Earlier text: THE MISSION OF CHRISTTHE DEFINITE SEVENTH DAY;
By John Nevins Andrews
Or, God’s Measurement of Time on the Round World. Can a definite day be observed by all the inhabitants of the earth? This, of course, depends upon the proper answer to another question; viz., Is there such a thing as a definite day of the week, or month, or year, to the whole human family? If there is, all can observe it; if there is not, then chronology itself is thrown into confusion by the indefiniteness of dates which necessarily ensues. On what ground, then, is it asserted that the reckoning of a definite day by the whole family of man is an impossibility? STATEMENT OF THE DIFFICULTY.
Our world is a vast globe which makes a complete revolution upon its axis once every twenty-four hours. In consequence of this, it is night to a portion of its inhabitants while it is day to the other portion. The day is therefore twelve hours earlier on one side of the globe than it is upon the other. And unless we can fix some line, or point, or place, from which to begin the reckoning of the day, we are thrown into confusion as to the definite day. Moreover, those who circumnavigate the globe in one direction gain a day by the operation; while those who sail around it in the opposite direction lose a day. We cannot, indeed, actually gain a day, nor is it possible for us really to lose one. It would therefore be more correct for us to speak of adding a day to our reckoning, or of dropping a day from it, than to speak of a day as actually lost or gained. We drop a day in circumnavigating the globe from east to west. This is done by going with the sun, and thus prolonging the time that it remains above the horizon. By this means we make each of our days a fraction more than twenty-four hours long. And in the complete circuit of our globe, we thus use up one entire period of twenty-four hours. And we add a day to our reckoning by going round the world from west to east. For as we thus travel in a direction opposite to the sun, we make the period of sunlight each day a fraction less to ourselves than it would have been had we remained stationary. And so also of the night, which we shorten in the same manner. As we thus take a fraction from each period between the successive sunsets, we do, in the complete circuit of the globe, thus save one day as the sum total of these fractions, though we have had no more real time than those who remained at home, whose reckoning is one day less than ours. Or to state it in another form: If we travel in the same direction with the motion of the earth, we gain one revolution of the sun by going ourselves one time more around the earth’s axis than do those who, during the same time, remain in their own land. And, again, if we travel in the direction opposite to the motion of the earth, i. e., if we go as the sun appears to go, from east to west, we actually make one revolution around the earth’s axis less than do those who remain at home. For as we travel against the motion of the earth, our circuit of the globe offsets one of the revolutions which the earth has made on its axis during this time. As a consequence, those who go round the world eastward are, when they arrive at their starting point, one day in advance of the reckoning of those who live in the country from which they started. And those who go around it in a westerly direction come out one day behind the reckoning of their own country. The number of those who actually accomplish the circuit of the globe is, comparatively speaking, very small. But these are not the only ones whose case presents a problem for solution. The people of Eastern Asia are one day in advance of the people of California. In Alaska they have a reckoning of time one day in advance of ours. And such was the case with the inhabitants of Pitcairn’s Island in the South Pacific, lying in the longitude of the west side of British America. These people brought their reckoning eastward from the coast of Asia, and thus, when visited by sailors who came westward from England, their time was one day in advance of the reckoning of those sailors. And, finally, the island of Australia, which lies south of the continent of Asia, gives occasion for a consideration of this question of the proper reckoning of the week. For if it conform in its reckoning of the week to that of the people of Eastern Asia, who are directly to the north of it, its time will be one day in advance of those who go to it across the Pacific Ocean from the west coast of America. WHAT MANY PERSONS CONCLUDE FROM THIS.
These considerations are supposed to prove that the observance of the definite seventh day is impossible, and that the fourth commandment requires, not the seventh day, but the seventh part of time. But before adopting a conclusion which compels us to deny some of the plainest statements of the Bible, let us see whether any such necessity exists. EXAMINATION OF THE FACTS IN THE CASE.
