Earlier text: General ArticlesModern Spiritualism.
By Editor
THEY DENY THE COMING OF CHRIST. SAID the Saviour, while discoursing of his coming and the end of the age, "Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there, believe it not. For there shall arise false christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect." Matt. 24: 23, 24. Some talk as though they supposed this was fulfilled in those who preach the near coming of the Lord; but there are many reasons why it cannot apply to them, but must apply to another class. All believers in the advent believe also in the personality of Christ, and, of course, cannot possibly proclaim that Christ is here, either in the desert, or in the secret chamber; but they teach exactly what the Scriptures say, that his coming is future, and will be personal, and visible to all, even as the lightning that shineth from one end of heaven to the other. But we think this scripture is now being fulfilled. There is a class, very numerous at present, and fast increasing in numbers, who do thus teach. There are false christs and false prophets, showing great signs and wonders, and preaching that the Lord is come. See the following from the Spiritual Telegraph, under the head of "Important Announcement to the World": "Hearken, then, to the voice of wisdom, O ye inhabitants of the earth, and be not blinded as to your Lord's appearing; for he is already in your midst." But if Christ is come, how is he come? We have not seen him; our friends still sleep in the dust; and as Peter said of David, so we can say of them: they are dead and buried, and their sepulchers are with us to this day. The above "important announcement" we cannot believe, until we can be assured that the events connected with his coming have taken place; but they have not. This leads us to remark that it must be utterly impossible for false christs to deceive those who have correct views of Christ and of his coming. And this deception could never have flourished as it has if the world and the church had not turned away from the doctrine of the Lord's coming. Those who firmly believe that Christ is a Priest on the throne of his Father, and that when he leaves that throne he will descend with a shout, with the voice of the Archangel and the trump of God, and that at his coming the righteous dead will be raised, the living changed, and all caught up together to meet the Lord in the air, while the wicked will be slain all over the earth; those, we say, who firmly believe these facts, cannot receive the testimony of false christs. But many who profess to believe the word of God only ask for a manifestation of supernatural power, or superhuman intelligence, to give full credit to the testimony of the power or spirit communicating. But if no false or spurious manifestations of power could be given, this scripture would never be fulfilled. Hence, it is not sufficient proof of their truthfulness, that signs and wonders are wrought; for the false christs and false prophets will show them even as Jannes and Jambres imitated the miracles wrought through Moses. From all this it is plain that before any can successfully proclaim themselves christs, they must destroy confidence in the exalted nature and position of Christ, or so pervert the testimony of Scripture as to make Christ such an one as themselves. This, Spiritualists have done. "I must look for the coming of my Lord in my own affection. He must come in the clouds of my spiritual heavens, or he cannot come for any benefit to me." The testimony of Dr. Hare, before quoted, shows a complete fulfillment of this prophecy: "He said that he had been protected from deception by the spirits of Washington and Franklin, and that they had brought Jesus Christ to him, with whom he had also communicated. He had at first repelled him as an impostor; but became convinced afterward that it was really him." According to Dr. Hare, Christ came and was in the "secret chamber" at that time. In the Banner of Light, Nov. 18, 1865, the controlling spirit testified through Mrs. Conant:— "The second coming of Christ means simply the second coming of truths that are not themselves new, that have always existed. . . . He said, 'When I come again I shall not be known to you.' Spiritualism is that second coming of Christ." As Christ is the exalted Son of God, the brightness of the Father's glory and the express image of his person, and the Father's sole representative to man, to make Spiritualism, with its falsities, its Atheism, and its licentiousness, identical with the coming of Christ, is the most horrid blasphemy. We have remarked that we cannot be made to believe that Christ has already come, because the voice of the Archangel has not been heard, and the dead in Christ have not risen. Spiritualists, however, easily dispose of this to their own satisfaction, for THEY DENY THE RESURRECTION. On this point there is no need to give a word of testimony, as they so completely ignore the doctrine that they seldom speak of it except with the most contemptuous expressions. We have often been led to wonder at Spiritualists, who will quote the Bible to sustain themselves on other points, affirming that a denial of the immortality of the soul is a denial of future life beyond the grave, with as much apparent confidence as though the Bible never mentions the resurrection. "Rev. A. D. Mayo," in the Division-street church, Albany, in a sermon on Spiritualism, said it shows "how the soul of man needs the assurance of an endless existence." But no man ever received assurance by Spiritualism of an endless existence through "Jesus and the resurrection;" to the contrary, its teachings are uniform that all have eternal life independent of Christ; that all are progressing to the same state of eternal bliss; that this is the unavoidable destiny of all. "At death, the external body of man again mingles with the common mass of the earth, never more to be reclaimed or needed by the man who gives it up."