EXERCISE gives strength and power. Learning the principles of music will not make a man a musician. Practice is necessary in order to give the fingers that flexibility which is so indispensable to the accomplished performer. It is so with every power of the mind and every member of the body. Exercise is the power which causes growth and progress.
Teachers should recognize this principle, and not suffer their pupils to exercise any one faculty to the neglect of others. Pupils who have a taste for mathematics should be encouraged to study the natural sciences and language, and vice versa. In the perfect body all the members are equally attended to, and all the muscles are properly exercised. So, also, in the perfect mind all the faculties are developed and exercised in like proportion. None are dormant; none have excessive growth.
It is, no doubt, better for individuals to follow that trade or profession for which they have a natural inclination. This they can do without allowing it to monopolize them altogether. Of course it is impossible for one man to become conversant with all knowledge, or to thoroughly understand all trades; yet he can become posted on subjects of general interest, and cultivate to a good extent all the legitimate powers of his mind.
If these principles were more generally understood and practiced by parents and teachers, we should not have so many one-sided men and women in the world. Physical deformity is more noticeable than mental deformity. If a man were habitually to use his right hand to the neglect of his left, until that member became large and strong and the other weak and puny, he would be looked upon as insane; yet men may be met with on every hand who exercise one faculty of the mind, and suffer the others to remain dormant (although it is as inconsistent as the case cited above), and it is of such a common occurrence as to escape remark.—ELIZA H. MORTON, in College Record.
TEACHERS’ MEETINGS.
By R. A. Underwood; Ida Sharpe; Sarah Stevens
At the Sabbath-school meeting held in connection with the T. and M. Institute at Corsica, Ohio, Jan. 30, a committee was appointed to suggest a plan for conducting teachers’ meetings, and also to answer a few questions pertaining to the S. S. work. The following is the substance of their report:—
1. We recommend that the teachers and officers hold a meeting, either once a week or once a month.
2. That all engage in a season of prayer, earnestly seeking the Lord for help and strength to carry on the S. S. work, and that plans be here laid whereby the work of the school may be made more effective.
3. If maps, charts, blackboards, etc., are needed to add to the interest of the school, here provide some way that they may be obtained. See that the school has all the Instructors necessary.
4. If any class should need to be divided or two classes to be put together, consider this matter, and appoint the proper teachers. Consider what is needed to interest the small children, and see that they have teachers who understand how to hold their attention, and who have the love of God in their hearts.
5. Let each teacher bestow personal labor upon each member of his class, and, if proper, give his experience for the benefit of others. If some member of the school is upon the point of deciding to obey the truth, or is in deep trial or distress, let some one in particular be designated to visit him.
6. If possible, let a considerable portion of the time be devoted to the consideration of the lesson for the coming week. Consider what is the best way to get lessons, when to get them, and how to get them.
Let all seek the Lord before coming to these meetings, and plead for his blessing to rest upon them as they assemble.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS.
Can an unconverted person teach in the Sabbath-school successfully? We answer, No. We regard it as the first object of the Sabbath-school teacher to lead the unconverted to Christ. Our work is not only to cultivate the mental powers and to teach faith in the Holy Scriptures, but to enlighten the mind relative to the solemn message of warning that is going to the earth’s remotest bounds. Therefore, as the stream cannot rise higher than its fountain-head, one who is unacquainted with experimental religion would be unfitted to impart wisdom to those who may be saved or lost by his influence.
Should a teacher sit while teaching? We think not.
Should he finish teaching before the time for closing the recitations, and allow the class to sit idly gazing around the room? We answer decidedly, No. Teachers should be so full of the subject of the lesson that they could fill even double the time given to recitations. They should branch out upon the subject, that not one moment may be lost; and they should have such an interest that the scholars will catch the same spirit.
R. A. UNDERWOOD,
IDA SHARPE,
SARAH STEVENS, } Committee.
SPECIAL MENTION.
THE LITTLE POPES OF RUSSIA.
