Earlier text: MORALITY OF THE SABBATH AND ITS IMPORTANCEThe Coming Reign of Terror.
By W. N. Pile
It is said that “history repeats itself.” This, in the main, is true. The student of history cannot but have observed that similar indications have generally preceded events of a similar character. This might be illustrated from nature. There must be a gathering of clouds before each storm. Causes, which in the past have led to revolution, rapine, license, and a general disintegration of society, will, if permitted to operate, produce again the same results. The French Revolution of 1789–1800 stands fixed in history as “The Reign of Terror.” Each succeeding faction which gained power during that awful era shed in torrents the blood of its enemies, until over 2,000,000 lives were sacrificed. All social order was destroyed. The marriage covenant was abrogated, and lust stalked abroad everywhere, licensed and unrestrained. The religion of Christ was declared an imposture and he an impostor. The reading of the Bible was forbidden, and the existence of its God denied. All this was the work of infidelity! Behold, therefore, in that terrible revolution, the miniature of the world without the restraining influences of God’s revelation. But is there any danger of such a frightful condition of things as we have hinted at? We answer, There is. The same causes are operating everywhere to-day which an hundred years ago were at work in France. The same names and principles may be heard and seen all about us. Let us first notice some of the more prominent elements which produced the French Revolution. Says Samuel Smucker, in his “Memorable Scenes in French History,” page 116:— We find in the records of that period, materials and events which prove that then it was that the impostures of modern spiritual rappers and mediums were first practiced, in precisely the same way and for the same results as they are in the present day. Count Cagliostro enabled Cardinal Rohan to sup with the deceased D’Alembert, with the king of Prussia, and with Voltaire, all dead some years before. He convinced His Eminence that the worker of these wonders had himself been present with Christ at the marriage in Cana of Galilee. . . . In the triumphs of Cagliostro, of Minner, and of St. Germain, which at this period were at their greatest height, we behold another instance of the uprooting of the firm and stable foundations of society in an excessive desire for novelties, and a restless itching after things new, mysterious, and wonderful. Spiritualism has been supposed by some to have originated much later than this; but spiritualism is as old as Egypt. More than three thousand years ago the Egyptians professed to confer with the dead. However, it has lately assumed proportions which it has not had before in modern times. Mr. Anderson, in “The Annals of the English Bible,” says:— Never let it be forgotten that, before the revolution of 1792, the promoters of infidelity in France are stated to have raised among themselves43 , and spent, a sum equal to £900,000 in one year, nay, again and again, in purchasing, printing, and dispersing books to corrupt the minds of the people, and prepare them for desperate measures.—Page 494. Dr. Dick, in his work on “The Improvement of Society,” says:— The way for such a revolution was prepared by the writings of Voltaire, Mirabeau, Diderot, Helvetius, D’Alembert, Condorcet, Rousseau, and others of the same stamp, in which they endeavored to disseminate principles subversive both of natural and revealed religion. Revelation was not only impugned, but entirely set aside. The Deity was banished from the universe, and an imaginary phantom, under the name of the “Goddess of Reason,” substituted in his place. The carved work of all religious belief and moral practice was boldly cut down by Carnot and Robespierre and their atheistical associates. Nature was investigated by pretended philosophers, only with the view to darken the mind and prevent mankind from considering anything as real but what the hand could grasp or the corporeal eye perceive.—p. 154. For a definition of “socialism” Webster refers us to “Communism,” which he defines as follows:— The reorganizing of society, or the doctrine that it should be reorganized, by regulating property, industry, and the sources of livelihood, and also the domestic relations and social morals of mankind; socialism; especially the doctrine of a community of property, or the negation of individual rights in property. The revolutionists carried all these principles into practice. The relations of the different classes of society were completely changed. The monarchy was overthrown, and an infidel republic established on its ruins. The king and queen were beheaded. Alison, Vol. 4, p. 151, says:— The confiscation of two-thirds of the landed property in the kingdom, which arose from the decrees of the convention against the emigrants, clergy, and persons convicted at the revolutionary tribunals, . . . placed funds worth above £700,000,000 sterling at the disposal of the government. The various titles were done away. It was a conflict between the rich and poor—between capital and labor! The motto of the Revolutionists was “LIBERTY, EQUALITY, FRATERNITY”—blessed words, but wholly misunderstood and misapplied; for with those fanatics “liberty” meant license; “equality” meant, to a degree, a sharing by the indolent and prodigal in the means of the industrious and saving; and “fraternity” represented a brotherhood of demons rushing together madly on to perdition. The relations of the sexes were also changed. It is astonishing to note how prominent a part women took in that awful tragedy. The following is from Lamartine’s “History of the Girondists,” Vol. 3:— “Speaking of the Revolution,” said Mirabeau, “If the women do not mix in it,” he said in a whisper to the emissaries of the Parisian