Your ShelfYour Projects

Review and Herald, Vol. 16, No. 26.

DEMONIACAL INFLUENCES
Earlier text: DEMONIACAL INFLUENCES

CLOSE OF THE VOLUME.

By Editor

With this week's issue another volume of the REVIEW takes its stand with things numbered and finished. Another six months of its existence have completed their circuit. During this period what has transpired? Has the watchful believer in the near advent of his Lord seen anything to shake his faith or hope? Has he seen anything which would tend to show that his Lord delayed his coming? Has he seen any evidence of a coming era of peace and safety? or of the world's conversion? or of a temporal millennium? Nothing of the kind; but much the reverse. As the shades of twilight deepen down gradually into the darkness of night, and as the coming tempest casts a deeper and deeper shadow over the land, so the signs of the times are continually thickening around us, and more and more solemn are the portents of coming events on every side. The time draweth near when the King of kings shall visit this revolted province, take the righteous to himself, and gather out all those who do iniquity and who would not have him to reign over them. We even now hear the distant sound of his approaching chariot-wheels. Signs betoken his return. Unconscious nature proclaims his approach. Wicked men and seducers, those who hate him, reject his gospel, misuse his servants, and scoff at his coming, proclaim nevertheless, though unwittingly, that the Lord cometh. And the voice of prophecy is heard above the din of war and the strife of nations, proclaiming, "Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousand of his saints." Glorious announcement to his waiting church! Does it meet in all our hearts the ready response, "Even so, come Lord Jesus, come quickly?" He comes as our friend. He appears to the salvation of all those who look for him; and shall we not rejoice? Republicans are to-day rejoicing in their victories in worldly politics; shall not a higher, holier and more fervent joy fill our hearts at the thought that a being is soon to take the throne whose reign shall be all righteousness, whose acts will be influenced by none of those prejudices and passions which dwell more or less in every human breast?
Salvation, immortality, perfect exemption from sickness, sorrow, pain and death, and all the ills of this evil state, and above all, eternal life with all the good of earth, with the angels of God, and Jesus himself in his glorious kingdom—are not these prospects for which we can forego the pleasures and allurements of earth? Knowing that this shall ultimately be the reward of the persevering saints, can we not patiently wait the accomplishment of our hope? The husbandman, says James, hath long patience. He who has committed to the earth the precious seed, and looks only for a harvest, hath long patience for that harvest. Because the seed does not sprout sooner, or grow more rapidly, or bear fruit immediately, he does not become impatient or disheartened, and throw down his implements of husbandry and abandon his field to weeds and ruin; but he toils on in expectation of by and by reaping an abundant crop. He waits till he receives the early and latter rain. He waits and soon receives a bountiful reward for all his toil.
And this is the illustration with which James would enforce a lesson of patience upon all his brethren. Great is the prize before us; and in due time we shall reap if we faint not. In the language of the poet Longfellow,
“Let us then be up and doing, With a heart for any fate; Still achieving, still pursuing, Learn to labor and to wait.”

EASTERN TOUR.

