THERE are those who suppose that seventh-day Sabbath-keeping is a matter lately come up, a modern novelty. We wish in this article to present some historical testimony to show that an unbroken line of Sabbath-keepers exists from the earliest ages of the Christian church to the present. Some, at least, of these no doubt held errors in faith and practice, as is evinced by their keeping Sunday also. We shall present the testimony in three parts, viz.: 1. From the apostles' days down beyond the time of Constantine, who died A. D. 337. 2. From this period to the Reformation in the sixteenth century. 3. From that time to the present.
I. "The primitive Christians had a great veneration for the Sabbath and spent the day in devotion and sermons. And it is not to be doubted but they derived this practice from the apostles themselves, as appears from several scriptures to that purpose." [Morer, a minister of the English Established Church, in a volume, "Dialogues on the Lord's Day," p. 189, London, A. D. 1701. See "History of the Sabbath," by J. N. Andrews, p. 333. For sale at the SIGNS OF THE TIMES Office, Oakland, Cal.] Among these "primitive Christians" were the "Nazarenes" and the "Hypsistarians." [Id., 338-340.]
The "Sabbath was religiously observed in the Eastern church three hundred years and more after our Saviour's passion. That church, being the greater part of Christendom, and having the apostles' doctrine and example to instruct them, would have restrained it if it had been deadly." [Brerewood, Gresham College, London, in "Learned Treatise of the Sabbath," p. 77, Oxford 1631; Id., 341.]
Notice he says that the Eastern church comprised the "greater part of Christendom;" and "having the apostles' doctrine and example," that is, having the least of false doctrine and apostasy among them, did not forbid the Sabbath being kept, but would, for the same reason, have done so had it been wrong. This is strong testimony from a man who did not keep the Sabbath, that it is according to apostolic doctrine and example to keep it; and Morer says the practice of spending the Sabbath in devotion and sermons, as was the practice of the early church, was no doubt derived from the apostles themselves, as the Bible teaches. Then why did not this man and his people spend the day in the same manner? Because "the church" commanded not to do so! Apostolic practice and Bible teaching must not stand in the way of the "holy Catholic Church."
It may be said that by "the Sabbath" these writers meant the first day of the week—Sunday. They did not so mean. In the larger extracts from which these presented are taken, it will be seen that this last day is separately mentioned. In this connection we wish to state that the phrase "the Sabbath" among the early Christians did not mean the first day of the week, but the day before, or Saturday. Says Coleman: "During the early ages of the church it [Sunday] was never entitled the Sabbath, this word being confined to the seventh day of the week, the Jewish Sabbath, which, as we have already said, continued to be observed for several centuries by the converts to Christianity." ["Ancient Christianity Exemplified," chap. 26, sec. 2; Id., 335, 336. See also Brerewood, Heylyn, and White; Id., 370, 371.]
It will be noticed that Coleman says the Sabbath was kept for several hundred years by the Christian converts. [See also the statements of Prynne and Ley, "Hist. Sab.," pp. 360, 361.]
II. Professor Stuart, in speaking of the time from Constantine to the Council of Laodicea, A. D. 364, says the practice of keeping the Sabbath was kept up by Christians who wished to respect the Mosaic law, "and finally became, as we have seen, predominant throughout Christendom." It was believed, at length, that the fourth commandment required the keeping holy of the seventh-day Sabbath, and not merely a seventh part of time, and reasoning that the requirements of the decalogue were of an unchanging and perpetual character, "the churches in general came gradually to regard the seventh-day Sabbath as altogether sacred." [Id., 360.]
In our day, Sabbath-keepers are said to have gone back to the law of Moses when they endeavor to honor the law of the great Jehovah, so Professor Stuart speaks of the early Christians. It is a very common thing with anti-Sabbath writers to stigmatize Sabbath-keeping and Sabbath-keepers by such prejudicial epithets as "Mosaic," and "Jewish," when at the same time the Sabbath is kept in obedience to the law of perpetual moral obligation and not out of any desire or intent to honor the law of sacrificial observances. He says Sabbath-keeping became at last "predominant throughout Christendom." It was then a general practice. Who would have supposed that Judaism had so infected the Christian church as to become predominant? He says again that the churches in general regarded the Sabbath as sacred. Then this "Jewish observance" became common, so much so indeed that the Council of Laodicea, not long after the middle of the fourth century, condemned it in these words: "Wherefore, if they shall be found to Judaize, let them be accursed from Christ." [Prynne, A. D. 1633, Id., 360, 361.] This author says: "The Council of Laodicea first settled the observation of the Lord's day and prohibited . . . the keeping of the Jewish Sabbath under a curse." ["Dissertation on the Lord's Day Sabbath," p. 34; Id., 361.]
