Earlier text: Churches and Spiritual ImpotencySECOND COMING OF CHRIST.
By J. B. Goodrich
WE are told by some that Christ's second coming took place at the destruction of Jerusalem, about A. D. 70. If that is a fact, then all the testimony given us by inspired men since that time should point us back to that event for the fulfillment of those prophecies bearing upon this subject. But what are the facts in the case? Exactly the reverse. John, while in tribulation, "in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God and for the testimony of Jesus Christ," speaks of the coming of Christ as an event still in the future. John wrote the Revelation A. D. 96; but the destruction of Jerusalem took place some twenty years before; therefore the destruction of Jerusalem could not be the second coming of Christ, of which John spoke. Rev. 1:7; 3:11; 14:4, and 22:12. Again, Paul warns the Thessalonian church against entertaining the idea that the day of Christ was at hand (2 Thess. 2:2), and then he says, "Let no man deceive you by any means." Deceive means "to lead into error; to cause to believe what is false, or disbelieve what is true; to impose upon; to delude; to ensnare; to entrap; to disappoint."—Webster. "For that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition." The man of sin is generally acknowledged by all Protestant churches to represent the Pope, standing at the head of the Romish Church, and corresponds to power described in Dan. 7:25, and Rev. 13:1-10, which arose, as noted in prophecy, in A. D. 538. Then the coming of Christ could not take place prior to that time, and Daniel said it should continue for a time, times, and the dividing of time, which is 1260 prophetic days. Each day for one year, 1260 years, brings us to A. D. 1798. So, according to Paul's instruction which he gave to his brethren, no one could expect the second coming of Christ till after 1798. The Lord by Paul says that Satan should work with all power, and signs, and lying wonders (2 Thess. 2:9, 10), which is now being fulfilled in modern Spiritualism, and is the last mentioned sign of Christ's coming, in the line of prophecy. For men to preach and advance the idea that Jesus came at the destruction of Jerusalem, or that he comes at death, or at conversion, is without any foundation in truth, and must be another gospel which Paul did not preach, and falls under his anathema in Gal. 1:8, 9. We cannot afford to be deceived. J. B. GOODRICH. Sorrow as Preparation for Life
By George Eliot
THIS sorrow which has cut down to the root—try to think of it, not as a spoiling of your life, but as a preparation for it.—George Eliot. Ministers Must Live What They Preach
By F. Whitfield
MINISTER of Christ, aim to live out of the pulpit what you have preached in it. If you preach Christ, live Christ. What men hear in the pulpit, let them see at the dinner table and the visit. If, notwithstanding your faithful, earnest preaching, you would not have the blood of souls to answer for when the Lord shall return, be watchful, prayerful, before you go into the pulpit, and when you come out of it. God keep us from the sin of saving a soul with one hand and destroying it with the other! Oh, the blood of souls! Who can estimate the fearful responsibility! Minister of Christ, "be thou an example of the believers, in word, in conversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity." 1 Tim. 4:12. Thus alone will souls be effectually won to Christ, and become thy "joy and crown of rejoicing" in the day of the Lord.—F. Whitfield. The Living Fountain in Christ
"WHOEVER is united with Christ has within his soul a living fountain from which to draw strength and grace sufficient for all emergencies. Words and deeds of righteousness flow from it and refresh the hearts of others, as well as the soul from whence it springs." AGAIN and again it is denied by Roman Catholic apologists that Bibles have been or are burned as an evidence of Roman Catholic hostility to the circulation of the Scriptures. Imagine what was the extent of the fury which raged against the Bible in the vernacular, when Romanism ruled the rulers of Europe, by this outburst which is thus recorded by the Madrid correspondent of the London Daily News and quoted in the Evening Post. He says that "the Liberal Government tries in vain to enforce the spirit of toleration among the authorities and subjects of his Most Catholic Majesty. Very recently in Biscay an agent of the Bible Society was attacked and insulted by twenty young Catholic students led by a Jesuit Father, who excited the lads to take possession of, tear up, and make a pious bonfire of, the Bibles, Testaments, and tracts. The Spanish judges, after carefully investigating the case, declined to send the offenders before the tribunal for the assault and the destruction of the property of the Foreign Bible Society. . . . "Whilst this treatment is meted out to foreigners and Protestants, the Spanish courts of justice send journalists to penal servitude for criticising the State religion." In the face of such incidents as this, we are taught, not merely by Romanists, but by weak Protestants, that we should consider the Roman Church as a great ally in the work of enlightening humanity in the principles of religious truth and civil liberty. We estimate Romanism by the exhibition it makes of itself when it has the opportunity to display its spirit. It burns Bibles when it can, because it believes that Bibles in the hands of the people are incendiary documents that will consume the cherished corruptions of their ecclesiastical establishment.