A “DEBATE on the Religious Amendment” of the Constitution of the United States occurred at Crestline, Ohio, on the 29th of December, 1875. In the course of the discussion, the advocates of the amendment presented the following, as a sample of the thing designed concerning practical points:— “The Jew and many Baptists have conscientious convictions that the seventh day of the week is the true Sabbath; but as many (or more) of other persuasions, believe the first day of the week to be the Sabbath. In this conflict the State has not hesitated to decide. And that decision—the only one that can be made—is based upon what is recognized as the Great Public Conscience. In other words, the conscientious belief common to the majority is given the preference, and embodied in legal enactments; while the minority, instead of being compelled to profess, or believe with the majority, are left to hold their own views and promulgate them, without incurring any civil penalty, provided they are not guilty of any overt act in violation of law.”
Read carelessly, the above sounds quite harmless; examined more closely, it has the true ring of the coin which says, “Might makes right.” The darkest periods in the history of Romanism, when its hands were full of blood, were days in which the “Great Public Conscience” was “given the preference,” and became the standard of the civil law. Even then the minority were allowed to hold and promulgate their views, providing they were “not guilty of any overt act in violation of law.” But on practical questions it is not possible for the dissenter to obey conscience without committing an “overt act in violation of the law.” Violations of the Sunday law—weak as it now is—are permitted only by sufferance, and because many believe the law to be unconstitutional and unjust. Increase the power of this “Great Public Conscience,” and make it a tool in the hands of partizans, and this sufferance will speedily disappear. Note the words of the above: “In this conflict the State has not hesitated to decide. And that decision—the only one that can be made—is based,” etc. Exactly, “the only one that can be made.” That is well put. That is plain. It is a true statement, from the standpoint of those who press such amendments. Majorities must govern in matters of religion, and the national government must so decree. That was good doctrine in the tenth century, when the death-pall of a corrupted State-church hung over the world. It was good doctrine even in the later years of the fifteenth century, when “Rome’s worst Pope,” Alexander VI., and his son, Cæsar Borgia, made the black pages of history blush with their crimes.
We may deem this “Religious Amendment” scheme an idle tale. It may prove to be an idle tale. It may prove to be nothing more. But earnest men are behind it. They think they do God’s service in pressing it. They are not now cruel in their opposition to the minority, at least the Protestant minority. They are only orthodox; intensely orthodox. So the Romish persecutors who slew thousands of Sabbath-keeping Waldenses during the later years of the dark ages, were only orthodox. They only put the “Great Public Conscience” into civil laws. The road between intense orthodoxy on the part of the “Great Public Conscience” and persecution is short. Truth need not be feared, but it is well not to be hoodwinked or cajoled.—A. H. Lewis, in Sabbath Recorder.
Fire-Worshipers in Bombay.
One of the features in Bombay is the Towers of Silence. The existence of these Towers of Silence is due to the curious system the Parsees have of dealing with their dead. They do not bury in the ground, for that would defile the earth, it being one of the four sacred elements which they venerate. Neither would they throw a body into the sea, which we do at times; nor into the river, which the Hindoos are in the habit of doing, for that would defile the water—another of the elements. Nor could they possibly burn their dead, for that would defile the fire, which to them is a peculiarly sacred element.
To avoid these defilements, they build a tower, and the dead are placed on the top of it where they are out of sight, and yet where they may go through the process of decay, which would, no doubt, be rapid in a hot climate like India; but this rapidity is assisted by a colony of vultures, who keep possession of the palm-tree, and are ready to swoop down when a “silent” addition is made to these towers.
There is a house attached called the suggree, in which prayer and some other sacred ceremonies are gone through for the dead. When the body is carried from this, the face is uncovered, so that all may have a last look; and no one, except the bearers of the body, is allowed to enter the door which leads to the upper part of these Towers of Silence.
But who are the Parsees? The visitor is not long at Bombay before he comes familiar with the sight of the Parsees walking on the beach and saying their prayers to the sun. They walk about, each by himself, with the book in hand, muttering, in slightly audible words, the ritual of their religion. It is in the Zend language, which has come down to them much as the Latin has in the Catholic church, and is more or less a dead language. The expounders of the Parsee faith say that they only pay homage to the sun as the visible sign of the Supreme Deity, and that their worship of fire is dictated by the same rule; and that, in truth, it is to God, through these symbols, their devotion is given.
