“When will wonders cease? Certainly, not while the appetite for them is so great. So long as men are led by curiosity and wonder to crave marvels, there will be enough to supply them. Strange terrors will haunt their imaginations. They will see sights in the heavens, and hear sounds in the air, foreboding gloom and disaster. Storms and tempests will betoken troubles and revolutions; and fiery comets, as they flame through the sky,
‘From their horrid hair
Will shake pestilence and war.’
“On such direful prognostics, apprehensions have often been felt that the world was coming to an end. A few years ago Father Miller traversed the country, rehearsing the prophecies, with figures and calculations, by which he fixed the day for the general conflagration. In mute terror his disciples, like an affrighted flock of sheep, awaited the day of doom. At length it came. The sun rose as usual; the hours wore on; at length, the twilight stole over the still and peaceful earth, and all was calm in the face of nature. The world did not explode, but Father Miller did. Poor man! he soon sank into obscurity and was scarcely heard of more.”
The above stray paragraph has fallen under our notice. As we consider that the readers of some paper are publicly treated to such stuff as that, we are led to some reflections. Whenever we see a writer passing over the “storms,” “tempests,” “troubles and revolutions” which are now confessedly more than ever beginning to convulse the world, with slurs and flippant sneers, and endeavoring to allay any serious reflections that might arise in any mind concerning them, we feel like asking a few questions.
We would like to ask the writer of the above if he ever read Matt. xxiv, or Mark xiii, or Luke xxi? What does the Saviour mean when he speaks of signs in the sun, moon and stars, and upon the earth distress of nations with perplexity, the sea and the waves roaring? and what would he have us understand by it, when he holds these out as signs by which we may know that we are approaching that time when we shall “see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory?” Could we admit for the sake of argument that we are not now upon the eve of that event, we would ask if these signs will not take place according to the Saviour’s prediction, whenever the end is right upon us? and will there not be found then multitudes who will be ready to make a mock of serious things, and laugh at the precursors of the great day, as resulting from the haunted imaginations of the superstitious and marvelous? Should we not, then, when we see events transpiring before us, bearing precisely the character of those pointed out by the Saviour, which he told us should be signs of the coming One,—should we not pause in view of them, and ask ourselves if we may not already have reached the time when “the great day of the Lord is near and hasteth greatly?”
The Saviour has positively assured us that these things should take place as signs of his coming, and that when they begin to come to pass, we should look up and lift up our heads, for our redemption was drawing nigh. It is evident then that he who penned the quotation at the head of this article was either grossly ignorant of the declarations of the Bible, or he intended to cast a slur upon the sacred page. We refer not now to the apprehensions entertained by a few (of the unbelieving however) in regard to the comet, which we protested against from the first, but of the signs in general of which he speaks. Such signs shall precede the end of the world, on the authority of our Saviour’s own words. Such signs are now, and have of late years been, taking place; and he who would meet them with braggadocio and ridicule, is fitly described by Solomon in Prov. xiv, 16.
So Father Miller, it seems, exploded. So the world think; and so probably thought the old Pharisees concerning Christ after his lifeless body had been deposited in the tomb. No doubt they then consoled themselves with the thought that the “new sect,” would soon be scattered to the four winds, and “Jesus of Nazareth” sink into obscurity and be scarcely heard of more. But as Christ told the daughters of Jerusalem who lamented him, not to weep for him, but for themselves and their children, so would we remind this writer that he may retain the pseudo-sympathy which he manifests for the “poor man.” Neither Father Miller nor his cause has any need of it. Let him rather bestow it upon himself and his children. For there is a time coming in which an “explosion” will take place, when he will need sympathy;—a time when the hopes of all scoffers will be exploded, and their fairest prospect blighted, and their delusive dreams expelled, and the stupefying fumes of unbelief and all forms of irreligion, in which their moral sensibilities have been steeped, cleared away forever, and they awakened to the reality of finding themselves vainly calling upon the rocks and mountains to hide them from the presence of a wrathful Lamb.
