Your ShelfYour Projects

Signs of the Times, Vol. 6, No. 17.

General Articles
Earlier text: General Articles

THOUGHTS ON BAPTISM—NO. 4.

By Editor

DIP AND SPRINKLE.

SPRINKLE is from two words only in the Old Testament, namely, nah-zah and zah-rak. The first is quite uniformly rendered both in the English and Greek, as will be seen by the following table:—
Nah-zah. Common Version. Septuagint.
Ex. 29:21 sprinkle. rhaneis.
Lev. 4:6 sprinkle. prosrhanei.
17 sprinkle. rhanei.
5:9 sprinkle. rhanei.
6:27 sprinkled. epirrhantisthe.
27 sprinkled. rhantisthe.
8:11 sprinkled. errhanen.
30 sprinkled. proserrhanen.
14:7 sprinkle. perirrhanei.
16 sprinkle. rhanei.
27 sprinkle. rhanei.
51 sprinkle. perirrhanei.
16:14 sprinkle. rhanei.
14 sprinkle. rhanei.
15 sprinkle. rhanei.
19 sprinkle. rhanei.
Num. 8:7 sprinkle. perirrhaneis.
19:4 sprinkle. rhanei.
18 sprinkle. perirrhanei.
19 sprinkle. perirrhanei.
21 sprinkleth. perirrhainon.
2 Kin. 9:33 sprinkle. errhantisthe.
Isa. 52:15 sprinkle. thaumasontai.
63:3 sprinkled. kategagon.
Here we find the same definiteness, and nearly the same uniformity, of rendering. In all the instances except the last two, the Septuagint uses the same word, or different forms of the same root, while the English has the same word throughout. As the idea of sprinkling is not found in tah-val, so the idea of immersion is not found in nah-zah.
The Hebrew word zah-rak occurs thirty-four times, as follows:—
Zah-rak. Common Version. Septuagint.
Exodus 9:8 sprinkle. pasato.
10 sprinkled. epasen.
24:6 sprinkled. proseechee.
8 sprinkle. kateskedase.
29:16 sprinkle. proscheeis.
20 sprinkle. (wanting.)
Lev. 1:5 sprinkle. proscheousi.
11 sprinkle. proscheousin.
3:2 sprinkle. proscheousin.
8 sprinkle. proscheousin.
13 sprinkle. proscheousin.
7:2 sprinkle. proschee.
14 sprinkleth. proscheonti.
8:19 sprinkled. proseechee.
9:12 sprinkled. proscheen.
18 sprinkle. proseechee.
17:6 sprinkle. proseechee.
Num. 18:17 sprinkle. proscheeis.
19:13 sprinkled. perierrhantisthe.
20 sprinkled. perierrhantisthe.
2 Kin. 16:13 sprinkle. proseechee.
15 sprinkle. ekcheeis.
2 Chron. 29:22 sprinkle. proseechean.
22 sprinkled. proseechean.
22 sprinkled. periecheon.
30:16 sprinkled. edechonto.
34:4 strowed. errhipsen.
35:11 sprinkled. proseechean.
Job 2:12 sprinkled. katapassamenoi.
Isa. 28:25 scatter. speirei.
Eze. 10:2 scatter. diaskorpison.
36:25 sprinkle. rhano.
43:18 sprinkle. proseechein.
Hos. 7:9 here and there-mar. sprinkled. exenthesan.
This word is somewhat more variously rendered, both in the English and in the Septuagint; is the but the same idea obtains throughout. Its signification, to scatter, hence, to sprinkle, admits of a variety of renderings; but this, as in nah-zah, the idea of dipping or immersing is not found.
We think nothing more is required to show that the language of the Scriptures admits of no such ambiguity as to put baptizo for rhantizo, or immerse for sprinkle. In Lev. 4:6, we find both dip and sprinkle used, and it is easy to see that they cannot be interchanged.
There are two texts in the Old Testament which have been greatly misapprehended, and from which unwarrantable inferences have been drawn, Eze. 36:25, reads thus:—
"Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean." On this, Dr. Scott remarks:— "In allusion to the divers washings and sprinklings of the ritual law, the Lord promised to sprinkle clean water upon his people, and to make them clean from all their filthiness and idols." This reference is correct, as may be seen by examining a few passages. In Num. 8:7, they were commanded to "sprinkle water of purifying" upon the unclean. In chap. 19:18, it is commanded that, if any one touch the dead body of a man, he shall be unclean; "and a clean person shall take hyssop