They have temples where the sacred fire is kept, on which account they are called “fire-worshipers” as well as “sun-worshipers,” but no stranger is ever admitted to them. The fire is brought from the city of Yezd, in Persia, which is the sacred capital of religion, and from which they emigrated to escape the fury of Mohammedan zeal.—Ex.
Irreligious Literature.
A positively irreligious literature would not be endured in the present day. But there is very much, that, without being irreligious, in the sense of profane or skeptical, is irreligious by the absence of all religious influence or recognition from its pages. Many of our popular writers discard it upon principle. It is chiefly men who have addicted themselves to science, and to inquiries into material things that lean in this direction, though many of our writers on light literature have the same tendency. The spirit aims to create a world of its own, in which there shall be literally no God. If it alludes to religion at all, it is only under the form of a sly sneer, or insinuated doubt, or a contemptuous depreciation of its professors, as if they alone were the men that are wanting in common sense.
The periodical literature of our day, in particular, is pouring out a perfect torrent of continuous publication. It is in this class of works especially the evil lurks to which we allude. Such works, with the newspapers, are threatening to supersede all other kinds of reading. The least evil is, that they must create a superficial, unthinking generation. It is true, these do not wholly repudiate religion; on the contrary, they profess a certain kind of respect for it. But it is not the respect that springs from affection, or that produces reverence. There is a flippancy about them, when religion is spoken of, that little consists with true love.
People in general are not aware of the dangers they expose their minds to by the constant perusal of such publications. Or, if they know it, they have not principle enough to forego the mental gratification of their exciting medley pages. They persuade themselves that there can be no harm in them, because they find Christian feelings now and then spoken of and commended. It never strikes them that it is religion with the blood of life off and the chill of infidelity on.—London Christian Observer.
Turkish Rules of Conversation.
In Turkey there are certain forms or canons of conversation, the violation of which is considered an outrage on society. Thinking they might be a benefit to Americans as well as Turks, we give them as follows:—
1. Never to interrupt the speaker while he is talking. You are not under any obligations to enter into conversation with him at all; but if you do, it is an understood condition of your conversation treaty that you should let him have his way.
2. Never to diverge in the middle of a conversation from the main thread of a discourse into a collateral issue. The breach of this rule is considered by a Turk as an unpardonable rudeness. This will, in his opinion, confound all thought, and render all profitable consecutive conversation impossible. This leads, as a corollary, to
3. To allow a short but sufficient pause between the conclusion of a discussion on one subject, and the entering on a new subject.
4. Never to tell a person a thing he knows already.
5. Not to excuse one's self when convicted of being in the wrong. How very seldom you hear in Europe, “Yes, I was in the wrong. I am sorry for it.” But in Turkey it is considered a violation of principle and a breach of politeness to refuse to be convicted of error. The cause of this difference lies deep in the character of the two races; in the absence on the part of the Turk of petty vanity and distracting self-esteem. The proudest race in the world, they are entirely exempt from vanity.
6. When you have nothing to say to hold your tongue. They never talk for the sake of talking. Empty, idle jabbering is a Frank but not an Ottoman practice. In Europe it is considered de rigueur to “say something,” whether that something is worth saying or not. Not so in Turkey; to say something when you have nothing to say worth saying, is considered there a degradation to yourself and a rudeness to your neighbor.
The Gift of God Is Eternal Life
“The gift of God is eternal life.”
Immersion.
By John Norton Loughborough
WHILE conversing with a friend, a short time since, upon immersion as baptism, he objected, urging that the water supply about Jerusalem was insufficient for immersions, especially for so many baptisms as occurred about the day of Pentecost. For the benefit of any who may thus suppose, I wish to quote a few facts from history relative to Jerusalem’s abundant water supply.
