HAYING become satisfied of the existence of a sanctuary in heaven, a true tabernacle which the Lord pitched and not man, the subject of its ministration and cleansing can furnish little ground for controversy. On this point, as on every other concerning the glorious heavenly things, and the more excellent ministry of the Melchisedec priesthood, in the person of our Lord, we must reason from type to antitype, from the earthly shadow to the heavenly substance.
The priests on earth, says Paul, serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things. This being so, it follows that the work connected with the earthly tabernacle, was the example and shadow of a like work in heaven. Let us then briefly examine
The Ministration and Cleansing of the Earthly Sanctuary.
This ministration was accomplished by the Levitical order of priesthood, and consisted of two great divisions: the daily ministration in the holy place, and the work in the most holy place at the end of the year. The daily ministration embraced the regular morning and evening burnt offering [Ex. xxix, 38-43], the burning of sweet incense on the golden altar, every morning when the high priest dressed the lamps, and every evening when he lighted them [Ex. xxx]; also, the additional work appointed for the Sabbaths of the Lord, and the annual sabbaths, new moons and feasts [Num. xxviii; xxix], besides the particular work to be accomplished for individuals as they should present their offerings throughout the year.
This latter was an important part of the service, and was performed as follows: Whoever had sinned brought his victim, that was to be offered up for him, to the door of the tabernacle. He then laid his hand upon the head of the victim which signified that his sin was transferred to it; it was then slain on account of that transgression, and the blood borne in by the priest and sprinkled in the sanctuary. Lev. i; iii; iv. Thus the sin of the individual was transferred first to the victim, and then through his blood to the sanctuary itself.
In this manner went the typical service forward through the year. Day after day, week after week, month after month, we behold the victim of expiation brought up before the door of the tabernacle. We see the transgressor confessing over him his sin, and thus transferring to him his guilt. He hereby acknowledged that he had sinned and was worthy of death. The law demands the life of the transgressor. But a substitute was provided. The guilt was imputed to the victim, and his life paid the forfeit. The priest took of his blood (and the blood of it is the life thereof, Lev. xvii, 11, 14) and bore it within the tabernacle, and sprinkled it before the Lord, before the vail of the sanctuary. Lev. iv. The sanctuary thenceforth became the receptacle of the offender's sin. A continual transfer of sins from the people to the sanctuary, was thus carried on through the year.
But what at length became of these sins? Were they suffered to remain in the sanctuary? They were not. There was another ministration at the close of the year, by which they were forever removed from the sanctuary, and a final disposition made of them. This was the yearly ministration, or the cleansing of the sanctuary. Lev. xvi. It took place on the tenth day of the seventh month. Verse 29. To accomplish this, the work of the high priest was changed from the holy place, to the most holy, within the vail. Here he entered with the blood of a bullock as a sin-offering for himself. Verse 3. He was then to take of the congregation of the children of Israel, (verse 5,) two kids of the goats for a sin offering. Upon these he was to cast lots, (verse 8,) one lot for the Lord and the other for the scape-goat. He was then to slay the goat upon which the lot fell for the Lord, for a sin-offering for the people (verse 15), and bear his blood within the vail, and sprinkle it with his finger upon the mercy-seat eastward, and before the mercy-seat seven times.
This blood was offered for two purposes: 1. To make an atonement for the transgression of the children of Israel in all their sins. 2. To cleanse, or make atonement for the holy sanctuary. This fact is plainly stated in Lev. xvi, 15-22, a part of which we here transcribe:
Verse 15. "Then shall he kill the goat of the sin-offering that is for the people, and bring his blood within the vail, and do with that blood as he did with the blood of the bullock, and sprinkle it upon the mercy-seat, and before the mercy-seat.
Verse 16. "And he shall make an atonement for the holy place, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins: and so shall he do for the tabernacle of the congregation.
Verse 17. "And there shall be no man in the tabernacle of the congregation when he goeth in to make an atonement in the holy place, until he come out and have made an atonement for himself, and for his household, and for all the congregation of Israel.