“Millerism” is not exploded. If Peter could declare himself begotten again to a lively hope by the resurrection of the Saviour, so can we, by the new developments of truth since our disappointment in 1844, by which the whys and wherefores of that disappointment are clearly given. The Advent movement is not yet finished. Prophecy is still hastening to its fulfillment. This the world might see and understand if they would; but they will not. They think that every vision faileth; and the unbeliever hardens his heart, and the scoffer grows bold in wickedness, and both are lulled more deeply into the delusive dream of peace and safety, and know not that sudden destruction like a winged messenger from the Almighty is upon their track.
It is not in “mute terror like an affrighted flock of sheep,” according to the above tissue of insult and falsehood, that the followers of the Lord wait for his coming. Those who know anything about it, know that they were not altogether “mute” in 1844, and they know that there were many hearts that swelled with emotions of joy at the thought of entering the mansions of their Father’s house. The fright, the terror, the lamentation and woe, are reserved for the wicked, when they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory; but the righteous will then be enabled to look up, and, with joy beaming upon their countenances, exclaim, “Lo, this is our God! we have waited for him, and he will save us.”
Good Works in Secret
If you have performed an act of great disinterested virtue, conceal it; for if you publish it you will neither be believed here nor rewarded hereafter.
Whatever you do for the Lord, do in the name of the Lord; that is, referring to his authority, expecting his blessing, and seeking his honor.—Sel.
REVIEW
By John Nevins Andrews
Of a Series of Lectures on the Sabbath Question, delivered in Battle Creek, March 31st-April 4th, 1857.
(Continued.)
As it was the announcement that Mr. Fillio would give the "scriptural view" of the Sabbath question, we should expect on his part at least an appearance of conformity to scripture. And so long as his labors were confined to the question of the seventh-day Sabbath, this appearance could to some extent be preserved; for there is plenty of scripture on that subject. But when the First-day institution comes up, the scene changes entirely. On this point his only arguments were assertions, without scripture warrant or authority, though some of them were pretty well backed up with such testimony as the church of Rome freely furnishes to sustain her dogmas—tradition.
F. "The first day of the week commemorates the resurrection of Christ, and the descent of the Spirit; in other words, the completion of the work of redemption."
Here we perceive his mind has undergone a complete change, and one particular portion of time is well adapted to a particular purpose. If he had designed to give the popular view, these assertions might pass current; but the popular view is not always scriptural. In this case there is no evidence in the scripture to sustain the declarations. There is an institution of the gospel which well commemorates the resurrection of Christ. See Rom. vi, 1-5. God has distinguished the seventh day by the facts of the creation, by its sanctification, and by his commandment; yet Mr. Fillio argued directly against its fitness for every purpose specified in the Scriptures. God has not so specified the first day, nor sanctified it, nor given any law respecting it; yet without any divine testimony Mr. F. discovers a wonderful fitness. Truly has the word of God pointed out such teachers: "They are wise to do evil, but to do good they have no knowledge." Jer. iv, 22.
By reference to Rom. viii, 22, 23, we learn that the saints of God are waiting and groaning for redemption. This sufficiently refutes his assumption.
F. "A plain scriptural example, backed up with the blessing of Christ, and the sanction of the Spirit, binds this duty very near, if not equal to positive enactment."
After all that he has said about the nature of the Sabbath and Sabbath law, it would be very ungenerous to suppose that he would claim that any moral principle is involved in the keeping of Sunday. Therefore it is neither positive nor moral. It has often been said that to be almost saved is to be wholly lost; and so, that which is only very near a law is no law at all. God's law, and the declarations of scripture respecting it, are all definite. Sin is the transgression of the law. But according to Mr. Fillio's theory of duty, the desecration of the Sunday institution is very near a sin. Such an approximation to something undefined is a poor substitute for scripture proof.
Let it be borne in mind that "the blessing of Christ" referred to, was not conferred on the first day of the week, but upon his disciples. And the probability that the Spirit sanctioned its observance is not very strong in the entire absence of any evidence that they observed it.
F. "Luke xxiv, 49. Tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high. When, Lord, shall we be endued with power from on high? One week hence, on the first day of the week."