—New York Observer. WHAT a marvelous change the Holy Spirit is able to work in those of whom it takes possession! We have a striking example of this in the case of the apostles. On the morning of the ascension they asked Jesus: "Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?" Even with the instruction that they had received since Christ's resurrection, they clung with childish pertinacity to their own crude ideas of his work. They still looked for a temporal kingdom, and a speedy deliverance from the Roman yoke. They were familiar with the prophecies, yet they did not understand them. Look at them ten days later, and note the difference. When the multitude began to inquire the meaning of what they saw, and others began to ridicule, the apostles at once rebuked the scoffers with dignity, and began to unfold the prophecies. There was no hesitation, no apologies. They spoke with authority, as though they had long been familiar with what they were teaching. What made this difference? They were "filled with the Holy Spirit." This was all. But let no one think that the Holy Spirit can accomplish such results for all indiscriminately, and do away with the necessity of exertion on the part of the individual. By no means. These men had been with one mind persevering in prayer for this very object. They were also of that class mentioned in John 7:17—they had been, and were still, followers of Christ; so it was to be expected that they should know of the doctrine. And, lastly, they had studied the word of God for themselves, and had done all that they could to understand it. To use a homely illustration, the wood was laid in position, and the kindlings were all prepared for a fire; all that was needed was the application of the spark to set the whole into a blaze. The Holy Spirit accomplished these wonderful results, because the way was prepared for it to work. Let us remember that that same Spirit will be given as freely to-day, if the necessary conditions are only fulfilled. Whose fault is it that Christians do not have more of the Spirit? WE hear a great many Christians complain of clouds. Such testimonies as this are common: "I enjoyed so much of the blessing of God a few days ago, and felt such peace in my heart, but lately I have been under a cloud." And the poor souls mourn and despond as though the Lord had lost all interest in them, and they could have no more confidence in him until he should remove that cloud. We feel intensely sorry for such people, for they are making trouble for themselves, depriving themselves of great blessings, neglecting work that they ought to be doing for the Master, and dishonoring God by doubting him. Let us look at the matter for a few moments in the light of the Scriptures and common sense. In the first place, clouds are very unsubstantial things. Sometimes, indeed, they look very dark and heavy and threatening, but the worst of them are nothing more than mist. We have seen heavy clouds hanging low upon the mountains, completely hiding their tops, but we have gone up through them without meeting the slightest difficulty, and have found clear sunlight above. Indeed, the cloud itself was not very dark when we got into it. That which from a distance looked like an impenetrable wall, was only vapor, and we found that when we were in the midst of it we could see quite a distance. We never knew a cloud to fall down on a man and smother him. Clouds do not usually knock people down. They do very often shut out a good many of the sun's rays, but no clouds have ever yet been known to cause the sun to stop shining. They cannot even shut out all of its light from the earth. Take the most cloudy day, and you would find that if the sun should actually cease shining, the darkness would be inconceivably greater. The clouds do not get so thick but that some rays of light pierce through them. The person who should say on a cloudy day that the sun had entirely ceased to shine, would be thought to have very little knowledge of the nature of the sun. So the person who thinks that God's love ceases every time a little gloom comes over the mind, either from natural causes or from Satan's malice, shows but little knowledge of the character of God. The psalmist says: "Lord, thou hast been our dwelling-place in all generations. Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God." Ps. 90:1, 2. And the apostle describes our Saviour as "Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to-day, and forever." Heb. 13:8. If God's love has been manifested toward us, we may be sure that a passing cloud cannot drive away that love. If he loved us yesterday, he loves us to-day. Listen to the words of the beloved disciple:— "Now before the feast of the Passover, when Jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end." John 13:1. To be frightened at the shadow of a passing cloud is an evidence of lack of faith in God. "But I don't feel near to God at such times," says one, "I feel just as though God was angry with me, and I dare not look up to him." That is just the trouble; you don't feel. When you felt the smile of God resting upon you, you trusted in that feeling, and not in the love and promise of God. But "we walk by faith, not by sight." "The just shall live by faith." Know, then, that nothing but sin can separate a soul from God. And even sin does not drive God away; it is simply that by which we take ourselves away from him. Now if the cloud is caused by sins committed, we know it; and knowing it, we know how to remove it. But if you are not conscious of having committed any sin that would bring darkness, then let your faith hold onto the promise of God. Know that God has not changed. "It is a good thing to give thanks unto the Lord, and to sing praises unto thy name, O Most High." Ps. 92:1. The failure to thank God for mercies received, often brings darkness. It was a lack of thankfulness that made men heathen. "Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened." Rom. 1:21. When people feel peculiarly happy, they are ready to exclaim with the psalmist: "I will bless the Lord at all times; his praise shall continually be in my mouth. My soul shall make her boast in the Lord." Ps. 34:1, 2. But they forget all about their resolution just as soon as their good feeling passes away. Instead of that, when clouds come, they should bring sunshine again by their praises to God. It is by simple faith, not by feeling, that we know the love of God. It is impossible for us to feel the love of God, unless we have appropriated it by faith. It is faith that makes it real to us, so that we may feel it. How can anybody doubt God? Has not Christ died? And if God "spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things." Rom. 8:32. What greater assurance can we ask for? Oh, that all might have such simple faith in God that they would take him just at his word, trusting him as fully in the darkness as in the light, knowing that the darkness and the light are both alike to God. Then they would say with the prophet: "Although the fig tree shall not blossom, neither shall fruit be in the vines; the labor of the olive shall fail, and the fields shall yield no meat; the flock shall be cut off from the fold, and there shall be no herd in the stalls; yet I will rejoice in the Lord, I will joy in the God of my salvation." Hab. 3:17, 18. That is true faith. It was such faith as Job had when he said, "Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him." When everything is clear, there is no call for faith; but when the clouds hang low, shutting out the beacon light, then faith in the Father's guiding hand is needed. The faith that makes the darkness even as the noonday, is the faith that overcomes the world. And why should we not have such faith, since Paul, who had every opportunity to make a careful calculation of the matter, says:— "I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord." Rom. 8:38, 39. W. "LOVERS OF PLEASURES."
By Editor
WE wonder how it is that professed followers of Christ can engage in the questionable ways of raising money for sacred purposes that are so prevalent at the present time,—cake-walks, fairs, grab-bags, post-offices, crazy suppers, etc., etc., till we come to mock marriages. Everything sacred is either travestied or dishonored by these affairs. The following from a correspondent in the Interior of December 27 presents by no means (would to God that it did) an exceptionable case:— "The church is denouncing divorce with their pens and lips and fostering it by their actions. I inclose you notice distributed to every family in this village, and announced as for the benefit of the Presbyterian Church, i. e., to raise money. The ladies are requested to prepare the menu for the occasion. A grand time is promised. Now what do we place be- fore our boys and girls? Why, a man 17 years and a lady 14 years are to be married. What must be the impression? Must it not be to the young that to get married is the one thing needful and the younger the better. We would like to hear of Christ as the loving elder Brother, as the risen Saviour, and all about his love for a sinful world, once more." And here is another taken from the Christian Oracle of the same date:— "The ladies of the Christian Church have changed the program for their New Year's eve supper. Instead of being just a plain oyster supper, as at first announced, it has been transmuted into a chicken-pie supper. An old hen will be caged, and the one guessing nearest her age may have supper free. Crazy waiters will dish up the fowl for you, and luny fortune tellers will read your history. New Year's eve, remember." Virtually such say, We are willing to give to the cause of Christ if it will minister to our carnal pleasures of appetite, fun, frolic, and lust. We are glad, however, that there are some who protest against it, and who desire the preaching of the cross of Christ. But as for the Christian church as a whole, its broad-mindedness and liberality are a matter of boasting. "Whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things." Phil. 3:19. "The church has fallen, the beautiful church, And her shame is her boast and pride." GOD MANIFEST IN THE FLESH.
