A TERRIBLE blow has fallen upon me, from the results of which I am still a great sufferer. On the 16th of August I was stricken with partial paralysis, which shocked my brain, and caused my right hand to fall by my side destitute of feeling and strength. And although this stroke did not take me from my feet, it terribly shocked my nerves.
At first I could command but one word in the English language, namely, pray. This I could speak to my wife and the Christian friends present. After a short season of prayer, I could raise my arm with ease, but could not move my fingers. In a few days, however, these began to return to their usual condition, and have been nearly as natural as those on the other hand.
For three weeks I was confined to my bed, nearly all the time a great sufferer from extreme nervousness, want of sleep, excessive sweating, and then chills. During this time I lost fifteen pounds of flesh. The care and attention I received day and night from Bro. U. Smith and wife, Bro. Amadon and wife, Bro. M. J. Cornell and wife, my own family, especially my dear wife, was most tender and kind. Other dear friends of the church manifested a most Christian and liberal interest for my welfare. May God bless all these dear friends, and if I am not able to compensate them here, may they find a reward in Heaven to be bestowed on them by the Lord for their care for his suffering servant.
Since I have been at "Our Home" I have taken rather heroic treatment. This, with loss of sleep, and my extreme nervous condition, has reduced me in weight and strength. This is said to be necessary to a permanent restoration. Since my sickness I have lost in all about twenty-five pounds.
I have enjoyed many free and happy seasons of prayer with those who have prayed with me and for me, and on the day appointed for fasting and prayer in my behalf, was very happy, hopeful, and free in the Lord. I enjoy with my faithful wife three seasons of prayer each day, that God in his own good time will raise me to health.
During my sickness I have been examining my life closely. I thank God that the best of my life has been spent in his service. But in the stormy trials of the past, since I have been connected with the cause of present truth, I see that I have not always trusted in God as I should have done, and drawn from him that rich grace which would have been sufficient to have filled me with consolation every hour. False-hearted men have grieved me, and I have too often cherished a feeling of murmuring against them. This has cast a gloom over my own spirit, when if I had endured the trials as I should have done I might have enjoyed the sunlight of Heaven.
In order to enter Heaven I must be an overcomer, and if my present afflictions are designed of the Lord to refine me as gold, and prepare me for greater usefulness here, and the rich reward of the overcomer hereafter, I should kiss the rod which has smitten me. From the very depths of my soul I can say, The Lord doeth all things well. I expect that God will hear the prayers of his people and raise me up. Self and wife hopefully join with the thousands of dear friends who are praying for us.
I commenced to write this statement with my own hand that eleven weeks to-morrow morning fell paralyzed by my side, but my strength failed and Eld. Loughborough finishes as I in weakness dictate to him. I have no idea of entering any department of labor whatever sooner than six months from the present time. Rest is my due, and I must have it, and shall take it. For seventeen years I have labored excessively, generally seven days of each week. The number of hours that I have labored during most of my Office life, for each day, have been double what they should have been. My wife is worn as badly as myself, and with the exception of the shock I have received, is in no better condition than myself. We must have rest, and the benefit of all the means for the restoration of health available. In due time we hope to come forth with new vigor to work temperately for God. We ask all those who have faith in God, to pray in faith for our speedy restoration.
Let no one think for a moment that we shall turn aside from our purpose, even when we are raised in a degree to health, to answer their objections to what we have taught. We have done our duty in the fear of God, and leave the result with him till he in his providence leads us to the work again. In his own good time the Lord will make all these matters plain to those who have a heart to believe. Skeptics and infidels see a thousand contradictions and errors in the Bible. God don't compel them to believe, but gives the doubter the privilege of doubting at pleasure, and we never expect to be able to make all things in our past teaching so plain as to compel every professed Sabbath-keeper to believe.
Satan no doubt will think that this is a fine time to hurry on certain ones to raise and talk their doubts and make distraction if possible; these will have a chance to fulfill all the desire of their hearts in the field of doubt. We would say to the numerous friends in Iowa, God sent us in your midst last June to check the wide-sweeping rebellion and fanaticism that was raging among you. You then had evidence of the right, for which you will have to give an account. That terrible conflict did very much to bring me where I now am. I from my heart forgive the erring, and would say to the true-hearted and good in that State, we need your prayers and sympathy.