Says John Ley: "From the apostles' time until the council of Laodicea, which was about the year 364, the holy observation of the Jews' Sabbath continued, as may be proved out of many authors; yea, notwithstanding the decree of that council against it." ["Sunday a Sabbath," p. 163, A. D. 1640; Ib.; Id.] He says the decision of the Laodicean council did not discontinue Sabbath-keeping, and it certainly did not.
Says the historian Socrates, about the middle of the fifth century: "For although almost all churches throughout the world celebrate the sacred mysteries on the Sabbath of every week, yet the Christians of Alexandria and at Rome, on account of some ancient tradition, refuse to do this." By "the sacred mysteries," Socrates probably means the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, as Sozoman, who was contemporary, meant by the word "mysteries." [Id., 367.]
We see that Socrates says "almost all churches throughout the world" met together on the Sabbath to partake of the sacramental emblems, with the exceptions of the churches at Alexandria and Rome. Alexandria, with the corrupting mystical philosophy, and Rome, first in apostasy, refused "on account of some ancient tradition" to do so. "Ancient tradition" has played a large part in getting the Sabbath out of the church and the Sunday in.
The historian continues: "The Egyptians in the neighborhood of Alexandria, and the inhabitants of Thebaia, hold their religious meetings on the Sabbath, but do not partake of the mysteries in the manner usual among Christians in general; for, having eaten and satisfied themselves with food of all kinds, in the evening, making their oblations, they partake of the mysteries." [Socrates, book 5, chap. 22; Id., 367.]
These people held "their religious meetings on the Sabbath" about A. D. 440, and though they did not partake of the communion "in the manner usual among Christians in general," it seems they followed the apostle in the matter that distinguished their practice from that of others. See 1 Cor. 11 : 20-22.
Sozoman, who lived at the same time, speaks in the same manner. [Book 7, chap. 19; Lardner, Vol. 4, chap. 85, p. 217; Ib.; Id.]
At this time the "practice of Sabbatizing on Saturday" and "the Judaizing practice of observing Saturday, were by the leading churches expressly condemned, and all the doctrines connected with them steadfastly resisted." [Cox, "Sabbath Laws," p. 280; Id., 368.]
We see by this that the Sabbath was a day of religious worship in the Christian church more than 400 years from the time of the death and resurrection of Christ, when it is said to have lost its sacred character; according to Cox, it was also a day of rest, of cessation from ordinary labor, as in the statements "it was their practice to sabbatize on Saturday," and "the Judaizing practice of observing Saturday," etc. "The leading churches," that is those churches infected with heresy, which led off more and more in the direction of complete apostasy, condemned these Sabbath-keepers. The Sabbath was soon after shut out of the church, and its observance deemed a deadly heresy.
Sabbath-keepers at Rome, about A. D. 600, were condemned by Pope Gregory. [Fleury, Eccl. History, Heylyn, Twisse; Id., 374.]
Some of the Waldenses, the "Sabbatati," observed the Sabbath. [Benedict; Goldastus; Abp. Usher; Id., 409, 410.]
The Waldenses date back to the time of Constantine, and beyond. [Benedict; Waddington; Jones; Jortin; Edwards; Id., 305-305.] They were extensively spread over the countries of Europe in the thirteenth century. [Id., 405.]
Sabbath-keepers at Constantinople in A. D. 1054. Sabbath-keepers about A. D. 1074, condemned by Pope Gregory VII. [Id., 420, 421.]
The "Cuthari" or "Puritans" in the twelfth century observed the Sabbath. [Allix; Id., 415.] Egbert says this people "were increased to great multitudes throughout all countries." [Jones; Ib.; Id.]
