Earlier text: A SERMON FOR THE LONELY ONESThe Coming of Christ: Matthew 24 and the First Century
By S. S. Griswold
The Coming of Christ.—No. 8.
Unless the 24th of Matthew refers to a coming of Christ that was about to take place immediately, much of what is there said would have no meaning. Those to whom Christ was speaking (verse 44) were told to hold themselves in readiness, because in such an hour as they thought not, the Son of man would come. And so with the remainder of the chapter, the whole of which was only applicable to that time. For if Christ was not then about to come, why should he thus warn them to whom he was speaking? It was the apostles, disciples, and Christians, of that age, that were to be ready, lest the coming of the Son of man should take them unawares. Such I most firmly believe was what Christ taught, and intended to teach, and in that manner he was understood, as the history of the belief of the early Christians, for the first century, will abundantly show; for it was the almost universal belief of all Christendom in that age that Christ would appear. This mistake lay in the manner of that appearing. Like the Jews who committed the mistake of Christ’s first advent, so those Christians committed a similar one respecting the second advent. And the same error has at times been committed ever since, and is being now propagated, viz., that Christ is to come bodily from the heavens. It is the same mistaken view, as I have said, the Jews committed, and will eventuate in a similar disappointment. Time and time again has there arisen in the church those who have maintained Christ’s personal return to this world, the final conflagration of this earth, &c., and that the time was then at hand. Among the many who have thus maintained, are Edward Irving and William Miller of modern times, and the Second Adventists of the present day, all of whom saw, as they thought, unmistakable signs of Christ’s immediate appearing. But as yet, all their predictions have proved untrue. And the true epiphany of Christ is continually before us. But let us pass to consider the 25th chapter of Matthew, beginning with the parable of the ten virgins, which is introduced by the adverb, “then,” denoting the time when that parable would have its applicability. “Then shall the kingdom of Heaven be likened unto ten virgins,” and during the time of establishing and building up of the kingdom of God, or the coming of the Son of man, the growth of the kingdom would be, in many things, like the invited guests to an eastern wedding, some of whom held themselves in readiness to enter the marriage feast when the bridegroom should arrive, while others neglected to be thus ready. How applicable was this parable to what the Lord said in the closing verses of the previous chapter, which read from verse 44. And hence Christ repeats his warning at the close of this parable, verse 13: “Watch, therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.” Here the same reason for their watching is assigned, viz., the immediate coming of the Son of man. The parable following was designed to illustrate the principles by which the kingdom of Heaven (the true church) was to be governed. The parable of the talents represents men as agents of Christ to whom was committed the interests of his kingdom. This parable covers the ground occupied by the church during the Christian dispensation. The closing illustration, commencing at verse 31, illustrates the principles by which men would be adjudged under the reign of Christ. The opening sentence, “When the Son of man shall come in his glory,” refers to the full investiture of Christ, with the universal government of mankind, and the principles by which he will reward every man. While the illustration looks forward to the final adjudication of all mankind, and to their reward as the result of their obedience to the principle therein set forth, the popular doctrine of the Judgment day was not probably intended. The judgment here referred to, is rather that of administration and its consequences than that of a particular day of ending the administration, and pronouncing a judicial sentence. Dr. Neander thus writes concerning that passage: “On the whole, then, we are not to look upon this representation as a picture of the final Judgment. Its aim is to set forth most vividly and impressively the great and fundamental truth, that no faith but that which proves itself by works, can secure the kingdom of Heaven. We cannot fail to see in the ‘throne,’ the ‘right hand,’ the ‘left hand,’ &c., a figurative drapery attending and setting off the one fundamental thought. . . . The form of description, then, we suppose to be parabolical, and its character in this respect was probably still more obvious when Christ delivered it. See Life of Christ, p. 375.” I have now examined every important reference to Christ’s coming in the gospels, and, if our exegesis be correct, have not found a single passage that speaks of a personal, bodily coming. There is, then, no such teaching by Christ as his personal, bodily return to our earth. Hence, the second-advent theory must be unscriptural, untrue. That mode of interpretation is evidently not the correct one. The true coming of Christ is a spiritual coming. Nor is the idea of “a spiritual coming” a theological invention, as my reviewer asserts, and he adds, “There can be no such coming of Christ,” and yet he prays, I presume, daily for just such a coming of Christ, viz., a coming of Christ by his Spirit—the Holy Spirit. But time will at last settle the question which of us is in the right. “Just over my room, in the Theological Seminary,” said a writer in the Church Union, “roomed a poor skeptic who had ruined his soul by searching Gibbon, Hume, Strauss, and Renan, and writing for the Boston literary taste. He could confute the arguments of Butler, Edwards, and Paley, but alas! he could not answer the stifled utterances of his own guilty conscience. All