Earlier text: THE PROSPERITY OF ISRAEL FORETOLDHISTORY OF TRINE IMMERSION.
By James H. Waggoner
JUSTIN MARTYR—CLEMENT—TERTULLIAN.
ELD. MOORE highly indorses Quinter's efforts in favor of their system, but his own pamphlet is much more ample in historical references. He says he has traced it directly to the apostles. The three writers nearest to the apostles given by him are Tertullian, A. D. 160–220; Clement of Alexandria, A. D. 150–220; and Justin Martyr, A. D. 100–165. These are the most important of all the witnesses, because they lived nearest to the apostles, and those who followed them must have depended on them more or less for any “tradition handed down from the apostles.” We shall take them in reverse order and notice first Because he was nearest to the apostles. Mr. Moore quotes and comments as follows:— “Justin wrote ‘An Apology for Christians, Addressed to the Emperor, the Senate, and the People of Rome.’ In this work he describes the doctrines and ordinances of the church of Christ; and on baptism has the following passage: ‘Then we bring them to some place where there is water, and they are baptized by the same way of baptism by which we were baptized; for they are washed in the water in the name of God the Father, Lord of all things, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit.’ “Justin's works were written in the Greek language, and are translated by Mr. Reeves, who, when speaking of the confession usually made in those early times, says of the above passage: ‘The candidates were thrice plunged under the water at the naming of the Three Persons in the blessed Trinity.’ “This is the candid opinion of the learned translator, that when Justin writes of the Christians being washed in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, he means nothing short of trine immersion. We give Mr. Reeves' convictions and candid opinion as a fair argument in support of the fact that the above passage refers to trine immersion.” Mr. Moore makes his quotations in the above from Pengilly on Baptism. And here, reader, we have the first stone, the very corner-stone of the edifice of trine immersion; the first witness—the one nearest to the apostles—to prove that trine immersion existed in the very days of the apostles. Here we have several points of interest. 1. Justin says nothing at all about trine immersion! We are reminded of the case of the lawyer who said he had five reasons to give why his witness was not in court. First, he was dead. The Judge here excused him from giving the other four. So we might stop right here with a clear case, but we will examine a little further. 2. It is Mr. Reeves' candid opinion that Justin meant trine immersion, though he says nothing about it. Upon what this opinion is based, and what it is worth, we shall presently see. 3. Mr. Reeves' opinion is offered as a fair argument in favor of the fact that the passage refers to trine immersion. It must be remembered that no other author of Justin's day is cited to prove the existence of the fact assumed. The whole burden of evidence lies in Mr. Reeves' opinion. In the “Ante-Nicene Library,” published by Clark, Edinburgh, the works of Justin are translated by Dr. Dods. From chap. 61 of his first Apology we copy as follows:— “I will also relate the manner in which we dedicated ourselves to God, when we had been made new through Christ; lest if we omit this, we seem to be unfair in the explanation we are making. And as many as are persuaded and believe that what we say and teach is true, and undertake to be able to live accordingly, are instructed to pray and to entreat God with fasting, for the remission of sins that are past, we praying and fasting with them. Then they are brought by us where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in which we ourselves were regenerated. For in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the Universe, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water. For Christ also said, ‘Except ye be born again, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of Heaven.’” If the translation of Dr. Dods is correct, and Dr. Schaff gives it the same way, then the term baptism is used by Mr. Reeves only by implication. However, the idea of baptismal regeneration is strongly favored by the language of Justin; so early did erroneous views of baptism begin to find their way into the church. But by no possible construction can trine immersion be inferred from his language. Chrystal, in his examination of “the Fathers,” for whose testimony he entertains a most profound reference, offers this as proof for immersion, but claims nothing on it in favor of trine immersion. Thus Mr. Moore's first witness utterly fails him. The next witness quoted nearest to the time of the apostles is Mr. Moore quotes and comments as follows:— “Clement is addressing himself to the churches planted by the apostles—churches composed of members, many of whom were baptized by the immediate successors of the apostles—when he uses the following words: ‘Ye were conducted to a bath just as Christ was carried to the grave, and were thrice immersed, to signify the three days of his burial.’