BETWEEN Mr. F. and Dr. A., the whole truth respecting the original Sabbath is confessed; yet each connects with that part of the truth which he confesses, sufficient error to completely drown it. And each sees the errors of the other, and denies them. Thus, Mr. Fuller states that the original week began with Sunday and ended with Saturday; which week, he teaches, has come down to us. This is a very important truth. But he drowns it in an ocean of error, by saying, (1), That the first six days of Genesis were not admitted into the original week, (2), That God's rest day was the first day of man's week, (3), That the week thus began with God's seventh day, and ended with his sixth. Thus Mr. F. states two very important truths, and hides them under three strange errors.
But Dr. Akers is just the counterpart of Mr. F. He says: The week began with the first day of creation, and thus the Sabbath came upon the seventh day of Adam's week. And so God's seventh day and Adam's seventh day were one and the same.
But he covers up these precious truths with an error equally as pernicious as those of Mr. Fuller. Thus he teaches: The first day of the week was Monday, and the seventh day, Sunday. Between the two, however, the whole truth is confessed, and all the errors of both are denied. Thus the truth is acknowledged:
1. The original week began with the first day of creation, and ended with the rest-day of the Creator. Adam's week corresponded to this.—Akers.
2. Adam's weeks began with Sunday, and ended with Saturday.—Fuller.
3. This week has come down to us unchanged in its reckoning.—Fuller.
4. The seventh day of Adam's week is still sacredly binding upon all mankind.—Akers.
Thus Mr. Fuller corrects the error of Dr. Akers that Sunday is the seventh day of the original week; and Dr. Akers shows no countenance to Fuller's idea that the first six days of Genesis were not counted in the first week; nor to the idea that the week began with the rest-day of the Lord. According to Dr. Akers, we should observe the seventh day of that week which God gave Adam; which day, according to Fuller, is Saturday, and which week, according to the same writer, has come down to us unchanged.
Mr. F. is an outspoken first-day man. Dr. A., on the contrary, is a most decided seventh-day man. Both, however, are earnest champions of Sunday as the true Sabbath. Mr. F. vindicates it on the ground that it is the genuine first day of the week; Dr. A. maintains it because it is the only day that has any right to the designation of seventh day of the week. What is remarkable, Dr. A. vindicates his Sunday-seventh day by an exact count of the days; and Mr. F., who cites this reckoning as reliable, uses it to establish his own theory that Sunday is the first day of the week, and is not the seventh.
When the same set of figures can be made to sustain two diverse positions, we may justly suspect some error in the use of the figures, or some slight of hand and cunning craftiness in the matter somewhere. Let us see how Mr. F. establishes his first day of the week. We shall find it a costly operation on his part; yet it is easy to understand why he enters into it. It is to avoid the difficulties of Dr. Akers' theory. If the rest-day of the Lord was actually upon the first day of the week, then he can avoid Dr. A.'s dilemma of having a week at the exodus with only six days in it, as has Dr. A.; and also when he reaches the New Testament he finds his favorite day bearing the right name—first day of the week—whereas Dr. A. has the ugly fact of finding his genuine seventh day on which Christ arose from the dead, called by inspiration first day of the week. And whereas Dr. A. at the exodus has to change not only the day of the Sabbath, but also the reckoning of the week itself, Mr. F. only has occasion to change the day of the Sabbath, and is able to leave the week unchanged. Yet it is to be noticed as a singular feature of this Sunday-seventh-day theory, that, whereas, Dr. A. and Mr. F. both assert that the Sabbath was changed on the day of the exodus, Dr. A. asserts that it was changed from the seventh day of the week to the sixth day, and Mr. F. asserts that it was changed from the first day to the seventh! Yet each of these gentlemen, by the change which he alleges, establishes the sanctity of Sunday on a firm basis!
