A LITTLE tract has been sent to this office entitled, "On the Immortality of the Soul, and Eternal Punishment," in which the writer claims that man cannot be otherwise than immortal, because Jesus said that we should not fear them that kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Matt. 10:28. But we read that we are to fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. This does not mean to preserve eternally alive. "The wages of sin is death;" and this death is eternal; therefore, as death is the punishment of sin, it is everlasting or eternal punishment, not eternal punishing. It is a completed punishment which will never be repeated; a death from which there is no resurrection. Jesus says that it is everlasting punishment (Matt. 25:46); Paul by inspiration declares that the everlasting punishment is "everlasting destruction" (2 Thess. 1:9; Phil. 3:19), and death (Rom. 6:23); Peter says perdition, which means utter destruction. 2 Peter 3:7.
The writer argues that the breathing into man's nostrils the breath of life, distinguishes him from the brutes. But the beasts have the same breath of life, and are termed living souls. Gen. 7:15, 22; Eccl. 3:19; Rev. 16:3; Gen. 1:30, margin. If because man was given the breath of life, he was immortal, the beast having the same breath of life would also be immortal. The way in which it was given to man might indicate added dignity and superiority, but not length of existence. Man was made capable of a higher existence, but this he forfeited through sin, became subject to death, from which he can only be released through Christ.
The writer of the tract refutes his own position. He says in the beginning that all men are immortal; but, later on, he declares that believers have eternal life and unbelievers have not. He makes a distinction between immortality and eternal life, applying immortality to the immaterial soul of all, while the Bible applies it to the substance of those who will be raised at the coming of Christ. Then shall this mortal put on immortality. 1 Cor. 15:51-55. God alone possesses inherent immortality. 1 Tim. 6:16. He will impart it to those who are his at his coming, who by well-doing seek for it. Rom. 2:6. It is at that time also that eternal life will be given. Col. 3:3, 4; John 6:54.
The terms "forever," "eternal," and "everlasting," all coming from the Greek word aiōn, do not always mean unending duration, but are applied to life, lifetime, or as long as anything in its nature would exist. The eternal fire of Sodom (Jude 7) burned up the cities of the plain (2 Pet. 2:6), and then went out, and the Dead Sea now slumbers where those once proud cities stood.
Sometimes these terms denote a completed process. "Eternal judgment" (Heb. 6:2) does not denote a judgment forever in session, but one whose decrees are never reversed. "Eternal salvation" (Heb. 5:9) and "eternal redemption" (Heb. 9:12)233do not mean an eternal saving or eternal redeeming, but a salvation, a redemption which will never be repeated; for those who have a part in it will never again be in a lost condition. So "eternal punishment" means eternal in effects, not in infliction, eternal punishment, not eternal punishing.
Simply because "forever and ever" is applied to God, it does not follow that the term indicates always duration without end. "Everlasting" is applied to God (Isa. 40:28), and to the Levitical priesthood (Ex. 40:15); but the priesthood has passed away, while God will forever exist. Unending existence is an essential element of his nature. He is the I AM, the Self-existent One. Everlasting applied to him denotes unending duration, because in his very nature he is without beginning or end. But the Levitical priesthood and the wicked are mortal, corruptible, and their punishment is eternal destruction, as is also that of Satan. Heb. 2:14; Mal. 4:1.
Eternal death is a terrible doom, eternal life is a boon invaluable. God has set them both before us—life and death, "therefore choose life;" "for the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life, through Jesus Christ our Lord." M. C. W.
A FALSE WITNESS ANSWERED.
By C. P. B.
The Censor, a Prohibition paper which has for its motto, "Tell the Truth," says:—
"The Seventh-day Adventists claim to be prohibitionists almost to a man. But their leaders are at war with the Prohibition party and the Woman's Christian Temperance Union and all who work for prohibition because they are not in favor of keeping Saturday as the Sabbath rest. But those who fight prohibition need not claim to favor it."
