Earlier text: Power and Humility of JesusA Sketch of Experience.
By William Covert
I BEGAN the observance of the Sabbath in February, 1868. I was a member of an “Age to Come” Adventist Church at the time, and thought that the Jews would soon be restored to the land of Palestine, and rebuild old Jerusalem, and that Christ would come and raise the sleeping saints and change the living righteous who believed as I did, to immortality, and the worst of the wicked would be destroyed; but a middle class who were neither righteous nor wicked, would survive. These we denominated “the left of the nations,” and we believed that they, as well as the “Twelve Tribes of Israel,” would be on probation in a mortal state during the millennium; that Christ would rule on “David’s throne” in Jerusalem, and the immortal saints would constitute his Cabinet or Royal Court, etc., etc. Thus we started out with the doctrine of the millennium, nearly agreeing in a few particulars. But the farther we traveled the less nearly we agreed, until, finally, no one could agree with himself a fortnight at a time; and when we reached the end of the one thousand years, some had many more ages to come in the future beyond that time, in which the dead were to be raised by decades and have a new probation. We claimed to be the “Brethren of the One Faith,” and indeed our faith was as uniform as the color of Jacob’s cattle. Yet I felt certain that there was an age of probation beyond this dispensation, and this in a general way we called the “Age to Come.” I do sincerely pity any one who gets entangled in the meshes of this doctrine, because he cannot see clearly the ground just before him that he may get a firm footing on anything. The deceptive mirage of the future age blinds his eyes so that he does not see the dangers in the road over which he has to travel. I continued to advocate this doctrine until the Tipton camp-meeting in 1870. That meeting, though a very small one, still has possession of the richest spot in my heart. I had learned to obey God before that time, but there I learned to love him. I went there prejudiced against Sister White, only because she contradicted the doctrine of the Age to Come. Her earnest appeals and solemn admonitions, united with the efforts of Brother White, softened my heart, and it was in an impressible condition when Brother Littlejohn arose to speak upon the “Hour of Judgment.” I had disbelieved the Messages because I could not harmonize them with the Age to Come. I had tried to place them and the prophetic periods in the future age as props for our hobby. I had never had the privilege of listening to one of our ministers on the subject, but when he had finished speaking, I believed the hour of God’s Judgment is come. None but those who have been deceived by this stupefying doctrine, and then liberated therefrom, can comprehend its deceptive influence. I had been watching the Catholic council that had been sitting in Rome that year, and the decree of “Infallibility” was of present interest; and I was prepared to believe it to be the most blasphemous decree ever voted by the “little-horn” power. And when the point was made that the “great words which the horn spake” was after “the Judgment was set and the books were opened,” I could no longer refuse to believe in the present truth. I now had the right end of the prophetic string, and as I unrolled it, every point in the Age-to-Come theory vanished from the field of prophecy, and truth, beautiful, symmetrical, and strong, stretched out before me and bridged every chasm that I had been trying in vain to span with the theory that I had tried so hard to utilize. The law and the Sabbath possessed new beauty and force. The millennium was no longer an unmeaning riddle, and the sanctuary and atonement opened up the whole plan of salvation so completely that I have seen no cause for entanglement in my Biblical studies since. At first I did not realize that I was so effectually divorced from my old theory. It was not until I had made a voyage of discovery up and down the prophetic streams that I discovered that I had been using the timbers prepared for the great temple of truth to bolster up error, and when every piece was brought into its place nothing was lacking. Within one month I was enabled to relate to the Brethren Lane and the members of my church what a revolution had been effected in my mind, and we wept tears of joy, rejoicing that we could see eye to eye. The Great Danger.
By F. W. R.
