Your ShelfYour Projects

Review and Herald, Vol. 46, No. 5.

Constantine—No. 2

Review and Herald

Jul 29, 1875

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jul 29, 1875

CONSTANTINE.—NO. 2.

BY J. H. WAGGONER.
Neander, the justly celebrated church historian, is not a whit behind Gibbon in his condemnation of the life of Constantine. He does not hesitate to ascribe his acts in favor of Christianity to deception and a lust for power. He says:—
“Constantine must indeed have been conscious that he was striving, not so much for the cause of God, as for the gratification of his own ambition and love of power; and that such acts of perfidy, mean revenge, or despotic jealousy, as occurred in his political course, did not well befit an instrument and servant of God, such as he claimed to be considered; but there was here the same lamentable self-deception, the same imposition upon one’s own conscience, which is so often to be seen in the mighty of the earth who wear religion as their motto, and which, in their case, so easily insinuates itself and gains the mastery, because it is so difficult for truth to find its way through the trappings of pomp which surround them; because they are approached by so many who, blinded themselves, dazzled by this splendor, blind them still more in return; and because no one has ever got access to them, who had the impartiality or the courage to discover to them the cheat, and teach them how to distinguish between outward show and truth. Thus was it with Constantine. And what wonder that he should proceed under such a delusion, when even Eusebius, one of the best among the bishops at his court, is so dazzled by what the emperor had achieved for the outward extension and splendor of the church as to be capable of tracing to the purest motives of a servant of God all the acts which a love of power that would not brook a rival had, at the expense of truth and humanity, put into the heart of the emperor in the war against Lucius; and of even going, so far as to represent him as giving out the orders of battle by a special divine inspiration, bestowed in answer to his prayers, in a war that beyond all question had been undertaken on no other grounds than those of a selfish policy.”—Pages 22, 23, vol. ii.
The testimonies thus far presented speak of his life in such general terms as to cover the periods both before and after his reputed conversion. We now offer a few which speak more particularly of the latter part of his life, after his profession of faith in Christianity. Neander relates as a fact, what many have referred to, that he embraced the faith of the Christians because his bishops offered him that consolation which the pagan priests, on account of the enormity of his crimes, refused to give him. These are the words of Neander:—
“When at length he began to feel the reproaches of conscience, he inquired of the Platonic philosopher, Sopatros, or according to others, of heathen priests, what he could do to atone for his crimes. It was replied to him that there was no lustration for such atrocious conduct. At that time an Egyptian bishop from Spain became known at the palace, through the ladies of the court. He said to the emperor that in the Christian faith he could find a remedy for every sin; and this promise, which soothed the conscience of Constantine, first led him to declare decidedly in favor of Christianity.”
With these facts before us, we do not wonder at the estimate put upon his Christianity by Neander in the following words:—
“It is most probable that, carrying his heathen superstition into Christianity, he looked upon baptism as a sort of rite for the magical removal of sin, and so delayed it, in the confidence that although he had not lived an exemplary life, he might yet in the end be enabled to enter into bliss, purified from all his sins.”—Church History, p. 29.
The superstitious nature of his religion is shown by such testimony as the following. Theodoret’s history contains the emperor’s letter to Sapor, king of Persia, in which he said:—
“My soldiers believe in this God; they bear his standard, and through him they gain the most famous victories.”—Theodoret, p. 76.
Another ancient writer speaks as follows:—
“Moreover Constantine caused the nails, with which Christ’s hands were fastened to the cross, to be converted into bridle bits and a helmet, which he used in his military expeditions.”—Socrates’ Eccl. Hist., p. 48.
These, as the labarum, or standard of the cross, were superstitiously regarded as charms, by which victory was to be gained in battle.
A very interesting article was recently published in the Christian Union, being an extended notice of a book of “Voyage and Travaill, which treated of the way to Hierusalem, and marvayles of Ynde, with other Llands and Contrees.” It was written by a Sir John Mandevil, in which he describes the place where the nails were found, and gives us to understand that virtue was ascribed to them in procuring victory. The following is an extract verbatim:—
“Also, within the Mount of Calvarye on the right side, is an Awter, wher the piler lyeth that our Lord Jhesu was bound to whan he was scourged, and ther besyde iij fote, ben iij pilers of ston that alweys dropen water. And summe seyn that thei wepen for our Lordes deth! And nygh that Awtier is a place under erthe, xliij degrees of deepnesse, where the only croys was founden by the wytt of Seynte Elyne, under a roche wher the Jewes hadde hide it. And that was the verray croys assayed. For thei founden iij crosses, on of oure Lord and ij of the ij thefes. And Seynte Elyne preved hem on a ded bodye that aros from death to lyve whan that it was leyd on it that our Lord dyed on! And there by in the wall is the place where the iiij nayles of oure Lord were hidd; . . . and one of these the Emperour of Constantinople made a brydill to his hors, to ber him in bataylle, and thorgh vertue thereof he overcam his enemyes and wan all the land of Asye the lesse.”