night long he walked to and fro, like a caged lion, fretting to break the life-bars; but he dared not. At last, fearing that he might make way with himself, I rose, dressed, and went up to comfort him once more.” “He paused as I entered, endeavored to conceal his haggard features, and pleaded ill-health for what could not be concealed—his inability to rest. Ah! I knew better; confronted him at once, and demanded to know where his philosophy had failed, and spoke the blessed name of Jesus of Nazareth whom he had mocked and denied, yea, crucified. He was in agony unutterable. I had torn off the thin mantle covering his humiliation. He was unmanned, and lost all his stimulated skepticism, making known to me at once the bare hypocrisy of his life. He believed, just as the devils did, and trembled. Every night for years he sought God in prayer, but in vain. His boastful unbelief had frozen stark and stiff all his emotions. He could not pray, and so was his life a hell, a falsehood, and that of the infidel hypocrite.” “Next morning he moved away. Casually, I met him; but he always avoided me, and seemed always to remember that night’s conversation. “Within one year, I was called at midnight to his dying bed. He lay motionless when I entered. Not a muscle could move, but his eyes looked despair unutterable. I tried to pray. It was futile. I could get no faith. So he died, professing what thousands preach—atheism; and believing, nevertheless, not unto salvation, just enough to lose his soul.”—Sel. Rowland Hill on Misers and Generosity
ROWLAND HILL once exclaimed: “There is a perpetual frost in the pockets of some wealthy people. As soon as they put their hands in them, they are frozen and unable to draw out their purses. Had I my way, I would hang all misers. I would hang them up by the heels, that their money might run out of their pockets, and make a famous scramble for you to pick up and put in the plate.” Bro. G. errs greatly if he supposes that we have so far mistaken the promise of the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, John 14:15–17, as to make that mean the coming of Christ, and to pray for his coming in any such manner. The coming of Christ is a coming “again,” John 14:3; it is as the re-appearance of one who has been away on a long journey, Mark 13:34–37; it is a “return,” for which the church is to “wait.” Luke 12:36. We never pray for the Lord to come again, to return, to appear after long absence, by his Holy Spirit; because we believe that he is in that sense now with his church, and has ever been with them, according to his promise, “Lo, I am with you alway,” Matt. 28:20; and that he will thus be with them till the end of this age or dispensation, according to the remainder of the promise, “even unto the end of the world.” For this purpose the Spirit was promised and given in large measure to the Christian church, to supply the lack of his personal presence, till he shall return. John 14:16; 16:17. We pray, indeed, that the Holy Spirit may copiously fill our hearts with its heavenly presence; but we pray for the coming of Christ as a distinct and altogether different thing. Take some of the plain descriptions of the second advent given us in the gospels, and try to make them signify a spiritual coming, or an outpouring of the Spirit. How would Matt. 24:30, 31, for instance, read according to this idea? Let us see: “And then shall appear the sign of an outpouring of the Spirit in heaven; and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see a great outpouring of the Spirit in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And the outpouring of the Spirit shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.” Yet would not such a paraphrase, monstrous as it is, be strictly accurate, according to the theory of a spiritual coming of Christ? See also Matt. 25:31–34, which we will quote as it stands in the common version, not having a sufficient command of language to adapt it to the spiritual view: “When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory. And before him shall be gathered all nations, and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats; and he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on his left. Then shall the king say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.” Let any man try to prove that the scene here described is simply some manifestation of the Spirit among men, and failing, as he surely will, then sit down and repent in sackcloth and ashes for having made the attempt. Well may the skeptic claim that if the sacred writers use language to no more purpose than this; if they speak of the tribes of the earth seeing Christ and mourning, when they are not to see him and mourn, and a great sound of a trumpet being heard when there is to be none, and a gathering of the elect, when there is to be no gathering, and the assembling of all nations when there is to be no assembling, and a separation of the good from the bad, when they are not to be so separated;—justly may he claim, under such circumstances, that the Bible is an imposition and religion a farce. Great stress is still laid on the fact that Christ spoke as if addressing the generation then living, to show that all his words must be fulfilled in their lifetime; and this peculiarity of expression is all any one has to offer in defense of such a view. But we have already sufficiently noticed this well-attested and almost universally acknowledged characteristic of prophetic writing, that we are carried along down the stream of time by the prediction of events in consecutive order; and the prophet, instead of always using the future tense, seems sometimes to go forward to the time when the fulfillment is to take place, and speak from that standpoint, of, or to, the generation which is to witness that fulfillment. In no other way can some prophecies be explained. And this hypothesis is as reasonable as it is necessary. Where Is the Blame?
