Signs of the Times, Vol. 31, No. 6.
LO, I AM WITH YOU ALWAYPage 1
Earlier text: LO, I AM WITH YOU ALWAYIn John 3:13 Christ speaks of the Son of Man which is in heaven. How could He be in heaven and speaking here on earth at the same time. The text reads in the A. R. V.: "And no one hath ascended into heaven, but He that descended out of heaven, even the Son of Man, who is in heaven." We would say (1) The American Revised Version in a foot-note declares, "Many ancient authorities omit who is in heaven." It is omitted by the concededly-best Greek Text, that of Wescott & Hort. (2) If it be genuine, it is simply a striking expression to show Christ’s perfect unity and correspondence with the Father even while here, and so is parallel to John 1:18, "Who is in the bosom of the Father." To Him were disclosed the secrets of God. While here upon earth He was in perfect connection with heaven and the Father. Compare 1 Cor. 5:3. Why is it that it says in Matt. 28:1, "In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week," etc., while in Mark 16:1, 2, we read, "Very early in the morning, the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulcher at the rising of the sun." How do you harmonize these texts? (1) Some explain "in the end of the Sabbath," as meaning literally, "Late on the Sabbath," "after the Sabbath," etc. The Emphatic Diaglott renders, "Now after the Sabbath, as it was dawning," etc. (2) The writer of this note believes that Greenfield’s Greek New Testament presents the true solution. We all know that there were no chapter or verse divisions in the original Greek, no periods, semicolons, or commas. There was therefore no division between Matt. 27:66 and Matt. 28:1. Greenfield suggests that opse de sabbaton, late on (or in the end of) the Sabbath be joined to the last verse of chapter 27. That verse would then read, "So they went, and made the sepulcher sure, the guard being with them, late on the Sabbath [or in the end of the Sabbath]." The next chapter would then begin with, "As it began to dawn toward the first day of the week," etc. This is in harmony with Mark and Luke, and to us most reasonable. Will you explain through the SIGNS whether the word fornication does not have other meaning in the Bible than adultery? Is it not right to get a divorce and be free to marry again for any other cause than fornication—meaning adultery alone? The dictionary defines fornication as idolatry. The word "fornication"—in the original porneia is a broader word than "adultery."—It is defined to mean "harlotry, including adultery and incest." The verb, porneuo, means "to act the harlot, to indulge unlawful lust (of either sex), figuratively, to practise idolatry," because, if Christians, we are married to Christ, and idolatry is joining to another. The same idea of unlawfully-indulged lust is in it all. "Fornication" has been defined as indulgence of sexual lust with any one of another sex; adultery, unlawful union between two persons either of whom is married. The only reason Jesus gives for divorce is, if we read the Bible aright, fornication. See Matt. 5:31, 32; 19:9. It is a question whether "putting away" always means divorce. But whether it does or not the right to marry must be based upon the only reason given by our Saviour, unfaithfulness to the marital vow. But if there is absolute incompatibility of temper, if treated cruelly, there may be separation. The wife has the right to leave her husband; but "if she depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband." See 1 Cor. 7:11-15. One is not bound to remain, is not a slave under bondage to remain, in an unholy union; but a mere separation is not a license to marry. There is no inharmony. Matt. 3:17 states that the Father’s voice spake from heaven, and John 5:37 declares that those unbelieving Jews never heard His voice. The speaking is one thing; the hearing another. The class mentioned by Jesus were among those who having ears heard not. On another occasion when the Father spoke, some thought it was an angel; others said it thundered. John 12:28, 29. 1614.—"Lead Us Not into Temptation." How are you going to harmonize, "Lead us not into temptation"? You do not believe this, nor I don’t. I would like it right the reverse. It is all harmony now, and we believe the truth implied. It is a prayer we pray daily; nor do we wish it the reverse. In other words, "Do not let us go, our Father, into temptation; do not place us where our feet shall falter and stumble. The prayer is not, Lead us not out of temptation, or through, but "Lead us not into temptation." It is the right expression of a human soul; it shows distrust in human strength. Great dangers lie before the man who courts temptation and feels anxious to meet them. Sooner or later will he find that his strength is weakness, his wisdom folly, and his self-sufficiency a broken reed. The Lord’s Prayer inculcates humility. 1615.—The Time of Christ’s Burial. Why is it that the Bible says Christ was three days and three nights in the grave, when it says also that He was buried on Friday, and was gone from the tomb early the first-day of the week? But the Bible states neither of these. Nowhere does it say that Christ was in the grave three days and three nights, and nowhere does it say He was buried on Friday. THE MINISTRY AS SEEN BY A MINISTER.