Without pretending to be versed in such literature, we will venture a rendering of the above, as it will be necessary for some readers to enable them to discover the point of the historian’s statement:—
“Also, within the Mount of Calvary on the right side, is an altar, where the pillar lieth that our Lord Jesus was bound to when he was scourged, and there beside four feet, are four pillars of stone, that always drop water. And some say that they weep for our Lord’s death. And nigh that altar is a place under earth, forty-four degrees (steps, probably) deep, where the true cross was found by the wit of Saint Helena, under a rock where the Jews had hid it. And that was the true cross proved (identified). For they found three crosses, one of our Lord and two of the thieves. And Saint Helena proved it on a dead body that arose from death to life when it was laid on it that our Lord died on. And near there in the wall is the place where the four nails of our Lord were hid. And of one of these the emperor of Constantinople made a bridle to his horse, to bear him in battle, and through virtue thereof he overcame his enemies and won all the land of Asia the less.”
The “Saynte Elyne,” here mentioned was no other than Helena, the mother of Constantine. Some historians say she caused the nail to be made into a bridle bit, and had the others wrought into his helmet for the benefit of her son.
Thus one testifies:—
“She gave orders that some of the nails should be driven into the royal helmet, in order that the head of her child might be preserved from the darts of his enemies; and she ordered some of the other nails to be fixed in the bridle of his horse, not only to insure the safety of the emperor, but also to fulfill an ancient prophecy.”—Theodoret, p. 63.
It appears evident that the mother and son were infected with the same spirit of superstition; and that much of Constantine’s regard for Christianity sprung from the benefit which he supposed he had received in battle from the sign or standard of the cross, and from the nails of the crucifixion found by his mother at Jerusalem.
Waddington speaks of his character thus:—
“The year which followed the final success of Constantine was disgraced by the execution of his eldest son; and it is not disputed that the progress of his career was marked by the usual excesses of intemperate and worldly ambition. Some of his laws were severe even to cruelty, and the general propriety of his moral conduct cannot with any justice be maintained.”—Church History, p. 83.
Dr. Carl Hase speaks emphatically of his character and life after his profession of Christianity:—
“The emperor still remained Pontifex Maximus, and some of his enactments indicate that he honored, or at least feared, the magical arts of the old paganism. Political interests seemed imperatively to require that Christianity should be established as the religion of the State, that those religious questions which were then producing innumerable divisions might be decided. . . . The same sign which has originally given him the victory (Labarum 312) has also conducted him to universal dominion, and he therefore regarded himself as the favorite of Heaven, called to secure an equal dominion for the cross of Christ. And yet he was not restrained from desecrating that very cross by hands deeply imbued with blood—the blood of his own son (326).”—History, pp. 103, 104, sec. 93.
That he retained throughout his life the title of Pontifex Maximus, or high priest of the pagan rites, is worthy of note. It certainly leads to the conclusion, which some writers have boldly declared, that he never came to consider the Christian religion as the only true one, or the God of the Christians as the only one worthy of being worshiped. But that, while he worshiped the gods, or at least honored them, he selected Christ as his “tutelary god,” and honored him above the rest. Thus Gibbon says:—
“His liberality restored and enriched the temples of the gods; the medals which issued from his imperial mint are impressed with the figures of Jupiter and Apollo, of Mars and Hercules; and his filial piety increased the council of Olympus by the solemn apotheosis [deifying] of his father Constantine.”—Page 251.
It is also to be noted that, while he retained the pagan title of Pontifex Maximus, he also took upon himself the office of a minister of the gospel of Christ, and preached in the congregations, as well as presided over a Christian Council. It is needless to say that he was flattered by his Christian courtiers on account of his wonderful discourses! Dr. Schaff says one of his sermons “is still extant, in which he recommends Christianity in a characteristic strain, and in proof of its divine origin, cites especially the fulfillment of prophecy, including the Sibylline books and the Fourth Eclogue of Virgil.”—Church History, vol. ii., p. 34.
This gives us at once an idea of his ministry and the character of his religion.
We have always been surprised that Christian people of this day, with all the facts within their reach, persist in styling Constantine a “Christian emperor.” But our wonder has been greatest to hear them speak of the happy time when “the empire became Christian.” So far from the empire becoming Christian the church in that day became anti-Christian. Dr. Dowling, in examining the rise of the great apostasy, says:—
