Your ShelfYour Projects

The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, Vol. 55, No. 10

DECEITFULNESS OF RICHES

The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald

Thursday, March 4, 1880

Seventh-Day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Thursday, March 4, 1880

DECEITFULNESS OF RICHES.

By Ellen G. White

BY MRS. E. G. WHITE.
Many who profess the special truths for our time, have not a proper discernment of character. They fail to appreciate moral worth. They may boast much of their fidelity to the cause of God, and their knowledge of the Scriptures; but they are not humble in heart. They have a special regard for those who are wealthy and prosperous, forgetting that riches do not give man favor with God. True excellence of character is frequently overlooked, if possessed by the poor man. Money sways a mighty influence. But does God care for money—for property? The cattle upon a thousand hills are his,—the world and all that is therein. The inhabitants of the earth are as grasshoppers before him; and the nations, with all their riches, “are counted as the small dust of the balance.” He is no respecter of persons. Yet men of property have often looked upon their possessions and said, By my wisdom have I gotten me this wealth. But who gave them power to get wealth? God has bestowed upon them the ability which they possess; and instead of giving him the glory, they take it to themselves. He will prove them and try them, and will bring their glorying to the dust; he will remove their strength and scatter their possessions. Instead of a blessing, they will realize a curse.
An act of wrong, or of oppression, any deviation from the right way, should be as promptly condemned in the rich as in the poor. All the riches that the most wealthy ever possessed will not be of sufficient value to cover the smallest sin before God. Repentance, true humility, a broken heart and a contrite spirit, alone will be accepted of him.
Many rich men have obtained their wealth by close dealing with their fellow-men, by overreaching in trade, to advantage themselves at the loss of others; and then they glory in their shrewdness, and keenness in a bargain. But the curse of God will rest upon every dollar thus obtained, and upon the increase of it on their hands.
How forcible are the words of our Saviour, “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.” Those who possess the ability to acquire property, unless constantly on the watch, will be led by their acquisitiveness to sacrifice the generous, benevolent, noble principles of their manhood for sordid gain.
Many have been corrupted by the spirit and influence of the world. Their characters are becoming more and more unlike the divine model. They are being transformed to become instruments of unrighteousness. In striking contrast with this class are those industrious, honest, poor men, who ever stand ready to help the needy; who would rather suffer themselves to be defrauded by their wealthy brethren than to manifest so close and acquisitive a spirit as they manifest; who esteem a clear conscience, and integrity, even in little things, of greater value than riches. They are so ready to help others, so willing to do all the good in their power, that they do not accumulate; their earthly possessions do not increase. If there is a benevolent object to call forth means or labor, they are the first to be interested in it and to respond to it, and will frequently go far beyond their real ability, denying themselves some needed good, to carry out their benevolent purposes.
Because such persons can boast of but little earthly treasure, they are often looked upon as deficient in ability and judgment, and are lightly esteemed even by their brethren. But how does God regard these poor, wise men? In his sight they are precious; and although not increasing their treasure upon earth, they are laying up for themselves a treasure in the heavens which is incorruptible. In so doing they manifest a wisdom as far superior to that of the wise, calculating, acquisitive, professed Christian, as the divine and godlike is superior to the earthly, carnal, and satanic. It is moral worth that God values. A Christian character untarnished with avarice, possessing quietness, meekness, and humility, is more precious in the sight of God than the most fine gold, even the golden wedge of Ophir.
Wealthy men are to be tested more closely than they ever yet have been. If they overcome their defects of character, and as faithful stewards of Jesus Christ render to God the things that are God’s, to them it will be said, “Well done, thou good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things; enter thou into the joy of thy Lord.”
The parable of the unjust steward is to the point. “And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness, that when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations. He that is faithful in that which is least, is faithful also in much; and he that is unjust in the least, is unjust also in much. If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches? And if ye have not been faithful in that which is another man’s, who shall give you that which is your own?”
God has committed to his stewards means to be used in doing good, and thus securing a treasure in Heaven. But if, like the man who had one talent, they hide their means, fearing that God will receive that which belongs to him, they will not only lose the increase which will finally be awarded the faithful steward, but also the principal which God gave them to work upon. They have not only neglected to lay up treasure in Heaven, but have also lost their earthly treasure. They have no habitation on earth, and no friend in Heaven to receive them into the everlasting habitation of the righteous.
Christ declares that “no servant can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will hold to the one and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon,”—cannot serve God and earthly riches too. “The Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things, and they derided him.” Mark the words of Christ to them: “Ye are they who justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts; for that which is highly esteemed among men [riches acquired by oppression, by deception, by overreaching, by fraud, or in any dishonest manner], is abomination in the sight of God.” Then Christ presents the two characters, the rich man who was clothed with purple and fine linen, and who fared sumptuously every day, and Lazarus, who was in abject poverty, and loathsome to the sight, and who begged the few crumbs which the rich man despised. Our Saviour shows his estimate of the two. Lazarus, although in so deplorable a condition, had true faith, true moral worth, which God sees, and which he considers of so great value that he takes this poor, despised sufferer, and places him in the most exalted position, while the honored and wealthy ease-loving rich man is thrust out from the presence of God, and is plunged into misery and woe unutterable. In the sight of God this wealthy man was of no value, because he had not true moral worth. His riches did not recommend him to God.
By this parable Christ would teach his disciples to shun the course pursued by the Pharisees, who judged or valued men by their wealth, or by the worldly honors they received. He showed that some who possessed both riches and worldly honor were of no esteem in the sight of God; more than this, they were despised and rejected,—cast out from his sight as disgusting to him, because there was no moral worth or soundness in them. They were corrupt, sinful, and abominable before him.
In Paul’s charge to Timothy he warns him of a class who will not consent to wholesome words, but who place a wrong estimate on riches. He says: “If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; he is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness; from such withdraw thyself. But godliness with contentment is great gain. For we brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out. And having food and raiment, let us be therewith content. But they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition. For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows. But thou, O man of God, flee these things; and follow after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness. Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses.” “Charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not high-minded, nor trust in uncertain riches, but in the living God, who giveth us richly all things to enjoy; that they do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communicate; laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.”
The great apostle, in his letter to Timothy, would impress upon his mind the necessity of giving such instruction as should remove the deception which so easily steals upon the rich, that because of their ability to acquire wealth, they are superior in wisdom and judgment to those who are in poverty; that gain is godliness. They flatter themselves that because of their wealth they are especially favored of God. Here is the fearful deception.
Individuals may devote their whole lives to the one object of acquiring riches, yet as they brought nothing into the world, they can carry nothing out. They must die and leave that which cost them so much labor to obtain. They stake their eternal interest, to obtain a little of this world, and lose both worlds. But some are determined to be rich; it is their constant study; and in their zeal, eternal considerations are overlooked. In the pursuit of wealth, they are blinded by Satan, and made to believe that their motives are good. Thus many have “erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.” They have sacrificed noble, elevated principles, given up their faith for riches; and if not disappointed in their object, they are disappointed in the happiness they supposed wealth would bring. They are burdened with care and perplexity; they are slaves to avarice themselves, their families are compelled to the same bondage, with only the advantage of reaping “many sorrows.”
The apostle shows the only true use for riches, and bids Timothy charge the rich to do good, to be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communicate; for in so doing they are laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come,—referring to the close of time,—that they may lay hold on eternal life. The teachings of Paul harmonize perfectly with the words of Christ, “Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness, that when ye fail they may receive you into everlasting habitations.” Godliness with contentment is great gain. Here is the true secret of happiness, and real prosperity of soul and body.