At the dedication of the new chapel at Princeton, Dr. McCosh delivered a discourse, from which the following on "Agnosticism" is an extract:- The leading philosophic and religious error of this day is not Unitarianism, which, in fact, is dead and laid out for decent burial. It is not rationalism, for thinking men now see that human reason cannot construct religion. It is not exactly atheism. Few are so bold as to assert or argue that there is no God. They claim, "We do not deny the existence of God, we are not so presumptuous as this; we make no denials, we simply maintain that we have no evidence." The most influential error of the day, the one underlying every other, is what is called Agnosticism. The founder of it in modern times is David Hume, usually called the skeptic; he would be called in the present day an Agnostic. According to this system we do not know things, we simply know appearances; and we know not and cannot know whether there is any reality beyond, or, if there be, what the reality is. Its supporters virtually affirm that truth cannot be found. Few are aware—indeed none, except those who have looked into the subject specially, are aware—how prevalent this style of thought and sentiment is, in the present day, in the English press all over the world. It is adopted by a vast body of young writers in England, and is being followed, without their being aware of it, by numbers in this country. In some cases it is openly stated and defended; in more it is implied without being avowed. When thoroughly and conscientiously carried out, it means that we cannot know anything. More frequently it means that we cannot discover any truth beyond what the senses reveal, that we have no certainty of spiritual truth, or, indeed, of moral truth, except as utility, or the power of imparting pleasure. Only those who have penetrated beneath the surface are aware how much this creed, or rather sentiment, is lowering the moral tone and religious faith of educated young men. It is bred in the damps of the earth; it rises up and is in the air; it covers the heavens from the view, and we breathe it as malaria. It is contradictory to maintain that we know, that we can know, nothing. But when we have shown this, we have not destroyed the error any more than we have killed a spectre by thrusting a sword into it. For the strength of its defense is, that supposed truth is contradictory, and therefore not to be believed. The only way to meet it is to stand firm, and to point to truth which we know as being self-evident, and which we are constrained to believe. What we have to do with those who favor the system is to set the truth before them and let it shine in its own light. We know that we exist, we know that others exist. Proceeding on in the same way, we find that God exists, that we are capable of knowing the distinction between right and wrong, and that we are responsible to God for the deeds done in the body, whether they have been good or whether they have been evil. We have as strong evidence of the higher and spiritual truths as we have of the lower. I have evidence that I exist, but I have also proof that God exists, the author of my being. These men would accept the lower truths, what can be seen and felt, in pleasure and in pain, in what they eat and what they drink, in meat and in money, and some are anxious to secure as many earthly goods as possible. Their agnosticism, practically, and in fact, consists simply in their affirming, and trying to persuade others, especially young men, that we can know nothing of the higher truths, of moral and spiritual truth, of God, of immortality, and a judgment day. This is the deadly influence of the system. It is seeking to kill the germs of spiritual life which are deep down in our nature, so as to keep them from germinating. It is undermining the faith of the rising generation, and holding back all the aspirations of the soul, which lead to high ideals, and to deeds of heroism and self-sacrifice. It is filling the air with doubts, difficulties, uncertainties, perplexities. It is, I fear, hindering many an earnest youth from devoting himself to the work of the church, and lessening the number of candidates for the ministry. It can be shown that we have good and valid proofs of these higher truths of morality and religion, even as we have of the lower ones of sense and sight. If we neglect either kind of truth, evil consequence must follow. If we do not eat and drink, we must die. If we refuse to believe in ethical and spiritual truth, we offend God and must suffer the penalties of a broken law, and live without the grand beliefs and hopes that elevate and cheer the mind. God is declared in his works. "The heavens declare the glory of God," the whole earth is full of his praise. It is the declared doctrine of Paul, and, I may add, of the highest philosophy which ever carries up to this high religion: "The invisible things of God are clearly seen, being understood from the things that are made, even his eternal power and God-head." Casting All Your Care Upon Him
"CASTING all your care upon Him, for He careth for you." The Idolatry of Talent
By F. W. Robertson