Those who are not acquainted with Seventh-day Adventists will probably believe what the Censor says about them; all others will, however, know that it is false. The Censor assumes that prohibition and the Prohibition party are inseparable. All well-informed people know that such is not the case. There are very many sincere and earnest prohibitionists outside the ranks of Adventists who do not approve the methods of the Prohibition party. The New York Evangelist, a leading Presbyterian paper, says editorially that only "about one-fifteenth of the prohibitionists of the United States have joined the Prohibition party." Is it not then a base slander to assert that because Adventists stand aloof from that party they are opposed to prohibition? Prohibition is a thing greatly to be desired, but its advocacy is not the sum of all virtues, and it would seem that the organs of the so-called Prohibition party should also cultivate truth-telling.
Again the Censor asserts, "their leaders are at war with the Prohibition party and the Woman's Christian Temperance Union and all who work for prohibition because they are not in favor of keeping Saturday as the Sabbath." Nothing could be farther from the truth. "Their leaders are at war with the Prohibition party and the Woman's Christian Temperance Union," only because that party and that organization seek to force upon them the keeping of a day which they cannot conscientiously observe. Adventists are not politicians, and many of them do not ordinarily vote, but wherever they have had an opportunity to vote for prohibition without at the same time endorsing measures to which they are conscientiously opposed, they have done so to a man. People who know Adventists and have any regard for truth do not say that they are opposed to prohibition.
C. P. B.
International YMCA Convention
The twenty-eighth International Convention of the Young Men's Christian Association of North America, will be held in Philadelphia, May 8-12. According to the official announcement of the convention sent out by the International Committee, no association, organized or reorganized since July, 1869, will be entitled to representation at Philadelphia, unless it has the test of active membership prescribed by the Portland Convention in the following excellent resolution:—
"Resolved, That the associations organized after this date shall be entitled to representation in future conferences of the associated Young Men's Christian Associations of North America, on condition that they be severally composed of young men in communion with evangelical churches (provided that in places where the associations are formed by a single denomination, members of other denominations are not excluded therefrom), and active membership and the right to hold office be conferred only upon young men who are members in good standing in evangelical churches; and we hold those churches to be evangelical which, maintaining the Holy Scriptures to be the only infallible rule of faith and practice, do believe in the Lord Jesus Christ (the only begotten of the Father, King of kings, and Lord of lords, in whom dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, and who was made sin for us, though knowing no sin, bearing our sins in His own body on the tree), as the only name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved from everlasting punishment."
JESUS was surrounded on every hand by enemies who were on the alert to take advantage of something that he might say which they could use against him. On this occasion the Sadducees had been questioning with him relative to the resurrection, "and one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him, Which is the first commandment of all?"
JUST what motive prompted this question the record does not inform us, but it would seem that it was a real desire to understand the truth, for Jesus at once answered, "The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord; and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength; this is the first commandment. And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these."
"AND the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth; for there is one God; and there is none other but he; and to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbor as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices. And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God."
IN answering the scribe as he did, the Saviour not only stated an important truth, namely, that love is the fulfilling of the law, but he did it in the manner best calculated to carry conviction to the mind of a Jew, i. e., by appealing to the writings of Moses. The first great commandment, namely, supreme love to God, our Saviour quoted from Deut. 6:4, 5, and the second, namely, equal love to our fellows, he quoted from Lev. 19:18. But in so doing he was simply taking his own. His Spirit had moved Moses to utter and to record those very words, therefore they were not the words of Moses but of God.
NOTHING short of perfect love meets the requirements of the divine law. The man who loves anything more than he loves God does not obey the first commandment, nor does he fulfill perfectly any duty to God. He may not make graven images, he may not blaspheme, and he may outwardly observe the Sabbath, but if he loves anything more than he loves God he is an idolater, and his service is not acceptable to Him who looks at the heart.234BUT not only is love necessary to enable us to keep the commandments which define our duty to God, but it is likewise necessary to enable us to perform our duty to our fellow-men. How can one keep from coveting, simply by loving his neighbor as himself, and if he does not do that he will covet, and covetousness, says the apostle, is idolatry. And thus it is literally true that "whosoever shall keep the whole law and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all," for in violating a single specification of that law the sinner shows that he is without that love which alone will enable him to keep any part of it acceptably.