First we note a scriptural fact. In the days of Hezekiah, Sennacherib, king of Assyria, purposed to come to Jerusalem to battle. “And when Hezekiah saw that Sennacherib was come, and that he was purposed to fight against Jerusalem, he took counsel with his princes and his mighty men to stop the waters of the fountains which were without the city. And they did help him. So there was gathered much people together, who stopped all the fountains, and the brook that ran through the midst of the land, saying, Why should the king of Assyria come, and find much water?” 2 Chron. 32 : 2-4.
History confirms this scriptural statement that Jerusalem and its immediate vicinity was abundantly supplied with water. Dr. Hibbard, who contended for sprinkling as baptism, says of Palestine, “It was such a climate that originated the demand for baths, pools, and fountains throughout the East, and made the practice of bathing to be common.”
Horne says, “It was one of the civil laws of the Hebrews that the bath should be used (Lev. 14 : 8 ; 15 : 8, 17 : 15, 16). We may, therefore, consider it as probable that public baths, soon after the enactment of this law, were erected in Palestine, of a construction similar to that of those which are so frequently seen at the present day in the East.”
Josephus supposes the number present in Jerusalem at their annual festivals to be about 2,700,200. This vast multitude, in attending to the requirements of their law, had to bathe their entire body in water. To accomplish this there must have been “much water” in Jerusalem.
Dr. Trail speaks of Jerusalem as follows: “Perhaps upon no city of the ancient world had greater cost been bestowed, or more skill shown, in securing for it an unfailing supply of water ; and such was the repute of Jerusalem in this particular, that its strength as a fortification is frequently alluded to by profane writers as including this grand and indispensable means of sustaining a lengthened siege. Thus Strabo, having mentioned the fact generally that Jerusalem, situated in the midst of a district destitute of water, was itself abundantly supplied therewith, presently afterward, and while referring to the capture of the city by Pompey, states that he took it, notwithstanding its substantial munitions and its being abundant in water, while all around was dry. To the same purport is the often-cited passage in Tacitus (Hist. v, 12) who describes the temple with its porticoes as a fortress; and such, in fact, it was, well fitted to sustain the frequent sieges to which it was liable. ‘Fons perennis aquæ, cavati sub terra montes: et piscinæ cisternæque servandis imbribus.’ ‘A fountain of perennial water, mountains hollowed out underneath, also fish-pools and cisterns—rain water being preserved.’ … The terraced gardens, the ‘paradises’ of the kings and nobles of Jerusalem, have long been desolated ; but even now, around the slopes of the hills may be traced, mile after mile, the aqueducts whence these gardens drew perpetual verdure, and which then poured their superfluous streams into the bosom of Moriah. . . . The series of writers from Strabo down to William of Tyre, use almost the same phrases, at once in describing the aridity of the region, and in attesting the fact that within the city there was always water enough and to spare.”
Eusebius, in the fourth century, quotes Timochares as saying of Jerusalem: “The whole city flowed with water, so that even the gardens were irrigated by those flowing waters out of the city.”
To get a more definite idea, we will notice some of the pools: 1. The Pool of Siloam, mentioned in John 9 : 7, 11. This is now fifty-three feet long, eighteen broad, and although partly broken down, the water is yet two or three feet deep in it. Josephus says of it, “This is the name of a fountain which hath sweet water in it, and that in great plenty.”
2. The Upper Pool, mentioned in 2 Kings 18: 17. Dr. Robinson says it was 316 feet in length, 218 feet in breadth, 18 feet deep, covering more than one acre of ground.
3. The Pool of Hezekiah, mentioned in 2 Kings 20 : 20. Dr. Robinson gives its dimensions as 240 feet long, 144 feet broad, covering three-quarters of an acre of ground. To this day the people freely descend to wash and to fill their water-jars. It is supplied by an aqueduct from the Upper Pool. The bottom is sloping.117
4. The Lower Pool of Gihon, mentioned in 2 Chron. 32: 3, 4, 20. Dr. Robinson says it covers more than three acres of ground. In the days of the Crusaders it was well supplied with water. Dr. Barclay gives its dimensions as 260 feet wide by 600 feet long.