—Reply to Dwight, p. 82. To show that Dr. Hare and others are wrong in the statement that the Old Testament does not teach immortality, we shall examine the Scriptures themselves on the subject. The Old Testament, it is true, does not teach immortality as Dr. Hare understands it, that is, the natural or inherent immortality of an intangible soul; neither does the New Testament. But they both teach immortality in a sense that Spiritualists do not believe, that is, through a resurrection. Why intelligent, learned, Bible-reading Spiritualists overlook this fact we shall not attempt to explain. We will give the proofs, and leave it between them and our readers. 1. The Resurrection of the body taught in the Old Testament.—We shall omit the consideration of many texts which speak of a hope of future life, without directly defining the means of its fruition, and notice such as speak explicitly upon this point. Paul says that Abraham looked for the fulfillment of God's promise to him through Isaac, even though he was slain, "accounting that God was able to raise him even from the dead." Heb. 11: 17–19. This, of course, must refer to the resurrection of the body, the whole man, as the multiplication of his seed through Isaac was a prominent part of the promise. Isaiah 26: 19: "Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in the dust; for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead." This is to us an assurance of future life that no spiritualistic phenomena can strengthen; but we doubt whether there is a Spiritualist in the land who would deny Dr. Hare's statement on this plain testimony of the Old Testament. Prov. 14: 32: "The righteous hath hope in his death." Inherent or natural immortality cannot be a subject of hope; nor does the text say that by reason of this he hopes to escape death, as Spiritualism teaches. The reasonable conclusion is in harmony with the other texts we quote. Isaiah 25: 8: "He will swallow up death in victory." Here is a promise, plain and explicit; Paul refers to it in his argument on the resurrection of the body. He says; "So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory." Every expression here must be inverted to make this accord with the views of Spiritualists. Jer. 31: 15, 16: "Rachel weeping for her children refused to be comforted for her children, because they were not. Thus saith the Lord: Refrain thy voice from weeping, and thine eyes from tears; for thy work shall be rewarded, saith the Lord; and they shall come again from the land of the enemy." By Matt. 2: 17, 18, we learn that this was prophetic of the lamentation for the children slain by Herod. According to this, the action of Herod placed them under the dominion of an enemy; the Scriptures call death an enemy; from the dominion of the enemy they shall "come again," or "return to their own border." Directly opposed to this, Spiritualism teaches that death is not an enemy, and that the infants slain passed immediately to the seventh sphere, the highest state of happiness. See Dr. Hare's book, page 110, and Allen Putman's work entitled, "Natty, a Spirit." Eze. 37: 12, 13: "Behold, O my people, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel. And ye shall know that I am the Lord, when I have opened your graves, O my people, and brought you up out of your graves." Dan. 12: 2: "And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt." Hosea 13: 14: "I will ransom them from the power of the grave; I will redeem them from death; O death, I will be thy plagues; O grave, I will be thy destruction." What language could prove a future life beyond the grave, if this does not? By this we see what reliance is to be placed on the assertions of Spiritualists respecting the Bible. 2. The New Testament teaches the Resurrection of the Body.—Prominent on this subject we find the resurrection of Christ, and as it is both the surety and the example of the resurrection of his followers, we will examine it with care. Woodman, who professes to be a Bible-believing Spiritualist, accounts for his appearance after his death by saying he could "Extemporize for them from surrounding matter, a thin, temporary, material form." And to dispose of the resurrection, he says: "At death, the real man, that is to say, his soul and spirit, rise from or out of his dead body; that in the New Testament this is denominated anastasis, or the resurrection."