Mr. F. does not wholly steer clear of difficulty in his theory of God's rest-day on the first day of the week. His week from Adam to Moses begins with a Sabbath for its first day. And when he changes the Sabbath at the exodus, from first day to seventh, it compels him to put two Sabbaths into one week! That is, the last week in Egypt, which began with first-day Sabbath, had its seventh day also made into a Sabbath by the act of setting the Sabbath back from Sunday to Saturday! So here was a very highly-favored week with a Sabbath for its first day and a Sabbath for its last, and with five working days between!
But on the whole Mr. F. has fewer difficulties, after the first start, than Dr. A. As both of them mean to come out in the New Testament, first-day men, it is evident that that process of reasoning which can make God's rest day, in the beginning, come upon the first day of the original week, will steer clear of a number of very serious difficulties that the Sunday-seventh day has to encounter.
But let us see what it costs Mr. F. to get started. His grand idea is this: The first day of the original week was the day on which the Creator rested, and which he blessed and sanctified for time to come in memory of that rest. How does he establish this remarkable declaration? By the statement of three palpable untruths as follows:—
1. That the six days of creation belonged to eternity and were not counted as the first six days of time.
2. That Adam's first day of existence was the Creator's rest-day.
3. That Adam counted the day of the Creator's rest the first day of the week.
These are very remarkable declarations to be made by a student of the Bible. Let us weigh them well.
1. Mr. Fuller makes the first of these statements for the alleged reason that time began with Adam's first day. Let us admit the proof. Now what follows? Simply this: as Adam must have been created quite early on the sixth day, as will presently be proved, it follows that the division between time and eternity, on Mr. F.'s own showing, does not lie between the sixth day and the seventh, but between the fifth day and the sixth. But it is really no proof at all, being simply coined out of his own vain imagination, and never in any way sanctioned by the words of inspiration.
(To be Continued.)
J. N. A.
The Sealing of the 144,000.
By Uriah Smith
(Concluded.)
IN a gospel prophecy found in Isa. 8, we read: "Bind up the testimony, seal the law among my disciples." Verse 16. This must refer to a work of reviving some of the claims of the law in the minds of the disciples, which had been overlooked, or perverted from their true meaning. And this, in the prophecy, is called sealing the law, or restoring to it, its seal, which had been taken from it.
Again, the 144,000 who, in the chapter before us, are said to be sealed with the seal of God in their foreheads, are again brought to view in Rev. 14:1, where they are said to have the Father's name written in their foreheads.
From the foregoing reasoning, facts, and declarations of Scripture, two conclusions inevitably follow:—
1. The seal of God is found in connection with the law of God.
2. The seal of God is that part of his law, which contains his name or descriptive title, showing who he is, the extent of his dominion, and his right to rule.
The law of God is admitted by all disinterested evangelical denominations to be summarily contained in the decalogue or ten commandments. We have then but to examine these commandments, to see which one it is, that constitutes the seal of the law, or in other words makes known the true God, the law-making power. The first three commandments mention the word God; but we cannot tell from these who is meant; for there are multitudes of objects to which this term is applied. There are "gods many and lords many," as the apostle says 1 Cor. 8:5. Passing over the fourth commandment for the time being, the fifth contains the words Lord and God, but does not define them; and the remaining five precepts do not contain the name of God at all. Now what shall be done?
With that portion of the law which we have examined it would be impossible to convict the grossest idolater of sin. The worshiper of images could say, This idol before me is my god, his name is god, and these are his precepts. The worshiper of the heavenly bodies could also say, The sun is my god, and I worship him according to this law. Thus, without the fourth commandment, the decalogue is null and void so far as it pertains to enforcing the worship of the true God. But let us add the fourth commandment, restore to the law this precept which many are ready to contend has been expunged, and see how the case will stand then. As we examine this commandment which contains the declaration, "For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is," etc., we see at once that we are reading the requirements of Him who created all things. The sun, then, is not the God of the decalogue, but he who made the sun. No object in heaven or earth is the being who here demands obedience; for the God of this law is the one who made all created things. Now we have a weapon against idolatry. Now this law can no longer be applied to false gods, who "have not made the heavens and the earth." Jer. 10:11. Now the author of this law has declared who he is, the extent of his dominion, and his right to rule; for every created intelligence must at once assent that He who is the Creator of all, has a right to demand obedience from all his creatures. Thus, with the fourth commandment in its place, this wonderful document, the decalogue, the only document among men which God ever wrote with his own finger, has a signature; it has that which renders it intelligible and authentic; it has a seal. But without the fourth commandment it lacks all these things.