God is doing a great work for me, every day discovers to me new imperfections in my Christian life, and brings me nearer to my Saviour. My dear wife is wonderfully sustained in strength, in hope, in faith, and in courage in the Lord.
JAMES WHITE.
"Our Home," Dansville, N. Y., Oct. 31, 1865.
Which Was Written Latest, the Book of Revelation, or Gospel of John?
By G.
It is generally supposed (probably from the order of the books,) that the Apocalypse closed the canon of inspiration. This is sometimes urged as an argument by those who oppose the perpetuity of spiritual gifts. Such quote Rev. xxii, 18: "If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book." But however plausible this view may seem, it is quite apparent that it will not abide the test of a close investigation. Our attention was called to this interesting subject several years since, and since that time we have been surprised to witness the amount of evidence, which from time to time has been thrown in our way, against the book of Revelation being the last addition to the New Testament canon. We find by examination that the gospel of John, (perhaps also John's epistles) and not the book of Revelation, was the last product of the inspired penman.
There is another interesting thought connected with this subject, viewed in the light of the Sabbath question. It is said by our First-day friends, that Sunday, at the time the book of Revelation was written, had obtained the general title of "Lord's day." Rev. i, 10. If this was the general title of Sunday, doubtless the181same apostle would address it by the same name in all subsequent writings. But in the gospel of John, written after the Revelation, we find him speaking in historical language, and there he calls it "the first day of the week." John xx, 1. This would show the futility of attempting to erect a Sunday fabric on the term "Lord's day."
Having made these introductory remarks, we will now state our authorities for not believing that the Revelation was the last written book of the Bible. The reader can judge of their respectability and value for himself.
1. The Comprehensive Bible, published by Lippincott & Co., Philadelphia, with a lengthy introduction, tables, chronological index, philological and explanatory notes, in its preface to the gospel of John, says: "After the death of Mary, the mother of Christ, which is supposed to have taken place about fifteen years after the crucifixion, and probably after the council held in Jerusalem A. D. 49 or 50, at which John was present, he is said by ecclesiastical writers to have proceeded to Asia Minor, where he founded and presided over seven churches, in so many cities, but chiefly resided at Ephesus. Then he was banished by the emperor Domitian, in the fifteenth year of his reign, A. D. 95, to the Isle of Patmos, in the Ægean Sea, where he wrote the apocalypse. Rev. i, 9. On the accession of Nerva the following year, he was recalled from exile, and returned to Ephesus, where he wrote his gospel and epistles, and died in the 100th year of his age, about A. D. 100, and in the third year of the emperor Trajan."
2. "The Annual," a neat and commodious edition of the Scriptures, published by Woodford & Co., New York, gives the same time for writing the Gospel of John as the Comprehensive Bible; namely, after his apostle returned from Patmos. This locates the Revelation in A. D. 96 or 97, and the Gospel 97 or 98.
3. Barnes' Notes, in the preface to John's Gospel, after stating the opinions of learned men on the time of its publication, says: "The common opinion is, that it was written at Ephesus, after his return from Patmos, and of course as late as the year 97 or 98."
4. An edition of the Bible published by Ivison & Phinney, New York, containing the apocrypha, with Canne's notes and references, also various tables, and a chronological index, in the latter says: "A. D. 96, St. John is banished into the Isle of Patmos, by Domitian, and there receives and writes his revelation. After the death of Domitian, John returns to Ephesus and writes his Gospel."
5. Nevin's Biblical Antiquities, by John W. Nevin, D. D., in a chronological scheme giving the authorship, time, and place, of writing the various books of the New Testament, locates John's writings as follows: "Book of Revelation, Asia Minor, A. D. 96. Three epistles of John, 96 to 100. Gospel according to John, 96 to 100." Page 446.
6. The Domestic Bible, edited by Rev. Ingram Cobbin, with numerous illustrations and copious notes, in the preface to John's Gospel says: "John was the brother of James, whom Herod beheaded. Acts xii, 2. He wrote about A. D. 97, having chiefly in view to record such miracles and discourses as most clearly displayed the character, office, and divine nature of the Saviour. His gospel supplies what the other evangelists omitted."
