Earlier text: General ArticlesThoughts on Daniel—Chapter XI.
By Uriah Smith
VERTEX 1. Also I in the first year of Darius the Mede, even I, stood to confirm and to strengthen him. 2. And now will I show thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they all; and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia. We now enter upon a prophecy of future events, clothed not in figures and symbols, as in the visions of chapters 2, 7, and 8, but given mostly in plain language. Many of the signal events of the world's history, from the days of Daniel to the end of the world, are here brought to view. This prophecy, says Bishop Newton, may not improperly be said to be a comment and explanation of the vision of chapter 8. The angel, after stating that he stood, in the first year of Darius, to confirm and strengthen him, turns his attention to the future. Three kings shall yet stand up in Persia. To stand up, means to reign; three kings were to reign in Persia; referring doubtless to the immediate successors of Cyrus. These were, (1) Cambyses, son of Cyrus; (2) Smerdis, an impostor; (3) Darius Hystaspes. The fourth shall be far richer than they all. The fourth king from Cyrus was Xerxes, more famous for his riches than his generalship, and conspicuous in history for the magnificent campaign he organized against Grecia, and his utter failure in that enterprise. He was to stir up all against the realm of Grecia. Never before had there been such a levy of men for warlike purposes; never has there been since. His army, according to Herodotus, who lived in that age, consisted of five millions, two hundred and eighty-three thousand, two hundred and twenty men (5,283,220). And not content with stirring up the East alone, he enlisted the Carthaginians of the West in his service, who took the field with an additional army of three hundred thousand men. VERSE 3. And a mighty king shall stand up, that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will. 4. And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion which he ruled; for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others beside those. The facts stated in these verses plainly point to Alexander, and the division of his empire. See on chapter 8:8. Xerxes was the last Persian king who invaded Grecia; the prophecy therefore passes over the nine successors of Xerxes in the Persian Empire, and next introduces Alexander the Great. Having overthrown the Persian Empire, Alexander "became absolute monarch of that empire, to the fullest extent it was ever possessed by any of the Persian kings." Prideaux i, 378. His dominion was great, including "the greater portion of the then known habitable world;" and he did according to his will. His will fortunately led him, B. C. 323, into a drunken debauch, in which he fortunately died; and his vain-glorious and ambitious projects went into sudden, total, and everlasting eclipse. The kingdom was divided, but not for his posterity; it was plucked up for others besides those. Within fifteen years after his death, all his posterity had fallen victims to jealousy and ambition. Not one of the race of Alexander was left to breathe upon the earth. So short is the transit from the highest pinnacle of earthly glory to oblivion and death. The kingdom was rent into four divisions and taken possession of by Alexander's four ablest, or perhaps most ambitious and unprincipled, generals, Cassander, Lysimachus, Ptolemy, and Seleucus. VERSE 5. And the king of the south shall be strong, and one of his princes; and he shall be strong above him, and have dominion; his dominion shall be a great dominion. The king of the north and the king of the south are many times referred to in the remaining portion of this chapter. It becomes therefore essential to an understanding of the prophecy, to clearly identify these powers. When Alexander's empire was divided, it was divided toward the four winds of heaven, east, west, north, and south; these divisions of course to be reckoned from the stand-point of Palestine, the native land of the prophet. That division of the empire lying west of Palestine, would thus constitute the kingdom of the west; that lying east, the kingdom of the east; that lying north, the kingdom of the north; and that lying south, the kingdom of the south. The divisions of Alexander's kingdom, with respect to Palestine, were situated as follows: Cassander had Greece and the adjacent countries, which lay to the west; Lysimachus had Thrace, which then included Asia Minor, and the countries lying on the Hellespont and Bosporus, which lay to the north of Palestine; Ptolemy had Egypt and the neighboring countries which lay to the south; and Seleucus had Syria and Babylon, which lay principally to the east. During the wars and revolutions which for long ages