Earlier text: The Words of the MasterA Masterpiece of Deception
By Ellen G. White
The ministration of holy angels, as presented in the Scriptures, is a truth most comforting and precious to every follower of Christ. But the Bible teaching upon this point has been obscured and perverted by the errors of popular theology. The doctrine of natural immortality, first borrowed from pagan philosophy, and in the darkness of the great apostasy incorporated into the Christian faith, has supplanted the truth, so plainly taught in Scripture, that “the dead know not anything.” Multitudes have come to believe that it is the spirits of the dead who are the “ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation.” And this notwithstanding the testimony of Scripture to the existence of heavenly angels, and their connection with the history of man, before the death of a human being. The doctrine of man’s consciousness in death, especially the belief that the spirits of the dead return to minister to the living, has prepared the way for Modern Spiritualism. If the dead are permitted to enter the presence of God and holy angels, and privileged with knowledge far exceeding what they before possessed, why should they not return to the earth to enlighten and instruct the living? If, as taught by popular theologians, the spirits of the dead are hovering about their friends on earth, why should they not be permitted to communicate with them, to warn them against evil, or to comfort them in sorrow? How can those who believe in man’s consciousness in death, reject what comes to them as divine light communicated by glorified spirits? Here is a channel regarded as sacred, through which Satan works for the accomplishment of his purposes. The fallen angels who do his bidding appear as messengers from the spirit world. While professing to bring the living into communication with the dead, the prince of evil exercises his bewitching influence upon their minds. He has power to bring before men the appearance of their departed friends. The counterfeit is perfect: the familiar look, the words, the tone, are reproduced with marvelous distinctness. Many are comforted with the assurance that their loved ones are enjoying the bliss of heaven; and without suspicion of danger, they give ear to “seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils.” When they have been led to believe that the dead actually return to communicate with them, Satan causes those to appear who went to the grave unprepared. They claim to be happy in heaven, and even to occupy exalted positions there. And thus the error is widely taught, that no difference is made between the righteous and the wicked. The pretended visitants from the world of spirits sometimes utter cautions and warnings which prove to be correct. Then, as confidence is gained, they present doctrines that directly undermine faith in the Scriptures. With an appearance of deep interest in the well-being of their friends on earth, they insinuate the most dangerous errors. The fact that they state some truths, and are able at times to foretell future events, gives to their statements an appearance of reliability; and their false teachings are accepted by the multitudes as readily, and believed as implicitly, as if they were the most sacred truths of the Bible. The law of God is set aside, the Spirit of grace despised, the blood of the covenant counted an unholy thing. The spirits deny the divinity of Christ, and place even the Creator on a level with themselves. Thus under a new disguise the great rebel still carries on his warfare against God, begun in heaven, and for nearly six thousand years continued upon earth. Many endeavor to account for spiritual manifestations by attributing them wholly to fraud and sleight of hand on the part of the medium. But while it is true that the results of trickery have often been palmed off as genuine manifestations, there have been also marked exhibitions of supernatural power. The mysterious rappings with which Spiritualism began were not the result of human trickery or cunning, but the direct work of evil angels, who thus introduced one of the most successful of soul-destroying delusions. Many will be ensnared by the belief that Spiritualism is a merely human imposture; when brought face to face with manifestations which they can not but regard as supernatural, they will be deceived, and will be led to accept them as the great power of God. These persons overlook the testimony of the Scriptures concerning the wonders wrought by Satan and his agents. It was by satanic aid that Pharaoh’s magicians were enabled to counterfeit the work of God. Paul testifies that before the second advent of Christ there will be similar manifestations of satanic power. The coming of the Lord is to be preceded by “the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness.” And the apostle John, describing the miracle-working power that will be manifested in the last days, says: “He doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men, and deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do.” No mere impostures are here foretold. Men are deceived by the miracles which Satan’s agents have power to do, not which they pretend to do. Satan beguiles men now as he beguiled Eve in Eden, by flattery, by kindling a desire to obtain forbidden knowledge, by exciting ambition