“Many of the errors, indeed, of several centuries, the fruit of vain philosophy, paved the way for the events which followed; but the hindrance was not effectually removed until Constantine the emperor, on professing himself a Christian, undertook to convert the kingdom of Christ into a kingdom of this world, by exalting the teachers of Christianity to the same state of affluence, grandeur, and influence in the empire, as had been enjoyed by pagan priests and secular officers in the State. The professed ministers of Jesus having now a wide field opened to them for gratifying their lust of power, wealth, and dignity, the connection between the Christian faith and the cross was at an end.”—History of Romanism, p. 29.
Neander informs us distinctly that this state of things was brought around by Constantine’s influence, who planned the condition of the church to conform to his own ideas for the peace and strength of his empire. In his remarks on Constantine and the Council of Nice, he says:—
“The heathen, he said, would be most easily led to salvation, if the condition of the Christians were made to appear to them in all respects enviable. They should consider that the advantage to be derived from preaching could not belong to all. Some, he said, might be drawn to the faith by being seasonably supplied with the means of subsistence; others were accustomed to repair to that quarter where they found protection and intercession (alluding to the intercession of the bishops); others would be won by an affable reception; others, by being honored with presents. There were but few who loved the exhibitions of religious doctrine; but few who were the friends of truth (therefore, few sincere conversions). For this reason, they should accommodate themselves to the characters of all, and, like skillful physicians, give to each man that which might contribute to his cure, so that in every way the saving doctrine might be glorified in all. A course of proceeding upon such principles must naturally have thrown open a wide door for all manner of hypocrisy. Even Eusebius, panegyrist of Constantine, blinded as he was by the splendor which the latter had cast over the outward church, although he would gladly say nothing but good of his hero; yet even he is obliged to reckon among the grievous evils of this period, of which he was an eye-witness, the indescribable hypocrisy of those who gave themselves out as Christians merely for temporal advantage, and who, by their outward show of zeal for the faith, contrived to win the confidence of the emperor, which he suffered them to abuse.”—History, p. 28.
Nothing can be added to the above words of Neander to make them impressive. Nothing more should be needed to put us on our guard against trusting to that age for any just decisions of truth. Gibbon says Constantine carried out the policy which he advised before the Council by offering valuable presents to those who would embrace Christianity. It was an age of great moral and religious darkness. The following words fitly describe it:—
“The simplicity of the gospel was corrupted; pompous rites and ceremonies were introduced; worldly honors and emoluments were conferred on the teachers of Christianity, and the kingdom of Christ in a great measure converted into a kingdom of this world.”—McClintock and Strong’s Cyclopædia, Art., Constantine.
And unfortunately the influence of that time and of those events is not lost upon the world and the church unto this day. As long as men praise Constantine and his works, and count the Roman Empire of the fourth century a Christian empire, so long are they guilty of putting darkness for light and evil for good; so long are they paying homage to a gross perversion and abuse of Christianity. Another eminent church historian says:—
“It were to be wished that there had been as much zeal at this time to support the doctrines and realize the power of the cross as there was to honor its formalities. But this was far from being the case. “For neither in Constantine, nor in his favorite bishops, nor in the general appearance of the church, can we see much of the spirit of godliness. Pompous apparatus, augmented superstitions, and unmeaning forms of piety, much show and little substance, appear.” This is the impression which the account given by Eusebius has left on my mind.
“External piety flourished, monastic societies in particular places were also growing; but faith, love, heavenly mindedness appear very rare; yet among the poor and obscure Christians I hope there was far more godliness than could be seen at courts, and among bishops and persons of eminence. The doctrine of real conversion was very much lost, or external baptism was placed in its stead; and the true doctrine of justification by faith, and the true practical use of a crucified Saviour for troubled consciences, were scarce to be seen at this time. There was much outward religion, but this could not make men saints in heart and life. The worst part of the character of Constantine is, that as he grew older he grew more culpable, oppressive in his own family, oppressive to the government, oppressive by eastern superfluous magnificence; and the facts to be displayed will show how little true humility and charity were now known in the Christian world, while superstition and self-righteousness were making vigorous shoots, and the real gospel of Christ was hidden from men who professed it.”—Milner, pp. 210, 211.
And thus again Dr. Hase:— “As fast as he could wisely do so, and by all the means which an absolute monarch can bring to bear upon his favorite plans, Constantine gradually bestowed upon the church security, wealth, privileges, and everything which could make it attractive.”—Page 103.