THY WILL BE DONE.

By Frances E. Pope

Thy will be done! Not lightly be it spoken, To fall like tinkling cymbals on the air; Beyond all other words are these the token Of resignation conquered from despair.
Not all who say, “Lord! Lord!” can tell what measure Of heavy cost it takes their depth to learn; What loss of ease, what sacrifice of treasure, What exile out of which is no return.
He who has proved this saying bears the traces Of furnace-fires that spare the gold alone; His conversation is in heavenly places; His life is lived as God’s and not his own.
His soul in restful patience he possesses, Nor sighs for hopes that vanished unfulfilled, As one who meets with loss, yet still increases Regretful dreams with spirit half self-willed.
No more in things of time his heart is centered; For he has seen their preciousness decrease; Has weighed the world and proved it void, and entered The upper chamber of abiding peace.
Thy will be done! Oh, utterance magnetic! That thrills anew the soul’s diviner chords, With deep compassion for that woe prophetic Which filled the anguished chalice of our Lord’s.
Behold in that sublime self-abnegation, What lowly path the Man of Sorrows trod, And know that out of thy humiliation Shall grow the grace to stand before thy God.
Then not with lip irreverent be spoken The hallowed words of God’s all-suffering Son; But say with contrite heart and spirit broken, Through loss, through sorrow, “Let thy will be done!”
—Frances E. Pope.

“THE SABBATH; IS THE LAW DEAD, OR AM I?”