Verse 20. "And when he hath made an end of reconciling the holy place, and the tabernacle of the congregation, and the altar, he shall bring the live goat:
Verse 21. "And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness.
Verse 22. "And the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited."
Tradition has it, that the goat thus led away, was hurled from a precipice and so killed. With this act the yearly round of service was completed. The work of the priest is again summed up in verses 33, 34, as follows:
"And he shall make an atonement for the holy sanctuary, and he shall make an atonement for the tabernacle of the congregation, and for the altar; and he shall make an atonement for the priests, and for all the people of the congregation. And this shall be an everlasting statute unto you, to make an atonement for the children of Israel, for all their sins, once a year."
In the foregoing testimony, is presented a general outline of the ministration and cleansing of the earthly sanctuary. This was performed unto the example and shadow of heavenly things. From this, therefore, we are to reason concerning
The Ministration and Cleansing of the Heavenly Sanctuary.
If the reader has seen no cause to disagree with us, in any of the positions thus far taken, he will see none, we trust, while this point is under investigation. We are not left to our own reasoning on this subject. Paul in his divine commentary on the typical system, has drawn the parallels between that and the more excellent ministry of the Melchisedec priesthood, to the satisfaction, it should be, of every one. We refer to the book of Hebrews. Let us notice his testimony.
1. The earthly sanctuary meets its antitype in the true tabernacle which the Lord pitched and not man, of which, with its true holy places, it constituted a correct pattern or shadow. Chap. viii, 2, 5; ix, 8, 9, 12, 23, 24.
2. The typical offerings meet their antitype in the great offering on Calvary. Chap. vii, 27; ix, 11-14, 26; x, 10, 12, 14.
3. The typical priesthood meets its antitype in the priesthood of our Lord. Chap. iv, 14; vii, 23, 24; viii, 1, 2; ix, 11, 24, 25.
4. As they had offerings to make, it is necessary that he also have somewhat to offer. Chap. viii, 3.
5. The work of the priest in the earthly tabernacle meets its antitype in the ministry of our Lord in the sanctuary above. Chap. viii, 5, 6.
We shall now show that Christ commences his ministry in the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary. It is necessary to keep this point in view, to guard against the erroneous theories which some have been led to adopt, by either losing sight of, or denying it. That Christ is our High Priest cannot be denied; that he has ascended to heaven is also beyond dispute; and that he there ministers for his people, they cannot call in question. But some claim that there is in the antitype only a most holy place, and that is all heaven; consequently our High Priest ministers in but one apartment.
1. The argument drawn from Dan. ix, 24, has already been noticed. We have also proved that the temple of God in heaven consists of two holy places, or it cast a most inexplicable shadow upon earth. But who will explain the anomaly of there being two holy places in the heavenly sanctuary, and yet a ministry performed in only one?
2. The text, "This man after he had offered one sacrifice for sins, forever sat down on the right hand of God" [Heb. x, 12], has been urged as forbidding the idea of his ministering in two holy places. We answer, that so far as the idea of sitting is concerned, it would be equally proper to represent him as standing on the Father's right hand. Acts vii, 55, 56. And then we reply further, that even when he is seen coming in the clouds of heaven, he is said to be "sitting on the right hand of power." Matt. xxvi, 64; Mark xiv, 62. Then he can certainly be at the Father's right hand in both the holy places. But Paul bears direct testimony on this point. He says that Christ is a minister of the sanctuary; and the word here rendered sanctuary is in the plural number, and signifies the holy places. This none can deny. It is by the Douay Bible rendered, "the holies;" and by Macknight, "holy places." We therefore justly conclude (1.) that our Lord can be a minister of the two holy places, and yet be at the Father's right hand; and (2.) that he must minister in both the holy places, or Paul's testimony that he is a minister of the holies (plural) is not true; for a priest that should minister simply in the holies of all, would not be a minister of the holy places.