5. The Pool of Bethesda mentioned in John 5: 2-4. According to Dr. Barclay the main pool is about 131 feet broad, and 365 feet in length; but its length is continued 142 feet further, where its breadth is only 45 feet. Dr. Barclay does not think that this is the genuine Bethesda.
Dr. Barclay also mentions three pools of Solomon some eight miles from Jerusalem. The upper pool is 380 feet long, 229 feet broad at the upper end, and 236 feet broad at the lower end. Its greatest depth is 25 feet.
The middle pool of Solomon is 423 feet long, 160 feet broad at the upper end, 250 feet broad at the lower end; greatest depth, 39 feet.
The lower of these pools is 582 feet long, breadth at upper end, 148 feet, and 207 feet broad at the lower end; its greatest depth is 50 feet. Dr. Barclay says, “More delightful swimming pools than these, heart could not desire; and that they were formerly used as such is rendered highly probable by the well-arranged flights of steps leading into them.” The Doctor says that the united area of these three pools is ten or twelve acres, presenting all depths at all seasons or stages of the water, from 40 to 50 feet in the center to shallow water at their rocky edges.
The aqueduct leading from these pools of Solomon to the temple, has been recently discovered. Of this, more may be learned in a work entitled, “Recovery of Jerusalem,” pp. 182-3.
For many of the facts above stated we are indebted to a book entitled, “Walks about Jerusalem,” written by Isaac Errett, published by Carroll & Co., Cincinnati, Ohio. It seems to us the facts show that Jerusalem and its vicinity had water sufficient for immersion of the 3,000, 5,000, or all the early converts to Christianity in that vicinity.
J. N. LOUGHBOROUGH.
Mrs. Ellen G. White.
By Ellen G. White
HER LIFE, CHRISTIAN EXPERIENCE, AND LABORS.
For six months not a cloud intervened between me and my Saviour. Whenever there was a proper opportunity I bore my testimony, and was greatly blessed. At times the Spirit of the Lord rested upon me with such power that my strength was taken from me. This was a trial to some who had come out from the formal churches, and remarks were often made that grieved me much. Many could not believe that one could be so overpowered by the Spirit of God as to lose all strength. My position was exceedingly painful. I began to reason with myself whether I was not justified in withholding my testimony in meeting, and thus restrain my feelings when there was such an opposition in the hearts of some who were older in years and experience than myself.
I reasoned that repressing my testimony would not hinder me from faithfully living out my religion. I adopted this plan of silence for a time. I often felt strongly impressed that it was my duty to speak in meeting, but refrained from doing so, and was sensible of having grieved the Spirit of God. Sometimes I even remained away from meetings that I knew would be attended by those who were annoyed by my testimony. I shrank from offending my brethren; but in this I allowed the fear of men to break up that uninterrupted communion with God which had blessed my heart for so many months.
We had appointed evening prayer-meetings in different localities of the city to accommodate all who wished to attend them. The family who had been most forward in opposing me attended one of these. Upon this occasion, while those assembled were engaged in prayer, the Spirit of the Lord came upon the meeting, and one of the members of this family was prostrated as one dead. His relatives stood weeping around him, rubbing his hands and applying restoratives. At length he gained sufficient strength to praise God, and quieted their fears by shouting with triumph over the marked evidence he had received of the power of the Lord upon him. This young man was unable to return home that night.
This was believed by the family to be a demonstration of the Spirit of God, but did not convince them that it was the same divine power that rested upon me at times, robbing me of my natural strength, and filling my soul with the unbounded peace and love of Jesus. They were free to say that not a doubt could be entertained of my sincerity and perfect honesty, but they considered me deceived in taking that for the power of the Lord which was only the result of my own over-wrought feelings.
My mind was in great perplexity, in consequence of this opposition, and, as the time drew near for our regular meeting, I was in doubt whether or not it was best for me to attend it. For some days previous I had been in great distress on account of the feeling manifested towards me. Finally I decided not to go, and thus escape the criticism of my brethren. In trying to pray I repeated these words again and again, “Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?” The answer that came to my heart seemed to bid me trust in my Heavenly Father and wait patiently to know his will. I yielded myself to the Lord with the simple trust of a little child, remembering that he had promised that those who follow him shall not walk in darkness.