succeeded, these geographical boundaries were frequently changed or obliterated; old ones were wiped out, and new ones instituted. But whatever changes might occur, these first divisions of the empire must determine the names, or we have no standard by which to test the application of the prophecy. That is, whatever power at any time should occupy the territory which at first constituted the kingdom of the north, that power, so long as it occupied that territory, would be the king of the north; and whatever power should occupy that which at first constituted the kingdom of the south, that power would so long be the king of the south. We speak of only these two, because they are the only ones afterward spoken of in the prophecy, and because, in fact, almost the whole of Alexander's empire finally resolved itself into these two divisions. Cassander was very soon conquered by Lysimachus, and his kingdom, Greece and Macedon, annexed to Thrace. And Lysimachus was in turn conquered by Seleucus, and Macedon and Thrace annexed to Syria. These facts prepare the way for an application of the text before us. The king of the south, Egypt, shall be strong. Ptolemy annexed Cyprus, Phoenicia, Caria, Cyrene, and many islands and cities, to Egypt. Thus was his kingdom made strong. But another of Alexander's princes is introduced in the expression, "one of his princes." The Septuagint translates the verse thus: "And the king of the south shall be strong, and one of his [Alexander's] princes shall be strong above him." This must refer to Seleucus, who, as already stated, having connected Macedon and Thrace to Syria, thus became possessor of three parts out of four of Alexander's dominion, and established a more powerful kingdom than that of Egypt. VERSE 6. And in the end of years they shall join themselves together; for the king's daughter of the south shall come to the king of the north to make an agreement; but she shall not retain the power of the arm; neither shall he stand, nor his arm; but she shall be given up, and they that brought her, and he that begat her, and he that strengthened her in these times. There were frequent wars between the kings of Egypt and Syria. Especially was this the case with Ptolemy Philadelphus, the second king of Egypt, and Antiochus Theus, third king of Syria. They at length agreed to make peace upon condition that Antiochus Theus should put away his former wife, Laodice, and her two sons, and should marry Berenice, the daughter of Ptolemy Philadelphus. Ptolemy accordingly brought his daughter to Antiochus, bestowing with her an immense treasury as a dowry. "But she shall not retain the power of the arm;" that is, her interest and power with Antiochus. And so it proved; for some time shortly after, in a fit of love, Antiochus brought back his former wife, Laodice, and her children, to court again. Then says the prophecy, "Neither shall he [Antiochus] stand, nor his arm," or seed. Laodice, being restored to favor and power, feared lest, in the fickleness of his temper, Antiochus should again disgrace her, and recall Berenice; and conceiving that nothing short of his death would be an effectual safeguard against such a contingency, she caused him to be poisoned shortly after. Neither did his seed by Berenice succeed him in the kingdom; for Laodice so managed affairs as to secure the throne for her eldest son, Seleucus Callinicus. "But she [Berenice] shall be given up." Laodice, not content with poisoning her husband Antiochus, caused Berenice to be murdered. "And they that brought her." Her Egyptian women and attendants, in endeavoring to defend her, were many of them slain with her. "And he that begat her," margin, "whom she brought forth;" that is, her son, who was murdered at the same time by order of Laodice. "And he that strengthened her in these times;" her husband, Antiochus, as Jerome supposes, or those who took her part and defended her. But such wickedness could not long remain unpunished, as the prophecy further predicts, and history further proves. VERSE 7. But out of a branch of her roots shall one stand up in his estate, which shall come with an army, and shall enter into the fortress of the king of the north, and shall deal against them, and shall prevail; 8. And shall also carry captives into Egypt their gods, with their princes, and with their precious vessels of silver and of gold; and he shall continue more years than the king of the north. 