By w.
WHEN the apostle, in his introduction to the epistle to the Romans, speaks of the gospel of God concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, he says of Christ that he "was made of the seed of David according to the flesh." In this expression, besides the statement of the genealogy of Christ, there lies not only a great theological truth, but also a most comforting thought for poor, frail, erring mortals. When Christ was here on earth, "God was manifest in the flesh." 1 Tim. 3:16. "God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself." 2 Cor. 5:19. Christ was God; it was by him that the worlds were made, and it was the word of his power that preserved all things. Heb. 1:3. He had equal glory with the Father before the world was (John 17:5); "for it pleased the Father that in him should all fullness dwell." Col. 1:19. In him dwelt "all the fullness of the Godhead bodily." Col. 2:9. Yet he was man at the same time. John puts the matter very forcibly and plainly when he says: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us." John 1:1, 14. No words could more plainly show that Christ was both God and man. Originally only divine, he took upon himself human nature, and passed among men as only a common mortal, except at those times when his divinity flashed through, as on the occasion of the cleansing of the temple, or when his burning words of simple truth forced even his enemies to confess that "never man spake like this man." The humiliation which Christ voluntarily took upon himself is best expressed by Paul to the Philippians: "Have the mind in you which also was in Christ Jesus; who being originally in the form of God, counted it not a thing to be grasped [that is, to be clung to] to be on an equality with God, but emptied himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, becoming in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the death of the cross." Phil. 2:5-8, Revised Version, marginal reading. The above rendering makes this text much more plain than it is in the common version. The idea is that although Christ was in the form of God, being "the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person" (Heb. 1:3), having all the attributes of God, being the ruler of the universe, and the one whom all Heaven delighted to honor, he did not think that any of these things were to be desired so long as men were lost and without strength. He could not enjoy his glory while man was an outcast, without hope. So he emptied himself, divested himself of all his39 riches and his glory, and took upon himself the nature of man in order that he might redeem him. It was necessary that he should assume the nature of man, in order that he might suffer death, as the apostle says to the Hebrews that he "was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death." Heb. 2:9. It is impossible for us to understand how this could be, and it is worse than useless for us to speculate about it. All we can do is to accept the facts as they are presented in the Bible. Other scriptures that we will quote bring closer to us the fact of the humanity of Christ, and what it means for us. We have already read that "the Word was made flesh," and now we will read what Paul says as to the nature of that flesh. "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh; that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit." Rom. 8:3, 4. A little thought will be sufficient to show anybody that if Christ took upon himself the likeness of man, in order that he might suffer death, it must have been sinful man that he was made like, for it is only sin that causes death. Death could have no power over a sinless man, as Adam was in Eden; and it could not have had any power over Christ if the Lord had not laid on him the iniquity of us all. Moreover, the fact that Christ took upon himself the flesh, not of a sinless being, but of sinful man, that is, that the flesh which he assumed had all the weaknesses and sinful tendencies to which fallen human nature is subject, is shown by the very words upon which this article is based. He was "made of the seed of David according to the flesh." David had all the passions of human nature. He says of himself, "Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me." Ps. 51:5. A brief glance at the ancestry and posterity of David will show that the line from which Christ sprung, as to his human nature, was such as would tend to concentrate in him all the weaknesses of humanity. To go back to Jacob, we find that before he was converted he had a most unlovely disposition, selfish, crafty, deceitful. His sons partook of the same nature, and Pharez, one of the ancestors of Christ (Matt. 1:3; Gen. 38), was born of a harlot. Rahab, an unenlightened heathen, became an ancestor of Christ. The weakness and idolatry of Solomon are proverbial. Of Rehoboam, Abijah, Jehoram, Ahaz, Manasseh, Amon, and other kings of Judah, the record is about the same. They sinned and made the people sin. Some of them had not one redeeming trait in their characters, being worse than the heathen around them. It was from such an ancestry that Christ came. Although his mother was a pure and godly woman, as could be expected, no one can doubt that the human nature of Christ must have been more subject to the infirmities of the flesh than it would have been if he had been born before the race had so greatly deteriorated physically and morally. This was not accidental, but was a necessary part of the great plan of human redemption, as the following will show:— "For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. [The Syriac version has it, "For he did not assume a nature from angels, but he assumed a nature from the seed of Abraham."] Wherefore in all things it behooved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succor them that are tempted." Heb. 2:16-18. If he was made in all things like unto his brethren, then he must have suffered all the infirmities and passions of his brethren. Only so could he be able to help them. So he had to become man, not only that he might die, but that he might be able to sympathize with and succor those who suffer the fierce temptations which Satan brings through the weakness of the flesh. Two more texts that put