To make this examination, let us now see how many definite points we can fix by indisputable facts. 1. A day of twenty-four hours is made up of an evening and a morning; i. e., of darkness and light, or of night and day. 2. The sun, by God’s appointment, rules the day. Gen. 1: 16. 4. The setting and the rising of the sun are caused by the revolution of the earth upon its axis once in twenty-four hours. 5. The earth turns from west to east, causing the sun to make the apparent circuit of the globe from east to west. 6. Thus, by divine arrangement, the course of day around our globe is from the east to the west; for it is thus that darkness and light follow each other around the world. For as the day begins with sunset, it cannot begin all around the world at once. And again, as the commencement of day must follow in the track of sunset around the world, it does certainly always go westward, and never eastward. 7. The day must therefore begin in the east. But where on our round earth is the east? The Old World, Europe, Asia, and Africa, is no more east of the New World, North and South America, than is the New World east of the Old. 8. But we must give to the Old World the precedence, and accept it as the Eastern Continent. For it is a matter of fact that each day begins as far east as the eastern coast of Asia, and comes thence westward to America, and that it does not begin in America and go thence to Asia. And it is certain that this order is right; for mankind originated in Asia, and from thence the New World was peopled. The first sunset in creation week was at that point farthest east at which the light of the sun could be first seen. This is certainly true, and it is of special interest in this case. For if the course of the sun in its westward journey is to rule the day, that rule should begin from the most eastern point at which its light could be seen. That point presented it to the most eastern observer, had men then existed, as just disappearing in the west. And at that very point, the fourth day of creation commenced. And sunset, which has ever since marked the beginning of the twenty-four-hour day, has followed on from that point in a never-ceasing circuit, divided into separate periods by passing that point from which it first started, which thus marks the commencement of the course of each day. 9. But no argument from the commonly-supposed location of Eden within the bounds of the present Turkish Empire can be admitted as sufficient to establish the beginning of the course of day to be in the western part of Asia. For it is certain that the geography of the antediluvian world cannot be identified with that of the world since the flood. The four rivers which were parted from one near the site of paradise cannot embrace in their number the Euphrates of the present earth, though one of those rivers did bear that name. Indeed, it is of no consequence to this argument whether paradise was in Western Asia or further east; for there is a manifest unfitness in locating this line through the Garden of Eden. We have, therefore, nothing to do with the establishment of an imaginary line from north to south through the heart of the Eastern Continent, on the west side of which the day should begin, and twenty-four hours later come round the world to those just across it on the eastern side. The wisdom of God has not involved the human family in such confusion as would be inevitable were this the case. 10. It is certain, as we have seen, that each day travels westward round the world, and also that it comes to us from Asia. But there must be some line, or barrier, or natural division, whence the course of day begins; for if there be not, all reckoning of time is thrown into confusion. Were there no starting point to the course of day, we should only need to journey east in order to ascertain that day begins in China twelve hours earlier than with us; and to journey thence eastward to our own country to prove that we are twelve hours in advance of the time in China. Such confusion and contradiction, however, does not exist; a sufficient proof in itself that the course of day does actually have a commencement and termination of its circuit of our globe. 11. There is a point from which each day of the seven sets out on its circuit of the globe. Each of these days makes one circuit, and but one, during each weekly cycle. Each day is made up of sunset, twilight, evening, midnight, cock-crowing, daybreak, sunrise, morning, forenoon, midday, afternoon, and sun’s decline. It takes just twenty-four hours for each day, thus constituted, to pass any point in its circuit of the earth. And hence it is evident that the commencement of each day completes the compass of our earth twenty-four hours before the end of that same day of the week accomplishes the same journey. 