SATISFIED

Not here! Not here! Not where the sparkling waters Fade into mocking sounds as we draw near; Where in the wilderness each footstep falters— I shall be satisfied—but oh, not here!
Not here, where every dream of bliss deceives us; Where the worn spirit never gains its goal; Where, haunted ever by the thoughts that grieve us, Across us floods of bitter memory roll.
There is a land where every pulse is thrilling With rapture earth's sojourners may not know, Where Heaven's repose the weary heart is stilling, And peacefully life's time-tossed currents flow.
Far out of sight, while yet the flesh enfolds us, Lies the fair country where our hearts abide; And of its bliss is naught more wondrous told us Than these few words, “I shall be satisfied.”
Satisfied! Satisfied! The spirit's yearning For sweet companionship with kindred minds, The silent love that here meets no returning, The inspiration which no language finds—
Shall they be satisfied?—the soul's vague longing— The aching void which nothing earthly fills? Oh, what desires upon my soul are thronging As I look upward to the heavenly hills!
Thither my weak and weary steps are tending; Saviour and Lord, with thy frail child abide! Guide me toward home, where, all my wanderings ending, I then shall see thee and “be satisfied.”
—Sel.

THE RESURRECTION.

By George I. Butler

(Concluded.)
Nothing is more plainly stated than the fact that the resurrection of Christ is an illustration to us of the nature of the resurrection of his people. Their bodies will be like his. Christ was the first-fruits. 1 Cor. 15:23. As in the law the Jews were required to bring a sheaf of the first ripe grain, which was a specimen of the nature of the whole crop, so our Lord Jesus Christ became the first-fruits of those who slept, not as being the first one ever resurrected, but as showing the nature of the resurrected body, and as demonstrating the fact of a future coming to life of the dead. In the latter part of the chapter, he brings this likeness still more clearly to view: “The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from Heaven. As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy; and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.” We are then to bear the image of Christ, the heavenly. But in Phil. 3:21, the apostle states this so plainly that none can doubt: “Who [Christ] shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able to subdue all things unto himself.” We have only to look to his body, as it came from the tomb, and as it was seen by the disciples after his resurrection, and we may know just what our resurrection bodies will be. This is what the psalmist means when he speaks of awaking in his Lord’s likeness.
Going back to the gospel history, we learn that the very body which went down into the grave came forth from it. In it were the very marks and scars caused by the spear and nails which pierced his hands and side. When Thomas doubted, he was called to examine these carefully, to prove that this was the identical person who was crucified upon the cross. His body was a literal body; for he says, “Handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.” He took also a “piece of broiled fish, and of an honey comb, and did eat before them.” The same actual body that went down to the grave came up again. It had the same outlines and features as before; for he was recognized by his disciples. Had he not looked as before, they certainly would not have accepted him as their Lord. And yet glorious changes had taken place. He seems to have been capable of going rapidly from place to place. He could appear in their midst in a moment. He could cause their eyes to be holden, so that they could not know him. He could mount up to the sky, and pass away from the earth; and no law of gravitation could chain him here. In short, his body was like the angels’ in nature; and so will the bodies of the saints be in the resurrection state. Luke 20:36. There will be a glory attending them, as was the case with Moses at the transfiguration. He had doubtless been raised from the dead.
What ground for consolation do we have here! There is something tangible and real in the resurrection state. We shall have a real body, and, consequently, inhabit a real world. Our powers of locomotion will be like Christ’s in his glorified body. We shall have no need of beasts, coaches, cars, or ships, to convey us from place to place; but we shall mount up with wings as eagles, shall run and not be weary, and shall walk and not faint. Isa. 40:31. The righteous will be able to traverse the earth from its remotest bounds, and appear before God from Sabbath to Sabbath and from month to month (Isa. 66:23) with all the ease that angels of glory could come from the presence of God to comfort Daniel while he was praying. Dan. 9:21. Yes, and who shall say they will not visit other worlds, and behold the glorious workmanship of God? Certainly, if we have a body like Christ’s, these conclusions are inevitable.
Another most interesting and precious thought, suggested by the above facts, concerns the identification of persons in the future world. This is a question which must ever be of surpassing interest to us. How terribly sad if when our friends are laid away we never can hope to see and know them again—if all the memories and associations of this world are to be wholly obliterated from the mind! The resurrection would then be more like a new creation than a living again. The idea seems absurd on the very face of it. Our future life is entirely dependent on this. Our living faithfully here, and spending the probation we have here given to us properly, decides our future state. How reasonable, then, to suppose that we should ever realize this, and be thankful for the means and agencies which God uses for our salvation. The Revelator plainly states the fact that we shall occupy a portion of our time in praising our Saviour. We shall realize, then, in its fullest sense, that it was through his blood and ministry that our happy existence there was brought to us.