By Wm. Penniman

BY WM. PENNIMAN.
(Concluded.)
To show how much the ingenuity of our author is taxed, we will quote a little more on the law. The language is further proof that, although he persists in saying that he “will not abate one jot or tittle” of the law, yet as it is so exceedingly difficult to prove that one is dead to it, he would like after all to abolish it.
“You might say it is abrogated as a covenant of works, but not as a rule of life, though the Scripture does not say so—it is a mere human invention.” This is certainly the best admission we have seen yet in favor of the law.
Hear him again: “Law is a ministration of death as well as of condemnation.” If the reader will turn to 2 Cor. 3:7, 8, he will see that there is a comparison between the ministration of the law under the former dispensation, and its ministration under the gospel; one was glorious, the other “rather glorious.” There seems to be no better explanation of 2 Cor. 3:7 than the following texts: “Because the law worketh wrath; for where no law is, there is no transgression.” Rom. 4:15. “And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.” Rom. 7:10. As the commandment was ordained to life, can we not as truthfully say that law is a ministration of life to those who obey it, seeking justification through the gospel, as well as a ministration of death to those who disobey it?
Galatians 3:24, 25 is quoted as further proof that we are not under the law. “Wherefore the law was our school-master to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a school-master.” The words “being justified by faith” plainly teach the object of faith, or the gospel. If justification could come by the law, then there would be no need of the gospel. The comments of Mr. Barnes upon Rom. 6:14, will fully explain the text quoted from Galatians. But before giving his comments, we will quote a little more from our author: “The reasoning of the apostle in the end of the 6th chapter of Romans, is fatal to the use of law as a rule of life.” He comes to this conclusion, since the apostle says, in the 14th verse, “Sin shall not have dominion over you; for ye are not under the law, but under grace.” Mr. Barnes says, in his notes upon this passage: “The apostle does not affirm that Christians are not bound to obey the moral law. The whole scope of his reasoning shows that he maintains that they are. The whole structure of Christianity supposes the same thing. Compare Matt. 5:17–19. The apostle means to say that Christians are not under the law as legalists, or as attempting to be justified by it.”
The arrows are next turned toward the Sabbath. In fact, that is what they are flying at all the time; for if one can only kill the law, of course the Sabbath dies with it. “The very thing we have heard of in Christianity is, that man never did keep the Sabbath, never could, nor never can be subject to it, nor have rest on that footing. It may be a mercy to his body (I believe it is, his body is a part of the old creation), but I speak of relationship with God.”
We find nothing of the kind in Christianity. We find that our Saviour kept it. John 15:10. And he declares that it was “made for man.” The disciples kept it; for we read that “they rested the Sabbath day according to the commandment.” Luke 24:56.
The apostles kept it. Acts 16:13; 17:2; 18:4. The only reason that is assigned for the position that man never did nor could keep the Sabbath, is found in Heb. 4: “If Jesus [Joshua] had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.” The context plainly shows that Paul is speaking of the earthly rest of the land of Canaan, and of the heavenly simply by comparison. Joshua, or Jesus, did not give them permanent rest; therefore “there remaineth a rest to the people of God.” In the 4th verse he makes an allusion to the seventh day, in connection with the eternal rest spoken of in verses 5 and 6.
“It cannot be kept.” Suppose the legislators of Illinois should enact certain laws which it would be impossible for the people to keep; would they not be considered very unjust and unwise? Would not God be also unjust and unwise to command obedience to a law which cannot be kept? But we find abundance of proof that God has commanded man to keep the Sabbath. He says, “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.” Ex. 20:8. “Verily my Sabbaths ye shall keep.” Ex. 31:13. “Here is the patience of the saints; here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.” Rev. 14:12.
It is not only a “mercy to his body,” but also a mercy to the whole man, mental, moral, and physical. It was so in the old dispensation, and it is just as much so now, and will continue to be forever. Isa. 66:23.