The "Passaginians," twelfth century. [Mosheim, Benedict; Id., 417, 418.]
This people were "that portion of the Waldenses who lived in the passes of the mountains." [Robinson, "Eccl. Researches," chap. 10, pp. 305, 306; Id., 417.]
The "Petrobrusians," in the twelfth century. [White; Id., 419.] The "Anabaptists," sixteenth century. Some among this people observed the Sabbath. [White; Id., 423. The "Abyssinians," sixteenth century. Id., 424-427.] The "Armenians," sixteenth century. [Teates, Buchanan; Id., 429-431.]
Carlstadt, Reformer, of the time of Luther. Labored with him in the Reformation. [White; Sears; Luther; Id., 456, 457.]
III. We have now reached the time of Luther and have found Sabbath-keepers all along the way. There were others who kept the Sabbath in Germany in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. [Maxon; Utter; Id., 467.] There are Sabbath-keepers there at the present time.
John Frith, an English reformer and martyr, who was converted by Tyndale about 1525, and who helped him translate the Bible, said that the word of God did not command that the first day of the week be kept holy, but the seventh, and that that word was "rather against us" in keeping Sunday and not the Sabbath. He was burnt at Smithfield July 4, 1533. [Id., 460.]
Davidis, a Unitarian Baptist minister, "a man of learning, address, and piety," in Transylvania, now a portion of eastern Austria, in the sixteenth century, who had charge of the churches in this country, and who was looked upon as an apostle, kept the Sabbath. [Robinson, Id., 462.] He was arrested and condemned to death. Died in prison. [Id.] Many others in Transylvania held with Davidis. There were Sabbath-keepers in Bohemia at the time of the389Reformation. [Erasmus; Cox; Hessey; Id., 463, 464.] These were likely a portion, at least, of the Waldenses, who were to be found in Bohemia in the thirteenth century. [Id., 405.]
There were Sabbath-keepers in Russia as far back as the fifteenth century. They are to be found there at the present time. [Pinkerton; Murdock; Id., 465, 466.] They were found in France in the sixteenth century. [Id., 468.] Sabbath-keepers have been in England for the last 300 years or more. [Maxon; Id., 469; Chambers; Id., 479, 480.] There have been churches of Sabbath-keepers there for nearly 300 years [Benedict; Id., 470], and there have been among them some very eminent men [Id.], such as Trask, Brabourne, the Steinmetts, Bampfield, and James. [See Hist. Sab., pp. 489-491.]
The first Sabbath-keeper in the United States was Stephen Mumford, who came over from London in 1664. Not long after this—Dec. 23, 1671—the first Seventh-day Baptist Church was organized at Newport, R. I. [Id., 493, 494.] The Seventh-day Baptists in this country number probably 10,000.
The Seventh-day Adventists arose at Washington, N. H., near the close of 1844. They number about 18,000 in church relationship. This people are very energetic in spreading their views among all classes. They publish a dozen periodicals, and millions of pages of books, pamphlets, and tracts are scattered everywhere. There are probably about 25,000 believers, in all, among them.
There are those who observe the Seventh-day Sabbath, in about every country on the globe. We have now followed down the line of history from the apostles' time to the present, and have found Sabbath-keepers all along. We do not claim that this proves the Sabbath of binding obligation—the Bible alone does this—but that it shows that Sabbath-keeping is not merely a modern practice.
N. J. BOWERS.
Concordia, Kansas.
Theater-Going.
By Spurgeon
I SEE it publicly stated by men who call themselves Christians that it would be advisable for Christians to frequent the theater, that the character of the drama might be raised. The suggestion is about as sensible as if we were bidden to pour a bottle of lavender water into the great sewer to improve its aroma. If the church is to imitate the world in order to raise its tone, things have strangely altered since the day when our Lord said, "Come ye out from among them, and touch not the unclean thing." Is Heaven to descend to the infernal lake to raise its tone? Such has been the moral condition of the theater for many a year that it has become too bad for mending; and even if it were mended it would corrupt again. Pass by it with averted gaze; the house of the strange women is there. It has not been my lot ever to enter a theater
during the performance of a play, but I have seen enough when I have come home from distant journeys at night, while riding past the play-houses, to make me pray that our sons and daughters may never go within the doors. It must be a strange school of virtue which attracts the harlot and the debauchee. It is no place for a Christian, for it is best appreciated by the irreligious and worldly. If our church members fall into the habit of frequenting the theater, we shall soon have them going much further in the direction of vice, and they will lose all relish for the ways of God. Theater-going, if it become general among professing Christians, will soon prove the death of piety.—Spurgeon.