This was designed for a conversation between Christ and his disciples. Of what importance such things are in a "scriptural view," it is hard to tell. We think Mr. Fillio might make some additions to the Apocryphal New Testament which might be of service in the Sunday cause. He has made a good beginning.
F. "Matt. xxviii, 10. Jesus appointed a meeting on the first day, in Galilee. This is a gospel institution."
Jesus did not "appoint a meeting" in Galilee, but promised that they should see him in Galilee; and this is several times mentioned. Matt. xxviii, 7, 10; xxvi, 32; Mark xiv, 28; xvi, 7. And there is not a particle of evidence that they saw him in Galilee on the first day of the week; it seems truly astonishing, that any one should presume to make such an unwarranted statement. There is no proof that Jesus was seen of them more than once in Galilee. Matt. xxviii, 16 says they went into a mountain in Galilee; but the mountains came to the shore of the sea; [Luke viii, 32, 33.] and we have evidence that they saw him there on the seashore. The scriptures so often mentioning the fact that they should see him in Galilee, after his resurrection, seems to place much stress on his being seen there as a confirmation of that event. And to show the fulfillment of that promise the circumstances of their seeing him in Galilee are recorded in John xxi. The disciples were fishing when the Lord met with them on the shore of the lake. It may have been on First-day, as Mr. F. asserts, though there is no evidence of it; for there were five other days, besides the first day of the week, wherein they were allowed to fish, or do their own work. Ex. xx, 8-10.
F. "But we are told that the day of the crucifixion is greater than the day of the resurrection. I am surprised that any follower of Jesus should advance this."
There are none, to our knowledge, who claim that this has any bearing on the Sabbath question, except the Mahometans; and with them it is a matter of will and supposition, as the choice of First-day is with Catholics and Protestants. There is no scripture on either side. But there are several scriptures which ascribe our redemption to the blood of Christ. Rom. iii, 24, 25; Eph. i, 7; Col. i, 14; Heb. ix, 12, 15; 1 Pet. i, 18, 19; Rev. v, 9. See Acts xx, 28. Therefore, if anything short of the full accomplishment of redemption (which is yet future) should be chosen, surely the day on which his blood was shed would be most appropriate. But as there is no authority for either, the observance of Sixth-day and First-day are alike mere "will-worship" or "voluntary humility," and both condemned by the Scriptures, being "commandments and doctrines of men," that turn from the truth; viz., the commandments of God. Col. ii, 18, 22, 23; Titus i, 14.
Many other declarations of the greatness of the first day, its consecration, &c., we pass by as unworthy of attention.
F. "On the day of his resurrection, the first day of the week, he met with them four times. 1. With the women; 2. with Peter; 3. with the disciples at Emmaus; 4. with ten disciples in Jerusalem."
One might have gathered from the delivery of the above, that there were four appointed meetings of worshiping assemblies on that day. And a stronger effort to make out a case without any foundation whatever, it has never been our lot to witness. The first meeting was his suddenly making himself known to the women who had come to the sepulchre with the spices, &c. When, where, or in what manner, he was seen of Peter is not related. The third meeting was in the midst of a seven and a half miles' journey made on that day. But he was not known to them till they were eating supper, when he vanished out of their sight. The fourth was some time later, when he came to the residence of the eleven, and found them also taking their supper, and he upbraided them because till that time they had not believed that he was risen. See Acts i, 13; Mark xvi, 11-14.
F. "John xx, 26. This is said to have been on Monday. But when any circumstance occurred one week from another the Jews called it after eight days. So in Luke ix, and Matt. xvii. They record the same transaction, but there is a difficulty—their statements disagree materially. Hence, they were accustomed so to speak, to begin on the first day from any occurrence, and one week from that was the eighth day."
