Earlier text: THE LAST WORK OF THE TRUE CHURCH.Infidel Objections to the Bible Answered. No. 19.
Joseph was the son of Jacob.—And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called the Christ. Matt. i, 16. Joseph was not the son of Jacob, but of Heli.—And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being, (as was supposed) the son of Joseph which was the son of Heli. Luke iii, 23. LUKE traces the genealogy of Christ from Mary, Matthew from Joseph. But in Jewish genealogies, the names of females were never permitted to appear. Hence Luke instead of inserting the name of Mary, who was the daughter of Heli, inserts, according to the custom in such cases, the husband of Mary, which was Joseph, calling him the son of Heli, whereas he was only his son-in-law. Concerning the apparent discrepancies between Matthew's and Luke's record of the genealogy of Christ, Dr. Clarke offers the following clear and satisfactory suggestions and explanations. Perhaps few questions have occasioned more trouble and perplexity to the learned, than that which concerns the genealogy of our blessed Lord, as it is given by the evangelists, St. Matthew and St. Luke. The tables found in these writers are extremely different, or, as some think, contradictory. In later times, the difficulty has certainly excited much discussion; but it is worthy of remark that, while the archives of the Jews remained entire, the accuracy of the evangelists was never called in question. Hence it follows, either that some corruptions have since that time crept into the text, or that the true method of reconciling the seeming inconsistencies, was then better understood. The silence of the enemies of the Gospel, both Heathen and Jewish, during even the first century, is itself a sufficient proof, that neither inconsistency nor corruption could be then alleged against this part of the evangelical history. If a charge of this nature could have been supported, it unquestionably would have been made. The Jews and Heathens, who agreed in their hostility to the religion of Christ, were equally interested in this subject; and could they have proved that a single flaw existed in these genealogical tables, they might at once have set aside the pretensions of our Lord and his disciples; for, if the lineal descent of Jesus from David were not indisputable, he could not possess the character essential to the Messiah, nor any right to the Jewish throne. If his title, in this respect, were even questionable, it is impossible to suppose that the Jews would have withheld an allegation which must fully vindicate them in denying his Messiahship, and in putting him to death as an impostor. We may confidently assert, therefore, that his regular lineal descent from David could not be disproved, since it was not even disputed, at a time when alone it could have been done successfully, and by those persons who were so deeply interested in the event. The sincere believer may consequently be assured that whatever difficulties appear at present had formerly no existence, and are even now of such a nature as cannot be allowed to shake the faith of any reasonable man. I would not, however, be understood to intimate that these difficulties are now insuperable; on the contrary, I am satisfied that the real difficulties are few, and that these have, for the most part, been satisfactorily explained by most of the evangelical harmonists. Much learned labor has been used to reconcile this genealogy with that in St. Matthew, Chap. i, and there are several ways of doing it; the following, which appears to me to be the best, is also the most simple and easy. Matthew, in descending from Abraham to Joseph, the spouse of the blessed virgin, speaks of sons properly such, by way of natural generation: Abraham begat Isaac, and Isaac begat Jacob, &c. But Luke, in ascending from the Saviour of the world to God himself, speaks of sons either properly or improperly such: on this account, he uses an indeterminate mode of expression, which may be applied to sons either putatively or really such. And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being, as was supposed, the son of Joseph—of Heli—of Matthath, &c. That St. Luke does not always speak of sons properly such, is evident from the first and last person which he names: Jesus Christ was only the supposed son of Joseph, because Joseph was the husband of his mother Mary: and Adam, who is said to be the son of God, was such only by creation. After this observation it is next necessary to consider, that, in the genealogy described by St. Luke, there are two sons, improperly such: i. e. two sons-in-law, instead of two sons. As the Hebrews never permitted women to enter into their genealogical tables, whenever a family happened to end with a daughter, instead of naming her in the genealogy, they inserted her husband, as the son of him who was, in reality, but his father-in-law. This import, bishop Pearce has fully shown, νομιζεσθαι bears, in a variety of places—Jesus was considered according to law, or allowed custom, to be the son of Joseph, as he was of Heli. The two sons-in-law who are to be noticed in this genealogy, are Joseph the son-in-law of Heli, whose own father was Jacob, Matt. i, 16; and Salathiel, the son-in-law of Neri, whose own father was Jechonias: 1 Chron. iii, 17, and Matt. i, 12. This remark alone is sufficient to remove every difficulty. Thus it appears that Joseph, son of Jacob, according to St. Matthew, was son-in-law of Heli, according to St. Luke. And Salathiel, son of Jechonias, according to the former, was son-in-law of Neri, according to the latter. Mary therefore appears to have been the daughter of Heli, so called by abbreviation for Heliachim, which is the same in Hebrew with Joachim. Joseph, son of Jacob, and Mary, daughter of Heli, were of the same family: both came