insurrection, “there will be nothing done.” He knew that the fury of the women, once inflamed, rises to excess, and to profanations which surpass the audacity of men. The women of Paris, running at the head of the republican bands of the capital, had in effect first violated the palace of the king, brandished the poniard over the head of the queen, and carried to Paris on the end of their pikes the heads of the massacred body-guards. Theroigne de Mericourt and her bands had marched to the assault of the Tuileries on the 20th of June and the 10th of August. Terrible during the combat, cruel after the victory, they had assassinated the vanquished, spilt their blood, and mutilated their bodies. The Revolution—its agitations, its days, its sentences, and its executions—had become for these furies a spectacle as necessary as the combats of the gladiator to the corrupted female patricians of Rome. Ashamed of being excluded from the clubs of men, these women had founded—at first under the name of fraternal societies, afterwards under that of societies of republican and revolutionary women,—clubs of their own sex. There were, by the place of their meeting, even clubs of children from ten to fourteen years of age, called “red children,” the baptism of blood upon the heads of these precocious republicans. These societies of women had their orators. Every day, detachments of these mercenaries, paid by the Commune, distributed themselves about the entrance of the tribunal, upon the route of the tumbrils, and upon the steps of the guillotine, to greet death, to insult victims, and to glut their eyes with blood. Antiquity had paid mourners; the Commune had stipendiary furies.—pp. 321, 322. The most important functions of government were carried on in the boudoirs of mistresses; the petticoat decided the questions of war or peace; and he would have been deemed a most incompetent minister indeed, who would have dared to controvert the opinions of a Pompadour or a Du Barri. When the existence of the true God had been denied, these infidels bowed down to a lewd woman as the “Goddess of Reason.” As a natural sequel of such changes as these we note another phase of that period:— The most sacred relations of life were at the same time placed on a new footing, suited to the extravagant ideas of the times. Marriage was declared a civil contract, binding only during the pleasure of the contracting parties. Divorce immediately became general; and the corruption of manners reached a height unknown during the worst days of the monarchy. So indiscriminate did concubinage become, that, by a decree of the convention, bastards were declared entitled to an equal share of the succession [property] with legitimate children. The divorces in Paris in the first three months of 1792 were five hundred and sixty-two, while the marriages were only seventeen hundred and eighty-five—a proportion probably unexampled among mankind! The consequences soon became apparent. Before the era of the consulate [that is, before the end of the “reign of terror”] one half of the whole births in Paris were illegitimate.”—Thier’s French Revolution, Vol. 2, p. 380. This word is defined by Webster thus: “A small territorial district in France governed by an officer called mayor.” Its origin is not so important as its principles, which we have seen both in Webster’s definition of “communism,” and as illustrated in the French Revolution. Its work has made its name the representative of all that is infamous and cruel. But the Commune and its bloody work were the natural consequences of the operation of the foregoing principles. The “reign of terror” followed, and France was deluged with blood. During about five years, according to such historians as Alison and Prud’homme, there were 14,994 different laws passed, 2,022,190 persons put to death in various ways, among whom were 24,000 Catholic priests, and 123,789 persons of high rank in the kingdom banished from the country. The number of persons guillotined during the reign of terror in France was 1,022,351. This does not include the massacre at Versailles, at the Abbaye, the Carmelite, or other prisons, on September 2, the victims of Glaciere, of Avignon, those shot at Toulon and Marseilles, or the persons slain in the little town of Bedouin, the whole population of which perished.—Thier’s French Revolution, Vol. 3, p. 106. Such was the rapidity with which the work of destruction was carried on that, within the short space of ten years, not less than three millions of human beings . . . are supposed to have perished in that country alone, chiefly through the influence of immoral principles and the seductions of a false philosophy.—Imp. of Soc., p. 154. From these statistics and from this awful picture of one of the many scenes of that period, we turn to inquire if the same causes are not now operating which produced such awful results. Let us inquire for them in the same order which has been observed. 1. Spiritualism. This infamous creature, a monster in the French Revolution, has grown fearfully since then. Its baneful influence has spread like pestilence everywhere! There is scarcely a community, however small, among the nations of the earth, that has not within it some of its leaven. It claims, and justly too, nearly all of the crowned heads of Europe! Politically considered, it is a dangerous element. It aims at the subversion of existing law, system, and order, and the establishment of a Spiritualistic Universal Republic. It already wields a large influence in the politics of the world. It is impatient of every restraint, and regards each man as his own moral standard, and proposes the utmost liberty to all. In September 1872 the spiritualists held a national convention in Troy, N. Y., at which E. S. Wheeler, one of the speakers, said:— I have got through paying the slightest deference to the legislatures and the laws they make. Law-abiding men have cursed the earth. Down with law, down with institutions, down with governments. We mean rebellion. Dr. Gardner has said that he would receive an address from the lowest depths of hell. So would I, and all the more readily if the devil himself brought it. We need not give more on this point. This is but the feeling of the great mass of spiritualists, which will soon be made to appear. Surely, if these principles were carried into successful practice, a “reign of terror” would ensue. 