Earlier text: THE SORROWS OF ESAUPARLEYING WITH TEMPTATION
Sin never pays only in its own kind. J. N. A. PARLEYING WITH TEMPTATION
WE are in a world of temptations. We cannot escape them. Fortunately the temptations themselves are not sins. The sin lies in yielding; and the yielding is almost invariably preceded by a parley. Parleying with temptation is the grand avenue to all the sins which the tempter would have us commit. If we can close up this, we fortify ourselves against many dangers. What is meant by parleying with temptation is most strikingly illustrated in the history of Balaam. When the messengers of the king of Moab came to him with splendid offers, if he would come and curse Israel, the Lord expressly told him not to go with them. A second deputation arrives with richer bribes and more imposing honors. Under an affectation of piety he says, “Tarry ye also here this night, that I may know what the Lord will say unto me more.” God had once expressly forbidden him. Of that he was well aware. But the offers were tempting. The prize was worth securing. And now could not he, notwithstanding God’s prohibition, some way secure the reward consistently with duty? He gave his mind up to the unlawful study of how to reconcile these two things. And because he loved the ways of unrighteousness more than his duty to God, God gave him up to follow his own ways; and the sad results are known to all. The human mind reasons now just as it did then; and thousands are substantially following the steps of Balaam. There are four principal ways in which we give the tempter access to us, and even solicit his assaults. 1. The first is when we re-open for debate a question which has once been decided. Our first judgments are the best. They spring from the intuitive perceptions of conscience before it is biased by after thoughts. Subsequent considerations are too often but the pleadings of selfishness or dishonesty to escape from the convictions of conscience. If Balaam, once expressly informed by God of his duty, and decided in that direction, had adhered to that decision, he would have been safe. But he re-opened the question for further discussion. Perhaps the question was not fully settled after all. Perhaps it could be decided in some way which would allow him to receive the reward which he so much coveted. Here was his first great stride toward his fearful fall. And so it is with us. Therefore when a question has once passed the tribunal of conscience, and been decided in accordance with clear perceptions of right, take your stand immovably upon that decision. Let the enemy understand that that is not a debatable question. This will save much after trouble. 2. The second way in which we weaken ourselves in the face of the enemy is when we do not at once subjugate the inward inclination which leads to the outward act. All things spring from within. Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. Every act can be traced to some inward motive. If these motives are right and pure, such will also be the actions which follow; if they are evil and impure, the actions will bear the same character. These hidden springs, therefore, need to be carefully watched. And when an inclination enters the heart which will lead to evil, subjugate it, suppress it, nip it in the bud, don’t let it mature. This is the easiest, quickest, surest, way to avoid the evils which will follow if this is not accomplished. The secret inclination in Balaam’s heart, which eventually matured into such bitter results, was the love of honor and gain. Could he not in some way secure these? This was the object of his parley; and this was the great cause of his fall; for the apostle mentions as his chief characteristic, that he “loved the wages of unrighteousness.” These secret inclinations being allowed to prevail, soon gain the understanding by special pleas addressed to it, and finally the will is drawn in, and the guilty deed is at once executed. Lay the axe at the root, suppress the inward inclination. The strength of the temptation is then gone. 3. The third way of parleying with temptation is to throw ourselves into circumstances of trial relying upon our own strength. The Christian’s strength is wholly in God. The Bible seeks to inculcate a true conviction of human weakness and guilt as the basis of all acceptable action. And the Christian’s sense of weakness is his strength; for it leads him to rely upon an unfailing arm. And it operates also in another direction; for feeling his weakness, he shuns temptation; and temptation shunned is powerless. The serpent cannot charm us, first of all, to fly from temptation; but when we are thrust out where we are obliged to grapple face to face with the foe, then rely on God for help and strength. With every temptation he is able to make a way of escape. 4. The last and fatal stage is reached when conscience becomes a party in the conspiracy with evil, and sin is made to look consistent with duty. So long as a person will acknowledge right principles, there is hope of him, however reckless he may appear. There is some ground upon which a reform may be based. But when the conscience is brought into that place where it will bear a false testimony, and the distinction between right and wrong is broken down, then the person is wholly given up to evil. Here is the great danger. Conscience may be perverted; it may be seared; it may become evil. Alas for the victim, when he reaches that stage in self-deception. Hence the necessity of guarding well the conscience. Hence the value of a Christian education. Welcome, anything which will enlighten the mind, and restrain from sin. Welcome, anything which, though it may not entirely restrain from sin, will render it uncomfortable. Something is gained even then. Failing to secure the enjoyment falsely promised, the transgressor may turn to seek what reward there is to virtue.152 “Every man,” says the apostle, “is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lust and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin; and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.” Such is the insidious entrance of evil; such is its awful result. We have spoken of some of the more usual avenues of its approach. If these can all be guarded we have but little to fear; and it is all summed up in one sentence: Don’t parley with temptation. U. S. QUESTIONS ANSWERED.