12. Moreover, when sunset, which is the commencement of each day, has come round to the point where the circuit of the day is accomplished, it does not tarry for the other parts of the day to come up that they may all cross the line together; but without one moment’s delay it passes the line which divides between the commencement and the end of that circuit, and beginning a new day it leaves the other divisions one by one to do their part in filling out the old day east of the line, which stands in the count of days one day behind the day which commences on the west of that line. And as these different divisions of the day fill out their time, they severally pass that line, and by that very act become corresponding parts of a new day in the cycle of the week. 13. The reckoning of time at the commencement of the course of day must therefore be twenty-four hours in advance of its computation where that course ends. Those, therefore, who cross this line from east to west, or from west to east, have to recognize this fact by dropping one day from their computation, or by adding one day to it. 14. It is a remarkable fact that this line of transition or division between the beginning and the termination of the course of day is found in crossing the Pacific Ocean. For we may start from California and proceed eastward to the eastern coast of Asia, and we shall at every meridian we cross be in perfect harmony, as to our count of the days, with all the people living upon that meridian; and when we reach China we shall have exactly the same count of days that they have in China. Again, if we start from China and reverse this journey, making our way westward to San Francisco, our days will correspond exactly to those of the countries we cross; and when we reach that city we shall have the same day that the people of that place have. This journey takes us fully two-thirds around the world, yet does not change our count of the days of the week. But take notice: If we cross the Pacific Ocean, either westward to China, or eastward from China to California, we find in the one case that we are one day behind the people of China; and in the other case that we are one day in advance of the people of California. And this is because of the well-known fact that the west shore of the Pacific Ocean is one day in advance of the time on the east shore of that ocean. 15. The dividing line between the commencement and the end of the course of day in its circuit round the world is, therefore, somewhere in the Pacific Ocean. Now let us put together several facts. (1.) The day comes westward from Asia. (2.) It may be traced back eastward from America to the farthest verge of Asia on the west side of Behring’s Straits, and no change takes place in the count of the day. (3.) It is manifestly impracticable to establish upon the land a line west of which the day is twenty-four hours in advance of that upon the east side of that line. And, therefore, as the day comes to the American continent westward from Asia, we must in our count follow the course of day westward to the confines of America at the east side of Behring’s Straits. (4.) And so of Asia: We must trace back the commencement of the course of day to the eastern verge of Asia, on the west of Behring’s Straits. (5.) And now observe, the commencement and the termination of the course of day are brought near together. And observe further this remarkable fact, that a line drawn from north to south through Behring’s Straits touches no body of land unless possibly some very minute islands in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. And it is worthy of special notice that no such line can be drawn through any other body of water upon the globe. 16. It is true that the people of Alaska, having come to that country eastward from Asia, across Behring’s Straits, have brought with them the numbering of the days which they had in Asia, making it correspond exactly to that on the other side of the Pacific, and causing, so far as their action can do it, that the day should commence the circuit of the globe from the west side of America. This is a manifest error; for the day comes in the divine order with the sun from Asia, and the American continent receiving the day in this manner, its extreme western verge should mark the end of the circuit of day, and not the beginning of that circuit. The people of Alaska stand one day ahead in their count, holding the same relation to our count of the days that the people of China do to that of those who go thither westward from America. The day which we carry to Alaska as the seventh, the Alaskans call the first day of the week. Let them change the numbering of the days, as they manifestly should, and let them observe as the Sabbath of the Lord the day they now keep; for it is really such. The Importance of Secret Prayer
God is often lost in prayer and ordinances. “Enter into thy closet,” said he, “and shut thy door about thee.” “Shut thy door about thee,” means much; it means shut out not only frivolity but business, not only company abroad but company at home. Let God have an opportunity to speak to thee in a still small voice, or he will speak in thunder. Thoughts on the Book of Daniel.