By John Norton Loughborough

My first meeting on this tour was at the Kirkville Conference, which was to me a season of refreshing and freedom; for the Lord gave freedom in presenting his truth. Brn. Cottrell and Sperry were present and took part in preaching the word. We were encouraged to see many old friends of the cause still holding on their way, and their beaming countenances (while listening to the truth) seemed to say, "Thy words are sweet to my taste."
A number were at this meeting who had embraced the truth at the tent-meetings held by Bro. Andrews and others the past summer. They listened with earnestness to the testimony on the unity and gifts of the gospel church; and the union and harmony that prevailed during the conference gave them a chance to see some of the practical workings of these truths.
I had feared that there would be much opposition on the subject of organization that had been so lately canvassed in the conference at Battle Creek; but as far as I could learn, those present were satisfied with the steps that had been taken.
After the Kirkville meeting I had an opportunity of visiting a brother and sister in the flesh, who had lately embraced the Sabbath, and was glad to find them firm in all the present truth.
Sabbath and first-day, Oct. 20 and 21, I spoke to a few brethren and sisters at Parma, N. Y. Some were present who had embraced the truth at the tent-meeting which was lately held there. On the evening of the 23d I spoke in the Wesleyan meeting-house at Olcott. Although the evening was rainy and bad, quite a number came in to hear. Several who had of late become interested in Somerset came up to hear. The Lord gave liberty in speaking on the unending nature of his law.
At Gilboa conference we had freedom. The meeting-house was nearly filled with brethren and sisters. On evenings and first-day a number of the citizens came in to hear. Bro. Waggoner was with me at this meeting and assisted in preaching the word.
Nov. 3d, 4th and 5th, according to appointment Bro. Waggoner and myself were with the church at Hillsdale, Mich. A goodly number of brethren were together on Sabbath and first-day, among whom was Bro. Harvey from Ind. On Monday, as appointed in the Review, the church in Hillsdale, having signed articles of Association met and elected their trustees to hold a deed of the meeting-house and lot, and transact (in a legal manner) business connected with the temporalities of the church. The Spirit of the Lord seemed to be with us in our business meeting, and I think all present felt that God approved the step they were taking.
As there has been feeling with some in regard to the name proposed at Battle Creek Conference by which we as a people should be known, I would say that I think the name, "Seventh-day Adventists," is the most natural and appropriate name we could take. In Hillsdale I came across a handbill that was used there some four years ago when our brethren were going to have a conference there. It reads, "There will be a conference of the Seventh-day Advent people held in Waldron's Hall," &c. This name I suppose was used in the handbill because everybody would know at once who it meant. Again, it has been proposed that we should be called the "Church of God." While we were at Gilboa a friend attended the meeting from Findlay, and became much interested and bought some books. He had some talk with Bro. Waggoner after meeting. Bro. W. asked him what church he belonged to. Church of God, was the reply. What, Winnebrenarians? "No; Church of God." Dunkers? "No; Church of God." Here was a poser; a man that belonged to the Church of God, but we had to find out who he belonged to, of somebody else; for the name "Church of God" was not enough to tell us who he was. Neither would the name Church of God alone tell others who we are.
J. N. LOUGHBOROUGH.
Battle Creek, Nov. 8.

OUR VISIT TO CANADA.

By A. S. Hutchins

Agreeably to appointment, Bro. Pierce and myself attended the Conference in Melbourne, C. E., on the 6th and 7th inst. We were disappointed in not meeting more of the brethren and sisters in Canada at this Conference. But the rainy weather and muddy going no doubt prevented some from being present, while others were kept away by sickness.
But we feel confident that those who were favored with the privilege of attending the meetings were refreshed, strengthened and encouraged still to pursue the narrow way to eternal life.
Here we met five from Eli, who have embraced the Sabbath the past summer under the labors of Bro. Evans. They all bore a good testimony in favor of the truth. Our meetings were held in the Advent meeting-house.
Elder Miles Grant of Boston, was holding meetings twelve miles from here, before and at the time of the Conference. Being invited by Bro. Evans to attend our meetings, he expressed a willingness to do so, provided he could have the privilege of stating the reasons publicly in the course of the Conference, why he differs with us on the Sabbath question. This was not granted. He then challenged Bro. E. to a discussion of the following question—"Is the seventh-day Sabbath binding upon the Christian church?"
The discussion was held on the 8th, and lasted about five hours; two in the forenoon and three in the afternoon, each speaking twenty minutes at a time, Eld. G. having the negative. After this discussion we remained in Melbourne and vicinity over a week, and so far as brethren there could learn the result of it, it was favorable for the cause of truth rather than against it. Though from a report of it in the Crisis by Eld. G., which fell into my hands to-day, I should think that he claimed a most successful triumph. But more on this point soon.
After carefully considering the demands of the cause of God in Canada, and the will of the Lord in this matter, it seemed clear to all of our minds that Bro. D. T. Evans should be set apart to the work of the ministry, by the laying on of hands, to preach the word and administer the ordinances of the Lord's house as the hand of the Lord might open the way before him; after which four were buried by him with Christ in baptism. The good Spirit of the Lord rested richly upon us.
From Melbourne we went twelve miles into a new place, where we held meetings which were to be continued by Bro. E. After this we spent one Sabbath with the few brethren in Eaton.
One of Bro. Hill's daughters of Melbourne that was present at the discussion, has since come out decidedly in favor of the Bible Sabbath. Her voice is now heard in prayer with the people of God, and she delights in the law of the Lord. May the blessing of heaven continue to rest upon Brn. Hills and Wales and their families for the deep interest they feel for the advancement of the cause of God. And may the blessing and peace of the Lord ever rest upon all the dear saints in Canada.
A. S. HUTCHINS.
Barton Landing, Oct. 29, 1860.