—Wiberg on Baptism, p. 228.” We cannot say positively that Clement never wrote these words, yet we are left strongly to doubt. No reference is made to any work where they may be found. We think we have had access to and have examined all the writings that are usually ascribed to Clement, but these words are not in them. We have seen what liberty was taken with Sozomen to make him testify to their purpose, and what a strong argument is made out of nothing in the case of Justin; and why, if this quotation is genuine, are we not told whence it is taken? That which is offered in proof must be shown to be proof. We have a right to call in question such loose quotations. Chrystal, who examines the words of the Fathers at length, and sets down everything he can find in favor of trine immersion, even quoting from writings which he confesses are spurious, makes no mention of this quotation. We cannot think he would omit it if it were to be found in the works of Clement. We have no confidence (as we have no reason to believe) that the quotation is genuine. If it were, yet the reason it offers is contrary to the Scriptures, and it would then only be another proof that trine immersion was recognized in Africa earlier than anywhere else; and Africa was, even at that time, the hot-bed of superstitious innovations in the Christian faith. See Milner as before quoted. There is no dispute that Tertullian did mention trine immersion; but he referred it only to tradition. This is denied by the trine immersionists, but the proof is decidedly against them. Eld. Moore publishes an appendix of Caution on this point. He says:— “In the writings of Campbell, Hinton, Fuller, and Wiberg, Tertullian is accused of stating that, ‘we are immersed three times, fulfilling somewhat more than our Lord has decreed in the gospel.’ This, however, is simply an incorrect translation of the Latin text, the Oxford translation of which reads as follows: ‘Then are we thrice dipped, pledging [not fulfilling] ourselves to something more than the Lord has prescribed in the gospel.’ Before the candidates were baptized they pledged themselves to some things not mentioned in the gospel, and to these Tertullian refers.” These words of Eld. Moore are not warranted by the facts. Tertullian does not speak of what was done before baptism, but in baptism. And the version of Campbell, Hinton, Fuller, and Wiberg, is most accurate in following the original, which is both followed and given by Stuart, whom we quoted elsewhere. The words of Stuart in full on this passage are as follows:— “Tertullian himself, however, seems to have regarded this trine immersion as something superadded to the precepts of the gospel; for thus he speaks in his book, ‘De Corona Militis,’ § 3: ‘Thence we are thrice immersed (ter mergitamur), answering, i. e., fulfilling, somewhat more (amplius aliquid respondentes) than the Lord has decreed in the gospel.’” Stuart is surely as literal as may be in rendering respondentes answering; and no one can possibly object to his making it equivalent to fulfilling, in this case; while the whole sentence in Tertullian points unmistakably to the action of trine immersion, and not to anything before baptism. But there is a decisive test to which we shall now bring this matter. Bingham, “Antiquities of the Christian Church,” is one of the witnesses cited by Eld. Moore, in his historical evidences. Bingham has treated the whole subject at length, though he does not directly give his own opinion of the correctness of the method. Of the derivation of trine immersion he says:— “Some derive it from apostolic tradition; others, from the first institution of baptism by our Saviour; whilst others esteem it only an indifferent circumstance or ceremony, that may be used or omitted without any detriment to the sacrament itself, or breach of any divine appointment. Tertullian, St. Basil, and St. Jerome put it among those rites of the church which they reckon to be handed down from apostolic tradition.”