7. The Cottage Bible, edited by Rev. Wm. Patton, and published by Case, Lockwood & Co., Hartford, Conn., with Practical Expositions and Explanatory Notes, adopts the idea that the Gospel of John was written subsequent to the Revelation. As the language is the same as that already quoted from the Comprehensive Bible, we need not repeat it.
8. The Mine Explored; or Help to the Reading of the Bible, published by the American Sunday School Union, p. 281, says: "John probably wrote his gospel after the year 97." And then again a little onward it states, "This gospel was probably written the last of all the books of the Bible, and more than fifty years after the gospel of Matthew."
9. The Biblical Reason Why, a general Hand-book for Bible students, p. 181, reads as follows: "John was bishop of Ephesus. Being called to Rome, he was condemned by the emperor Domitian to be cast alive into a cauldron of boiling oil; but being miraculously preserved, and coming out more fresh and vigorous than he entered in, he was banished to the Isle of Patmos. Here he was favored with visions which form the subject of the book of Revelation. After Domitian's death, St. John returned to Ephesus, wrote his gospel about the year 98, and died A. D. 100."
10. Olshausen's Commentary. This much distinguished German critic, although in some respects he differs from most other commentators on this question, in Vol. ii, p. 296, says: "The contents, no less than the form of the Apocalypse, indicate that its composition was earlier than that of the Gospel." And again, "Between the composition of the Apocalypse and that of the Gospel, however, a period of some length seems to have elapsed."
11. Horne's Introduction. This voluminous writer, Vol. ii, p. 314, remarks: "John was banished to the Isle of Patmos towards the close of Domitian's reign, where he wrote his Revelation. On his liberation from exile, by the accession of Nerva to the imperial throne, he returned to Ephesus, where he wrote his Gospel and Epistles, and died in the hundredth year of his age." And again he says, "We have strong evidence from the contents and design of the gospel itself, that it was not written until the year 97."
12. The Paragraph Bible, issued by the London Religious Tract Society, in the preface to the gospel by John, says: "According to the general testimony of ancient writers, John wrote his gospel at Ephesus, about the year 97."
13, and last, Hale's Sacred Chronology. This celebrated chronologist puts down the gospel of John, in the year A. D. 97, after the apostle's return from Patmos, and argues with some warmth against those who contend for an earlier date. Dr. Hale's testimony on any point of chronology would be entitled to great weight, because chronology was his study. His remarks against the theory that the Gospel of John was written before the destruction of Jerusalem, are a complete upsetter to that scheme.
We have several other testimonies in our possession, which testify that John wrote the gospel after the Revelation, but it is not necessary to present them. Among the ancients who favor this position are Irenæus, Theodoret, Epiphanius, Jerome, St. Augustine, Eusebius, and Chrysostom; and among moderns, are Dr. Mill, Fabricius, LeClerc, Morer, Bertholdt, Bishop Tomline, and Mr. Jones, in addition to others previously mentioned. We might also refer to the "Bible Text Book," of the Am. Tract Society, the "Union Bible Dictionary," of the Am. Sunday School Union, the "Religious Encyclopedia," "Watson's Bible Dictionary," "Dictionary of the Holy Bible," by the Am. Tract Society, and various editions of the Bible, and New Testament, which we have examined, and all of which decidedly, in one way or another, sustain the view we have presented.
With such testimonies, is it any wonder, then, that the writer believes that the Gospel by John was written after the book of Revelation?
Hard Questions for Spiritualists.
By Editor
THE following tough questions for Spiritualists, are from a believer in the phenomena, but who is disgusted with the libidinous tendencies of that sect. The article is from a little tract just sown broadcast, by Wm. B. Potter, M. D., of Philadelphia, who hopes thereby to warn the world, and reform his "erring brethren." The extract speaks for itself. If what Dr. Potter says is correct, Spiritualism truly must be a vile thing. The italic is his. G.