DISCUSSION IN MELBOURNE.

By A. S. Hutchins

THE discussion between Bro. D. T. Evans and Eld. Miles Grant, of the question, “Is the Seventh-day Sabbath binding upon the Christian church?” I spoke of in my report of our meetings in Canada. But Eld. G.’s account of it in the Crisis having fallen into my hands it seems proper that it should be noticed again, and some of his statements in the Crisis corrected.
From Eld. G.’s report of this discussion, I judge he considers himself most successfully triumphant, while Bro. E. met with a flat failure. We take another view of the matter, as also did the citizens of Melbourne, so far as we learned. Not one, to my knowledge, who keeps the Bible Sabbath, or who was favorably inclined to our position, was in the least moved away from the truth by it. But contrariwise, it was believed that the prejudice of some minds was by it broken, and they were favorably disposed towards the truth.
Bro. E. showed the origin of the Sabbath, God’s Rest-day, to be at the creation week. That the day on which God rested he blessed and sanctified; gave the definition of the word sanctify, as given by Webster, i. e., “to separate, set apart, or appoint to a holy, sacred or religious use.”
Read Mark ii, 27. “The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath.” Argued that man, here, is used without restriction, consequently the Sabbath was made for the whole human family. Bro. E. here introduced the reading of the text in it’s original. “The Sabbath was made for THE man, and not THE man for the Sabbath.” This language points us directly to the man Adam. And as Adam was the only man when the Sabbath was made, and the head of the human family, consequently the Sabbath was made for every being bearing the name, man. Job xiv, 1; Ps. civ, 23; Eccl. xii, 13, were then read as illustrative of the use of man in the above texts, agreeably to the following grammatical rule: “A noun without an adjective is invariably taken in its broadest extension, as, Man is accountable.”
In reply, the negative did not unsettle nor disprove these points, but contended the Sabbath could not here be binding because no command had been given for its observance. Still he was shown the Sabbath to be obligatory upon Israel in the wilderness of Sin, some thirty days previous to the proclamation of the law upon Sinai.
Says Moses [see Ex. xvi, 23], “This is that which the Lord hath said (not is going to say) To-morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord.” Why the Sabbath thus familiarly spoken of if not binding previously? for nothing is here said of its institution.
Neither at Sinai is it spoken of as a new institution, nor as there sanctified. But “Remember the Sabbath-day, to keep it holy;” that is, forget it not.
Eld. G. read Deut. v, as containing the reason why Israel should observe the Sabbath. In his report, after quoting the 15th verse, he says, “When the Lord chose the memorial day by which Israel was to commemorate their deliverance from Egyptian bondage, he selected the one on which he rested at the close of creation week; but the reason for instituting the Sabbath for Israel was not because he rested himself, but because of their great deliverance just accomplished.”
Not a word is said in this chapter of the Sabbath as a “memorial day,” of the deliverance of Israel from bondage, nor about the “reason for instituting the Sabbath for Israel.” Appropriate memorials commemorative of this great and mighty event are found in Ex. xii. Says Moses, speaking of the deliverance, “It is a night to be much observed unto the Lord for bringing them out from the land of Egypt.” Ex. xii, 42. Hence these assertions are unsustained by the word of God, and this reasoning fallacious.