for self-exaltation. It was cherishing these evils that caused his fall, and through them he aims to compass the ruin of men. “Ye shall be as gods,” he declares, “knowing good and evil.” Spiritualism teaches that “man is the creature of progression; that it is his destiny from his birth to progress, even to eternity, toward the Godhead.” And again: “Each mind will judge itself, and not another.” “The judgment will be right, because it is the judgment of self. . . . The throne is within you.” Said a spiritualistic teacher, as the “spiritual consciousness” awoke within him, “My fellow men, all were unfallen demigods.” And another declares, “Any just and perfect being is Christ.” Thus, in the place of the righteousness and perfection of the infinite God, the true object of adoration; in the place of the perfect righteousness of the law, the true standard of human attainment, Satan has substituted the sinful, erring nature of man himself, as the only object of adoration, the only rule of judgment or standard of character. This is progress, not upward, but downward. Safeguards from Deception
None need be deceived by the lying claims of Spiritualism. God has given the world sufficient light to enable them to discover the snare. As already shown, the theory that forms the very foundation of Spiritualism is at war with the plainest statements of Scripture. The Bible declares that “the dead know not anything,” that their thoughts have perished; that they have no part in anything that is done under the sun; they know nothing of the joys and sorrows of those who were dearest to them on earth. Furthermore, God has expressly forbidden all pretended communication with departed spirits. In the days of the Hebrews there was a class of people who claimed, as do the Spiritualists of to-day, to hold communication with the dead. But the “familiar spirits,” as these visitants from other worlds were called, are declared by the Bible to be the “spirits of devils.” The work of dealing with familiar spirits was pronounced an abomination to the Lord, and was solemnly forbidden under penalty of death. The very name of witchcraft is now held in contempt. The claim that men can hold intercourse with evil spirits is regarded as a fable of the Dark Ages. But Spiritualism, which numbers its converts by hundreds of thousands, yea, by millions, which has made its way into scientific circles, which has invaded churches, and has found favor in legislative bodies and even in the courts of kings,—this mammoth deception is but a revival, in a new disguise, of the witchcraft condemned and prohibited of old. Says the prophet Isaiah: “When they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead? To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.” If men had been willing to receive the truth so plainly stated in the Scriptures, concerning the nature of man and the state of the dead, they would see in the manifestations and working of Spiritualism the working of Satan with power and signs and lying wonders. But rather than yield the liberty so agreeable to the carnal heart, and renounce the sins which they love, multitudes close their eyes to the light, and walk straight on, regardless of warnings, while Satan weaves his snares about them, and they become his prey. “Because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved,” therefore “God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.” Satan has long been preparing for this final effort to deceive the world. The foundation of his work was laid by the assurance given to Eve in Eden, “Ye shall not surely die.” “In the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.” Little by little he has prepared the way for his masterpiece of deception in the development of Spiritualism. He has not yet reached the full accomplishment of his designs; but it will be reached in the last remnant of time. Says the prophet: “I saw three unclean spirits like frogs, . . . They are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.” Except those who are kept by the power of God, through faith in His Word, the whole world will be swept into the ranks of this delusion. The people are fast being lulled to a fatal security, to be awakened only by the outpouring of the wrath of God. Saith the Lord God: “Judgment also will I lay to the line, and righteousness to the plummet: and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of lies, and the waters shall overflow the hiding-place. And your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, then ye shall be trodden down by it.” The Sabbath Through the Ages
By Charles L. Taylor
XII. The Change of the Sabbath as Proved by History
An Indictment and Confession