By Editor
1. PLEASE explain in the SIGNS Mark 9:43-48, "Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched." S. H. We copy the following remarks on this passage from the book entitled, "Man's Nature and Destiny," by Elder Uriah Smith:— "These passages are relied on with as much assurance, perhaps, as any, to prove the eternal misery of the reprobate. If this language had never been used by any of the inspired writers of the Scriptures, till it was thus used in the New Testament, it might be urged with some degree of plausibility, as an expressive imagery of eternal torment. But, even in this case, it might be replied that fire, so far as we have any experience with it, or knowledge of its nature, invariably consumes that upon which it preys, and hence must be a symbol of complete destruction; and that the expression, as it occurs in Mark 9:44, can denote nothing less than the utter consumption of those who are cast into that fire. "But this expression was one which was well known and understood by those whom Christ was addressing. Isaiah and Jeremiah frequently use the figure of the undying worm and quenchless fire. In their familiar scriptures the people daily read these expressions. Let us see what idea they would derive from them. We turn to Jeremiah 17:27, and read:—" "“But if ye will not hearken unto me to hallow the Sabbath day, and not bear a burden, even entering in at the gates of Jerusalem on the Sabbath day; then will I kindle a fire in the gates thereof, and it shall devour the palaces of Jerusalem, and it shall not be quenched.”" "From this text we certainly can learn the meaning that was attached to the expression, ‘unquenchable fire,’ by the Hebrew people. This fire was not to be quenched, therefore it was unquenchable. But it was to be kindled in the gates of Jerusalem, and devour the palaces thereof. It was therefore literal, natural fire. But how could a fire of this kind, thus kindled, be supposed to be a fire that would burn eternally? They certainly would not so understand it. No more should we. Moreover, this threatening of the Lord by Jeremiah was fulfilled. 2 Chron. 36:19: ‘And they burnt the house of God, and brake down the wall of Jerusalem, and burnt the palaces thereof with fire, and destroyed all the goodly vessels thereof.’ Verse 21. ‘To fulfill the word of the Lord by Jeremiah.’ Thus Jerusalem was burned according to Jeremiah's prediction that it should be consumed in unquenchable fire. But how long did that fire burn? Only till it had reduced to ashes the gates and palaces on which it preyed. Unquenchable fire is therefore simply a fire that is not quenched, or does not cease, till it has entirely consumed that which causes or supports it. Then it dies out of itself, because there is nothing more to burn. The expression does not mean a fire that must absolutely eternally burn, and that consequently all that is cast therein to feed the flame must forever be preserved by having the portion consumed immediately renewed.”" Both the worm and the fire are presented as the means of the destruction of carcasses; see Isa. 66:24. For very clear evidence of this see also Matt. 3:12; “He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.” The fire of the day of perdition of the ungodly will have the same effect upon the wicked that a fire which could not be quenched would have upon chaff. Rev. 20:9, says prophetically of that day: “And fire came down from God out of Heaven, and devoured them.” Malachi says it “shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.” Mal. 4:1. Ps. 37:20 says: “The enemies of the Lord shall be as the fat of lambs; they shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away.” This is a very small part of the Scripture testimony as to the effect which the fire of perdition will have upon the finally unregenerate. 2. How do you prove that 1 Tim. 4:3, 4, does not permit the use of every kind of flesh, that of swine included? H. W. That there is some limitation to this language everybody believes; at least we do not believe that there are any civilized people who hold that every living creature is good for food and was designed to be eaten. Every poisonous filthy reptile is a living creature, and so is man. Are they all good for food? Now we think the limitation is shown in verse 5: “For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.” The word of God did indeed sanctify or “set apart” certain animals the flesh of which might be eaten; and it expressly forbade the use of others. Swine were among the beasts not permitted to be eaten,—they were unclean. By Gen. 9 we learn that the distinction between clean and unclean beasts did not have its origin in the Levitical law. It existed before the flood. Swine were unclean before the Jews as a people existed. We need no argument to prove to us that they are unclean now. 3. What evidence from Scriptures have we that this is the only world whose inhabitants have sinned? We are not aware that any such evidence exists. 4. Does Rom. 14:5, 6, prove that there is no day now binding as the Sabbath? It does not; evidently it has no reference to that subject. Here again we claim a necessary limitation of the language. See the context, “One man believeth that he may eat all things; another, who is weak, eateth herbs.” This shows, as Dr. Edwards well argues in his “Sabbath Manual,” that the subject is not the moral law. Now turn to Ex. 16:4, and we find the term “every day” used where it does not include the weekly Sabbath. They were to gather a certain rate of manna every day, but were not to gather it on the Sabbath. In things of a secular or merely ceremonial nature, as in these two passages, every day does not include the Sabbath of the Lord. J. H. W. RIGHTEOUS MEASUREMENT.