From the foregoing reasoning it is evident that the fourth commandment constitutes the seal of the law of God, or the seal of God. But the Scriptures do not leave us without direct testimony on this point.
We have seen above that in Scripture usage, sign, seal, token, and mark, are synonymous terms. Now the Lord expressly says that the Sabbath is a sign between him and his people. "Verily my Sabbaths, ye shall keep; for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the Lord that doth sanctify you." Ex. 31:13. The same fact is again stated by the prophet Ezekiel, 20:12, 20. Here the Lord tells his people that the very object of their keeping the Sabbath, that is, observing the fourth commandment, is that they might know that he was the true God. It may be said that the Sabbath was only a sign between God and the Jews. True this was spoken to the Jews, who were then separated from all other nations, to be God's people, and the depositaries of all divine truth in the earth. But when they, through disobedience were broken off, and the Gentiles grafted in through Christ, becoming "Israelites indeed" and "Jews inwardly," would it not apply equally to them?
Thus the fourth commandment, or the Sabbath, is taken by the Lord as the sign between him and his people, or the seal of his law; the people by that commandment signifying that they are the worshipers of the true God, and God by the same commandment making himself known as the great Creator of all things.
We refer again to the fact that the same company who in Rev. 7, have the seal of the living God in their foreheads, are brought to view again in Rev. 14:1, having the Father's name in their foreheads. This is good proof that the "seal of the living God," and the "Father's name," are used synonymously. The chain of evidence on this point is rendered complete, when we ascertain that the fourth commandment, which we have found to be the seal of the law, is spoken of by the Lord as that which contains his name. The proof of this will be seen by referring to Deut. 16:6: "But at the place which the Lord thy God shall choose to place his name in, there shalt thou sacrifice the passover," &c. What was there where they sacrificed the passover? There was the sanctuary, having in its holiest apartment the ark with the ten commandments, the fourth of which declared the true God, and contained his name. Wherever this was, there God's name was placed; and this was the only object to which the language could be applied.
Having ascertained what the seal of God is, we are prepared to proceed with the application of the prophecy. By the scenes introduced in the verses before us, namely, the four winds apparently about to blow, bringing war and trouble upon the land, and this work restrained till the servants of God should be sealed, as though a preparatory work must be done for them to save them from this trouble, we are reminded of the houses of the Israelites marked with the blood of the paschal lamb, and spared as the destroying angel passed over to slay the firstborn of the Egyptians, Ex. 12: also of the mark made by the writer's inkhorn, Eze. 9: upon all those who were to be spared by the men with the slaughtering weapons who followed after; and we conclude that the seal of God, here placed upon his servants, is some distinguishing mark or religious characteristic, through which they will be exempted from the judgments of God that fall on the wicked around them.
As we have found the seal of God in the fourth commandment, the inquiry follows, Does the observance of that commandment involve any peculiarity in religious practice? Yes, a very marked and striking one. It is one of the most singular facts to be met with in religious history, that in an age of such boasted gospel light as the present, when the influence of Christianity is so powerful and wide-spread, one of the greatest crosses a child of God can take up, even in the most enlightened and Christian land, is the simple observance of the law of God. For the fourth commandment requires the observance of the seventh day of each week, as the Sabbath of the Lord; but all Christendom through the combined influence of paganism and the papacy, have been beguiled into the keeping of the first day. A person has but to commence the observance of the day enjoined in the commandment, and a mark of peculiarity is upon him at once. He is distinct alike from the professedly religious and the unconverted world.
We conclude then that the angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God, is a divine messenger in charge of a work of reform to be carried on among men in reference to the Sabbath of the fourth commandment. The agents of this work on the earth, would of course be ministers of Christ; as to them is given the commission of instructing their fellow creatures in Bible truth; but, as there is order in the execution of all the divine counsels, why may not a literal angel have the charge and oversight of this work?