“The Sabbath is the rest of man in the flesh. Religiously, there is no rest for man in the flesh, as there is no recovery for man in the flesh. The law tried it, and set up the Sabbath as a sign consequently of the covenant.” We will try to analyze this; the sense may lie so deep that we cannot bring it to the surface. It may be a part of the “new creation being born again.” It is admitted that man needs a Sabbath or rest in the flesh; but that he has no need of it in Christ, or in the “new creation.” We cannot see why there is religiously no rest for man in the flesh. The wise man says that to “fear God and keep his commandments, . . . is the whole duty of man.” Eccl. 12:13. David says, “The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.” Ps. 19:7. If keeping the law of God is a moral duty, then keeping the Sabbath, whether in the flesh or in the spirit, is a moral and religious duty.
“The law tried it.” Tried what? The idea seems to be that the law tried to give man religious rest in the flesh, and failed, and set up the Sabbath as a sign (not consequently of the covenant) that he could not keep it. Certainly this would be a pretty good sign that man could not keep the law, as so many fail to keep this part of it.
“God has no Sabbath really in this world of sin and misery.” Wonderful assertion! Strange way of getting rid of the Sabbath. To say that God has none in this, sinful and miserable world. Then certainly he has no law. If there is no Sabbath, why all this ado to prove that one is dead to it? Just prove that there is no Sabbath, never was, nor ever will be, and the case is gained. But assertions are not arguments.
“I do not enter into the detail of Scripture ground for the distinction of this day (Sunday, or, as it is termed, Lord’s day), which I published many years ago in reply to the taunt of priests, who used it to prove the authority of the church which had changed the day.” Notwithstanding he says there is no Sabbath, yet he seems to have some use for Sunday after all. The reason he does not now use the old threadbare so-called Scripture arguments for change of day is because the priests hurl them against him. This taunt of the priests must be endured, notwithstanding all the replies that may be made to them. The priests can not only taunt the Protestants for keeping a day which has been set up by the authority of their church, but also for practising infant sprinkling, believing in the immortality of the soul, endless suffering, etc.
“It is certain the early Christians never confounded the Lord’s day and the Sabbath. Those who are Jews knew both as distinct, and those around them did too.” It is indeed strange that so many persist in calling the first day of the week the Lord’s day, when there is not one particle of authority for it in the Bible. Rev. 1:10, “I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day,” is quoted as proof. The seventh day, or Sabbath, is repeatedly called the Lord’s day, Isa. 58:13, but the first day of the week, never. Eld. J. N. Andrews, in preface to “Complete Testimony of the Fathers,” says: “The first day Sabbath was absolutely unknown before the time of Constantine. Nearly one hundred years had elapsed after John was in vision on Patmos before the term Lord’s day was applied to the first day. During this time it was called ‘the day of the sun,’ ‘the first day of the week,’ and ‘the eighth day.’ The first writers who gave it the name of ‘Lord’s day’ state the remarkable fact that in their judgment the true Lord’s day consists of every day of a Christian’s life, a very convincing proof that they did not give this title to Sunday because John had so named it on Patmos.” It is true that there is no confounding of the first day with the Sabbath. They have ever been distinct since the counterfeit day was set up.
A quotation is given from the fathers, which proves too much. “Justin Martyr, in a well-known passage of the dialogue with Trypho, who reproaches him with giving up the Sabbath, says: ‘How can we keep the Sabbath, who rest from sin all the days of the week?’” This proves that Justin had once kept the true Sabbath, but had apostatized, and that he did not then believe in any one day of rest. “Testimony of the Fathers,” page 34, alluding to Justin Martyr, says: “The idea of the change of the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the week is never found in his writings; . . . yet Justin Martyr is prominently and constantly cited in behalf of the so-called Christian Sabbath.”
Another arrow which does not hit: “A council of Orleans in the sixth century, or beginning of the seventh, reproaches Christians with keeping the Sabbath and not carting home their corn, or traveling, and asks them if they have turned Jews. But we must not suppose that this meant Sunday, or the Lord’s day.” We are glad to know that the Sabbath was kept in the sixth century, and the fact that Christians were then reproached for keeping the Sabbath, and were called Jews, is convincing proof that there is “nothing new under the sun.”
My prayer is that man-made institutions may go down, and that God’s word may gain the victory.