[Our issue of November 17 contained the article on the Sabbath entitled “The Change of the Sabbath as Indicated by Prophecy.” In that article were given fourteen different reasons for regarding the seventh day as still the Sabbath. It was also shown that prophecy predicted that an apostate power would arise, which would think to change the times and laws of God (See Dan. 7:25), and that this change was wrought by the Papacy according to its own acknowledgment. This article notes some of the testimony of history.—Ed. S. of T.] By an indictment of Heaven, returned several centuries ago, the defendant, Rev. Mr. Papacy, is charged with having wilfully, deliberately, maliciously, and premeditatedly made erasures and changes in the fundamental law of the kingdom of God, all such erasures and changes having been absolutely contrary to the well-known and expressed will of the Lawmaker. It is also further charged that said defendant has had traitorous designs upon said kingdom, planning both to overthrow and supplant it by subtle, ingenious reasoning and covert attack. Is the defendant guilty, or not guilty?” “If it please your Honor, I, the Rev. Mr. Papacy, do hereby plead guilty to said indictment, affirming that in whole and in part said charge is absolutely correct. And I further plead that which the court and community ought to know to be true; namely, that I consider myself highly honored in thus attacking the vital laws of Jehovah, and especially do I claim it an honor to have completely nullified the commandment requiring the observance of the seventh day.” The foregoing charge and accompanying confession of guilt are both plain and to the point. It would scarcely seem necessary, therefore, to continue the trial, and by introduction of testimony seek to prove the confession of the culprit. But in this Sabbath matter that is exactly what conditions require. It is a case where the jury of mankind seeks to repudiate the voluntary confession of the criminal, and to place the responsibility of the artful and destructive changes in God’s law upon the shoulders of the Lawmaker Himself. In other words, men are unwilling to accept the claim that the Papacy changed the Sabbath, and are arguing that somewhere, at some time, somehow Jesus Christ made the change from Sabbath to Sunday. The question is most serious; so let us call for the proof that the Papacy does tell “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth” when it solemnly tho boastfully affirms that “the Catholic Church changed the day from Saturday to Sunday.” History, bring your witnesses. In order to a real understanding of the history of the Sabbath change, to see clearly the why and the how of that which was actually done, the attention is again called to the rapid degeneration of the church of Christ from the days of the apostles onward. Surrounded as they were by a great heathen, sun-worshiping world, the people of God early allowed themselves to be influenced by the spirit and customs of the age; the bars were let down, pagan philosophers came in and substituted Platonism for the Bible, and in harmony with that philosophy all manner of pagan beliefs and practices ere long came into vogue. Speaking of this very matter and of those very times, Mosheim says, “WHEN ONCE THIS PASSION FOR PHILOSOPHIZING had taken possession of the minds of the Egyptian teachers and certain others, and HAD BEEN GRADUALLY DIFFUSED by them in various directions THROUGHOUT THE CHURCH, THE HOLY AND BEAUTIFUL SIMPLICITY OF EARLY TIMES VERY QUICKLY DISAPPEARED, AND WAS FOLLOWED BY A MOST REMARKABLE AND DISASTROUS ALTERATION IN NEARLY THE WHOLE SYSTEM OF CHRISTIAN DISCIPLINE.”—Commentaries, Cent. 2, Sec. 33. Dr. Killen, a Presbyterian theologian and teacher of church history, speaks to the same point, as follows: “In the interval between the days of the apostles and Constantine the Christian commonwealth changed its aspect. The bishop of Rome—a personage unknown to the writers of the New Testament—meanwhile rose into prominence, and at length took precedence of all other churchmen. RITES AND CEREMONIES OF WHICH NEITHER PAUL NOR PETER EVER HEARD, CREPT SILENTLY INTO USE, AND THEN CLAIMED THE RANK OF DIVINE INSTITUTIONS.”—“The Ancient Church.” This testimony is most striking and important, because it puts into a nutshell the whole question of the Papacy and the Sunday. Notice again how it is stated. First came the decline in the church; next, the rise of the bishop of Rome and his exaltation over all other ministers; and third, the creeping in of pagan customs, of which, as we shall see, Sunday was the all-important one. And do not forget that the bishop of Rome was, from the first, THE ONE who put the Sunday forward. With a fallen church and an ambitious ministry, it was found an easy matter to adopt the observance of the first day; because, so many being pagan at heart, the pagan day and its festivities appealed strongly to their natures. Moreover, a desire for large membership and greater popularity led the bishops to consider the propriety of adopting the Sunday as a day for religious service, that by so doing they might get into closer touch with those whom, tho pagans, they sought to bring into the church. Thus we read: “The Lord’s day [Sunday] had no command that it should be sanctified, but it was left to God’s people to pitch on this or that day for the public worship. And being taken up and made a day of meeting for religious exercises, yet for three hundred years there was no law to bind them to it.”—Morer. Indeed, it is preeminently true that there was no law either human or divine for more than three centuries to bind men to the observance of Sunday. “Not any ecclesiastical writer of the first three centuries attributed the origin of Sunday observance either to Christ or His apostles.”