By John Nevins Andrews
"With what measure ye mete it shall be measured to you again." Matt. 7:2. THESE words were uttered by our Lord as a warning to his people. He wished them to understand that wrong doing should bring calamity and sorrow upon the wrong doer. Now he even declares that the very kind of evil which we cause others shall come back upon ourselves. We have many notable instances of this in the Bible. Jacob acted an extremely unbrotherly part toward Esau, and an inexcusable and wicked deception toward his father. He had to flee for his life. He fell into the hands of Laban, who, though his own uncle, acted toward him in the same deceitful and cruel manner that he had acted toward Esau. In fact, the deception of Laban was the cause of lasting misery in the family relations of Jacob, till it finally brought about the sale of Joseph as a slave to be carried into Egypt. For some twenty-two years, Jacob supposed his son torn in pieces of a wild beast. For Joseph was 17 years old when his brethren sold him, and was 30 years of age when he stood before Pharaoh. Shortly after this the seven years of plenty came on, and in the second year of the famine Jacob came into Egypt. The sorrows of Jacob's life, and some of them were very serious, cover a period of more than fifty years, and are distinctly traceable to his own wrong acts. His sorrows seemed to have ended when he found Joseph in Egypt. But how long a period it was before his captivity was turned! What a man sows, that he shall reap. It can never pay to do wrong. David is another example of receiving back in kind for the wrongs committed. Read his wicked conduct toward Uriah. Then read the retribution that followed through all the rest of his life, and principally in his own family, too. See the sad history of Amnon and Tamar, of the rebellion and unnatural crimes of Absalom. See 2 Sam. 11-19. Even Adonijah's rebellion and death may be considered a part of this retribution. Sin never pays only in its own kind. J. N. A. Wherewith Shall I Come Before the Lord?
By Eld. Geo. I. Butler
"Wherewith shall I come before the Lord?"
By Eld. Geo. I. Butler. This expression occurs in a very remarkable passage in the prophet Micah, chap. 6, verses 6-8, which reads as follows: "Wherewith shall I come before the Lord, and bow myself before the high God? shall I come before him with burnt-offerings, with calves of a year old? Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams, or with ten thousands of rivers of oil? shall I give my first-born for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul? He hath showed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?" We call this scripture remarkable because, perhaps, in no other in the blessed Bible is the real nature of genuine religion made more clear, and its relative importance distinguished more forcibly, from mere outward service. Outward ceremonies and services have their place, and a certain degree of importance, in our divine religion. But we must never forget that this importance is very small in comparison with the service of the heart, and obedience to those principles which perfect a Christian character. Perhaps there is no question of greater importance than this, "Wherewith shall I come before the Lord" in a way which will be acceptable to him? It should be the study of every created being how we may answer the end of our creation, and live in a manner acceptable to God. It is always prominent in the mind of every good man. A sense of man's accountability to God, and the fear arising from a sense of guilt because not at peace with him, has doubtless been at the foundation of every false system of religion in our world. Satan, the arch-deceiver, when he could not wholly quiet men's consciences because of this sense of guilt, has taken delight in misdirecting their efforts to pacify its strivings. The great mistake seen in all false religions, and in all formal professors of the genuine, is the one corrected in this text; the prominence accorded to outward forms and service, and the neglect of the heart service and the principles of justice, mercy, and obedience to God. It is wonderful what zeal the heathen show in maintaining their systems of false religion; enough to put to shame many professors of the true. Their