this matter very forcibly will be sufficient evidence on this point. We quote first 2 Cor. 5:21:— "For he [God] hath made him [Christ] to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." This is much stronger than the statement that he was made "in the likeness of sinful flesh." He was made to be sin. Here is a greater mystery than that the Son of God should die. The spotless Lamb of God, who knew no sin, was made to be sin. Sinless, yet not only counted as a sinner, but actually taking upon himself sinful nature. He was made to be sin in order that we might be made righteousness. So Paul to the Galatians says that "God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons." Gal. 4:4, 5. That Christ should be born under the law was a necessary consequence of his being born of a woman, taking on him the nature of Abraham, being made of the seed of David, in the likeness of sinful flesh. Human nature is sinful, and the law of God condemns all sin. Not that men are born into the world directly condemned by the law, for in infancy they have no knowledge of right and wrong, and are incapable of doing either, but they are born with sinful tendencies, owing to the sins of their ancestors. And when Christ came into the world, he came subject to all the conditions to which other children are subject. From these texts we are enabled to read with a better understanding Heb. 5:7, 8, where the apostle says of Christ:— "Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared; though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered." Jesus spent whole nights in prayer to the Father. Why should this be, if he had not been oppressed by the enemy, through the inherited weakness of the flesh? He "learned obedience by the things which he suffered." Not that he was ever disobedient, for he "knew no sin;" but by the things which he suffered in the flesh, he learned what men have to contend against in their efforts to be obedient. And so, "in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succor them that are tempted." "For we have not a High Priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need." Heb. 4:15, 16. One more point, and then we can learn the entire lesson that we should learn from the fact that "the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us." How was it that Christ could be thus "compassed with infirmity" (Heb. 5:2), and still know no sin? Some may have thought, while reading this article thus far, that we were depreciating the character of Jesus, by bringing him down to the level of sinful man. On the contrary, we are simply exalting the "divine power" of our blessed Saviour, who himself voluntarily descended to the level of sinful man, in order that he might exalt man to his own spotless purity, which he retained under the most adverse circumstances. "God was in Christ," and hence he could not sin. His humanity only veiled his divine nature, which was more than able to successfully resist the sinful passions of the flesh. There was in his whole life a struggle. The flesh, moved upon by the enemy of all righteousness, would tend to sin, yet his divine nature never for a moment harbored an evil desire, nor did his divine power for a moment waver. Having suffered in the flesh all that all men can possibly suffer, he returned to the throne of the Father, as spotless as when he left the courts of glory. When he lay in the tomb, under the power of death, "it was impossible that he should be holden of it," because it had been impossible for the divine nature which dwelt in him to sin. "Well," some will say, "I don't see any comfort in this for me; it wasn't possible that the Son of God should sin, but I haven't any such power." Why not? You can have it if you want it. The same power which enabled him to resist every temptation presented through the flesh, while he was "compassed with infirmity," can enable us to do the same. Christ could not sin, because he was the manifestation of God. Well, then, listen to the apostle Paul, and learn what it is our privilege to have:— "For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, of whom the whole family in Heaven and earth is named, that he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man; that Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height; and to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fullness of God." Eph. 3:14-19. Who could ask for more? Christ, in whom dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, may dwell in our hearts, so that we may be filled with all the fullness of God. What a wonderful promise. He is "touched with the feeling of our infirmity." That is, having suffered all that sinful flesh is heir to, he knows all about it, and so closely does he identify himself with his children, that whatever presses upon them makes a like impression upon him, and he knows how much divine power is necessary to resist it; and if we but sincerely desire to deny "ungodliness and wordly lusts," he is able and anxious to give to us strength "exceeding abundantly, above all that we ask or think." All the power which Christ had dwelling in him by nature, we may have dwelling in us by grace, for he freely bestows it upon us. Then let the weary, feeble, sin-oppressed souls take courage. Let them "come boldly unto the throne of grace," where they are sure to find grace to help in time of need, because that need is felt by our Saviour, in the very time of need. He is "touched with the feeling of our infirmity." If it were simply that he suffered eighteen hundred years ago, we might fear that he had forgotten some of the infirmity; but no, that temptation that presses you touches him. His wounds are ever fresh, and he ever lives to make intercession for you. What wonderful possibilities there are for the Christian! To what heights of holiness he may attain! No matter how much Satan may war against him, assaulting him where the flesh is weakest, he may abide under the shadow of the Almighty, and be filled with the fullness of God's strength. The One stronger than Satan may dwell in his heart continually; and so, looking at Satan's assaults as from a strong fortress, he may say, "Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him that loved us." w. RELIGIOUS LEGISLATION.