THERE is in our day a marvelous idolatry of talent; it is a strange and grievous thing to see how men bow down before genius and success. Let us draw the distinction sharp and firm between these two things; goodness is one thing, talent is another. When once the idolatry of talent enters the church, then farewell to spirituality; when men ask their teachers, not for that which will make them more humble and Godlike, but for the excitement of an intellectual banquet, then farewell to Christian progress.—F. W. Robertson. PERHAPS, on the whole, moderately early rising is now a more common practice in cities than it was forty years ago. It seems strange that the habit of lying in bed hours after the sun is up should ever have obtained a hold on the multitude of brain-workers, as undoubtedly it has in times past. Hour for hour the intellectual work done in the early morning, when the atmosphere is yet unpoisoned by the breath of myriads of actively moving creatures, must be, and as a matter of experience is, incomparably better than that done at night. The habit of writing and reading late in the day and far into the night, "for the sake of quiet," is one of the most mischievous to which a man of mind can addict himself. When the body is jaded, the spirit may seem to be at rest, and not so easily distracted by the surroundings which we think less obtrusive than in the day; but this seeming is a snare. When the body is weary, the brain, which is an integral part of the body, and the mind, which is simply brain function, are weary too. If we persist in working one part of the system because some other part is too tired to trouble us, that cannot be wise management of self. The feeling of tranquility which comes over the busy and active man about 10:30 or 11 o'clock ought not to be regarded as an incentive to work. It is, in fact, the effect of a lowering of vitality consequent on the exhaustion of the physical sense. Nature wants and calls for physiological rest. Instead of complying with her reasonable demand, the night-worker hails the "feeling" of mental quiescence, mistakes it for clearness and acuteness, and whips the jaded organism with the will until it goes on working. What is the result? Immediately, the accomplishment of a task fairly well, but not half so well as if it had been performed with the vigor of a refreshed brain, working in health from proper sleep. Remotely, or later on, comes the penalty to be paid for unnatural exertion—that is, energy wrung from exhausted or weary nerve centers under pressure. This penalty takes the form of "nervousness," perhaps sleeplessness, almost certainly some loss or depreciation of function in one or more of the great organs concerned in nutrition. To relieve these maladies, springing from this unsuspected cause, the brain worker very likely has recourse to the use of stimulants, possibly alcoholic, or it may be simply tea or coffee. The sequel need not be followed. Night work, during student-life and in after years, is the fruitful cause of much unexplained, though by no means inexplicable suffering, for which it is difficult, if not impossible, to find a remedy. Surely, morning is the time for work, when the whole body is rested, the brain relieved from its tension, and the mind-power at its best.—Lancet. Ananias, Sapphira, and the Love of Money
This signal manifestation of the wrath of God upon the dissemblers was a check which Infinite Wisdom knew was needed. The church would have been disgraced, if, in the rapid increase of professed Christians, there were persons professing to serve God, but worshiping mammon. There are many Ananiases and Sapphiras in our day, whom Satan tempts to dissemble because of their love of money. By various plans and excuses they withhold from the treasury of God the means intrusted to them for the advancement of the cause of God. Should the punishment of Ananias and Sapphira be visited upon this class, there would be many dead bodies in our churches requiring burial. "And of the rest durst no man join himself to them, but the people magnified them." Verse 13. This passage is rather obscure, and various fanciful opinions are given by different commentators in regard to it. The following seems to us the most reasonable explanation of it: There is a contrast between "the rest" and "the people," the former term being used with reference to the wealthy class, to which Ananias evidently belonged, and the latter term being applied to the common people. We learn from this verse, then, that the judgment upon Ananias and Sapphira accomplished just what was intended,—it kept the young church free from those who would use its growing popularity as a means of gaining honor for themselves. The church of God was never intended to be used as a means of gaining access to "good society." Submission, but Not Obedience
By Ellet Joseph Waggoner
While we cannot obey earthly governments when they come in conflict with the law of God, we need not resist them. This point is well put by Dr. Lyman Abbott, as follows:— “The church may impose the creed or the ritual against which the conscientious judgment of the individual revolts; the State may call upon the Quaker to bear arms in war; and thus not merely the opinion or taste of the individual, but his conscience, may be brought into collision with the judgment or even the conscience of the community or the family. What then? The answer of the Scriptures to this question is plainly submission, but not obedience. The individual is not even then to set the community at defiance by resistance; neither is he to yield to the community by acquiescence. He is simply to disobey the law, act on his own conscience, and accept the consequences. Thus Daniel, forbidden to pray, raised no revolt against the palpably unjust decree, but prayed and