By E. F. Cottrell
The union of all Christians would be a good thing, or Jesus would not have prayed that they all might be one, even as he and the Father are one—a perfect oneness—nor would an apostle have taught that there should be no divisions among them, but that they should be “perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.” If the union of all Christians would be a good thing, their division, as at the present day, is a bad thing. Hence there is a fault somewhere. Where does the blame rest? It is natural for sinful man to excuse himself, and shift his blame upon another. This is exemplified in the first excuse for sin that was ever made. “The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.” The blame is shifted to the woman, and, through her, to God who gave her. So professed Christians seem disposed to lay the blame of their sinful divisions to the Bible and its Author. They are coming to the deliberate conclusion that it is impossible for men to understand what is required of them in the law of God and the gospel of Christ. If this is so, the blame, of course, is with the Bible. The revelation must certainly be defective. Still there is a grand movement in progress for the union of all evangelical denominations. Not such a union as the Bible requires—a perfect union in heart and voice, so that there is “one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all,” &c.—but a union founded upon the assumption that such a union is impossible, because that men cannot understand the requirements of God alike. Consequently, it is proposed for each to hold and practice whatever of truth and whatever of error there may be in his creed, calling their differences non-essential, and unite together as they are; thus virtually saying that there is no standard of faith and practice, and that truth and error are, for aught they know, equally good. But the proposal for such a union, though it may be thought to be very charitable toward men, I must regard as a proposed conspiracy against the word of God. If the Bible is not a perfect rule of faith and practice, what is the use of it? When a union is effected by a conglomeration of discordant creeds, ignoring their differences, no standard of appeal is left. A plea of difference of understanding will shield from any censure. At present, this is supposed to be a good excuse. This broad charity, falsely so called, opens the gate to the largest liberty. Bible charity rejoiceth not in iniquity, but in the truth; but this ignores the difference, and rejoiceth in both alike. But what is the object of the proposed alliance? Some may favor it from the best of motives only. But what will be the result? We fearlessly challenge it as a conspiracy against divine revelation, the truth of God. The union of two that had formerly been at enmity between themselves resulted in the crucifixion of Christ; and it is evident that the present proposed union will result in the crucifixion of the truth, and the persecution of those who still adhere to the Bible and keep its commandments. By the time this union is consummated, the true and loyal people of God will have been separated out from this Babel of confusion, and their adherence to the truth, and non-conformity to the prevailing idea of Christian union, will mark them as the objects upon which to try the gentle suasion of civil law, which will then be at their control. The Christian churches are now composed of the good and the bad, of true believers, loyal in heart to the King of kings, and base hypocrites, having the form and not the power of godliness. These will be separated, according to the word of the Lord. The message of Rev. 9-12 will call out the true. Only think of what will ensue, when a sham union, independent of the word of the Lord, shall be effected with all these numerous and powerful bodies, with all of the salt of the earth separated, and the Spirit of God consequently totally withdrawn! Human nature, unrestrained by the Spirit of God, is the same base thing it ever has been since Cain slew his brother, because his own works were evil and his brother’s righteous; notwithstanding all the enlightenment and refinement of which we boast in these days. And it is worthy of special consideration that, while there is such a tendency to union upon the broad foundation of a charity and liberality toward each other that ignores and virtually sets aside the word of God, making its institutions and ordinances non-essential, because unintelligible and necessarily misunderstood—there is simultaneously a reaching out after civil power to enforce