from Zorobabel; Joseph from Abiud, his eldest son, Matt. i, 13, and Mary by Rhesa, the youngest. See ver. 27. Salathiel and Zorobabel, from whom St. Matthew and St. Luke cause Christ to proceed, were themselves descended from Solomon in a direct line; and though St. Luke says that Salathiel was son of Neri, who was descended from Nathan, Solomon's eldest brother, 1 Chron. iii, 5, this is only to be understood of his having espoused Nathan's daughter, and that Neri dying, probably, without male issue, the two branches of the family of David, that of Nathan and that of Solomon, were both united in the person of Zerubbabel, by the marriage of Salathiel, chief of the regal family of Solomon, with the daughter of Neri, chief and heiress of the family of Nathan. Thus it appears that Jesus, son of Mary, reunited in himself all the blood, privileges, and rights of the whole family of David; in consequence of which he is emphatically called, The son of David. It is worthy of being remarked that St. Matthew, who wrote principally for the Jews, extends his genealogy to Abraham, through whom the promise of the Messiah was given to the Jews; but St. Luke, who wrote his history for the instruction of the Gentiles, extends his genealogy to Adam, to whom the promise of the Redeemer was given in behalf of himself and of all his posterity. God’s Anger: When is it Manifested?
“God judgeth the righteous, and God is angry with the wicked every day.
If he turn not, he will whet his sword; he hath bent his bow, and made it ready.” Psa. vii, 11, 12. It is true God is a judge as well as a Father, a ruler as well as a Saviour. It is true that He loves righteousness and hates wickedness; but while he abhors sin, he still loves and pities sinners. And he who would rightly testify the gospel of the grace of God, must truly tell the story of the tender bearing of the heavenly Father toward the lost and ruined sons of men, lest he repel those he ought to win, and discourage those whom he should seek to save. “But does not the Bible say that ‘God is angry with the wicked every day?’ And has not this word of God been the warrant for, and substance of, the most thrilling sermons and the most terrible appeals? Does not the Bible say this?” Our answer is Yes, and No! That is, King James’ Bible says, ‘God is angry with the wicked every day,’ but God’s Bible says no such thing. The well-instructed reader of the Scriptures need not be informed that wherever words in the common English Bible are printed in italic letters, it is to indicate that there are no corresponding words in the original Hebrew or Greek;—the italic words being added by the translators to supply something which they deemed needful to complete the sense. Now in this passage, Psalm vii, 11, the whole phrase, ‘With the wicked,’ is in italic letters, and is not found in the Hebrew Bible at all. Says Dr. Adam Clarke, “The Hebrew for this sentence, . . . according to the points, is, ‘And God is angry every day.’” Hence John Fry translates it, “Elohim is a righteous judge, yea, Elohim is angry from day to day.” J. Clowes renders it, “God is a just judge, and God is indignant every day.” And Benjamin Weiss translates it: “God is a righteous judge, and God is angry every day.” Such are some of the versions from the Hebrew, as it is pointed in the current editions of the Bible. Now, having settled that “God is angry every day,” of course the inquiry might arise, what, or whom, could he be angry with? Whom, but the wicked? thought the Jews who made the old Chaldee Paraphrase; and they added this to the text accordingly. And, says Dr. A. Clarke, “Our translation seems to have been borrowed from the CHALDEE, where the whole verse is as follows, ‘God is a righteous judge; and in strength he is angry against the wicked every day.’” Says Dr. J. M. Good, “The translators, not obtaining a satisfactory sense . . . have thought it necessary to interpolate, ‘With the wicked,’ for which the Hebrew text gives no authority whatever. And hence, while without it we get no good sense, this is a mere paraphrase destitute of any support.” The whole, then, of this tremendous addition to the word of God, so contrary to the spirit of the gospel, and so opposed to the constant tenor of divine revelation, rests simply and solely upon the paraphrase of some ancient Jew, who gives no evidence of being acquainted with the Lord Jesus Christ or the gospel of his grace, but whose unwarranted interference, adopted and incorporated by the translators among the words of inspiration, has cast a shadow over the character of the Heavenly Father, and perhaps done more to repel men from seeking his face than any other error that could be named. Some English translators, however, give a different turn to the passage, as John Jebb, who renders it thus: “God is a righteous judge, and God is provoked every day.” And this is nearly the sense of the Prayer Book Version: “God is a righteous judge, strong and patient, and God is provoked every day.” Bp. Coverdale also renders it: “God is a righteous judge, and God is ever threatening.” But these versions do not seem to fully present the meaning of the sacred word. Dr. Clarke, after quoting several translations, says: “I have judged it of consequence to trace this verse through all the ancient Versions in order to be able to ascertain what is the true reading, where the evidence on one side amounts to a positive affirmation, God is angry every day; and on the other side to as positive a negation, He is NOT angry every day. The mass of evidence supports the latter reading. The CHALDEE first corrupted the Text by making the addition, with the wicked, which our translators have followed; though they have put the words in italics, as not being in the Hebrew Text. In the MSS. collated by Kennicott and De Rossi there is no various reading on this Text.