A great and wonderful deliverance had just been wrought for God’s chosen people, they were now delivered from the iron heel of oppression, and the galling yoke of continued servitude, imposed upon them by cruel task-masters, were brought out where if they would, they might “observe his statutes, and keep his laws” [Ps. cv, 45]; “Therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the Sabbath-day.” Deut. v, 15.
If this last quoted scripture proves the Sabbath a “memorial-day,” or to have been instituted for Israel, then by the same process of reasoning Eld. G. is bound to admit that the principles of honesty and justice are memorials, instituted for the same class and for the same purpose. See Deut. xv, 15; xxiv, 17, 18.
Again, that “man” is used in its most extended sense in Mark ii, 27, the negative did not deny—was not particular whether it was so construed or not, but could not see that the texts above quoted from Job xiv, 1; Ps. civ, 23; Eccl. xii, 14, had any bearing on the point.
We further claim that Bro. E.’s arguments in favor of the perpetuity of the law of God, drawn from Matt. v, 17–19; Rom. vii, and other texts, were not refuted. Had Eld. G. refuted or unsettled these points, he would have felt himself quite confined to the negative side of the question, instead of out-running his time, and getting on to the affirmative, as claimed by himself, and some of his friends.
The report makes Bro. E. say, “The other nine commandments are not brought into the N. T.” Whereas he said, “they were not given in the N. T. on a new account, or as a new law: no more brought over into the N. T. than the Sabbath.” The reader will bear in mind that the Sabbath of the Lord is mentioned fifty-nine times in the N. T.
Both in the discussion and report, Eld. G. makes the ten commandments exclusively the old covenant, which at some point of time (not told when) receives a deadly wound, before or after which, nine-tenths of the wound is healed, nine of the ten commandments, “omitting the fourth, are re-enacted in the New.” He continues, “The fourth is a special institution for Israel; the other nine contain moral precepts binding upon all classes.” The following scriptures contain what he calls the “nine.” 1. Matt. xxii, 36–38. 2. 1 Cor. x, 7. 3. Matt. v, 34. 5. Eph. vi, 2, 3. 6. Rom. xiii, 9. 7. Rom. xiii, 9. 8. Rom. xiii, 9. 9. Rom. xiii, 9. 10. Rom. xiii, 9.
Then he says, “Jesus adds a new commandment, which supplies the place of the fourth, which is abolished.” This is the “re-enacted,” “re-modeled” law or covenant, “omitting the seventh-day Sabbath.” The core of the sore is now taken out, the root of the fault in the first covenant is extracted, the troublesome, burdensome, tiresome fourth commandment can no more afflict.
But here are objections, the mark is overshot somewhere. Eld. G.’s first commandment of the nine, is the first of the ten great commands, and contains the sum of our duty to God, hence the Sabbath is there. Again, when was the re-modeling of this covenant completed? If not till Paul wrote his epistles, there must have been an elapse of a number of years, before the last five of the nine could have been binding. Again, Eld. G. believes the first day is the Sabbath, and says, “He who keeps the seventh day, virtually unites with the Jews in denying the resurrection of Christ.” Where is the place for the first-day Sabbath in his covenant? Where is the “thus saith the Lord” for keeping it?
Says David, “The law of the Lord is perfect.” What would he say could he see the one in question?
“Shall man attempt, with blind and bungling move, What is already perfect, to improve? Better ’would be, ye fighters of the law, If your own weakness, verily, ye saw; If ye would hear the teachings of God’s word, And live obedient to all ye heard. Better ’twould be t’ obey God’s holy will, And own the Sabbath precept binding still, Before ye make, in all ye do and say, Such wretched work to have it done away.”
A. S. HUTCHINS.

CONFERENCE AT LAPEER.