and dip it in the water, and sprinkle it upon the tent, and upon all the vessels, and upon the persons that were there, and upon him that touched a bone, or one slain, or one dead, or a grave." This was for what is denominated "ceremonial uncleanness," having no relation to moral defilement. Paul refers to it in Heb. 9:13: "For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh." It was not as an ablution to cleanse from filth, but it was figurative, ceremonial, and typical; and the gospel fact which it prefigured is stated by the apostle thus: "How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?" Verse 14. And for this reason Paul speaks of "the blood of sprinkling," and "having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience." Heb. 12:24; 10:22. Thus it is seen that these sprinklings of the ritual law, to which reference is made in Eze. 36:25, have no relation to any New Testament ordinance; they looked to a different object. And while that object is so definitely stated, there can be no excuse for the error of applying them to baptism in order to give countenance to sprinkling for that ordinance. The sprinkling of the conscience by the blood of Christ is declared to be their antitype, and a gospel duty is as clearly shown in connection therewith: "Having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water." Heb. 10:22.
Isa. 52:15, "So shall he sprinkle many nations," has been the ground of much speculation, and from it have been drawn some very erroneous conclusions. Even Dr. Clarke, who approves the rendering of the Septuagint, which is quite different from our common version, asks, in brackets, "[Does not sprinkling the nations refer to the conversion and baptism of the Gentiles?]" Scott, who offers no objection to the translation, much more appropriately refers it to the blood of sprinkling, the same as Eze. 36:25; to the sacrifice of Christ, to which so plain reference is made in the context. But the translation in the Authorized Version cannot be defended. It should be understood that there are different forms or species of every Hebrew verb; and some of these have significations peculiar to themselves, which do not belong to any other species of the same word. Gesenius gives two definitions to that form of nah-zah used in this text: 1. To leap for joy, to exult, to make rejoice. 2. To sprinkle, e. g., water, blood, also oil, with upon or towards. He accordingly renders this text, "So shall he cause many nations to rejoice in himself." The Septuagint has thaumasontai from thaumazo, to wonder, marvel, or admire. This very well preserves the idea of the original, and preserves the parallelism of the composition in the original. "As many were astonished at thee, . . . so shall he cause many to wonder, or admire." And this Gesenius notices and approves, thus: "Gr., Syr., Vulg., Luth., Eng., 'So shall he sprinkle many nations,' see No. 2, i. e., my servant the Messiah shall make expiation for them; but this accords less with the parallel verb, shah-mam." Shah-mam is the verb used in verse 14, and means, to be astonished. A translation of the Old Testament by Isaac Leser, a Jew, gives this text as follows:— "Just as many were astonished at thee, so early greatly was his countenance marred more than any (other) man's, and his form more than (that of) the sons of men. Thus will he cause many nations to jump up (in astonishment); at him will kings shut their mouths," etc. Dr. Clarke says, "I retain the common rendering, though I am by no means satisfied with it." He notices several authors who are equally dissatisfied, and finally says, the "Septuagint seems to give the best sense of any to the place."