VERSE 24. Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the Most Holy. Such are the first words the angel utters to Daniel, toward imparting to him that instruction which he came to give. Why does he thus abruptly introduce a period of time? We must again refer to the vision of chapter 8. We have seen that Daniel at the close of that chapter says that he did not understand the vision. Some portions of that vision were at the time very clearly explained. It could not have been these portions which he did not understand. We therefore inquire what it was which Daniel did not understand, or, in other words, what part of the vision was there left unexplained. In that vision four prominent things are brought to view. 1. The Ram. 2. The He-goat. 3. The Little Horn. 4. The period of the 2300 days. The symbols of the ram, he-goat, and little horn, were explained. Nothing, however, was said respecting the time. This must therefore have been the point which he did not understand. And as without this the other portions of the vision were of no avail, he could well say, while the application of this period was left in obscurity, that he did not understand the vision. If this view of the subject is correct, we should naturally expect, when the angel completed his explanation of the vision, that he would commence with the very point which had been omitted, namely, the time. And this we find to be true in fact. After citing Daniel's attention in the most direct and emphatic manner, back to the former vision, and assuring him that he had now come forth to give him understanding in the matter, he commences upon the very point there omitted, and says, “Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city.” But how does this language show any connection with the 2300 days, or throw any light upon that period? We answer, The language cannot be intelligibly referred to anything else; for determined signifies “cut off,” and there is no period from which the seventy weeks could be cut off, but the 2300 days of the previous vision. How direct and natural, then, is the connection. Daniel's attention is fixed upon the 2300 days, which he did not understand, by the angel's directing him to the former vision; and he says, “Seventy weeks are cut off.” Cut off from what? The 2300 days most assuredly. Proof may be called for that the word determined signifies to cut off. An abundance can be given. The Hebrew word rendered, determined, is nechtak. This word Gesenius, in his Hebrew Lexicon, defines as follows: “Properly, to cut off; typically, to divide; and so to determine, to decree.” In the Chaldeo-Rabbinic Dictionary of Stockius, the word nechtak is thus defined: Scidit, abscidit, conscidit, incidit, excidit—to cut, to cut away, to cut in pieces, to cut or engrave, to cut off.” Mercerus in his “Thesaurus,” furnishes a specimen of Rabbinical usage in the phrase, chatikah shel basar—“a piece of flesh,” or “a cut of flesh.” He translates the word, as it occurs in Dan. 9: 24, by “præcisa est,” was cut off. In the literal version of Arias Montanus, it is translated “decisa est,” was cut off; in the marginal reading which is grammatically correct, it is rendered by the plural, “decisæ sunt,” were cut off. In the Latin version of Junius and Tremellius, nechtak (the passive of chatheak) is rendered “decisæ sunt,” were cut off. Again, in Theodotion's Greek version of Daniel (which is the version used in the Vatican copy of the Septuagint, as being the most faithful), it is rendered by sunetmethesan, “were cut off;” and in the Venetian copy by tetmentai, “have been cut.” The idea of cutting off, is pursued in the Vulgate, where the phrase is “abbreviatæ sunt,” have been shortened. “Thus Chaldaic and Rabbinical authority, and that of the earliest versions, the Septuagint and Vulgate, give the single signification of cutting off, to this verb.” Hengstenberg, who enters into a critical examination of the original text, says: “But the very use of the word, which does not elsewhere occur, while others, much more frequently used, were at hand, if Daniel had wished to express the idea of determination, and of which he has elsewhere, and even in this portion availed himself, seems to argue, that the word stands from regard to its original meaning, and represents the seventy weeks in contrast with a determination of time (en platei) as a period cut off from subsequent duration, and accurately limited.” Christology of the Old Testament, Vol. II, p. 301. Washington, 1839. Why, then, it may be asked, did our translators render the word, determined, when it so obviously means cut off? The answer is, They doubtless overlooked the connection between the eighth and ninth chapters, and considering it improper to render it cut off, when nothing was given from which the seventy weeks could be cut off, they gave the word its tropical instead of its literal meaning. But, as we have seen, both the construction and context require the literal meaning, and render any other inadmissible. Seventy weeks, then, or 490 days of the 2300, were cut off upon, or allotted to, Jerusalem and the Jews; and the events which were to be consummated within that