the observance of a religious institution which is not so much as mentioned in the Scriptures—the observance of the first day of the week as the Christian Sabbath—concerning which, Neander, an eminent church historian, says, “It was always only a human ordinance,” and for which all but the most ignorant know that there is no command in the word of God. They might truly denominate this a non-essential; for where no law is, there is no transgression. But in regarding in some way this day most are agreed. And it is truly remarkable, that while they hold such lax views concerning those institutions which are subjects of revelation, they should feel the necessity of a more stringent enforcement of human tradition. We have the charity to believe that not one in a thousand of those who feel favorable to these two movements, namely, an alliance of sects without respect to Bible truth, and the seeking of civil enactments to sustain human tradition, have the least idea of the sure result, should they succeed. But let them succeed, and the result we have intimated is inevitable. Plausible as this must be to men of reason, especially those acquainted with the history of the past, yet it may seem only imaginary, and therefore incredible. But we find this view of things supported by revelation; so that there is not only reason to fear such a result, but we may confidently expect it. For proof of this, the reader is referred to Rev. 13:11-18, a descriptive prophecy that can apply to no other power than the United States. This word of prophecy will not fail of its fulfillment. Brethren, in view of these things, what shall we do? To those who say, “A confederacy,” shall we respond, “Amen; a confederacy”? Isa. 8:12. Shall we not rather “Sanctify the Lord of hosts himself;” stand up, in word and deed, for the “commandments of God and the faith of Jesus” (Rev. 14:12); and refuse assent to an alliance which sets aside the word of God, compromises its truths, and virtually lays the blame of men’s divisions and heresies, which originate in, and are perpetuated by, the carnal mind, upon the Author of revelation? 1 Cor. 3:3, 4; Rom. 8:7. To stand firm and unwavering upon the word of the Lord will be extremely unpopular. Those who do this will be esteemed narrow-minded, bigoted, and exclusive. But this position will be safe. God will vindicate his word, and teach all men that they cannot traduce it with impunity. The strongest confederation of men cannot nullify that word, and make the blame of their disobedience adhere to its Author. But, my brethren, nothing short of an entire consecration to God, a supreme love of his holy law in our hearts, will prepare us to stand in the time that is before us. Are we ready? Cut It Down.
By Jos. Clarke
DECISIVE words! Cut it down, why cumbereth it the ground? The land upon which this tree stood was valuable. Some good and fruitful tree might as well stand there in its place. It had stood there for many a year, and had had the care of the skillful and industrious gardener, and no fruit was borne. What was to be done? It must bear fruit or come down. Alas! how many a tree has bowed before the woodman's ax, because it would not bear fruit. It grew, it flourished, it looked thrifty and handsome, was well proportioned and large; but it bore no fruit. No other trees looked so well as this, perhaps. Others bowed beneath their load of fruit. Often the branches broke, and marred the beauty of the bearing trees. Some of them had become quite bent and homely and deformed from continued and liberal bearing; but this tree stood there alone in worthless barrenness. Who has not seen such trees? But the gardener entreats for one more year of grace. It is given. All the skill of the gardener is exhausted upon this tree. The spring opens. How he watches the opening buds of promise! How he rejoices in the profusion of blossoms, and the autumn of richness and glory! Lo, the ripe and luscious fruit! What joy the servant feels, as he displays to the proprietor the full-laden tree! So has it been. The Son of God entreats for the sinner, Spare him one more year! One more year? No more than that? Perhaps one more month; one more week; or one more day. But who is this sinner? Oh! it is one of the trees in the garden. It is one of the professors of religion. His profession is fair; plenty of leaves, but no fruit. Bear fruit, then, O barren tree, or be cut down. The ax is sharp and glittering. It only waits the day appointed. The ground is valuable. Another tree must fill thy place, or thou must bend beneath thy load of fruit. Jos. CLARKE. The Book of Job.