He quotes a very judicious comment of Secker, in which he says, Yaz-zeh, frequent in the law, means only to sprinkle; but the water sprinkled is the accusative case; the thing on which has al or el. Thaumasontai makes the best apodosis." Dr. Clarke also quotes a criticism of Dr. Jubb, who renders it, "So shall many nations look on him with admiration; kings shall stop their mouths," etc. This criticism, or rendering of Dr. Jubb, as well as others noticed, preserves the general idea very well, which seems to have been the only aim of the authors. But it is not a close rendering, as it gives the active form, which the original is not. Thaumasontai, which is used in the Septuagint, and which Dr. Clark says gives the best sense, is the passive voice, and, of course, more nearly corresponds to the original than does our version. The original is the causative form; therefore the rendering of Gesenius (and Leser, so far as the form is concerned) is not only preferable, but necessary or unavoidable. To translate it "he shall sprinkle," is to change it from its grammatical form, the causative, and give the first or simple active form. And it also destroys the harmony of the construction by ignoring the parallelism, so beautifully wrought into the original. The rendering quoted from Dr. Jubb, while it preserves the parallelism and gives the true general idea of the verb, is yet open to this further objection, that it gives the active (kal) plural, ("they shall admire"), whereas the Hebrew original is the causative (hiphil) singular, ("he shall cause them,") etc. Now if we endeavor to preserve the idea of the common version, and give it the causative singular form, we will at once perceive the incongruity of the rendering. The text should certainly not be rendered sprinkle.
BAPTISM OF THE SPIRIT—SCRIPTURE ILLUSTRATIONS—INSTANCES. Once more we let Prof. Stuart speak, as he professes to settle the whole question on a principle which he considers most decisive proof against confining our practice to immersion, according to the word baptizo. He refers it to the spirit of the gospel, as follows:— "Whenever an enlightened Christian wishes to make the inquiry, what is essential to his religion, should he not instinctively open his Bible at John 4, and there read thus: 'Believe me the hour cometh, when ye shall, neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. . . . The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshipers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth; for the Father seeketh such to worship him. God is a Spirit, and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.'" It seems strange indeed that such a man as Prof. Stuart could find any warrant in this text for departing from the plain, literal reading of the divine record. The principle here stated covers all worship and all duty. This is freely admitted. But we read also, "Thy word is truth." Therefore John 4 is only perverted when, under pretense of worshiping God in spirit and in truth, we set aside his word, which is truth, and which is the only true measure of religious duty. With as good reason the Romanist might quote John 4 to justify the worship of images contrary to the express declaration of the word of God. The Friend (Quaker) quotes this to set aside the precept of baptism altogether, and his conclusion is certainly as just as that of Prof. S., and of all those who press it into the service of changing this ordinance of our Saviour. If we can set aside one duty under pretense of worshiping in spirit, we may others, and our worship becomes a mere matter of choice or will worship. However much we might regard the intention of Prof. Stuart, we are compelled to condemn his reasoning, which, if accepted, would turn our religion into antinomian sentimentalism. Editor.

