Earlier text: The Doctrine of a Trinity as Related to the Atonement“Visions and Revelation of the Lord.”
By W. N. Glenn
IN 1 Cor. 12:2-4 the apostle refers to a most remarkable occurrence which had taken place “above [some versions read, about] fourteen years” previously. He does not state where it occurred, and appears to have been loth to say anything about it at all. We infer this from the fact that he had been reticent regarding the vision for so long a time; and by his apology in verse 11, it would seem that only the necessities of the then existing circumstances induced him to mention it when he did. He was compelled to do what the Corinthians themselves should have done, to wit, defend his character and work amongst them. The only clue to the probable place where the vision was given is the time, which, according to commonly received chronology, was about the time he was hunted up by Barnabas at Tarsus. But whether the “revelation” was given at Tarsus, or Antioch, or Jerusalem, or some other locality, is a matter of conjecture. PAUL is too modest to say plainly that he is the one that saw the vision, but no one doubts that he was; and no doubt his great courage, wisdom, perseverance, and faith were largely due to assurances and instructions of that occasion. He was “caught up to the third heaven” [the highest heaven], verse 2, or “paradise,” verse 3, “and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful [or possible] for a man to utter.” As to his condition at the time, he says: “Whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell; God knoweth.” Clarke says, and we agree with him, that “being carried literally into heaven, was possible with the Almighty;” but, of course, he supposes also the possibility of a temporary separation of body and spirit, while the latter was caught up. OTHER commentators take this scripture as positive proof that Paul believed in an entity that could go out of the man and return. If the popular theory be true, then to be caught up “out of the body” would be equivalent to death, and the return after the vision would be a resurrection. But the apostle does not intimate any such thing. He does not say, Whether dead or alive I cannot tell. He recognizes consciousness in either of the conditions mentioned. It was the man that was caught up, and he heard the unspeakable words. Whether bodily or mentally taken up, he could not tell. To construe Paul’s language into a belief in a conscious existence separate from the body, in the face of 1 Cor. 15 and of 1 Thess. 4, is an injustice to his plainly expressed doctrine. W. N. GLENN. Singing in the Sabbath-School.
By J. S. Hart
CHILDREN without exception are fond of good music. It has become, in the last few years, one of the most powerful means for bringing children into the Sabbath-school. In the mission schools of our large cities, a great many of the scholars are attracted to the school in the first place by the music. The teachers literally sing them in. Children, whose parents for some reason do not allow them to enter the school, are often seen hanging with longing ears about the doors and windows, listening to the sweet music, and sometimes even braving punishment rather than forego the pleasure. Good music is one of the most important means of bringing children into the Sabbath-school, and of keeping them there; while great care should be taken not to employ music in the school which is irreverent, or undevotional, or which has unworthy and degrading associations, care is still more needed on the other hand that it should be of that living and attractive sort which the children love, and in which they can join; any tune or any hymn, which after fair trial it is found the children do not take to, had better be dropped for something which they will take to.—J. S. Hart. SPEECH OF OLD RYE
By Carson
I was made to be eaten,
And not to be drank;
To be threshed in a barn,
Not soaked in a tank. I came as a blessing,
When run through a mill;
As a blight and a curse,
When put through a still. Make me up into loaves,
And your children are fed;
But if into drink,
I will starve them instead. In bread I’m the servant,
The eater shall rule;
In drink I’m the master,
The drinker a fool. Then remember the warning—
My strength I’ll employ,
If eaten, to strengthen,
If drunk to destroy. —Carson. Young Lad's Death from Cigarette Smoking