“‘The true sense may be restored thus:—el with the vowel point tsere signifies God:—al, the same letters with the point patha, signifies not. Several of the versions have read it in this way: ‘God judgeth the righteous and is NOT angry every day.’ He is not always chiding, nor is he always punishing, notwithstanding the continual wickedness of men.’
“In substantial accordance with this view, Dr. Clarke translates the passage as follows, from the ancient versions: THE VULGATE:—‘God is a Judge, righteous, strong and patient;—will he be angry every day?’ THE SEPTUAGINT:—‘God is a righteous judge, strong and long-suffering; not bringing forth his anger every day.’ SYRIAC:—‘God is the judge of301 righteousness; he is not angry every day.’ THE ETHIOPIC:—‘God is a just judge, and strong and long-suffering; he will not bring forth tribulation daily.’ THE ARABIC:—‘God is a righteous judge strong and long-suffering; not bringing forth his anger every day.’” To these may be added the DOUAY or Catholic version of the Vulgate:—“God is a just judge, strong and patient: is he angry every day?” Brenton’s translation of the Septuagint reads:—“God is a righteous judge, strong and patient, and not inflicting vengeance every day.” Charles Thomson renders it:—“God who is a judge just and powerful, (though he is long-suffering, and doth not execute vengeance every day) will, unless you turn back, sharpen his sword.” Bishop Horsely translates:—“God is a righteous judge, although he is not angry every day; if the man will not turn, he will whet his sword:” i. e., “his anger is not breaking forth upon every occasion, yet the season of judgment will surely come.” Granville Sharpe renders it:—“God judgeth the righteous and is not angry every day.” And Dr. John Mason Good gives it thus:— “My defence is in God
Who delivereth the upright in heart;
A God of righteous judgment.
Though he taketh not vengeance every day,
If the man retract not, he will whet his sword.