Boldness.
THAT which gives the believer boldness in coming to God, is the blood. "Having, therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus." The believer enters by faith where Jesus is, worships in the courts of Heaven, feels at home even in the presence of God, because he who was wounded for our transgressions is there for him. This makes him bold, not because he is anything, but because the great High Priest is everything, his righteousness being the righteousness of God. Many a child of God is in bondage from seeking to superadd, though he is not aware of it, something to the finished work of Jesus, just as if this were not enough; and yet God, by raising up Jesus and setting him at his right hand, has shown himself fully satisfied with the work of Jesus, and for the sake of Jesus and the life he laid down on the cross, he now passes over every poor sinner who trusts only in him. Millions have been sheltered under that blood. God has set him forth to be a propitiation, or covering, through faith in his blood. All who are quickened by the Father and draw to Jesus as lost sinners, and made to trust only in the blood of Christ, are safe. God has given his word that they are safe, for "when I see the blood," he says, "I will pass over you." "He that believeth on him is not condemned." Condemnation fell on Jesus; the judgment came down upon the Lamb—the Lamb was slain, and all who trust in that are free.—Sel.
The Power of Kind Words
We need not be famous poets in order to utter words which will thrill and bless poor human hearts. Kind words are living things. Devote thy tongue and lips to their utterance. They will return to thee in Heaven if not on earth, and repay a hundredfold.
A CALL TO THE UNCONVERTED.
By Julia A. Bentley
BY JULIA A. BENTLEY.
COME, ye sinners, poor and needy,
Burdened with your load of guilt,
Come and give your heart to Jesus;
He for sin his blood has spilt.
Up in Heaven that blessed Saviour
Now for trusting sinners pleads;
He who gave himself to save you
Can and will supply your needs.
Come, then, weary, heavy laden,
Cast your burdens on the Lord;
He has promised to sustain you;
You can lean upon his word.
Never was a friend so faithful;
Never was a friend so true;
Oh the love, the love of Jesus—
Jesus bled and died for you.
Come, then, sinners, do not tarry;
Now is the accepted day;
Come, confess your sins to Jesus,
He will take them all away.
That he might atone for sinners,
Christ, the Lord of glory, died;
And for sin a cleansing fountain,
Full and free he has supplied.
Come, O come, polluted sinner,
Do not wait another day;
Plunge beneath that cleansing fountain,
And wash all your sins away.
Place your faith and hope in Jesus,
Make the blessed Lord your trust,
Lay your treasures up in Heaven,
Where the gold will never rust.
Earthly joys and glories vanish;
This life's fleeting fast away,
Swifter than a weaver's shuttle;
Soon will come the Judgment day.
Oh then give your heart to Jesus,
In his love and mercy trust,
That the resurrection morning
May behold you with the just.
How God Protects Us.
THE Bible is radiant with promises of divine protection and guidance, and Christian history is full of remarkable examples of their fulfillment. Dr. C. S. Robinson thus refers to well-known facts: "A tide was kept back strangely for twelve hours once, and so a host of Christians in Holland were saved from slaughter by the Duke of Alva. A tremendous wind once scattered the Armada of Spain over the wide wastes of the North Sea, and so Protestant England was spared to the world. John Knox moved his usual seat away from before the window one night, pressed by a feeling he could neither understand nor resist; an hour later there came a musket-ball, crushing the glass and burying itself harmlessly in the opposite wall. Such things occur almost every day in some conspicuous and exposed lives. One man has a conviction that he must not take a certain train, another feels that danger lies in his embarking on a certain ship; the train is afterwards wrecked, or the vessel is lost; now the man knows that God interposed and protected him, and he offers a new consecration of his life thus spared as the only return he can make."—Ex.