pilgrimages, penances, sacrifices, and painful rites, are such that few professors of Christianity would ever think of enduring as much for Christ's sake. But these are all outward services. Many forms of Christianity have degenerated mainly to ritual and ceremonies. This is always the tendency in times of backsliding and formality. Then professors are all the more strenuous for the forms. So it was with the ancient Jewish church. With what vigor does the prophet Isaiah denounce the formal professors in his day: "To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the Lord. I am full of the burnt-offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats. . . . Bring no more vain oblations; . . . the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting. Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth; they are a trouble unto me; I am weary to bear them. And when ye spread forth your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you; yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear; your hands are full of blood." Isa. 1:11-15. Why does the prophet speak so disrespectfully of these outward services, when every one of them was commanded in the ceremonial law? Not because they were not all right in their proper place, and a duty under other circumstances; for they were. But because the real service of the heart, and obedience to principles of justice, mercy, and the love of God, were lacking. They set the form before the substance of religion. Where the latter is left out, and men content themselves with the form, God abhors it. In the old dispensation, the forms of religion embraced various kinds of offerings and sacrifices, attendance upon feasts and new moons, circumcision, and priestly ministrations, prayers and fasting. In this dispensation, we have attendance upon divine worship, the ordinances of baptism, and the Lord's supper, prayer and fasting; and these are of divine appointment. Man has added to these in some churches various rites, prostrations, crossings, changes of apparel, and offerings of incense, etc., which God never commanded, of which it might well be said, "Who hath required this at your hand?" In Catholic churches, the visitor is astonished, if unaccustomed to the sight, to see the faithful making the sign of the cross, counting their beads, and at the prostrations, adorations, and devotional movements, in which all present participate with a wonderful unction. Yet many of those present he may know make nothing of swearing, and fighting, and cheating, while others may really be sincere. This outward service may affect the imagination, and satisfy its votaries that they are God's children, but it is a grand deception. Our Protestant churches may as really rely upon their forms as the other. No doubt millions satisfy themselves with occasional formal prayer, attendance upon worship, participation in the ordinances of baptism and the Lord's supper, as much as the Catholic in his forms. The great things which God requires is a character imbued with love for justice, mercy, and communion with God. Where these are found in the heart and life, the outward services, prescribed by the word of life, will be acceptable and profitable. Prayer and attendance upon divine worship will be a means of bringing the blessing of God to the soul, and they will result in a closer communion with the great source of spiritual life. The Lord's Supper will be a true feast of the Lord where we partake of him spiritually. But without these principles prevailing in the heart, all outward services are empty mockery, which God abhors. We may pour out "rivers of oil," "give our first-born for our transgression," or our bodies to be burned, and all these sacrifices will avail us nothing. "If we regard iniquity in our hearts, the Lord will not hear us." "Wherewith shall we come before the Lord" acceptably? By "doing justly," "loving mercy," and "walking humbly with God." From the heart we must repent of (that is, turn away from) our past sins, accepting the great offering made through Christ for the transgressions which are past, and through the strength which he will impart, live honest, pure, and holy lives, hating all iniquity. This kind of religion God will regard, and man must respect. All other is but filthy rags. WAYSIDE PREACHING.