We have already noticed the chronology of this work as locating it in our own time. This is further evident from the fact that as the next event after the sealing of these servants of God, we behold them before the throne, with palms of victory in their hands. The sealing is, therefore, the last work to be accomplished for them prior to their redemption.
In Rev. 14, we find the same work again brought to view under the symbol of an angel flying in the midst of heaven with the most terrific warning that ever fell upon the ears of men. It is the last work to be accomplished for the world before the coming of Christ, which is the next event in the order of that prophecy, and hence must synchronize with the work here brought to view in Rev. 7:1-3. The angel with the seal of the living God in chapter 7, is therefore the same as the third angel of chapter 14. And this fact gives additional strength to our view of the seal. For while as the result of the work in chapter 7, a certain company are sealed with the seal of the living God, as the result of the third message of chapter 14, a company are brought out rendering scriptural obedience to all the "commandments of God." Verse 12. But there is no commandment of the decalogue except the fourth, upon which the Christian world theoretically needs reforming; and that this is the representative question in this message is evident from the fact that the keeping of the commandments, observing, with all the other moral precepts, the Lord's Sabbath, is what distinguishes the servants of God from those who worship the beast, and receive his mark, which is the observance of a counterfeit Sabbath. U. S.
How It Was Blotted Out.
For many years I had been a follower of strange gods and a lover of this world and its vanities. I was self-righteous, and thought I had religion enough of my own that was better than the Bible. I did not believe in the devil or hell. I believed that as God had created man he was bound to save him. I knew I did not serve him, did not know him, did not obey him. Prayer was forgotten, church was neglected, and worldly morality was the tree which brought forth its own deceptive fruit.
But when I shared parental responsibility and our boy was growing up, our mutual love for him made us anxious about his welfare and future career. His mind turned over the little he had learned about God; and his nightly prayers had been taught by us from habit and superstition more than from any conscientious feelings. His questions often puzzled me, and the sweet and earnest manner in which he inquired of his poor sinful father to know more about his Heavenly Father, and that "happy land, far, far away," of what his nurse had taught him, proved to me that God had given me a great blessing in the child.
A greater distrust in myself, and a greater sense of my inability to assure my boy of the truth contained in the simple little prayers I had learned from my mother, with my brothers and sisters, gradually began to come over me, and made me oftener reflect. Still, I never went to church; had not even a Bible in the house. What was I to teach my boy—Christ and him crucified, or the doctrines I had tried to believe?
One of his little friends died, then another, then his uncle. All these deaths made an impression on the boy. He rebelled against it; wanted to know "why God had done it?" It was hard that God should just go and take his friends; he wished he would not do it. I, of course, had to explain the best I could. One evening he was lying on the bed partly undressed, myself and my wife being seated by the fire. She had been telling me that Tom had not been a good boy that day; she had been telling what he had been doing, and had reproved him for it. All was quiet, when suddenly he broke out in a loud crying and sobbing, which surprised us. I went to him, and asked him what was the matter.
"I don't want it there, father; I don't want it there," said the child.
"What, my child, what is it?"
"Why, father, I don't want the angels to write down in God's Book all the bad things I have done to-day. I don't want it there; I wish it could be wiped out;" and his distress increased. What could I do? I did not believe, but yet I had been taught the way. I had to console him, so I said,
"Well, you need not cry; you can have it all wiped out in a minute if you want."
"How, father, how?"
"Why, get down on your knees, and ask God, for Christ's sake to wipe it out, and he will do it."
I did not have to speak twice. He jumped out of bed, saying, "Father, won't you come and help me?"
Now came the trial. The boy's distress was so great, and he pleaded so earnestly, that the big man who had never bowed down before God in spirit and in truth got down on his knees alongside of that dear boy, and asked God to wipe away his sins; and perhaps, though my lips did not speak it, my heart included my own sins too. We then got up, and he lay down in his bed again. In a few moments more he said,
"Father, are you sure it is all wiped out?"