The following stirring narrative, if it is a correct representation of facts (and for this we have no less an authority than the Pall Mall Gazette, from which it is taken) shows how absolutely the Russian people are controlled by superstition and spiritual tyranny, and the fearfully low state of religion in that country. It will be read with painful interest:—
Dimitri Sadenow is the pope of a parish in the diocese of Pauloslav,—a large parish, straggling over ten miles in every direction from the parsonage, and miserably poor. The two or three barines, or squires, who reside in it get no rents from their broad acres, and live by farming their lands as they can and distilling vodki. This does not prevent them from occasionally making handsome presents of jewelry to deck the images of saints in their church; for they are superstitious, and if Dimitri chose to work upon their fears by preaching to them when they were tipsy, he might extract bigger donations than he does. But Dimitri is an unbeliever, a wretched, bitter, disappointed man, who took orders without any vocation, simply because he was the son of a pope and because the Archimandrite of Pauloslav did not choose to release him from the obligation of succeeding his father, which, though not actually binding in law, is made so by custom. Some say that Dimitri was a wild dog at college—that he got into the Nihilist set, and used to subscribe to the book club which clandestinely procured Socialist periodicals from Germany. Anyhow, when the lad had turned his twentieth year, and was preparing for the profession of engineer, he got into some trouble with the authorities, and was requested to take his choice between expulsion and ordination. Expulsion from college would have meant enrollment in the army and compulsory service therein for twelve years; so Dimitri, gnashing his teeth, consented to abandon the scientific studies which he loved and to devote his mind to mastering the absurdities of Russian theology.
This was a heavy fall for a youth who had talent and a yearning after truth; but worse was yet to come. Dimitri was in love, and in submitting to ordination he begged hard of his Archimandrite that he might be suffered to marry the girl of his heart. In Russia, however, it has always been sought to make of the white or secular clergy a sort of Levitical corporation by compelling the children of the popes to intermarry. So the Archimandrite told Dimitri that an old pope had just died in the diocese, leaving three daughters unprovided for, and that it would be seemly on his part to make his selection from among these three maidens. Dimitri, in his despair, chose the ugliest and most cross-tempered. He had no option about marrying or remaining single, for a pope is bound to marry; and he can only hold his benefice so long as his wife lives. When she dies, he may not marry a second time, but must resign his cure and become a monk—a hopeless monk, too; for, although all the dignitaries of the church are chosen from among the black or regular clergy, it is only the celibate monks who can aspire to honors. A widower has simply to resign himself to a life of idleness and of swindling by selling sham relics to simpletons—at least, if he wants to live comfortably. Thus, on the whole, Dimitri Sadenow settled into clerical life with a miserable prospect. He did not love his profession, his wife, nor his bishop; just to put too fine a point upon it, he would have consigned all three to perdition if he had believed in perdition, but he did not.
Dimitri had just enough consciousness to be thoroughly wretched in the career which fate had marked out for him. He found out, in the first place, that he was not receiving the amount of salary that was his due. There are 36,000 parishes in Russia, and the budget of the Public Worship Department amounts to £5,000,000 a year. This sum, distributed equally among the parishes, should give each £140 a year for the payment of a pope, a deacon, and two clerks. But it is in the interest of the bishops to keep the establishment of deacons and clerks undermanned, so that they may draw the salaries of these officers; and, in fact, Dimitri Sadenow received but £30 a year, though he was expected to fill up a yearly schedule stating that he had a deacon and two clerks, and was receiving the regular rates of pay for them. The first time that he had to sign this paper Dimitri rebelled, and made a marginal note to the effect that he was discharging alone the multifarious duties of his parish; but hereupon the Archimandrite sent a police officer to warn him that he must fill up his schedule as per order, and not according to fancies of his own, seeing that the number of deacons and clerks requisite in a parish depended upon the bishop himself and not upon individual popes. Dimitri took the hint, but soon he found himself in another dilemma; for one of the barines in his parish came to him with a request that he would undertake the sale of vodki among his parishioners on receipt of the usual commission. Now, Dimitri loathed vodki, both for himself and for others; but when he said as much to the barine, the latter was greatly shocked, and asked him whether it was seriously his intention to hinder native industry and to diminish the Czar’s taxes. The revenue, as he pointed out, was swelled chiefly from the returns of the excise officers; and it had been the custom among popes from time immemorial to recommend vodki to their parishioners as a grateful cordial, and to levy a percentage on the barrels of that liquor that were sold directly from the vestry or at the publican’s. Dimitri’s wife, who was present (at the keyhole) during their colloquy, broke out into a storm of invective when the barine was gone, and shrilly reminded her husband that she—a pope’s daughter—had thought it no disgrace to sell vodki, and that she did not see why her husband should have any scruples, since it was impossible that a pope could eat cabbage-soup daily and rear up a family on £30 a year.