Several errors may be noticed in the above. 1. Matt. xvii, and Luke ix, do not contain any contradiction, nor any difficulty to the candid mind. One says it (the transfiguration) was "after six days," and the other "about an eight days after." If the second said about ten days after, it would not contradict the first that it was after six days. 2. As after six days means about eight days after, it cannot also be that after eight days should be just one week after, nor on the eighth day. 3. Even if it was admitted that it was their custom to reckon one as is here claimed, it would avail nothing to his argument unless it was also shown that after eight days, and the eighth are identical. But they are not. Every reckoning of time contradicts it. Thus the nineteenth century commenced fifty-seven years ago; nineteen centuries are not yet completed; while after nineteen centuries is more than forty-three years in the future. But suppose it had directly said it was on First-day, what then? Every thing essential to his argument lies beyond that.
F. "It is argued by great and good men who have the means of ascertaining that the ascension was on the first day. He was seen forty days, or many days, which denotes a round number, and means just six weeks, as they reckoned time by weeks from Sunday to Sunday."
Who these "great and good men" were we know not, as we were not favored with their names. This was a new announcement. If their "means of ascertaining" were no better than Mr. Fillio's, they were not very great, judging from the manner in which he handled it; as he failed to give any proof on the point, it is but fair to suppose that he did not know of the existence of any. Forty days means forty-three days as they reckoned time! How does he know it? Perhaps his "wonderful echo" so informed him.
Here we behold the convenience of the Sunday theory. While the advocates of the Sabbath of the Lord are plodding along in the dull path of fixed facts, authenticated records, and well-defined laws, the Sunday advocates have only to give fancy a loose rein, and evidences cluster around, with light and airy forms, placing themselves in every conceivable shape and position to suit the exigencies of the case. And why not? "Theology would be far behind the "spirit of the age" if we should cramp it down to lawful accuracies and positive proofs. "One day in seven and no day in particular" is the first day of the week.
"The seventh part of time" always comes on that day. After eight days from one Sunday, by a singular construction, brings us to the next Sunday; and forty days, by an elongation no less singular, comprises six full weeks and a day, beginning and ending on Sunday. A sliding scale of morality has been coming into use for a long time. Mr. Fillio has done much toward perfecting it.
In making his reckoning to the day of Pentecost he remarked that "the wave-sheaf was offered on the seventh day of the week." Lev. xxiii, 11, says, "on the morrow after the Sabbath the priest shall wave it." The New Testament does not say that Christ arose on the first day, but we think he did, as he was the antitype of the first-fruits which was offered on that day. But if Mr. Fillio is correct, the argument for the resurrection on the first day is entirely destroyed. And again, if the common computation is correct, which makes the resurrection and Pentecost to have been on the same day of the week, it would follow from Mr. Fillio's argument that both occurred on the seventh day. Dr. Clarke has a calculation by which the day of Pentecost is clearly brought on the second day of the week. A few more efforts on the part of Sunday advocates will leave us nothing to do in exposing their inconsistencies.
F. "There is no evidence that Christ met with them on any other than the First day."
Then the meeting recorded in John xxi, must have been on First-day. We hope our friends who put forth such declarations as the above will read that chapter with care.
F. "On that day he met with them three different times, and sent the Comforter to crown the finished work of redemption."
As the work of redemption, according to Mr. F.,150was finished on the morning of the resurrection, the ascension, and the gift of the Spirit were no part of that great work; these must be the "non-essentials" of which so much has been said! But no one would gather such an idea from the scripture. He ascended on high as an Intercessor, to grant remission of sin, and the Spirit was given to perfect the followers of Jesus. Heb. ix, 15, 24; Acts v, 31; Eph. iv, 8-13. They who think that the work of redemption was finished when our Saviour rose from the dead, must leave out of that work his intercession or priesthood, and second coming, without which the work of redemption could never be accomplished. To say that such an error arises from taking a superficial view of the work of Christ, does not near express the truth: it arises from losing sight of the main features of that work, and the manner of its consummation.
F. "1 Cor. xvi, 1, 2. This order was no new thing. Notice first: Paul is returning from a pastoral visit to the churches in Galatia; he established a rule of weekly contribution at the time of the meetings of other christian churches. They could attend to it best on First-day. Why? Because it was the day of assembling. It was the day of observance."
