.” We referred to the pretensions that the United States was making, of extending “the blessings of liberty” to the peoples in the Philippines, San Juan, and Cuba, who had hitherto been oppressed by Spain. Then we said: “All this is precisely what Rome proposed to do. Rome claimed that she never wished to make any conquests of any people, nor to control any territory, outside of her own boundaries of Italy. All that she ever did outside of Italy was altogether out of pure benevolence, and solely to extend to oppressed peoples the blessings of liberty, of which the Romans were the exemplars before the world, and in behalf of the world, and which they so sincerely loved that they couldn’t be content at all so long as any other people were not enjoying this wonderful liberty. Therefore they would man fleets and raise armies, send them over seas at great sacrifice and immense expense, to fight battles for strange peoples, only that those peoples might have the blessing of liberty, of which Rome was the world’s conservator.” We then cited the ancient history of the decree of liberty to the Grecian States, which the Roman Republic proclaimed in 196 B. C., as follows:— “The senate and people of Rome, and Titus Quintius, their general, having overcome Philip and the Macedonians, ease and deliver from all garrisons, taxes, and imposts, the Corinthians, the Locrians, the Phocians, the Euboeans, the Phthiot Achaeans, the Magnesians, the Thessalians, and the Perrhaebians; declare them free, and ordain that they shall be governed by their respective laws and usages.” We then quoted the history that followed that proclamation, in which were the following two paragraphs:— “The remembrance of so delightful a day and of the invaluable blessing then bestowed, was forever renewing, and for a long time the only subject of conversation at all times and in all places. Every one cried, in the highest transports of admiration and a kind of enthusiasm, that there was a people in the world who, at their own expense and the hazard of their lives, engage in a war for the liberty of other nations; and that not for their neighbors, or people situated on the same continent, but who crossed seas, and sailed to distant climes, to destroy and extirpate unjust power from the earth, and to establish, universally, law, equity, and justice: that by a single word and the voice of a herald, liberty had been restored to all the cities of Greece and Asia: that only a great soul could have formed such a design; but to execute it was the effect at once of the highest good fortune and the most consummate virtue.” “They called to mind all the great battles which Greece had fought for the sake of liberty. ‘After sustaining so many wars,’ said they, ‘never was its valor crowned with so blessed a reward as when strangers came and took up arms in its defense. It was then that, almost without shedding a drop of blood or losing one man, it acquired the greatest and noblest of all prizes for which mankind can contend. Valor and prudence are rare at all times; but of all virtues, justice is most rare. Agesilaus, Lysander, Nicias, and Alcibiades had great abilities for carrying on war, and gained battles by both sea and land; but it was for themselves and for their country, not for strangers and foreigners, they fought. That height of glory was reserved for the Romans.’” Then we asked: “When two things are so precisely alike in their beginnings as are this course of Rome and that proposed for the United States, can there be much likelihood that the endings will be any less alike?” In the Review of Aug. 23, 1898, under the heading of “Passing Events,” we gave again “A Little Ancient History, Which Is Also Modern.” We said: “The conquests of the Roman Republic were made in the name of liberty, to deliver peoples from oppression. But after these conquests had been made, and the immediate question settled, there was a different story to tell.” We then cited, word for word, another portion of that “Ancient History” of the liberty proclaimed by the Roman Republic to the Greek States, whom she had freed from the oppressive rule of kings, prefacing it with these words: “Honest old Rollin’s ‘reflections’ upon the course of the Roman Republic are important to-day, as the republic of the United States has started in this identical path.” Two paragraphs from the “Ancient History” then printed in the Review run as follows:— “The Romans declared loudly in favor of those republics [of Greece]; made it their glory to take them under their protection, and that with no other design, in outward appearance, than to defend them against their oppressors; and further to attach them by a still stronger tie, they hung out to them a specious bait, as a reward for their fidelity—I mean liberty, of which all the republics in question were inexpressibly jealous, and which the Macedonian monarchs had perpetually disputed with them.” “The bait was artfully prepared, and was eagerly swallowed by the generality of the Greeks, whose views penetrated no further. But the most judicious