By M. E. Cornell

BRO. SMITH: This meeting was one of interest, and we trust of profit, to all present. Brn. Bates and Lawrence were there to help preach the word. The pointed testimony was given and appreciated. It was good to be there. The real manifest determination of the majority seemed to be to rise with the message, if a more earnest effort will accomplish it. Three were baptized. The scene at the water was unusually solemn.
With Bro. Lawrence I spent last Sabbath at Milford. Several there seem in earnest. They sustain regular meetings, and have a growing interest.
We spend the coming Sabbath at Shelby, and then go to Livingston county. Our address for ten days will be Parshallville, Livingston Co., Mich.
M. E. CORNELL.
Detroit, Nov. 8.

MEETINGS IN VINTON, IOWA.

By B. F. Snook

I have just closed a meeting here, lasting from Thursday to Sunday night. The weather has been very unfavorable. We have had so much rain that many could not attend our meetings who would have rejoiced to be there. However, we had a good meeting. The Lord was with us. The brethren were much strengthened and encouraged. All who attended were much interested. Bless the Lord for doing a good work here! for raising up a good, warm-hearted people to show forth his praises by living out the great principles of holiness which he designs shall ever characterize his people. My heart was rejoiced to meet there, strange faces but kindred hearts. It seemed somewhat lonely to be here without my fellow-laborer, Bro. Cornell. I have amused myself some by viewing the places of our former resort and pleasant walks. But I missed him, and soon the fond thought comes to my mind, that we will if faithful, enjoy many a pleasant walk together in more beautiful bowers than here, and behold more beautiful scenes than this earth now affords.
There is much opposition here. The priests have been busy since the tent was here, trying to create all the prejudice they possibly can. They know that their craft is in danger; that as the light of truth shines, their honest members will leave them and serve God instead of serving the pope. Babylon is filling fast with everything hateful and abominable. But her destruction hastens. May God’s people leave her as they would a house on fire or a sinking ship! They should never stop to think of reforming her. She is not to be reformed. She must receive her portion of the plagues. Let commandment-keepers be faithful. Oh brethren, be diligent in making your election sure. Your trials here may be severe, and your persecutions awfully painful; but stand firm on the truth. An eternity of joy will by far outweigh them all.
“Come then my dear brethren, count all things but loss For treasures in heaven; don’t shrink from the cross Ye favorites of heaven, dear lambs of the fold, Though demons surround you be faithful and bold. “Consider the dangers that lie in your way, What snares and temptations in this evil day; All this you must suffer, and patient endure, Till Jesus shall take us where sufferings are o’er.” B. F. SNOOK.

REPORT OF BUSINESS MEETING AT GILBOA CONFERENCE.