period are briefly stated. The transgression was to be finished. That is the Jewish people were to fill up the cup of their iniquity; which they did in the rejection and crucifixion of Christ. An end of sins, or of sin offerings was to be made. This took place when the great offering was made on Calvary. Reconciliation for iniquity was to be provided. This was made by the sacrificial death of the Son of God. Everlasting righteousness was to be brought in, the righteousness which our Lord manifested in his sinless life. The vision and the prophecy were to be sealed up, or made sure. By the events given to transpire in the seventy weeks, the prophecy is tested. By this the application of the whole vision is determined. If the events of this period are accurately fulfilled, the prophecy is of God, and will all be accomplished; and if these seventy weeks are fulfilled as weeks of years, then the 2300 days, of which these are a part, are so many years. Thus the events of the seventy weeks furnish a key to the whole vision. And the most holy was to be anointed: the most holy of the heavenly sanctuary. In the examination of the sanctuary, on chapter 8: 14, we saw that a time came when the earthly sanctuary gave place to the heavenly, and the priestly ministration was transferred to that. Before the ministration in the sanctuary commenced, the sanctuary and all the holy vessels were to be anointed. Ex. 40: 9, 10. The last event, therefore, of the seventy weeks here brought to view is the anointing of the heavenly tabernacle, or the opening of the ministration there. Thus this first division of the 2300 days brings us to the commencement of the service in the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary, as the whole period brings us to the commencement of the service of the second. We now consider the argument conclusive that the ninth chapter of Daniel is connected with the eighth, and that the seventy weeks are a part of the 2300 days; and with a few extracts from the writings of others we will leave this point. The Advent Shield in 1844 said:— “We call attention to one fact which shows that there is a necessary ‘connection’ between the seventy weeks of the ninth chapter, and something else which precedes or follows it, called ‘the vision.’ It is found in the 24th verse: ‘Seventy weeks are determined, or cut off, upon thy people . . . to seal up the vision,’ &c. Now there are but two significations to the phrase ‘seal up.’ They are, first, ‘to make secret,’ and second, ‘to make sure.’ We care not now in which of these significations the phrase is supposed to be used. That is not the point now before us. Let the signification be what it may, it shows that the prediction of the seventy weeks necessarily relates to something else beyond itself, ‘called the vision,’ in reference to which it performs this work, ‘to seal up.’ To talk of its sealing up itself is as much of an absurdity as to suppose that Josephus was so much afraid of the Romans that he refrained from telling the world that he thought the fourth kingdom of Daniel was ‘the kingdom of the Greeks.’ It is no more proper to say that the ninth chapter of Daniel ‘is complete in itself,’ than it would be to say that a map which was designed to show the relation of Massachusetts to the United States, referred to nothing but Massachusetts. It is no more complete in itself than a bond given in security for a note, or some other document to which it refers, is complete in itself; and we doubt if there is a school-boy of fourteen years in the land, of ordinary capacity, who would not on reading the ninth chapter, with an understanding of the clause before us, decide that it referred to something distinct from itself, called the vision. What vision it is, there is no difficulty in determining. It naturally and obviously refers to the vision which was not fully explained to Daniel and to which Gabriel calls his attention in the preceding verse—the vision of the 8th chapter. Daniel tells us that Gabriel was commanded to make him understand that vision (8: 16). This was not fully done at that interview connected with the vision; he is therefore sent to give Daniel the needed ‘skill and understanding,’ to explain its ‘meaning,’ by communicating to him the prediction of the seventy weeks.” “We claim that the ninth of Daniel is an appendix to the eighth, and that the seventy weeks and the 2300 days or years commence together. Our opponents deny this.” Signs of the Times, 1843. “The grand principle involved in the interpretation of the 2300 days of Dan. 8: 14, is that the seventy weeks of Dan. 9: 24, are the first 490 days of the 2300 of the eighth chapter.” Advent Shield, p. 49. “If the connection between the seventy weeks of Dan. 8, does not exist, the whole system is shaken to its foundation; if it does exist, as we suppose, the system must stand.” Harmony of the Prophetic Chronology, p. 38. Says the learned Dr. Hales, in commenting upon the seventy weeks, “This chronological prophecy was evidently designed to explain the foregoing vision, especially in its chronological part of the 2300 days.”—Chronol., Vol. II., p. 517. U. S. The Sonship of Christ.