and most clear-sighted among them discovered the danger that lay concealed beneath this charming bait; and, accordingly, they exhorted the people from time to time, in their public assemblies, to beware of this cloud that was gathering in the west; and which, changing on a sudden into a dreadful tempest, would break like thunder over their heads to their utter destruction.” Then we closed the article with these words: “This extract will be good to keep, and to read along with much spread-eagleism that has been, and that will be, manifested upon ‘Imperial America,’ ‘our colonial policy,’ and ‘our obligations to extend the blessings of liberty to oppressed peoples’ and ‘to all the world.’” This same thought we have followed up from time to time ever since, because there has been abundance of occasion for it. It was for these reasons that we never had a particle of confidence in the professions of the extending, by the United States, of “the blessings of liberty to oppressed peoples.” We knew that ancient Rome, and her character, are cited in the book of Daniel especially for the last days. We knew that this history was not thus cited in the word of God in vain. We had studied that history, to know what the real character of that ancient republic was. And, knowing that it was thus cited in the word of God as instruction to the people of the last days,—these present times,—and knowing that the only great republic that there is in the world is the United States, it was easy to know where to look for the events concerning which the career of this ancient great republic was so especially instructive. And, knowing that the blessings of liberty promised by that ancient great republic were delusions; and, knowing that that republic is cited in the word of God as instruction for “the last days,” we could not possibly have any confidence in “the blessings of liberty” promised by the modern great republic. Still, that great benevolence was being loudly proclaimed by the government of the United States. June 20, 1900, the convention of the National Party, in their platform, declared that “to Cuba independence and self-government were assured in the same voice by which war was declared, and to the letter this pledge shall be performed.” Yet, for all this, we knew that it would not be so; because, in addition to the warnings which the Scripture gives upon the subject, there were constantly appearing evidences, on the part of the government itself, that the promises to Cuba were never to be kept, either in spirit or in letter. When the directions of the United States were given for the creation and the holding of a convention to frame a constitution for Cuba, the instructions plainly showed that there was no such thing to be allowed as Cuban independence. A newspaper correspondent in Washington who plainly had access to the innermost circles of information of the administration, was constantly writing in the magazines, as well as in his regular newspaper, facts and information concerning the purposes of the administration, which showed conclusively that, on the part of the administration, there was no intention of recognizing any such thing as the independence of Cuba. However, it was first decided to communicate to the Cuban Convention that, when the convention had framed and adopted a constitution for Cuba, then the convention was “to formulate what, in your opinion, ought to be the relations between Cuba and the United States.” And when the convention had formulated their relations, then “the government of the United States will doubtless take such action on its part as shall lead to a final and authoritative agreement between the people of the two countries to the promotion of their common interests.” The Cuban Convention framed a constitution for Cuba; but this other arrangement, dictated by the United States, was not carried out. Then the convention was informed that unless they did make such arrangements, the President of the United States could not present to Congress their constitution, with his approval. Still the Cuban Convention delayed. Then, Feb. 27, 1901, the Senate of the United States, and Thursday, February 28, the House of Representatives, passed legislation by which, on the part of the United States, the power of the United States is extended over Cuba forever, and by which is established forever “the right” of the United States “to intervene for . . . the maintenance of a government” in Cuba. And, with all this, the government of the United States declares “that the government of Cuba consents that the United States may exercise the right to intervene,” etc. Cuba had not consented, nor has she yet consented, except with the mere consent of silence in the presence of the overwhelming power of one of the mightiest world Powers. But the United States has declared “that the government of Cuba consents that the United States may exercise the right to intervene for . . . the maintenance of a government” in Cuba “adequate . . . for discharging the obligations with respect to Cuba, imposed by the Treaty