Everlasting gratitude will fill our hearts as we reflect upon our transition and the agencies through which it was brought about. Shall we entirely ignore those human agencies, which have also faithfully labored for us—such as faithful ministers, and companions, and friends who have toiled for our salvation? Certainly not. It would be a strange thing if we had no desire to see them there, and to resume their companionship. This would argue that we had far less love there than here, which would be absurd.
But we are expressly told that certain ones will be known. Moses and Elias were known, even to those who lived in this mortal state, when they appeared on the mount of transfiguration. Will Peter, James, and John, know less when they reach that perfect state, when that “which is in part, shall be done away”? Here we “see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face”; now we “know in part,” but then we shall know as we are known. We think their powers of knowing will be wonderfully increased. Certainly, then, they will know Moses and Elias there.
Even the wicked will see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of God. When they come around the holy city, just previous to their destruction, this will doubtless be fulfilled. These things argue strongly that we shall know each other there. But the fact that Christ’s resurrection is an exact sample of ours, the same as the sheaf of the first-fruits was a sample of the rest of the harvest, seems positively to prove recognition. His disciples did know him, and he knew them. Cannot the angels distinguish one another and us? We shall be as the angels are.
The prophet Jeremiah states a most interesting fact when he refers to the children put to death by wicked Herod when he destroyed all the infants in Bethlehem of two years old and under. Jer. 31:15–17: “Thus saith the Lord, A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, and bitter weeping; Rachel, weeping for her children, refused to be comforted, because they were not. Thus saith the Lord, Refrain thy voice from weeping, and thine eyes from tears; for thy work shall be rewarded, saith the Lord; and they shall come again from the land of the enemy. And there is hope in thine end, saith the Lord, that thy children shall come again to their own border.” These children had not gone to Heaven, unless Heaven is the land of the enemy. They were in the grave. But they should come forth. This is the plainest text in the Bible in regard to the future life of infants. These were very young. But they were to come forth—to live again. Were these mothers never to know their infants again? How then could those mothers’ hearts be comforted by this prophecy? How could their work be rewarded if they never should clasp their children again? If they came to their own border, and the mothers never knew one of them, the comfort would be lacking, terribly lacking.
Ah! here is infinite consolation, parents, to you who have lost dear children and precious babes. We have laid them down in sorrow. Our hearts have been pierced with anguish as we saw them in their coffins, and took the farewell look as they were lowered into the grave from our sight. And to some of us, even the consolation of smoothing their dying pillows, of closing their eyes in death, and of taking the last sad look, has been denied. But, thank God, there is hope in their end. The resurrection morn is soon to burst upon us. Old earth shall quiver and throb at the archangel’s trump, and shall bring forth at one mighty birth a nation of immortals. Parents will meet their children, companions their loved ones, dear friends shall greet one another there, never more to be sundered.
There is at times in our hearts an unutterable longing—a soul-hunger—to behold the faces of those we have loved, now, alas! laid away from our view. It seems to us we cannot have it so—as if life was robbed of its charms, and we were utterly heart-stricken. To such, oh, how precious the resurrection promise! “I am the resurrection and the life,” says the Son of God. How precious and important does this make the coming of Christ, which is to usher in the glad morn of immortality. They are waiting in peaceful rest for that glad moment, sweetly sleeping without a pang or sorrow, while our hearts in sadness mourn their absence. Prove to me we shall not know them, and you rob me of some of the most precious hopes that cluster around the glories of Heaven. We shall know them. “Refrain thy voice from weeping, and thine eyes from tears; for thy work shall be rewarded, saith the Lord; and they shall come again from the land of the enemy.”
What a morn of glory is before us, if we are only faithful! What a meeting after our parting! What a company will then be gathered! What joy! what bliss will be felt in every heart! All the truly good will be there, and not one evil person. The holy martyrs who died for the truth will be there. Friends most dear will greet one another. And the assembled, countless host, with their Lord and Saviour at their head, will then ascend to the city of God, to receive the mansions prepared for them. They will go through the pearly gates. They will walk the streets of gold. They will partake of the fruit of the tree of life. They will dwell in the presence of God himself. They will renew the acquaintance and fond associations which death has sundered; and eternity, endless, boundless, will open before them. Then shall we be satisfied. This is the hope which the resurrection makes possible. May God help us to prize it, to live in view of it. What is this poor world in comparison with this hope? It is vain and unsatisfactory. Here is a hope so glorious that souls in darkness will prize it when it is presented before them. May we all labor to bring it before others, that they may share in it at last.
GEO. I. BUTLER. Rolla, Mo., June, 1875.