—Book 11, chap. 11, § 7. We here learn that the early advocates of trine immersion were not at all agreed as to its origin. Some ascribed it to the institution of the Saviour, but these were not its earliest advocates. Others ascribed it to tradition; and still others considered it an indifferent matter. There was not among them such an agreement on the subject as the trine immersionists would have us believe. It will be noticed that “apostolic tradition” is distinguished from that which was appointed by the Saviour. Tertullian, the very earliest witness for trine immersion, and the prince of traditional innovators, “put it among those rites of the church which they reckon to be handed down from apostolic tradition.” This shows that Eld. Moore's “Caution” is utterly futile, and that his construction of the words of Tertullian is wrong. Words are like families—they often change their place in society. A family that is great and honorable now, may be poor and almost forgotten twenty years to come, and that is poor and unknown now, may be great then; so, words that were formerly popular and proper are now obsolete, that is, not used, and words which are now regarded as slang, will, after a few years, be allowed in pure conversation and writing. The Bible was originally written in Hebrew and Greek, and translated into English at different times and by different persons. The first translation into English was made by John Wickliffe, between 1360 and 1380, but was not printed, as printing with wooden types was not discovered until about 1430, and metal types were not used until about 1445, and the first Bible was published in 1450, but it was not an English Bible. Wm. Caxton, the first English printer, set up his press in Westminster Abbey, and began business in 1474, nearly a hundred years after Wickliffe had finished his translation. Another reason why it was not printed, when printing was popular, was that he was a great reformer, and cruelly persecuted by his enemies, who, about 1384, secured an order from the king of England to expel him from the University of Oxford, and that everywhere his writings should be seized and destroyed, and even after his death his bones were dug up and burned. A few of his manuscripts, however, escaped destruction, and are to be found in the public libraries of England. The New Testament was printed from this manuscript many years after, but never got into general circulation. In this translation, Psalms 121:4, reads in this way: “Lo he not nappe; neither slepe that kepeth Israel.” The sense of this is just the same as that given in the same passage in our Bible, but the spelling and words are very different, while “nappe” has in our day been abbreviated to nap, and is seldom, if ever, used in dignified composition. Suppose you turn to your Bible and see how it reads there. Another remarkable rendering in that Bible is found in Acts 14:14, which reads: “Paul and Silas rent their clothes and skipped out among the people.” This is the very same in meaning as that found in our Bibles, but how different in expression. In John 12:26, we read: “If any man serve me, my Father shall worship him.” This sounds like blasphemy, but simply because the word worship has changed its meaning so much since that time. Another great reformer, named Wm. Tindal, sometimes called Tyndale, also made a translation of the Bible, and published the New Testament in 1526, but the edition was bought up by Sir Thomas More and Bishop Tonstall to keep the people from reading it; but another edition was published in 1530, which was collected and burned to keep it from the hands of the people. In561 1532 Tindal and his associates printed the whole Bible, but in preparing a second edition he was arrested and burned at the stake. One of Tindal's associates was named Miles Coverdale, who, after Tindal's death, published a complete translation of the Bible in 1535. In Tindal's New Testament we read, in Heb. 12:22, “a sight of angels,” which would be thought very low language, indeed—we think our Bible reads better. In Coverdale's Bible we read, in Cant. 2:8, “My beloved cometh hopping upon the mountains,” and in Judges 4:15 we read, “So the Lord trounced Sisera and all his host.” Now, we know that boys hop, and sometimes are trounced, but it sounds strange when these words are applied to the actions of the Lord. In 1604 King James, of England, appointed fifty-four learned men to make a new translation of the Bible, but they did not begin their work until 1607, and then only forty-seven engaged in it; they finished the Bible which we now have, in 1611. It is a grand piece of literary work, and in the language of one of the most learned and respected ministers that ever lived in the Methodist Protestant Church, It is the most perfect English in the world. Remember, the Bible never changes in meaning; the language is constantly changing, as you see how some words that were once good English, and thought fit to be used in translating the Holy Bible, are now not allowed in good conversation in the parlor.—Methodist Protestant. The Sabbath School.