THE Cincinnati Commercial Gazette gives this account of a young lad who died from the excessive use of cigarettes: “He concealed his habit from his parents until taken sick, and then it was too late. The heart ceased its functions from sheer weakness. This should be a warning, but it will not be heeded. Every cigarette smoker, like every toper, will conclude that it is none of his funeral, and will persist in destroying the nervous system. When repeated warnings will not cure the folly of pointing supposed unloaded guns and pistols at people ‘just for fun,’ what can be expected as the result of the death of one lad from the vile cigarette habit?” SABBATH means rest; the day of the Sabbath means the day of the rest. A strictly allowable translation of the last part of the fourth commandment is the following: “Wherefore, the Lord blessed the day of the rest, and hallowed it.” No subject is more controverted at the present time than that of the Sabbath; and, no matter what phase the controversy may assume, the real ground of contention is the day. Most people are willing to accept the Sabbath as an institution if they can reserve to themselves the privilege of choosing the day. But that privilege is all that the most obdurately self-willed and rebellious could ask, because the day is the sum and substance of the institution. This is most clearly stated by Mr. Morton in his “Vindication of the True Sabbath,” thus:— “The only object, direct or indirect, of this commandment, is ‘the day.’ What are we commanded to remember? ‘The day.’ What are we required to keep holy? ‘The day.’ What did the Lord bless and hallow? ‘The day.’ In what are we forbidden to work? In ‘the day.’” This is strictly true; and therefore he who controls “the day” fully controls the institution, and really controls or gives direction to the commandment. And if an individual, or a people, a legislature, or all the world, assume to fix “the day” to be observed as the Sabbath, they make themselves judges, and not doers, of the law; a position not to be desired in the sight of the Lord. James 4:11. And the practical result is the same where people affect to reject the fourth commandment, and the Sabbath altogether; for they immediately proceed to build up another institution, based upon another day,—a day which God never blessed, never sanctified, never commanded to be observed, nor in any manner specified as a day of observance. And this gives freedom of action to the same spirit of self-will—of choosing a day differing from that chosen by the Lord,—and thus again is raised the same controversy over “the day.” The real objection of these is not to a Sabbath, or an institution of rest, for that they claim. Their objection is to “the day.” Give them the day of their own choice, and all is well with them. But they will not accept the day of God’s rest; of his blessing; of his sanctifying; of his commanding. What, or which is “the Sabbath day?” If this can be definitely settled by the Scriptures, the whole controversy is settled. We do not say, however, that we can lay controversy or quiet the objector by proving which is the sanctified rest day of Jehovah. The question may be settled by producing Scripture proofs; but the controversy can be quieted only by removing the spirit of self-will which raised it. The carnal mind cannot be subject to the law of God; Rom. 8:7; it will choose its own way, or delight in “will worship” rather than in keeping God’s commandments just as he has given them. Of the origin of the Sabbath and the selection of the day, a certain author wrote:— “The very first day whose evening and morning Adam saw, was the Sabbath day. The sixth day could hardly be called man’s first day, for he never beheld its evening and morning. But the seventh creation day was man’s first day, and that was the day on which God rested, and which he hallowed and blessed. The seventh creation day was identical with the first day of man’s week.” Others to the same intent might be quoted, but this shows the spirit of the whole. This pretended argument rests on the supposition that the Sabbath necessarily stood related to the time of the creation of Adam. And some go even farther than this, and assume that Adam himself made choice of the day which was to be the Sabbath! But the truth is that the creation of Adam had no more to do with the selection of the Sabbath day than the creation of any other object. The seventh day was chosen “because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.” The quotation above says “the seventh creation day was identical with the first day of man’s week.” But the truth is that man never had a week in distinction from God’s week. If any Sabbath ever existed suitable to man’s week, it must be man’s sabbath—a human institution; only of human origin. But the Bible knows nothing of any such week or such institution. The facts concerning the true Sabbath are clearly stated, and easy to be understood. Indeed they cannot be misunderstood. They may be denied, or evaded, or perverted, but no one can misunderstand them. The Bible explicitly says:—- God made the world and all things in six days.
- He rested the seventh day.
- For this reason he blessed the seventh day and sanctified it.