Ohio conference, held at Gilboa, Oct. 28, organized for business by appointing G. W. Holt Chairman, and J. Clarke Secretary. Report of the Tent Committee for the past year was presented and accepted. By referring to the pledges it was found that some of them were still unpaid, though due last June. Bro. Butler suggested that energy, perseverance and punctuality were indispensable to unity and success. Not slothful in business [Rom. xii, 11], that all should show the same diligence to the end [Heb. vi, 10–12], and that a lack of these have the tendency to destroy confidence of brethren, that the arrearages on pledges for the past three years was an unmistakable evidence of slothfulness, and betoken a lack of such diligence as Paul recommended, and that he hoped those present who had just reasons why their pledges remained unredeemed would frankly assign them, so that our mutual confidence may be restored as far as possible. Explanations were then called for, when some gave satisfactory reasons why they were behind their pledge, while others promptly discharged theirs. On motion of Bro. Butler it was
Resolved, That a Committee of Finance be appointed to look out, and supply, the wants of the cause in Ohio, whereupon the chair appointed Brn. Jos. Dudley, L. E. Jones and J. P. Fleming, all of Gilboa, as said Committee, J. Dudley being Secretary, and L. E. Jones Treasurer. The way to supply the Finance Committee with means to meet the pecuniary wants of the cause, was then introduced as the next point to consider. Here Bro. Butler presented the manifest necessity of system in our financial affairs. That he had been burdened and grieved at the injustice and inequality shown in the past in allowing a few of our earnest and zealous brethren and sisters to bear the whole burden of the cause, and that too with their very moderate means, while others claiming a place among us, and who have in some instances much more abundance are seen going free, or comparatively so. These things are unkind, they are unjust, and do not possess the features of that system of equality which is not only recommended in the Scriptures, but absolutely enjoined. Reason, justice, humanity and brotherly love require equality, and consequently so do the Scriptures. "If any man minister, let him do it as of the ability that God giveth that God in all things may be glorified." 1 Pet. iv, 11. "Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store as God hath prospered him." 1 Cor. xvi, 2. "For I mean not that other men be eased and ye burdened, but by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that there may be equality." 2 Cor. viii, 13, 14.
Bro. Waggoner seconded the remarks of Bro. Butler, referred to the donation of sister ——, a sister of very moderate means, compared her $100 donation with the stinted benefactions of some who were more wealthy by far, and yet had done but comparatively nothing, and claimed that such inequality is unscriptural, that a gospel which has no equality in it, is no gospel at all. Many touching and timely remarks were then made by various members of the conference on the same subject, with much anxiety that some system be adopted calculated to secure as nearly as possible complete equality.
Bro. Butler then suggested the propriety of this conference first determining in its best united judgment what amount was actually necessary to be raised during the coming year to defray the necessary expenses of our entire operation in this State for one year. A few moments being given for general deliberation, a motion was offered and unanimously voted that $800 be raised. Bro. Butler then recommended that since it was the judgment of the conference that $800 be raised, that it should be raised on the principle of equality, that an inventory of all the property of the church in the State, personal and real, be taken, then as the whole amount of said property is to raise the whole amount of said $800, so is each one's share of that whole amount of property to raise his share of the $800.
This system will undoubtedly secure gospel equality and draw the line of demarkation so plainly as to lop off selfish clogs if there are any, and show who really are our brethren in the gospel. On motion of Bro. Waggoner the system just suggested by Bro. Butler was adopted by a unanimous vote. Suggestions were then made that the shortest, and no doubt as fair a way to get up the inventory of the church's property would be to get a list of the names of all the members of each church, and then place opposite each individual's name the value of his or her property as shown on the tax receipt for the current year. This plan was then put as a motion and unanimously adopted.
A motion was then made and carried that the Chair appoint a committee of one in each church represented in this general conference to take an inventory of the property of each member as specified in the last resolution, and forward said inventory to J. Dudley, Gilboa, Ohio, the Secretary of our Financial Committee, who will in due time send back to each church said inventories, with the proportionate share of each member annexed to his name, whereupon the Chair appointed such committees as far as churches were represented in conference.
On motion it was next unanimously voted that we recommend the foregoing plan to all the churches and scattered brethren in Ohio not represented in this conference, and cordially invite them to co-operate with us, by making out a similar inventory of their property, and forwarding the same to our Finance Committee as soon as the first day of December, 1860.
N. B. The above arrangement is not intended to interfere with the treasuries of the local churches, where they should have something to bestow upon the true objects of Christian charity around them, but merely to provide for the wants of the cause at large as the truth goes into new fields where it has no friends, or not friends enough to defray necessary expenses.
After the business of the conference was all disposed of, the ministering brethren proceeded to the ordination of Bro. J. Dudley to the office of deacon by the laying on of hands and prayer.
G. W. HOLT, Chairman. J. CLARKE, Secretary.

THE TRANSGRESSOR'S FATE:

By M. Hull

OR A SHORT ARGUMENT ON THE FIRST AND SECOND DEATHS.