3. Again: Heb. ix, 8, and also x, 19, are by some urged to prove that Christ ministers only in the most holy place. These texts both speak of the holies as though it were in the singular number; but we have already observed that the words thus rendered are not in the singular, but plural: not "hagia hagion," holy of holies, as in chap. ix, 3, but simply "hagia," holies, plural, the same as is rendered sanctuary in chap. viii, 2. Also the phrase in chap. ix, 12, 25, rendered "into the holy place," is the same as is in verse 24 literally rendered into the holy places (plural). These texts therefore instead of sustaining what they are often quoted to prove, viz., that Christ has but one apartment in which to minister, furnish positive testimony to the reverse, by showing that there are holy places in the heavenly sanctuary, and that Jesus ministers in them both.
4. Three hundred and sixty-four days of that service which was performed unto the "example and shadow of heavenly things," was accomplished in the first apartment, or holy place, and only one day out of the year, in the most holy. If therefore, Christ ministers only in the most holy place, the first, and by far the greater, part of the earthly ministration is without an antitype.
5. The ministration in the most holy at the end of the year, was only performed for the purpose of cleansing the sanctuary; and if in the antitype, Christ only ministers in the holy place, it follows that he performs only the antitype of this service; consequently the cleansing of the sanctuary commenced at the ascension of our Lord. But the cleansing of the sanctuary, according to the type, must be preceded by a long ministration; and who will tell us, in this case, when it took place? Again, the 2300 days extend to the cleansing of the sanctuary, and with this view, they should have terminated in A. D. 31, at our Lord's ascension. But, as we have already seen, they did not terminate till 1813 years this side of that event.
The priesthood of Christ is a superior priesthood in which the imperfections of the earthly priesthood find no analogy. We will notice this in a few of its particulars.
1. Christ is a priest after the order of Melchisedec, and not after the order of Aaron. Heb. v, 6.
2. Perfection was not of the Levitical priesthood; for if it had been, says Paul, what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not after the order of Aaron? Chap. vii, 11.
3. Those priests were many; because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death; but this man continueth ever and hath an unchangeable priesthood. Verses 23, 24.
4. It was necessary for the priests of the house of Levi, to offer up sacrifices daily, embracing all the various offerings that were made by those who had transgressed. But all this Christ did by one act when he offered up himself. Chap. ix, 25, 26, 28; x, 10, 12, 14.
5. The round of service in the earthly tabernacle was many times repeated; but the ministry of Christ is accomplished once for all. Heb. ix, 11, 12, 24, 25; x.
6. All the blood which was offered in the former dispensation, was offered for past transgression only, and made no provision for the future; while the merits of that blood which was shed on Calvary applied not to the past alone, but to the future also. Heb. ix, 14, 15.
7. As the blood of Christ is the only blood ministered in connection with the heavenly sanctuary, whether by actual presentation or by virtue of its merits, we need not inquire, the same blood must be ministered in both apartments.
8. As long as Christ fills the office of priest, so long he is mediator between God and man.
The prophets John and Isaiah had each a view of our Lord's position and ministry in the heavenly sanctuary. John saw a door opened in heaven. This must have been the door of the heavenly tabernacle; for it disclosed to John's view the throne of God, which was in that temple. Rev. iv, 1, 2; xvi, 17. That it was the door of the first apartment is evident from the objects which he there beheld [Rev. iv, 5; viii, 3]; and the second apartment which contains the ark of the testament, or ten commandments, is not opened till the sounding of the seventh angel. Rev. xi, 19. Read also Isaiah's description of the same place: Isa. vi, 1-6. That he and John were both viewing the same place will appear from a comparison of the following Scriptures: Isa. vi, 1, with Rev. iv, 2. Isa. vi, 2, with Rev. iv, 6-8. Isa. vi, 3, with Rev. iv, 8. Isa. vi, 6, with Rev. viii, 3; ix, 13.