Then the seventh-day Sabbath rests upon the facts of creation week. Nothing else enters into its foundation. And no other day could serve the purpose of a memorial of “all his work which God created.” Any other day of the week did not see “all his work” completed, as a part of his work was done on each of them. And the seventh-day Sabbath commemorates the work of God—not of man. We do not commemorate Adam’s rest, but God’s rest. It was not the seventh day nor any day of a week which Adam constructed, but the week of the Creator, five days of which were fully in the past when Adam was created. All those who try to relate the Sabbath to “man’s week,” or “Adam’s first day,” or with anything but the rest of the Creator, are abusing the word of the Lord, and walking in the light of the sparks of their own kindling. Isa. 50:11. We come now to examine the fourth commandment and the Sabbath which it enjoins, and we inquire: Whose Sabbath is this? and, What does it commemorate? And we will notice the positions of those who say it originated at the time when Israel left Egypt. Does the record in Exodus 16 justify their statement? Not at all. They say its first occurrence was when the manna was given, and was withheld on that day. But on the sixth day Moses said: “This is that which the Lord hath said [in some past time], To-morrow is the rest [though the day spoken of was future, it was, by past appointment, the rest day] of the holy Sabbath [it was a sanctified day, by some past act] unto the Lord,” or of the Lord. Now to what facts do these statements refer? To none but those of creation week. At that time God did rest the seventh day; Exodus 16 identifies the seventh day as the rest day. And God blessed and sanctified the seventh day, the day of his rest. Exodus 16 says the seventh day is a holy rest day. God sanctified the seventh day because it was the day of his own rest. Exodus 16 says the seventh day was the holy or sanctified day to or of Jehovah. The reference to the Creator’s rest day is unmistakable, without a hint of anything else to which it can refer. And one other point in the Pentateuch must be noticed. A very recent writer says:—
“The seventh-day Sabbath was declared by Moses (Deut. 5:15) to have been instituted on account of the deliverance from Egyptian bondage.” This is the idea put forth by many who oppose the Sabbath of the fourth commandment; and we are always surprised that such statements are made. Notice the following facts on this point:— 1. Deut. 5:15 is in a rehearsal of past events, and is not a literal copy of the fourth commandment as God gave it to them. Indeed, it does not claim to be. Moses said, “Keep the Sabbath day to sanctify it, as the Lord thy God hath commanded thee.” God did command them, speaking to them with his own voice; and nobody will pretend that the Lord used these words which were used by Moses—“as the Lord thy God hath commanded thee.” He does not pretend to give the commandment literally, in this historical review. 2. Moses did not declare that the Sabbath was instituted on account of the deliverance from Egyptian bondage. He did not tell why the seventh day was chosen rather than another; he did not give any account of its being blessed and sanctified; he did not even intimate that there existed any reason for its sanctification. He gave no reason of the institution at all. But we shall presently see where all these points are clearly revealed. 3. Moses referred to a local reason for the requirement resting specially on them, but there never existed any local reason for the institution. The rest, the blessing, the sanctification—everything which made the institution,—all lay far back of deliverance from Egypt. For an example of a local reason for enforcing a general obligation, see Deut. 24:17, 18. “Thou shalt not pervert the judgment of the stranger, nor of the fatherless; nor take a widow’s raiment to pledge; but thou shalt remember that thou wast a bondman in Egypt, and the Lord thy God redeemed thee; therefore I command thee to do this thing.” And Lev. 19:35–37. “Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment, in meteyard, in weight, or in measure. Just balances, just weights, a just ephah, and a just hin, shall ye have; I am the Lord your God which brought you out of the land of Egypt. Therefore shall ye observe all my statutes, and all my judgments, and do them.” Will any contend that righteousness and justice and truth were not of obligation before deliverance from Egyptian bondage, and were of obligation