"GOD is love," and in requiring us to cultivate and exercise love, the Creator simply requires that we should do that which will cause us to become like him. And this is not an arbitrary or unreasonable requirement, for while God requires it he gives the ability to perform it. It is God who worketh in us both to will and to do of his good-pleasure. Christians are represented as branches of the vine, Christ himself being the parent stalk, and all their sap and nourishment come from him. God requires great things, but he also promises and provides great things.
WE have before remarked that the scribe was probably honest in asking the question which our Lord answered so admirably, and of this we have another evidence in the fact that he was perfectly satisfied with the reply. He said: "Well, Master, thou hast said the truth. And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God." One who loves truth and who can discern truth certainly has some of the Spirit of God, and if cherished, that Spirit will lead into all truth.
"LET US HAVE PEACE."
By Dudley Marvin Canright
ALAS! how shall we survive! The Firebrand with borrowed fire launches at us a five-column, nonpareil-slugged, pica article, with display head-lines as follows: "Seventh Dayism;" "The Folly of Worshiping a Day;" "A Well-timed Argument;" etc. It is copied from the Earnest Christian, written by one Rev. B. T. Roberts. The opening words well apply to the article in question, "Never was zeal so misdirected." The article presents no new argument. It contradicts itself in saying that the commandment does not require the seventh day of the week, and then says that "the reason for selecting the seventh day in preference to the fifth or sixth" is because "the Lord rested from the creation on the seventh day." Certainly the Lord rested on a definite day, and that day was the seventh day of the week; for the very next day was "the first day of the week." Luke 23:56; 24:1. The main proof is based on the "Fathers," from whom every error that ever disgraced Christianity can be proved. These "fathers" are among those who should "enter in privily not sparing the flock, speaking perverse things, and drawing away disciples after them." Acts 20:29, 30. The very fact that a Protestant will resort to the "Fathers" to prove Sunday sacredness is clear evidence that they have no Bible proof, and that they themselves are conscious of the fact.
On the same page as the above article, in bold-faced, two-line English, the Firebrand has the following: "We build our hopes on God's immutable promises." We cannot help querying if it is by treading under foot God's immutable precepts. They quote John 15:7: "If ye abide in me and my words abide in you." Does this mean only those words of Christ that please the Firebrand? Does it mean that the words of the immutable fourth precept are excluded? The argument concludes with, "Let us have peace." Is it peace with God which they desire? "Great peace have they that love thy law and nothing shall offend them." Ps. 119:165. But to the wicked, the transgressor of God's law, "there is no peace." Isa. 57:21. M. C. W.
THE WOULD-BE ARBITER.
"THERE is almost always," says the Advance, "some measure of truth and pertinence in the Pope's 'allocutions.' In one of the latest of these, speaking of the relations between Russia and the Vatican, and more generally of the position of the church in the modern world, the Pope remarks that it is now more than ever necessary for the Governments to make common cause with the church by reason of the perils by which they are surrounded. The progress of military science, he says, and the perfection of weapons of destruction, are insufficient. The surest defenses of the nations will, after all, be found neither in gun-boats nor in battalions, but rather in the development of the character of the people, and by each being careful to render unto each what belongs to the other, and closely adhering to the dictates of justice."
The evident meaning of all this is that the nations should make the Catholic Church, in the person of the Pope, the arbiter of all their differences. And it is now more than ever necessary that they should do this, since the progress of military science and the perfection of weapons has made war so much more destructive than formerly. The events are rapidly taking place which will cause all nations to "wonder after the beast which had the wound by the sword and did live."
An Italian Life of Jesus
A simple "Life of Jesus," in the Italian tongue, by Signor Bonghi, based solely on the gospel narrative, has already secured a circulation of upwards of 30,000 copies.
WHAT DOES THE CARDINAL MEAN?
By M. C. W.
THE Independent quotes from Cardinal Gibbons' first Lenten sermon as follows:—
"But we must be familiar with the Bible to have the scriptures in our hearts, and we can only know it by reading it carefully and prayerfully. I exhort you strongly to sanctify this season of Lent by studying the Bible at least ten or fifteen minutes every day, especially the New Testament and the Psalms. The Bible is the best and most entertaining companion in the world. . . . No other agency has produced such a revolution in society as the Bible. St. Augustine, the greatest mind in eighteen centuries, was led to be converted by the casual reading of a few words from one of St. Paul's epistles. . . . The Scriptures ought to be the garden of a priest, as St. Charles Borromeo said, and of the laity as well. What is good for the one, is good for the other. The clergy has no monopoly of sanctity. I see the Bible lying on your tables, but I fear, in many cases, it is there more for ornament than for use. Cultivate the Scriptures, and your soul will be enlightened and nourished."