By C. P. B.
At the concluding meeting of the Christian Ministerial Association of California, held in San Francisco on the 3d instant, "The Lord's Day" was one of the topics discussed. It was subdivided thus: The authority for and proper manner of its observance; The religious value of a day of rest; Are Sunday laws beneficial and desirable? The published report of the meeting says: "R. N. Davis, of Napa, read a carefully prepared paper showing the traditions and customs of the early Christians in the observance of the day. He did not approve of legislating with a view of compelling men to observe Sunday. The Lord's day being a spiritual institution, civil laws have no jurisdiction with reference to the manner of its observance." In this Mr. Davis has expressed the correct view in regard to Sunday laws. Sunday is a religious institution, and legislation regarding Sunday is religious legislation, no matter by what other name it may be called. A civil law enjoining a religious act is a law concerning religion and regulating its exercise, notwithstanding all that Sunday-law advocates have said to the contrary; and all liberty-loving citizens,40 of whatever religious belief, do well to oppose such legislation. But Mr. Davis was scarcely consistent, for "legislation to close saloons on Sundays he considered right, and he believed in legislating to restrain the wicked citizen, and for the preservation of law and order, in order that the preacher might have an opportunity to reach the citizen who is liable to be tempted." So says the report. We have no word to say in favor of liquor selling; it is evil and only evil continually, and ought to be prohibited on all days; but to single out Sunday and close saloons upon that day simply that men may go to church instead of going to the saloons is entirely beyond the proper sphere of civil government. But the plea may be made that the saloons ought to be closed on Sunday, not on religious grounds but because more men being idle upon that day more men patronize them. Then it ought to be extended to all holidays. The real truth is that men advocate Sunday closing of saloons because of a religious regard for the day, more than because of opposition to liquor selling. And such laws tend far more to the exaltation of Sunday as a religious institution than they do toward the suppression of the liquor traffic. "WHY MAKE YE THIS ADO?"
By M. C. W.
"HE who has the truth can afford to be fair and patient; and one of the best inferential evidences that an advocate or opponent has not the truth, is to see him fly into a rage, and fret, and fume, and scold, and call hard names, and misrepresent those whom he cannot answer with reason or fact. Such a spectacle seems to be exhibited by the editor of the Interior, in its issue of December 27. A correspondent writes from Minneapolis, Minn., as follows:— "DEAR INTERIOR: You are aware that the Seventh-day Adventists claim that the whole Christian world has apostatized on the matter of the Sabbath; that we are observing the first instead of the seventh day, contrary to the command of God; that in so doing the whole Christian family, continuing to violate the strict letter of the law, will receive the mark of the beast and be destroyed at the day of Judgment. Now, we think these Seventh-day Adventists to be fanatics upon this question, and yet, when they point us to innumerable passages of Scripture, both in the Old and New Testaments, in support of their faith, what shall we say, but to admit that they are technically right, at least? Is the whole Christian world simply following out a pernicious innovation of the Roman Church, which violates the sanctity of the true Sabbath? I argue, as well as I can, that the day was changed from the seventh to the first by the authority and permission of Christ himself; that, whether our Christian Sunday is in reality the veritable day established by divine enactment or not, the Christian race is keeping a sabbath, that they are carrying out the divine injunction in spirit, if not in letter, and that in doing this they are complying with God's command to keep the Sabbath-day holy. I must confess, however, that our Adventist friends seem to have the weight of evidence on their side. I would like your scholarly views." To this the editor thus replies:— "The weight of what evidence? The evidence that the entire visible church of Christ for eighteen centuries have been damned, the only exception being a very small band of Saturday fanatics, mostly of this century? Is that Christianity—or is it the most ferocious type of heathenism? We have a number of times shown the falsity of the alleged facts and logic of such people—but what good does it do? They are determined that the Lord Jesus Christ shall not receive honor, so far as they are concerned. Let them settle their differences with him and with his church, with him. That must be a pleasant sort of a faith—so charitable and Christian(?)