He hath stretched out his bow and made it ready,
And fitted it to his weapon of destruction:
He will deal out his arrows red-hot.” Such are the proofs of this sad instance of darkening counsel “by words without knowledge,” through unwarranted additions to the words of God which are as pure as silver refined in a furnace. And how fitly does this passage, when understood, illustrate the character of the heavenly Father. God is NOT “angry with the wicked every day.” No! King James’s Bible may say that, but God’s Bible never does. The Hebrew Bible, the Greek Bible, the Latin Bible, the Syriac Bible, the Arabic Bible, the Ethiopic Bible, say no such thing. God is not angry with the wicked,—he is not angry every day. Grieved at his heart by the perverseness of those whom he has loved with an unfathomable affection, he still proclaims himself “The LORD, the LORD God, merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty.” Of him the Prophet testifies: “The Lord is slow to anger, and great in power, and will not at all acquit the wicked.” “His anger endureth but for a moment: in his favor is life.” “His mercy endureth forever.” “God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved; for God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” “God is love.” “We love him because he first loved us.” Such are a few of the numerous scriptures which tell us of the pitying love of God to fallen men. And it was this love that Jesus manifested when he healed the sick, cast out demons, forgave sins, bound up broken hearts, received sinners, was kind to the evil and the unthankful, comforted all that mourned, wept over Jerusalem that rejected him, endured the cross and despised the shame for his enemies, saved the penitent malefactor by his side, prayed for the men that pierced and slew him, died, the just for the unjust, rose again for our justification, sent the first tidings of his resurrection to the man who had denied him with oaths and curses, had the disciples begin their proclamation of free pardon in the city where men clamored for his blood like beasts of prey, and to them who nailed him to the cross, converted the persecuting Saul, to make him a chosen vessel of mercy, and to manifest all his long-suffering in him, and finally has for eighteen hundred years kept open door to the meanest, the lowest, and the vilest of his friends and foes, and has never cast out a trembling sinner that has come to seek his face. It is true that God is a governor as well as a Father. It is true that Christ is not only a Saviour, but is also an appointed Judge. But the time of judgment has not arrived, nor will it “until the Lord come, who shall both bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and manifest the counsels of the hearts.” Now is the day of grace, of mercy, of salvation; judgment is yet “to come.”—The Christian. Tell me the meaning of Scriptures. One gem from that ocean is worth all the pebbles of earthly streams.—M'Cheyne. REPORT FROM BRO. STRONG.
By P. Strong
Sept. 24th, after having a hard time with the dumb ague, I went to Bro. Nelson’s, where I spent the rest of the week taking baths and resting for the coming Sabbath. Friday the 27th, I preached the funeral discourse of Bro. William Nelson’s youngest child, and in the evening held a meeting with the brethren in Ithaca. Spent Sabbath and first-day with them. Found them united and trying to overcome; still there is a great work for them to do in the reform. Oh! that all may move out understandingly is our prayer. Oct. 1 and 2, held meetings in the Wright district, five miles northwest of Alma. Found a few scattered brethren holding on to the Sabbath. They were much encouraged and wished me to stay longer. There are enough here to form quite a little church if they would get into a working position. But we would say to them, Cast away your idols, press together, live out the truth, and Heaven is yours. Sabbath eve, Oct. 4, once more at Alma. The blessing of the Lord rested down upon us while trying to show that Christ is our peace. Eph. ii, 14. Sabbath morning, preached on the necessity of prayer, and it was followed by a covenant meeting, in which most took part. A deep spirit of confession was manifested in many, while others who have long lived in neglect, are still determined to stand in the way. We then went to the water where four willing subjects were buried with their Lord. Meeting again in the evening. First-day morning, preached on the necessity of having the whole armor on, which was followed by a business meeting, in which Bro. Nelson (the Elder) tried to point out the necessity of all bearing the cross at all times and also to effect a reconciliation in some who feel like standing on their dignity, being hurt by a reproof from Elder W., not taking into consideration Paul’s testimony, “Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruits of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.” Heb. xii, 11. Yet hearty confessions were made by others, and we hope the good work will go on. After the business meeting closed we were again called to the water’s edge, where three more showed their faith in a risen Lord by following him in baptism. Sunday evening I tried to point out the signs of the times as recorded in Matthew xxiv, to a full house of attentive listeners. Many are waked up, and I hope that the work will go on till the dark cloud which has been brought on them by disobedience will be moved away. I now leave this place till the Quarterly Meeting the first of next month. Oct. 7 to 11, I spent in visiting and study. Oct. 12 and 13, held meetings at Ithaca. In covenant meeting most of them took a lively interest. Held a business meeting on first-day in which the good of the cause was taken into consideration. This closes our meetings in this county for the present. We came here in company with Bro. and Sr. White, a stranger to all. Have formed many happy acquaintances and enjoyed some excellent meetings for which we feel grateful. We trust also that our labor has not been in vain. Five new ones have united with the church and fifteen been baptized. Many are moving out on the reform, still there is great need of consecration to the truth. We leave, with many thanks to kind brethren for their care toward us, and hope to see them in the overcoming work, at the quarterly gathering, and on Mount Zion, saved with the redeemed host. MEETINGS IN CENTRAL DISTRICT, MICH.