That is excellent advice as far as it goes, but we query as to whether the cardinal meant it or not; or is it a sop to Protestants? Why we query is this: The Council of Trent declared that the indiscriminate use of the Bible would be productive of "more evil than good." In 1816 Pius VII. condemned Bible societies, and this was followed by another bill from Leo XII. in 1824; another by Pius VIII. in 1829, two more by Gregory XVI. in 1832 and 1844. The one by Gregory XVI., dated May 8, 1844, after referring to preceding decrees, says:—
"Moreover, we confirm and renew the decrees recited above, delivered in former times by apostolic authority, against the publication, distribution, reading, and possession of books of the Holy Scriptures translated into the vulgar tongue."—History of Rome by Dowling.
Now if the Roman Catholic Church does not change, one of two things is true: Either Cardinal Gibbons is acting contrary to ecclesiastical law, or else it is a Jesuitic trick to blind Protestant minds to the real intents of the Catholic Church. We suggest to all good Catholics the reading of the seventh chapter of Daniel and the second chapter of 2 Thessalonians, and the thirteenth to the eighteenth chapters of the Revelation. But we apprehend that there will be no more reading of the Bible than heretofore. But what extravagant ideas the cardinal has—"ten or fifteen minutes every day," for the period of Lent! If they should study it more time than that, the cardinal apprehends, perhaps, another revolution. Yes; the Bible has produced a revolution—the Reformation of the sixteenth century, for instance. But although these are not the kind that Rome fancies, it is the kind which the Bible always produces. M. C. W.
Old Testament History.
OFFERINGS FOR SIN.
(Lesson 17, April 27, 1889.)
1. WHAT has God represented himself as most willing to do?
"Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; and let him return unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon." Isa. 55:7.
2. In what does he delight?
"Who is a God like unto thee, that pardoneth iniquity, and passeth by the transgression of the remnant of his heritage? he retaineth not his anger forever, because he delighteth in mercy." Micah 7:18.
3. How great is his mercy?
"For as the heaven is high above the earth, so great is his mercy toward them that fear him." Ps. 103:11.
4. What will he do for our iniquities, and where will he put them?
"He will turn again, he will have compassion upon us; he will subdue our iniquities; and thou wilt cast all their sins into the depths of the sea." Micah 7:19.
5. How far does he remove our transgressions from us, if we but repent?
"As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our transgressions from us." Ps. 103:12.
6. What assurance have we of all this?
"What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us? He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?" Rom. 8:31, 32.
7. What is it that cleanses from sin?
"The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world!" John 1:29.
"But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin." 1 John 1:7.
8. Yet what were the Israelites required to do when they committed sin?
"And if any soul sin through ignorance, then he shall bring a she goat of the first year for a sin-offering. And the priest shall make an atonement for the soul that sinneth ignorantly, when he sinneth by ignorance before the Lord, to make an atonement for him; and it shall be forgiven him." Num. 15:27, 28.
9. Tell the particulars of this sin-offering.
"And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the sin-offering, and slay the sin-offering in the place of the burnt-offering. And the priest shall take of the blood thereof with his finger, and put it upon the horns of the altar of burnt-offering, and shall pour out all the blood thereof at the bottom of the altar. And he shall take away all the fat thereof, as the fat is taken away from off the sacrifice of peace-offerings; and the priest shall burn it upon the altar for a sweet savor unto the Lord; and the priest shall make an atonement for him, and it shall be forgiven him." Lev. 4:29-31.
10. In case the entire offering was burnt, what was done with the blood? Lev. 4:5-7, 11, 12.
11. What is said of the blood?
"For the life of the flesh is in the blood; and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul." Lev. 17:11, last part.