“Things Written.”

By A. H. Vankirk

“For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope.” Rom. 15: 4.
In this passage of Scripture, thoughts of the greatest importance are suggested, and of a nature that ought to awaken in the breasts of all feelings of earnest inquiry. Here we are directed to that source of all hope, Christ, and here it is that we may obtain a knowledge that will be comforting to the soul. “Whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning”—written that we might gain a true knowledge of the will of our Heavenly Father concerning us.
“Knowledge is power,” and may there not, then, lie hidden in these aforetime-written things a knowledge that will give the learner such a power as can be obtained from no other source? To the humble and sincere Christian, one who has had experience in the things of God, the only acceptable answer is, Yes. But do we all understand the kind of learning to which Paul refers? Have not many fallen in with the idea that the learning spoken of is of an exemplary or historical nature, and written to inform later generations of what men in those times did, what mistakes they made, what sins were reproved, what trials were endured, &c.?
That the scope of the Scriptures embraces these things, none will dispute; but that this is all, the close reader of sacred lore is forced to deny. The subsequent words of the text under consideration prove that more than this is embraced in the teachings of the Bible; for we may through patience and comfort of these very Scriptures have hope. Indeed, hope seems to be made very prominent in the text, and it is that upon which all its considerations depend, and this hope, the text says, we may gain a knowledge of in those things that were written aforetime for our learning.
Hope is defined to be expectation joined with desire. We ask, then, What is there in the Scriptures that is able to inspire hope in our hearts? According to the words of Christ, the Jews had hope of eternal life through the teachings of the Scriptures. He did not reprove them for this hope, and by his silence on this point we may safely believe that he approved of it. If, then, a knowledge of an eternal existence, of an endless life, is to be derived from their perusal, what a comfort there is in them.
Let us consider the elements of hope. These, as before stated, are desire and expectation. Desire springs from surrounding circumstances. Now, are we not placed in a world where, according to our better reason and judgment, there are things not just right? Does not the true Christian daily, not only around, but within, himself see things occur that sicken the heart, thus kindling within him a strong desire for something better, for a world where all is bright, and where sin and unrighteousness are not known?
This desire having been created, is it at all unreasonable that we should look about ourselves to discover, if possible, evidences that we may realize that desire? Certainly not. But where look for the desired information? In nature, says the naturalist. But when death summons him, all seems dark. He who has trusted so much to nature, as it is termed, to enlighten him, has a hope that is truly fallacious; one that carries him to the dark portals of death, and there deserts him, leaving him in despair. No; finite man may boast as he will of the revelations of nature, but in regard to evidences of a future life, they are a blank. With all his intellect, Ethan Allen failed to find here a satisfying hope. Although he trusted so much to “reason and nature,” on his death-bed he is said to have told his daughter to heed the instructions of her mother, who rested her hope on the Scriptures alone.
Shall we not go, then, to the Scriptures, which Paul tells us are “profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works”? They certainly contain the things that were written aforetime, and through them we have hope of eternal life. Now, in order to inspire a hope of this kind, they must contain evidences that such a desire may be fulfilled.