Poor Dimitri, as usual, had to give in. He promised to sell spirits, and did so; but next there came to him a plausible bagman who had relics to sell, and who wanted Dimitri to preach a whole series of sermons on a certain shin-bone, which he avowed to be that of St. Isaac, and most potent in curing rheumatism, love-pangs, and colds in the head. Dimitri laughed outright. As a man of science he had recognized the alleged human shin-bone to be simply the femur of a four-legged animal, and he requested the bagman to go elsewhere with his blasphemous trumpery. Thereupon the bagman looked grave and tugged Dimitri mysteriously by the sleeve. “Look here, pope,” said he, “your bishop has given his voucher for this bone, and I have paid him 200 rubles for doing so; if now you venture to make sport of it, it’s a matter of heresy, nothing less.” Dimitri looked at the bone, pressed it to his heart, and walked off. He was beginning to learn prudence—not so much because he was afraid of his bishop as because he dreaded his wife. On the following Sunday he preached a grand sermon about the bone, and received a fee from the bagman in reward for his eloquence. He would have liked to pitch the money into the fire, but the wife of his bosom secured it before it had had time to reach his waistcoat pocket; and the same thing happened with respect to the consignment of relics which the bagman had left, and which were all bought up within a few days like bread in famine-time. It smote Dimitri to the heart that he had to recommend these impostures and get money for them; but he was no longer a free agent, and his conscience had become a thing of naught, rubbed away between conflicting interests.
One day a Nihilist agent called upon him, and asked him whether he would sell a few tracts. Dimitri’s feelings would have prompted him to cry out, “Yes, with all my heart!” but he was already so trained to cautious ways that he merely held out his hand and said, “My fee will be ten rubles.” The sum in question having been paid, Dimitri promised that he would try to dispose of the seditious literature, and he has kept his word. He is now what one may call a priest in full practice. He sells vodki; he scatters religion with one hand and Nihilism with the other. Dressed in his canonicals, he looks holy as the saints in illuminated missals, but within he is all full of rageful thoughts; and if a revolution occurred, he would be first to set fire with his own hands to that gaudy parish church of his, which is stocked to overflowing with offerings, which recall to his mind the degrading superstitions of the people among whom he lives, and force his reason to revolt against the profession which he exercises.
THE POLITICAL OUTLOOK IN SPAIN.