only upon those who were so delivered? They may with all the reason with which they contend that the seventh-day Sabbath was instituted because of that deliverance. We will now examine the fourth commandment itself, as delivered by the voice of God in the hearing of all the people. “Remember the Sabbath day [the day of the rest] to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work; but the seventh day is the Sabbath [rest] of the Lord thy God.” How and when did the seventh day—this self-same day commanded to Israel—become the rest of the Lord God? Jehovah himself gives full information on this point. These are his own words: “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.” Now we affirm without fear of contradiction, that this is the only seventh day that God ever commanded to Israel. This is the Sabbath day referred to in Ex. 16 and Deut. 5; and this is the only reason of the institution. And these are identically the facts set down in Gen. 2. Mark well the words. In Ex. 20:11, the Lord says, 1. He made all things in six days. 2. He rested the seventh day. 3. For this reason—which “wherefore” means—the Lord blessed the rest day and hallowed it. See how exactly this corresponds with Gen. 2:3. “And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it; because [for the reason] that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.” Now we shall be pleased if some one will give explicit Bible proof that the seventh-day Sabbath—the Sabbath of the fourth commandment—became the rest day of the25 Lord at any other time than that recorded in Gen. 2:3; that it was blessed and sanctified for any other reason than that given in the commandment, namely, that in it the Lord rested from all his work of creating the heavens and the earth. Spiritualism in The Churches.
The Banner of Light says that Spiritualism is permeating all classes of society, and largely prevails in all the churches. Of this we were aware, though the generality of Christians seem to be unaware of the fact. The Cincinnati Commercial Gazette gives an account of an interview with Judge Carter of that city, in which the Judge said:— “There are in this city, I believe, from eight to nine thousand, and perhaps more, Spiritualists. They are not all open believers. You will find them in all Christian denominations—among the Catholics, the Presbyterians, Methodists, &c. Many who do not wish to give up their outward honors in the church, or who do not wish to be annoyed by their family connections, are really Spiritualists. They attend our seances, but keep their profession as quiet as possible. I was at a wonderful musical seance last night, and there I noticed a few prominent German Catholics.” The following words come to us credited to Harriet Beecher Stowe. We believe that all the Beecher family are now Spiritualists:— “May we look among the band of ministering spirits for our own departed ones? Whom would God be more likely to send us? Have we in heaven a friend who knew us to the heart’s core—a friend to whom we have unfolded our soul in its secret recesses, to whom we have confessed our weaknesses, and deplored our griefs? If we are to have a ministering spirit; who better adapted? Have we not memories which correspond to such a belief? . . . “Many a one, we are confident, can remember such things; and whence come they? Why do the children of the pious mother, whose grave has grown green and smooth with years, seem often to walk through perils and dangers fearful and imminent as the crossing Mohammed’s fiery gulf on the edge of a drawn sword, yet walk unhurt? Ah! could we see that attendant form, that face where the angel conceals not the mother, our question would be answered.” And we might inquire further: What more natural than that a person with such a belief, should invoke the aid of these deeply interested friends in Heaven? How directly does Spiritualism lead away from Christ, to that dogma of Catholicism, the invocation of saints! A Unitarian minister, Mr. Cudworth, recently died very suddenly in Boston,—while praying in a public service. The following is from a report of the funeral:— “The platform which had been arranged, and the body of the church, contained representatives from the Governor’s staff, and many notable individuals in the social, theological, military and civic ranks. The funeral exercises comprised an organ voluntary, singing by a quartette (which had been trained under the direct supervision of Mr. Cudworth, who was a gifted musician as well as orator); introductory