12. When only the fat of the sin-offering was burnt, what was done with the flesh?
"The priest that offereth it for sin shall eat it; in the holy place shall it be eaten, in the court of the tabernacle of the congregation." "And no sin-offering, whereof any of the blood is brought into the tabernacle of the congregation to reconcile withal in the holy place, shall be eaten; it shall be burnt in the fire." Lev. 6:26, 30.
13. In this case, what was the flesh considered as bearing into the sanctuary?
"And Moses diligently sought the goat of the sin-offering, and, behold, it was burnt; and he was angry with Eleazar and Ithamar, the sons of Aaron which were left alive, saying, Wherefore have ye not eaten the sin-offering in the holy place, seeing it is most holy, and God hath given it to you to bear the iniquity of the congregation, to make atonement for them before the Lord?" Lev. 10:16, 17.
14. Was there any power in these offerings to cleanse from sin?
"For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices, which they offered year by year continually, make the comers thereunto perfect." "For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins." Heb. 10:1, 4.
15. Yet were not the people actually and fully pardoned when they made these offerings? Num. 15:28; see also Lev. 4, noting especially verses 20, 26, 31, 35.
16. Then what must have been the significance of those offerings?—They represented the death of Christ, "who his own self bare our sins in his body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness" (1 Peter 2:24), by whose stripes we are healed. God's promise makes future things as real as though they had been already performed, and so the blood of Christ was as powerful to cleanse from sin in the days of Moses as it is now. The sin-offerings that the people brought, simply showed their faith that the Lord had laid upon Jesus the iniquity of us all, and that there is cleansing in his blood. It was by faith that all sacrifices that were of any value were made. Heb. 11:4. It was faith that made the people whole in those days, as well as in the days of Christ, or at the present time; and without faith it was as impossible to please God then as it is now.
17. If there was not true repentance, would any sacrifice avail?
"If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear me." Ps. 66:18.
18. What does the Lord require of us?
"For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt-offerings." Hosea 6:6.
"Wherewith shall I come before the Lord, and bow myself before the high God? shall I come before him with burnt-offerings, with calves of a year old? Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams, or with ten thousands of rivers of oil? shall I give my first-born for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul? He that showed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?" Micah 6:6-8.
19. What are the real sacrifices of God?
"For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it; thou delightest not in burnt-offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise." Ps. 51:16, 17.
GOSPEL ORDINANCES.
By Merritt C. Wilcox
It is true that there is "none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved" but that of Jesus. Those who lived before his first advent, who will be saved in the kingdom of God, will be saved through the blood of Christ just as much as those who are saved who lived since that time. Abel and Moses will be saved through Christ just as truly as Paul and John. He "is the Saviour of all men." He died not only for the redemption of transgressions in this dispensation, but also "for the redemptions of the transgressions that were under the first testament." Heb. 9:15.
It follows, therefore, that those who lived before the first advent had the gospel. The good tidings of great joy came to them. For them a Saviour was to die, which, based on God's promise, and, later, on his promise and oath, was just as sure to the believer then (because God "cannot deny himself") as it is to the believer now. So Paul says that the gospel was preached unto Abraham (Gal. 3:8), and to Israel according to the flesh. Heb. 4:2. Abel also had faith in the Redeemer to come, as did multitudes more not mentioned. Heb. 11:4.
Why then the offerings of goats and calves, if salvation comes only through Christ? They were the gospel ordinances of the past dispensations. In the Christian dispensation, we have baptism, the Lord's Supper, and the ordinance of humility. The celebration of the Lord's Supper shows faith in the death of our Lord Jesus Christ,—faith in the effectual merits of his broken body and shed blood. Faith is to be manifested in this till Christ comes again. 1 Cor. 11:26. At that time it ceases of necessity to be longer observed.
There were certain laws expressed or implied in connection with this ordinance.
The bread was unleavened; for it was that used in connection with the passover when no leaven was to be found in Jewish dwellings. Ex. 12:8; 34:25. Leaven is corruption, and nothing but the unleavened would fitly symbolize the perfect offering of Christ's sinless body. 1 Cor. 5:7, 8. The wine was unfermented. It was the fruit of the vine, indicating that which was just pressed out. The same principle applies to this as to the leaven. Fermentation235could not symbolize the precious blood of Christ.