My duty impelled me to go to the meeting. I went with the full assurance in my mind that all would be well. While we were bowed before the Lord, my heart was drawn out in prayer and filled with a peace that only Christ can give. My soul rejoiced in the love of the Saviour, and my physical strength left me. With child-like faith I could only say, “Heaven is my home, and Christ my Redeemer.”
One of the same family whom I have mentioned as being opposed to the manifestations of the power of God upon me, stated on this occasion, that he considered I was under an excitement which he thought it my duty to resist, but instead of doing so he thought I encouraged it, as a mark of God’s favor. His doubts and opposition did not affect me at this time, for I seemed shut in with the Lord, and lifted above all outward influence. But he had scarcely stopped speaking when a strong man, a devoted and humble Christian, was struck down by the power of God before his eyes, and the room was filled with the Holy Spirit.
Upon recovering sufficiently, I was very happy in bearing my testimony for Jesus, and in telling of his love for me. I confessed my lack of faith in the promises of God, and that I had checked the promptings of his Spirit from fear of men, but that, notwithstanding my distrust, he had bestowed upon me unlooked-for evidence of his love and sustaining grace. H— P—, the brother who had opposed me, rose, and with many tears, confessed his error in regard to me, that his feelings had been all wrong. He humbly asked my forgiveness. Said he, “Sister Ellen, I will never again lay a straw in your way. God has shown me the coldness and stubbornness of my heart, and he has broken it by the evidence of his power. I have been very wrong. When sister Ellen seemed so happy I would think, Why don’t I feel like that? Why don’t brother R—— receive some such evidence? for I felt that he was a devoted Christian, yet no such power had fallen upon him. I offered a silent prayer that, if this was the holy influence of God, brother R—— might experience it this evening.”
“Almost as the desire went up from my heart, brother R—— fell, prostrated by the power of God, crying, ‘Let the Lord work!’ My heart is convinced that I have been warring against the Holy Spirit, but I will grieve it no more by stubborn unbelief. Welcome, light! Welcome, Jesus! I have been backslidden and hardened, feeling offended if any one praised God and manifested a fullness of joy in his love; but now my feelings are changed, my opposition is at an end, Jesus has opened my eyes, and I may yet shout his praises myself. I have said bitter and cutting things of sister Ellen, that I sorrow over now, and pray for her forgiveness as well as all who are present.”
Brother R—— then bore his testimony. His face was lighted with the glory of Heaven, as he praised the Lord for the wonders he had wrought that night. Said he, “This place is awfully solemn because of the presence of the Most High. Sister Ellen, in future you will have our help and sustaining sympathies, instead of the cruel opposition that has been shown you. We have been blind to the manifestations of God’s Holy Spirit.”
There had never been a question as to my perfect sincerity, but many had thought me young and impressible, and that it was my duty to restrain my feelings, which they regarded as the effect of excitement. But all the opposers were now brought to see their mistake and confess that the work was indeed of the Lord. In a prayer-meeting soon after, H— P—, the brother who had confessed that he was wrong in his opposition, experienced the power of God in so great a degree that his countenance shone with a heavenly light, and he fell helpless to the floor. When his strength returned, he again acknowledged that he had been ignorantly warring against the Spirit of the Lord in cherishing the feeling he had against me.
In another prayer-meeting still another member of the same family was exercised in a similar manner and bore the same testimony. A few weeks after, while the large family of brother P— were engaged in prayer at their own house, the Spirit of God swept through the room and prostrated the kneeling suppliants. My father came in soon after and found them all, both parents and children, helpless under the power of the Lord.
Cold formality began to melt before the mighty influence of the Most High. All who had opposed me, confessed that they had grieved the Holy Spirit by so doing, and they united in sympathy with me and in love for the Saviour. My heart was glad that divine mercy had smoothed the path for my feet to tread, and rewarded my faith and trust so bountifully. Unity and peace now dwelt among our people who were looking forward toward the coming of the Lord.
Preaching by Steam.