prayer by Rev. J. L. Scott (Presbyterian); reading of Scriptures by Rev. Mr. Potter (Universalist); addresses by Revs. L. B. Bates (Methodist), Dr. J. E. Twichell (Congregationalist), R. Perry Bush (Universalist), and Samuel H. Winkley (Unitarian); prayer by Mr. Winkley, and benediction by Rev. J. K. Richardson (Baptist). “The following excerpts from the tributes paid by the speakers to the deceased will serve to show the deep sense of public loss and the feeling of loving remembrance which pervaded the assembly. “Rev. Dr. Twichell said: There are those who live more in death than in life. In attics and cellars of this city to-day there are widows and orphans who have as deep a grief for this loss as any present. May God bless this Church of Our Father in the sudden bereavement. May God bless the poor of this city, who have lost one of their truest friends. “Rev. Mr. Bush said: He has gone in the midst of his labors, gone in that act which so became his consecrated soul, in prayer, beginning on earth and ending in heaven. We know that he is here, even feel it in our hearts. Oh! how grand to die in union service and on Thanksgiving Day. “Rev. Mr. Bates said the deceased really did not know death. He was translated. The change from the mortal to the immortal was instantaneous. In all our homes, Protestant and Catholic, there are tears to-day. “Rev. Mr. Winkley said: The tendrils of Mr. Cudworth’s affection went out and twined around the hearts of all he touched. To the very last the tendrils were going out on every side. His knowledge came more from his heart than from his head, and that was why he was so great a man. He is not dead. These are his remains, not himself, and he almost smiles upon us now as we look at him. Angels do not cease to be angels when they are taken from our sight.” Mr. Cudworth himself was a pronounced Spiritualist. But this did not separate him in the least from the sympathies of the clergymen of the various denominations, as he would have been had he been a member of some small denomination, though a sincere Bible believer and earnest Christian. We should like to know if “Rev. Mr. Bates” believes that Elijah was translated as Mr. Cudworth was? There were some incredulous, skeptical ones in that day who suggested that “the Spirit of the Lord hath taken him up, and cast him upon some mountain, or into some valley,” and they sent out fifty men who sought him three days, but they did not find him. 2 Kin. 2:12–17. It was not just so in the case of Mr. Cudworth. If he was translated it was of short duration, for he was found in Boston, and there they buried him! If the fifty had found Elijah on some mountain, or in some valley, or in some city, and buried him, would Paul have written that he was translated? And will Elijah ever experience the resurrection? No; they who are translated cannot know a resurrection. The truth is that Spiritualism has sadly demoralized the theology of the day, so that it does not at all correspond to “the faith once delivered to the saints.” Pleasing errors have become popular, and “truth is fallen in the streets,” and few are they who “ask for the old paths, where is the good way,” that they may “walk therein.” Jer. 6:16. But he who is the resurrection and the life is coming to call his sleeping saints from the dust of the earth. The great harvest day is near. The warning is going forth. Rev. 14:9–14. Happy are they who heed the solemn words. “If Thou Hadst Been Just.”
Among the many “vain repetitions” used in prayer, the “set phrases” made honorable by custom, generally spoken without considering their import, few, if any grate more harshly on the ear than the above. Often do we hear people informing the Lord (it is not praying), that if he had been just with them, they had been cut off, &c. This is a reproach in the ears of unbelievers, and an offense against the gospel of Christ. Many of the theories of religion now extant, rob the gospel of the element of justice, and so dishonor God in his purposes and appointments. This is done directly by those who teach that the Saviour abrogated God’s just law; and also by those who teach that Christ did not suffer the penalty of that law, but something less, substituted for that penalty. By the first class the principles of justice are set aside; by the second its claims are disregarded. God deals with all according to the strictest rules of justice. To do otherwise would be to trample on his own attributes, and destroy the harmony and purity of his own character. Every careful