2. Infidelity. It is a well-known fact that confirmed spiritualists invariably deny in part or wholly the divine origin of the Bible. The God of the Bible is as completely ignored by them as by the French revolutionists. Dr. Gardner, another speaker at the Troy convention, said he protested against such a sinful waste of time and words as praying. “He didn’t want to listen to invocations to any one that they didn’t know, Josh or Jehovah.” Another speaker, while opposing a resolution rebuking profanity, said, “I can swear in twenty different languages if you will give me time, and all the resolutions in the world won’t stop me. I assert my God-given right to damn everything and everybody whenever I please.” Another said, “It is just as natural for me to swear as it is for some people to pray, and my swearing does just as much good.” But infidelity is still more widespread than spiritualism, for while spiritualism is infidelity, all infidels are not spiritualists. There is little faith in the word of God among multitudes who do not acknowledge themselves to be spiritualists. The world is being flooded with infidel publications which are rapidly preparing the people “for desperate measures.” Even among the professed Christian churches, theoretical and practical infidelity abounds. Religion, among the masses of its professors, has dwindled to a mere system of formalism. The spawn of the dragon is everywhere! The three unclean spirits have gone “forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world.” There are very, very few real believers in the word of God. 3. Socialism. Since the French Revolution the masses of the world have been rapidly drifting into the worst forms of socialism. The spirit of that period seems to have expanded till it has filled all nations. France has done more toward molding the social ideas of the age than any other nation. Having been one of the most powerful of nations, and having possessed so many men of genius, as well as being the emporium of fashion, her influence has been as great as it has been pernicious. The better elements among the masses are being deceived by the fair promises and fine speeches of designing leaders, as were many who engaged in the French Revolution, who saw not the awful consequences of their teaching. The motto of the revolutionists—“Liberty, Equality, Fraternity”—is the accepted one of the masses. But, as we have seen, “liberty” means “license” in most cases. “Equality” means the application of socialistic ideas, viz., the abrogation of all distinctions. The poorer classes, urged on by the worst elements among them, are everywhere becoming more and more impatient to establish this fancied equality. The possessions of the rich are looked upon with an envious eye, and all that is needed is a fair opportunity to appropriate the coveted wealth. The conflict between capital and labor waxes hotter and hotter, and tends rapidly to a crisis. One cause of this has been the course of capitalists. This is an age of consolidation and monopoly. The rich have joined hands to oppress the poor. Railway, banking, and manufacturing monopolies rule city, State, and to a great extent, the national governments. The gold and silver, instead of being in circulation to the relief and benefit of the poor, are generally lying in the vaults of the banks. Provoked by this state of things, the laboring classes have imbibed a feeling that bodes no good to capitalists. The Hon. and Rev. Sidney Godolphin Osborne, one of the most observant and philanthropic men in England, and who has made the condition and feelings of the working classes a study for fifteen years, depicts them as “filled with a rage which only wants leadership and opportunity to burst forth with devastating fury.” The same feelings animate these classes everywhere! Thus the roaring of the volcano is heard. The eruption cannot be far distant! To war against these combinations of the rich, the poor also have been banding themselves together, until there is now scarcely a trade not represented by a “union.” These unions number from one to sixty thousand members each; and there are hundreds of them in the United States, while in Europe the number is vastly larger than here. We now proceed to notice that these local unions are fast being embraced by an organization which is world-wide. This society which has lately become so prominent and created so much apprehension, is only about ten years old, and yet it already numbers its members by millions. Ignoring all national, party, and religious boundaries, it forms the laboring classes of the world into a grand army for the overthrow of its enemies—kings and capitalists. Its organization consists of “local sections,” “Federal Councils,” and a “General Council.” Each member contributes a given sum yearly for the carrying out of its ends. Four General Congresses have already been held by this organization in Europe. The following is the avowed “Platform” of the International, as given in Woodhull & Claflin’s Weekly, of January 6, for the instruction of those forming new sections:— The various Congresses held by the Association at Geneva, Lausanne, Brussels, and Basle, discussed and adopted the following points, which may therefore be said to form the programme of the International: - The total abolition of all class rule and all class privileges.