"He Will Come!"
THE personal, visible second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, is a doctrine to which the church should turn with ever increasing interest. Because extremists have brought this truth under a shadow by undertaking to set the time and give the particulars as to the manner of his coming, this precious doctrine must not be allowed to go into the background, nor must we be robbed of its teachings and defrauded of the hope which it inspires, by any exegesis which declares that "Christ came at the destruction of Jerusalem," or is coming in the victories of his kingdom every day; or is here continually manifested by the Holy Spirit which bears witness of him. All these things are true, but they are not all the truth. The kingdom of God is as God himself, "which was, and is, and is to come!"
He is coming, some day—sometime—in the clouds of heaven, when "every eye shall see him," and all who love his appearing will rejoice with exceeding great joy. All his parables bearing on this subject—and they are many—show that that coming is to be a personal, visible one. Then they who have not oil in their lamps will find that the door is shut! Then they who have refused to have this Man to rule over them shall perish in his sight!
The years go on and over. The world grows old, and the seasons come and go. But some day—we know not when—somehow—not yet known—the trumpet shall sound, the dead will be raised, and all the righteous will God bring with him! "He will come!"—Advance.
A Sharp Rebuke.
A CERTAIN infidel, who was a blacksmith, was in the habit, when a Christian came to his shop, of asking some one of his workmen if they had ever heard about Brother So-and-so, and what they had done? They would say, No; what was it? Then he would begin to tell what some Christian brother, or deacon, or minister had done, and then laugh and say, "That is one of their fine Christians we hear so much about."
An old gentleman—an eminent Christian—one day went into the shop, and the infidel soon began about what some Christians had done, and seemed to have a good time over it. The old deacon stood a few minutes and listened, and then quickly asked the infidel if he had ever read the story in the Bible about the rich man and Lazarus?
"Yes, many a time, and what of it?"
"Well, you remember about the dogs, how they came and licked the sores of Lazarus?"
"Yes, and what of that?"
"Well," said the deacon, "do you know you just remind me of those dogs, content merely to lick the Christians' sores?"
The blacksmith grew suddenly pensive, and hasn't had much to say about failing Christians since.—Louisville Observer.
The Lasting Power of Influence
A PERSON never knows just when his influence is exerted for good or for evil, or how lasting it is to be in its effects.
Ephesian Magic.
THE city of Ephesus was renowned throughout the world for the worship of Diana and the practice of magic. Though it was a Greek city, like Athens or Corinth, the manners of its inhabitants were half Oriental. The image of the tutelary goddess resembled an Indian idol rather than the beautiful forms which crowded the Acropolis of Athens; and the enemy which Paul had to oppose was not a vaunting philosophy, as at Corinth, but a dark and Asiatic superstition. The worship of Diana and the practice of magic were closely connected together. Eustathius says that the mysterious symbols called "Ephesian Letters" were engraved on the crown, the girdle, and the feet of the goddess. These Ephesian letters or monograms have been compared to the Runic characters of the North. When pronounced they were regarded as a charm, and were directed to be used especially by those who were in the power of evil spirits. When written, they were carried about as amulets. Curious stories are told of their influence. Crœsus is related to have repeated the mystic syllables when on his funeral pile; and an Ephesian wrestler is said to have always struggled successfully against an antagonist from Miletus until he lost the scroll, which before had been like a talisman. The study of these symbols was an elaborate science, and books, both numerous and costly, were compiled by its professors.