Prayer

PRAYER.—The first, second, and third elements of the Christian life should open, prolong, and conclude each day. The first act of the soul in early morning should be a draught at the heavenly fountain. It will sweeten the taste for the day. If you can have but ten minutes with God at that fresh, tranquil, and tender season, make sure of those minutes. They are of more value than much fine gold. But if you tarry long so sweetly at the throne, you will come out of the closet as the high priest of Israel came from the awful ministry at the altar of incense, suffused all over with the heavenly fragrance of that communion.

OUR HOPE AND REFUGE.

By Mrs. R. P. Stuart.

If there is one thing for which the poor weary heart has reason to be especially thankful, it is the fact that we have not an High Priest who cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities, but has in all things been tempted like as we are, and knows just how to succor the tempted, to strengthen the weak, and to comfort the desponding. His pitying hand is ever outstretched with blessings for such as will turn humbly and trustingly to him. To such as strive to subdue their carnal desires and to know and do His will, He giveth strength according to their day; and withholdeth no good thing from those who walk uprightly. The pilgrims way may be over deep morasses or flowery meads, through surging waters or by the singing brook, or up the rugged steep, yet the guiding hand ever goeth before, and happy is that heart which can always say, "He leadeth me."
"What a friend we have in Jesus, All our sins and griefs to bear. What a privilege to carry Everything to God in prayer."
It is the privilege of Christians to establish such close relationship with their friend and teacher, to have their heart so imbued with His Spirit that, as an obedient trusting child would rest in the arms of a wise and loving parent, and breathe out his griefs and heartaches upon that faithful breast, so they may rest in the arms of Jesus, and breathe to Him the cares and vexations which no earthly friend, however kind, can understand or alleviate. Nearer, my God, to thee, has been the Christian's prayer in all ages. But how much more earnest should be the cry down here amid the perils of the last days, when dangers are thickening around us; when earth's vain allurements are taking on every attractive garb to ensnare and win us away from the truth; when the enemy's wrath and power is greater in proportion to the little time he has to work. How close should be our walk with God. How necessary that we humble ourselves before Him and so relate ourselves to Him that in every temptation and trial we can say, "What a friend we have in Jesus." How imperative the demand that we understand fully the work that is progressing in the heavenly sanctuary, and realize that Jesus will soon, and forever, cease pleading, when the door of mercy will be closed against the impenitent, and he that is filthy will be filthy still. How earnest should be our cry for help. With what awfully solemn anxious fear should we plead that the Spirit of truth, which emanates from the holy sanctuary, may thoroughly convert our hearts that we may see wherein we lack, and strive earnestly to purify our souls while mercy lingers.
Dear Christian pilgrims, let us arouse and improve these precious moments remaining to us—every one more precious than the gold of Ophir. Let us work and pray earnestly for ourselves and each other, and for souls perishing around us. Jesus is our friend, and advocate with the father. Through him we may have grace and strength to resist all the fiery darts of the adversary, and go clear through with God's remnant people. It will more than compensate for all griefs and heartaches here, all trials and burdens by the way, to be permitted to share with the ransomed of the Lord when they shall return and come to Zion with songs and everlasting joy upon their heads.
Mrs. R. P. Stuart. Madison, Dakota.

THE RIGHTS OF THE POOR.

By Editor

THE following question and answer are from the Territorial Enterprise, of Virginia, Nevada. It is worth the reading and consideration of every working man:—
“Virginia, March 13, 1880. “Editor Enterprise:—Will you please answer this question, where there seems to be a good deal of doubt. Has a poor man got any rights that a rich man is bound to respect, according to your views?’
“Such a letter as the foregoing is entitled to a frank reply. A poor man here has the right to work for better wages, and, with his earnings, to buy better clothes and food than the poor men of any other country on the face of the earth enjoy. He has a perfect right to lay by the product of a few months' work, and with it buy a team, and go to Mason's Valley, or Surprise Valley, or Pitt River Valley, or any of a thousand other valleys, and take up 160 acres of land which is richer than the best valleys of the Eastern or Middle States, and to own it absolutely for himself and his heirs. He has a right with one month's earnings, to buy himself a pick, shovel, hammer, three pair of blankets and three months' food, and to go out into the desert prospecting. And if he finds a mine as rich as the Eberhardt or the Eureka Consolidated, it will be his, and the laws of the United States will guarantee it to him. He has all the waters of the Union to fish in, all the forests of the Republic to hunt in; he has precisely the same protection that John Mackay had when he came here, and more than John Mackay now has, while his opportunities are 500 per cent. greater than those of the men that settled up the United States between the Atlantic and the Mississippi. There is full protection for him to do any legitimate thing; there are free schools for his children; all the offices of the country are open to him; he can engage in any occupation that suits him; the taxes are so light that they are no burden, and the laws impose no restraint to prevent his doing anything he pleases, so long as he does not interfere with the rights of his neighbors. If, after a few years of toil and frugality he makes for himself a home on a farm or in the city, if by his industry and sagacity he secures a valuable mine, he will be so protected that no man can interfere with him. The law will enable him to say to the man who has gambled in stocks and lost, and who wants him to divide: ‘I worked honestly for what I have, and it is mine.’ To the American-born loafer, who has spent his years around the beer saloons and free-lunch establishments of the cities, and who wants help he can say: ‘While you were idle I was at work, and what I have is for myself and my children.’ To the man who says, ‘My youth was passed in hardships, under a foreign despotism, and in this country I know it is not right for you to have a competence while I am still poor,’ he can answer: ‘This country gives to every comer here land as free as it does air and water; it secures good wages to the laborer, and throws no obstacle in the way of the laboring man. He may aspire to anything he pleases, do any rightful thing he may please to do; but it cannot give a man a disposition to work, or be prudent, or wise, or honest, or grateful for the blessings around him. It can, however, and will, protect honest accumulations against the covetousness of the lawless, against the lust of the canaille, and so far, at least, it will not justify the loafer in his demand for a division, any more than it will the more honorable robber who, with his life in his hands, demands, on the highway, the purse of the traveler.”
We trust our correspondent will see the point, and that instead of writing any more complaining letters, he will try the experiment of earning an honest dollar by honest work, and see how sweet is the bread that such a dollar will buy.”