9. So the king of the south shall come into his kingdom, and shall return into his own land. This branch out of the same root with Berenice, was her brother, Ptolemy Euergetes. He had no sooner succeeded his father, Ptolemy Philadelphus, in the kingdom of Egypt, than, burning to avenge the death of his sister, Berenice, he raised an immense army and invaded the territory of the king of the north, that is, of Seleucus Callinicus, who, with his mother, Laodice, reigned in Syria. And he prevailed against them, even to the conquering of Syria, Cilicia, the upper parts beyond the Euphrates, and almost all Asia. But hearing that a sedition was raised in Egypt, requiring his return home, he plundered the kingdom of Seleucus, took forty thousand talents of silver and precious vessels, and two thousand five hundred images of the gods. Among these were the images which Cambyses had formerly taken from Egypt and carried into Persia. The Egyptians being wholly given to idolatry, bestowed upon Ptolemy the title of Euergetes, or the Benefactor, as a compliment for his having thus, after many years, restored their captive gods. This, according to Bishop Newton, is Jerome's account, extracted from ancient historians; but there are authors still extant, he says, who confirm several of the same particulars. Appian informs us that Laodice, having killed Antiochus, and after him both Berenice and her child, Ptolemy, the son of Philadelphus, to revenge those murderers, invaded Syria, slew Laodice, and proceeded as far as Babylon. From Polybius we learn that Ptolemy, surnamed Euergetes, being greatly incensed at the cruel treatment of his sister, Berenice, marched with an army into Syria and took the city of Seleucia, which was kept for some years afterward by the garrisons of the kings of Egypt. Thus did he enter into the fortress of the king of the north. Polyænus affirms that Ptolemy made himself master of all the country from Mount Taurus as far as to India, without war or battle; but he ascribes it by mistake to the father instead of the son. Justin asserts that if Ptolemy had not been recalled, by a domestic sedition, into Egypt, he would have possessed the whole kingdom of Seleucus. The king of the south thus came into the dominion of the king of the north, and returned to his own land, as the prophet had foretold. And he also continued more years than the king of the north; for Seleucus Callinicus died in exile, of a fall from his horse; and Ptolemy Euergetes survived him for four or five years. VERSE 10. But his sons shall be stirred up, and shall assemble a multitude of great forces; and one shall certainly come, and overflow, and pass through; then shall he return, and be stirred up, even to his fortress. The first part of this verse speaks of sons, in the plural; the last part, of one, in the singular. The sons of Seleucus Callinicus, were Seleucus Ceraunus and Antiochus Magnus. These both entered with zeal upon the work of vindicating and avenging the cause of their father and their country. The elder of these, Seleucus, first took the throne. He assembled a great multitude to recover his father's dominions; but being a weak and pusillanimous prince, both in body and estate, destitute of money, and unable to keep his army in obedience, he was poisoned by two of his generals after an inglorious reign of two or three years. His more capable brother, Antiochus Magnus, was thereupon proclaimed king, who, taking charge of the army, retook Seleucia, and recovered Syria, making himself master of some places by treaty, and of others, by force of arms. A truce followed, wherein both sides treated for peace, yet prepared for war; after which, Antiochus returned and overcame in battle Nicolaus, the Egyptian general, and had thoughts of invading Egypt itself. Here is the "one" who should certainly overflow and pass through. VERSE 11. And the king of the south shall be moved with choler, and shall come forth and fight with him, even with the king of the north; and he shall set forth a great multitude; but the multitude shall be given into his hand. Ptolemy Philopater succeeded his father, Euergetes, in the kingdom of Egypt, being advanced to the crown not long after Antiochus Magnus had succeeded his brother in the throne of Syria. He was a most luxurious and vicious prince, but was at length roused at the prospect of an invasion of Egypt by Antiochus. He was indeed "moved with choler" for the losses he had sustained, and the danger which threatened him; and he came forth out of Egypt with a numerous army to check the progress of the Syrian king. The king of the north was also to set forth a great multitude. The army of Antiochus, according to Polybius, amounted on this occasion to sixty-two thousand foot, six thousand horse, and one hundred and two elephants. In the battle, Antiochus was defeated, and his army, according to the prophecy, was given into the hands of the king of the south. Ten thousand foot and three thousand horse were slain; and over four thousand men were taken prisoners; while of Ptolemy's army, there were slain only seven hundred horse, and about twice that number of infantry.161 Centre Street Teachers’ Meeting.