—Reply to Dwight, page 82. Such a perversion of Scripture as this is altogether without excuse. The language of the New Testament is plain and decisive, not only in regard to the resurrection of the body of Christ, but also of the bodies of all. 1. The resurrection of Christ was not the rising of his spirit out of his body when he died, for he did not rise till the third day after his death; will they thence contend that his spirit did not leave his body till the third day after his death? 2. That which arose was placed under the guardianship of Roman soldiers; but no one can believe that after Jesus had been some hours dead, the soldiers were put on guard to prevent the escape of his spirit! 3. His enemies denied his resurrection and reported that his disciples had stolen him. But we cannot even suppose that they reported, or that anybody believed, that his disciples stole his spirit out of his body the third day after he died! 4. When his followers went to the sepulcher, after his resurrection, they "found not the body of the Lord Jesus." Luke 24: 3. 5. Peter, in his sermon on the day of Pentecost, proves the resurrection of Christ by the promise of God to David, that "of the fruit of his loins according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;" Acts 2: 30, 31; which is direct and positive proof of a bodily resurrection. This is sufficient to show what the resurrection of Christ was, according to the Scriptures; and we may safely affirm that, 1. The idea of the resurrection as taught by Spiritualism is not advanced in the Bible, either directly or indirectly; and, 2. Those who heard the apostles preach did not get such an idea from their teachings, notwithstanding their prepossessions would incline them to it. We will take the case of Paul at Athens, which as clearly shows this fact as could be desired. Nearly five hundred years before the time referred to, Socrates taught the present spiritualistic view, and told his friends before his death they would not bury Socrates; they would bury the body, but Socrates would go to dwell with the gods. Less than four hundred years before the time of Paul, and soon after the death of Socrates, Plato advanced his subtle sophistries on the same subject. It is generally claimed that Plato's reasonings were received by the philosophers of those days. These philosophers Paul met at Athens, the seat of this style of philosophy, and they heard him until he preached the resurrection of the dead, when they mocked, and would hear him no further. Had he taught the rising of an immortal soul out of the dying body, as Woodman says the resurrection means in the New Testament, instead of mocking, they might have placed Jesus whom Paul preached, in the temple of their gods! This view is confirmed by the resurrection of those saints whose bodies came out of their graves, and who went into the holy city and appeared to many, after the resurrection of Christ; and also by Christ's declaring that he was the resurrection, and immediately demonstrating it by calling Lazarus from the grave. In Rom. 8: 23, Paul says that we who have the first-fruits of the Spirit are waiting and groaning for the redemption of the body. In Phil. 3: 21, he says Christ "shall change our vile body that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body." In 1 Thess. 4: 13–18, the apostle says he does not wish them to be ignorant concerning them which are asleep, nor to sorrow as those that have no hope; he then instructs them on the hope of the Christian, showing that, 1. The Lord himself shall descend. 2. The dead in Christ shall arise. 3. The living shall be caught up with them to meet the Lord. The result: So shall we ever be with the Lord. Then follows the application: Comfort one another with these words. We might give much more proof, but the above is more than sufficient to expose the false statements of Spiritualists. And if any apology seems necessary for offering so much proof on so plain a point, we present it in the following words of Dr. Clarke:— "One remark I cannot help making: the doctrine of the resurrection appears to have been thought of much more consequence among the primitive Christians than it is now! How is this? The apostles were continually insisting on it, and exciting the followers of God to diligence, obedience, and cheerfulness, through it. And their successors in the present day seldom mention it! So the apostles preached, and so primitive Christians believed; so we preach, and so our hearers believe. There is not a doctrine in the gospel on which more stress is laid; and there is not a doctrine in the present system of preaching which is treated with more neglect."—On 1 Cor. 15. EDITOR. IT matters little where I was born,
Or if my parents were rich or poor;
Whether they shrank at the cold world's scorn
Or walked in the pride of wealth secure;
But whether I live an honest man,
And hold my integrity firm in my clutch,
I tell you, my brother, plain as I can,
It matters much! It matters little where be my grave,
If on the land or in the sea,
By purling brook, or 'neath stormy wave,
It matters little or naught to me;
But whether the angel of death comes down
And marks my brow with a loving touch,
As the one who shall wear the victor's crown,
It matters much! Out of the Ark.