A FREE SEAT.

[Feeble poetry, but strongly suggestive.]
HE was old and poor, and a stranger In the great metropolis, As he bent his steps thitherward To a stately edifice. Outside he inquires, "What Church is this?" "Church of Christ," he hears them say; "Ah! just the place I am looking for, I trust he is here to-day."
He passed thro' the spacious columned door And up the carpeted aisle, And as he passed, on many a face, He saw surprise and smile. From pew to pew, one entire side, Then across the broad front space; From pew to pew down the other side He walked with the same slow pace.
Not a friendly voice had bid him sit To listen to gospel truth; Not a sign of deference had been paid To the aged one by youth. No door was opened by generous hand, The pews were paid for—rented, And he was a stranger, old and poor, Not a heart to him relented.
As he paused outside a moment to think, Then again passed into the street, Up to his shoulder he lifted a stone That lay in the dust at his feet; And bore it up the broad grand aisle In front of the ranks of pews, Choosing a place to see and to hear, He made a seat for his use.
Calmly sitting upon the huge stone, Folding his hands on his knees, Slowly reviewing the worshipers, A great confusion he sees. Many a cheek is crimsoned with shame, Some whisper together sore, And wish they had been more courteous To the stranger old and poor.
As if by magic, some fifty doors Open instantly, And as many seats, and books, and hands Are proffered hastily. Changing his stone for a crimsoned pew, And wiping a tear away, He thinks it was a mistake after all, And that Christ came late that day.
The preacher's discourse was eloquent, The organ in finest tone, But the most impressive sermon heard Was preached by a humble stone. 'Twas a lesson of lowliness and worth That lodged in many a heart, And the Church preserves the sacred stone, That the truth may not depart.
—Sel.

CHRIST, WITH A CROSS.

By Dwight Lyman Moody

IN one of his recent St. Louis discourses, reported in the Globe-Democrat, Mr. Moody made use of this apt illustration:—
There is a story in Roman history of a young Roman who was in the Roman army, and he was to be promoted; but the officer right under him came to the king, and he says: “Look here, this man that you are going to promote is a Christian, and by the law of Rome he has no right to hold an office.” and so the young man was called into the presence of the monarch, and an inquiry was made if it was true that he was a Christian. He told the king that he was. “Well,” says the king, “I will give you three hours to give up Christ and Christianity. You can have the place in that time if you will do that; but if not, your head must come off.” A Christian bishop in the city heard of him and he went to that young officer. He was a young man of great wealth and position and beauty. He took him into the church of God, and he put his sword alongside the Bible and he said to the young man: “What is your decision? Is it for the Bible? If it is, you must give up life. If it is for the sword, you will have honor for a little while. Rome will delight to honor you. Now, what is your decision?” The young man says, “That Bible is my decision.” It cost him his life to confess Christ. In three hours from that time that young man was beheaded.
Would to God that we had men of that stamp at the present day: men who are willing to confess Christ even if it cost their lives; men who are willing to confess him even if it costs everything they have; men who are not ashamed to own their Lord and master. And I want to say right here that if we begin to confess Christ, just the moment we begin to take him and confess him and own him as our Lord and Master we will have men all around us beginning to inquire what they must do to be saved. I never knew it to fail.