“CLEARLY, Thursday evening after prayer-meeting won’t do any longer,” remarked the superintendent of Centre Street Sunday-school, one rainy evening, to the half dozen discouraged members of his staff who stayed to study the lesson. “The ladies won’t stay so late, and the rest of us are all tired out and depressed by our inability to comment after the minister. After this, we’ll have one night in the week to ourselves—say Friday.” And to the fact that the superintendent carried his point may be found one reason why every Sunday-school worker concedes Centre Street teachers’ meetings a success. There are a good many other reasons, but the class certainly owes its individuality to that one. Its separate existence gave it courage. Controlling one evening a week, it began to assert itself, and to be imperative as to attendance and preparation. The result, the very palpable and pleasant result, is that the teachers love it, the Bible class students, always invited, pronounce it “splendid,” and even an elder drops in occasionally to beam benevolently over his spectacles and maintain orthodoxy. About a quarter to eight they begin to gather in the comfortable little class-room; and each newcomer is greeted with a nod and a smile all around, for everybody is acquainted with everybody else. There is much pleasant chat among the teachers, which increases when the superintendent arrives with somebody to introduce. The room was bright before he came; it is brighter now. His interest in his teachers and their wants goes straight to every heart, and warms it into reciprocity. Presently some one hands around the little red hymn books, and there is no more talking. They draw closer around the table, with its big Bible and bright crimson cloth, and if the secretary of the Y. M. C. A. isn’t late, and the minister’s wife is there, the singing will be very pleasant to listen to. Anyway, it is hearty and contagious. Then the superintendent prays. He doesn’t pray for the government, or the heathen in Africa, or “those detained by the inclemency of the weather.” Perhaps his prayer isn’t comprehensive enough. But he asks for those things for his teachers, and his Sunday-school, and himself, that are special needs. And his teachers pray for him, feeling that his desires are theirs. They talk a little about every verse in the lesson if there is time, and everybody brings a new thought, or a fresh fact, or a different illustration. The leader is open to any question, and occasionally, under the guise of the lesson, other points are brought up, and help is sought and obtained upon many a perplexing point in the teacher’s daily life. Nobody sees the question motive, but the answer is given in sympathy, and there is one worry less next week. Last Friday night they ventilated the attendance question, and plans for securing perfect quiet during the opening exercises will come up next week. Old Mr. McNeish will propose a Disciplinary Committee, and a system of reporting to this august and awful body. There will be lively debate, and the Disciplinary Committee will go to the wall—not, however, until better plans have been advanced by the teacher of the primary class, timidly approved by the minister’s wife, heartily supported by the superintendent, and accepted by everybody but Mr. McNeish. Of course, Centre Street teachers’ meeting is not without its drawbacks. There are people around that red table-cloth from whom you couldn’t get an idea with a hydraulic press. And there is a stern old Scotchman, invulnerable in the “catechism,” who won’t allow anybody to differ with it; and a mild-voiced little lady who persists in quoting from the fourteenth chapter of John, without the slightest reference to the lesson. Then some of the ladies will whisper their comments to one another, instead of making them audible to the class; and certainly two or three of the older teachers have a tendency to become doctrinal rather than practical. But the Scotchman is unassailed, and the irrelevant texts are listened to, and there is very little discussion that is not valuable to the teachers, either on Sunday or week-day. So the chief critics of the meeting, and the way it is conducted, are those who come often enough to be struck by these small things. They are people like that. But in the estimation of most of the teachers, their superintendent, and a good many of the heartily welcomed Bible class, no other service is so pleasant a privilege as Centre Street teachers’ meeting.—S. S. Times. The Sabbath-School.
By Ellet Joseph Waggoner
Where to Decide Disputed Points.