—Domville. The first actual law in favor of the Sunday was issued by the emperor Constantine in the year 321 A.D., and was as follows: “Let all judges and townspeople, and all artisans, REST ON THE VENERABLE DAY OF THE SUN. But let those who are situated in the country freely and at full liberty attend to the cultivation of their fields; because it often happens that no other day is so fit for sowing corn or planting vines; lest by neglecting the proper occasion, they should lose the benefits granted by divine bounty.” At the time Constantine made this Sunday decree, he was closely associated with the church and its religious teachers, and particularly with the bishop of Rome, who at this time had come to occupy the leading place among his fellow bishops, and to be a prominent political factor in the workings of the state. And as the bishop, so was the church. She had become so paganized in belief and practise that she actually divorced herself from God, and formed an idolatrous and adulterous connection with the empire. Church and state were united. Constantine himself presided at church councils, and, under the bishops, largely directed the church work, tho it is a notorious fact that he was a heathen sun-worshiper until the day of his death. See Hawes’s “Church History.” That first Sunday law, of 321 A.D., was made by the emperor to satisfy the demands of the clergy, who were now insisting that “the wild solar holiday of all pagan times” should be made a permanent part of the church practise. And it should be noticed that this was exactly what the law called for,—rest upon “THE VENERABLE DAY OF THE SUN.” And Gibbon, the great historian, observes that “Constantine styles the Lord’s day dies solis (day of the sun), a name which could not offend the ears of his pagan subjects.”—“Decline and Fall,” chapter 20. The law was passed to please the heathen within and without the church. Sunday-Sacredness Obtaining Credence
From the time of Constantine forward the church and state combination, with the bishop of Rome always in the lead, began urgently to put forth the idea of Sunday sacredness. Heylyn, a noted English scholar, testifies, “We shall find both emperors and councils very frequent in ordering things about this day and the service of it.” One of the first and most striking things in the exaltation of the day, was accomplished by Sylvester, bishop or pope of Rome during Constantine’s reign, who, by virtue of his “apostolical authority,” bestowed upon Sunday the title of “Lord’s day.” Sunday was thus for the first time, and BY OFFICIAL ACT OF ROME, given a Sabbatical character, given the name which truly belonged only to the Sabbath of the fourth commandment. “To Constantine and Sylvester, therefore, the advocates of first-day observance are greatly indebted. The one elevated it as a heathen festival to the throne of the empire; . . . the other changed it into a Christian institution, giving it the dignified appellation of ‘Lord’s day.’”—“History of the Sabbath,” by Andrews. The Change Wrought by Bishops
In close connection with the acts of Constantine and the pope, there was advanced by Eusebius, another bishop, the argument that Christ changed the day! Never before had such a doctrine been heard from any writer or teacher; and certainly Eusebius gave no scripture to support HIS claim. The closing words of his sophistical production deny the claim and show the real authors of the change: “All things whatsoever that it was duty to do on the Sabbath, these WE HAVE TRANSFERRED TO THE LORD’S DAY [meaning Sunday], as more appropriately belonging to it, because it has a precedence and is first in rank, and more honorable than the Jewish Sabbath.” The church, through both emperor and pope, had now spoken, and Sunday was established. True, there were those all along who protested mightily against the whole wicked thing; but they were only a small minority, and the movement to dethrone completely the true Sabbath was continually accelerated. Church councils framed aggressive measures; and “by a law of the year 386, those older changes effected by the emperor Constantine were more vigorously enforced, and in general, CIVIL TRANSACTIONS OF EVERY KIND on Sunday were strictly forbidden. Whoever transgressed was to be considered, in fact, as guilty of sacrilege.”—“Neander’s Church History,” Volume 2. If any statement of man ever made regarding THE TIME when the Sabbath was changed, is absolutely correct, that of Domville is certainly the one. Note particularly what he says: “CENTURIES of the Christian era PASSED AWAY BEFORE THE SUNDAY WAS OBSERVED BY THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH AS A SABBATH. HISTORY DOES NOT FURNISH US WITH A SINGLE PROOF or indication that it was at any time so observed PREVIOUS TO THE SABBATICAL EDICT OF CONSTANTINE.” The confession of the criminal is conclusively proved. The so-called church of Christ, fallen and spiritually debauched, under the leadership of the bishop of Rome and in league with the pagan empire of Constantine, did transfer the Sabbath to Sunday. This is the concurrent testimony of a large number of most reliable witnesses. And every candid person who has made a careful study of the church history of those early centuries, now knows that the change of the Sabbath took place just as has been indicated. The claim that Christ or His apostles changed the law of the Sabbath, has long since been abandoned by all real scholars. As the “Christian at Work,” in its issue of January, 1884, has said, “We hear less than we used to about the apostolic origin of the present Sunday observance, and