By Joseph Bates
According to previous appointment I met with the church and people at Newton, Sabbath and first-day, Sept. 20–23. Bro. Byington was at home and united with us in holding five meetings. The closing one on Sunday evening was very encouraging. Friends and neighbors seemed much interested to hear about Jesus and his soon coming. Bro. Byington took me to the rail road. I spent one day in Marshall, visiting two families of Sabbath-keepers. The 24th and 25th, I visited the church in Convis and held two interesting meetings with them. The 28th and 29th, general meeting of the churches from Charlotte and Oneida with the church in Windsor. There was not so many in attendance at this Monthly and Quarterly Meeting as was expected, in consequence of sickness and other causes. Yet the meetings were free, strengthening and encouraging, with the blessing of the Lord. Sept. 30 to Oct. 3d, I was with the church and people in Oneida. Visited and prayed with the families and held two interesting meetings with them. More than half the church live some distance from their place of worship; but we hope they will continue their extra efforts to meet together and encourage and strengthen themselves in the Lord. With Bro. and Sr. Newman I visited the sick near Eaton Rapids. From there they took me some twelve miles further to the Sabbath meeting with the church in Charlotte. Here on Sabbath and first-day we held three good meetings and celebrated the ordinances of the Lord’s house and were blessed of the Lord. Sunday and Monday evenings, Oct. 6 and 7, by request, I held meetings in East Walton near Bro. Lampson and Murray’s. The people seemed much in earnest to hear and it was remarked that the school-house would not hold them if the meetings were held another evening. Oct. 8, I visited the families of Sabbath keepers in Parma. Oct. 9, Bro. West took me from Marshall to Burlington. Here on Sabbath and first-day, we held five meetings and celebrated the ordinances. Meeting on Sunday evening was solemn and interesting. Oct. 15, came with Bro. and Sr. Miller to attend the series of meetings holding in Battle Creek which commenced the 11th inst. They were deeply interesting to all present. Came home the 18th. Sabbath, the 19th, enjoyed an interesting meeting with the church and people in Monterey. Praise the Lord. JOSEPH BATES. LABORS IN N. Y.
By S. B. Whitney
Although I have not reported during the last quarter, yet I have not been idle. July 13 and 14, I attended the Quarterly Meeting in Bangor. The 20th, met with the brethren in the Thompson neighborhood, and the 27th, with the church at Norfolk. Aug. 3d, was with the brethren in Genoa, and the 4th, commenced a course of lectures in a school-house near Bro. Lane’s, continuing until Sept. 22d. This is a thriving, farming community, composed very generally of intelligent and well-informed inhabitants; and though the congregations have not been large, yet they have been very steady and attentive, and the result has been good. My plan of labor has been to hold meetings each alternate evening during the week, commencing with first-day evening, and first-day A. M., making five meetings each week, aside from one Sabbath meeting, and in addition to this, to visit from house to house during the intervals; and although it was right in the hurry of harvest, the interest steadily increased till it became quite general, and continued to the close. After trying this plan I am strongly of the opinion that it is the preferable one for such a community at this season of the year at least. Eight have fully decided to keep the Sabbath, and several others are upon the point of deciding, while others still are investigating. I obtained three subscribers for the Review and one for the Reformer. Left here the 23d to attend Conference, and am now again here, to follow up the good work and endeavor to bring those who are almost persuaded to the deciding point. My trust is in the God of Israel, after a humble and faithful discharge of duty on my part. Genoa, N. Y., Oct. 11, 1867. Historical Department.