That this was the day of observance or day of assembling, has yet to be proved. That he established a rule of weekly contributions at the time of meetings is contrary to the evidence of the text. Even Justin Edwards, who has made such an effort to press every thing into the service of the First-day, in his note on this passage says, "at home." See his Notes on the New Testament.
J. W. Morton, in his "Vindication of the True Sabbath," pp. 51, 52 says:—
"The apostle simply orders, that each one of the Corinthian brethren should lay up at home some portion of his weekly gains on the first day of the week. The whole question turns upon the meaning of the expression, 'by him;' and I marvel greatly how you can imagine that it means in the collection-box of the congregation. Greenfield, in his Lexicon translates the Greek term, 'by one's self, i. e., at home.' Two Latin versions, the Vulgate, and that of Castellio, render it 'apud se,' with one's self, at home. Three French translations, those of Martin, Osterwald, and De Sacy, 'chez soi,' at his own house, at home. The German of Luther, 'bei sich selbst,' by himself, at home. The Dutch, 'by hemselven,' same as the German. The Italian, of Diodati, 'appresso di se,' in his own presence, at home. The Spanish, of Felipe Seio, 'en su casa,' in his own house. The Portuguese, of Ferreira, 'para isso,' with himself. The Swedish, 'naer sig sielf,' near himself. I know not how much this list of authorities might be swelled, for I have not examined one translation that differs from those quoted above."
F. "Another evidence. Acts xx, 7. This was not called as a special meeting. There is no such inference in the case. There has been an attempt to play on this passage. The primitive Christians met early in the morning, and also in the evening. They met on this Lord's day, and Paul preached a long sermon. This makes a perfect net-work or chain of evidence."
The remark that there has been a play on this passage, doubtless refers to the view advanced that this was an evening meeting; and as the evening was the first part of the day, and preceded the morning, this meeting was held before First-day morning, and at the break of day on First-day morning, Paul departed on his journey. And Mr. Fillio did not deny it, or attempt to show that it was not so. To have attempted it would have been to expose his weakness; therefore he prudently passed it by with the simple declaration that they met in the morning as well as in the evening. But no one could pretend that this was a morning meeting. The reading of the passage forbids it. Thus our position is clearly true. And here let the reader notice, that in this passage, which proves that Paul started on his journey on First-day morning, is the only account in the New Testament of a public meeting on the first day of the week. Acts ii, does not mention the first, or any other day of the week, but the day of Pentecost, which was not a weekly, but a yearly feast-day.
Now we have passed through a "perfect chain" of evidence, let us see what it is composed of. 1. The Sabbath is a positive institution. 2. It was instituted after Israel left Egypt. 3. It was peculiarly Jewish. 4. The fourth commandment was essentially different from the other parts of the decalogue. 5. The priests were required by law to violate it. 6. The least violation was to be punished with death. 7. The Sabbath was a shadow. 8. The law of Horeb was given to the Jews alone. 9. The law written and engraven on stones was abolished. 10. The law of the new covenant is in contradistinction (of opposite qualities) from that written on stones, (the ten commandments.) 11. The Sabbath was lost in Babylon, some centuries before Christ. 12. Christ and his disciples openly violated it. 13. He consecrated the first day of the week. 14. There is very near a law for its observance. 15. After eight days from Sunday means the subsequent Sunday. 16. Forty days means six full weeks and one Sunday over. 17. Paul ordered them to take up collections in their meetings on First-day. 18. It was an established custom to meet on that day.
Comment is unnecessary. As he claimed that the work of redemption was finished at the resurrection, and had merely to be "crowned" by the ascension, and gift of the Spirit, so here he has finished the "perfect chain" of evidence, and got two links to spare. The first is as follows:
F. "The first day was called by primitive Christians and ancient fathers the Lord's day. John thus designated it. Rev. i, 10. Some claim that this means the seventh-day Sabbath; but this cannot be made to mean Sabbaton. The first day was always called the Lord's day. Examine the original Greek and you will find it so."