"Why don't every one receive communications from friends or relatives in spirit life? We are told that our friends and relatives think more of us and are more anxious for our welfare than when with us in earth life. Why don't our friends control mediums and rap, tip or write out communications and order them sent to us? If our friends cannot control mediums, why don't they get those spirits that do control to communicate for them? Instead of all getting communications from friends in this way, why is it that not one person in ten thousand gets a communication unless he goes or sends to the medium for it? In thousands of instances a few words from the mother would save the daughter from the snares of the seducer, or the son from ruin; in such cases why don't the parent seek some medium and give the warning? Why do our friends when communicating, so rarely give names? Cannot a spirit control a medium's hand to write a name as readily as a personal description that may apply to a score of persons? Why do spirits so often object to giving tests and so frequently fail when they attempt it? Why have they failed to convince nine-tenths of those who have witnessed the manifestations? If Spiritualism is such a great blessing, and spirits are so anxious to convince mankind, why don't they give the foreign news in advance of the steamers, or give tests to our professors of science? Why have spirits when treating questions of science given so much that is fanciful, foolish and false? Why have so many of the mediums been persons of low characters? Why have Negroes, Indians, and inferior races had so much of spirit manifestations, while enlightened nations have had so little, until within the last sixteen years? Why was "seeking unto spirits that mutter and peep" forbidden under the Mosaic dispensation? Why are we told under the Christian dispensation to "try the spirits?" Why have so many of the mediums left husband or wife, or been guilty of gross immoralities? Why have all the spiritual papers that have exposed "Free-Lovers" failed to pay expenses? Why have notorious "Free-Lovers" and libertines been special and honored correspondents of spiritual papers? Why has spiritual literature been so full of "Free-Love," and "whatever is, is right" theories and teachings? Why did the Committee of the National Spiritual Convention at Chicago report a plan of National Organization, with a special provision that no charge should ever be entertained against any member, and that any Spiritualist without any regard to moral character might become a member? Why did the National Spiritual Convention at Philadelphia, which has just closed, accept notorious libertines as delegates? Why did the committee refuse to even read a proposition to disfellowship notorious, persistent, and habitual libertines? Why was a proposition by a speaker to welcome a delegate from perdition, or Satan himself, received with applause? Why do Spiritualists generally refuse to disfellowship "Free-Lovers?" Why has Spiritualism broken up hundreds of families and become noted for "Free-Love" and Affinity-Hunting? Why have the better class of communications always taught us not to trust spirit communications, but to rely on our own reason and conscience? Why has dealing with spirits in all ages and countries tended to immorality and licentiousness, unless counteracted by the purest virtue or the strongest religious principles? Why so much flattery, so many contradictions, so much about spheres and Psychology, and so much that is merely thought reading, in spirit communications?"
A Very Materialistic Christianity
By R. F. Cottrell
For the N. Y. Independent.
"A Very Materialistic Christianity."
MR. EDITOR:—In your paper of Aug. 10, I notice an article with the above heading, in which you attempt the portraiture of a certain people with whom you lately met in a "remote settlement of the West." From some of the features in your description, it seems quite possible the people alluded to may be the people with whom I have the honor of being connected; but, if so, your attempted portraiture is, in some respects, a mere caricature. I therefore ask the privilege of a brief reply, through your columns, that your readers may be better informed respecting us as a people. Your sense of justice cannot deny us the privilege of answering for ourselves, since your opportunities of gaining a knowledge of us have doubtless been quite limited, and the channels of your information may have been corrupted by prejudice. I am truly glad, however, that we have been noticed in the Independent, for the work in which we are engaged was not intended to be done in a corner.
You speak of our work, if indeed we are the people, as "a singular movement in the way of proselytism." Proselytism is no reproach, if men are proselyted from error to truth, and from disobedience to duty. This was182the work of the first apostles and has been the work of the true church in every succeeding age. And as for singularity, the preaching of the truth has always seemed more or less singular; and had John the Baptist lived and preached his message in our times, he would probably have acquired the appellation of a "back-woods orator."
You are mistaken in regard to the place of the publication of our periodical. Our paper is published at Battle Creek, Michigan, Eld. James White being the President of our publishing association, and not as you have it, in Boston—"the source of so much light to our country."
We do not teach that "the soul sleeps with the body in the grave!" We believe, that man is a unit—that soul and body are not separate beings; but that it takes the whole body soul and spirit, if you please, to constitute a living man or soul. The living man became subject to death on account of sin, no part being exempt, and there is no remedy but the resurrection. "If the dead rise not, then they that have fallen asleep in Christ are perished." See 1 Cor. xv, 16–18.