By Genil
The recent Spanish crisis which caused the downfall of General Martinez Campos, has caused such dissatisfaction to all the political parties, that we consider the trouble will be interminable while the actual Premier, Canovas del Castillo, sits on the Blue Bench. Every one knows that when Campos was Captain-General in Cuba, he pursued the best policy possible in order to bring the rebel chiefs of the insurrection in that country to peaceful terms, and he succeeded in his persistent idea of the pacification of the Island, by establishing in Cuba the same provincial system of government as that of the mother country; and as he was empowered by the Madrid cabinet to yield any privileges which he thought fit to the Gem of the Antilles, while making necessary reforms which were demanded by the state of affairs and condition of the country, he offered himself at the treaty of Zanjon to be the first to protect the Cuban interests and to promote the abolition of slavery. In March last, Campos was called to Spain by the home government to give an account of the affairs in Cuba, including a resumé of the new reforms which he had instituted. Having explained fully to the king and cabinet that a sudden and entire change in the government of the ultramarine provinces was most important, they decided in the most friendly manner that Canovas should retire from the post of President of the council, and the vacancy thus occasioned should be filled by Campos; this appointment he accepted willingly. Soon after, he entered into power, and not forgetting the promises which he had made to the men of Zanjon he followed his own policy, which was to extend not only the reforms in Cuba, but to remedy the evils which afflicted Spain, evils that the conservative party of Canovas has increased by the imbroglio which Canovas himself had provoked, by taking again the power, he not being entirely identified with the liberal ideas and policy of Martinez Campos. The imbroglio had its abettors, and the excitement in political circles and in the Cortes became intense. The public discontent of the Spanish people was hurled against the audacity of Canovas. An explanation was demanded by the minority of both houses with reference to the crisis caused by Canovas and his friend, Senor Romero Robledo, but Mr. Canovas declined to make any apology, and suddenly turned his back, leaving the Chambers, and saying at the same time that he was not accountable to anybody. The representatives regarded this action as one of the most imprudent insults that has ever been recorded in the history of Parliaments, and the minority, composed chiefly of Cubans, retired from their seats, breaking up the session and holding several meetings, in which it was agreed that they would not resume their seats while Canovas should be in power.
According to our information, Senors Canovas and Romero Robledo are natives of Malaga, and could not see with pleasure that the policy of Campos required the immediate abolition of slavery in all the Spanish dominions, and the protection of the sugar cane plantations of Cuba. This opposition on the part of Canovas and Robledo will be easily understood when we say that Robledo is married to the daughter of the late Senor Julian Zulueta, who left several sugar plantations with thousands of negros in Cuba, and, of course, Mr. Robledo, as Secretary of State, which office he has always held under the Canovas ministry, could not see the prospect of an immediate liberation of the slaves which he still held in that Island without opposing the measure with all his strength. Mr. Canovas, believing that if he were to favor the sugar plantations of Cuba, those of Malaga would lose in their importance and interest, thought proper to cause the imbroglio of which we have before spoken, and together with Romero Robledo they reached the strategic point at which they overthrew Campos.
Now we learn that not only the political parties, but the whole nation is against Senor Canovas del Castillo, because the policy of his new cabinet, by the advice of Robledo, has suspended more than fifteen daily papers in Madrid, and as many in the provinces, and it is natural that public men should be agitated on the subject. Lately an interview has taken place between General Campos and Senor Sagasta, the leader of the constitutional party, and it seems that Senor Canovas is not very secure in his post, although it appears that he has assumed the Portfolio of the Interior, appointing at the same time the Count de Toreno as President of the Congress, in consequence of the death of Senor Ayala, its former President. We think from present appearances that Canovas will be obliged to leave the ministry; then Senor Sagasta undoubtedly will form a new cabinet of the constitutionalists, and things may take a different shape in Spain and Cuba. The constitutional, although monarchical, is the most liberal party in Spain, and we have no doubt that by changing the policy of the country altogether, and keeping Canovas aside, both Spain and Cuba may gain, and still be saved from the conservative plague.—Genil, in America.
AFFAIRS IN THE BRITISH EMPIRE.
On the 5th of February, Parliament was opened by Queen Victoria in person. In the Queen’s speech, which was read by the Lord High Chancellor, she spoke of Afghan affairs, the situation in South Africa, and the necessity of action by the government to avert famine in Ireland, but carefully avoided the questions of political reform and land tenure. Of the pressing need of attention to these matters, the reader may judge by the following from the Christian Weekly of Feb. 7:—
There are rumors of an impending storm that threatens to break over Great Britain, that before it has passed may unsettle the foundations that have stood undisturbed for centuries. The present distress in Ireland has brought the question of land tenure prominently forward, and is exciting an agitation the issue of which no one is wise enough to forecast. John Bright, in a public speech last week, suggested the appointment of a commission with power to sell the farms in Ireland of landlords willing to sell to tenants willing to buy, and to advance three-fourths of the purchase money, the principal and interest to be repaid in 35 years. It is stated that one of the main questions before the coming Parliament will be a bill for the abolition of the law of primogeniture, and for the simplification of the transfer of land. A simple statement, but how radical may be the result! Of the 27,243,857 acres of England and Wales, 66 persons own 1,917,076; 100 persons own 3,917,611; and less than 280 own 5,425,764 acres. In Ireland 744 persons own 9,612,728 acres, or nearly one-half of the island, while in Scotland 24 persons own more than one-fourth the whole area, and 70 own 9,400,000 acres, or about one-half of the whole.