Oh! how the acknowledgment grated through my unbelieving heart, as the words came to my mouth.
"Why, yes, my son; the Bible says, if you ask God, from your heart, for Christ's sake, to do it, and if you are really sorry for what you have done, it shall be all blotted out."
A smile of pleasure passed over his face, as he quietly asked,
"What did the angel blot it out with? With a sponge?"
Again was my whole soul stirred within me, as I answered,
"No, but with the precious blood of Christ. The blood of Christ cleanseth from all sin."
The fountains had at last burst forth. They could not be checked, and my cold heart was melted within me. I felt like a poor guilty sinner, and, turning away, said, "My dear wife, we must first find God, if we want to show him to our children. We cannot show them the way unless we know it ourselves."
And in the silent hour of the night I bent in prayer over that dear boy, and prayed, "Lord, I believe, help thou mine unbelief!" My wife, too, united with me, and we prayed jointly for ourselves and our child. And God heard our prayers, and received us, as he always does those who seek him with a whole heart.—The Parish Helper.
The Home Circle.
THE TWO LIGHTS.
" 'When I'm a man!' is the poetry of youth.
'When I was young!' is the poetry of old age."
"WHEN I'm a man," the stripling cries,
And strives the coming years to scan—
"Ah, then I shall be strong and wise,
When I'm a man!"
"When I was young," the old man sighs,
"Bravely the lark and linnet sung
Their carol under sunny skies,
When I was young!"
"When I'm a man, I shall be free
To guard the right, the truth uphold."
"When I was young I bent no knee
To power or gold."
"Then shall I satisfy my soul
With yonder prize, when I'm a man."
"Too late I found how vain the goal
To which I ran."
"When I'm a man these idle toys
Aside forever shall be flung."
"There was no poison in my joys
When I was young."
The boy's bright dream is all before;
The man's romance lies far behind.
Had we the present and no more,
Fate were unkind.
But brother, toiling in the night,
Still count yourself not all unblest
If in the east there gleams a light,
Or in the west.
—Blackwood's Magazine.
Credit.
THE question is sometimes raised whether giving credit to the poor, be on the whole a benefit? Or, whether the evils do not exceed the advantages, to those who borrow? Like most practices introduced into society, credit may be used for good or for evil, according to the extent in which it is used. It may be abused by excess, like food or pleasure. In some conditions, the honest, the industrious, and the frugal, may be greatly benefited by credit. Their means of wealth are thus increased. And without such aid they might have plodded and struggled for years and acquired no estate. And yet without prudence and great caution, they may make an improper use, of their good credit; and obtain loans which they are unable afterwards to return. The best plans will sometimes fail; and he who calculates on making fifty per cent. with a loan of one or two thousand dollars, may lose by the speculation. Many an honest and frugal man has been ruined in his estate, by his facilities for borrowing. In this, as in all things else, moderation and prudence are excellent guides.
To a man fond of show, and without habits of industry and economy, the credit system is still more dangerous. So long as he can borrow, he will indulge in his expensive living, and in the parade of which he is so fond. At first, he means to pay; and that in a few months, when his rents and dues come in. But when they come, they are not enough to meet the demands of his creditors; and he must borrow again. He cannot think of retrenchments; his mode of living has become necessary to his happiness, and his standing in society, and he finds it necessary to live on credit. He now merely hopes to pay; for on calculation he cannot justly expect to do it. His expenses are greater than his income; and his only way to keep on in the style he has lived, is to obtain more credit and loans. The system to such a man and his family, is full of mischief. He must soon fail; and the longer it is kept off the greater it will be.
There may be circumstances under which the credit system may be beneficial; but those who venture do well to remember that the day of payment will soon arrive; and that, should they be led to extravagance or idleness by the extention of credit their condition would be far less desirable than that of poverty, with sobriety and economy.
RESPECT FOR RELIGION.