By Editor
WHEN men shut their eyes to the apostasies, disorders in society, and the villainies of the present, and look only upon the advancements in the arts and sciences, they feel flattered that they live in an age of unparalleled progression. Not stopping to discuss the matter whether advancing blessings equal progressing evils, we wish here to call attention to the approximate perfection in the art of printing, and the rapidity with which the religious press may do preaching by steam.
And probably no religious people have done as much preaching in this way, when numbers and time are taken into the account, as the Seventh-day Adventists. We established a paper which taught the views of this people as early as 1849, when we could number only a few scores of souls. This small beginning grew in a quarter of a century, steadily and surely, to a legally incorporated publishing association at Battle Creek, Michigan, with a capital of $100,000, a reliable patronage of 15,000 souls, and through our Tract and Missionary Societies to almost unlimited demand of printing matter on religious and reformatory subjects.
April, 1875, the Pacific S. D. A. Publishing Association was incorporated at Oakland, according to the laws of California. In about ten months, buildings have been erected at a cost of $12,000. A car load of presses and other machinery has been purchased and brought across the continent from New York, types and other material, sufficient to do the present business of the Association, have been purchased, the entire cost of which is $8,000. This sum has been donated by the eastern friends of our cause. This young Association is paying neither interests nor rents.
The Signs of the Times has a paying circulation of nearly 4,000, and its list of subscribers is rapidly increasing. Thank God that we can give so good and cheering report of the California Publishing Association as it enters on the eleventh month of its existence. Judging from the past, we can safely predict for it a very prosperous future.
Besides the issue of the Signs, our California Steam Press has printed more than three tons of Tracts and Pamphlets during the past four months, containing the most valuable matter for our people at this time. Already the item of postage paid on this kind of matter which has been sent out from the Office of the Signs of the Times during the past three months, amounts to between two and three hundred dollars. The idea is truly grand that an unpopular message of Bible truth, that was first held by a few humble persons on the shores of the Atlantic a few years since, has passed across the continent, gathering strong and devoted friends at every step, and now is being preached by steam on the Pacific. Best judges say, when speaking of our large cylinder printing machine, that it is the best press on the Pacific Coast.
And right here, just as the Pacific Press is completely established, the advancing cause in Europe demands that there should be an Office of publication in Switzerland, as suggested in the report from our worthy missionary, Eld. J. N. Andrews. We highly approve the measure, and venture the statement that there is no time to be lost. But little has been accomplished for the cause in our own country without the press. The cause moved very slowly on this continent until we commenced publishing in good earnest. The work in Europe will amount to but little until our brethren there commence preaching by steam.
Periodicals in both the French and German languages will soon be issued from the S. D. Adventist Office in Europe. There, too, our tracts, already published at Battle Creek in both these languages, can be re-produced, and others of equal or superior value can at once be printed. The time has come. We have three men of ability in Europe, who are devoted to the cause of God, and we expect more will be raised up to stand in defense of the truth there. We pledge $1,000 for the Press and Mission in Europe, during the year 1876, from our own purse, in installments of $100 a month, beginning with April, and closing up in December with $200, and shall expect to be joined by those friends of the cause who have more of this world's goods than a humble competency.
We hope that others will be ready with donations, so that we can forward $1000, from Battle Creek, Michigan, the first of April, and the same amount the first of each month during the year. Now is our time to act, and may God prosper our missionaries in Europe in all those preparations necessary for preaching by steam.
In claiming that this is simply a parable, we are in harmony with the great body of biblical expositors, as listen to the following:—
Lightfoot says: “And that it was a parable, not only the consent of all expositors may assure us, but the thing itself teaches it.” On Luke 16: 19.
Whitby says, “That this is only a parable, and not a real history of what was actually done, is evident.” Luke 16.
Theophylact says, “But this parable can also be explained in the way of allegory.” Luke 16.
Dr. A. Clarke says, “Let it be remembered, that by the general consent of all, except the basely interested, no metaphor is ever to be used in proof of a doctrine. In the things that concern our eternal salvation, we need the most pointed and express evidence on which to establish the faith of our souls.” On Matt. 5: 26.