It is extremely unpleasant to review anything wherein a want of candor is evinced. The most able persons may sometimes take a weak position, and the most candid may sometimes be led by prepossessions to advocate an error; but when any one pursues a continuous course of false reasoning and perverting the truth, honesty before God and our fellow-men requires us to characterize it truly and expose the deception. And we have no hesitation in saying that deception was practiced by the lecturer in his remarks on Rev. i, 10. Those who think that that scripture refers to the Sabbath, do not claim that Rev. i, 10 mentions the Sabbath or seventh day of the week by name; but they take other scriptures, such as have been quoted in this review, to show that the Lord has claimed one day of the week as his, and that is the seventh day. And that is the fair and correct method of settling questions by the Scripture. And now in turn we will ask, Does Rev. i, 10 mention the first day of the week? It does not. If you "examine the original Greek" will you find any mention of the first day of the week? You will not. If you examine the whole Bible will you find a single passage calling the first day of the week the Lord's day? You will not. Did the Lord ever claim it as his day? He did not. What authority had Mr. F. for making such a statement? None whatever. What scripture is applicable to his course? Matt. xxiv, 4.
The last link was the most definite and clear that he presented. It was the testimony of the fathers; uninspired tradition. And here let the fact be noticed that the denomination to which the lecturer belongs—the Baptist—professes to reject tradition and take the Bible alone. Had any individual arisen and proved by the same authors that the sprinkling of infants was the duty of gospel believers, he would have denied the authority at once. So inconsistent will men act when led by prejudice. Had Luther had confidence in such testimony the Reformation would not have been; and had Protestants carried out the principles of the Reformation they never would have appealed to such testimony to sustain unscriptural dogmas. But when men are determined to sustain the Sunday at all hazards, tradition is the best field for them to labor in. Whatever is claimed from Scripture on that side is by unnecessary and far-fetched inferences, while much of their traditional evidence is direct and pointed. But in this we rejoice, that those who keep the Lord's Sabbath and teach men so, are not reduced to such straits. Some may query thus: Did any of the early writers speak in favor and defence of the seventh day? We answer, they did; and their testimony can be produced if necessary. But we do not consider it necessary as long as we have an abundance of better testimony, to wit, the plain word of the Lord.
His first witness was IGNATIUS; who, he claimed, called the first day of the week "the Lord's day, the queen and prince of all days. Let every friend of Christ celebrate the Lord's day. Let us not sabbatize, but live according to the Lord's day, on which our Life arose."
Those who have read the same testimony in Justin Edwards' Manual will notice that Mr. Fillio has followed the marginal reading of the Apocryphal New Testament in the above quotation. In regard to the "Lord's life," Mr. Fillio says, partly following the marginal reading, "live according to the Lord's day." It is that "living according to the Lord's life," is the proper reading may be seen by the expression, "How shall we live different from him?" We say Mr. F. partly follows the margin: he says, live, the margin reads, living. The idea of the epistle is this. How shall we live different from him, if even the prophets came to a newness of hope in living according to the Lord's life; or, as he did.
3. The common English version from which Dr. Edwards and Mr. F. professedly quote involves the suppositions that (1.) the prophets did not keep the Sabbath, but the Lord's day, or as they claim, the first day of the week, which is too absurd to deserve a notice. And (2.) that at the coming of Christ, whom the prophets waited for, they were raised from the dead; whereas the scriptures teach that they will be raised at the second coming of Christ, under the sounding of the seventh trumpet. Rev. xi, 15-19.
We have been thus particular on this testimony, as Ignatius lived at an early age, and some think this epistle conclusive, or rather, the supposed quotation; for it is not generally known that it is speaking of the lives of the prophets, and has no reference to the observance of a day. That theory which rests on a few inferences, and such garbled extracts from spurious Catholic writings, is a bad one for Protestants to rest on. Reader, when you follow in the track of such errors, remember that God will bring every work into judgment.
J. H. W.
(To be Continued.)
He that Overcometh shall inherit all Things.