“He has a respect for religion.” Is it possible? how deeply humble! The creature has a respect for the service of the Creator! A grass-hopper deigns to acknowledge that it has a respect for the King of kings and Lord of lords! Verily, a subject of congratulation for the universe! A worm, crawling in the dust, confesses to its fellow worm that it has some respect for the government of the “high and mighty one that inhabiteth eternity.”—Dr. Muhlenberg.
What Saved Him.
A YOUNG wife in Michigan had just got settled in her home. All seemed fair and promising, for she did not know her husband was a drunkard. But one night he came home at a very late hour, and much the worse for liquor. When he staggered into the house, the wife, who was greatly shocked, told him he was sick, and to lie down at once, and in a moment or two he was comfortably on the sofa, in a drunken sleep. His face was reddish-purple, and altogether, he was a pitiable looking object.
The doctor was sent for post haste, and mustard applied to his feet and hands. When the doctor came and felt his pulse, and examined him and found that he was only drunk, he said:—
"He will be all right in the morning."
But the wife insisted that he was very sick, and that severe remedies must be used.
"You must shave his head and apply blisters," she urged "or I will send for some one who will."
The husband's head was accordingly shaved closely and blisters applied.
The patient lay all night in a drunken sleep, and, notwithstanding the blisters were eating into his flesh, it was not till near morning that he began to beat about, disturbed by pain.
About daylight he woke up to a most uncomfortable consciousness of blistered agonies.
"What does this mean?" he said, putting his hands to his bandaged head.
"Lie still; you mustn't stir," said his wife; "you have been very sick."
"I am not sick."
"Oh, yes, you are. You have the brain fever. We have worked with you all night."
"I should think you had," groaned the poor victim. "What's the matter with my feet?"
"They are blistered."
"Well, I am better, now; take off the blisters—do," he pleaded piteously.
He was in a most uncomfortable state—his head covered with sores, and his feet and hands still worse.
"Dear," he said, groaning, "if I should ever get sick in this way again, don't be alarmed and send for a doctor, and, above all, don't blister me again."
"Oh, indeed I will; all that saved you were the blisters; and if you have another such spell I shall be more frightened than ever, for the tendency—I am sure—is to apoplexy, and from the next attack you are likely to die unless there are the severest measures used."
He made no further defense. Suffice it to say that he never had another attack.
Reports from the Field.
By John Norton Loughborough
Southampton, England.
THE cause in "Old England," is still advancing, if not as rapidly as we might desire, it moves nevertheless, and is getting hold of minds. Two more kept last Sabbath with us, and we have received many favorable responses from those to whom we are sending the Signs. Out of two hundred names selected from various sources in different parts of the kingdom only two have declined to read the paper.
Our missionary work has increased to that extent, we deemed it needful to have more workers, and have, therefore, sent for sister Maud Sisley to come from Bale, Switzerland, to assist us. By card received from her to-day we learn that she is with her friends at Tunbridge, England, and will be with us the first of next week.
May the Lord enable us all to humbly and earnestly do what our hands find to do in his cause, is our prayer.
J. N. LOUGHBOROUGH.
April 10, 1879.
Clarksville, Illinois.
By John F. Ballenger
For several weeks I have been laboring in and around this place, in the neighborhood of the Gridley church. It was a hard field, as many had heard the truth and rejected it, and some of the members of the church had been unfaithful. For some time in the past there had been no Sabbath meetings or Sabbath-school held here, and they had not attended the ordinances for over two years. By the blessing of the Lord on our labors in public and private, a little company of sixteen signed a covenant to keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus, and to unite in church fellowship. Regular Sabbath meetings were established, and a Sabbath-school of twenty-seven members was organized.
J. F. BALLENGER.
Santa Rosa and Healdsburg.
By William M. Healey
I MET with the church at Santa Rosa during their District Quarterly meeting. On the Sabbath we had over one hundred adult commandment keepers present and a very good meeting. On Sunday it rained so that the attendance was small. We found the church here in quite a prosperous condition. The meeting of the T. and M. Society was quite well attended considering the rain which prevailed at the time; there seemed to be a desire to get more fully into the T. and M. work.