By Wardle
Prophecy is History in Advance. ONE of the most striking events which have occurred in modern times, indicating the near approach of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, was the darkening of the sun over this continent, May 19th, 1780, with its following night of darkness, which has been demonstrated to have been entirely supernatural, or in other words, the sun became as dark as the shades of night, although the morning was clear and bright; and the night became as Egyptian darkness, by an act of the Divine Hand, as the moon was at the full, and therefore the darkness could not have been produced by an eclipse. God put his hand over the face of the sun, obscuring the light of day, and caused the moon to remain in darkness. This event, we, as believers in the immediate coming of Christ, have taken to be one of the strongest signs given by the Lord, in answer to the question, “What shall be the sign of thy coming?” finding what we have thought to be its fulfillment recorded upon the pages of history, its darkness claiming the attention of the Legislature of Connecticut, and with the words of Colonel Davenport, of Stamford, attached, when the darkness impressed that body that the day of judgment was at hand, he like a wise man, “wished to be found in the way of his duty,”—so said President Dwight, in the Connecticut Historical Collections. With a very limited exception, we, as Adventists, have taken the above event to be one of the foundation-stones of our hope of soon seeing our Redeemer in glory, and how sad have been our hearts, when we have heard and seen this position assailed, we fear not with the holiest of motives; but let this be as it may, it has done its work, it has shaken the faith of some, and like “hope deferred,” made many hearts sad. It is true some have Origenized this sign, and by spiritualizing a literal answer to a literal question, have made of the sign,—“darkening of the sun,”—a moral, not a physical event. This seems to us a strange thing indeed, when we read the word, and witness with what care and nice precision Jesus measures out the answers to the questions: “When shall these things be?”—the destruction of the City and Temple,—“What shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world,”—or age, for doubtless the disciples, into whose minds the Holy Ghost had put these questions, thought that when the City and Temple of Jewish worship were destroyed, the end of the age would come. We are met, then, on the question of this literal sign, by two classes of objectors to the use we make of it: the one spiritualizes it, as we think, into nothingness; and the other says, it has not taken place, because that which we take for the fulfillment of the sign, was done in a corner, quite outside the field of prophetic territory, and therefore cannot be what Jesus meant in the declaration, “the sun shall be darkened,”—in other words God was not at liberty to hang the sign of Jesus’ Coming again, where in his wisdom it pleased him. Even if he did impress the minds of the inhabitants, that the day of judgment was near at hand, “it would not be the sign intended, because it did not occur in sight of the dwellers upon the old Roman, Grecian, Medo-Persian, or Babylonian territory.” It is thought not to be sufficient that it did occur before the eyes of the Christians whose fathers and mothers fled from the old Roman territory, and from the spirit of the old persecutor; and I would ask, who were more fitting than they to receive the sign of the coming great Deliverer? Where would you have God show the sign of his Son’s second coming? Surely not in the land of the Turk, where the Koran is the guide book of the Mussulman, and Mohammed is his prophet, instead of Jesus. Certainly not over the benighted lands of Persia or Greece. Would you have the sign hung out over the seat of the beast,—where the inhabitants are denied the Lamp of Life, and the priests darken counsel with words without knowledge? All of these were too much steeped in iniquity and lost in heathenism to be affected by the darkening of the sun at noon-day. If not in any or all of these localities, and we reject the one over the land which has been the refuge of his people in these last days, where but in that land, and before the eyes of those who in their doings were to mark the end of the days of “that tribulation?” France then, the land above all others, as a part of the old Roman territory, was the most fitting place where the sun should be darkened, because God had seen fit to link her destiny with the ending of the 1260 days of tribulation; God (Mark xiii, 24) says, “In those days, after that tribulation,” the sun shall be darkened, &c., and as the event which occurred in France in 1793 [1798, Ed. Review] terminated those 1260 days of tribulation, we might reasonably look for the darkening of the sun in France, and find it recorded in connection with these great events which terminated the power of the little horn of Daniel 7th chapter. We find France, then, who has been and is still figuring so largely in the events of these last days,—she who is not outside of the prophetic territory,—has had that great physical sign, “the sun darkened, in those days, after that tribulation,” producing the same effect upon their minds (only to a greater degree, if we can judge from the record) that was produced upon the minds of the people in New England in 1780. But to the record, that it may speak for itself, and cheer the hearts of the waiting ones:— Says the writer of the article on the French Revolution, in the Encyclopædia, First American edition, Philadelphia, 1798,—“We cannot here avoid mentioning a physical event, which assisted not a little in producing many of the convulsions attending the revolution, a general scarcity of grain, which occurred about that period. On Sunday the 13th, of July, 1788, about nine in the morning, without any eclipse, a dreadful darkness suddenly overspread several parts of France. It was the prelude of such a tempest as is unexampled in the temperate climates of Europe. Wind, rain, hail and thunder, seemed