By Adoniram Judson
THE day was intensely hot, and the weary missionary sat alone in his zayat looking haggard and careworn. All day long he had repeated over and over again, as he could find listeners, such simple truths as mothers teach the little children on their knees. Among those who passed by, some scoffed, others were indifferent, but no one had cared to listen to the gracious message he had to give. If he could only do something to fill up these tedious intervals. He might read, but no; this was a work to which he must not give a divided mind. While his face was hidden by a book, some poor native might lose his last chance of hearing the words of life. "God reigns, God Almighty reigns," he repeated, "and I have given myself to him, soul and body, for time and eternity. His will be done." Still the day seemed long; and with aching head and heavy heart he took up a little Burmese tract, as familiar to him as his own name, and began to read aloud. Attracted by his foreign accent, the passers-by turned their heads a moment to listen and then scornfully passed on. Finally a coarsely clad water-bearer lowered the vessel from her head and seated herself to listen. But the reading did not please her. Grinning in angry derision until her wrinkled visage became positively hideous, she arose, muttering to herself, "Jesus Christ! no nigban*! ha, ha, ha!" With a sinking heart the missionary is about to lay aside his tract, when another shadow falls upon the path. A tall, dignified, aristocratic man leading a little boy, whose bright, button-like eyes are in perfect keeping with his dancing little feet, passes by. "Papa! papa!" said the boy, with a merry little skip, "Look, look, papa! there is Jesus Christ's man." "Jesus Christ's man" raised his eyes from the book which he could read just as well without eyes, and bestowed one of his brightest smiles upon the little stranger, and received in return a pleased but faithful recognition. The father did not speak or turn his head, but a ray of sunshine went down into the missionary's heart from those happy little eyes. Somehow he felt that his hour's reading had not been in vain, and he continued it with increased earnestness and emphasis. A priest wrapped his yellow robes about him, and sat down upon the steps, as though for a moments' rest. Then another stranger, a philosopher, came boldly up and seated himself on the mat. At night, in his closet, the missionary remembered both philosopher and priest; pleaded long and earnestly for the scoffing old water-bearer; and felt a warm tear stealing to his eye, as he presented the case of the tall stranger and the laughing, dancing ray of sunshine at his side. Day after day went by, as hot, as dusty, and bringing as many feverish winds as ever; but the hours were less wearisome because of the little buds of promise which had been formed. Every day the stranger carried the same imperturbable face past the zayat, and the child made some silent advance towards friendship with the missionary. One day, as they came in sight, the missionary beckoned with his hand and the child with a single bound, came to his knee. "Moung, Moung!" exclaimed the father in a tone of surprise blended with anger. But the child was back again in a moment, with a gay colored madras handkerchief wound around his head, and his eyes sparkling and dancing with joy. "You have a very fine boy there, sir," said the missionary, in a tone intended to be conciliatory. The stranger turned with a low bow and then hastened away. "I do not think that zayat a very good place to go, Moung, Moung," said the father, gravely, when they were well out of hearing, "These white foreigners are—." He did not say what, but shook his head with a mysterious meaning. The boy's eyes grew larger and deeper, as he continued to look up into his father's face in wondering silence. "Papa," at length said he.153 "What, my son." "Angry?" The soft smile on that stern, bearded face was a sufficient answer. "Is it true that she,—my mother"— "Is it true that my mother prayed to the Lord Jesus Christ?" "Who dares to tell you so?" "I must not say, papa; the one who told me said it was as much as life is worth to talk of such things to your son. Did she papa?" "That is a very pretty turban the foreigner gave you." "And makes your bright eyes brighter than ever." "Did my mother pray to the Lord Jesus Christ?" "There, there! you have talked enough, my boy," said the father gloomily; and the two continued their walk in silence. Upon inquiry the missionary learned that this man was a writer under the government, a very respectable man, but haughty and reserved. "Does the teacher remember," continued the missionary's informant, "that three or four years ago a young woman came to you for medicine?" The missionary smiled, "I should have a wonderful memory, Shuay-bay, if I carried all my applicants for medicine in it." "But this one was not like other women. She had the face of an angel, and her voice—the teacher must remember her voice. It was like the silvery chimes of the pagoda bells at midnight. She was the favorite wife of the sah-ya, and this little boy, her only child, was very ill. She did not dare ask you to the house, or even send a servant for the medicine, for her husband was one of the most violent persecutors." "Ay, I do recollect her, by her distress, and her warm gratitude. And so this is her child! What has become of the mother?" "Has the teacher forgotten putting a gospel of Matthew in her hand, and saying that it contained medicine for her, for that she was afflicted with a worse disease than the fever of her little son; and then lifting up his hands and praying very solemnly?" "I do not recall the circumstance, but what came of it?" "They say," answered the Burman, lowering his voice, and casting an investigating glance around him—"they say the medicine cured her. She read the book nights, while watching by her baby; and then she would kneel down and pray as the