By Ellen G. White
AFTER the baptism of Jesus, he was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil. When he came up out of Jordan, he bowed and plead with the great Eternal for strength to endure the conflict with the fallen foe. The opening heavens and the descent of the excellent glory attested his divine character; and the Father's voice declared the close relationship of Christ to his Infinite Majesty: "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." The mission of Christ was now about to begin; but he must first withdraw from the busy scenes of life to a desolate wilderness for the express purpose of bearing a three-fold temptation in behalf of those whom he had come to redeem. When Christ entered the wilderness his countenance was changed, its glory had departed, the weight of the sins of the world was pressing upon his soul, and his features expressed unutterable sorrow, a depth of anguish that fallen man had never realized. The indulgence of appetite had increased with every successive generation since Adam's transgression, until the race was so feeble in moral power that they could not overcome in their own strength. Christ in behalf of the race was to conquer appetite, by enduring the most powerful test on that point. He was to tread the path of temptation alone, with none to help or comfort him. The length of this fast is the strongest evidence of the great sinfulness of debased appetite, and its power over the human family. Through appetite, Satan had accomplished the ruin of Adam and Eve, and through all succeeding generations, this had been his strongest weapon in corrupting the human race. As Christ had taken the form of man, and was subject to his infirmities, Satan hoped to conquer him through this powerful medium, and laid his plans accordingly. As soon as Christ's long fast commenced, he was at hand with his temptations. He came clothed in light, claiming to be an angel sent from the throne of God to sympathize with Christ and relieve him from his suffering condition. He represented to him that God did not desire him to pass through the pain and self-denial which he had anticipated. He claimed to bear the message from Heaven that God only designed to prove the willingness of Christ to endure his test. Satan told him that he was to set his feet in the blood-stained path, but not to travel it, that, like Abraham, he was tried to show his perfect obedience. He claimed to be the angel who stayed the hand of Abraham, as the knife was raised to slay Isaac, and that he had now come to save the life of the Son of God, deliver him from a painful death by starvation, and assist him in the plan of salvation. But Christ turned from all these artful temptations, and remained steadfast in his purpose to carry out the divine plan. Foiled at one point, Satan now tried another expedient. Believing that the angelic character he had assumed defied detection, he now feigned to doubt the divinity of Christ, because of his emaciated appearance and uncongenial surroundings. In taking the nature of man, Christ was not equal in appearance with the angels of Heaven, but this was one of the necessary humiliations that he willingly accepted when he became man's Redeemer. Satan urged that if he was indeed the Son of God he should give him some evidence of his exalted character. He suggested that God would not leave his Son in so deplorable a condition. He declared that one of the heavenly angels had been exiled to earth, and his appearance indicated that instead of being the King of Heaven he was that fallen angel. He called attention to his own beautiful appearance, clothed with light and strength, and insultingly contrasted the wretchedness of Christ with his own glory. He claimed direct authority from Heaven to demand proof of Christ that he was the Son of God. He taunted him with being a poor representative of the angels, much less their high Commander, the acknowledged King in the royal courts; and insinuated that his present appearance indicated that he was forsaken of God and man. He declared that if he were the Son of God he was equal with God and should evidence this by working a miracle to relieve his hunger. He then urged him to change the stone at his feet to bread, and agreed that if this were done he would at once yield his claims to superiority, and the contest between the two should be forever ended. Suffering humiliation, hunger, and contempt, Jesus repulsed Satan with the same scripture he had bidden Moses repeat to rebellious Israel: "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." In this declaration, and also by his example, Christ showed that wanting temporal food was a much less calamity than meeting the disapprobation of God. In becoming man's substitute, and conquering where man had been vanquished, Christ was not to manifest his divine power to relieve his own suffering, for fallen man could work no miracles in order to save himself from pain, and Christ, as his representative, was to bear his trials as a man, leaving an example of perfect faith and trust in his heavenly Father. Christ recognized Satan from the beginning, and it required strong self-control to listen to the propositions of this insulting deceiver, and not rebuke his bold assumption. But the Saviour of the world was neither provoked to give him evidence of his divine power, nor to enter into controversy with one who had been expelled from Heaven for leading a rebellion against the supreme Ruler of the universe, and whose very crime had been a refusal to recognize the dignity of the Son of God. It was not for the Son of God to descend from his