By D. T. Bourdeau
This book is a remarkable production. Its introduction, covering chapters 1 and 2, is said to be written in prose in the original, while the controversy between Job and his friends is written in poetry. The conclusion, relating to the recovery and final prosperity of Job, is written in prose. There can be no question as to the authenticity of this book. It is embraced in the Jewish catalogue of Sacred Scriptures, and Job is mentioned elsewhere in the Bible—both in the Old and New Testaments, Eze. 14:14; James 5:11, and in connection with important personages. There has been much controversy as to when Job lived, and by whom the book bearing his name was written. The following are the principal reasons which are given to prove that Job lived before Moses:— 1. His long life. He must have lived over two hundred years. See chap. 42:16, &c. 2. The book of Job makes no allusion to the law of Moses, and to the wondrous works of God toward Israel in Egypt, and in the wilderness, which are consequently referred to in subsequent writings, as making known the character of God, the greatness and care of his providence, &c. 3. The worship of the sun and moon, which is the most ancient form of idolatry, is the only form of idolatry mentioned. Chap. 31:26-28.149 4. The usages and customs described are those of the patriarchs of the first ages. 5. The religion of Job is of the same nature as that of the patriarchs before Moses; it is a religion of sacrifices, but without priest or sanctuary. 6. Dr. Hales adds a new argument drawn from astronomy, and based on chapters 9:9; 38:31, 32. He claims that the constellations mentioned were the cardinal constellations of the spring and autumn, 2130 years before Christ. If Job lived between the flood and Abraham's time, we have additional evidence that God was not without witnesses to his truth in that age of the world. But if Job lived at a later period, say during the sojourn of the children of Israel in Egypt, as some claim, God had indeed a faithful witness and shining light north-east of Arabia at that time. Some claim that the book of Job was written by himself, others that it was written by Elihu, and others, by Moses. The case of Job, that of Melchisedec, who was perhaps a faithful son or grandson of Shem, who had borne too many burdens, &c., to fill the place assigned to Abraham, that of Jethro, Moses' father-in-law, in the land of Midian, are worthy of our thought and admiration. And thank God, we will have additional chapters of their lives if we are so faithful as to meet them in Heaven. Meanwhile, let us imitate their virtues and wisdom as far as they are left on record, especially the patience of Job, to which we are referred by James in a chapter applying in these times. James 5. To the Ministers in Michigan.
We wish to say a word to our brethren that labor with our churches. Our Saviour said to Peter, If you love me, feed my sheep. He also has said, I am the bread of life. Now, to understand the present want of the people, so as to select the proper food for them, to nourish them for everlasting life, seems to be what is implied by the words, “Feed my sheep.” But how can you give them such food, and make it acceptable to them, if you fail to walk in the light that God has in mercy sent to us as a people? We mean the health reform. How can you expect the Spirit of God to set home the truth you may present, while your example in drinking tea, eating flesh-meat, and taking medicine, shows your lack of faith in the light God has given us? Shall we, to gratify our appetite, let our example strengthen those that are leaning that way, so as to weaken, instead of giving them the bread of life? Proper food will strengthen and help the sheep. We hope those that labor among our brethren will so cherish the light in mercy sent to us, that they will be strong in the Lord and the power of his might, and so be able to lead others in the right direction, and not in the wrong. Again, in reference to our young licentiates, it should be understood that the proper place for them to labor is in new fields. They have received licenses to try their gift, in order to ascertain if they are qualified to present the truth. The only proper place for them to do this is in new fields. We protest against their going among our old churches to preach, where there are men of older and larger experience than themselves. And we do not believe the Conference will feel clear to pay for their labor unless bestowed in new places. Unity and Diversity.
By Roswell F. Cottrell
THERE are many who look upon the almost endless diversity of faith among the professed believers of the Bible as a necessity, arising from want of clearness in the language of revelation. Even professed Christians have compared the Bible to a musical instrument on which any tune can be played. If this is so, it must be by forcing an interpretation contrary to the tenor of revelation, or else the blame is justly chargeable to the Bible and its Author. We might as well deny that the Bible is a revelation of the will of God. It is evident that if it is such a revelation, it is consistent and harmonious in all its parts. The difficulty, we conclude, is in the errors of early education, and in the obdurate perversity of the human will. The Scriptures teach us that believers should be in “unity of faith;” that they should be of “one mind;” that they should “all speak the same thing;” and that there should be “no divisions among them;” but that they should be “perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.” To say that God requires us to be perfectly united, without giving us the means, is to impeach his character. Therefore, the Bible being true and, consequently God such a being as is therein described, the blame of diversity, instead of unity, of faith, rests with men, and not with God and his word. · But it is obvious that in order to have unity of faith, there must be unity in interpretation; and unity in any mystical or fanciful interpretation can never be hoped for. Therefore, the most obvious interpretation is always the true one. The Bible must be interpreted just like any other book. R. F. COTTRELL. Increased Evidence for the First Day.