BY M. HULL.
(Concluded.)
But I must pass to the examination of another question, viz., Does man die more than one death for the Adamic transgression?
I might quote a host of modern authors to prove that he does; but such testimony is not final with the Bible student. I will therefore only give a few extracts to show the position of the theological world, after which we will examine scripture testimony.
Dr. Clarke says, "Thou shalt surely die." Mot tamuth; literally, a death thou shalt die; or, dying thou shalt die. Thou shalt not only die spiritually, by losing the life of God. But from that moment thou shalt become mortal. Clarke's Com. on Gen. ii, 16.
Benson says, "The death here threatened is evidently to be considered as opposed to the life (or lives, rather) which God had bestowed on him. This was not only the natural life of his body, in its union with his soul, but the spiritual life of his soul in its union with God, and the eternal life of both. The threatening then implies, Thou shalt not only lose all the happiness thou hast, either in possession or in prospect, and be liable to the death of the body, and all the miseries which precede and accompany it. But thou shalt lose thy spiritual life and become dead to God—dead to God and things divine, and shalt even forfeit thy title to immortality: and be liable to death eternal, and all this in the day thou eatest thereof." Benson's Com.
Buck says, "The covenant of works was made with Adam; the condition of which was his perseverance during the whole time of his probation. The reward annexed to his obedience was the continuance of him and his posterity in such perfect holiness and felicity as he then had, while upon earth, and an everlasting life with God hereafter. The penalty threatened for the breach of the commandment was condemnation terminating in death, temporal, spiritual and eternal." Theological Dictionary, under Covenant of works.
The Westminster Confession of Faith, pp. 45, 46, says, "Every sin, both original and actual, being a transgression of the righteous law of God, and contrary thereunto, doth in its own nature bring guilt upon the sinner, whereby he is bound over to the wrath of God, and curse of the law, and so made subject to death, with miseries, spiritual, temporal, and eternal."
The Shorter Catechism (bound in the same volume), p. 384, says, "All mankind by their fall lost communion with God, are under his wrath and curse, and so made liable to all the miseries in this life, to death itself, and the pains of hell forever."
The above is the voice of the wisdom of this world; but where has the Bible said anything about a threefold death? Where has it threatened more than one death for Adam's transgression?
The law says, "Thou shalt surely die." If this is not plain enough for our comprehension, we will take the penalty as pronounced by the supreme Judge. Gen. iii, 17-19. "And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field. In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."
Here the elements are all arrayed against man. The ground is cursed, thorns and thistles grow spontaneously to war against him. He enters upon a toiling stage—sweat spontaneously gushes out of his pores. Decomposition has commenced, and must continue until his toil and sweat are ended by his returning to the dust.
Dear reader, is not this plain enough? Can you not now understand the penalty of Adam's sin? If not, follow his history a few centuries and you will find his obituary. Gen. v, 5. "And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died." Thus the penalty of God's broken law has been executed upon Adam, and his history is wound to a close.
Permit me here, dear reader, to exhibit the glaring absurdity of the three-fold-death system, by using a familiar illustration:
Suppose that Mr. A., of this State, is guilty of petit larceny, for which the law says he shall be imprisoned in the county jail any length of time the court may decide, not exceeding twelve months. He is thrust into prison according to the letter of the law. After he has suffered the penalty prescribed by the law, the officer comes to take him out. As the officer is engaged in loosing his fetters, A. says, "Well, I have broken the law and paid the penalty." "No, no," says the officer, "we are not done with you yet. You have now got to go to the State prison, and be confined to hard labor for five years." "What for?" says A. "Petit larceny," responds the officer. But Mr. A. pleads that "the law does not say I shall go to the penitentiary." "It means it," says the officer. A. asks why the law does not say so if that is its meaning? "O," says the officer, "that is the hidden, or secret meaning. I guess you never studied theology; if you had you would have learned that books say one thing and mean another." The fiat has gone forth and is unalterable. To the State prison he must go. He goes grumbling along, relating the cause of his complaint to every one he chances to meet, and all say that his complaints are just.