The Lord's Supper illustrates the offerings of past dispensations. The sacrifices and offerings were a manifestation of faith in Christ till he came. Heb. 9:8-12. Laws to regulate these offerings were necessary, in order that Christ might be typified by that which would rightly represent his perfect sacrifice. So the beasts must be of the first year without blemish, the very prime of the flock. They must be offered in just such ways that the people might realize how necessary it was to do just right, and how holy was the great antitypical Sacrifice which these offerings symbolized. These offerings were therefore the gospel ordinances of that time. Through the death of the lamb or goat, they saw the death of the Lamb of God. For this reason Christ is called the "Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." Rev. 13:8. Through the blood of the victim, they saw the precious blood of Christ that could cleanse from sin.
Of course, when Christ came, these offerings necessarily ceased. Faith could no longer use them. With them also ceased the laws regulating them. These laws were not repealed; they expired by limitation, just as will the gospel ordinances of this dispensation, when Christ comes the second time. M. C. W.
NOTE.
By Editor
WHEN the Lord says, "For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice," and David says, "Thou desirest not sacrifice, else would I give it; thou delightest not in burnt-offering," we must understand it as meaning that God never had any delight in sacrifices and burnt-offering unaccompanied by a contrite spirit; for immediately after David said what we have just quoted from him, he added: "Then shalt thou be pleased with the sacrifices of righteousness, with burnt-offering and whole burnt-offering." The meaning is that God is not pleased with mere form and soulless ceremony. He does not desire a person to do penance, and his favor cannot be bought by any amount of treasure or affliction of one's body. See Micah 6: 6-8. But he is pleased with a broken and contrite heart; and such a heart will say from the fullness of its sense of the divine mercy, "What shall I render unto the Lord for all his benefits toward me? I will take the cup of salvation, and call upon the name of the Lord. I will pay my vows unto the Lord now in the presence of all his people." Ps. 116: 12-14.
IDAHO AND WASHINGTON TERRITORY.
By J. W. Scoles
ALTHOUGH some time has elapsed since I have sent in a report of labor, I have not been altogether idle.
During the latter part of November, I began a series of meetings in Garfield, Wash., continuing three weeks, and resulting in ten adults accepting the truth.
December 13 to January 2 I held meetings at Viola, Idaho, with the company brought out during our tent-meetings there last summer. The good work was confirmed in several hearts, and on December 30 nine willing souls, one of them a lady over seventy years of age, went forward in the ordinance of baptism. In the afternoon a church of ten members was duly organized, with proper officers, and a Tract and Missionary Society was also organized. Here is a church without a single former Sabbath-keeper connected with it, and if some of our brethren who are determined to change their location desire to get where they can be a real help to others, here is an opportunity.
From January 3 to February 10 I labored with the church at Moscow, Idaho. This church has just completed a neat chapel for public worship, and is prospering spiritually also. As the result of the effort made at this time five new ones decided to keep all the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.
February 23 and 24 Elder D. T. Fero met with us at Garfield, and assisted in the organization of a church of seventeen members, two more being baptized at this time.
As we leave this Conference for other fields of labor, it is with the prayer that the blessing of God may so attend his cause both here and elsewhere, that we shall soon see the work closed up; and when the blessed Master shall come, may we, with those for whom we have labored, be permitted to enter into the rest that remains for the people of God.
J. W. SCOLES.
March 14.
CHRISTIAN JEWS.
By Editor
Most of our readers are probably aware that there is in Russia a number of converted Jews under the leadership of Joseph Rabinowitz, who not only have embraced the faith of Jesus, but who still observe the Bible Sabbath. The following sketch of their leader, which we take from the Gospel in All Lands, will, we are sure, be of interest:—
Energetic in character and ambitious in self-improvement and the advancement, politically, socially, and morally, of his people, he, years ago, became known as a zealous friend of reform among the Eastern Jews. With an education and enterprise far beyond his brethren, he set about to devise ways and means to attain his ideals and ends. He acquainted himself with the advanced philosophical thought of the West, in the hope that its adoption by his people would elevate them to a higher spiritual plane, and thus secure for them higher ideals and nobler ends. But he soon learned to doubt both the efficiency of the means and the possibility of applying them to a people whom centuries of persecution and ultra-conservatism had been hardening to principles so at variance with their traditional ideas.