THERE is nothing that will take the life out of a Sabbath-school much quicker than controversy over disputed points. The discussion may be carried on with perfect good feeling by all parties, and yet the result cannot be other than injurious. There are various reasons for this. The Sabbath-school is not a debating club, but a school—a place in which to learn. The time usually allotted to consideration of the lesson is short and none of it should be wasted. But if discussion is allowed, the minds of the children are diverted from the lesson, by listening to that which, no doubt, is far above their comprehension. Again, it has a bad influence. Children are naturally trustful, and inclined to accept the truth as told to them by their teachers. Indeed, any person unacquainted with Bible truth, and willing to be taught, as the fact of his being in Sabbath-school would show him to be, will quite readily accept the view that is first presented to him, if it appear reasonable, and be presented in an earnest, forcible manner. But if controversy arise, he finds that even those who presume to teach are divided among themselves, and his confidence in their teaching is at once lessened. No matter if the discussion be carried on in a friendly spirit, and all agree in the final decision, the minds of the pupils have been drawn away from the main point before them, and in the minds of some, doubts have arisen, which otherwise would have been unknown. This, perhaps, is the greatest evil resulting from Sabbath-school discussion. But it will be asked, What can be done? How can this be avoided? It is only by a comparison of views that the truth is arrived at. If it were not for this friendly discussion, some would go away holding erroneous views. This brings us to the point. There is a place where all questions should be settled, and that is at the teachers' meeting. The only way to secure perfect unanimity in teaching is to meet and compare notes. It is by no means to be understood that even here anything like controversy need occur. Most of the difference in views arises from an insufficient amount of study. Some teacher who has bestowed more thought on the lesson, quotes a passage which none of the others have thought of and the difficulty vanishes in a moment. All the points in the lesson on which any difference of opinion is possible should be considered, and the proper meaning should be found, if possible, and all should agree on it. There will be no difficulty in agreeing, if all are actuated by right motives. Then all the classes will receive the same instruction, and there will be no clashing in general exercises. Other questions which will arise on this subject, will in due time receive attention. E. J. W. Professor Huxley on Scientific Theories
By Alta
PROFESSOR HUXLEY says that when a scientific man gets a theory in his head, he won't give in to another if it can be proved by 1,000 men that he is wrong. Of course he won't! It's part of the business to disagree with everybody else. Then folks will think he's right and knows more than the others.—Alta. VALUABLE BOOKS FOR BIBLE STUDENTS.
SACRED GEOGRAPHY AND ANTIQUITIES.
WITH maps and illustrations, by Rev. E. P. Barrows, D. D. The investigations of missionaries and explorers during the last century have thrown a flood of light on many points once involved in obscurity, and it is the aim of this book to condense and put into methodical form what has thus been collected. 685 pp. $2.25. BIBLE GEOGRAPHY. HAND-BOOK OF
Containing the name, pronunciation and meaning of every place, nation, and tribe mentioned in both the Canonical and Apocryphal Scriptures. By Rev. Geo. H. Whitney, A. M. Illustrated by one hundred engravings and forty maps and plans. 12 mo. 400 pp. $2.50. BIBLE MANNERS AND CUSTOMS. HAND-BOOK OF
Containing descriptions of the ancient manners and customs mentioned in the Bible, and explaining over three thousand Scripture Texts. By Jas. M. Freeman, D. D. Illustrated by 168 engravings, and accompanied by an Analytical Index, a Textual Index, and a Topical Index. 12 mo. 515 pp. $2.50. THE WORLD'S PROGRESS, A DICTIONARY OF DATES.
Being a Chronological and Alphabetical Record of all essential facts in the progress of society, from the creation of the world to the present time, with chart. By T. B. Perkins. Octavo size. 1,020 pp. $3.00. LIFE AND EPISTLES OF ST. PAUL,
By Conybeare and Howson, giving a living picture of St. Paul and the circumstances by which he was surrounded. Illustrated with maps and engravings. 764 pp. $1.50. THE LIFE AND WORDS OF CHRIST.
By Cunningham Geikie, D. D., with marginal references to the Scriptures, notes and index. Two volumes complete in one book. Printed in pica type, octavo size. 1,260 pp. $1.75. We have just received the following commendation of this work from an earnest Christian worker in Maine :— HAVING read Dr. Geikie's life and works of Christ, I find it more interesting the farther I read; and when he introduces us to the trial and crucifixion of Jesus, one can almost imagine himself present to witness the cruel mockery, and the terrible scenes of Calvary. Although I am not prepared to indorse all that is said in the book, yet I think it the best I ever read of the kind. J. B. GOODRICH. Address, PACIFIC PRESS, Oakland, Cal. SMITH'S COMPREHENSIVE DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE.