for the reason that while the Sabbath and Sabbath rest are woven into the warp and woof of Scripture, IT IS NOW SEEN, AS IT IS ADMITTED, THAT WE MUST GO TO LATER THAN APOSTOLIC TIMES FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SUNDAY OBSERVANCE.” Sunday is certainly one of those pagan things, spoken of by Dr. Killen, which crept into the church and “then claimed the rank of divine institutions.” Dear friend, if it be true—and it is—that “the selection of Sunday, thus changing the particular day designated in the fourth commandment, was brought about by the GRADUAL CONCURRENCE of the early Christian church, and [rests] ON THIS BASIS, AND NONE OTHER” (“Christian at Work”); if it be true—and it is—that “NO LAW OR PRECEPT appears to have been given BY CHRIST OR THE APOSTLES, either for the ABROGATION of the Jewish Sabbath, or the INSTITUTION OF THE LORD’S DAY [Sunday], or the SUBSTITUTION of the FIRST for the SEVENTH day of the week” (Lyman Coleman, in “Ancient Christianity Exemplified”); if it be true—and it is—that the PAPACY WAS the power that made the substitution, is it not your duty and mine resolutely to assert our Protestant principles and stand true to the Bible? Shall we follow the example of our Lord (Luke 4:16), or anti-Christ? “The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God.” The words of the apostle are that “evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived.” It is a common thing to read in the newspapers of “the carnival of crime.” For instance, in the New York World of November 8 there is the statement that a regular organized gang of horse-poisoners exists in New York City, who practise a deliberate system of blackmailing. Ten thousand dollars, it declares, has been paid in the last three months by owners of horses in order to gain immunity from the dread “Arsenic Club.” During that same period 500 horses have been killed; and the 500 horses were worth much more than the ten thousand dollars. The owners had refused to pay the price of the “Arsenic Club,” and they have suffered in consequence. Dr. H. Stark, veterinary9 surgeon, of 321 East 3rd Street, declares that within the last few years more than 2,000 animals have been poisoned. For instance, an expressman received a letter signed “The Black Hand,” ordering him to pay $500 or suffer the loss of his animals. And he was calmly told “the business of getting money from horse-owners who do not want their animals poisoned is so good on the East Side, that we expect to extend it over the whole city.” And while the reporter was talking with the doctor, word came that two horses belonging to a dairy company had fallen dead, making forty horses that had been lost by that dairy concern within three weeks. The name “Arsenic Club” has been given to it by the doctor, because that is the poison they always use, mixing it in the form of a cruller or biscuit, and place it in the feed-bag or throw it into the stall. Sometimes the poison is placed in an apple. In one case seventeen horses were poisoned at one time. The doctor thinks that a good many of these crimes are done by confederates employed in the different barns. Then follows a list of eight different owners who have suffered in this manner. The Atmospheric Heavens
By R.
And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament.” Gen. 1:7. Thus, in a few words, the Bible relates the creation of that which scientific men call the atmosphere. It is a very simple description of a very complex thing. This scripture, as well as the whole narrative of creation, is intended for the instruction of all mankind, and is not for the learned reader only. Also, it is intended for all mankind in every age of the world’s history, no matter what relative knowledge of science that age may possess. For a book like the Bible, addressed to the souls of all mankind no matter what their educational attainments, no other course is permissible. The language must be so simple, so touching the root-idea of things, that any man may gather some knowledge of its meaning. At the same time, the wording must be so clear and pure that no scientific attainments, no matter how great, shall ever be able to really criticize it or in the true sense supersede it. Such we shall find is this clear statement concerning the creation of the atmosphere. There have been times when men believed and taught that the earth was flat, and spread out as a plain many miles in extent. They thought the heavens were a crystal dome which rested on all sides upon the firm support of the earth. And some men in our days seek to show that the word “firmament” of the Scriptures means this same thing. One writer translates it “hammered plates.” In doing this, he shows more invention than knowledge. The word rakiya, from which “firmament” is translated, is from a root word, meaning to HAMMER or POUND. The word “plates” is not at all in the word. To hammer metal out into plates is to cause it to expand, and so in time the word, which meant only to HAMMER, came to mean expand. And thus in the Hebrew language the word came to have two meanings—one, to hammer; and the other, to expand; and that which was expanded was called rakiya, an expanse. There is a great reason for the use of this Hebrew word in this connection. Note how it is. We understand that air is made up of a mixture of two gases, oxygen and nitrogen; and