This statement throws some light on the peculiar character of the miracles wrought by Paul at Ephesus. We are not to suppose that the apostles were always able to work miracles at will. An influx of supernatural power was given to them at the time and according to the circumstances that required it. And the character of the miracles was not always the same. They were accommodated to the peculiar forms of sin, superstition, and ignorance they were required to oppose. Here, at Ephesus, Paul was in the face of magicians, like Moses and Aaron before Pharaoh; and it is distinctly said that "God wrought special miracles by the hand of Paul," from which we may infer that they were different from those which he usually performed. We know in the case of our blessed Lord's miracles, that though the change was usually accomplished on the speaking of a word, intermediate agency was sometimes employed, as when the blind man was healed at the Pool of Siloam. A miracle which has a closer reference to our present subject is that in which the hem of Christ's garment was made effectual to the healing of a poor sufferer and the conviction of the by-standers. So on this occasion garments were made the means of communicating a healing power to those who were at a distance, whether they were possessed with evil spirits or afflicted with ordinary diseases. Such effects, thus publicly manifested, must have been a signal refutation of the charms and amulets and mystic letters of Ephesus. Yet this was no encouragement to blind superstition. When the suffering woman was healed by touching the hem of the garment, the Saviour turned round and said, "Virtue is gone out of me." And here at Ephesus we are reminded that it was God who "wrought miracles by the hands of Paul," and that "the name," not of Paul, but "of the Lord Jesus, was magnified." —Conybeare and Howson's Life of Paul.
"AGAIN, David gathered together all the chosen men of Israel, thirty thousand." Verse 1. The sixth chapter records two great victories gained by the army of David,—one over the Jebusites, and one over the Philistines. Now he once more assembles the chief of his men, but for another purpose. The ark of God was to be brought to the capital of the kingdom.
In order to understand this chapter, it is necessary to go back in the history of the Jews about a hundred years. In the fourth chapter of first Samuel we have the account of a great battle between the Israelites and the Philistines, in which the Israelites were conquered, and the ark, on which they had depended for safety, was captured. At that time God showed the people that the mere possession of the tables of the law would afford them no protection when they were trampling upon the law itself; that to have the thing from which God was accustomed to manifest himself, was a vain thing unless he himself was enshrined in their hearts.
From this overthrow the Israelites did not recover for many years. The possession of the ark, however, proved disastrous to the Philistines, as we learn from 1 Sam. 5 and 6. God showed them that the things pertaining to his worship must not be handled irreverently. They were glad to purchase rest from the afflictions which he sent upon them, by returning the ark. When it arrived at Beth-shemesh, the men of that place were smitten, because they presumed to look into the sacred chest, and they sent to the citizens of Kirjath-jearim, requesting them to come and get it. Here it remained until the time of the present lesson. The reader will notice, by the margin of 2 Sam. 6: 2, that "Baale of Judah," from which David sent to bring the ark, is but another name for Kirjath-jearim.
"TO BRING up from thence the ark of God, whose name is called by the name of the Lord of hosts that dwelleth between the cherubim." Verse 2. The margin of this verse gives the more literal rendering, and the one that makes sense: "To bring up the ark of God, at which the name, even the name of the Lord of hosts, was called upon." "That dwelleth between the cherubim." In Ex. 25: 10-22, we have a full description of this ark, and the object for which it was used; there we find the statement that God would commune with the people from between the cherubim that were upon the mercy-seat—the cover of the ark.
"AND they set the ark of God upon a new cart." Verse 3. This was contrary to the instructions given by the Lord. The ark was to be borne by the staves (see Ex. 25: 12-14); the sons of Kohath were appointed to carry it and the other holy vessels, but even they were not to touch or look upon any of them. See Num. 4: 4-15. In no case was the ark to be placed upon a wagon. Num. 7: 7-9.
"AND David and all the house of Israel played before the Lord on all manner of instruments made of fir wood, even on harps, and on psalteries, and on timbrels, and on cornets, and on cymbals." Verse 5. As Dr. Clarke says, this place should be corrected from the parallel passage in 1 Chron. 13: 8. There it is said that they played with all their might, on harps, etc., and that makes good sense. The Hebrew letters of the two passages are nearly identical, which doubtless accounts for the difference. The Septuagint has in this place the same reading as in 1 Chron. 13: 8, with might.
"AND when they came to Nachon's threshing-floor, Uzzah put forth his hand to the ark of God, and took hold of it; for the oxen shook it. And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Uzzah; and God smote him there for his error;391and there he died by the ark of God." Verses 6, 7. In this we have an other illustration of how God regards his work and worship. It may seem to some that Uzzah’s punishment was too severe for so small an act, but such judgment comes from setting up our standard instead of God’s. How do we know that Uzzah’s error was a small one? From the punishment that followed we would suppose that God regarded it as a great sin. Indeed, we must so regard it unless we are willing to admit that God was unjust. God is just; the punishments which he inflicts are always proportionate to the sin committed, therefore Uzzah’s error must have been a grievous one. The whole proceeding was irregular, but Uzzah, in presuming to lay hands on the sacred ark, overstepped all bounds. Had not that swift punishment been meted out to him, the worship of God would have been degraded, as a common affair, and reverence for sacred things would have entirely died out among the people.