You represent us as teaching "that the final Heaven of the saints is to be a sort of Garden of Eden restored; with all its material and voluptuous delights." You must be aware that the Scriptures promise a restitution—a new Heavens and a new earth—and also the resurrection of the body. And where is the evidence that a resurrected, spiritual body is immaterial—that it has not "flesh and bones" as our Lord had after his resurrection? Why should material men sigh for immateriality? Can we not, while we are here in our fleshly bodies, worship God in spirit and in truth? Some such true worshipers were on the earth in the time of our Saviour; for he says, "But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshipers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth." We need not become immaterial in order to worship God aright.
You continue: "The wicked, they hold, in default of being raised from the dead, are annihilated, their bodies being literally burnt up in the fires of the final conflagration, and becoming ashes under the feet of the righteous; a sort of manure, we suppose, to increase the fertility of the paradisiæal soil, &c. Now since it is Bible language that the wicked shall be burned up root and branch, and be ashes under the feet of God's people, does not your jeering comment savor too much of scoffing at the Scriptures themselves? In all candor I ask you to reflect on this."
But if you are not mistaken concerning the people you describe—if they hold that the wicked will be burned up, "in default of being raised from the dead," I assure you we are not the people. We have no fellowship with the denial that "there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust." We hold that the wicked will be raised from the dead, and will be punished for the deeds done here in the body, and none can more heartily condemn the opposing heresy than we.
Your second paragraph I quote entire, as follows: "Saturday as the only lawful Sabbath is a great practical item in their faith. It is the seventh day from creation, and the great crime of the Christian world is the observance of the first day of the week. This is the mark of the beast; this is the Babylon out of which the people are exhorted to escape. As this new religion is wholly materialistic, of course an outward or literal day is more to it than faith, repentance and holiness. Its advocates are too ignorant to entertain the question as to whether Saturday is really the seventh day from creation, or whether those seven days may not have been geological periods. They are innocent of all such investigations."
All the world—Jews, Christians and Mohammedans, are agreed in the numbering of the days of the week. The Saviour recognized the day the Jews were observing as the true Sabbath of the commandment which refers us for its origin to the creation; and there has been too much contention since that time concerning the respective claims of the seventh-day and the first, too many religiously observing, during the middle ages, each of these two days—for the true reckoning of the week to be lost. The commandment still says, "The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God." Are we under no obligations to heed it? You speak of it as "an outward or literal day." Is not the first day as much? In behalf of which so many so-called Sabbath conventions are being called in these days, to promote its better observance, if not to enforce it.
This literal day is more, you say, to our "wholly materialistic" religion than faith, repentance and holiness. What is faith, but believing the testimony of God's word? What is repentance, but turning away from sin which is the transgression of the law? And what is holiness, but obedience to the same divine law? We teach that men should repent of their Sabbath-breaking as well as every other sin. And it is in vain to claim holiness of heart, if we are unwilling outwardly to obey the ten commandments.
It is a cheap way to dispose of those who plead for reform, to affect to despise them on account of their ignorance. Did you imagine that your suggestion as to whether Saturday is really the seventh day from creation, was something new to us? or that we knew nothing of the "oppositions of science, falsely so called?" We knew that open infidels array the pretended revelations of geology against the records of the Bible. But I would not like to see a Christian encourage infidelity, by engaging in a similar work. The several geological periods of the creation week consisted each of an "evening and a morning," the evening being darkness or night, and the morning, light or day; and upon the fourth day the sun was set to rule these geological periods, dividing the light from the darkness, and it has faithfully performed the task assigned ever since.
The preaching of truth, ever since the days of Him who "came not to send peace on earth, but a sword," has divided neighborhoods and families, as you say this Sabbath preaching is doing. But the fault is not in the truth, nor in the faithful preaching of it, but in those who reject and oppose it.
Concerning the report that "The noisiest work is generally reserved by these Sabbatarians for the first day of the week," I have heard it reiterated so often for the last forty years that it seems to us too stale for repetition. I have been conversant with Seventh-day Baptists for that length of time, and with Seventh-day Adventists some fifteen years, and have never known the report to be true in one instance. But I have frequently known noisy work postponed to another day, solely out of regard to the feelings of our first-day neighbors, and to avoid all occasion for the repetition of this slanderous report. This courtesy I have never known, on their part, an effort to reciprocate.