of Paris on the United States, now to be assumed and undertaken by the government of Cuba.” Thus, on her own initiative, the United States government has swept away her own official promise of freedom and independence to Cuba, and her promise not “to exercise jurisdiction, sovereignty, or control over said islands, except for the pacification thereof,” and has established forever her power over Cuba, and her “right” forever, at any moment, “to intervene” in the affairs of the government of Cuba. And thus, in principle and in practice, in spirit and in the letter, the republic of the United States has repeated the crafty policy of the republic of Rome. Of the republic of Rome, and of Rome of all time, it is written: “Through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many.” Dan. 8: 25. Out of Rome was formed the Beast. The republic of the United States is walking, step after step, in the way of the republic of Rome. Under the pretensions of a peaceful, lamb-like disposition, this republic, too, “through his policy also, shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; . . . and by peace shall destroy many.” From that thing anciently came the Beast. From that same thing, repeated in these last times, comes the Image of the Beast. And now, with an emphasis that it never had before, the Third Angel’s Message speaks with its “loud voice:” “If any man worship the Beast and his Image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the10 wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of His indignation. . . . Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.” IN THE MIDDLE OF THE WEEK
By Uriah Smith
A CORRESPONDENT sends us a query about the meaning of the phrase “the midst [or middle] of the week.” Every reader of the REVIEW will recognize it as belonging to the subject of the 70 weeks of Dan. 9:24, which is a branch of the 2300 days, of Dan. 8:14, an important and essential link in the prophecy. We are happy to receive queries on this subject; for we are glad to know that the minds of Bible students are being turned to the study of the prophetic periods, of which there are no more important ones than the 2300 days and the 70 weeks. These are, and ever will be, timely and current topics in our study of the chart of the current of probation, especially in its closing stages. They are topics of immediate importance and lasting value, to guard against errors and wrong views continually pressing upon us, and to guide us through the future. They are like the pillars for which Sampson inquired in the temple of the Philistines when he was about to be avenged of his enemies. To the lad who held him by the hand he said, “Suffer me that I may feel the pillars whereupon the house standeth.” So the 2300 days and the 70 weeks are the pillars whereon the whole scheme of the Third Angel’s Message rests, so far as prophetic periods are concerned; that is to say, If these can be set aside or overthrown, the whole superstructure falls to the ground. The period of the 2300 days is the great landmark by which we can take our bearings in reference to every other prophetic date. How is this or that date related to the 2300 days? — and having settled this, we know where we are. It strikes all branches of the work in its history. When great crises are upon the world, and especially at that point where its computation comes to an end, its extensive and important bearing is seen. At that time, when this period ended, the truth of God had reached a great crisis in its religious development, and the world a great crisis in its religious experience. The veil was lifted which opened a view into eternal scenes — the doings of the great court of assize in the heavenly temple, which has to do with the world from the time of its fall to the day of its redemption, and with all the millions of men who have to do with its checkered scenes. “Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.” That scene is opened in the development of the gospel which shall not close till all things are finished. In the early days of the message the themes of the 2300 days and the 70 weeks were more prominent subjects than they have been in later years, because they were then a more newly developed collateral evidence of a truth which Adventists were trying to enforce upon the attention of the people; and everywhere were seen and heard, in articles and discourses on the prophecies, the announcements, “The prophetic era of the world has come; The 2300 days demand an explanation; At the end of the days the sanctuary shall be cleansed; These days end in our times. Come and learn duty, and be prepared for the future.” Men listened; the world was stirred. A religious revival was aroused greater than any that has been seen since the great Reformation. Fifty-six years have passed since that division of the threefold message for these last days reached its culmination. But has a jot or tittle of the great truth of the 2300 days been erased from the record, or fallen under a cloud, or been taken away? — Not one jot or tittle. The