WHAT was it that made that little box of wood and gold so sacred? Why was it to be approached with such awe and reverence, and only by persons duly set apart for that purpose? It was because it contained a copy of the law of God. That which God declares to be his own righteousness—a transcript of his own character—was inclosed in that ark. That law is the foundation of the government of God; it is that by which the loyalty of all creatures is tested. When men lose their reverence for that, they lose their reverence for God’s Government, and for God himself. It was on this account that God had given such specific directions concerning the ark.
How do we know what is right and what is wrong? It is evident that it is only by being told. And what warrant have we for calling any violation of one of God’s commands a little sin? Do we not by so doing become judges of God? The lesson to be learned from this circumstance is that to disregard any one of God’s requirements is a heinous sin; that sin of any kind is exceedingly displeasing to God. Familiarity with sin hardens us; we learn to excuse it, and our standard is lowered to correspond with existing circumstances. But God is sinless, and the more sin there is committed the more odious it becomes to him. If we, then, desire to do what is right, and thus to please God, it is evident that we must in all cases accept the standard of right and wrong which God gives. Our feelings are no criterion whatever, for that which we look upon as trivial, may be regarded by God as a terrible sin.
It is by his law that God reveals his will. Two texts will prove this. "I delight to do thy will, O my God; yea thy law is within my heart." Ps. 40: 8. Here we find that to have the law of God in the heart, is to cheerfully do all his will. Again Paul says: "Behold thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God, and knowest his will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the law." Rom. 2: 17, 18. Here we learn that those who know the will of God are those who are instructed out of the law. But God does not change; we have his word for this. His will concerning men is just the same now as it ever was. This being the case, it follows that his law is always the same. And so it is. Christ said: "It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail." Luke 16: 17. And what has this to do with the lesson? Simply this: "If God regarded it as so terrible an offense merely to touch the receptacle which contained his law, how must he look upon those who dare to trample upon the law itself? The pope of Rome has impiously presumed to change the law, especially that portion which enjoins the observance of the seventh day of the week, and millions of people have accepted his act. It is considered all right to labor upon the day which God sanctified, because "everybody does so." But the Lord says: "Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil." We are to make God’s law, and not our feelings, or the practice of the multitude, our standard of right and wrong. "Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily [as in the case of Uzzah], therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil." Eccl. 8: 11. But judgment, though long delayed, is sure to come, and when it does come it will be according to righteousness, or, in other words, according to the law of God.
Acts 19 does not afford so clear proof that they who were baptized unto John's baptism were again baptized by the apostles as has been supposed by many. This was an unusual case, according to the record. On being questioned by Paul they said, "We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost." They had not been baptized by John, but by Apollos, who was converted at Ephesus a short time before the visit of Paul. Though this was twenty-five years after the resurrection of Christ, Apollos knew only the baptism of John, and baptized just as John had administered the ordinance, unto a belief in a Messiah who was yet to come. That they were unacquainted with the facts concerning Christ, and the fulfillment of John's predictions of Christ's work, is evident from their answer to Paul, "We have not even heard whether the Holy Spirit is given." (Anderson's translation.) It was an error on the part of Apollos to teach the people that Christ was yet to come, when he had already died and was risen from the dead. This error of Apollos was corrected when Aquila and Priscilla expounded to him the way of God more perfectly.
Those who were baptized by John in the faith of a coming Messiah, did not need to be baptized again when they accepted him. But those who were baptized in the faith of a coming Messiah after he had died and risen from the dead, needed to be baptized again, inasmuch as their first baptism was nearer to a denial of him who had come, than of a belief in him. It every way seems just and fitting that Paul should commence with them as novices.