THE following searching sentences are extracts from a sermon recently delivered before a fashionable congregation in Paris, Ill., by Rev. H. M. Brooks. Altho this minister classes himself among those whose laxity and disloyalty to principle he denounces, it seems that there is occasionally one who is not afraid to raise a warning voice. These extracts are not given here in order to "find fault" with a class, but that the reader may see the conditions as they are, and accept them as the warning they are intended to be: As a class, we ministers are the biggest cowards on earth. My brethren blame me for telling tales out of school, but I can not help it. We are cringing, cowering, timid slaves who are compelled to surrender our manhood, and be directed by men and women who belong to the church because it is fashionable, and would belong to an infidel club just as willingly, if it were equally fashionable. We are paid so much a year, not for telling the truth, but for telling what the people want to hear. It takes us four or five days of each week hard study to learn, not how to present the truth, but how to dodge it. We fully understand that, if we should happen to tell the truth, it is our business to apologize for having done so. We fully understand that no man can preach for a rich, fashionable congregation, and tell the whole truth, and hold his job. It is therefore the chief end of the preacher's life to know how to please his congregation, and hold his job. We know that greed has commercialized business men, mammonized the church, and hypnotized the clergy, but we dare not tell it. We know that we are run by rich men, many of whom have acquired their wealth by the most questionable methods, and fashionable fools who have neither religious conception nor conviction, but we dare not open our heads. We can preach about the latest novel, or the Sunday baseball game, but we dare not say too much on "righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come." We are permitted to preach that men and women must repent to an extent, and be converted to a degree, or they will be damned in a measure; but we must not say much about justice, mercy, and faith. In the presence of the church we are as truckling as ever a scullion was in the presence of a king. A preacher with a good place and a good salary was never known to have an original idea, or to enter a protest against the oppressor of the weak. We know that almost all crimes in the whole catalog are committed by church members, but we dare not speak with authority. We all know that the church is not looked upon as a place of worship, but a place of entertainment. Never in the history of the world was there a time when it meant so little to belong to church as it does now. The church is dying of unbelief. It is on the highway to infidelity, and the road seems greased for the occasion. Most church members would rather think that death ends all than to think of meeting a just God, and giving an account of the way they are living. It is very rapidly becoming materialistic. It knows very little, cares less, what Christ taught on anything. Indeed, the Bible is looked upon to-day as being out of date—an impertinence—and people are called "old fogy," who believe it. It believes, or admits for the sake of argument, that that part of the Bible is true that requires no sacrifice, but it has no use for that part of it that requires unselfish service for the good of all. Anything it can do to make a show, it will do at any cost, but doing right in the love of right is a thing that never enters its mind. Not long ago I read of a preacher in New York who was worth twenty-five million of dollars. Think of such a man being a disciple of Him who had not where to lay His head! I once saw a woman stand in a missionary meeting with five thousand dollars' worth of jewelry on, and heard her make a plea for the poor heathen. Christ was born of a poor woman. He was brought up by a carpenter; and if a rich, fashionable church member could see Jesus to-day going along the streets with His tools, they would turn up their noses at Him, and if He should come into any of our cities to-day, and say again, "The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man hath not where to lay His head," He would be arrested for vagrancy, and thrown into prison. He associated but little, during His personal ministry, with the rich, and, had He called His disciples from among the rich, He would not have been crucified. These are plain truths plainly told. Praise God, not every preacher is serving the devil in the "livery of heaven." There are men who are living up to the light they have, and are giving the message of God as far as they know it; and such men are turning souls into the path of salvation. But it is a sad fact that the statements quoted above do not, in general, overdraw the present situation. The "church" is drifting into infidelity; the "church" is fawning upon the world; as far as giving the warnings of God to the world is concerned, the Bible statement of the case corroborates the statement of the speaker above quoted—the fashionable, time-serving pastors are "dumb dogs" (Isa. 56:10); instead of feeding the flock, they are feeding upon the flock; instead of encouraging faith, they are propagating doubt by both life and teaching. This condition of "the church" should be a warning to every true child of God that the time of Israel's deliverance is near at hand. SUNDAY ENFORCEMENT NEWS AND COMMENT.