teacher had done. At last her husband got the book." "What did he do with it?" "Only burned it. But she was a tender little creature, and could not bear his look; so, as the baby got out of danger, she took the fever and died. She got courage as she drew near the end, and begged her husband to send for you. He is not a hard hearted man; and he was more than life and soul to him, but he would not send. And so she died, talking to the last moment of the Lord Jesus, and calling on every body around her to love him and worship none but him." "Is this true, Shway-bay?" "I know nothing about it, teacher; it's not safe to know anything. The sah-ya has taken an oath to destroy every body having too good a memory. But"—and the man looked cautiously around him—"does the teacher think that little Burman children are likely to run into the arms of foreigners without being taught?" "Aha! say you so, Shway-bay?" "I say nothing, teacher." The missionary seemed lost in thought and his assistant passed on his way.—Memoirs of Adoniram Judson. Accountability for Idle Silence
As we must render an account of every idle word, so must we also of our idle silence.—Ambrose. Life’s Evening Reflects the Day
LIFE's evening will take its character from the day which has preceded it. Frank Leslie’s Scientific Humor
By Editor
Frank Leslie’s Budget does up its science in the following manner:— Jack (aged ten years or under): "I trust, Tommy, that you believe in the non-essentiality of a pre-existent first cause." Tommy: "Oh, certainly. At least, I go no further back than the primordial atomic globule."—[Exeunt, driving their hoops.] Congregational Church Expels Creationist Dissenter
At a recent prayer-meeting in Ashfield, Mass., a member of a Congregational church brought a charge of infidelity against the pastor, founded on his exposition of the Bible account of the creation, in which the clergyman explained the six days as periods not of twenty-four hours each, but of much greater length, according to the widely received teachings of modern scientists. The congregation, with scarcely an exception, sustained their minister, and the name of the dissatisfied member was on Sunday dropped from the roll of the church at his own request.—Christian Union. GLEANINGS FROM THE EASTERN FIELD.
MINNESOTA, Anawauk, Le Sueur Co.—Brn. D. C. Burch and E. A. Curtis report as the result of a series of meetings begun in this place in January, that "seventeen have signed the covenant, nearly all of whom are heads of families. With only one exception, they have thrown away their tobacco. A Sabbath-school of thirty-two members has been organized, and there is prospect of quite an increase soon." INDIANA, New London.—Feb. 15, Brn. J. M. Rees and Wm. Covert began meetings in this place, which lasted ten days. Of these Bro. Covert says: "A good degree of the Spirit of God was enjoyed throughout. Much prejudice was removed. There was a good attendance from the village and vicinity. Twenty-two meetings were held. Eight applied for membership in the church, and will shortly be baptized and received into fellowship." ALABAMA, Washington Co.—Eld. C. O. Taylor, writing Feb. 24, says: "I have just returned from this county. Bro. Elliott has been there at different times for the past year. About twelve were keeping the Sabbath. The outside interest was very great, and many were halting between two opinions. The halting ones were very much helped, on this wise: A minister sent an appointment, and with it a request that all who were 'on the fence' would remain there till he came, and he would help them off. He came last Sunday. The interest was very great. The house could not hold the people, and the meeting was in the open air. One gentleman and his daughter came twenty miles on horseback; another came seventeen miles. The effort on the part of the opposition to God's truth was very weak. The position taken was, that we cannot keep the law; that it is done away, and the first day is the Sabbath. It was not difficult to overthrow his assertions, and the truth gained a great victory. The gentleman who came seventeen miles remarked to me that the minister did not prove his points. In his closing remarks he admitted that the law is in force, by saying, 'As to the law, if it lay in a good man's way he would take it up, or do it, and not go around it.'" "The day was a high day for the truth in all that section. Those obeying were strengthened. Some who were 'on the fence' made haste to keep all God's commandments. Others were anxious to hear more of the new doctrine. The lovers of truth have commenced to build a meeting-house." DANGERS OF MODERATE DRINKING.
By T. L. Cuyler
Let me point out to you three false lights which have been hung out by hands that ought to have shrunk from the deed. These false lights may tempt many a young man to steer away from the safe channel of total abstinence. The first one is that God's word approves and sanctions the use of alcoholic beverages! For one hundred years American slavery was buttressed by the same plea, that the Bible sanctioned it. But since the battle of Appomatox, the sharpest eye never discovered such a passage. Now the teachings of Scripture may be summed up in four heads:—
1. The Bible in various passages points out the evils and the perils of intoxicating drinks. It never pronounces a blessing on an intoxicant, and often warns men against its use. Several passages forbid such use.
2. The Bible in several passages approves and commends abstinence from intoxicating beverages. There is not a single verse in this book which condemns total abstinence.
3. The whole spirit of the word of God teaches self-control and self-denial, both for our own sakes and for the good of our fellow-men. The only passage in which the word "moderation" occurs, has no reference whatever to moderate drinking. It has not the faintest reference to the use of beverages. The word itself translated signifies constancy, calmness, quietness.