The Lord here carries forward this great work which he commenced with the act of bearing the sins of the world at his death, by pleading the cause of penitent sinners, through his blood shed in their behalf; and thus their sins are, by his mediation, transferred to the heavenly sanctuary. There is nothing strange or fanciful in this. Every one can easily understand it. Such was the service of the type, which was a shadow of the heavenly things; and such, therefore, is the heavenly ministration itself. Thus are the sins of God's people transferred to the sanctuary. But will they remain there forever? No. They will be removed, just as they were in the type, and the heavenly sanctuary will be cleansed even as was the earthly.
(To be continued.)
Meetings in Vermont.
By A. C. Bourdeau
Bro. White: We commenced our labors with the tent in Vermont under many discouragements. The last week in June we went to East St. Johnsbury, by the instruction of the committee, and made arrangements for a piece of ground on which to pitch the tent; but after we had posted up several hand-bills in different places, the owner of the ground refused to let us pitch the tent on his land, saying that the people did not want us there. They had learned that we were Seventh-day Adventists, and they were so sealed over with popular orthodoxy that they did not want to have such unpopular doctrines preached in the place.
As we found no opening for meetings there, we went to Danville Green, but could find no ground on which to pitch the tent. We then went to North Danville, found an opening, and commenced meetings July 5. We continued there twenty-three days, and gave twenty-one lectures. The truth was presented with freedom, and in power. But the tent-ground was so wet on account of heavy rains which continued for three weeks, that for most of the time we could hold no evening meetings, and the work was much hindered. On first-days our congregations were large and attentive.
After the Sabbath question was fully discussed, Bro. Hutchins requested those who believed that the first day of the week was the Sabbath, to stand upon their feet. Only one arose. Then several arose in favor of the Sabbath of the fourth commandment.
Three weeks ago I was drafted according to Act of Congress "for enrolling and calling out the national forces," approved March 3, 1863, and we concluded to suspend our tent labors till I was liberated from the draft; for many were hindered from attending the meetings on account of the hurrying time of haying, and the excitement about the draft.
I believe that I am the only one among the brethren in this State that was drafted. God has heard the earnest prayers of his people, and now I am prepared to resume my labors with the tent.
Sabbath, Aug. 1, my brother and myself met with the brethren at Fairfield, Vt. We had liberty in preaching the word to them. We were glad to see those who came out under our labors last spring, firm in the truth. May God bless them, and add to their number such as shall be saved.
Sabbath, Aug. 9, the brethren and sisters came together for a quarterly meeting at West Enosburgh. A goodly number had traveled more than twenty miles to attend this meeting. The brethren and sisters were greatly encouraged by the word spoken. Since last spring twelve have united with the church, and others will unite with us soon. I am glad that the good work is going on in this church. We were made happy in attending to the ordinances of the Lord's supper, and washing feet. "If ye know these things, happy are ye if ye do them." John xiii, 17.
A. C. Bourdeau.
West Enosburg, Vt., Aug. 17, 1863.
Man in Death.
By B. F. Snook
Is man conscious or unconscious in death? On this question we affirm that in death man is unconscious. We have proved that man is a unit and as such he dies. Our proposition relates to him as a unit, in the state of death.
Argument first, is founded upon man's condition before he received the breath of life. (1.) He was man as much before, as he was afterward. (2.) He was unconscious. (3.) He could not praise the Lord. (4.) He had no thoughts. But when he received the breath of life he became a living soul, a living creature. What made him a living creature? The breath of life. Gen. ii, 7. And as a living creature he was conscious, could think, and praise the Lord. His life was dependent upon that breath of life, not upon an immortal soul. Therefore, as on receiving the breath of life, he became a living, conscious, and active man, capable of exercising the power of thought, and praising the Lord. When the breath departed or left him, his condition was just the same that it was before he received it. He became unconscious, and could neither think, nor praise the Lord.