By John D. Bradley
[From John D. Bradley, 60 New York Ave., N. W., Washington, D. C.] Sunday Agitation in Washington.
THE action, on December 12, of the association of Protestant clergymen in Washington in deciding that "the first Sunday of the coming year should be devoted to the discussion of the question of Sabbath observance in the city of Washington;" and that a campaign should be inaugurated against "the governmental practise of making certain employees work on Sunday;" and the indications that attempts are to be made to secure the passage at the present session of Congress of certain Sunday bills applying to the District of Columbia that were introduced at the last session and are now pending—these have called forth considerable activity on the part of Seventh-day Adventists, whose headquarters are now located in Washington and who are noted as opponents of religious legislation. The ministers of this denomination residing in Washington prepared an open letter to the clergy on the subject, and a mass-meeting was held for the purpose of discussing and protesting against the pending Sunday bills. Also, it is understood, steps are being taken to have petitions against the passage of these bills ready for presentation to Congress in case the measures come up for consideration. The open letter to the clergy, which filled three and one half newspaper columns, appeared in the Washington Post, of December 26, and was signed by fourteen "resident Seventh-day Adventist ministers of Washington," including the resident leaders of the denomination. The purpose of this letter was "to present from a Bible standpoint what to us appears to be the truth respecting the Sabbath question, and why both Sunday-keeping and Sunday legislation are wrong." The writers declared that they believed, with their brethren of other Protestant faiths, "thoroughly in the pressing need of a world-wide campaign in favor of better Sabbath observance;" but felt that there was need of caution to be sure "that all we do is Christian, and done in a Christian way." Asserting that they stood firmly with the Protestant clergymen, too, "on the solid rock of Protestant faith—'the Bible, and the Bible only,' as the rule of belief and action," the writers proceeded at length, and by the citation of many texts, to show "what our guide, the Bible, says on the Sabbath question." The thing shown was, of course, that the seventh day, and not the first day, of the week is the Biblical Sabbath. Following this it was stated how "the heathen Sunday" supplanted the real "Lord's Day" in the Christian church, thus entailing "a breach in the law of God," and that the papal church boasts of this change to-day as evidence of its spiritual authority. In this connection the origin of Sunday legislation was pointed out, but aside from this the following near the close of the letter was all that was said with regard to Sunday legislation: To-day nearly all the states of our Union contain laws honoring the Sunday, while the Lord's Day is constantly trampled underfoot, and made the busiest day of all the week. At the present moment two Sunday bills are pending before the lawmakers here at the seat of government. There is also a widespread movement among nearly all the religious bodies in favor of a universal Sunday law.