By Daniel T. Bourdeau
This evidence is based on a marginal reference as follows: Rev. 1:10 reads, “I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day.” In the margin the letter c, on which great stress is laid, as though it was inspiration, refers to John 20:26; Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:2; where the first day is mentioned. From this circumstance the conclusion is drawn that the first day is the Lord’s day. This reminds me of the man who said he could draw water out of wool. Being asked how, he replied, “By first putting it in. So our opponents must first put, “The first day is the Lord’s day,” in the above texts before they can prove what they claim. Those texts say not a word about the Sabbath, or the change of the Sabbath, or about the first day being the Lord’s day. And did they, or any other Scripture, establish the first day as the Sabbath, we would simply have two Sabbaths on our hands; for the fourth commandment, which remains unrepealed, enforces the seventh day. But this would be unreasonable. And as to the Lord’s day, we read, “The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God;” and the Lord calls it, “my holy day;” and of that day Christ styles himself Lord. Ex. 20:8-11; Isa. 58:13; Mark 2:28. The Lord never claimed any other day of the week as his own. But how is the first day mentioned in the texts referred to, and in their connection and parallel texts? Answer: 1. As the day in which Christ appeared to his disciples to convince them that he was risen from the dead. And at that time Christ upbraided them for their unbelief in his resurrection, as “they sat at meat,” i. e., were eating their supper, Mark 16:9-14, and consequently were not having a religious meeting to commemorate his resurrection. 2. As a day, the night part of which, corresponding with our Saturday night (for the day commenced at sunset), Paul held one religious meeting with the disciples at Troas, “ready to depart on the morrow.” And while Paul was preaching, Luke and others were sailing a ship around a neck of land from Troas to Assos. And Sunday morning Paul started on foot for Jerusalem. And Paul delighted in the law of God, and kept the Sabbath. Rom. 7:22; Acts 13:42, 44; 16:13; 17:1-4; 18:4, 11. 3. 1 Cor. 16:2, mentions the first day as a business day, in which every Christian in Corinth, &c., was to lay by him in store, or at home in store, Greek, French, &c., as God had prospered him, and not to meet to worship and take up a public collection. And the church at Corinth was raised keeping the Sabbath. Acts 18:4, 11. In regard to marginal references, it is a well-known fact that they are of recent origin. They sometimes assist the reader, and sometimes they lead away from the truth. Our present division of the Bible into chapters and verses is said to have been made by Jerome in the fourth century. Therefore, letters in the margin referring to chapters and verses must date this side of that time. They differ in different languages, and originated in their present form this side of the translation of the Bible into modern tongues. JAMES WHITE
By James White
The California Camp-meeting closed well, and all the friends appear well pleased, and greatly encouraged. There were twice as many tents, and persons that camped on the ground, as was expected. Eld. Loughborough is an able manager. The order was excellent, and much admired, and complimented, by those who visited the ground. Elder Cornell preached twice, Elder Loughborough once, Mrs. White five times, but with difficulty in consequence of severe cold, and we gave ten discourses, beside speaking to many points in social meetings. From the very first, we enjoyed unusual freedom. The social meetings were marked with freedom, intelligence, and devotion. This people will compare very favorably with our brethren generally for intelligence, and devotion to the cause. The financial condition of the cause in this State is good. The brethren are ready to do more for us than we could expect or wish. Our company, Mrs. White, Willie, sister Hall, and the writer, have been glad every moment since we met a cordial reception at the end of our long journey at San Francisco, that we were in California. The camp-meeting has not by any means changed our feelings upon the subject. And nothing but stern duty will ever call us from this country. We like the people of California, and the country, and think it will be favorable to our health. Our summer sojourn in Colorado was pleasant and favorable to health. We now have strong hopes of recovering health, strength, and courage in the Lord, such as we enjoyed two years since. We shall escape the cold, northern winter. Elder Loughborough states that for the past four years he has not seen snow fall for the space at one time of three minutes. Providence has guided, and present indications are, that in 1872-3, we not only escape the heat of summer by living in Colorado where we could see snow every day for nine weeks, but we shall also escape the cold of winter. This will be a remarkable year to us, in which we do not experience either summer or winter. Our general interest in the cause is increasing, and we hope to be able to complete several important works which are needed at this time, such as Bible Adventism, Bible Hygiene, &c., &c. San Francisco, Cal., Oct. 10, 1872. A PRESCRIPTION.—What can a poor dyspeptic do for Jesus?
Ans. Eat wholesome food, take regular exercise as much as possible in the open air, and eschew quick medicine. An invalid's first duty is to get well; his second will appear to him on the performance of the first. “Rise up and walk” is still a very good prescription, and sometimes results in almost miraculous cures.— Christian at Work. The Tables Turned.