bore the penalty. Thus the apostles, forbidden to preach, organized no resistance to the palpably illegal decree of the Sanhedrin—for freedom of speech was a constitutional right in the Jewish Commonwealth—but went on with their preaching and submitted to arrest and trial.” “And they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his name.” The apostles had been beaten—a punishment that carries with it more disgrace than anything else. And yet they rejoiced. As we study the lesson, it is easy for us to see why they should rejoice; but how would it be if we were in similar circumstances? If we think that we would do as they did, we can easily test the matter. If we endure the little trials that befall us, uncomplainingly; if we are patient under abuse or ridicule, then it may be that we could rejoice in persecutions. It is not a hardship, but a privilege, for the Christian to suffer for Christ. It is accounted as much a blessing as it is to be allowed to believe on him. Phil. 1: 29. See also 1 Thess. 3: 3; 2 Tim. 2: 12; Matt. 5: 10–12. E. J. W. Vows to God and Their Neglect
But even hypocrisy was not the whole of their crime. The text says they "kept back" part of the price of the land. The original word occurs elsewhere but once in the New Testament, Titus 2:10, where it is rendered "purloining." Greenfield defines it, "to keep back anything unlawfully, secrete, purloin, embezzle." The case, then, was this: It was understood that those who at that time sold property, did it not for gain, but for benevolent purposes. Whether they had made a formal vow or not, the act of selling the land was evidence of at least an outward consecration of it to the cause of God. And yet so lightly did they regard their vow that they dared to appropriate a portion of the property to their own use. But this was simply stealing, for as soon as the decision was made to devote the proceeds of the sale to the cause, the land belonged to God. Then we may also learn from this how serious a matter it is to vow to the Lord and then neglect to pay our vows. It is a terrible thing to refuse to help support God's cause, but it is still worse to vow and not pay. No wonder the question is asked in astonishment, "Will a man rob God?" Let each one ask himself this question. The Rulers’ Fear of the People
"Ye intend to bring this man's blood upon us." These wicked rulers had no fear of God before their eyes, but they feared the people. Verse 26 says, "They feared the people lest they should have been stoned." The people had been healed in the name of Jesus; but every sermon of the apostles showed that the Jewish rulers had crucified him. The rulers did not by these words intend to deny that they had put Jesus to death; they simply showed that they feared the consequences if the people should have the matter set before them in its true light. Obedience to God in Matters of Conscience
"But," some will say, "we are commanded to be 'subject unto the higher powers,' and are told that 'whosoever resisteth the power resisteth the ordinance of God;' so then, if the Government should command us to observe the first day of the week, it would be our duty as good citizens to obey." But the example of Peter and John, of Paul himself, of Daniel and the three Hebrew children, is sufficient to teach us that Paul in Rom. 13 refers simply to ordinary, human affairs, and not to matters of conscience, for which a person is answerable to God alone. The saying, "The voice of the people is the voice of God," is one of Satan's lies; "The carnal mind is enmity against God." A Modern Sapphira.
By W. M. Taylor
IN the market-place of the town of Devizes, in England, there is a tablet which records that near to the spot on which it is fixed, a woman dropped down dead, having just uttered the words, "If I have got the half-crown, may God strike me dead!" and the coin was found firmly fixed in the hand of her corpse.—W. M. Taylor. We Ought to Obey God Rather Than Men
By H. Clay Trumbull
"We ought to obey God rather than men." That would seem to be an indisputable truth; but it is really a truth that is not even generally accepted as a basis of action in the world at large. What men insist on, rather than what God has commanded, is popularly binding. Fashion is more blindly followed than Bible teachings, by the average church-goer. Many a man or woman shrinks from standing out against public sentiment, while quietly defying God by conscious disobedience of his law. And there are multitudes who would hesitate to break a statute law, when they would not quiver at the thought of breaking some positive law of God. There are those who would not steal a dollar from the public treasury (there are those, I say, even if they are by no means the entire population), yet who would steal time and service from God, with hardly a thought of special iniquity. And the world generally judges men rather by their conformity to man's law than to God's law. A church-member can defraud God out of his dues without losing caste in church or community, when he would be a branded man if he openly defrauded one of his fellows to a far less extent. Yet, in spite of popular practice in such matters "we ought to"—whether we do or not, "we ought to obey God rather than men." The apostles were sound on this point. It is a pity that more of us are not as sound just here.—H. Clay Trumbull. He doth much that doth a thing well. A Valuable Book on an Important Subject.—New Edition.
THE LIFE AND EPISTLES OF ST. PAUL.