It is evident that the purpose of this letter was, not to discuss the question of Sunday legislation, but to present, on the basis of what was assumed to be a common authority, the case of the seventh-day Sabbath in opposition to the Sunday Sabbath. In view of the fact that the clergymen had simply announced a campaign in behalf of "Sabbath observance," and had given no specific indication that an appeal was to be made to the civil authorities, such a communication to them at this stage of the proceeding was, no doubt, the proper one on the part of those who wish to raise the issue as to the legitimacy of the Sunday-sabbath, and to whom the question as to which of two days shall be observed as the Sabbath, is of the utmost importance. Of course, that is a theological question; and yet, as the clergy are demanding legislation in behalf of the Sunday as a religious institution, the question of the legitimacy of the Sunday sabbath is a pertinent and proper one. The open letter of the Adventist ministers to the clergymen, a quite full abstract of which was published in the Washington Evening Star on the day that it appeared in the Post, elicited from the Post an editorial on the subject, headed "Sabbath and Sunday." At the outset the Post observed that "the controversy between the Sabbatarians and the observers of Sunday has been one of long standing," and that "there is a great deal to be said on both sides, with the probability that the most exhaustive argument will not result in changing the now established order of things." But it is added, "at the same time, the contention that Sunday is not the original day of rest specified in the Bible, is so well established as to be beyond further dispute; Sunday is a modern institution, comparatively speaking." After sketching the rise and establishment of Sunday observance, the Post concludes that "there is, therefore, very considerable ground for the doubt which many people express concerning the necessity of observing Sunday as a day of holiness." It is observed that "Blackstone went so far as to assert that a violation of a Sunday law was not Sabbath-breaking," and that upon the decree of Constantine "much of the Sunday legislation rests, not only as respects secular statutes, but also canonical and ecclesiastical law." The Post thinks, however, that there is wisdom in "setting apart, as Moses did, one day in the week for cessation from labor," tho "it does not make any material difference whether this day is the ancient Sabbath or the modern Sunday." And since the day customarily and generally so set apart (it is not to be understood that the Post means set apart by compulsory legislation) "is devoted to the inculcation of higher ideals" and is the day upon which "millions of people are urged to lead better lives, and are the subjects of earnest appeals, to which a very large proportion of them respond, with determination to renounce the ways of evil," the Post thinks it must be admitted that the world is benefited thereby, not only physically, but morally and spiritually, and concludes, therefore, that, "viewed from the most secular standpoint, Sunday is a praiseworthy institution, and there is not the slightest possibility that it will disappear from the world's calendar." But it recognizes that there is something to be on guard against in this matter by saying in conclusion: "The only danger is that those who observe Sunday will become intolerant of those who regard it more as a holiday than as a holy day. Against this intolerance those who appreciate the real value of Sunday must ever be on their guard." Current happenings demonstrate the timeliness of this admonition. A Washington Mass Meeting.
The mass meeting or "grand rally to discuss Sunday legislation in the District of Columbia," as it was advertised, followed close upon the publication of the open letter to the clergy, being held on the evening of December 28, in the new Pythian Temple. The meeting, which was fairly well attended, was addressed by six or seven of the leading Adventist ministers, some of the topics being, "History Repeating Itself in the United States," "The Sabbath on the Continent [Europe]," "Sunday Legislation in the District of Columbia," and "The Logic of Sabbath Legislation." In the course of his introductory remarks, Mr. K. C. Russell, chairman of the meeting and head of the Adventist "Religious Liberty Bureau," said: The chief reason which has prompted those who have made the call for this mass meeting is the danger that threatens the civil and religious rights of our citizens, because of an organized effort of some representative people in our midst to secure legislation on religious questions, especially on the subject of Sunday observance. It is true that this movement is not confined to this city, for it is becoming universal and world-wide. The storm center, however, is here at our nation's capital, for the promoters have plainly expressed their desire and intention to bring influence and pressure to bear upon the Congress of the United States to enact a Sunday law for the District of Columbia, knowing full well that when it is committed to Sunday legislation in the District of Columbia, it will be an easy task to secure a national Sunday law which would result in giving effect to the state Sunday laws. Last spring two Sunday bills were introduced into Congress, and they succeeded in getting one past by the House of Representatives, which is now pending its third reading in the Senate. These bills were sprung upon the citizens by these religio-political enthusiasts in such a quiet way that it was impossible to secure a public hearing. It can readily be seen by every lover of liberty and right that it is high time to sound a warning before we find ourselves again