By Talmage
Do you know the reason why the people stayed outside and perished? Why, I sup-pose that some stood out because they thought that after a while they could go in. They said to themselves, "I must get richer, I must get more flocks, I must culture my lands better." Or they may have said, "That ark has been open so long, it will continue to be open; I can go in another time." The Lord waited 120 years in the case of Noah's ark. These people all the time were delaying and procrastinating. Meanwhile the heavens were filling with water and the storm was brewing. They had come to their last year, to their last month, to their last week, to their last day, to their last hour, to their last minute; but suddenly an ocean dropped from heaven, and an ocean surged up from beneath, and God rolled earth and sky in one—a wave of awful destruction. But I think that some of these people were kept out of the ark for fear of being laughed at. I suppose a man to be starting towards that ancient ark, and people gather round and say, "Ha, ha! see, he's going into the ark; what an absurd thing! Why, there's going to be no storm, and if there is, that ship won't outride it. Come and see him. Look! this is too good to keep. Just look. Ha, ha! going into the ark!" And so the man turns back. He couldn't bear to be laughed at, and so he perished in the deluge. And I suppose in this house there are hundreds of people who are being laughed out of their best interests. And for fear of being scoffed at and derided there are hundreds of people drawn away from God and heaven. Oh! these scorners, what can they do for you at last? When you are on your dying pillow will they come to comfort you? In the great day of eternity will they bail you out? They can keep you out of heaven, but can they keep you out of hell?—Talmage. Railroad Employment and Support
Few people are aware of how important an interest the network of railways has become, and how much it takes to keep them in running order as the annexed figures will show. Four hundred thousand persons are employed on the railroads in this country, 2,000,000 depend upon them for immediate support, and $400,000,000 are annually paid to employers and persons furnishing supplies. Are All the Commandments Abolished?
By Editor
THE editor of the Earnest Christian has been stirred, by a letter of inquiry from San Francisco, to point out the "erroneous" positions of the Seventh-day Adventists. His first objection to our teaching is as follows:— "They make the essential thing in true religion to consist in keeping as the Sabbath, the seventh day of the week." We would remind Mr. Roberts that there is one commandment which is not yet generally supposed to be abolished. It reads thus:—"Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor." This he has violated in the above quoted remark. Nothing which any Seventh-day Adventist ever wrote, will justify such an assertion. But we do say that it is not every one that says to Jesus, Lord, Lord, that shall enter into the kingdom of Heaven, but they that do the will of his Father. See Matt. 7:21-23. We say that both "the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus" are necessary to a perfect Christian character. Rev. 14:12. While the earnestness of the editor is in a profession of love to God, we declare our belief that "this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments." 1 John 5:3. And because we believe these Scripture statements, we have no confidence in the sensational or sentimental or emotional or superficial religion which the editor of the Earnest Christian so strenuously advocates. The editor says of the Pharisees, "Strict as they were in keeping the seventh day of the week for the Sabbath, they were not in a state of salvation." Perhaps he considers that he has herein afforded a wonderful piece of information, that they who persistently rejected Christ "were not in a state of salvation!" We have no more doubt of the fact than we have that they who rely on their faith in Christ, and refuse to do the will of God as revealed in his holy law will suffer a great disappointment in the final day; or that they who "make void the law through faith," or continue it its transgression that grace may abound, will find that theirs has been a vain religion in that day when every man shall be rewarded according to his works. Singularly enough Mr. R. proceeds to argue against the obligation to keep the Sabbath. And, as we might expect, re-iterates objections which have been fully answered scores of times. But it may be that he has not kept himself acquainted with the discussion of this subject of late years; so we will notice his positions. 1. He refers to "the times" and "days" of Gal. 4, and to Paul's words in reference to them, as arguments against the seventh-day Sabbath. If he will refer to Deut. 18, he will find that the observance "of times" was a heathen custom; that it had no reference to any observance which Jehovah had ever required of any people. And Paul speaks to the class who had been addicted to such practices, as having done "service to them which by nature are no gods." Gal. 4:8. He who refers this to the keeping of the seventh-day Sabbath—"the Sabbath of the Lord thy God"—shows marvelous ignorance of the truths of Scripture. Or if he is not ignorant, he certainly manifests a great degree of irreverence. We have no feeling of unkindness toward Mr. R., and we are not disposed to make any severe application to his case. But, until he can extricate himself from the dilemma stated above, we would suggest that he be less censorious toward those who are trying to show their faith by their works, instead of making faith a substitute for obedience. 