Be pleased candidly to review our position and yours, with a view to ascertain which are "the most fatal errors which ever corrupted the church and encouraged infidelity"—whether they are with those who contend for a strict adherence to the letter and spirit of the word of God, or with those who favor the prevailing customs and traditions, and contend that literal obedience is non-essential—claiming to worship God "in spirit," while his "truth" is ignored, if not repudiated.
Very respectfully yours,
R. F. COTTRELL.
Olcott, N. Y., Sept. 1, 1865.
The Contrast.
By Joseph Clarke
God does, Satan undoes; God creates, Satan destroys; God builds, Satan tears down; God enlightens, Satan darkens the mind.
God gives strength, Satan weakens the body and mind; God is good, Satan is evil; God is righteous and holy, Satan is unrighteous and unholy; God is pure, Satan is vile; God is the Creator, Satan is a created being; God is independent, Satan is dependent.
God delights in conferring happiness, Satan delights in making others miserable; God restores the erring and the wanderer, Satan is in raptures at the success he has in bewildering the lost and straying. God dwells in unapproachable light, amid the hosts of angels, who are ever happy in his presence; Satan is ever in chains of darkness, reserved to his final doom, made more bitter by the hosts of demons that surround him, and all their misery enhanced by the thought that their own pride brought them down from Paradise.
God is happy in his own righteousness, without a stain of injustice upon him; happy in the thought of the happiness and joy his hand confers upon his creatures, who not only in Heaven, but throughout the wide universe, attest to his goodness. Satan is miserable with his millions of sharp goads, which, like so many venomous stings, ply his conscience and render him desperate and raging in his hopeless career.
If Satan is as dependent for his existence as the merest worm, why did God permit him to prolong his rebellion for thousands of years, why permit him to soil the Garden of Eden with his filthy presence, and there make others as miserable as himself?
When Satan fell, he had not yet fully demeaned himself to the lowest scale of wickedness; evil had not yet been developed; angels had not yet witnessed the debasing consequences of sin; sin and disobedience were not yet fully appreciated, even by angels; the influence of sin upon the moral and physical constitution of men and angels had not been witnessed, Satan stood up as yet only as a fallen angel; yet noble and kingly, yet an angel, with strong desires for a restoration to his former home.
Time has fully developed the nature of pride and selfishness, and has manifested the true and unfailing results of sin.
Satan and his angels are no more the noble beings who fell from Heaven, and man is no more the beautiful angelic man as he came from the hands of his Creator.
Everywhere are spread out before us, evidences of his fall; the prison filled with felons too corrupt for innocence to gaze upon; the asylums for deaf, dumb, blind, idiotic, and insane; the general lack of benevolent qualities in mankind, and in many branches of the human race the utter ruin of mind and body, all tell the same tale of woe and sin.
With such a monument to the memory of pride and rebellion, the universe will ever be safe when its author and abettor, with his helpers, are all consigned to oblivion.
JOSEPH CLARKE.
The Bible Rule of Interpretation.
By F. Gould
"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation." 2 Peter i, 20.
It has often been said that the Bible "is like a fiddle," many tunes can be played, and many changes and variations can be made upon it. So we are told that we can prove most any doctrine by the Bible to suit our own notion or convenience. But let us look at this in the light of reason and revelation. There is a discrepancy somewhere; it must be one of two things: either God has failed to give us a perfect rule, inspiration has failed to point out a direct and an unbroken chain of prophecy, and a code of laws, which leads to the promotion of man's highest interest, and which will enable the professed followers of our Lord Jesus Christ, to "come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God," or else the great mass of religionists have failed to come up to the great standard rule of Bible interpretation which God has given, and are trying to work their passage by bringing the Bible to their own standard of interpretation; thus causing discord, disunion, and isms among the professed followers of Jesus Christ. I am satisfied the latter position is correct.
We believe the Bible should be its own interpreter, and should be taken in its most plain and literal sense, when it can be done without destroying the harmony of its several parts. Bible truth is a unit, and in viewing it from all its various stand-points, we find that the ways leading from each of these stand-points, converge toward one common centre; and when united form a perfect whole.
All the inspired writers, from Moses down to the last sacred penman, are in unison in relation to the great plan of human redemption. Those writers were not dictated by human wisdom, but by the Holy Ghost. "For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." 2 Pet. i, 21.