First-day keepers always appeal to this text in proof of the sacredness of Sunday-keeping. They say that it shows that the apostles were accustomed to hold meetings every Sunday, because this passage directs them to take up a public collection every first day of the week. We say there is no such meaning in the passage. It simply means just what it says, “that every man should lay by him in store,” that is, by himself at home. That this is the true meaning of the passage can be shown by a host of authorities and translations, as witness the following:—
“Let him designate a certain portion; let him do this by himself when he is at home, when he can calmly look at the evidence of his prosperity.”—Barnes.
“Some are of the opinion that the sums thus set apart were brought to the treasury of the church at the time; but the words do not seem to admit of that interpretation; and if each separately laid by the sum which he proposed to give, the whole would be brought together at once when necessary, without any trouble in soliciting contributions.”—Comp. Com.
“Every one was to lay by in store, have a treasury or fund with himself for this purpose.
“Some of the Greek fathers rightly observe here that this advice was given for the sake of the poorer among them. They were to lay by, from week to week, and not bring into the common treasury, that by this means their contributions might be easy to themselves, and yet grow into a fund for the relief of their brethren.”—Matthew Henry, Com.
“The apostle only meant that there should be no private and petty gatherings, then first to be made, when he came, but only one suneis-phora [joint contribution] formed, containing all the sums which had been gradually laid up in private.”—Bloomfield. Notes on Greek Text. And of the “gatherings,” he says: “The word logia is nowhere else found in the scriptural, and very rarely in the classical, writers; and seems to have been confined to the language of common life. It properly signifies a gleaning, and then, as here, a slight gathering.”
“Certainly it may not be inferred from this passage that collections took place among the congregations on the Sabbath, for it was Paul’s intention that each should make a suitable contribution at home.”—Olshausen, Com.
“Lay by him in store; at home.”—Justin Edwards’ Notes.
“‘Par’ heauto, by or with oneself; in one’s house at home, Fr. chez soi.1 Cor. 16: 2. So Xen. Mem. 1.13.3.”—Robinson’s Lexicon.
“‘Par’ heauto, at one’s home or house. Lat. apud se, Hdt. 1.105, cf. 1.86.”—Liddell & Scott’s Lexicon.
These were Sunday men; some of them of the most rabid kind. What but the most evident facts could lead them thus to remove the foundation for a popular Sunday inference? I copy also a few translations:—
“Let every one of you put aside at home, and lay vppe whatever he thinketh mete.”—Tyndale.
“Let each one of you lay by himself in store.”—Sawyer’s.
“Let each of you lay by him and treasure up.”—Anderson (Disciple).
“Let every one of you lay aside and preserve at home.”—Syriac.
To the above I add a summary given by J. W. Morton, in his address to the Synod of the Ref. Pres. church:—
“I marvel greatly how you can imagine that it means in the collection box of the congregation! Greenfield, in his Lexicon, translates the Greek term, par heauto, ‘by one’s self, i. e., at home.’ Two Latin versions, the Vulgate and that of Castellio, render it ‘apud se,’ with one’s self at home. Three French translations, those of Martin, Osterwald, and DeSaçy, ‘chez soi,’ at his own house, at home. The German of Luther, ‘bei sich selbst,’ by himself, at home. The Dutch, ‘by hem selven,’ same as the German. The Italian of Diodati, ‘appresso di se,’ in his own presence, at home. The Spanish of Felipe Scio, ‘en su casa,’ in his own house. The Portuguese of Ferreira, ‘para isso,’ with himself. The Swedish ‘naer sig sjelf,’ near himself. I know not how much this list of authorities might be swelled, for I have not examined one translation that differs from those quoted above. Now if your premise is false, your inference is not only unnecessary, but wholly inadmissible.”
We claim that this has no reference to the weekly Sabbath. The ablest first-day commentators admit the same thing as may be seen by what follows:—
“It is not clear that the apostle refers at all to the Sabbath in this place [Col. 2:16], whether Jewish or Christian; his sabbaths, or weeks, most probably refer to their feasts of weeks”—A. Clarke, in loco.