The past two weeks I have spent in Healdsburg preaching Sabbaths and first-day. This church has grown quite small by the removal of many of its members. Last Sunday we received by baptism Bro. N. A. Young, who is well known by many of our people. W. M. HEALEY.
Healdsburg, May 2.
East Norwalk, Ohio.
By H. A. St. John
I HELD a meeting with the Norwalk church April 19. Five were baptized, and ten united with the Norwalk church, all of whom have commenced to keep the Sabbath during the past winter. Three or four others are keeping the Sabbath, and we hope they will fully unite with us soon.
H. A. ST. JOHN.
Bellville, Ohio.
By A. O. Burrill
Our meetings at this place have continued for five weeks. At least a dozen have commenced to keep the Sabbath, and seven have been added to the church. The Sabbath-school has been greatly improved, and nearly doubled. Brn. Mann and Richards, who are laboring three miles from here in the country, are having an excellent interest, and the probability is that there will be quite an accession to this church from that place.
A. O. Burrill.
April 21.
Paulding Center, Ohio.
By A. L. Hussey
I COMMENCED meetings April 6, at a place three miles west of Paulding Center, where Bro. Wm. Cottrell held meetings about five years ago. Nine signed the covenant. The attendance was good from the beginning.
April 22. A. L. HUSSEY.
Albion, Nebraska.
By Daniel Nettleton
Since we closed our lectures here last winter, this little company have been at work in the missionary cause, and as a result they are growing in grace and a knowledge of the truth, and ten others have commenced to keep the Sabbath with them.
Daniel Nettleton.
Dry Creek, Kansas.
By M. and H. Enoch
WE came to this place March 27. The prophecies and the Sabbath question have been canvassed. Thirteen have signed the covenant. Six of these are just beginning to keep the Sabbath. Others are investigating.
April 16. M. AND H. ENOCH.
West Sumner, Maine.
By J. B. Goodrich
As the result of our meetings in this place, thirty-five, adults and children, have signed a covenant to keep the commandments of God, and to walk in the light of the third angel's message, thus associating themselves together for the purpose of sustaining religious meetings and a Sabbath-school.
J. B. GOODRICH.
Independence, Kansas.
By John H. Cook
VisITED the brethren at Peru April 5–11, organized a church of nine members. Nearly all of them adopted the tithing system. The circulating library of Sister White’s writings was purchased, and a Sabbath-school and tract society were established among them. Three were baptized. April 11 to 17, we visited the church at Harrisonville, fourteen miles south west of Independence. All the officers of this church had moved away, yet with a commendable zeal they had kept up their meetings. One more had commenced to keep the Sabbath. J. H. Cook.
Page Co., Virginia.
By I. Sanborn
I HELD a quarterly meeting at Zion, Page Co. It was a good meeting, and I found nearly all faithful. The Bible-class is interesting and prosperous, but by persevering effort may still be improved. But I was pleased with the improvement that had been made, while hoping and praying for more. Nearly all had something to pay to the S. B. treasurer as tithes. Three were baptized, and others expect to follow their example. At Soliloquy four have been baptized since their quarterly meeting. The interest is good at all points where I have labored.
I. SANBORN.
THE FUNERAL OF HOPE.
By Richard Liles
THE following sad but beautiful lines were written by the late Richard Liles, Esq., of Danville, Va., a gentleman of genius, a fine scholar, and a lawyer of distinction. The lines speak of the sad experience and fate of the author:—
I have been to the funeral of all my hopes,
And entombed them one by one;
Not a word was said,
Not a tear was shed
When the mournful task was done.
Slowly and sadly I turned me round,
And sought my silent room;
And there alone
By the cold hearth stone
I wooed the midnight gloom.
And as the night wind's deepening shade
Lowered above my brow,
I wept o'er days
When manhood's rays
Were brighter far than now.
The dying embers on the hearth
Gave out their flickering light,
As if to say,
This is the way
Thy life shall close in night.