By Susan Elmer
Who can conceive the full import of these words? How oft has the weary pilgrim when looking over the past, and calling to mind how holy he must be, felt encouraged as these words came with full force to his mind. He that overcometh shall inherit all things. What could we have more? For what more could we wish? This blessed promise is enough to buoy up the weary saint under the severest trials. Is he poor as to the things of this life? Let him remember that soon, if faithful he shall possess all things. Is he sick and afflicted? soon his sufferings will all be over. The inhabitants of the world to come shall no more say I am sick. Is he called to part with his dearest friends? He will soon meet them again around the throne of God, never more to be parted. Death never knocks for admittance there; no tears can dim the eye, no bitter grief stir the deep fountains of the heart. Is he despised and forsaken here? He shall there have the honor of reigning with Christ eternally. The poorest saint on earth will there be far richer than any earthly king. Then let this glorious promise cheer the care-worn pilgrim, and animate him in his lonely hours. Again, the thought that we are soon to inherit such glorious things, should serve as a spur to hasten us on our way. O let us be faithful. The dark night is fast wearing away. Soon will be ushered in the cloudless morning. Soon the parted heavens will reveal to us the Son of man in all his glory. May we so live as to exclaim, Lo this is our God we have waited for him and he will save us. Then will be heard the151voice from heaven, “Come up hither.” So shall we ascend and be forever with the Lord.
SUSAN ELMER.
Ashfield, Mass., Aug. 27th, 1857.
Encouragement to Sacrifice and Persevere
By William Harris
From Bro. Harris.
Bro. Smith: In the Review which I love for the truth it contains, I find many precious letters from the brethren and sisters. I love to read of their determination to go through, and fight the battle of the Lord against the walls of old Jericho till they crumble and fall, and the saints take the kingdom. I want to say to you all who are seeking to make a sacrifice of your property and your lives also, for the kingdom, I am going with you. A little more praying and sacrificing, and we shall be able to go up and possess the land. How good the sound of a coming Saviour to bring us the victory. Praise his name!
In 1842 I heard the First Angel's Message. It cheered my heart, and I have ever loved the Advent doctrine. In 1847 a brother staid with us over night, who told us there was a company that were keeping the Sabbath of the Lord, and that we were keeping the Pope's Sabbath. I began immediately to see if it were so. I found it was. When the next Sabbath came round, our work being done up Friday night, we rested, and never have had work about on the Sabbath since.
Myself and companion have stayed here in this dark place most of the time since, and kept the Sabbath all alone. Some of our neighbors will listen to the Word and read, but have no heart to obey the Lord. They say they wish all the world would keep the Sabbath, then they would. I suppose that some in the days before the flood when Noah was warning them of their destruction might have had sympathy enough to say, if all the world would listen to you, we would. I have been looking into the nature of things and find that the world is doomed to destruction. It cannot save me and I cannot save the world. If we will be saved, we must keep the commandments of God.
William Harris.
Port Byron, N. Y., Aug. 30th, 1857.
A Call to Zeal and Repentance
By William H. Graham
From Bro. Graham.
Bro. Smith: It is now nearly six years since I embraced the Sabbath of the Lord our God together with kindred truths, which are able to make us wise unto salvation. I had no part in the First Angel’s Message, as I had no opportunity of hearing it. I have often regretted that I was not in that movement. I believe without a doubt that it was of God, that it was a fulfillment of his word, and that it was given in the right time. I am glad I ever had the privilege of listening to the great and sublime truths contained in, and connected with the third and last message of mercy to poor fallen man, which is now being given to the world. I am glad too, that when I had settled down into a careless indifferent state, thinking that because I had a theory of the truth I was "rich and increased with goods and had need of nothing," that the warning message to the poor lukewarm Laodiceans found way to my heart, and I was enabled, in a measure at least, to be zealous and repent. I do desire now to make thorough work for the kingdom; for it seems to me it is death to settle back into a lukewarm state, after being aroused by this message.
O how awfully solemn is this hour in which we live. In view of the impending storm of the wrath of God so soon to burst upon the shelterless heads of our friends and neighbors, in view of the truths which God has committed to us, and by which he is about to judge the world, in view of the unmistakable signs fast thickening around us, that the Lord is soon to descend from heaven to render to every man according as his works shall be, what manner of persons ought we to be in all holy conversation and godliness. How should we warn, weep over, and pray for our friends? What holy, spotless lives should we lead before them? so that if possible they may be saved, but if not that we may be able to say with the Apostle in the great day of reckoning that our skirts are clear from the blood of all men.