THE FIRST WEEK OF TIME.
By James White
The record of the several events of the first week of time, as they transpired in their order, is given in the first and second chapters of the book of Genesis. The work of creation was performed in the first six days of that week. The Creator rested from his work, or ceased to create, on the last day of the first week of time.
The year has its origin from the revolution of the earth around the sun; the day, from its revolution on its axis; the sacred month, from the phases of the moon; but the reckoning of time by weeks is not derived from anything in nature.
From the facts of creation alone the weekly cycle derives its origin. And the period of the week has been recognized in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments all the way down the ages, reaching into the present dispensation. Laban said to Jacob, “Fulfill her week, and we will give thee this also for the service which thou shalt serve with me yet seven other years. And Jacob did so, and fulfilled her week.” Gen. 29:27, 28. Here a day represents a year, as in the case of the seventy weeks of the ninth chapter of Daniel. The seventy weeks represent four hundred and ninety years, and the seventieth week, in the midst of which the Jewish sacrifices and oblations ceased with the death of the Son of God, represent seven years.
“The week, another primeval measure, is not a natural measure of time, as some astronomers and chronologists have supposed, indicated by the phases or quarters of the moon. It was originated by divine appointment at the creation—six days of labor and one of rest being wisely appointed for man’s physical and spiritual well-being.”—Bliss’ Sacred Chronology, p. 6; Hale’s Chronology.
“Seven has been the ancient and honored number among the nations of the earth. They have measured their time by weeks from the beginning. The original of this was the Sabbath of God, as Moses has given the reasons of it in his writings.”—Brief Dissertation on the first three Chapters of Genesis, by Dr. Coleman, p. 26.
“SEVEN. The way in which this number comes before us on many occasions in Scripture is very remarkable, and suggests that it must have had some hidden or typical significance. The present constitution of nature is recorded to have been made in six days, followed by a seventh day, in which God rested, and which he blessed and sanctified forever. Gen. 2:2, 3.
“The division of time into weeks of seven days each, originated in this great event; and the hallowing of the Sabbath in the fourth commandment finds its reason herein: ‘For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day; wherefore, the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it.’ Ex. 20:11. In the patriarchal history, as well as in the Mosaic legislation, the recurrence of the number seven and its combinations is very frequent. Even in the later Old-Testament history this number is met with too often for it to be always accidental. The repetition of the same number and of its multiples in the New Testament has also been observed. Seven has been called the symbol of perfection and the symbol of rest. But whether this is certainly correct or not, we may safely say with Mr. Wemyss: ‘Jacob’s seven years’ service to Laban; Pharaoh’s seven fat oxen and seven lean oxen; the seven branches of the golden candlestick; the seven trumpets, and the seven priests who sounded them; the seven days’ siege of Jericho; the seven churches, seven spirits, seven stars, seven seals, seven vials, and many others, sufficiently prove the importance of this sacred number.’—Key to Symbolical Language of Scripture. Jews, Pagans, and Christians have vied with each other in attempts to prove the mysterious character of the number. The estimation in which it was held, on account of its singularly sacred character, may explain its adoption as a sort of representative number. Of this last use of the term seven, instances occur in the following texts: Lev. 25:4; 1 Sam. 2:5; Ps. 12:6; 79:12; Prov. 26:16; Isa. 4:1; Matt. 18:21, 22; Luke 17:4.”—Cassell’s Bible Dictionary, vol. i.