thrilling propositions, and the arguments upon which they rest, stand full and complete, and as firm as ever. The remarks thus far are not intended as an answer to the queries which have been sent in for consideration, and which will be noticed later. What is here said is designed only as a reminder of the great themes, worthy of profound meditation and study, which cluster around this subject. Our correspondent is no novice on the subject of the 2300 days. It is only on one point that a query arises, which he would like explained, as will hereafter appear. He understands when the days began; that is, that they date from the beginning of the work authorized by the going forth of a commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem; and this commandment was issued to Ezra, by Artaxerxes Longimanus, the king of Persia, in the seventh year of his reign, B. C. 457. Ezra 7. This decree to Ezra is the only one which meets the specifications of the prophecy (Dan. 9:25) wherein the true decree is set forth. The decree of Cyrus, B. C. 336 (Ezra 1:1-4), did not meet the conditions; it was too limited. The same may be said of the decree of Darius, B. C. 519. Passing over the decree of Artaxerxes, to the commission to Nehemiah (Neh. 2:1-8), we find that that was not a decree at all, and is not so called. These are all that can be found, except that given to Ezra; but that contained ample provision to do all that was intended; namely, to restore and to build Jerusalem. It was drawn up in due form, and is fully recorded in Ezra 7. It restored to the Jews their civil polity, their religious ritual, and all else necessary to the existence of the nation as a theocracy. This was in the seventh year of the King Artaxerxes; and that year was 457 B. C., one of the best-established dates of all history. Thus do we have the important question, When did the 2300 days begin? answered beyond all dispute or question. The subsequent dates, as brought to view in Dan. 9:25, follow in the simplicity of arithmetical figures, and the accuracy of mathematics. The “seven weeks,” or the forty-nine years, allotted to the building of the city, extended to the last act of reformation by Nehemiah in the fifteenth year of Darius Nothus, B. C. 408. In this the events are found accurately fulfilling the prophecy; and the decree to Ezra is the only one from which to reckon, to find these results. We have the satisfaction of knowing when this decree, filling so important a place, was issued, by whom and to whom issued, under what conditions it was issued, the provisions it contained, and everything about it that needs to be known. All this is fully set forth. Ezra and his company did not reach Jerusalem till the fifth month (Ezra 7:8); and it would be a trifle later than that, or well into the autumn, according to the Jewish calendar, before the actual beginning of the work, which, according to the prophecy, must be the point from which to begin to reckon. From that point the “sixty-nine weeks,” or 483 years, to the Messiah the Prince, would end in a corresponding season of the year, A. D. 27; and in that very year Christ was anointed with the Holy Ghost and with power, and was manifested as the Messiah to the people. One week more, or seven additional years, remain to complete the whole period of seventy weeks. Tracing this along by years to its conclusion, we find ourselves in the autumn of the year A. D. 34, and at the end of that section of the great period of 2300 days which was cut off, or set apart, to mark the time during which the Jews should be nominally accounted the house of Israel, or the people of God. This last week that we have passed over takes us beyond the ministry of Christ, and of course covers the date of His crucifixion. And here is where the difficulty of our correspondent comes in. The prophecy brings to view the crucifixion of Christ in this manner: “And after three-score and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself.” Dan. 9:26. This must refer to the crucifixion of Christ; for that was the way in which He was cut off. And the next verse tells us how long it was after the three-score and two weeks that this took place: “And He [the Messiah] shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst [middle] of the week He shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation [the Jewish sacrificial services] to cease.” Christ did this by offering himself, the antitype of all their offerings, upon the cross. This was to be in the middle of this last week. Remember that the prophet is not speaking of the ordinary week of seven days, but of a prophetical week of seven years. Hence those who take this passage to prove that the crucifixion of Christ must have taken place on Wednesday, because that is the middle of the ordinary week, show that they are entirely11 off the subject. The middle of this week of years would be three years and a half from the beginning of this week, at the baptism of Christ. Three and one-half years from the autumn of A. D. 27 would bring us to the spring of A. D. 