in the shackles of religious tyranny and persecution that has been the scourge that has blackened the history of the past. This movement should be opposed, on the ground that it is both uncivil and unchristian. The First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States declares that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." This principle was engrafted into the Constitution by the fathers of our country, who understood something of these things that threaten us to-day, as they were just emerging from an age of religious intolerance and oppression. It would seem that these words of this amendment were inspired, for they are in sweet accord with the language of our Saviour, "Render unto Cæsar the things that are Cæsar's, and unto God the things that are God's." This statement of Christ's forever divorces the church from the state, and, if regarded by man, there never would be any legislation upon the Sabbath question, for the Sabbath does not belong unto Cæsar, but unto God, and should not be rendered unto or through Cæsar, but unto God and to Him alone. "The logic of Sabbath legislation" was presented thus by Mr. W. A. Colcord, secretary of the Adventist "Religious Liberty Bureau:" Legislation on the part of civil government means compulsion. Sabbath legislation, therefore, means compulsory Sabbath observance. The Sabbath is religious. Sabbath legislation, therefore, means religious legislation. Putting the two thoughts together, Sabbath legislation means compulsory religious legislation. The Sabbath institution being religious, to establish a certain day by law as the Sabbath, must consequently mean the establishment of religion by law, to that extent at least. Sabbath legislation, therefore, means a religious establishment; in other words, a union of church and state. Sunday laws are needed, it is urged, in order that laboring men who wish to keep Sunday may do so without "diminution of wages or loss of employment." But if those who observe Sunday need a law compelling all others to observe the day, then by parity of reasoning, those who observe any other day need a law requiring all others to observe that day. And the state can not grant such a law to one class and deny it to another, without enacting class legislation and making an unjust distinction between its citizens. But the truth is, no class needs such a law. Every such law is a selfish, unjust, un-Christian thing. Sunday laws, therefore, give preference by law to a certain class of citizens, and are, therefore, class as well as religious legislation. One of the speakers, who has recently returned to this country, after several years' stay in Europe, pointed out that in Europe, both present conditions and past history show that where Sunday observance is most guarded by law, it is least beneficial to the people, being most devoted to the degrading pleasures and revelries for which the compulsory idleness not only affords an opportunity, but induces. "Legislation makes Sunday observance worse, not better," declared the speaker. On the day following this mass meeting, reports of it, with substantial quotations from some of the addresses, appeared in the Washington dailies. A few days before, a representative of the Washington Times interviewed Mr. Russell on the subject, and quoted him, in part, as follows in that paper: The real issue in this Sunday-law crusade for the District of Columbia, does not appear in the public announcements of the proposed campaign. The avowed design of the International Reform Bureau is to secure a District Sunday law, and thus prepare the way to have Congress enact a national Sunday law, and thus give effect to the state Sunday laws. To secure this end they are seeking the aid of the clergy, and lobbying Congress on every occasion. All must see that such legislation is dangerous, for it means nothing less than a union of church and state, and is in flagrant contradiction to the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. ONE of the most terrible and deplorable spectacles that has ever been witnessed of the cruelty of an autocratic government was that seen in St. Petersburg, Russia, on Sunday, January 22. A strike was on, and was spreading. The workmen, accompanied by their wives and children, were marching in a body to the palace of the emperor to lay their grievances before him, believing that his officials had blinded his eyes to their true condition and the hardships under which they labor. Their leader, a priest of the Russian Church, had led them to believe that, if only they could reach the ear of the one whom they termed the "little father," he would listen to their case, and provide a remedy. In that faith they began their march. Cordons of troops had been thrown around the palace to prevent them from attaining their object. The commands of the military officers to halt were disregarded. The soldiers fired first blank volleys, and then followed with volleys of bullets, which mowed the people down by thousands. This work was followed up by cruel charges of the savage Cossack and Circassian cavalry companies. These rode over the masses of people, cutting them down with their sabers, and trampling them under their horses' hoofs. Women and children were made no exception in this cruel work. Twenty-six dead children of varying ages were found in one place. Persons having no connection with the crowds were ruthlessly sabered or shot down by the blood-mad troops who galloped hither and thither seeking victims. The reports indicate that over two thousand persons were killed, and five thousand wounded, as a result of the day's work. On account of this massacre, the faith of the people in their officials is more shaken than ever, and the feeling of hatred toward their government is