Arg. 2. The building, unbuilding, and rebuilding of man. (1.) His building, or formation. "The Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. Gen. ii, 7. This gives us all needed information relative to the building of man. No such material as an immaterial soul entered into the construction of that building. (2.) His unbuilding. How is man unbuilt? The Lord says by David, "Thou hidest thy face, they are troubled; thou takest away their (never dying immortal soul? No,) breath; they die, and return to their dust. Ps. civ. 29. "His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth." cxlvi. 4. It is apparent from the foregoing, that no immortal soul, nor deathless spirit, either entered into man in his building, or departed from him in his unbuilding, or death. (3.) His rebuilding. This is effected in the resurrection, and if we do not, upon examination, find that an immortal soul or never-dying spirit enters into man at that time; we with all safety may conclude that there is no such thing in all that constitutes man, and that all arguments in favor of the consciousness of the dead based upon this assumption, are weighed in the balance and found wanting. The rebuilding of man is beautifully presented in Ezekiel's vision of the valley of dry bones. Chap. xxxvii.102"Again he said unto me, Oh ye dry bones, hear the word of the Lord. Thus saith the Lord God unto these bones, Behold I will cause (an immortal soul? Yes, says orthodoxy, but, says the Bible) breath to enter into you, and ye shall live." Verses 3, 4. "And I will lay sinews upon you, and will bring flesh upon you, and cover you with skin and put breath in you, and ye shall know that I am the Lord. So I prophesied as I was commanded; and as I prophesied there was a noise and behold a shaking, and the bones came together, bone to his bone; and when I beheld, lo, the sinews and flesh came up upon them, and the skin covered them above, but there was no breath in them. Then said he unto me Prophesy unto the wind, Prophesy son of man, and say to the wind, Thus saith the Lord God, Come from the" (heavens, O ye immortal souls and be united with your bodies? No; that is the voice of the creed worshipers; but the Bible says, Come from the) "four winds, O breath and breathe upon these slain, that they may live. So I prophesied as he commanded me and the breath came into them, and they lived and stood up upon their feet an exceeding great army." Verse 10. In all this very minute prophetic description of the resurrection, not one word is said of immortal souls or spirits.
Arg. 3. Man in death has no remembrance. "For in death there is no remembrance of thee; in the grave who shall give thee thanks? Ps. vi, 5. "I am forgotten as a dead man out of mind; I am like a broken vessel." xxxi, 12. According to these Scriptures the dead have no remembrance of anything. Not even the righteous who love God and rejoice in his mercies, blessings and goodness, have any remembrance in death. How different is this plain truth from the fables of the religionists of these times. By the self-styled orthodox, all classes who die, except the most flagrant sinners, are preached immediately to heaven, where they are represented as being in the most perfect bliss, thanking, and blessing God at the remembrance of his mercies.
Arg. 4. Is founded upon Ps. cxv, 17. "The dead praise not the Lord, neither any that go down into silence." This testimony accords with our reasoning upon the constitution of man before he received the breath of life. He could not then praise the Lord. Death reduces him to that same state again, in which he cannot praise his Maker. And so it is with all who die and go down into silence. The dead go down not up; and they rest in silence, until their silent slumbers are broken by the mighty peals of the Archangel's trump. The whole system of popular theology is directly opposed to this Bible truth, and must of necessity be of him who said "ye shall not surely die."
Arg. 5. The very thoughts of the dead have perished. They cannot think. Ps. cxlvi, 4. His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth, in that very day his thoughts perish. This testimony is based upon the very fact in the nature of man, that before he received the breath of life he could not think, and as death remands him back to the same condition, in death he of necessity cannot think. But why cannot man think after death, as well as during life? The reason is obvious. He thinks with the brain. This point is easily proved. When the brain is pressed upon by the skull, all things, feeling, and intellect, are as really suspended, as they are in death. Dr. Richmond mentions the case of a woman whose brain was exposed, in consequence of the removal of a considerable of its bony covering by disease. He says, "I repeatedly made pressure on the brain, and each time suspended all feeling and all intellect, which were immediately restored when the pressure was withdrawn." Prof. Chapman, in one of his lectures says, "I saw an individual with his skull perforated and the brain exposed, who was accustomed to submit to be experimented upon by pressure and who was exhibited by the late Prof. Weston to his class. His intellect and moral faculties disappeared on the application of pressure to the brain. They were held under the thumb as it were, and restored at pleasure to their full activity by discontinuing the pressure. These are facts that no man can gainsay, and they demonstrate completely our position. Additional evidence is found in the fact that idiots cannot think or reason; because they have no brain in the front part of the skull where the reasoning faculties are located.