lofty mission to prove his divinity to Satan, nor did he condescend to explain the reason of his present humiliation, and the manner in which he was to act as man's Redeemer. If the children of men would follow the example of their Saviour, and hold no converse with Satan, they would be spared many a defeat at his hands. Six thousand years has this arch-enemy been warring against the government of God, and continued practice has increased his skill to deceive and allure. But Satan had too much at stake to lightly give up the battle. He knew that if Christ came off victor, his influence would be lessened. So, in order to awe Christ with his superior strength, he carried him to Jerusalem and placed him on a pinnacle of the temple. He now demanded that, if he were indeed the Son of God, he should cast himself from that dizzy height, and thus indicate entire confidence in his Father's preserving care. The sin of presumption lies close beside the virtue of perfect faith and confidence in God, and Satan endeavored to take advantage of Christ's humanity and urge him over the line of trust into presumption. He now admitted that Christ was right in the wilderness, when he placed such perfect confidence in the Father, and he now urged that one more proof should be given of his entire faith in God, by casting himself from the temple. He assured him that if he were indeed the Son of God he had nothing to fear, for the angels would uphold him. Satan was well aware that if Christ could be prevailed upon to fling himself from the temple, in order to prove his claim to the protection of his heavenly Father, he would, by that very act, exhibit the weakness of human nature. But Jesus came off victor from the second temptation, by spurning the sin of presumption. While manifesting perfect trust in his Father, he refused to voluntarily place himself in such peril that it would be necessary for the Father to display divine power in order to save his Son from death. This would have been forcing Providence to come to his rescue, and thus he would fail to give his people a perfect example of faith and trust in God. Finding that he prevailed nothing with Christ in the second great temptation, Satan began to be alarmed for the result of his efforts. The continued steadfastness of the Son of God filled him with apprehension, for he had not expected so strenuous an opposition. He now called all the resources of his satanic nature to aid in one last mighty effort to baffle and defeat the Saviour. In his first two temptations, he had concealed his true character and purpose, claiming to be an exalted messenger from the courts of Heaven. But he now throws off all disguise, avowing himself the Prince of Darkness, and claiming the earth for his dominion. He took Jesus up into a high mountain and showed him the kingdoms of the world, spread out in a panoramic view before his eyes. The sunlight lay on templed cities, marble palaces, fruitful fields, and vineyards, gilding the dark cedars of Lebanon and the blue waters of Galilee. The eyes of Jesus, so lately greeted by gloom and desolation, gazed upon a scene of unsurpassed loveliness and prosperity. Then the tempter's voice was heard: "All this power will I give thee, and the glory of them; for that is delivered unto me, and to whomsoever I will, I give it. If thou therefore wilt worship me, all shall be thine." This last temptation was designed to be the most alluring of all. Christ's life was one of sorrow, hardship, and conflict. Poverty and privation attended him; even the beasts and the birds had their homes, but the Son of man had not where to lay his head. Homeless and friendless as he was, there was offered him the mighty kingdoms of the world and the glory of them for a single consideration. The eyes of Jesus rested for a moment upon the scene before him; he then turned resolutely from it, refusing to dally with the tempter by even looking upon the enchanting prospect he had presented to him; but when Satan solicited his homage, Christ's divine indignation was aroused, and he could no longer tolerate his blasphemous assumption, or even permit him to remain in his presence. He exercised his divine authority, and commanded Satan to desist, saying, "Get thee hence, Satan; for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve." Satan had asked Christ to give him evidence that he was the Son of God, and he had, in this instance, the proof he asked. He had no power to withstand his peremptory dismissal, and was compelled to obey the divine command. Writhing with baffled hate and rage, the rebel chief retired from the presence of the world's Redeemer. The contest was ended. Christ's victory was complete as had been the failure of Adam. But the conflict had been protracted and trying, and Christ was exhausted and fell fainting to the ground, with the pallor of death upon his countenance. Then the heavenly angels, who had bowed before him in the royal courts, and who had watched his conflict with painful interest, ministered unto him, strengthening him with food, as he lay like one dying. They had beheld with awe and amazement their heavenly Commander passing through inexpressible suffering to achieve the salvation of man. He had endured a more severe test than man would ever be called to bear. But, as he lay emaciated and suffering, the angels brought messages of love and comfort from the Father, and an assurance that all Heaven triumphed in the victory he had gained for man. Thus the great heart of Christ warmed to life again, and became strengthened for his coming work. — Great Controversy, Vol. II. IS THE WORLD TO BE CONVERTED?