2. He claims that we pervert the commandment in making it enjoin the seventh day of the week, when it does not say so. Here again we might express our surprise that a professed "master in Israel" should take a position so untenable. Let us notice— a. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth," and he rested the seventh day from that beginning. That was the act whereby the cycle of weeks was established. If Mr. Roberts doubts or denies it, let him point to some other time and event when the week of seven days originated. This fixes the Sabbath of the Lord to the seventh day of the week. b. The Jews had the Sabbath of the Lord, the Sabbath of the fourth commandment, definitely pointed out to them in the wilderness of Arabia. And, accordingly, they have always kept the seventh day of the week. c. The Sabbath-day was well known to our Saviour, and to all others in his day. And inspiration declares that the next day succeeding the Sabbath of the commandment was the first day of the week. Therefore the Sabbath preceding it was the last day of the week, or the seventh day of the week. 3. To further carry out this idea, Mr. R. says:—"Any one can tell when he has worked six days, and then if he keeps the seventh, he keeps God's command." Perhaps Mr. R. does not know that God rested on one certain day; that he blessed that day; and that he hallowed that day; and that his commandment refers to that day, and to no other. We are willing to be very charitable, and to allow him the benefit of ignorance of these Scripture facts. Or, if he thinks these facts have no bearing on the question, then we have some queries to propose. 1. Does he believe that "any one," as his expression indicates, may choose any day as the Sabbath, after six days of labor? 2. If seven men should, by this method, begin their labor on different days, and therefore rest on the several days of the week, would they all keep "the Sabbath of the Lord?" 3. If the selection of the particular day rests with "any one," so that all the days of the week may properly be kept by different persons, does it not then follow that God has sanctified all the days of the week to accommodate his law to our choice or convenience? 4. But if the Lord sanctified but one day, and commanded the observance of that one day, and that because it is a sanctified day, will it not follow that they who keep another day, or other days, do not keep the commandment of God? Our objection to this loose method of interpreting God's precepts, is contained in the next point attempted to be made by the Earnest Christian. 4. "A fourth objection to this seventh-day doctrine is that it tends to demoralize a community." Pray, wherein? His reason is that some will keep the first day and others will keep the seventh day in the same neighborhood. But in this he reveals his own weakness. 1. This is all right if the commandment enjoins no particular day, but is to be selected by "any one" after six days of labor, no matter at what point in the week that labor begins. It is his own doctrine which leads to confusion and to looseness respecting the commandment of the Lord. 2. We deny the charge in every respect. So Ahab charged Elijah with "troubling Israel." But Elijah answered: "I have not troubled Israel; but thou, and thy father's house, in that ye have forsaken the commandments of the Lord, and thou hast followed Baalim." 1 Ki. 18:17, 18. They who cling close to God's commandments are first to be blamed; but they who forsake the commandments are the real authors of the confusion and trouble. If all were to reject the seventh day, this would not remove the confusion, for they who keep the first cannot agree upon any reason for their practice. Let us see how Mr. Roberts would correct this tendency to demoralization. (1) He teaches that it is impossible to keep any particular day, as the world is round. (2) He teaches that "any one" may choose his own day. (3) He teaches that the Sabbath is of little or no consequence in this age, even quoting Old Testament prophecies to prove that the Lord does not require it, and quoting from Paul to show the dangerous tendency of the observance of days. Suppose a whole community or State should adopt his theory, nothing but demoralization would be the result. On the other hand, among Sabbath keepers—we mean those who keep the Lord's holy day, and not the day of their own choosing—there is only unity in faith and practice. "Your ways are not equal." We are not slow to avow our love for the "commandments of God" as well as for "the faith of Jesus." Mr. Roberts says, "the essential thing in true religion is love to God and love to man." We confess it, and, on the authority of the word of inspiration, we say, the essential thing in love to God is to keep his commandments. "For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments." This modern, man-invented theory of love and sanctification outside of perfect obedience is a delusion of the most dangerous kind. We propose hereafter to give some facts to illustrate this statement. The true standard of genuine piety is found in the word of God. For devotion, nothing equals the book of Psalms; and nothing equals it in exaiting [sic] the holy law of God. In the New Testament, Jesus and all his apostles breathe the same reverent spirit in regard to the law. The beloved and loving disciple, John, so mild in spirit and demeanor, was only stirred to severe language by this profession of intimate knowledge of God while neglecting or slighting His commandments. He replies, "He that saith, 'I know Him,' and keepeth not His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him." 1 John, 1:4. All must confess that this is severe; but who will affirm—who dare affirm—that it is not just? "What Doth the Lord Require of Thee."