- Complete political and social equality of both sexes.
- Nationalization of the land and of all the instruments of production.
- A reduction of the hours of labor, so as to allow more time for improvement and recreation.
- Education to be undertaken by the State—to be obligatory, gratuitous, and secular.
- Religion to be ignored, as being a speculative subject concerning the individual. No religious differences or creed to be recognized.
- The substitution of a direct system of taxation based upon property, instead of the present system of levying taxes upon industry; the taxation to be progressive.
- The abolition of the standing army as being a provocative to war.
- The adoption of the principle of associative production, with a view to the complete supersession of the present system of capitalist production.”
Without stopping to pass upon the merits of all or any of these principles, it must be evident that to put them in practice would be to completely change the present political and social relations of society. Such mighty changes cannot be effected without a fearful struggle! “As to membership,” says Richard J. Hinton, in an article written about a year since, “about one-third of the English trades unions have connected themselves more or less directly with the International Association. In France, 433,785 unionists are co-operating; in Switzerland, 42,326; in Germany, 150,000; in Spain, about 20,000; in Austria and Hungary, 100,000; Belgium has an affiliated membership of 20,000; Italy, one of at least 100,000; while in Holland, Denmark, and even Russia, there are sections organizing. The American National Labor Union, with its membership of over 200,000, is in full sympathy.” It has probably nearly doubled its numbers since this article was written. There are now thirty daily and weekly papers published in Europe by the International, and several in this country. The society has five “corresponding secretaries” in New York and Brooklyn alone,—English, German, French, Spanish, and Italian. We have seen that socialism aims at a change in the relation of the sexes. The platform of the International proposes “complete political and social equality of both sexes.” We learn from this why it is that all socialists are in sympathy with that society. We have seen that women were very prominent in the period of the French Revolution, but they are more so now. They strove to imitate the examples of men at that time in the formation of clubs, societies, &c., and by these means precipitated and rendered more awful the horrid era. But then this work was confined mainly to the immodest and fanatical French; now it is world-wide. Women are seeking the positions of men in circles from which their nature should inspire them to shrink. Woman suffrage societies, clubs, and conventions for political and other purposes, abound, and are fast decreasing that modesty and reserve with which they should be clothed, and preparing the way for another “reign of terror” far greater in magnitude than that in France. This is especially true among spiritualists. Their mediums and orators are principally women. At the Troy Convention of Spiritualists, held in September (before alluded to), Mrs Victoria C. Woodhull, of New York, was elected President of the American Association of Spiritualists. In that position she fairly becomes a representative spiritualist. In her address to the convention she said:— As surely as one year passes from this day, and this right [woman suffrage] is not fully, frankly, and unequivocally considered, we shall proceed to call another convention expressly to frame a new constitution and to erect a new government, complete in all its parts, and to take measures to maintain it as effectually as men do theirs. These sentiments were indorsed by the following resolution:— Resolved, That we, as the board of Trustees, secure the address of our President, and adopt it as an expression of our views, to go before the world as the voice of the American Association of Spiritualists; and that our President be requested to take measures to carry out the objects therein proposed; and, to that end, we hereby pledge her our hearty co-operation and assistance. This may at first appear laughable, but let it be remembered that these are the sentiments of thousands of men as well as of women. A draft of the new “Constitution of the United States of the world,” embodying these sentiments and those of the International, has since been published in “Woodhull & Claflin’s Weekly,” edited by Mrs Woodhull and her sister, Miss T. C. Claflin. We learn from this that the aim of the Internationalists and the spiritualists is the establishment of a “Universal Republic” on the ruins of the present systems.—W. N. Pile. “LEAD ME TO THE ROCK THAT IS HIGHER THAN I!”