NEW EDITION, octavo size, 1,200 pages, with many important additions and improvements from the works of the most eminent scholars, commentators and travelers. It is designed to be In regard to the pronunciation and signification of Scriptural names; the solution of difficulties respecting the interpretation, authority and harmony of the Old and New Testaments; the history and description of Biblical customs, events, places, persons, animals, plants, etc. In this book it is designed to make everything intelligible to those who understand only the English language, and to place them as nearly as possible on a level with the scholars who are familiar with the original languages of the Scriptures. All the words in the vocabulary are pronounced and divided into syllables, and words or parts of words are respelled whenever this is necessary to indicate the pronunciation. The book contains numerous maps, and is abundantly supplied with superior engravings, which are of real utility to the student. No one who desires to study the Scriptures intelligently will be without a copy of this most excellent book, as its price is within the reach of all. Price, in cloth .................................................................... $5.00
" in library binding ....................................................... 6.00
Address, SIGNS OF THE TIMES, Oakland, Cal YOUNG'S ANALYTICAL CONCORDANCE
The latest and most complete work of the kind ever published is now offered at a price within the reach of EVERY BIBLE STUDENT. This book places in the hands of every earnest student, knowledge heretofore limited to a very few. IT CONTAINS ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTEEN THOUSAND MORE WORDS Than Cruden's Unabridged Concordance. It gives every English word, also the Hebrew and Greek original words, with their pronunciation and literal meaning. The Greek and Hebrew words are transliterated so that they are intelligible to any English reader. A complete index of the original words is added, referring them to the English words under which they are found. Price, postpaid, $3.25.
Address, PACIFIC PRESS, Oakland, Cal. THE YOUTH'S INSTRUCTOR
By Editor
AN ILLUSTRATED WEEKLY PAPER FOR YOUTH AND CHILDREN, DEVOTED TO MORAL, MENTAL, AND RELIGIOUS CULTURE.
This paper is not devoted to insipid stories and religious fiction, but is filled with a great variety of that kind of reading which tends to the healthful development of the youthful mind. Its pages are made bright by the choicest illustrative pictures, and its columns are always full of useful information. As a Sabbath-school and Lesson paper, it is suited to the wants of scholars and teachers, and is calculated to increase the interest of all who read it, in thorough Bible study. The Sabbath-school Department contains two series of lessons, one for children and one for youth. SUBSCRIPTION PRICE, 75 CENTS A YEAR.
All new subscribers paying the above price will receive the "Child's Poems" as a premium without extra charge. TERMS TO CLUBS, PAID IN ADVANCE.
Price per Copy, Post-paid. - 5 to 10 copies...................60 cents a year.
- 10 copies and upward ...........50 cents a year.
Subscription for 5 to 10 copies will be taken for six months. Larger clubs may be paid for quarterly. Address YOUTH'S INSTRUCTOR, Battle Creek, Mich.
Or, SIGNS OF THE TIMES, Oakland, Cal. Where’s the Danger?