By D. M. GARDNER
The New Testament is properly called the gospel of Jesus Christ. It was written to teach us about him. Who then is Jesus Christ? It seems as though no question could be more plainly settled than this is in the New Testament, and yet there has been much dispute about it. I believe the Scriptures clearly teach that Jesus Christ is not a created being; neither is he the very and eternal God the Father, but he is truly and properly the divine Son of the only wise God, begotten of his own substance, and thus partaking of the nature and attributes of his Father. If we are asked how this could be, how God could really have begotten a Son of his own substance, we frankly confess that we cannot tell, any more than we can tell how God came to exist. These things are infinitely above our knowledge; but what the Bible plainly teaches we firmly believe whether we understand all the whys and wherefores about it or not. Inspiration declares that Jesus was God's own Son, and this we believe. “He that spared not his own Son.” Rom. 8: 32. Again, “He gave his only begotten Son.” John 3: 16. The book of Hebrews clearly sets forth Jesus Christ as the true Son of God, in the proper sense. The apostles after introducing him, first shows that he is higher than the prophets, by whom God had formerly spoken to his people. Heb. 1: 1. Next he shows that he is higher than the angels. Heb. 1: 4. Next he shows that he is higher even than that great prophet and law-giver, Moses. Chap. 3: 3. Next he exalts him above Aaron. Chap. 5. Then he shows how far superior he is to the Levitical priests, Chap. 7, and thus having shown Christ to be superior to all beings, he tells us who he is, viz., the Son of God. But all these others, Moses, and Aaron and the prophets and angels are also called sons of God; hence he must be God's Son in a higher sense than they are. Thus he says:— “God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in times past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds. Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high.” Heb. 1: 1–3. Jesus, then, is the one by whom the Father made the worlds. He is the express image of his Father's person. He possesses a higher nature, which is above that of all other beings, which he has obtained by inheritance. It was not simply given to him as an office, but he inherited his nature from his Father. Here we are glad to find both ancient and modern creeds in harmony with the Bible, as they all assert that Christ “is of one substance with the Father.” Some have claimed that Christ was a created being, but there is no scripture for this. Revelation 3: 14 is referred to as proof of that view, where Jesus is called the “beginning of the creation of God.” From this it is claimed that he was the first of all created beings, but yet was actually created. The Greek word here translated beginning is arche. Among its chief definitions as given by Greenfield is that of “head, author, efficient cause,” Rev. 1: 8; 3: 14. This we believe gives the proper sense of the passage. He is the head, or the author, of the creation of God, the one by whom he created all things; for this is so declared many times. Thus Paul says: “God who created all things by Jesus Christ.” Eph. 3: 9. Again, “By whom also he made the worlds.” Heb. 1: 2. That Jesus Christ is truly and properly the Son of God, is not only plainly taught in the New Testament, but it is the very burden of every book, from Matthew to Revelation, the same as the doctrine of one God is the burden of the Old Testament. We might epitomize the teachings of the Old Testament thus: There is but one true and living God, Jehovah. And the New Testament thus: Jesus Christ is the only Son of the one true God. Everywhere we turn, on every leaf, on every page, this doctrine stands out bold and prominent. It is asserted over and over on every occasion, in every conceivable manner. Let us notice a few of them. Even way back in the Old Testament, the prophet spoke of Jesus as God's Son. “I will declare the decree, the Lord has said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.” Ps. 2: 7. When the angel Gabriel came to Mary to announce his birth his very first introduction to the human family was as the Son of the Highest. “He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest; and the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee; therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.” Luke 1: 32, 35. Again, on the solemn occasion of his baptism, where directly from heaven the Father, with his own voice introduced him to the disciples, he announced him as his Son. “And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” Matt. 3: 17. Again, when the devils are made to cry out and to own his authority, they acknowledge him as the Son of God. “And devils also came out of many, crying out, and saying, Thou art Christ the Son of God. And he rebuking them suffered them not to speak; for they knew that he was Christ.” Luke 4: 41. Perhaps one of the most important and interesting conversations recorded in the New Testament was that of Christ with his disciples when he asked them what the people thought of him, what they called him. “Whom do men say that I, the Son of man, am? And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist; some Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Matt. 16: 13–16. Here Peter squarely acknowledges him as the Son of the living God. Now observe how much importance Christ attaches to this confession. Because Peter had thus unequivocally confessed his faith in this doctrine, viz., that Christ was the Son of the living God, Jesus