Something to lean on
That’s higher than I;
My props are all failing;
They weaken and die.
Just when I am feeblest,
And sorest my need,
Does each one prove worthless—
A frail, broken reed. Something to cling to
When over my soul
Dark tempests may gather
And billows may roll;
When I sink in deep waters
With no helper nigh,
And lose sight of the Rock
That is higher than I. Something to comfort
When friends are all gone,
In the hours I lie mourning
Alone, all alone;
When friends all turn from me
Or roam far away,
And not one I have loved
Is my shield and my stay. O Thou who hast promised
Thine angels, to cheer
All those who have striven
To walk in thy fear,
Let me feel their wings fanning
My tired, aching brow,
For wakeful and dreary
Are the nights to me now. And when overwhelmed
In a dark, cloudy day,
May thine hosts be around me,
Lest blindly I stray;
Unseen, yet so near me,
That evil shall fly,
While they lead to the Rock
That is higher than I. —Rocky Mountain Presbyterian. Wise Sayings and the Power of a Kind Word
WISE sayings often fall to the ground, but a kind word is never thrown away. The Sin Against the Holy Ghost.
By Uriah Smith
We have queries from several correspondents respecting what constitutes the sin against the Holy Ghost. We believe that during our twenty-two years’ connection with this office, more questions have come in upon this subject than upon any other single question. And perhaps there is no subject upon which the enemy seems more ready to tempt and harass exceedingly conscientious souls than upon this. To bring no railing accusation against the prince of darkness, we may say, at least, that he is destitute of every vestige of candor, and every species of honor; and if he cannot succeed in lulling the consciences of men to sleep, and causing them to live in a state of carelessness and indifference, he will then take advantage of their awakened and watchful conscientiousness, and endeavor to drive them to despair over the supposition that they have committed the unpardonable sin, and therefore cannot be saved. If any are now tempted in this direction, we invite them to look carefully at a few facts connected with this subject. The circumstances under which mention is first made of the sin against the Holy Ghost, furnish a key to the meaning of that expression. These are recorded in Matt. 12: 22-32. Christ had wrought a notable miracle. One was brought unto him possessed with a devil; and so terribly malignant was the influence of the evil one upon the unfortunate person, that he was rendered both blind and dumb. Christ cast out the devil, and the individual was healed so that he both spake and saw. All the people were amazed, and began to give expression to their conviction that Christ was indeed the Messiah, by the question, “Is not this the Son of David?” For the impression prevailed that when the Messiah should come, he would cast out devils, and that none but he could do such a work. Christ’s works testified of him, and there was enough in them to convince the most obstinate of the truthfulness of his claims. But the Pharisees, a class, we are sorry to say, not yet extinct, ever standing around watching with envious and jealous eyes the movements of Christ, despising him in his humility, grieved and maddened that the people should be inclined to accept him, and determined at all hazards to resist and overthrow his work, now found themselves in a very critical position. The devil had been cast out, and the dumb and blind both spake and saw. None could deny that. Christ had done this good work by the power of his word. This was equally evident. Now what were these Pharisees to do? If they admitted that Christ had wrought this work by the Spirit of God, they would admit that he was what he professed to be, and then all their opposition to him would recoil disastrously upon their own heads. Their insane hatred against Christ and his work would not permit them to acknowledge the truth. There was but one other course open to them; and that was to attribute the wonderful work which Christ had wrought, not to the power of the Spirit of God, but to that terrible embodiment of evil, the prince of darkness; and rather than acknowledge the truth, they hazarded that bold venture, and said contemptuously, “This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub, the prince of devils.” Their claim was as foolish as it was blasphemous. This Christ showed by referring to the obvious principle that a kingdom, city, or house, divided against itself, cannot stand, and that if Satan cast out Satan, he was divided against himself, and would work his own destruction. Then comes the announcement respecting the sin against the Holy Ghost. These Pharisees had committed this sin; which was, attributing to the devil the performance of a work which, in its very nature, gave ample evidence of having been done by the Holy Ghost; and doing this to avoid an acknowledgment of the truth. This it was that called forth the denunciation of Christ, and this, then, is what constitutes that sin. Reader, have you ever, for the sake of denying the truth, which you would otherwise be obliged to confess, attributed any work to the devil, which gave evidence of being the work of the Spirit of God? If you have, you have reason to fear that you have committed this sin. But if you have become so hardened as that, you will not have fears of anything of the kind. The Pharisees were not alarmed about themselves at all. Their consciences were utterly hardened and at ease. So will be that of every one who has committed this sin. If your sin is a burden to you, that is in itself evidence that you have not committed the sin that is unpardonable. U. S. The following letter from a friend in Madison Co., Ohio, has just been received at this Office. Although