By Editor
A SISTER in Oakland has permitted us to copy the following from a letter which she lately received. The writer is an educated lady, and a member of the Episcopal Church:— "The papers you have been sending I have not read thoroughly, and cannot therefore give so positive an opinion as if I had. I have thought them put forth in a very pleasing way, with short articles, well calculated both in sentiment and style, to please the mass of the American people. The Christian duties they inculcate are excellent, and tellingly, yet pleasingly urged. In relation to their doctrine—ah! there is just the danger. It really does not matter one bit whether we believe in the seventh day or the first day, i. e., in the Sabbath, or day of rest, or the ‘Sun-day’—the very day of our Lord, who is the Sun of righteousness. In the very earliest ages of the church both days were observed; but soon the old Jewish day was allowed to fall out of use." These remarks, coming from a person of reading, are worthy of notice. 1. We are at a loss to know where is the danger of teaching and keeping the seventh day if "it does not matter one bit whether we believe in the seventh day or the first." 2. We cannot help wondering, if the first day were enforced by a plain commandment in the Bible, and the seventh day had no Bible evidence to sustain it, whether professed lovers of the Bible and actual lovers of Sunday would then say it makes no difference which day we keep. If they will stop to examine themselves carefully they may discover that they are indulging self-deception. 3. When the writer, in the service of "the church," responds to the reading of the fourth commandment, saying: "Lord, incline our hearts to keep this law," does she then think it makes no difference whether she keeps it or something else as a substitute for it? And if the latter, is the response worship or mockery? 4. The reference to Sunday as a day kept in honor of our Lord as the Sun of righteousness would indicate that the writer really believes that that was the origin of that name or title to the first day of the week. Yet we cannot believe that any person of average intelligence and information really believes any such thing. All who know anything of the truth in this matter know that the old Roman designation of dies solis was of heathen origin, and was derived from the consecration of the first day of the week to the center of our planetary system. It was not of Christian origin, and had no reference to our Lord as the Sun of righteousness. The first law for Sunday keeping of which history makes mention was that of Constantine, of whose decree Dr. Schaff, in his Church History says:— "He enjoined the observance, or rather forbade the public desecration of Sunday, not under the name of Sabbatum or dies Domini, but under its old astrological or heathen title of dies solis [day of the sun, or Sun's day], familiar to all his subjects." And again Dr. Schaff says, he—"Reverenced all the gods, as mysterious powers, especially Apollo, the god of the sun, to whom in the year 308 he presented munificent gifts." His famous edict for the observance of "the venerable day of the sun" was proclaimed two years before he made any profession of Christianity; and after he began to give honor to Christ he did not fully renounce the service of Apollo, as Dr. Schaff further says:— "Even later, he placed his new residence under the protection of the God of the martyrs and the heathen goddess of Fortune; and down to the end of his life he retained the title and dignity of a Pontifex Maximus, or high priest of the heathen hierarchy. His coins bore on the one side the letters of the name of Christ, on the other, the figure of the sun-god, and the inscription, Sol invictus." The Sunday-school Union Bible Dictionary says:— "Sunday was a name given by the heathen to the first day of the week, because it was the day on which they worshiped the sun." The worship of the sun was, not only contrary to the spirit of right worship, but, expressly forbidden by Jehovah. Deut. 4:19; 17:2-5; Job 31:26-28. Thus the consecration of the first day of the week and giving it the title of Sunday, so far from having any foundation in respect to the authority of the God of Heaven, was in defiance of his authority and in violation of his express commandment. We can give much more evidence in harmony with that given above from Dr. Schaff and the S. S. Bible Dictionary. Not a word of evidence can be offered to the contrary. To ascribe the consecration of Sunday, or the conferring of that title to the first day of the week, to a regard for Christ as the "Sun of righteousness," is to pervert the facts of history which must be known to all. 5. It is not quite true that both days were kept "in the very earliest ages of the church." Dr. Scott says the "change, from the seventh to the first, appears to have been gradually and silently introduced, by example rather than by express precept." On Acts 20:7. No "express precept" was ever given for the observance of the first day; a gradual introduction is very indefinite, but such was the case, though it did not commence "in the very earliest ages of the church." Dr. Matthew Henry, in his Commentary, says the first day was not called the Sabbath in the first two centuries of the Christian era. Every one who knows anything of the history of the early ages of the church, knows that this statement of Dr. Henry is correct. Nor was the title of "Lord’s day" applied to it in the earliest ages of the church. These titles—Sabbath and Lord’s day—are given to the seventh day alone in all the Scriptures; and it was only when the opinions of the doctors of the church were elevated to equal authority with the Scriptures that they were given to "the venerable day of the sun." 6. Why call the seventh day "the Jewish day?" Is it not true that God rested on the seventh day when he made heaven and earth? Gen. 2:3. Is it not true that it was, for this reason called the Sabbath, or rest of the Lord? "The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God." Why treat with such contempt that which in the Scriptures is called "the holy of the Lord, honorable?" Isa. 58:13. If due regard were paid to Scripture facts and Scripture language, the Sabbath of the Lord God would not be so recklessly trampled under foot. It is only by hiding the plain word of the Lord on the subject that the feelings of the people are fortified to place reproachful epithets upon the most honorable institution erected in the holy Scriptures. We sometimes feel almost like apologizing to our readers for saying so much on such plain and evident points of truth; but how can we avoid it when educated people are persisting in enforcing upon the public mind such unscriptural positions? We wish there were no occasion to defend plain statements of the word of God. Surely there should be none, especially among professed believers in the word. But while others persist in obscuring the truth, we consider it our duty, with equal persistency, to tear away the veil and let the light shine out to the world. Question Answered.