BY W. J. CONYBEARE, M. A., LATE FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE, AND J. S. HOWSON, M. A., PRINCIPAL OF THE COLLEGIATE INSTITUTE, LIVERPOOL. A NEW and popular edition, complete in one volume with index, chronological tables, and notes. The purpose of this work is to give a living picture of St. Paul himself and of the circumstances by which he was surrounded. To accomplish this much more has been done by them than to present a mere transcript of the Scriptural narrative. For example, to comprehend the influences under which the Apostle grew to manhood, we must realize the position of a Jewish family in Tarsus, and must understand the kind of education which he would receive as a boy in his Hebrew home, or in the schools of his native city, and in riper years “at the feet of Gamaliel” in Jerusalem; while to understand his history as a missionary to the heathen, we must know the state of the different populations which he visited, and the character of the Greek and Roman civilizations of his time. What Dr. Geikie has done for the Life of Our Lord, Conybeare and Howson have done for the life of St. Paul. As a picture of the civilization of Paul’s time, their book is admirable, and shows thorough familiarity with all those places and aspects of truth which study can make available in interpreting the wonderful life and teachings of the Great Apostle to the Gentiles. It is a work of gigantic industry and profound learning, and has already passed through many editions. THE Life and Epistles of Paul, by Conybeare and Howson, is emphatically a standard work, so thoroughly executed that it seems doubtful that it can be much improved upon. I have often referred to it in my studies, and always with profit. The apostle Paul was not only, to use his own words, “in labors more abundant,” but his letters form a large part of the literature of the New Testament. It is not for the mere gratification of curiosity that we wish to learn what we can of such a man. By studying his personal history and the circumstances connected with his untiring labors, we are able to enter into the spirit of his work, and far better to appreciate what he has written. I can cordially recommend this book to all students of the New Testament. J. H. WAGGONER. THE Life of St. Paul by Conybeare and Howson, I regard as a book of great merit, and one of rare usefulness to the earnest student of the New Testament history. ELLEN G. WHITE. Obeying God Against Human Decrees
By Editor
"WE ought to obey God rather than men." This is a truth which is recognized by all, and acted upon by but few. A writer in the Christian at Work truly says: "In all human things it is our duty to be submissive, as Paul shows, to the government under which we live; but in divine things, where God speaks and his voice is against the decree of government, we are justified in disobedience." But who dares to disobey a decree of men, that he may obey God? There are a few, but the majority of those who read of and approve the apostle's course, dare not take their stand upon an unpopular truth, against which there is no positive law. The most weighty excuse that can be urged against the keeping of the Sabbath of the Lord is that it is peculiar and inconvenient. It is easier to approve of the good deeds of men in past ages than it is to follow their example. But if we approve of their course, we condemn ourselves if we do not do likewise. Lesson for the Pacific Coast—May 19.
There are probably very few who really comprehend the crime for which Ananias and Sapphira were punished. It has been customary to refer to them and to their punishment as an example of what an awful thing it is to lie, and of the terrible consequences of lying. Now while it is impossible to exaggerate or even to fully comprehend how heinous a sin lying is, it is a fact that simply lying was not the sin for which these unfortunate persons suffered. Their sin was hypocrisy of the worst kind. They wished to have a reputation for generosity and benevolence, without the necessary self-denial. In the high priest's palace, Peter himself had told an open lie, and had added profanity to his lying. In his case it was unpremeditated; he fell under the temptation almost before he was aware of it. But in this case there was design; Ananias and his wife had agreed together to practice this deception, and they dared to persist in it even in the place of solemn prayer. They lied to the Holy Ghost. If Peter had not questioned them, they would have simply handed in a part of the money and said nothing; but their sin would have been the same. Their lying words to Peter were wicked, but the enormity of their crime consisted in their desire to appear better than they really were. From this we may learn how God regards the hypocrite. There are many ways in which we may act the same part. God does not punish every case of this sin as he did in this instance, but he takes notice of it none the less, and at the last day, "will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts." 1 Cor. 4:5. Armstrong's Anti-Sabbath Book.
By Editor
IN noticing the questions of the Christian Advocate on the subject of the Sabbath, we again called attention to a Methodist publication, a pamphlet written by a Mr. Armstrong, and to our exposure of its deceptions, and invited the Advocate (as we had done before) to point out the errors in our strictures, if there were any, and to defend the positions of the book. If this were not done, we stated that we should hold the Methodist denomination responsible for the deceptions which the book contained. They might indeed free themselves by repudiating the book or withdrawing it from the market. But they are not willing to do either. The only reply to our invitation is the following from the Advocate of April 25:— "The Signs of the Times wants us to explain and defend the argument of Rev. Wm. Armstrong on the question, 'Is Saturday or Sunday the Christian Sabbath?' The work can be bought for twenty-five cents, and any one interested can get it and read it. Personally, we have no special concern about the matter. Whether Mr. Armstrong is right in interpreting the case and the history of the Sabbath or not does not bother us. Our neighbor's devotion to the seventh day is very emphatic, and hence he puts all his strength