a private letter, it will be of so much interest to our readers that we decide to make it public. First, because the friends of truth are glad to hear of every one who is turning from darkness to light. Secondly, because the writer, confused by the errors and superstitions he everywhere discovers around him, and seeking earnestly the right way, deserves the sympathy and prayers of God’s people. Thirdly, because, having an experimental knowledge of the principles and ceremonies of popery, he is prepared to testify that the Protestant churches have each retained more or less of the relics of that unscriptural system. Fourthly, because he has been providentially set upon the track of truth, by finding one of our pamphlets, in a way to greatly encourage, and stimulate the zeal of those who are engaged in the good work of scattering our publications over the land. We have sent him some publications, and trust that the Lord will guide him into all truth. His letter is dated Jan. 28, 1875; and he says:— “I am a seeker after the truth, but am confused. I want to become a member of the little church that is marching on to victory. But where is this conquering band, God’s army, to be found? I have long attended the Catholic church, used holy water, and knelt down at the sound of the little bell, crossed myself and repeated Hail Marys, creeds, &c. I have invoked patron saints. I have read Catholic books. And at last I have read and re-read the Holy Bible, to see whether these things are true. After faithfully perusing the Scriptures, I find it out of the question for me to believe in the power of the priests, bishops, and their head, the pope of Rome. “But I am now worse lost than ever. I have attended many Protestant churches, and am grieved to find in them all some part of popery. They claim to be Protestants, but they seem to me to be only very poor Catholics; for they condemn the pope, yet they hang fast to many of the very rottenest threads of popery. “Who and what are the Seventh-day Adventists? I picked up a tract the other day, entitled, ‘Who Changed the Sabbath?’ and I am so interested in it that I have had to read it every day since. And, in fact, I am so completely absorbed in it that I want to, and must, know more of a doctrine that seems to me to be teaching people to turn from the errors of popery. Will you kindly tell me of this religion that teaches man to hold fast to the commandments of God, condemning the false power of the Antichrist, the pope of Rome? I do believe in obeying the divine commandments of God, in keeping holy his Sabbath day. “Please answer this or hand it to some one who will take an interest in giving light to one who stands in a dark place. I feel like a lost sailor tossing about in the furious waves of mid ocean. Can you reach forth your spiritual hand and lift me from my dangerous situation? Help me, or I shall sink in despair. What am I to do to be saved?” Will the Saints Go to Heaven?
By A. Smith
The redeemed of all nations will stand before the throne and ascribe their salvation to God and the Lamb. Rev. 15:2; 14:1-5; 7:9-15; 19:1-9. John had a view of scenes to transpire long after his time, and, as though standing upon the earth at the time, he heard the shout of45 victory that will ascend from the sea of glass before the throne of God in Heaven. How can such a shout be heard in Heaven if the saints never go there? Christ, when about to leave the world and go to the Father, John 16:28, see also 1 Pet. 3:22, told his sorrowing disciples that they could not follow him then, but that they should follow him afterward. John 13:33, 36; 14:3. Christ prayed that his people might be with him, and behold his glory which he had with the Father before the world was. John 17:24, 25. How can they see that glory unless they go to Heaven where he is associated with the Father on the throne of universal dominion? When Christ rose from the dead, many of the saints also rose and ascended with him to Heaven. Matt. 27:52, 53; Eph. 4:8, 9. Christ promised the penitent thief that he should be with him in Paradise. Luke 23:43. When Christ comes in his glory to raise the dead, all the holy angels will come with him. 2 Thess. 1:7; Matt. 16:27; 25:31. There is nothing said about their returning to Heaven, yet John afterward saw them with redeemed men before the throne. During the 1000 years, the earth is in a state of chaos, and unfit for the abode of the redeemed. Isa. 24:1-6, 17-22. Many days is 1000 years. (Compare verse 23 with Rev. 22:1-5. This event does not transpire till the end of the 1000 years, hence Christ cannot reign here during that period.) Jer. 4:23-28. Satan, once called Lucifer, the covering cherub, &c., and his angels, will be confined here during that time, having been cast out of Heaven. Eze. 28:11-19; Isa. 14:12; Rev. 20:1-3; Jude 6. Satan is the antitypical scape-goat, upon whose head will be placed all the sins of God's people; and to carry out the figure, he must be let go alive into a land uninhabited, and this land or uninhabited place is the earth, as we have seen, during the 1000 years. The binding of Satan consists simply in confining him to this chaotic earth, and restraining his power by leaving none alive upon the earth that he can tempt to sin. The antediluvians were shut up in prison by being condemned to destruction, and limited in their probation to one hundred and twenty years, yet in other respects they were free till the day that Noah entered the ark. Matt. 24:37-39; 1 Pet. 3:19, 20. So with Satan. Though by limitation his power is restrained, he is yet free to roam over the earth and witness the ruin which his iniquity has wrought—not a very desirable place, truly, during that time, for redeemed men. But when renewed, they will possess it forever and ever. Dedication at Armada, Mich.