4. Every passage in the Bible is to be studied in the light of the whole book. The whole book teaches the same truths which God has written upon our bodily constitution. If alcohol poisons the body, disorders the brain, corrupts the character, damns the manhood, and destroys the soul, it is forbidden by the whole volume of the revealed word.
The second sophistry is that wine and ale and other alcoholic beverages are creatures of God, to be not refused, but used "in moderation and with thanksgiving." I have heard that quoted since I was a child. As to alcoholic beverages being good creatures of God to be used with thanksgiving, I deny as an absurdity. Alcohol is not a "good creature" of the God of love; for it is nowhere to be found in the whole domain of nature. While the Almighty has created innumerable fountains of sparkling water, he never created a gill of alcohol! It is the simple product of the fermenting vat and distillery. It is born of vegetable decay. God made the golden corn to nourish and sustain his mighty family; but distillation throws the golden grain into a vat of rottenness, and presses out of the rotting mass the fiery juice of alcohol. God hung the purple clusters on the vine to gladden the human eye and the palate; but fermentation turns the pure blood of the grape into the maddening intoxicant. God created poppies, but he never created opium. If he did create it, are there not poisons known in nature that may be sometimes sparingly used as a medicine, but common sense forbids them as a beverage?
The last sophistry that has been hung up to throw its delusive light at a dangerous gateway, is the following sentence uttered lately by a ministerial brother, whom I love as a friend, but reject as a safe teacher of ethics. I quote his words exactly. He says: "A third moral error of the total abstinence theory is its assumption that moderate drinking leads to drunkenness. The millions upon millions of our race who have been accustomed to drink wine and who never knew drunkenness, stand up against this atrocious dogma. And yet this dogma has actually become an axiom with the total abstinence reformers, and they would disdain to argue it." Yes, I do disdain to argue it, as much as I would disdain to argue that Fulton street leads to Fulton Ferry. All human observation settles that. I do not say that every one that goes down Fulton street enters the gate at the ferry, but I do say that those who are in the ferry-house must have gone through that street. If my learned friend simply meant to say that a very moderate drinker is not an enslaved drunkard, and may never become a drunkard, we grant it. We grant that Niagara rapids are not Niagara cataract. We grant, too, that some men who have launched their boats far up toward the head of the rapids have pulled out of the stream and have reached the shore. But this we declare, that just so long as Niagara rapids tend toward the cataract and draw with an increasing suction and momentum toward the cataract, so long by the immutable law of God will every use of alcoholic stimulants tend to drunkenness and draw to destruction. That some have resisted it and have not been drawn over does not alter the character of the tendency. There is not a moderate drinker in this house who is not constantly resisting the tendency while he remains a moderate drinker. I set before you all, the clear, straight channel of total abstinence. It is a safe channel, strewn with no wrecks of health, and wrecks of homes, or wrecks of hearts or eternal hopes. It has guided millions to competence and comfort and cleanliness of life. It has borne thousands to the cross of Christ. God has blessed the honest efforts of pulpit and platform and press to guide men and women into this safe channel, and as long as this pulpit stands, the true light shall shine on the safe channel, and no wife, or mother, or daughter, or sister, shall ever call me to account and charge upon my example, or the utterances from this pulpit, the wreck of a son, or a brother, or a husband, for time or for eternity. All I ask is to be on the safe side, on God's side, for this world and for the life everlasting.—T. L. Cuyler. Temperance.
By Ellet Joseph Waggoner
UNDER the heading, "A text from an anti-tobacco tract," a daily paper gives an account of an old man in the East, whose clothing was set on fire by his pipe while he was in the woods, and who nearly lost his life in consequence. This instance doubtless created quite a sensation in the vicinity where it occurred; but why should it be taken as a text for an anti-tobacco tract? If there is nothing wrong in smoking itself, then this accident argues nothing against tobacco, but should rather furnish a text against the careless handling of fire. The fact is, the writer of the paragraph knew, as all intelligent men do, that tobacco-smoking is in itself wrong, and thought that this accident would furnish an argument against the practice. But why take this isolated instance as a text? There are thousands of men all over the country, who are burning not only their own clothes, but the clothes of wife and children. Not only this, but they are burning up themselves, scorching their throats, destroying their lungs, deadening their brains, and making themselves obnoxious to decent people. And yet nobody cries "Fire!" How can we stop the conflagration? E. J. WAGGONER.