That all desire eternal life, none will dispute; and that all may have it is amply set forth in the Bible. The following passage, found in 1 Tim. 2: 4, contains testimony on this point: “Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.” This salvation can only be obtained by patient continuance in well-doing. (Rom. 2: 7.) If, as some affirm, we already have immortality, or eternal life, there is no need that we continue in well-doing to gain it, and therefore here is a portion of Scripture that is not profitable to us. If we already possess immortality or eternal life, it is no more a matter of hope; for Paul says, Rom. 8: 24, “But hope that is seen [or known] is not hope; for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for?” and in the next verse he says, “But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it.” Would it not be better, then, to wait patiently in the comfort of the Scriptures for that hope which is to be realized in the future, when life shall be given us at the glorious revelation of Christ?
For further evidence that this hope has not been realized, we will resort again to that fountain of real knowledge, the Scriptures. In Job 4: 17, we find the following question: “Shall mortal man be more just than God?” Job here calls man mortal, and he must necessarily mean the thinking, intelligent part, as that, and that alone, can be just or unjust. But we are not left in the dark in regard to the meaning. In verse 19, we read that this man dwells in a house of clay. Here is most positive testimony in regard to our circumstances contained in things that were written aforetime for our learning. What greater evidence is needed to create a desire for something better? Surely, those who believe in the inherent immortality of man are mistaken, and they have no true hope.
Further evidence that our departed ones, the dead, have not realized this hope, or its fruition, is found in Job 14: 21: “His sons come to honor, and he knoweth it not; and they are brought low, but he perceiveth it not of them.” Now if immortality is inherent in man, and his intelligent existence continues after death, why may he not know of the trials of his sons who are left to battle with the realities of this world? Because, says the psalmist, in the day that his breath goeth forth, “his thoughts perish.” Read Ps. 146: 3, 4. Thought is an essential property of the mind, and an essential property cannot become extinct unless the thing to which it belongs becomes so.
We now have evidences that awaken a desire for eternal life, and will proceed to look for evidences upon which to base expectation. If these can be found, then we can indeed have hope through the things written in the Scriptures. David had very high expectations in his heart when he exclaimed, “As for me, I will behold thy face in righteousness; I shall be satisfied, when I awake, with thy likeness.” Ps. 17: 15. The beloved disciple bears a similar testimony in 1 John 3: 2: “Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be; but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.” Paul also, Phil. 3: 21, confirms the above in the words, “Who [Christ] shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.” “And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself even as he is pure.” 1 John 3: 3.
What reasons had these worthies for this strong hope—the strongest in the world? They had been eye-witnesses of the power of Christ in raising the dead to life; had seen him go into the grave; had talked with and handled him after his resurrection; had heard him say that he would also raise his followers “up at the last day.” What more was needed to convince them? Admitting their testimony to be true, we may rest in the blessed expectation of a realization of our desires of a better life; and if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, we can also rest assured that he will, when he comes, bring all the sleeping believers with him. Says Christ, “To him that overcometh I will give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.” Rev. 2: 7. “To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.” Chap. 3: 21.
Reader, let the uppermost thought of your mind be the hope of eternal life. Overcome, and with all the redeemed share with Christ eternal blessedness in his everlasting kingdom.
A. H. Vankirk.
Continue reading: So Shine