By James White
THE high and heavenly calling of the gospel presents but one hope. "Even as ye are called in one hope of your calling." That hope looks forward to the second coming of Jesus Christ, and the resurrection of the just. When Jesus, the author and finisher of the Christian's faith, shall appear in glory; when we shall see him, then that for which the church has hoped, will have come. The Christians of every age have looked forward to the time when their adorable Redeemer should come. They have ever looked forward to that event as the consummation of their hope. But the various religious bodies indulge in other hopes besides this, some of them taking the place of this. There is but one hope. Where there is a plurality, some of them must be false hopes. They cannot all be true and scriptural. We wish to call your attention to some of these hopes of the church, which we shall show are not in accordance with the Scriptures of truth. First, we would mention the hope of the world's conversion. This is not a long-cherished hope in the church. It was not the hope of the apostles. It was not the hope of the martyrs. It was not the hope of the Reformers. Daniel Whitby, D. D., whose sentiments upon this subject prevailed less than two hundred years since, was the first to present before the church the doctrine of the world's conversion, or the universal spiritual reign of Christ. Yet these sentiments in this short period have obtained in nearly all the religious denominations. Hope is composed of expectation and desire. Expectation must be based upon some evidence. If you expect anything, of course you have some evidence that you are to realize it. However much you may desire a thing, if you have no evidence to expect it, you have not a well-grounded hope. Now where is the evidence that God designed ever to convert the world? Where are the Scripture proofs that there is to be a long period of a thousand years when there will be no sinners; when all will be converted to God, all be Christians, all be holy, all be happy? Do you find it in the prophets? This period is called the millennium, which is simply a thousand years. The doctrine of Daniel Whitby, cherished by the churches, with a very few exceptions of individual members, is that, during the seventh millennium, there are to be no sinners, but all are to be holy. This has been regarded as the great Sabbath of rest from toil and sin and sorrow. If such a state of things is to exist in the seventh millennium, then, of course, the last days, the last great day of this seven-thousand-years' week, is to be all over glorious. If this is all true, we may expect to hear the prophets describing the last days as desirable. And we should find the apostles joining them in writing most glorious descriptions of the last days. We would hear Christ, not describing the state of things at his advent as in the days of Noah, and of Lot, but a time when light and life and holiness would rule everywhere. But the sacred Scriptures do not thus speak of the last days. The prophets represent them as days of danger, days of gloominess, of thick clouds and darkness. There is but one universal testimony among all the prophets on this point. The last days are especially gloomy and dark. We come to the New Testament, and find harmony here with the Old Testament. Jesus gives us the parable of the wheat and tares. The wheat are the children of the kingdom, the tares are the children of the wicked one. The question is asked, Shall we not go and gather out the tares? The answer is, Let them both grow together until the harvest; and, the harvest is the end of the world. The children of the kingdom are represented by the wheat, the children of the wicked one are represented by the tares; and both are to grow together until the end of the Christian age. Now where is the room here for the temporal millennium? The apostle Paul, in describing the last days, is far from representing them as glorious. "In the last days," he says, "perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof; from such turn away." 2 Tim. 3:1-5. Now, I ask, What kind of a millennium is this? There are perils all around; men in the church who are not only lovers of their own selves, but even despisers of those that are good. They are not unbelieving outsiders, but have a form of godliness. Here is a portrait of the professed church of Jesus Christ in the last days, with eighteen distinct sins brought out in her unblushing features. But let us take a view of this subject in the light of reason. If the world was ever to be converted, why has it not been converted before this time? Can we expect that there can be mightier agencies employed to convert men than have been employed? Why did not the patriarchs convert the world? Do you expect to see greater men than Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Daniel, Noah, Job, and Lot? Why did not they convert the world? If the world can be converted at any time, when the Son of God came down and preached his own gospel, and wrought miracles in the sight of men, why was not the world converted then? Are you