said to him, “Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona; for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Verses 17, 18. It is upon this doctrine, then, that the church of Christ is built. It is the chief corner stone of the gospel. It is a doctrine which flesh and blood could never have revealed. It had to come by direct revelation from God. Upon this text Liddon truthfully remarks:— “If St. Peter had meant that Christ was the Son of God solely in virtue of his membership in the old Theocracy or by reason of his consummate moral glory, the confession would have involved nothing distinctive with respect to Jesus Christ, nothing that was not in a measure true of every good Jew, and that may not be true for every good Christian. If St. Peter had intended only to repeat another and a practically equivalent title of the Messiah, he would not have equalled the earlier confession of a Nathanael, or have surpassed the subsequent admission of a Caiaphas. If we are to construe his language thus, it is altogether impossible to conceive why ‘flesh and blood’ could not have ‘revealed’ to him so obvious and trivial an inference from his previous knowledge, or why either the apostle or his confession should have been solemnly designated as the selected Rock on which the Redeemer would build his imperishable church.”—Liddon's Bampton Lectures, Lecture 1, pp. 10, 11.325 Take another sublime event in the history of Jesus, his transfiguration on the mount with his three chosen apostles. It was given to them to confirm their faith in him; and here once more, the voice of the eternal Father was heard from heaven saying: “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.” Matt. 17: 5. Jesus himself ever claimed this relationship with the Father, and predicated his whole authority upon it. He says: “Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?” John 10: 36. Take again the testimony of John the Baptist, and it is very decisive upon this point. He was raised up and sent by the Father for the express purpose of bearing testimony of Jesus. What was his record? Just in harmony with all the rest. He says, “And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.” John 1: 34. And then John, the beloved apostle, who was more intimate with Christ than all the rest, and who was let into the secrets of his heart, when he came to write his gospel, he says emphatically that he wrote it for the express purpose of proving that Jesus was the Son of God. “But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.” John 20: 31. Take the remarkable conversion of the eunuch. After Philip had preached unto him Jesus, he requested to be baptized. Philip now requires of him a confession of his faith. This he was not slow to give in the following words: “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.” Acts 8: 37. Upon this confession Philip baptized him. - (Condensed from Review and Herald.)*
WELLSVILLE.—Of the meetings at this place, Brethren B. L. Whitney and M. H. Brown write: “We can still report progress here. As we anticipated, the work has moved slowly, but it is still moving. There are now between fifteen and twenty keeping the Sabbath as the result of our labor here, and others are deeply interested, who, we hope, will soon take their stand. The prayer-meetings are well attended three times each week, and we have public service Sabbath and Sunday. On Sunday last we organized a church here with twenty-seven members. There are others who will join soon, and we expect to see this number increased to forty by the time the new house is ready for dedication. We still desire the prayers of the brethren for the work here.” PARMA.—Brother S. B. Whitney came to this place September 27, and found the friends holding on and doing well, though they have had to meet terrible opposition. He remained with them over two Sabbaths, and left them much strengthened and encouraged. The opposition is wearing away some, and there are those who, it is hoped, will yet embrace the truth. HOWARD CITY.—October 12, Brother A. O. Burrill writes that the meetings at this place still continue, but are to close the following Sunday. Eighteen have commenced the observance of the Lord’s Sabbath. INDIANOLA.—Meetings closed here October 8. They had continued about seven weeks. The weather was favorable and the attendance good. There was only one Sabbath-keeper at this place when the meetings began. Twenty-seven new ones have signed the covenant, and hundreds are convinced. A hall has been rented in which to hold meetings. NORTH OTTER.—The meetings at this place have closed. Six covenanted together to keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus. They will maintain Sabbath meetings. KANKAKEE.—The little company of Sabbath-keepers at this place met at their usual place of worship October 6 and 7. The French brethren of St. Anne, Papineau, and those residing four or five miles south of Kankakee, met with them, some thirty-five or more altogether. Brother Bezon, of St. Anne, spoke to them in the French language. He seemed to have great freedom of speech, and many of the French brethren were moved to tears. The Spirit of God seemed to pervade the hearts of all present. GRIFFIN.—Elder C. O. Taylor has labored in and around Griffin nearly three weeks. He says: “The people expressed much anxiety to hear, coming three or four miles, and that when the nights were quite dark. Some opposition came up, just enough to cause the true-hearted more fully to identify themselves with us. I spoke three times to the colored people while here. They seemed much interested, and wanted to hear more.”