After he has served out his time he expects to be released. But the executor informs him that he must now be hanged by the neck until he is dead. "What are you going to hang me for?" says A. "Petit larceny," responds the officer. "The law does not say so," says A. But as the officer is fastening the rope around his neck he informs A. that this is the meaning of the law. I ask in all candor, Would not every citizen of the State rebel against such a procedure as the above? And yet we are gravely informed that this is the way God deals with the human family on account of Adam's sin.
First, we must die a spiritual death, i. e., lose all desire to do good. Second, a temporal death, i. e., separation of soul and body. Third, an eternal death, i. e., eternal life in misery. And if you deny it you are charged with heresy, infidelity, and "not being able to discern things of the Spirit."
But the most glaring absurdity of all is a plan of redemption from a three-fold death. They tell us that a plan of redemption has been provided—that we are redeemed by virtue of the vicarious sufferings of Jesus Christ. If that be true, then Christ must die a three-fold death before man can be redeemed!
Thus, Christ must come into the world a good and holy being, after which he must die a spiritual death (get into "that awful state of ignorance, insensibility and disobedience which mankind are in by nature," Buck) and have a spiritual resurrection (be converted) before man can be redeemed from the first death.
After that he must die a corporeal death and have a corporeal resurrection in order to redeem man from a physical death. But after this is done his work is only commenced, for he has yet to redeem man from the dominion of eternal death, which he can only do by suffering the same himself. Thus in the attempt to get up a plan of redemption, this theory consigns Christ and the whole family of men to endless perdition!
As the reader is tired of following us through the absurdities of modern theology, we pass from them to investigate the Bible doctrine of the nature of the death we die in consequence of Adam's transgression.
In examining this subject I shall first consider the word "Man," and see if I can determine its meaning; or what man is made of; whether he is a compound of mortality and immortality, part of dust, and part of some kind of a vital fluid which can never die; or whether he is "but dust and ashes." Gen. xviii, 27.
In 1 Cor. xv, 45, Paul says, "And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit." The first man Adam is declared to be a living soul. That living soul is of the earth, earthy. The writing referred to is found in Gen. ii, 7. "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul." Here man (the whole being) was made of dust; and an immortal soul put into him? No. The breath of life breathed into him, and man, that which was made of dust, became a living soul. Paul says in 1 Cor. xv, 47, "The first man is of the earth, earthy." Not part of the earth, and a part from heaven, as immortal-soulists claim.
Here I might ask, If man has in his nature a principle which survives the death of the corporeal structure, what is it? Man as a whole is said to be mortal. Job xiv, 17. If a part of man survives death, the Bible would somewhere make the exception. This it does not do. But it everywhere treats man as a unit. Man was man before the breath of life was put into his nostrils, and he was only man afterwards. The Bible teaches that man must die. It talks about living men and dead men, so that man is as really man after his death as he was before he died. The difference being, that with one the vital functions are performing their work, while with the other they have ceased. Who will say that a mill is not as really a mill when it has stopped as it is when grinding wheat or corn?
If the above position be true, viz., that man is a unit, (and its truthfulness cannot be disputed), it follows that if a part of man is immortal, all is; and if a part dies, all the parts die, unless the Scriptures have made the exception. The Bible nowhere excepts any part of man, but abounds in declarations like the following: "Man that is born of woman is of few days and full of trouble." "Man dieth and wasteth away." "If a man die shall he live again?" "Man shall turn again to the dust," &c., &c.
I have often heard ministers say that man (the man proper) does not die. In funeral discourses I have heard them say that "John is not dead. Here is the shell in which John lived, but John is in heaven." See the following extract from an obituary published in the Christian Advocate:
"Little Jane was a lovely child, and young as she was, she loved to pray, and though we call her dead, she is not dead, she is alive,
"Trying the powers of her little voice, While the angels listen—many now rejoice, And join with her in the praise of God, Who washed her young spirit in Jesus' blood."
But no such idea can be found in the Scriptures. On the contrary, the Bible says, "Moses, my servant, is dead." "Lazarus is dead," &c. Again, when the Savior calls Lazarus from the dead, he does not call a body from the grave, and an immortal soul from heaven, to unite them together. But after the stone was rolled away from the grave [John xi, 41] he "cried with a loud voice, 'Lazarus, come forth, and he that was dead came forth,' bound hand and foot with grave clothes." John xi, 43, 44.
So it will be in the resurrection. "All that are in their graves (not their immortal souls in heaven) shall hear his voice and shall come forth." John v, 27, 28.
Continue reading: LETTERS