looking for a minister mightier than he? Do you expect a more powerful preacher, whose word shall be backed up with greater miracles, and with more wonderful demonstrations of the presence of the Spirit of God than was witnessed in Christ? Do you expect any to preach more earnestly than he did? to be more faithful in pointing out sins than our Saviour was? Why did not he convert the world? And why did not the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ convert the world? It is true, some of them were uneducated men, but they were not all ignorant men. Do the temporal-millennium men look for more learned men and more learned ministers than Paul? Can they expect mightier than he in word and doctrine? And you that have read the Acts of the Apostles, and there learned the mighty miracles that attended the apostles, as they preached the gospel with the Holy Ghost sent down from Heaven, may well inquire, If the apostles did not convert the world, why may we expect that others can do it? Has human nature changed for the better? Has man improved, either physically, morally, or mentally? If he has, there may be some hope that he may still be elevated, and finally taken out of the grasp of Satan. But we fail to see that man has improved, either physically, mentally, or morally. And more than this, we think we have evidence that he has depreciated in all these respects. That he has depreciated physically is evident from the Scriptures. Adam and his sons, until the flood, lived somewhere from eight to ten hundred years. Now, in order for him to have strength of mind, in a sound body. In proportion as man's physical strength has depreciated, the mental power of the race has degenerated. And as his moral power has grown weak, just so has his intellect become unbalanced and enfeebled. The improvements of the age, such as the application of steam, and of lightning to the telegraphic wires, are what God said should be. These things are but the fulfillment of prophecy. And what God promises and brings about, for that let him have the praise. To say that man is becoming really wiser, that he is having greater mental strength, greater mental perfection and wisdom, is contrary to all the facts in the case. And certainly the state of society has not improved. Read the lists of crime from Boston, New York, Chicago, San Francisco, and from other cities. You read, and turn away with disgust. Crime fully keeps pace with, if it does not outstrip, the boasted progress of the age. We wish here to call your attention to the great image of the second chapter of Daniel. This image's head is of fine gold, the breast and arms of silver, the sides of brass, the legs of iron, the feet of iron and clay. This image, in its four parts, represents the four great universal monarchies that have borne rule upon the earth, which is to be followed by our Lord's everlasting kingdom, which is to be set up at the coming of Jesus Christ. That image's head represents Babylon; the breast and arms of silver, Persia; the sides of brass, Grecia. The legs represent Rome. The ten toes of the image represent the ten kingdoms into which Rome was divided. What next? The stone is to smite that image, and then is the iron, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and become like the chaff of the summer threshing-floors. Now let us see if we are to have the world converted? The stone is to smite the image upon the feet, and then are the parts to be broken to pieces together—not converted—and become as the chaff of the summer threshing-floors, and the wind is to carry them away so that no place can be found for them. This is their utter destruction, not conversion. And in the days of these kingdoms the God of Heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed. That is the fifth, the glorious, everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, to be set up at the time of his coming. Those who talk of the golden age, soon to come, may learn something from this image. Where was the golden age? In the days of Babylon, represented by that head of gold. We may look back to that time, and there, comparatively speaking, was the golden age. Persia, represented by the silver, was an age of less value. Grecia, of brass, an age of still less value. Rome, of iron, of less value still. And when you come down to our time, we find that the iron is mixed with miry clay. Now those who talk of a golden age, down here, have things perverted, as we read in the prophets, they put darkness for light and light for darkness. So they have perverted the truth of God in reference to this matter. They have turned Nebuchadnezzar's grand image upside down, and make it stand upon its head. That is the way they get the golden age down here. But there is no hope of earthly glory to the church of Jesus Christ, only that which reaches beyond the crash of earthly kingdoms. When the stone smites the image, all its parts are ground to powder, and become like the chaff of the summer threshing-floors, and the wind carries them away. Then will the everlasting kingdom be set up upon the new earth, which shall stand forever.