31; and here, according to the prophecy, the crucifixion should have taken place; and here it must have taken place; for the scriptures can not be broken. But the compilers of the New Testament have given as the date of the crucifixion A. D. 33. And now our correspondent wants to know how to adjust these statements. If all were from the Bible, it would be difficult; but some of them being from men, they are easy to correct. The date of the baptism of Christ in A. D. 27, is correctly given in the margin of Mark 1:10; also the date of the martyrdom of Stephen, just previously to the conversion of Paul, is correctly given as A. D. 34, in the marginal chronology of Acts 8:1. The death of Stephen, and the soon-following conversion of the apostle Paul, and his dedication to the carrying of the gospel to the Gentiles, impressively signalized the end of the seventy weeks; and if the true date of the crucifixion had been given, as the others named were given, there would be no difficulty. Our correspondent says that if the expression “in the midst of the week,” may mean any time during the week, then it can be explained; but if not, he wishes the evidence that the crucifixion was in the spring of A. D. 31. The expression can not mean “any time during the week.” The prophetic periods are far more rigid than that. It must mean the exact middle. The trouble of our correspondent arises from his taking it for granted that the dates given in the marginal readings of the Gospels are all and always correct. This, unfortunately, is not the case. On this point we shall be allowed to transcribe a few paragraphs from the work, “Looking unto Jesus,” pages 191-193:— “The date which this gives for the crucifixion, A. D. 31, is confirmed by abundance of testimony. The crucifixion was attended by a preternatural darkening of the sun, for the space of three hours. Matt. 27:45. ‘A total eclipse of the moon may occasion a privation of her light for an hour and a half, during her total immersion in the shadow; whereas a total eclipse of the sun can never last, in any particular place, above four minutes, when the moon is nearest to the earth, and her shadow thickest.’—Hales, Vol. I, page 69. . . . Hence, it appears that the darkness which ‘overspread the whole land of Judea at the time of our Lord’s crucifixion was preternatural, from the sixth until the ninth hour, or from noon till three in the afternoon, in its duration, as also in its time, about full moon, when the moon could not possibly eclipse the sun. The time it happened, and the fact itself, are recorded in a curious and valuable passage of a respectable Roman Consul, Aurelius Cassiodorus Senator, about A. D. 514. ‘In the consulate of Tiberius Cæsar, August 5, and Ælius Sejanus (U. C. 784, A. D. 31), our Lord Jesus Christ suffered, on the 8th of the Calends of April (25th of March); when there happened such an eclipse of the sun as was never before nor since.’ In this year, and in this day, agree also the Council of Cæsarea, A. D. 196 or 198; the Alexandria Chronicle, Maximus Monachus, Nicephorus, Constantinus, Cedrenus; and in this year, but on different days, concur Eusebius, Epiphanius, followed by Kepler, Bucher, Patinus, and Petavius; some reckoning it the 10th of the Calends of April, others the 13th.”—Id., pages 69, 70. “The common Bible chronology, placing the crucifixion in A. D. 33, was, according to Dr. Hales, assumed on no earlier authority than that of Roger Bacon, in the thirteenth century, who, finding, by computation, that the paschal full moon fell on Friday, in the year 33, was led by that circumstance to suppose that that must have been the year of the crucifixion. But this very circumstance Dr. Hales claims as proof that that was not the year; for the true paschal full moon should come, not on the day of the crucifixion, but the day before, when Christ ate the passover with His disciples.” “We have thus thirteen credible authorities locating the crucifixion in the spring of A. D. 31. And all the evidence on this point tends also to establish the date of Christ’s baptism in the autumn of A. D. 27; for, according to the prophecy, the Messiah was to be cut off after three years and a half from the time of His manifestation; and, according to the evangelists, His ministry continued just that length of time, three years and a half. If, therefore, He was crucified in the spring of A. D. 31, He was baptized and commenced to preach three and a half years before, in the autumn of A. D. 27.” The answer to the query of our correspondent, then, is this; namely, the dating of the crucifixion in A. D. 33 is a mistake, made in the manner already stated. It is inconsistent with the other dates, which fact shows that it is wrong, and should be corrected. The crucifixion was in the spring of A. D. 31, exactly where the prophecy demands it; and this is sustained by a sufficient amount of unimpeachable testimony. Thus the whole argument for the 70 weeks and the 2300 days, and the conclusions upon which we rest concerning them, are as solid as a rock. U. S. WHAT IS BEST?