reader must have noticed that the glory of God was ever prominent in the words and actions of the Saviour; this was first in the song of the angels who announced his birth; and Paul says that Christ was set forth as a propitiation, “that God might be just, and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus.” Rom. 3:23–26. This is one of the most glorious truths of revelation. Justice and mercy unite in the offering of Christ; and in no system of religion do they unite except in the gospel. So to rob the gospel of its grand design of the vindication of justice, is to bring it down to the level of false systems. The same act which enables God to be just and to pass by the sin of the believer, and justify him for the sake of his ransom and substitute, will enable him to be just in giving all the same opportunity to repent and believe. God’s justice rests in Christ, both toward the saved and the lost. He took the penalty of that just law in his own person, by which all judgment is committed to his hands. For the believer, the penitent, he bears the dread consequence of guilt till it is returned upon the head of its originator; but to the impenitent, the incorrigible, who refuse to be reconciled to God through him, he finally returns the demands of justice on their own heads. Dr. Barnes, as quoted in articles on the Atonement, says there was mercy and not justice in the offering of Christ. A refutation of that idea was offered in those articles. We here give an extract from Alexander Campbell in vindication of justice; it is from a letter to B. W. Stone, who seems to have imbibed views subversive of those principles. Mr. Campbell said:— “The difficulty is not about the necessity of his death in order to reconciling us to God; but it is about the necessity of his death in order to God’s pardoning us. . . . Would you have any one to think that Christ’s death occurred simply to demonstrate God’s goodness; and that this demonstration occurred simply to induce repentance; and that repentance alone superinduces forgiveness? . . . For my part I will stand up before the universe of God, not only in affirming, but in attempting to prove, that the death of Jesus Christ, our blessed and only Lord, was, and is, and evermore shall be, as necessary to demonstrating the justice as the goodness of God in forgiving sins. To unite mercy and justice in forgiving the sinner, was, in my view, the supreme end of God’s sparing not his own Son.” Mil. Har. Vol. v., No. 2, p. 66. 1841. This is evidently the true scriptural view. God’s mercy—his boundless mercy is shown in the death of his Son; his infinite justice is honored therein also. Mercy and justice unite in his dealings toward us. He is just in all his ways; he has been just toward us through the cross of Christ, by which we have had a probationary time to repent and return to him. Christ died for all, and he is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world. But they who refuse to honor him in his justice can never enjoy his mercies in forgiveness and eternal salvation. May the glory of God, the vindication of his holiness and justice, be ever first in our minds and hearts; as it was in the heart, the life, and gospel of his Son. Editorial Note on Dr. Tombes and the Sabbath
By Editor
NOTE.—In a recent issue of the SIGNS we noticed that Dr. Tombes, a well-known Baptist minister of California, had promised to write on the Sabbath, to give his reasons for believing that the Sabbath of the fourth commandment was not the Sabbath of creation. We have seen his first article. Those who have some time been readers of the SIGNS will remember that we republished two articles from Dr. Tombes on “the Hebrew Tah-val,” being a criticism of Dr. Young’s definition of that word. Those articles were worthy of the commendation we gave them, and gave evidence of the ability of Dr. Tombes as a scholar and reasoner. As relevant to this subject which we are now canvassing we will review his article, probably next week. It is a pleasure to review the arguments of candid, scholarly men, and we believe that Dr. Tombes is such. Of course when he opposes the Sabbath he cannot do justice to himself. Protestantism Forgotten in Calvin's Birthplace Noyon
A BAPTIST pastor of Chauny, Switzerland, securing a place to preach in Noyon, the birthplace of Calvin, finds Protestantism so nearly forgotten that scarcely any of the inhabitants have even heard of the name of Calvin. A Reformation is much needed in the land of the reformers. The Cause Is Onward.