we know that it is a quality of all gases to expand unless in some way confined. Furthermore, science teaches us that the expansion of gases is due to the hammering upon one another of the atoms of which they are composed. All matter, but especially gaseous matter, is vibrant with force, and force is the energy of the creative word. When God, therefore, wrapped the earth about with a gaseous atmosphere, vibrating under the constantly impressed energy of the word, the very vibrating and clashing and hammering of the atoms of the gases caused these particles to seek wider room and thus expand until the stress of expansion was in perfect balance with the restraining stress of gravity. And thus it is even to this day. Hence we have a HAMMERED EXPANSE, for the atoms of the gases were hammered or caused to vibrate by the activity of the word of the Creator. And we have even now a hammered expanse, for the power of the word still causes them to vibrate and so continue to maintain the expanse. The first of these two acts of the word caused the creation of the atmosphere. The second act of the word causes it to be maintained. It is true that in time men came to think of the sky as a dome of crystal. It is thus that the Greeks and Romans viewed it. So, too, the Jews, in time, as they apostatized, came to cover the Scriptures with their own traditions and interpretations, borrowed in most part from the teachings of the heathen. The final result of this misunderstanding, alike of the Word and the works is seen to-day in our English translation of the word rakiya by the word “firmament,” as something firm or substantial. But men’s ideas and God’s Word are separate things. Revelation gives us the truth of science in the word “expanse;” and science is left to search out the facts which explain that truth. And this is the harmony of the Bible and science, and this is their co-operation. Last of all, the Scriptural word for the atmosphere is better than that given by science. The language of science is largely the description of appearances. Thus books of astronomy speak of the “sun entering Aries,” by which they do not mean that the sun actually enters the constellation of Aries, but that it passes a certain point in space, called the “vernal equinox.” They also speak of the conjunction of heavenly bodies, but do not mean that these bodies actually conjoin; they merely appear to do so. And scientific men, non-scientific men, and the Bible itself, put the appearance for the reality, when they speak of the rising and setting of the sun. It is perfectly proper to use such an expression, for we speak of a mere phenomenon, without any reference to the cause which produces it. To do otherwise would be to place a burden upon us that neither we nor our language of common conversation could bear. We have said that the Scriptural name for the heavens is a better word than that given by science, and so it is. The name that science gives to the expanse is “atmosphere;” that is, a ball of vapor. It is really a more superficial word than the one given by inspiration; the scientific word “atmosphere” deals more with appearances; the word from the Bible, “expanse,” suggests more the inner nature, and prompts us to learn what was expanded, and what caused the expanse. R. JESUS says, “What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them.” Mark 11:24. Again, “Whatsoever ye shall ask in My name, that will I do.” John 14:13. From a misunderstanding of the above scriptures there has often grown fanaticism on the one hand, and discouragement on the other. Unsanctified hearts have taught that God must give everything asked of Him, and that we have a right to demand it. Good, humble souls have been filled with such teaching, have not received answers to unwise prayers, and have doubted and become discouraged. But God’s Word is not given to breed either fanaticism or doubt. God means what He says. Faith will obtain answer from Him. But do not the above texts say “whatsoever”? and does not “whatsoever” mean anything, without an exception?—Yes. But there are conditions always on which God bestows the blessings of His grace; and His promises are limited by the conditions. We may not take one text on a certain truth and base all upon its mere wording apart from other texts upon the same subject; for it is in this way that Satan obtains advantage of us. He told Jesus to cast Himself from the pinnacle of the temple; and, to make the temptation effectual, quoted the promise, “He shall give His angels charge over Thee, to keep Thee: and in their hands they shall bear Thee up, lest at any time Thou dash Thy foot against a stone.” The promise was all true, every word of it; and a little later in the mission of Christ, at Nazareth, it was demonstrated. But the text quoted by the enemy did not apply to a presumptuous or selfish act; and so Jesus says, “It is written AGAIN, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.” Here was another text which had a bearing upon the question, and the first could not apply when not in harmony with the second. “All THY ways,” omitted in the devil’s quotation, would be all the ways in harmony with God’s way. So, while it is written, “What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them,” “it is written again,” “And this is the confidence that we have in Him, that if we ASK ANYTHING