By L. A. Reed
BEFORE God finally chose what themes He should present to men in the literature of the Bible, He called into council with Him His only Son. And “that which in the councils of heaven the Father and the Son deemed essential for the salvation of man, was defined from eternity by infinite truths [themes] which finite beings can not fail to comprehend.” — “Special Testimony on Education,” pages 6, 7. “He who came forth from God to our world gave instruction on every subject [theme] about which it is essential that man should know in order to find the pathway to heaven. To Him, truth was an ever-present, self-evident reality; He uttered no suggestions, notions, or opinions; but presented only solid, saving truth.” — Id., page 4. What are the great themes of Biblical literature, and of what do they treat? It is evident that if we study these themes, and abandon our minds to them, they will absorb all our thoughts and become the stimulus of our lives. I read that “eternal interest should be the great theme of teachers and students.” Therefore, I take it, that whatever these themes of Biblical literature may be of themselves, and however many of them there may be, they all relate to eternal interest; and eternal interest should be our one great theme. Why not? All other themes must eventually get out of date. But all that God does in thought and act is done in the light of eternity, with a purpose that is eternal, and with a meaning, therefore, that is infinite. But some will say, “Very well, in Biblical literature we study that which will save our souls, and in the world’s literature we learn things helpful in other ways.” But with God there are no ways but eternal ways; and so it is impossible to find things helpful in other ways. Everything we do, whether we eat or drink, or whatsoever we do, should be done for eternity. We can learn nothing but that it will in some way affect our salvation. It must be either for or against our eternal life. Every thought that we think is a help or a hindrance to our walk with God, for as a man thinketh, so is he. If the thoughts of other men are not positively harmful, yet in order to think their thoughts, we must for the time being fail to think God’s thoughts; and for us to go one moment without thinking with Him is for us to go for so long a time without God; it is for us to walk alone. But Enoch walked with God, and he had this assurance that he pleased God, and God took him, and so he still walks with God. Furthermore, for every moment that we leave God’s thoughts out of our minds, we are weakened in the combat with sin. Ah, if we knew what we have to do yet in order to remove the marring effects of sin, we should not fritter away one precious moment in anything that would not be for our direct advancement heavenward. “Eternal interest should be the great theme of teachers and students.” All the noble themes worth consideration are in the literature of the Bible. For, “from God, the fountain of wisdom, proceeds all the knowledge that is of value to man, all that the intellect can grasp or retain.” What do you care then for other knowledge, when all that is of value to you comes in His word from God? And how much more than “all that the intellect can grasp or retain” do you expect to get into this mind of yours? L. A. REED. THE YEAR OF JUBILEE
By Percy T. Magan
The year of jubilee was the happiest of all the years to the people of Israel. No service, no sacrifice, gave as much joy as did this ordinance. So true is this fact, that the very word “jubilee” has come into common use as the expression of the acme of happiness. And now Seventh-day Adventists have been told by the Spirit of Prophecy that “if all will take hold of this work of rolling back the reproach of debt from our schools, in the spirit of self-sacrifice, for Christ’s sake and for the truth’s sake, it will not be long before the jubilee song of freedom can be sung throughout our borders.” This is not an arbitrary promise. It is a fundamental part of the gospel and the Third Angel’s Message. The twenty-fifth chapter of Leviticus is the chapter of the Bible on the jubilee. Here is what it says:— “And thou shalt number seven sabbaths of years unto thee, seven times seven years; and the space of the seven sabbaths of years shall be unto thee forty and nine years. Then shalt thou cause the trumpet of jubilee [“loud of sounds,” margin, Heb.] to sound on the tenth day of the seventh month, in the day of atonement shall ye make the trumpet sound throughout all your land. And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof: it shall be a jubilee unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family.” Let every one notice, first of all, the time when the year of jubilee began. The trumpet of jubilee was to sound on the tenth day of the seventh month, in the day of atonement. It did not begin at the regular time for the beginning of the Jewish year; it began “on the tenth day of the seventh