upon it to very little effect, except among his own people. We think it a question of no more consequence whatever, and we always pity any one who gets excited about it. As we do not believe that our readers are generally interested in the Sabbatarian controversy, we respectfully decline to fill our paper with it." In other item in the same number of the Advocate, on the same subject, we find the following words:— "The Signs of the Times wants us to answer its book notice of a work on the 'Sabbath,' by Mr. Armstrong. We do not remember the notice nor the book." The Advocate has a conveniently variable memory. We shall forward a copy of our notice to the editor so that excuse will be removed. As to the other, we cannot exactly see how his memory needs much refreshing, seeing that he says "the work can be bought for twenty-five cents, and any one interested can get it and read it." This information is strangely positive, considering the fact that he has no remembrance of the book of which he speaks! In other articles the Advocate has made this Sabbath and Sunday controversy a serious matter. We think it has not lost any of its importance; but that the peculiar position in which the Advocate is placed makes it convenient to pass it over as lightly as possible. We do not believe its readers will be satisfied with the notice of this subject, as copied above, if they understand the facts in the case. And we shall do our duty in placing the facts before them as far as we possibly can. The Advocate says, "any one interested can get it and read it." The editor is a man of age, of experience, and of scholarship. He cannot be ignorant of the fact that his statement does not at all meet the case. He does not and cannot say that any one can get it and read it and judge for himself. Why not? Because Mr. Armstrong, backed up by the indorsement of a Doctor of Divinity, gives a pretended exposition of the Hebrew of Ex. 16. We claim that this exposition of Mr. Armstrong is a willful deception, false in both its statements and in its grammatical construction of the original text. And in this mainly consists the wickedness of the deception: The English reader, who is unacquainted with the original text, cannot possibly determine for himself the truth or falsity of the exposition. He is obliged to take its statements on credit. Our indictment of the book is a strong one, but no stronger than the circumstances and the cause of truth demand. We are free to say that if such a course had been taken by any accredited writer or any publishing house of the Seventh-day Adventists, it would greatly "bother us." And we have not a shadow of a doubt that if such a deception could be fastened upon our people, the Advocate would help it to bother us as far as it was in its power. Candid readers, Methodists, look at this case in the light of Christian duty and responsibility. Mr. Armstrong's argument strikes at the Sabbath of the fourth commandment. By God's commandments every work will be brought into Judgment. Eccl. 12:13, 14. This is a question that affects our standing before God both now and in the Judgment. A Methodist minister writes a work containing an inexcusable deception, a willful perversion, as we claim, of the word of God on the question. A Methodist D. D. introduces and indorses the work. The Methodist "Book Concern" gives it to the world. Methodist Advocates recommend it. And when its truthfulness is called in question—when it is indicted as a deception and a work of error—whether it is correct or not—does not bother the California Christian Advocate! We must suppose it does not. But what religious inconsistency is shown therein. Nothing but a personal recommendation by the Bishops could give it stronger denominational indorsement than it has received. It has gone forth to its thousands of readers as a faithful exposition of the word of God, and now, after it has influenced their minds in favor of an error and against the truth of God's commandments, whether it is right or wrong; whether it contains truth or error; whether it is a faithful exposition or a manifest perversion of the Scriptures, is a matter of indifference to those who have given it to the world, and who still advertise it for sale! They are not bothered on the point. It is a matter too trifling to receive their attention, or to be suffered to interfere with the more important matters they have on hand! We have often been accused of a want of charity for stating that the standard of religion is lamentably low in the Protestant churches; that there is abundance of the form of godliness and a great destitution of its power: 2 Tim. 3:1-5. But the fact is more and more evident; the proof itself more and more prominent. In church standards they are wise; of traditions they are tenacious; but "the weightier matters of the law" do not often bother them. The evasions are legion which are found all over the land, in almost every denomination, as a means of getting rid of the commandments of God. We are pained with the prospect as we write. God has foreseen and pointed out the dangers of the last days, and the deceptions which would prevail, and instituted means to secure a conscientious observance of his commandments; Rev. 14:9-12; but the church joins hands with the world against divine authority. Under the flimsy pretext of a "police regulation," or a "secular arrangement," to which the churches give the full power of their influence, the Sabbath of Jehovah our God is willfully and scornfully trampled under foot. "Lord, how long?" We would that the message of warning were heeded; that the people would flock to the standard which the Spirit of the Lord is lifting up against the enemy. Isa. 59. But "the Scribes and the Pharisees" of to-day are reproducing the history of those of eighteen hundred years ago. They have had the "key of knowledge" committed to them. Unmindful of the great responsibility resting upon them, they shut up the way of the kingdom of Heaven, refusing to enter therein, and to let those enter who would if not turned away from the truth of the sacred word by perversions and vain reasonings. But as it was in the days of Noah, so also in the coming of the Son of man. God's Spirit will not always strive. Judgment will not long delay. God of mercy, prepare us to stand in that solemn day.