By N. Orcutt
An interesting incident lately came to my knowledge which is too good to be lost. One of the isolated ones in Vermont—a sister who embraced the truth some nine years since, and who has only heard two or three discourses from preachers of our faith, in those nine years—last spring attended an advent meeting in a town adjoining the one in which she resides. The preacher took for his text, on the occasion, the words, “It is written.” He congratulated his hearers that they found the truth written in the word of God. Said he: “That is our guide; but Seventh-day Adventists have to go to Battle Creek to the visions to learn what is truth; but we have the word of God, &c.” At the close of his remarks, he gave liberty for others to speak, liberty which our lonely sister felt constrained to improve. She told those present that she had kept the Sabbath of the Lord for several years, that it was not a yoke of bondage, but a day of joy and delight. That she did not have to go to Battle Creek to the visions, or to the man of sin who thought to change times and laws, to learn when the Sabbath day came, for, “It is written,” “The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work.” That it was not written that it was the Sabbath of the Jew, but, “It is written” that it was the Sabbath of the Lord, and he had commanded us to keep it holy. This being the case, she felt under obligation to strive earnestly to be found among those who are endeavoring to keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus, that with them she might finally enter in through the gates into the city. That preacher must have felt somewhat as the commander in battle who sees his batteries captured and turned against him, if he had discernment enough to realize what havoc his own guns were making with the fortress of error and misrepresentation which he had reared. While we sincerely pity such for their blindness, we may be permitted to rejoice in the harmony and power of the truth, rejoice that it is impregnable, being hedged about by the brief words, “It is written.” May the Lord bless and sustain the lonely ones and water the seed sown that others may be led to obey the truth, and be company for them in their pilgrimage to the promised land. Practical Thoughts.
By Daniel T. Bourdeau
THIS we will find to be true if we form a correct idea of the magnitude of the work connected with the last message, and are willing to act any part the Lord would have us, to advance his cause. God knows the place each of his children is best adapted to fill, and each one should know the work God has assigned him to do. As each organ of the body has a specific function to fulfill, so each member of the body of Christ has a specific work to perform, to the glory of the great Head of the church. The eye cannot do the work assigned to the foot, nor the foot that assigned to the ear; yet each member of the body sympathizes with the other members, and by doing its own work, the prosperity of the whole body is promoted. So with the different members of the body of Christ. We have often heard of certain organs of the body breaking down by working vicariously, i. e. performing the work of other organs; so many persons have been known to break their backs by taking upon themselves burdens that others should bear. No one individual should monopolize the work God has divided for many to perform. Very often we should give others an opportunity to work if they cannot do as well as ourselves. Perhaps they have been inefficient for want of exercise, and should have an opportunity to work, that they may improve while relieving our burdens. If we have not got the abilities to do as great a work as another, we should not through envy and jealousy fall back on dignity and do nothing, or be discouraged. God does not measure character and bestow reward so much by the amount that one does as by the principles that actuate us in doing. We know that God does not require of us more than we can do. But the great difficulty with most of us is that we do not accomplish as much as we might, for waiting to do a great work, and not doing the humble work of to day. Sunday-Keeping in Heaven.
By H. A. St. John
Recently, on the seventh day, the Sabbath of the Lord, we listened to a funeral discourse in which the speaker, when giving consolation to the mourners in a pathetic strain, told them that their brother (whose lifeless form was before them) was now in glory, and that to-morrow (Sunday), would be the first Sabbath he would spend in Heaven. Here was consolation indeed; but to us it appeared of a very questionable character. Immaterial, disembodied spirits, in an aerial, immaterial Heaven, beyond the bounds of time and space, where there is unceasing rest and felicity, keeping Sunday might, perhaps, be a source of consolation to some, if it only came within the bounds of comprehension. Ah, thought I, and is this orthodox condolence? If so, where, in the name of true wisdom, are we drifting? How different these words of comfort from those given in the Holy Scriptures to mourners under like circumstances. The oil of consolation is invaluable, when mourning the loss of friends; and because of its value, God, in his sacred word, has laid down many receipts, in which he has plainly pointed out all the ingredients that go to make up the genuine compound. And in every case the ingredients of the genuine oil are Bible truths and gospel promises. We have come down about 1800 years from the close of the canon of our Scriptures, and we find a very different article, made of vastly different materials, in very common use. Where, in all the book of divine directions, have we any such materials for consolation as above noticed? It bears not the seal of Heaven. It has been compounded, no doubt, by some of the doctors of the church, and has the wine of Rev. 18:3, for its base. May we be so enlightened that the consolations of divine truth may ever be ours.