Dear brethren and sisters, I feel solemn while I write in view of these things, and it is my prayer that we may be enabled to search our hearts in the light of truth, and see to it that we are giving all diligence to make our calling and election sure. May God enable us to "seek righteousness, to seek meekness," for there is only a "may be we shall be hid in the day of his fierce anger."
I am glad to hear through the Review, of the prosperity of the cause in the West. I hope the time will soon come when the message will go with a loud voice, and call out all God’s honest ones who are now starving for the bread of life. I believe the Lord’s hand is in this work, and he will finish it, and cut it short in righteousness. The hundred and forty-four thousand will speedily be made up, and the saints of the Most High will take the kingdom under the whole heavens, in which they will shine as the stars and as the brightness of the firmament for ever and ever.
When I view the glories of the eternal inheritance so soon to be given to the saints, I feel to say I must be there. Soon, very soon those who are faithful will be there. Their conflicts will be ended, the battle fought, the victory gained, the crown received, and they will sit down in their long expected, eternal home, with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, to go out no more for ever. With such a hope as ours, in view of the prospect that now lies before us, have we any real cause of discouragement? True we, at least I, have many besetting sins, which must be overcome, and we find ourselves amid the perils of the last days; yet by the grace of God we can overcome. By doing all on our part we can gain a perfect victory over everything that is unlike Jesus, and stand at last among the happy company who will be presented without spot or wrinkle or any such thing.
That this may be our happy lot is the prayer of your unworthy brother. Wm. H. Graham. New Ipswich, N. H., Aug. 28th, 1857.
OBITUARY.
Fell asleep, Aug. 24th, 1857, in Parma, Mich., Eddie Wood, third son of Harry H., and Lucy A. Bramhall, aged three months and seventeen days.
He was a great sufferer; but the little head will now toss no more with pain, nor the little form writhe in agony. He is now at rest.
Little darling "thou hast left us!
Here thy loss we deeply feel;
But 'tis God that hath bereft us,
He can all our sorrows heal."
Yet, sweet babe, "we hope to meet thee,
When the day of life is fled,
Then in heaven with joy to greet thee,
Where no farewell tear is shed."
LETTERS.
“Then they that feared the Lord spake often one to another.”
Keeping the Commandments of God
By P. S. Thurston
From Bro. Thurston.
Bro. Smith: I wish to discharge my long neglected duty to the scattered church of God through the columns of your worthy paper. I accidentally, or rather providentially, heard of the Tent meeting at Mackford in time only to attend on Sabbath and First-day at the close of the meeting. But God sends the early and the latter rain, and I bless his holy name that enough of the retiring drops fell upon my thirsty soul to cause me to act. I then and there decided to keep the Commandments of God and the faith of Jesus. I had been halting between duty and inclination for about three years. Through the faithful labors of the brethren present and the assisting grace of God I was enabled to break loose from the world; and since that time my path has been like unto that of the just which is as the shining light, and my daily prayer is that it may shine more and more unto the perfect day. Since myself and companion have commenced keeping the commandments, we can say of a truth, It is better to be doers of the word than hearers only.
I read in the Word, blessed are the pure in heart; for they shall see God. The desire of my heart is to lead a pure and holy life that I may have right to the tree of life, and enter in through the gates into the city. I can say with the Psalmist, “O how I love thy law; it is my meditation all the day.” I receive much instruction and consolation through the Review and Herald. May it ever go forth laden with precious fruit, and may the blessing of God rest down upon those engaged in its publication, is my ardent prayer. I pray God to bless those messengers who have already gone forth to proclaim the present truth, also to raise up, qualify, and send forth more laborers into his vineyard; for truly the harvest is great but the laborers are few.
Yours hoping for immortality at the coming of the Lord.
P. S. THURSTON.
Marquette, Marquette Co., Wis., Aug. 30th, 1857.