Again, let us hear Paul: "But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me, is not after man: For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the Revelation of Jesus Christ." Gal. i, 11, 12. But let us here inquire into the reason183why men have lowered the standard of Christianity and Bible truth, and have departed from God, the fountain of living waters. We answer, it is the way which they have been educated, which has been upon false premises. The case of the apostle Paul will hear upon this important point. We understand that he was brought up at the feet of the learned Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner and law of the fathers, and with authority from the chief priests. He punished the saints, and compelled them to blaspheme, and persecuted them even unto strange cities, and he verily thought he ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth; but after he was converted, and the scales fell from his eyes, his educational influence was turned, and he became a mighty and strong man in the truth of God.
It is a fact worthy of note, that from the earliest period of the gospel church down to the present time, the common people who have not had the advantages of an education, have more easily and readily embraced the gospel, from the fact that they have not been influenced by educational prejudices. The poet has well said,
"'Tis education forms the tender mind,
Just as the twig is bent, the tree's inclined."
Since the rise of the Advent doctrine, and especially since the proclamation of the third angel's message, there has been a class of individuals who have looked away from the great mass of corrupt teaching and false interpretation, and have learned to let the Bible stand as its own expositor. The Bible is no more to them a "sealed book;" its rich treasures are unlocked, and said the angel to Daniel, "But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end; many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased. Many shall be purified, made white and tried: but the wicked shall do wickedly, and none of the wicked shall understand, but the wise shall understand." Dan. xii, 4, 10.
God will lead his people, when they take his unerring word for their guide.
F. GOULD.
Stowe, Vt.
Strong Faith and a Clear Sky.
By Lydia Jane Shaw
ThE Scriptures plainly teach us that it is our duty and privilege to pray for the things which we need, with the expectation of receiving them. This truth is taught in such texts as these: "He shall deliver the needy when he crieth; the poor, also, and him that hath no helper." Psa. lxxii, 12. "And it shall come to pass before they call, I will answer; and while they are yet speaking, I will hear." Isa. lxv, 24. "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, who giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not, and it shall be given him." James i, 5. Doubts and spiritual darkness are the natural visitants of the prayerless heart; they abide in the gloom of moral night, uncheered and unblessed by the bright beams of heavenly light. But prayer, effectual, fervent prayer, awakens and strengthens faith. Faith removes clouds and darkness, as well as mountains, and gives the soul a clear sky. The disciples of Jesus realized the benefits of prayer in strengthening their faith, when they so ardently and fervently prayed, "Lord increase our faith." And when that poor despairing medicant exclaimed, "Lord, I believe, help thou mine unbelief," he not only felt the need of prayer to strengthen his faith, but happily realized its benefits in bringing into exercise a patience of faith, which grappled with the mountain difficulty before him, and removed it. He that prays much, will have strong faith, will be little troubled with doubts, clouds, and darkness. And he that is delivered from clouds and darkness, must live in the bright sunshine of a clear sky.
A praying man will be a faithful man, a spiritual man, a happy man, a holy man, and one fruitful in all that is good. And by frequent converse with an all-intelligent and benevolently instructive God, he secures a thorough knowledge of what is most important for man to know. Who then, that would possess the valuable treasure of these graces, will fail to secure them, seeing they may be obtained upon such easy terms—simply asking. Let all remember that the ef-fectual, fervent prayer of a sincere and upright heart, is a currency that always passes readily at the storehouse of Heaven, and will bring in exchange, the choicest and best of Heaven's blessings. And he that would be rich in blessings, full of faith, and walk in a clear sky, should pray always, with all prayer and supplication in the spirit, realizing that the Lord Jesus Christ is the all in all of his redeemed. In every want, He is their friend; in every danger, He is their defense; in weakness, He is their strength; in sorrow, their joy; in pain, their peace; in poverty, their provider; in sickness, their physician; in hunger, their bread; in trouble, their consolation; in perplexity, their counselor; in the furnace, their refiner; in the flood, their rock; in assaults, their refuge; in accusations, their advocate; in debt, their surety; in slavery, their ransom; in captivity, their deliverer; in the day, their sun; in the night, their keeper; in the desert, their Shepherd; in life, He is their hope; in death, their life; in the grave, their resurrection; in Heaven, their glory! Therefore let us draw nigh unto Him, who is all in all for time and for eternity, and he will shelter us in the day of his fierce anger.