They are on a level with the brutes. They can eat and speak. They are supplied with all the animal organs but destitute of the rational. Another fact, adding strength to the above conclusion is, that as is the size of the brain, so are the reasoning faculties. All the great men of both church and state, have been and are men of large and well developed brains. But the immortal-soul theory says that it is with the soul that we think and reason and hence this conclusion that man can think as well after death as during life. If this be true, we are not dependent upon brain for memory thoughts or reason. And therefore we can think and reason as well without brains, as with: and if so why cannot the idiot think and reason with his immortal soul? The conclusion appears evident, that if the idiot during life cannot think with an immortal soul being destitute of brains, in death, when the same are as though they had no brains, they can no more reason and think than the idiot. Death chills, benumbs and stupefies the brain so that it cannot act, and thus the testimony of David is proved true: In that very day his thoughts perish, die, cease. But when man wakes, his mind will act from his last thoughts. His last thoughts in life will be his first in the resurrection. This is evinced by facts. Many examples might be given in which persons have been entirely unconscious for months and years, from injuries of the brain. But when the injuries were removed which obstructed the action of the brain, they were restored to consciousness, and began to think and act just where they left off, as if nothing had happened to them, and no time had passed away.
Arg. 6. The dead know not anything. Job in speaking of the dead, says, "His sons come to honor and he knoweth it not: they are brought low, but he perceiveth it not of them." xiv, 21. "Doubtless thou art our father, though Abraham be ignorant of us." Isa. lxiii, 16. Why is it that the father knows not the destiny of his sons upon the earth? And why was Abraham ignorant of Israel? Because they slept in unconsciousness. "For the living know that they shall die, but the dead know not anything, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten." Eccl. ix, 5. This is so plain that comment is needless. The dead know not anything, neither have they yet a reward. The time of their reward is placed in other scriptures under the seventh trumpet. Rev. xi, 15.
Note from Bro. Ingraham.
By William S. Ingraham; T. M. Steward
About a dozen have decided to obey God and keep his commandments in this place. There is a prospect of raising up a good church in Darlington. Pray for us that the truth may bear off a glorious victory.
WM. S. INGRAHAM.
T. M. STEWARD.
Darlington, Wis.
Note from Bro. Snook.
By B. F. Snook
WE met with the brethren at West Union according to appointment. We were truly happy to find the church there trying to live out the truth and that the Lord was adding to them such as should be saved.
May this church ever be a light shining to those around with rays of truth to lighten their way to the kingdom. We met with a general turn-out of our good brethren and sisters from neighboring churches. At Marion, Bro. Sanborn preached to good acceptance, and all were highly edified and encouraged by his labors. We hope that the brethren may long remember his straight and faithful testimony and profit thereby.
B. F. SNOOK.
Labors in Ohio.
By J. H. Waggoner
I CLOSED my meetings in Chardon on Sunday, the 9th inst. The circumstances were unfavorable, as the house I occupied was rented for shows, which, of course, interfered with the meetings. My health was very poor at the commencement, and I continued as long as my strength would permit. Many who appeared deeply interested and even convinced on the Sabbath, ceased to attend toward the close. Whether they love the praise of men more than the praise of God, the great day will disclose. Some who were interested and anxious to hear, could not attend to the close, as the weather became favorable for their haying, and help very scarce, they were obliged to give their entire time to labor. I do not think the work is finished in Chardon, and hope it may be renewed when circumstances are more favorable. I found a few there who had been interested in the second advent years ago. The remark of one sister was striking. She said when I commenced lecturing on the prophecies, she hoped the people would see the harmony of their fulfillment, and so she would have a feast without any cross. But soon they led to the Sabbath, crossing to all earthly hopes and feelings. Next came baptism, a heavy cross to one who had been a life-long Presbyterian. So it is in Christian life and experience. A feast is only to be had by way of the cross, and they who will avoid the cross will go empty away. A little company are keeping the Sabbath there, and I trust more may yet be added to their number.