By Uriah Smith
The new Seventh-day Adventist house of worship, at Armada, Mich., was dedicated Jan. 31, according to the appointment in the REVIEW of Jan. 21. The occasion was one of a good degree of interest. Brethren were in from surrounding churches, Memphis, Dryden, Almont, Greenwood, Grant, and Rochester, so that on the Sabbath, when but few not of our faith were present, the house was well filled. After a discourse by Bro. Corliss, Sabbath afternoon, some fifty good, sound, sensible testimonies, were given in a little more than as many minutes, by the brethren and sisters present. On Sunday, the house was crowded at each of the three services, all available space being taken up with extra seats. In the forenoon, we endeavored to give to the people something of an analysis of that movement which is represented by Seventh-day Adventists at the present time, showing that we are led to our views upon Bible subjects by a principle of interpretation which is simple in itself and uniform in its operation; that this principle is to allow the Bible to be its own interpreter, taking it as it reads, and letting the literal passages explain the figurative. We showed that it is only by an application of this principle that any new truth has ever been discovered in the Christian world. The justification by faith, of Luther, the full and free salvation, of the Methodists, and the immersion, of the Baptists, all owe their existence to the fact that the Bible was taken on these points just as it reads, and held to mean just what it says. And the same principle still further carried out leads us to the adoption of the observance of the seventh-day Sabbath, and to the belief that the second personal and literal coming of Christ is now near at hand. The trouble with the churches is that they have stopped too soon. Having discovered a certain degree of truth, they have been content to stop with that; whereas, if they had only allowed the same principle which had brought them to that truth, to operate on other subjects, it would have led them into the truth on all those subjects. In the afternoon Bro. Corliss gave a stirring synopsis of our position on the Sabbath question, showing the institution of the Sabbath in Eden before the fall, giving a running commentary on the facts of its intermediate history, and coming out with the Sabbath joyfully observed by all flesh in Eden restored. In the evening we called the attention of the people to facts of present and startling interest in the eastern world, by a knowledge of which they can intelligently watch the signs of the times in that direction. The people gave good attention, and we trust the impression made upon them was such as will not operate against the future progress of the cause in that vicinity. June 20, 1873, Brn. D. H. Lamson and E. B. Lane commenced a tent meeting in Armada, which continued nine weeks and four days. The result was that about sixty in the immediate vicinity took their stand upon the truth. The necessity of having a house of worship was immediately felt, and Bro. D. H. Lamson, who soon made his home at Armada, has for much of the year past had this enterprise upon his hands. Sleepless nights, anxious days, and weary miles of travel have been his portion while trying to push this through; and the result speaks well for his perseverance, and is a great triumph for the cause there. The house is 32 by 50, substantially built, and very neatly finished, and is conceded by all to be the best house of worship in the place. It cost about $1,800. Only about $1,000 of this sum had been paid, leaving an indebtedness of about $800. But before the meetings held in connection with the dedication services were closed, arrangements were made for the liquidation of this entire amount, so that the friends there feel well and safe in regard to the enterprise. Bro. L. evidently has the sympathy of the better part of that community in his work. There is now a call for another course of lectures there, and a prospect that much good could be done by such an effort. It is hoped that arrangements can soon be made for a response to this call. U. S. The Bible Banner Gets a New Masthead
THE Bible Banner, published at Vineland, N. J., comes to us this week with a new head, which is a great improvement on the old. Under the proprietorship and editorship of Eld. A. A. Phelps it is a live monthly.