month, in the day of atonement.” The day of atonement was the day when all Israel waited around the tabernacle, afflicting their souls until the descent of the cloud announced that God had blotted out their sins. The day of atonement was a blessed day in Israel; for what can be more blessed than the knowledge that our sins have been blotted out? The day of atonement came every year; but the year of jubilee came only once in fifty years, and it began on the day of atonement. But the year of jubilee was the year in which EVERY SOUL WENT FREE FROM DEBT. Then what day could be more of a jubilee day than the one in which all sins were blotted out and all debts were wiped away? In these closing scenes of time, we are living in the antitypical day of atonement, when Jesus is blotting out the sins of those who seek for pity and for pardon. And, thank God, we are also living in the antitypical year of jubilee, when every debt that stands as a reproach against the cause and name of God is to be wiped out. Israel sang the song of jubilee when her debts were canceled. The same is promised to the remnant Church to-day, that we shall sing the song of jubilee, when, in loyalty to God, we have rolled back the reproach of debt which stands as a disgrace against the institutions that bear His name. It is written that in the year of jubilee “ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his own family.” This also is true to-day; for when all our sins and all our debts are blotted out and washed away, the ransomed of the Lord shall return and come to Zion, the purchased possession, and we shall be infolded in the arms of those dear ones of our family, whom “we have loved long since, and lost awhile.” In the year of jubilee the land reverted to the original owner. It is written: “The land shall not be sold forever: for the land is mine; for ye are strangers and sojourners with me.” And now God calls upon us to free our schools from debt, and let them become once more in deed and in truth dedicated to God himself. The jubilee is designed to teach every soul that all we have is not our own, but only held in trust for God. By selling and sacrificing our houses and our lands to pay these debts, we shall learn the precious lesson of being “strangers and sojourners” with Christ. Lastly, Israel was given the year of jubilee that they might remember that they had been BONDmen in the land of Egypt, and that God had called them out of that dire captivity. Jesus, the Lord of heaven, surrendered the hoarded wealth of eternity, the mansions of His Father, the gardens and vineyards of Paradise, and the balmy bowers of the tree of life. He left all, and for our sakes came to earth and became poor, that through His poverty we might roll back the reproach of the debt of sin which bound the human family with the bands of death. IN SOUTH LANCASTER ACADEMY TERRITORY
Professor Griggs, the principal of the South Lancaster Academy, is upbraiding me, good-naturedly, for not doing more for the RELIEF OF THE SCHOOLS in his district; but from his own letters and reports, New England does not appear to be asleep, but is hard at work. Here are a few cheery notes from a recent letter from him, and a clipping which he sent:— “I feel that we have done remarkably well, all things considered, in this district. Two thousand dollars, and I should not wonder if considerable more, has already been received for books. We have paid from a thousand to fifteen hundred dollars on our debt, and are in a condition where we can meet every demand.” “There are some encouraging reports coming in from the workers. I notice you are cracking up the Western work, but I want you to understand that things are going on here without the cracking. I will inclose you a clipping from the report of one brother. This man has sent us over a hundred dollars in money from the sale of books. He writes as follows:— “I have never so thoroughly enjoyed meeting people as I have the last few days in trying to sell this book [“Christ’s Object Lessons”]. The Lord has given me a wonderful blessing. I have taken between fifty and sixty orders, in about a week and a half, and have not put in my whole time, nor half the time. I have called upon some prominent business men, and they have manifested a very willing disposition to take the book. I have met persons12 on the sidewalk, taken out the book and canvassed them, and sold right there; have met some in the middle of the road, and sold the book there, and received my money; have exchanged books for groceries; have gone out to do business, and in the midst of the business have turned the subject and sold a book, and delivered it on the spot.” “This brother cites a number of instances where he made sales, and adds the following: ‘A man to whom I sold a book stopped me on the street and asked me to bring him seven copies for the members of his Sunday-school class. He said that “Christ’s Object Lessons” is the best gem he ever saw. And so the work goes.’”