“There can be no doubt about the great antiquity of measuring time by a period of seven days. (Gen. 8:10; 29:27.) The origin of this division of time is a matter which has given birth to much speculation. Its antiquity is so great, its observance so widespread, and it occupies so important a place in sacred things, that it must probably be thrown back as far as the creation of man. The week and the Sabbath are thus as old as man himself. In Exodus, the week comes into very distinct manifestation. Two of the great feasts—the Passover, and the feast of Tabernacles—are prolonged for seven days after that of their initiation. (Ex. 12:15–20, etc.) The division by seven was expanded so as to make the seventh month and the seventh year sabbatical. In the N. T., we of course find such clear recognition of and familiarity with the week as needs scarcely be dwelt on.”—Smith’s Bible Dictionary.
“Week, a period of seven days, a division of time adopted by the ancient Egyptians and Hebrews, and in general use among Christians and Mohammedans. Its origin is referred back in the Mosaic account to the creation of the world, and there is no other record relating to it.”—American Cyclopædia.
The week has ever been regarded by the writers of both Testaments as a period of seven literal days, excepting in those places where it is used prophetically, a day for a year. With this view, all the statements of the sacred writers in reference to the week and the Sabbath can be harmonized. Infidelity, under the cover of what is called the science of geology, has turned its batteries upon the Mosaic record in denial of the long-established opinions of the learned, the wise, and the pious of past ages, that the first week of time constituted a cycle of seven literal days.
We are gravely told by these scientific gentlemen that the seven days of the first week of time represent seven immense indefinite periods. They seem to forget that a succession of indefinite periods is an impossibility, as they would constitute but one indefinite period.
The law regulating the duties of the week as enjoined upon man, refers back to the first week of time in these words: “Six days shalt thou labor and do all thy work; but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do any work.” Then follows the reason for this arrangement on the part of the Law-giver: “For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day; wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.” Ex. 20:9–11. Notice these points:—
1. The first week of time is a pattern for all succeeding weeks; the first six days for toil, the seventh for rest. The Creator gives an example to the creature, man. God created during the first six days of that first week, and rested on the last day of it; and while he has given the first six days of the week to man, in which to labor for a livelihood, he has reserved the seventh to himself to be kept holy.
2. The second act of the Creator in making the Sabbath for man, was to put his blessing upon the day of his rest. This is the period he claims as his day, on account of resting upon it, and which he has commanded to be kept holy. Was the Lord’s rest-day, or Sabbath, a literal day, or was it an indefinite period covering millions of years? If the period of creation was six literal days, the period of man’s toils and cares before a day of rest, is six literal days. And if the day on which Jehovah rested was a period marked by one revolution of the earth upon its axis, the Lord’s Sabbath to be kept holy is a literal day of twenty-four hours.
But, if the suppositions of these gentlemen who speculate in matters of geology at the expense of the Mosaic record be received—if the period of creation was one immense indefinite period, and not six; for that would be an impossibility—then the period of man’s toils and cares before a day of rest, is also immense, covering millions of years. And if the last day of the first week, the day on which Jehovah rested from his work, was another immense indefinite period, the weekly Sabbath of the Old and New Testaments, which was made for man and commanded in the moral law to be kept holy, is also an immense indefinite period of time.
3. The third act on the part of the creating and law-instituting party was to sanctify the day of rest, and make it holy. To sanctify, means to set apart to a holy and sacred use. This was the finishing stroke in making the Sabbath, not for the angels, nor for intelligent beings on other spheres, but for men on this globe. With the view that the first week was a cycle of seven literal days, a pattern of all succeeding weeks, the subject is a plain one, and within the grasp of reason.
“The Sabbath was made for man,” for Adam and his posterity. After the completion of the first week, Adam entered upon his week, and could keep the second rest-day that dawned upon the world, and each succeeding Sabbath during his long lifetime of nine hundred and thirty years. But, if the six days of creation, as we are told, were six indefinite periods, each covering millions of years, Adam, created in the early part of the sixth immense period, and dying at the age of nine hundred and thirty, leaving millions of years to reach to the close of that sixth period, died without keeping a single Sabbath.