FATE OF THE APOSTLES.

ALL the apostles were assulted by the enemies of the master. They were called to seal their doctrines with their blood, and nobly did they bear the trial. Tradition says:—
Matthew suffered martyrdom by being slain with the sword, at the distant city of Ethiopia.
Mark expired at Alexandria, after having been cruelly dragged through the streets of that city.
Luke was hung upon an olive tree, in the classic land of Greece.
John was put into a chaldron of boiling oil, but escaped death in a miraculous manner, and was afterward banished to Patmos.
Peter was crucified at Rome, with his head downward.
James, the greater, was beheaded at Jerusalem.
James, the less, was thrown from a lofty pinnacle of the temple, and then beat to death with a fuller's club.
Philip was hanged up against a pillar, at Hieropolis, in Phrygia.
Bartholomew was flayed alive.
Andrew was bound to the cross, whence he preached to his persecutors until he died.
Thomas was run through the body with a lance, in the East Indies.
Jude was shot to death with arrows.
Matthias was first stoned, and then beheaded.
Barnabas, of the Gentiles, was stoned to death by the Jews, at Salonica.
Paul, after various tortures and persecutions, was at length beheaded, at Rome, by the Emperor Nero.
Simon Zelotes was crucified, in Judea.

MATTHEW XXIV.

“THIS GENERATION.”

DIFFERENT views are taken of the Saviour’s words in Matt. 24: 34. “This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.” One is, that the generation means the race, or Jewish people. This we consider a forced construction. It seems to be as unnecessary as it is unnatural. And it leaves everything indefinite where every declaration of the context tends to infiniteness. It adds nothing whatever to the force of the general statement of the chapter.
Another is, that the individuals then present, or the generation living at that time, would continue till all these things were fulfilled. This has far more appearance of plausibility than the other theory. It might well be considered the truth were there no opposing considerations. But opposing considerations exist, which are not only weighty but, we think, insurmountable. This view is not necessary, because another and more reasonable one can be presented. The facts and reasons which we, in former articles, set forth, do render our conclusion necessary, namely: that the chapter speaks of a personal, literal, coming of the Saviour, which has not yet taken place. We have no idea that these facts will ever be met and these reasonings refuted.
Another view, which we hold to be the true one, is, that the language is prophetic, and uses the present for the future, as is common in the prophecies. Isaiah 9 speaks of the birth of Messiah as already having taken place, and chapter 53 in like manner speaks of his sufferings and death as being then in the past, more then a half a millennium before he appeared on earth. If these prophecies were treated as Universalists, and others of late years, treat Matt. 24, the evidence of the messiahship of Jesus would be entirely destroyed. Yet Matt. 24 is as certainly a prophecy as Isaiah 9 and 53.
Compare the language of our Saviour with that of Paul. Speaking to the Corinthian church he said, “We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,” or translated, at the sound of the last trump. The pronoun “we” naturally refers to the speaker and those to whom he speaks. But the trumpet has not yet sounded, the resurrection has not yet come, the translation of the living righteous to immortality without their seeing death has not yet taken place, and Paul and the church of Corinth have all fallen asleep. But Paul’s brethren have not. Paul was speaking by prophecy as surely as was Isaiah in chapter 9, when he said, “Unto us a son is given.” When Isaiah uses language which refers so directly and unmistakably to those then living, as taken according to the natural application of the terms, why do all so readily apply it to a generation centuries then in the future? It is only because the facts compel us to recognize this usage in the prophecies. So the words of Paul can refer to only the last age of the church, to those of his brethren who shall be living when Christ comes, who shall be saved from death, and translated into the kingdom of God’s dear Son.
And so also in 1 Thess. 4: 13-18. Here he says: “We which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not go before those who are asleep.” He explains what he means by those who are asleep, for he says: “The dead in Christ shall rise.” Universalists uniformly refer the resurrection to a moral change, to a rising or passing from moral or spiritual death. But to speak of those who are morally or spiritually dead in Christ is to use language very strange and inappropriate. The Scriptures plainly teach that they who have fallen asleep in faith, who have died in Christ, shall have part in the first resurrection, which will take place when Christ comes.
Of Paul and his brethren in Thessalonica we can say as we said of those in Corinth,—they are not alive, they do not remain; “the day of the Lord has not yet come, for the “day of salvation” still continues; the voice of the archangel has not been heard; the saints have not risen from the dead, and the living saints have not been caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and worldlings and worldly-minded professors still cry, “Peace and safety.” As Paul spoke here also by the spirit of prophecy, to some of his brethren all these words will be fulfilled—not one word will fail.
And so of the words of the Saviour. Having carried the minds of the disciples forward to the signs in the sun, moon, and stars, he said, “When ye see all these things, know that he is near, even at the doors.” Will any one pretend that these things there referred to were then present? By no means. But do not these things refer to things in the presence of the speaker? Not necessarily. But “this generation” and “these things” belong together, for this generation shall see these things, see verse 34, though all were then in the future. And when these things are fulfilled, this generation—to which these things are present facts—will not pass till all be fulfilled, even to the coming of the Son of man. It is a solemn truth to contemplate, yet we firmly believe it is truth, that the signs have been fulfilled, and that the generation which saw the wonderful shower of falling stars in 1833, the last of the signs, will not pass away till the Lord himself shall descend from Heaven.