I wept aloud in anguish sore
O'er the blight of prospects fair;
While demons laughed,
And eager quaffed
My tears like nectar rare.
Through hell's red halls an echo ran,
An echo loud and long,
As in the bowl
I plunged my soul,
In the might of madness strong.
And there within that sparkling glass
I knew the cause to lie;
This all men own,
From zone to zone,
Yet millions drink and die.
Meat for Students
"I AM about to utter a most heterodox sentiment, and one which I feel sure will shock and horrify the majority of my readers. But I utter it boldly, confident that it is correct. It is this: Meat should be eaten very sparingly, if at all, by all brain-workers, for the plain and simple reason that it is too stimulating to the brain. 'Prove it,' cries beef-eater. In the Lancet, Vol. I., page 186 (1869), we read: 'A bear kept at the Anatomical Museum of Glessen showed a quiet, gentle nature as long as he was fed exclusively on bread; but a few days' feeding on meat made him vicious, and even quite dangerous. That swine grow irascible by having flesh food given them is well known—so much so, indeed, that they will then attack men.' Those who have kept a watch-dog know that he is much more fierce and liable to attack burglars if he is fed exclusively upon meat than when fed upon vegetable food.
"Again, when a man is stricken by paralysis (one of the most formidable of brain diseases), what does the wise physician say? 'You must eat no meat; it is altogether too exciting to the brain.' It is the best, and sometimes almost the only thing, that can be done for the sick man now; but it is like 'locking the barn-door after the horse is stolen,' for very rarely, if ever, does he regain his former health and vigor.
"My experience and observations show that in many cases of insomnia, not dependent upon other diseases, there is so strong a probability that meat is causing all the mischief, that its relinquishment should be insisted upon by the attending physician before resorting to sedative or narcotic drugs.
"So greatly conducive to irritability of the nervous system is meat, especially beef, that among its minor evils may be reckoned the weeping over lessons, the fractiousness, the petulance, the hysterical laughing and crying, the low spirits, excessive homesickness, etc., etc., which appear to be the usual accompaniments of boarding-school life. This is lamentable. Whenever I see a school of young ladies afflicted with 'nervousness,' it reminds me of a beautiful garden of roses infested with mosquitoes. It always requires considerable moral courage on the part of the medical attendant to prohibit the free use of meat, except in cases of very grave nervous disease, like paralysis, etc.; for it seems to be the universal opinion, that the butcher's cart and the meat market are the only barriers between mankind and death. This is not so—provided food equally nutritious is substituted for it."—Sanitarian.
Sanitation
Sanitation.
CUT WOUNDS.—A wound made by a knife or other sharp instrument is best healed by bringing the edges together and putting on a bandage which will not exclude the air. Nature will work the cure, if the person be healthy, much better than any salve or ointment.
Treatment of Stings.
The pain caused by the sting of a plant or insect is the result of a certain amount of acid poison injected into the blood. The first thing to be done is to press the tube of a small key from side to side to facilitate the expulsion of the sting and its accompanying poison. The sting, if left in the wound, should be carefully extracted, otherwise it will greatly increase the local irritation. The poison of stings being acid, common sense points to the alkalies as the proper means of cure. Among the most easily produced remedies may be mentioned soft soap, liquor of ammonia (spirits of hartshorn), smelling salts, washing soda, quicklime made into a paste with water, the juice of an onion, tobacco juice, chewed tobacco, bruised dock leaves, tomato juice, wood ashes, tobacco ashes and carbonate of soda. If the sting be severe, rest and coolness should be added to the other remedies, more especially in the case of nervous subjects. Nothing is so apt to make the poison so active as heat, and nothing favors its activity less than cold. Let the body be kept cool and at rest, and the activity of the poison will be reduced to a minimum. Any active exertion whereby the circulation is quickened, will increase both pain and swelling. If the swelling be severe, the part may be rubbed with sweet oil or a drop or two of laudanum. Stings in the eye, ear, mouth, or throat, sometimes lead to serious consequences. In such cases medical advice should always be sought for as soon as possible.—Horticulturist.