We have concluded to pitch the tent in Orwell Center; meeting to commence 21st. In the mean time I am holding meetings as I think will be most effectual in further removing the dreadful influence that has been exerted in this county. Already there are indications of good from the meetings held here, and I trust the Lord will work for the honor of his own word.
J. H. WAGGONER.
Orwell, Ohio, Aug. 18.
Meetings in Michigan.
By Joseph Bates
BRO. WHITE: We held three meetings with Brn. and friends in Byron Centre, Sabbath and first-day Aug. 8, 9. Nearly half the number that constitute their Sabbath meetings have moved to other parts of the State this season, which has left them in a somewhat scattered state. They were much encouraged with our visiting them. I hope our Brn. in the vicinity will call on them as they pass.
From Aug. 10–17 we spent in visiting individual members and families, and held five preaching and social meetings with the church in Wright, much to our satisfaction, and we trust to their benefit.
We are now with the church in Orange, to labor until the 24th inst.
JOSEPH BATES.
Orange, Ionia Co. Aug. 19, 1863.
Presumptive Arguments.
By Dudley Marvin Canright
Edward Beecher, in his "Papal Conspiracy exposed," page 226, says: "Another presumptive argument that the system is a stupendous fraud, is found in the extreme scantiness of the scriptural proof by which it is sustained."
"There is no specific, formal and definite statement of the system in the Bible, such as a system of power like this ought to bear. Compare the statement of powers of officers in the laws of Moses, and the constitution of the United States, and in the case of Christ, with the statements claimed for this corporation as its scriptural proofs."
All Protestants will agree that he reasons well; and that papacy by this test must inevitably fall to the ground.
But the same reasoning will also undermine some of the main pillars of Mr. Beecher's faith: as, for instance, Sunday-keeping. If we search the Bible, we shall be astonished at "the extreme scantiness of the scriptural proof by which it is sustained." The most zealous defenders of Sunday are compelled to acknowledge that, "there is no specific, formal, and definite statement," of this institution in the Bible. Follow Mr. Beecher's plan and compare the scriptural evidences claimed for Sunday, with those claimed for the Sabbath in the Old Testament and how insignificant they appear! According to Mr. B., this "furnishes a strong presumptive argument that this institution is a stupendous fraud."
He continues, "Now how easy would it have been to have started right at the beginning, if the claims of this corporation are true. But alas! what an utter void is there where indisputable proof ought to be found! True, certain things are said to the apostles, and it is implied that they were to have successors of some sort, and that with them Christ would be to the end of the world; but not a step can be taken without begging the question, who these successors should be."
Plainly this is all true; but with Sunday-keeping it is still clearer; for not only is there an entire want of all "indisputable proof" on this subject, but no "certain things are said to the apostles," or any one else, from which it can be inferred that such an institution as a first-day Sabbath was contemplated.
How easy it would have been for any of the New Testament writers to pen just one text on this important subject. Thus they would have saved theologians so much trouble or perplexity in trying to defend this time-honored institution. But alas! how negligent they were.
Again he says, "Mr. Newman (a catholic) confesses that the passages of Scripture claimed by the papal see, are more or less obscure and need a comment."
The same is true of those passages claimed for the Sunday Sabbath. Without many comments and far-fetched conclusions they are of no use to the cause. For example, Rev. i, 10. "I was in the spirit on the Lord's day." The Bible student reading this is led to inquire what day is meant by "Lord's day." Turning to Mark ii, 28; Isa. lviii, 13; Ex. xx, he learns that the seventh-day is claimed by the Lord as his day, and hence naturally concludes that that is the day meant by the term "Lord's day."