By S. N. Haskell
GOD requires the heart's supreme affection. If that is not given, God does not accept our labor, or the sacrifice we make. "The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise." When the Jews entered into the promised land, they were to bring for a thank-offering a wave sheaf of the first-fruits. This was before they had put in the sickle to gather in the grain. Then when they had harvested their grain, the first loaf of bread made from the first threshed and ground corn was given to the Lord as an acknowledgment of his goodness to them. See Lev. 23. In all the temporal blessings that they received, God was acknowledged as the giver by them, when they gave to him a thank-offering of the first-fruits of the best they received. But when the Jews backslid from God, how great a change came over them in this respect. It was self first, and God afterward. They would do for the Lord if it cost them nothing. They brought to the Lord the refuse, the blind, the lame, and that which they could spare as well as not. This was showing contempt to the Lord's ordinances and despising his name. It was not treating God with that respect they would show to their governors. They would not even shut the doors of the temple nor kindle a fire upon the altar without pay. This state of things is clearly described in the following words: "A son honoreth his father, and a servant his master; if then I be a father, where is mine honor? and if I be a master, where is my fear? saith the Lord of hosts unto you, O priests, that despise my name. And ye say, Wherein have we despised thy name? Ye offer polluted bread upon mine alter; and ye say, Wherein have we polluted thee? In that ye say the table of the Lord is contemptible. And if ye offer the blind for sacrifice, is it not evil? and if ye offer the lame and sick, is it not evil? offer it now unto thy governor; will he be pleased with thee, or accept thy person? saith the Lord of hosts. And now, I pray you, beseech God that he will be gracious unto us; this hath been by your means; will he regard your persons? saith the Lord of hosts. Who is there even among you that would shut the doors for nought? neither do ye kindle fire on mine altar for nought. I have no pleasure in you, saith the Lord of hosts, neither will I accept an offering at your hand." Mal. 1: 6-10. "Ye said also, Behold, what a weariness is it! and ye have snuffed at it, saith the Lord of hosts; and ye brought that which was torn, and the lame, and the sick; thus ye brought an offering; should I accept this of your hand? saith the Lord. But cursed be the deceiver, which hath in his flock a male, and voweth, and sacrificeth unto the Lord a corrupt thing; for I am a great King, saith the Lord of hosts, and my name is dreadful among the heathen." Mal. 1: 13, 14. They had lost sight of the special providence of God and the sacredness of his work. To sacrifice was a burden to them. They had no relish for it. Religion had become to them a round of ceremonies without life and power. The burden of God's cause did not rest upon them. And because of this, the labor of their hands was blasted. They had labored hard and brought in little. They failed in procuring what they wished to eat. They clothed themselves, but were not warm. They would at times earn much money, but it was like putting in a bag with holes. It did not seem to spend well. When they looked for much, lo, it came to little. The Lord said all this was because he did blow upon it, and the reason why he blew upon it was because every man run to his own house, or made his own interests first, and left the work of the Lord as a secondary matter. See Haggai 1: 5-11; 2: 16-18. But if they would return to the Lord and seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, he promised from that day to bless them. Hag. 2: 19. Our temporal blessings are spoken of as being in proportion to honoring the Lord with our substance. "Honor the Lord with thy substance, and with the first-fruits of all thine increase; so shall thy barns be filled with plenty, and thy presses shall burst out with new wine." Prov. 3: 9, 10. Promises are numerous touching this point, and when the heart is fully imbued with the Spirit of God, so that it is drawn out for others to the extent that our ease, comfort, means, and all, are laid upon God's altar, the Lord will bless the effort made. Here lies the strength and success of the