—that the church universal is to be branded with the mark of the beast, and every individual in it, since the resurrection of Christ, damned, only excepting a little lot of Adventist Sabbatarians. We used to think it worth while to reason with such people, but we do not think so now. If they like to observe Saturday, and deny Christ the honor given to him of the Father, the question is between God and them. Let them look well to the answer they are to make when they shall meet Christ at the bar of Judgment." Now, good Mr. Editor, why could you not have shown these ferocious heathen and "Saturday fanatics" "the falsity of the alleged facts and logic" of their views once more, just once more, and patiently, too? It would have been much more convincing, you know. Why could you not have given some evidence that honoring Sunday is honoring Christ? Why not point out from God's word where we are told to keep the first day? Why not show these "fanatics" that it is dishonoring to Christ to keep one of the ten commandments just as God has given it to us. And as the fourth commandment is only a part of that law which Christ did not come to change, perhaps you will tell us how we do dishonor Christ by keeping the fourth commandment, and do not dishonor him by keeping the others. You know, Mr. Editor, that the Bible says that God created the worlds through Christ (John 1:1-3; Heb. 1:3; 1 Cor. 8:6); that all things were created by him (Col. 1:16), and that being so (for, of course, you believe it), the One who created was the One who rested; and therefore the seventh day, upon which he rested, and which he blessed and sanctified, is the Sabbath, or rest-day, of Christ, or the Lord's day. Mark 2:28; Rev. 1:10. Are not these facts, Mr. Editor? and is not this good logic? Again: Jesus came to save his people from sin (Matt. 1:21); sin is the transgression of God's perfect law (1 John 3:4; Rom. 7:7); the fourth commandment is a part of that law; and therefore its transgression is sin. Now when the Scriptures say that Christ shall save his people from their sins, or from transgression of the law, does it mean that the fourth commandment is excepted? Or did the angel mean that Jesus should save his people in sin instead of from sin? May we not ask for "your scholarly views" on the above? Is it not among the greatest triumphs of grace that a sinner should be made obedient? that the heart once not subject to God's law, should be made, through Christ, willingly subject? God's law to us never seems so holy as when we view it from Calvary; and his love in giving Christ to die never seems greater than when viewed from Sinai's base. And, please be patient, Mr. Editor, will you not give us one text of Scripture from prophet, apostle, or our blessed Lord, which says that we should keep holy the Sunday? Tell us also how great numbers will make a difference in the truth? How is it that there has not been the great "falling away" as Paul declared there would be? Acts 20:29, 30; 2 Thess. 2; 2 Tim. 4:3, 4. And may it not be possible that Calvin and Knox, good men though they were, did not see all the truth? Another question, Mr. Editor: Why do you misrepresent Seventh-day Adventists as teaching that "the church universal is to be branded with the mark of the beast, and every individual in it, since the resurrection of Christ, damned, only excepting a little lot of Adventist Sabbatarians"? They do not so teach. They have never so taught. They believe that light rejected brings condemnation; don't you? They believe that God is giving to the world a warning message in Rev. 14, Isa. 58, Joel 2 and 3, Zeph. 1 and 2, and other scriptures. Isn't he doing this? We are among the "fanatics," but we desire to hear you again. Be patient once more. It will do you no good to scold so, and it will not help us nor your seemingly honest correspondent. You say in your same issue, Mr. Editor, that "all men, when the shadows of age begin to come, ought to pray to be delivered from becoming crabbed, or crotchety, or self-opinionated," etc. We believe it, and desire to profit by it. But perhaps you did not mean all that about the Adventists. We will wait for explanation.