By Editor
"AN infidel refers to Judges 1:19, as proof that the Bible is only a human record. What answer would you give?" ANSWER. As there are many people who profess to love the Bible, who merely love their own opinions which they think the Bible indorses, so we believe there are many infidels who are far more opposed to what they think the Bible teaches than to the Bible itself. We knew an intelligent man who had made the theory of the immortality of the soul his study for years, but entirely from reason and philosophy. Because he could not believe that the soul was immortal he was called an infidel, and himself thought he was an infidel, because he believed what teachers of the Bible said in regard to the teachings of that book. But when he heard the truth plainly set forth from the Bible on that subject, his faith and feelings entirely changed. He said he found he was not an infidel to the Bible, but only to some popular opinions which had been wrongly ascribed to the Bible. In the case of the text referred to above, one who has not studied the Bible, who does not understand the principles on which it is based, will naturally look upon the reason given, in its connection, as frivolous, and a direct reflection on the power of God. It reads: "And the Lord was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountains; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron." There is no difficulty in the text to those who consider aright the benefit and the necessity of faith in God. A child who refuses to trust and to reverence a wise and kind earthly parent, has thrown away his balance wheel; he is on the highway to ruin. Much more is a person on the road to ruin who refuses to trust God. The will of God is right; to disregard his will is to go in the way of wrong, and evil must be the result of wrong doing. Therefore it was in kindness and love that the Lord refused to go with Israel, and to prosper them when they turned from right to wrong—from good to evil. The Lord instructed them to go forward in obedience and to trust in him, no matter how forbidding the circumstances, and he would be their strength and shield, and cause them to triumph over their enemies. When they came to the border of Canaan they sent forward spies who returned with an evil report, and caused the people to fear because there were giants in the land. To fear the giants was a denial of the word and truth of God; it was highly disrespectful to their Heavenly Father and King; it was showing ingratitude for the miraculous deliverances which he had already given them. Consequently he refused to go with them, and gave them up to the power of their enemies. And this was the condition of Israel at the time spoken of in the text. While they warred with the inhabitants of the mountains "the Lord was with Judah." Of course they trusted in him or he would not have been with them. And so they got the victory. But when they warred with the inhabitants of the valley they did not get the victory—the Lord was not with them. And why not? Because the people were fearful and lost their trust in God, when they were met with chariots of iron. This was but one of many cases where they trusted to appearances and were suffered to realize their fears. The same principle governs them all. In the New Testament we find the same thing. The Saviour constantly held up before his hearers the necessity of their believing in order to his granting them the favors they required. And thus it is said in Matt. 13:58, "And he did not many mighty works there because of their unbelief." Or as it is yet more strongly expressed in Mark 6:5, 6: "And he could there do no mighty work, save that he laid his hands upon a few sick folk, and healed them. And he marveled because of their unbelief." We do not at all wonder that they who have never studied and do not appreciate the subject of faith or trust in our Heavenly Father, should not be able to apply this principle to this and scores of other texts. We find only harmony in the Scripture record, and accept it as worthy of God, who, in insisting upon his right to honor and glory, provides for the well-being of his creatures. No people can prosper if they heap indignity and reproach upon their ruler, especially when he is worthy of their highest respect. To disrespect his person and his word, is to disregard his authority; and to disregard his authority is to introduce treason and anarchy; and where these exist there is neither peace nor happiness. God is Supreme Governor over all. His commandments are holy, and just, and good. How necessary, then, that we honor him and trust his word.