“The days here referred to are doubtless the days of the Jewish festivals. It is not a fair interpretation of this to suppose that the apostle refers to the Sabbath properly so called, for this was a part of the decalogue, and was observed by the Saviour himself, and by the apostles also. It is a fair interpretation to apply it to all those days which are not commanded to be kept holy in the Scriptures.”—A. Barnes, in loco.
THE SABBATH IN PALESTINE.
The following statements relative to the names of the days of the week as they are now commonly named in Palestine, is from a late missionary from that country:—
“Not any of the nations, whether Jew or Arab, name the days of the week, Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, &c.; nor do they call the first day of the week Lord’s day, nor do they ever give to the seventh day the name Saturday.”
“Never do they count the day from midnight to midnight, but always from sundown to sundown. The seventh day is known throughout Arabdom by yom es-sabb—or day of the Sabbath. Neither the word seven nor any other name is given by the Arabs to the Sabbath day. It is always the Sabbath; and the reason for it, they say, is, that this has been its name from the beginning.”
D. M. Canright.
Heart-Keeping.
“KEEP thy heart with all diligence; for out of it are the issues of life.” As good house-keeping is essential to domestic comfort, so good heart-keeping is essential to healthy and happy piety.
The word of God represents the human heart as a dwelling. The unconverted heart is a habitation of the Evil one, with his brood of unholy thoughts and sinful tastes and passions. When Jesus Christ first enters this dwelling-place of the Evil one, he finds it fearfully filthy and out of order. The first work of the Divine Spirit is to cleanse the house. Every room must be entered and purified. Into the stately and sumptuous drawing room where Pride held court, the lowly Saviour enters and expels the occupant. From the walls of Sensuality’s chamber many wanton pictures have to be taken down. The deserted and cobwebbed closet of Conscience is entered by the key of Truth, and is thrown open to the daylight.
Memory is another apartment of the mind which the Holy Spirit renews for a higher and holier use. Ranged on its shelves he finds the stores which were brought in through the five doorways of the senses. Much of this accumulation is but rubbish. Christ does not destroy this faculty; he simply makes it henceforth a granary of truth. A sanctified memory is the soul’s store-room. We pity the man with whom this is but an empty garret or a confused lumber-room, heaped up with accumulated things, so hopelessly mingled that its owner can never lay hands on what he needs at the moment. With a devout believer the memory is a cabinet of curiosities of God’s love. In no apartment does Jesus abide oftener than in this; here the alabaster-box of gratitude is broken, and the room is filled with the sweet odor of the ointment.
There is also a chamber of Taste, from whose window the lover of beauty looks out on magnificent landscapes; and at midnight up into the star-studded vaults of Heaven. There is a lofty watch-tower where holy Vigilance keeps guard to espy the approaches of the enemy. Woe unto the Christian when the sentinel falls asleep on the tower! Over the doorway to this turret the Spirit has written, “Watch unto prayer!” “Blessed is he whom his Lord when he cometh shall find watching.” From this tower Faith often looks out through the spyglass of the promises, and catches bright glimpses of the celestial city which lies at the end of the way.
“For glimpses such as these
My willing soul will bear
All that in darkest hours it sees
Of toil and pain and care.”
We must not overlook one room in a converted heart, though it be ever so small or ever so secluded. It is the secret “closet” where Faith holds sweet fellowship with God. It is fragrant with the presence of Jesus. Here stands the mercy-seat. To this inner sanctum Faith keeps a golden key inscribed, “Ask, and ye shall receive; seek, and ye shall find; pray without ceasing.” Over the door she readeth the inviting words: “Enter into this closet, ‘and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.’” On the walls are inscriptions written in moments of devout intercourse with God, when the meditations of him were like the droppings of the honeycomb.
This is Faith’s stronghold; here she weapons herself for the daily conflict. Silence in that closet of prayer bespeaks death throughout all the house. When that door is suffered to rust on its hinges and that chamber is deserted, then the heart-house is soon retaken by Satan, and evil spirits come in and dwell there. To keep this house with all diligence is the primal duty of every one who bears the name of Christ.—Cuyler’s Heart Life.