THE NATURE OF CHRIST.

By Editor

The Golden Censer is a paper which we have always read with pleasure, and welcomed it to our table whenever we have acted as editor where it was received as an exchange. Its general religious tone is good. But it certainly is not above a deep-seated prejudice. In its issue of March 27 it contained an article on the divinity of Christ, in which it sets down the Adventists as Arians. It says:—
"The leaders, so far as representative men can, have put themselves on record as opposed to the doctrine. For instance, the declaration of Mr. Waggoner in these words: 'Of course we cannot believe what men say about his (Christ's) being co-equal with God in every respect, and that the divine Son of God could not suffer nor die.' By this we see that they do not believe that Christ took on him the seed of Abraham; but that he had no other nature than the nature of the seed of Abraham. They believe that Christ was all mortal, and had but one nature, and that the human."
We cannot forbear recommending the writer of the above to read carefully and considerately Ex. 20:16. He quotes from our work on "The Atonement," and we would consider him somewhat excusable in drawing his conclusion, had we not in the plainest terms declared directly to the contrary. We do not believe that Christ "had but one nature, and that the human." And that statement to the contrary is so plainly made that no one can possibly mistake it. In justice to Seventh-day Adventists and to our readers we shall early take opportunity to give our views on this subject.
We cannot believe, as does the editor of the Censer, that the sacrifice of Christ was merely human; we hold that the divine being, known in the Scriptures as "the Son of God," died for our fallen race. Any other view destroys the great "mystery of godliness," 1 Tim. 3:16, and degrades the atonement. The sufficiency of the atonement rests upon the dignity and divinity of the offering made to the infinitely holy law of God. To hold that "the Christ" merely took on him a human nature for a season, and let that die, while the divine Son of God neither suffered nor died, belittles the gospel system and brings the doctrine of the atonement down to the level of the lowest Socinianism; it is to make our salvation depend on a merely human sacrifice. Did Christ die, or did he not? And who is Christ? These are important questions,—of such transcendent importance that we do not like to stand misrepresented before the world in reference to them. We hope that our opponents, one and all, will remember that no amount of zeal and pious feeling will excuse an act of injustice.
Continue reading: THE SIN OF WITCHCRAFT. (Continued.)