By Stephen Nelson Haskell
THERE has been no time in the history of our work when the evidences were more manifest that God was with his people than now. In the political world everything indicates a great revolution. The Eastern Question, which has agitated the minds of the people for many years, has now reached a point when one step more and we shall see the fulfillment of Dan. 12:1, 2, 3. The Sunday agitation in this country has gone too far for any compromise which would prevent the union of church and State in a very brief period of time. The cyclone, earthquakes, tidal waves, and floods, are bringing upon the earth distress of nations with perplexity. “Men’s hearts are beginning to fail them with fear for looking after those things that are coming on the earth.” Some say these things are indicative of the anger of God against the nations because they do not keep the first day of the week. The people in nearly every State are determined the Legislature shall do something on the question, while the more far-seeing men tell us the only remedy for the Sunday violation lies in the Constitutional Amendment, and therefore they are working to this end. Many of our people are beginning to realize that the end is near. California, in investing about $35,000 for the education of young men and women to engage in the cause of God, has moved none too soon. Money is of no account when compared to the saving of souls, and those who now make large investments in this direction manifest true wisdom. It should never be a question, Will it pay in dollars and cents; but the question should be, Will it contribute to the salvation of souls for whom Christ died. The brethren in New England, New York, and Pennsylvania, in addition to what they pledged to the foreign missionary work, have passed resolutions to raise in the aggregate a sum not less than $55,000, within one year, and about one-half of this has already been subscribed and quite a proportion paid. This is as it should be, for $50,000, raised in 1884 will be worth more than $500,000 five years from now. It is now that we are to prepare for the final harvest. It is now, while peace is in our borders, while the laws are so favorable to our work, that we should not leave a stone unturned to scatter the light of truth until by tracts and periodicals the truth, will fall like leaves of autumn in every part of this land. We have now reached 1884, and what are we doing for the SIGNS OF THE TIMES—our pioneer sheet? At one time last year the paper reached a circulation of twenty thousand copies. This year it should not reach a circulation of less than fifty thousand, and this can be easily done if every Conference in the country work with courage and zeal in this respect. The Sabbath Sentinel is sent forth to the different States to arouse our brethren if possible, and to notify the thousands who are sincere in the Sunday movement, of its nature and its final results. If there ever was a people on earth who should be awake it is Seventh-day Adventists. If there was ever a time when they should bring into exercise every power of their being and their talents of means, it is now, and those who cannot see the importance of this time, when such unmistakable evidences are increasing, need the pity of Heaven. It will be too much to expect that these efforts which are being put forth will accomplish their design without meeting with great obstacles. To carry forward this work successfully will require as much energy of character and earnestness of purpose as is necessary to carry forward any worldly enterprise. Those who27 have purposed in their hearts to give themselves to God and to dispose of their means in the interests of his work will oftentimes find it difficult to do this; but with an intelligent zeal for God, we should make the circumstances instead of the circumstances making us. It may at times require a sacrifice on the part of those owning lands to effect a sale, but as we approach the great Jubilee, we see no reason why the same principle should not apply to us that applied to the children of Israel in reference to their property when they approached the year of jubilee. “The priest shall reckon unto him the money according to the years that remain, even unto the year of jubilee, and it shall be abated from thy estimation.” See Lev. 27:18, 23, 24. This in some cases will be necessary, for it is no marvel that Satan will seek to hinder any effort in the living out of our faith in the near coming of Christ. Pledges made under the influence of the power and spirit of the truth of God are made sacred and good to the Father by the merits of our Lord Jesus Christ. To consider those pledges of no account, would be to us a snare and bring upon us the frown of God. See Deut. 23:21–23. Prov. 20:25. Eccl. 5:4–6. Acts 5:1–11. But to faithfully perform the vows which we have made, and thus preserve our word with sincere integrity, will not only bring a blessing to the individuals themselves but to their families. See Jer. 35:18, 19, and Deut. 1:8–20. God is now selecting men for his service—men whose hearts are true, men who can be relied upon in the coming storm. Fair-weather Christians have ever been many, but tried men have been few. God now calls for tried men and women, those whom he can trust under any circumstances, those who will make any sacrifice rather than violate any principle of integrity on their part. Promptness is as necessary in divine things as in worldly enterprises. Satan is on the alert and “as a roaring lion walketh about seeking whom he may devour.” He is a vigilant foe, not only watching the avenues of our hearts, that he may erect his throne there, but closely watching every effort that will tell for the advancement of the truth. Plans should be immediately laid for the SIGNS to increase its circulation tenfold more than was accomplished in 1883. Let there be one united rally from one end of the land to the other; let there be a missionary effort put forth by those who are living alone in their neighborhoods; in short, let there be a general move for the advancement of the truth, and something will be accomplished. We look for greater victories the coming year than we have ever witnessed in the past. S. N. HASKELL. Of What Were the Gentiles to Repent?