But this instance does present satisfactory proof that it is right to re-baptize those who have not met the requirements of the gospel rite in their first baptism.—J. H. W., in Thoughts on Baptism.
The Teacher's Knot.
"The constant habit of reviewing," upon which good Dr. John Todd insisted half a century ago, in the "Student's Manual," is not yet estimated at its full value by teachers generally. Especially are Bible students slow to secure its benefits; wise men, however, are finding new ways of doing it, and are demonstrating its importance and usefulness. A method which a Connecticut school has recently adopted, is that of having monthly review concerts. On these occasions, the titles, golden texts, and central thoughts are repeated by the school, or by classes, and this exercise is interspersed with the reading of more or less elaborate articles on special topics, in the line of the lessons, by the more capable pupils. In the same State there is at least one pastor who devotes a Sunday evening in each quarter to a review sermon,—a sermon reviewing not the Sunday-school lessons, but his sermons. He places on the blackboard such points, from his sermons of the preceding three months, as he feels to be important, and calls attention to them in a review discourse. On that evening he is always sure of a large and interested audience. Not less sure are his people to gain a clearer view of truth in its relations, and to get a better hold on it for their memories. There is an old story of a sick tailor who sent word to his craftsmen that he wanted them all to be present when he should die, as he had a message for them. With his last breath, he gasped to the eager group, "Put a knot in your thread." For want of the knot which only reviewing can put in the thread of teaching, a vast amount of work is wasted. Dry and distasteful reviews do more harm than good; but of wise reviewing it is difficult to have too much. The more careful the "preview," the more interesting and practical may be the review. But reviews there should be, in the pulpit, at the superintendent's desk, in the class. Certainly every one who would have the truth at command must often recall what he has been studying, that it may be labeled, classified, and, so to speak, filed away, where one can put his hand upon it at a moment's warning. "The constant habit of reviewing" is a capital habit to form.—Sel.
Temperance.
THE WIFE’S NEW STORY.
The story, ma’am! Why, really now, I haven’t much to say;
If you had come a year ago, and then again to-day,
No need for any word to tell, for your own eyes could see
Just what the friends of temperance have done for John and me.
A year ago I hadn’t flour to make a batch of bread,
And many a night these little ones went hungry to their bed.
Just peep into the pantry, ma’am, there’s sugar, flour, and tea—
That’s what the friends of temperance have done for John and me.
The pail that holds the butter he used to fill with beer;
He hasn’t spent a cent for drink for two months and a year.
He pays his debts; he’s well and strong, and kind as man can be—
That’s what the friends of temperance have done for John and me.
He used to sneak along the streets, feeling so mean and low,
And always felt ashamed to meet the folks he used to know;
He looks the world now in the face; he steps off bold and free—
That’s what the friends of temperance have done for John and me.
Why, at the shop, the other day, when a job of work was done,
The boss declared, of all his men John was the steadiest one.
“I used to be the worst, my wife,” John told me, and says he,
“That’s what the friends of temperance have done for you and me.”
The children were afraid of him; his coming stopped their play;
Now, every night, when supper’s done, and the table’s cleared away,
The boys will frolic round his chair, the baby climb his knee—
That’s what the friends of temperance have done for John and me.
Oh, yes! the sad, sad times are gone, the sorrow and the pain;
The children have their father back, and I my John again.
Don’t mind my crying, ma’am; indeed, it’s just for joy to see
All that the friends of temperance have done for John and me.
And mornings, when he’s gone to work, I kneel right down and say,
“Father in Heaven, oh, help dear John to keep his pledge to-day!”
And every night, before I sleep, thank God on bended knee
For what the friends of temperance have done for John and me. —Sel.
Anti-Tobacco Reform in Afghanistan
THERE are now anti-tobacco reformers even in the East. Afghanistan has a bold Mohammedan theologian who has just announced that the use of tobacco is contrary to the law of the Prophet. This has created such a stir that Abd-er-Rahman, the Ameer, has ordered a council of theologians to assemble and vote on the question. Should the council declare smoking lawful, the reformer will be sent to prison for adding to the law of the Prophet; should the use of tobacco be declared unlawful, smoking will be prohibited in Afghanistan.—Sel.