Christian. Lose this Spirit and we might as well cease our efforts. A few weak prayers and certain rounds of duty are not sufficient to bring the power of God's Spirit into the heart. It is not a little sacrificing just now, and that the end of it. It is a sacrifice to-day, to-morrow, and so on to the end. It is a life of sacrifice. It is to bear the cross daily. "He that cometh after me and taketh not up his cross daily and followeth me cannot be my disciple." It is to have the mind exercised, the heart drawn out for others, and not be weary in well doing. And there is not one-half the danger of becoming weary while actively engaged that there is in ceasing to be at work and brooding over the past. This is the enemy's ground. If we are to die on the field, let us die at our post. Let us be men and women to the very last. This Spirit of sacrifice is the Christian's forte. It is where he will receive power from on high. It is when sacrifices are made that cost something, that God meets men and gives a spirit that will reach hearts. It is when self is laid at the foot of the cross. It is when selfishness is rooted out of the heart that Christ will come in, and not before. Publicans and harlots bid as fair to reign in glory as do those that daily mingle with their judgment-bound fellow-men, with hearts as unfeeling as a stone for their spiritual welfare. Men and women are wanted who regard the cause of Christ of more value than their farms or their merchandise. If men and women can go to heathen lands to toil and suffer every deprivation for the cause of Christ, and when there, send their children to this country to be educated among friends, nevermore to see them in this world, how must Heaven look upon those who will let a worldly influence prevent them entering the work of Christ? "This life to toil is given, And he improves it best Who seeks by patient labor To enter into rest." The cause in which we have enlisted is everything or it is nothing. If this third angel's message of Rev. 14 be the truth of God, then our all is at stake. We should bend all our energies to act well our part for its advancement. Not by impulse, but to settle into the work, counting well the cost, coming to the conclusion that it will take all there is of us to act our part. If we have any idols, they are to be laid one side. If we have ways and schemes that conflict with the spirit of this work, bring them to the altar of present truth, and let them there be sacrificed, and the heart be broken before God. Men of iron nerve whose hearts are as true as steel are called for to enter the work of God at the present time. It is because there has been some who have not considered their own interest, neither have counted their lives dear unto themselves for the advancement of this work, that God has blessed this cause and saved it from such extremes as would have proved its ruin. The pioneers in this and every good cause are an example in this respect. The lives of such men are familiar to all. It is such a spirit of sacrifice and devotion that will consider it a privilege to suffer deprivation, if need be, that God will own and bless. This is the spirit that brought Jesus from Heaven to suffer and die for a fallen race. And we want missionaries possessing the spirit of Christ, who will be true to God's cause in every emergency, at whatever cost. We want men and women who will labor unselfishly in their neighborhoods, and in the community where they live, and who will not let the sinner go until he gives his heart to God. They should have hearts that are tender, that will feel for the sinner, and that will not wait until urged and urged to bear responsibilities, but who will be drawn out for the afflicted,245 and will sympathize with them. This spirit has not wholly left the earth. It exists in the heart of every true child of God. It is when sacrifices that cost something are called for that the heart is tested. It may be to renounce friends that are near and dear for the truth's sake. A right eye or a right hand may cause us to offend; if so, we had better enter into life maimed than having two eyes or two hands to be cast into hell. But however costly the sacrifice, it cannot be compared with the sacrifice made for us; and our appreciation of that sacrifice is shown by the sacrifice we make for Christ. If it is full and complete, God accepts it; and it is consumed in his precious cause. S. N. HASKELL.