But how different a conclusion is arrived at, when he reads the necessary complement—a comment as follows "I was in the spirit on the Lord's day, &c. i. e., the Christian Sabbath. John here calls the first day of the week the 'Lord's day.' This was the common name for it in the first centuries."
How wonderfully that helps it! All is plain now. A man must be bigoted indeed who will not yield to such evidence!
But the truth is, the passage claimed for the Sunday institution, like those claimed by the papal see, "needs a comment."
Mr. B.'s remark on the Bible evidence for papacy is also very applicable to that for the Sunday Sabbath. Plainly at first sight it is not there; and you may strain your eyes, and yet you cannot see it. If all this is not strong presumptive evidence of a stupendous fraud, I know not where to find it.
D. M. CANRIGHT.
Coldwater, Mich.
Explanation.
By Oliver Hopper
"For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now leteth will let, until he be taken out of the way." 2 Thess. i, 7.
It has been a query in the minds of some, what is meant by the words, "leteth" and "let." We think it means to hinder, or obstruct.
The same word occurs in Isa. xliii, 13, also Rom. i, 13, where it undoubtedly has this meaning. See also the following evidences:—
"Only there is one that hindereth till he be taken out of the way."—Dr. Doddridge.
"The obsolete word -let- in the sense of hindrance."—Dr. Macknight.
"Let—hindrance, delay."—Webster.
OLIVER HOPPER.
The Pilot Grove Church.
By J. M. Ferguson
At a business meeting May 3, 1863 the members of the Seventh-day Adventist church of Richmond and Dayton, and Pilots Burg and vicinity passed resolution as follows,
Resolved, that we call the name of our church Pilot Grove church.
By order of of the church.
J. M. FERGUSON, Sec'y.
J. M. FERGUSON
Bro. WHITE : We have built a church at Pilot Grove 30x40. We think it will be large enough to hold any meeting which we may desire. We desire the State Conference here this fall, thinking the location near the center of the Western field. We would like to have you and sister White make a visit this fall to Iowa if possible at the time we have our State Conference.
In hope of eternal life.
J. M. FERGUSON
Sister Harris’s Christian Testimony
By Caroline E. Harris
From Sister Harris.
BRO. WHITE: With deep gratitude of heart would I take my pen to bear testimony to the great goodness of God, and of my desire to come up with his people. In the great building which is fitly framed together in Christ, and which groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord, I am glad there are none so weak and imperfect but they may have place. Praise the Lord that he can make use of the poorest material in this building. Glory to God! With my whole heart I desire to get into the place I should be in. I believe my Saviour is helping me to go on from strength to strength. I have said, "Thou art my refuge and my portion in the land of the living."
"Close by thy side still may I keep,
Howe'er life's various currents flow;
With steadfast eye mark every step,
And follow thee where'er thou go."
"Thou, Lord, the dreadful fight hast won;
Alone thou hast the wine-press trod;
In me thy strengthening grace be shown,
O may I conquer through thy blood!"
"So when on Zion thou shalt stand,
And all heaven's hosts adore their King,
Shall I be found at thy right hand,
And free from pain thy glories sing?"
Mr. Wesley is in the grave now; but soon will he see Jesus, and with "all heaven's host adore their King." O the prospect that looms up before the people of God! Heart cannot conceive it.
If it is so very pleasant to see a band of Christians meet, as at the Battle Creek Conference (described by Bro. Smith in a late Review), where the meeting is only for a short time, and they part again, each to breast the storms and trials of life, what a meeting will that be when Abraham the patriarch, and all the prophets, shall have come up from their dusty beds, with all the pure and good of all ages, and the dear martyrs too, who counted not their own lives dear unto them for Christ's sake, and all, all shall greet each other and give praise to him who redeemed them by his blood—their battles fought, their hopes all realized, and an eternity of bliss before them!
O let me be there! Let me share the suffering and the cross, that I may also share the victory and the rest. I am glad the work of the Lord is moving onward.
Yours hoping for life.
CAROLINE E. HARRIS.
Lunenburg, Vt.