ACCORDING TO HIS WILL, He heareth us: and if we know that He hear us, WHATSOEVER we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we desired of Him.” 1 John 5:14, 15. But in the very texts used at the beginning of this article there are the same limitations. In the first—that of Mark 11:24—is faith (see verses 22, 23), and in the second—that of John 14:13—is the expression “in My name.” We must ask in faith; but faith is founded on God’s Word. That is not faith which is not founded on the Word of God; it is presumption. The Word of God expresses the will of God; it is the revelation of His will. Then if our faith is founded on God’s Word, as it most assuredly is, if we possess faith (Rom. 10:17), and we submit to that Word, both in precept and promise, as we will if we “have faith in God,” we will desire nothing else so much as we desire God’s will, and will, therefore, ask in accordance with God’s will. Hence we may plead with unlimited confidence all that God has promised us in His Word. The second text uses the expression “in My name,” Christ’s name. Names are indicative of character. See Ex. 34:5-7; Matt. 1:21; Jer. 23:6. But God’s character is revealed to us in His Word by faith. Therefore asking in Christ’s name is again asking in faith, asking according to God’s will; and thus asking, God will surely answer. Upon this we may rely. Let us begin by pleading such promises as these: “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” “For this is the will of God, even your sanctification.” That means to be made like Christ; it is to have Christ dwelling within; and in Him are all blessings. Demoniacs.— When our Lord came to earth, nearly 2,000 years ago, He met special manifestations of satanic working. Everywhere He went, nearly, He found those possessed of demons. Sometimes the malefic spirit controlled the human but slightly. Sometimes the victim was made dumb. Carrington tells us that one of the investigators of Eusapia Palladino, who was right-handed, became left-handed; and Eusapia, who was left-handed, became right-handed. Sometimes the ancient obsession manifested itself in inarticulate cries, in foaming at the mouth, in temporary insanity, developing into permanent derangement of the mind. All these are duplicated in Modern Spiritualism. When God is pouring out His Spirit upon all flesh, Satan is also working “with all power and signs and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness.” 2 Thess. 2:9, 10. True, there are some who call these wonders “the great power of God;” but so they did anciently. Acts 8:9-11. There ought to be more power in the churches of Jesus Christ to cast out the demons. Sunday-Law Persecution in Tennessee
We have received quite a full report of a recent case of Sunday-law prosecution from Mr. Cyrus Simmons, attorney at law, Nashville, Tenn., to whom we here acknowledge our thanks. The case came before Thomas R. Nelson, judge of the criminal court of Knox County. The accused criminal was Davis Cruze; the awful crime with which he was charged was chopping wood on Sunday. A motion to quash was overruled. The prosecuting witness, Samuel Coward by name, swore that on Sunday morning at six o’clock, May 16, 1909, he saw the defendant chopping wood, and also on other Sundays saw him working and chopping wood. The witness was asked if he ever chopped wood on Sunday. He said he cut wood or kindling on Sunday, but he did not make as much noise about it as the defendant. He also charged the defendant with working and making a noise on Sundays and disturbing the religious services conducted in the church near by. On examination, the defendant, Davis Cruze, said that he was a Seventh-day Adventist; had been working hard the previous week late and early away from home, and did not have time to cut wood during the week; that the wood he had was stumps and knots obtained from a neighbor; that early on that Sunday morning, about six o’clock, at the request of his wife he cut a little wood; that he only chopped about fifteen minutes, and that with as little noise as he could on stumps and knots. That was the first wood which he cut, and it was several hours before the church meeting. He always made it a point to keep his family quiet during services on Sunday and to conduct himself as a Christian, so as not to annoy or disturb his neighbors. His testimony was substantiated in every particular by two other witnesses, D. R. Bird and Horace Edington, the latter of whom said that Samuel Coward had malice and prejudice against the defendant because he was a Seventh-day Adventist; that on one occasion he heard him say, “The sooner the better we get shed of these d—— Adventists.” It was also shown that it was customary in that mountainous district where the defendant lived for the neighbors to chop wood on Sundays. After instruction by the court, the jury retired, was out five minutes, and returned the verdict of “Not guilty.” Our correspondent adds: “This is one of the many cases where the Sunday law has been used for the purpose of gratifying personal revenge, or as a means of religious intolerance. We are told by the books that it is better for ninety-nine guilty men to go free than for one innocent man to be punished. If Sunday legislation works such partial and iniquitous prosecution and persecution, is it not self-evident that such a law does more harm than good?”