And with this view, it is no marvel that a thousand antinomian pulpit gentlemen of to-day will give utterance to the sentiment that no man has been able to keep the law of God. For how could they observe the fourth precept of the moral code on the grounds of these geological speculations? For example: Six immense periods shalt thou labor and do all thy work, but the seventh immense period is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do any work. For in six immense periods, each covering millions of years, the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh immense period; wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.
Our object in this article is to show, not only the absurdity, but the danger of departing from the obvious, and long-established interpretation of the days of creation week, and the days of each succeeding week, as mentioned in the Scriptures of both Testaments. Infidel geologists, in arraying themselves against the Mosaic record of creation, strike a blow also against the immutable law of God, against the Old Testament which rests upon that law, and against the New Testament which has its foundation in the Old.
The Spirit of God, that inspired both Testaments, knew whether the seven days of creation week, and all other succeeding weeks, were periods of twenty-four hours each, or immense boundless periods. And the Son of God at his first advent, and the Holy Ghost that brought the doings and the sayings of the Son of God to the minds of the four writers of the gospels, understood perfectly the meaning and application of the word Sabbath, whether it applied to a literal day or to an immense period having no boundaries.
When Moses said to Israel, with reference to the manna, “To-morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord; bake that which ye will bake to-day, and seethe that ye will seethe, and that which remaineth over lay up for you to be kept until the morning,” he never dreamed that he was standing in a sixth immense period, directing his brethren what they should do with reference to a seventh boundless period. And when he said: “Six days ye shall gather it; but on the seventh day, which is the Sabbath, in it there shall be none,” he little thought that he was giving directions in reference to six immense periods, all to be crowded into the brief history of the falling manna. And when he said: “It came to pass that there went out some of the people to gather105on the seventh day, and they found none,” he could have had no other idea than that the Sabbath was the brief period of the revolution of the earth on its axis.
And when the prophet Nehemiah mentions the cases of some treading wine-presses on the Sabbath, and doing other servile work on that day, and commands that the gates of Jerusalem should be shut when they began to be dark before the Sabbath, does he speak of a boundless period? or is he speaking of a literal day of twenty-four hours, whose commencement is marked by the shades of literal night? Judge ye. He says: “In those days saw I in Judah some treading wine-presses on the Sabbath, and bringing in sheaves, and lading asses; as also wine, grapes, and figs, and all manner of burdens, which they brought into Jerusalem on the Sabbath day; and I testified against them in the day wherein they sold victuals. There dwelt men of Tyre also therein, which brought fish, and all manner of ware, and sold on the Sabbath unto the children of Judah, and in Jerusalem. Then I contended with the nobles of Judah, and said unto them, What evil thing is this that ye do, and profane the Sabbath day? Did not your fathers thus, and did not our God bring all this evil upon us, and upon this city? yet ye bring more wrath upon Israel by profaning the Sabbath. And it came to pass, that when the gates of Jerusalem began to be dark before the Sabbath, I commanded that the gates should be shut, and charged that they should not be opened till after the Sabbath: and some of my servants set I at the gate, that there should no burden be brought in on the Sabbath day.” Neh. 13:15–19.
And when Luke records the facts that the holy women returned from the sepulcher where Christ was laid in death and “prepared spices and ointments, and rested the Sabbath day according to the commandment,” and “upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulcher bringing the spices which they had prepared” to embalm their Lord, does he mean by the words Sabbath and first day, two literal days of twenty-four hours each? or does he mean that the burial of Christ took place on the sixth immense period of time, the holy women rested during the seventh immense period, and the resurrection took place at a very early point of a boundless period that lay beyond?
And when our Lord gave instructions to his disciples in reference to the destruction of Jerusalem A. D. 70: “But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the Sabbath-day,” did he mean by the word Sabbath, the definite seventh day, twenty-four hours in length? or did he mean that they should offer petitions that their flight might not be on a seventh part of time, or one day in seven and no day in particular? or did he mean to say, Pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on an immense boundless period of time? With these questions we leave the reader to his reflections whether to accept the plain and obvious meaning of the word of God relative to the week, held by the learned and godly of past ages, or to be tossed to and fro by the speculations of “science, falsely so called.” J. W.