growing to the most dangerous extent. They have seen the futility of opposing troops with their own unarmed persons; but the spirit of revolt is growing stronger and deeper. While some factories have resumed operations, the strike is spreading to many other cities, and workmen are demonstrating in a threatening manner. Outbreaks have occurred in both Poland and Finland. Committees of revolt are working in secret for the attainment of their object, the overthrow of the government. The officials claim to believe that they have quelled the uprising; but reports indicate that most threatening fires are smouldering, and that, as soon as the people can arm themselves, there will be a time of overturn and terror in Russia. The government is taking every precaution possible, is massing all available troops in the centers of danger, and has ordered quantities of machine guns. It has also promised certain reforms, which might have helped the situation, had they come before the people were fired upon for asking them. Besides the two bills emanating from the "Reform Bureau," which have hitherto been presented in these reports, there is another Sunday measure pending in Congress from the last session, and for the passage of which it is very probable that pressure will be brought to bear shortly. This measure emanated from the Washington retail clerks' and dealers' associations, and is entitled, "A bill requiring certain places of business in the District of Columbia to be closed on Sunday." It was introduced in the House of Representatives on the 4th of last February, and has made better progress toward passage than the "Reform Bureau" measures. It passed the House of Representatives on April 6, thereby becoming "an Act," and was introduced in the Senate and referred to the Senate committee on the District of Columbia on the following day. A tie vote in the committee shortly before the adjournment of Congress last spring prevented the measure from being reported at the last session, but it may be favorably reported at this session, and it is quite certain that efforts to that end will be made. The measure, which is House Resolution 11,819, reads as follows: Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That it shall be unlawful for any person in the District of Columbia to sell or to offer for sale, or to keep open any place of business for the sale or delivery of, any groceries or fruits or meats or vegetables or other provisions, on Sunday, except that, from the first day of June until the first day of October, meats sold prior to Sunday may be delivered at any time before ten o'clock of the morning of that day. Any person who shall violate the provisions of this Act shall, on conviction thereof, be punished by a fine of not less than twenty-five dollars, nor more than fifty dollars, for the first offense, and for each subsequent offense by a fine of not less than fifty dollars nor more than one hundred dollars, or by imprisonment in the jail of the District of Columbia for a period of not less than one month nor more than three months, or by both fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court. It is truly declared in a circular which the Seventh-day Adventists are circulating against the Sunday measures now pending in Congress, that the above measure "would make it a crime to supply a loaf of bread to satisfy hunger on Sunday." That there is religious sentiment, as well as commercial interest, involved in the demand for this measure, is shown by the statement made in behalf of the organized dealers last spring, that such a law is needed because they are "compelled to keep open their places of business on Sunday to compete with those who do not respect that holy day." THE Russian troops opposing the Japanese left in Manchuria are reported to have crossed the Hun River, and attacked the position of the Japanese. A heavy engagement of artillery was reported on January 26. The Japanese have advanced against the attacking Russians. The climatic condition at the present time causes the fighting to be attended with untold suffering. The ground is covered with snow, and frozen so hard that intrenching is nearly impossible. General Kuropatkin is said to have reported to the czar that his European troops are very reluctant about advancing against the enemy, as they see no reason of fighting longer, now that Port Arthur has fallen. It is quite generally believed in diplomatic circles that the condition of things in Russia is bound to hasten the end of the war. Nevertheless, Japan is making extensive preparations for its continuance. She is calling out and drilling additional armies of reserves, and is building many powerful war craft of different sizes. It is reported that one of her principal squadrons is fitting out for special service. Exposition, Venezuela, and Armenia
One of the most unique features in expositions is that to be seen at the Lewis and Clark Exposition to be held the coming summer at Portland, Oregon. Guild's Lake, which is said to be the largest body of water ever inclosed within exposition grounds, is to have its entire bottom studded with electric lights, encased in water-tight receptacles. The effect at night will be a striking one. There is a probability of trouble between the United States and Venezuela over the course which the latter has taken toward certain foreign investments, and her failure to carry out her agreement with the powers, whose demands against her were decided by the court of arbitration. The American consul who has visited the stricken districts of Turkish Armenia, reports that conditions of extreme distress exist there. In addition to their poverty the people are in constant terror, because of the depredations and cruelties of the soldiery camped among them.