to contend in impetuosity; but the hail was the great instrument of ruin. Instead of the rich prospects of an early autumn, the face of nature in the space of an hour presented the dreary aspect of universal winter. The soil was converted into a morass, the standing corn beaten into the quagmire, the vines broken to pieces, the fruit-trees demolished, and unmelted hail lying in heaps like rocks of solid ice. Even the robust forest trees were unable to withstand the fury of the tempest. The hail was composed of enormous, solid, and angular pieces of ice, some of them weighing from eight to ten ounces. The country people, beaten down in the fields on their way to church, amidst this concussion of the elements, concluded that the last day was arrived; and scarcely attempting to extricate themselves, lay despairing and half suffocated amidst the water and the mud, expecting the immediate dissolution of all things. The storm was irregular in its devastation. While several rich districts were laid entirely waste, some intermediate portions of country were comparatively little injured. One of sixty square leagues had not a single ear of corn or a fruit tree of any kind left. Of the sixty-six parishes in the district of Pontoise, forty-three were entirely desolated, and of the remaining twenty-three, some lost two-thirds and others half their harvest. The Isle of France, being the district in which Paris is situated, and the Orleannois, appear to have suffered chiefly. The damage there, upon a moderate estimate, amounted to 80,000,000 of livres, or between three and four millions sterling. Such a calamity must at any period have been felt; but occurring on the eve of a great political revolution, and amidst a general scarcity throughout Europe, it was peculiarly unfortunate, and gave more embarrassment to the government than perhaps any other event whatever. Numbers of families found it necessary to contract their mode of living for a time, and to dismiss their servants, who were thus left destitute of bread. Added to the public discontent and political dissensions, it produced such an effect upon the people in general, that the nation seemed to have changed its character; and instead of that levity by which it had ever been distinguished, a settled gloom now seemed fixed on every countenance.” The above historical account, which I have copied, verbatim, seems to grasp and embrace all that is intended by the language as recorded by the Evangelists. Matthew says, “Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened;” Mark says, “In those days after that tribulation the sun shall be darkened;” whilst Luke, alluding to the very same event as a sign of the Saviour’s coming, gives a wider range to the effects that would be produced at, or near the time of the darkening of the sun, saying “There shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars, and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.”—Luke xxi, 25, 26. Thus has God’s word in several ways linked the darkness of the sun with the ending of the period of tribulation. * I fear that we as believers in the speedy coming of our Lord do not cling to the signs given by the Lord to mark his return, hence many do not lift up their heads, and so fail to know that their redemption draweth nigh. Better believe a little too much in the right direction, and be led to holy living than fail of the grace of God and become cast away.—Wardle in Advent Herald. To forward the favorable reception of such tunes, two facts as to their original intention must be practically borne in mind. They were sung faster than we usually sing them, and, what is better, by a far greater number of voices. It is a great mistake to suppose that old tunes should be sung in a heavy, drawling style. Our forefathers in the church were cheerful Christians. A psalm of a dozen verses was but short to them. Hence, as well as from other circumstances, it is clear that they sang in a quicker and livelier manner than is commonly conjectured. The tune “Old Hundred” is made a dirge in our days, but in theirs it was a joyous and animating canticle. In like manner “York” tune, which is shelved among the dull and obsolete, was, little more than a century ago, the liveliest and most popular tune in the entire kingdom. But to hear old tunes to advantage, they must be sung in old style; not only must they be sung with decent gravity and cheerful sanctity, but by masses of people, by a multitude of voices, “by all the people together,” as the original directions state. Six thousand voices were wont to be heard at St. Paul’s Cross. “Three or four thousand singing at a time in a church in this city is but a trifle,” said the excellent Roger Ascham, in a letter from Augsburg, dated the 14th of May, 1551. A correspondent of the New York Observer, describing the worship at All Saints’ Church, Margaret street, London, says: “I must express my delight with the singing of the hymns at this service. The words were evangelical and very sweet. The tunes were familiar, and the time was so rapid and inspiring that I was fascinated. They sang six or eight verses, and I wished there had been twenty-six. There were no interludes. The organ was heard only as an accompaniment. I think we have much to learn about sacred song. We kill all the elasticity of our songs by a drawling style of singing. “In many of our churches the hymn is an infliction, whereas it should be a refreshment and a joy. The organist must show off his skill, and the slow movement of the song sometimes makes one yawn. A capital reform will be accomplished when we suppress the interludes, or limit them to ten seconds, and then rouse ourselves to rapid, cheerful songs of praise. Mr. Spurgeon’s congregation did not sing fast enough to satisfy him the Sabbath I was there, and he begged them to sing faster, a request which secured a great improvement in the next hymn. It is an interesting fact that the idea of more rapid singing is everywhere prevalent and growing in England, and that a few years promise to secure the greatest improvement in the spirit and pleasure of public praise.”