He again attempted to win them away from their greed for gain, which, next to their formalistic religious exercises, is the all-controlling and all-degrading factor in the mind and life of the oriental Jew. But his endeavors to establish agricultural colonies for them, both at home and in the holy land, proved abortive. While in Palestine, the conviction ripened in him, through an independent study of the New Testament in its relation to the Old, that Israel had made the mistake of its national life, and had become untrue to its historic mission, by the rejection of Christ.
This conviction concerning Christ, not as the Saviour of the world, but as the embodiment and fulfillment of the prophecies of old, and of the ideals and aims of Israel as a nation, is the central thought around which the whole movement circles. The principles enunciated by the humble Nazarene are recognized as those which alone can accomplish the destinies of the people, and enable them to attain the end for which they were set apart as a chosen people.
It is thus regarded as a serious break in the normal and historical development of Israel that eighteen hundred years ago this people as a nation refused to accept those tenets and principles which are regarded by all Christians, and now also by Rabinowitz and his followers, as the legitimate and only correct outcome of the whole previous historical development of Israel. To heal this breach is the ideal aim of the Kishineff reformers, by setting in anew there where first the chosen people entered upon an erroneous path of national development.
These ideas explain why the Kishineff communion by no means desire to join any of the existing Christian denominations. Their object is to secure the recognition of Christianity, as the genuine and legitimate development of Old Testament Judaism, and as the only means of securing the national prosperity of the Jews as such. For this reason they do not think of ceasing to be Jews. They still keep the seventh day; they still practice circumcision; they still celebrate the Paschal feast as a memorial of the deliverance from Egypt—because all these are national characteristics distinguishing them from Germans, from the English, from other peoples, as separate from each other with its own peculiarities.
[And the writer might have added, Because they can find no authority in the Scriptures for neglecting the observance of the Sabbath.]
The Missionary.
By Frank Hope
NEVADA.
I HAVE spent the last six weeks among the Nevada churches. Held meetings in Reno, St. Clair, and Dayton. The preaching was generally of a practical nature, embracing chiefly the great truths of justification by faith and true conversion. The National Reform movement and our relation to the powers that be were also given attention. At St. Clair the outside attendance was quite large. The Reno church is now furnished and ready for dedication. Four signed the covenant, and thirteen desire baptism. FRANK HOPE.
Oakland, March 31, 1889.
TRUTH.
By Christian Advocate
TRUTH is a jewel sought by few,
Its worth cannot be told;
More brilliant than the diamond's light,
More precious far than gold.
It brightest shines when set in love,
Its radiance gleams anew,
And faith reflects the glorious light,
Till error shrinks from view.
Though buried long 'neath rubbish pile,
Its luster grows not dim;
Exumed once more 'tis blazoned forth,
The same pure, sparkling gem.
With constant wear it changes not,
Fierce heat, or icy chill;
Rude storms but brush the dust away,
It shines the brighter still.
This precious gem is free to all,
But few the jewel wear,
Because its brilliancy obscures
The tinsel fable's glare.
Because its light will never blend
With vanity and pride,
The mass prefer false, fading charms,
And cast true worth aside.
—Christian Advocate.
Truth, Bigotry, and Christian Love
By S. S. Times
It is one thing to be right one's self; it is another thing to win others to the right. One person who holds firmly to essential truth, may make that truth offensive to others by his bigotry in its defense. Another person who holds with like firmness to the same truth may make error winsome to others by his manner of denouncing bigoted defenders of truth. In each case the one who holds to the truth is all right for himself, and all wrong for others. Bigotry for the truth may be a means of promoting error; and so may a denunciation of bigotry. Holding the truth in such love as will make one loving towards both bigots and skeptics is as rare a grace as it is admirable.—S. S. Times.
Simplicity in Prayer
GOD loves to have us pray with earnest simplicity. Better in God's sight are the broken and heart-felt lispings of a child than the high-flown utterances of some who think themselves wonderful in prayer.