By Uriah Smith
PAUL in his interview with the elders of the church of Miletus, Acts 20:17–38, told them that he had kept back nothing that was profitable, “testifying both to the Jews and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.” verse 21. These here termed Greeks were Gentiles. There can be no doubt about that; and Paul, whose mission was especially to the Gentiles, went about urging upon them, with all the energy of one commissioned of Heaven to do the work, repentance toward God. Repentance signifies sorrow for sin as morally wrong. It is the renouncing of the love and practice of sin. “Repent, . . . that your sins may be blotted out,” is the order laid down and the direction given by an inspired apostle. Acts 3:19. As repentance is thus seen to be the putting away of sin, the New Testament definition of sin naturally deserves a place right here. John testifies that sin is the transgression of the law; 1 John 3:4; and Paul tells us that by the law is the knowledge of sin, and that sin is not imputed when there is no law. Rom. 3:20; 5:13. So that we know not what sin is, nor when it is, nor where it is, and indeed there is no such thing as sin, unless there is law to reveal, define, and condemn it. We thus have the matter quite definitely before us. Paul charged the Gentiles, as the very first step toward securing the favor of God, to repent. Repentance is putting away sin. Sin is law transgressed; and to put away sin is to cease from such transgression. Of what law were the Gentiles at this time living in violation? Paul was at this time on his last journey to Jerusalem. The chronology of this visit is set down as A. D. 59. It was only twenty-five years before this that Paul was converted to the Christian religion. In the first chapter of Galatians he tells us the course he pursued after his conversion. He did not go immediately up to Jerusalem, and labor among the Jews, his countrymen; but with the gospel he had just received from God, he went immediately into Arabia. Returning to Damascus, he spent three years more in those parts, and then went to Jerusalem, and enjoyed the society of Peter and James for fifteen days. Thence, without even visiting the churches in Judea, he went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia, the Christians of Judea knowing only this about him, that he now preached the faith which he once destroyed. Fourteen years after, he went up again to Jerusalem, and he went up by revelation, and communicated unto them, he says, that gospel which he preached unto the Gentiles. This brings us down to within at least eight years of the time when he testified to the elders of the church of Miletus that his business had been to preach to the Gentiles repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ. But we find not an intimation in all this, that he went forth to promulgate a new system of morality from that which had been binding on the world up to that time. If, as some hold, the previously-existing law had been abolished and a new one was promulgated with the introduction of the new dispensation, the first work would have been to acquaint the world with that fact. They must first have a knowledge of their obligations before they could be charged with blame for violating them, and held to repentance for such violation. But Paul’s course was first of all to preach repentance, showing that the law which they had violated was one of long-standing obligation and well-understood principles. When Paul said, Repent, they knew what he meant, and on what authority he pronounced them guilty. Again, he testified to Jew and Greek alike. But when he spoke to a Jew about repentance, what would the Jew understand by it? All well know that his mind would go at once to that great moral code, the ten commandments, which God had deposited with them as a nation for safe-keeping and for transmission, when the fullness of the time should come, to the followers of Christ. Acts 7:38. But Paul made no difference between Jew and Greek. He testified to both alike, showing that both were under the same moral obligations, amenable to God in exactly the same particulars. How men can suppose that God has different requirements, in a moral point of view, for men in different quarters of the globe, or in different ages of the world, is past our comprehension. How they can suppose that he will judge one class by one rule and another by another, when he had one rule of righteousness for Noah and all the antediluvians; when the inhabitants of Canaan were cast out for violating the same principles the Israelites were required to keep; and when Paul, this side the cross, testified repentance to Jews and Greeks alike, is an anomaly not easily explained. U. S.