Sudden Death and the Uncertainty of Life

—At the moment that the Tay bridge fell, hurrying so many to an untimely grave in the waters of the firth, Mr. Macrae, the pastor of a church in Dundee, was preaching on the uncertainty of life, and urging the frequency of sudden death as a reason for being ready to leave this world, and not postponing till to-morrow what should be done to-day.

The Lord My Shepherd.

By Y—Y

Beloved, we “were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop” of our souls. 1 Pet. 1:25. But are we following closely; or are we lagging far behind in the pilgrimage? You are aware that in the East the shepherd always goes before his sheep, and calls them by name, and they follow him. Thus our Lord says, “My sheep hear my voice.” John 10:27. Are you and I attentive listeners? Do we stand upon our watch, to see what he will say unto us, and what we shall answer when we are reproved? Hab. 2:1. Does the Lord know that, like Caleb, we follow him “fully”? Num. 14:24. Then in the resurrection he will give us eternal life; we shall live and reign with him, and none shall pluck us out of his hand. He has left an example, that we “should follow his steps.” 1 Pet. 2:21; Phil. 2:5, etc.
The Lord our Shepherd is presented to us in three precious characters.
1. He is the Good Shepherd. Behold him, our Saviour! What gives him this holy name? He gave his life—his soul—for the sheep. How the intelligent reception of this joyous truth sets us free from the pagan-papal idea of the immortality of the soul! If the “natural body,” i. e., “the living soul” (1 Cor. 15:44, 45; Gen. 2:7), were immortal, or deathless, then the Father could not have made the Son’s “soul an offering for sin,” neither could our Good Shepherd have “poured out his soul unto death.” Isa. 53:10, 12. But because we are partakers of flesh and blood, which are corruptible, and “cannot inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor. 15:50), he himself likewise took part of the same, that through death, he might destroy him that had the power of death, and deliver us (Heb. 2:14, 15), thus, oh, ineffable mercy! giving his soul a ransom for many (Matt. 20:28). Let us adore Him who, loving us, loved us to the end (John 13:1), and consecrate ourselves entirely to his service. But see where this leads us: “He laid down his life [soul, psuche] for us; and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.” 1 John 3:16.
2. He is the Great Shepherd. Death could not hold our Good Shepherd. God raised him from the dead, among whom he had lain to prove his love for the sheep. Because he had so humbled himself, God has highly exalted him (Phil. 2:9–11); and we behold him now as our great and powerful High Priest, interceding for us; our great Shepherd to take care of his sheep, whom he has purchased by his precious blood. He, seated at the Father’s right hand, watches over us, and desires that we may be perfect in every good work, thus doing the Father’s will. Heb. 13:20, 21. Do we rejoice in his tender solicitude for us? Is his present work the object of our daily meditation and thanksgiving?
3. He will soon be manifested as the Chief Shepherd. The coming of the Lord is at hand. The warning voice has reached our ears. The third angel’s message is going forth. We are living in the last generation before the Master will rise up and “shut to the door” of mercy. Luke 13:25. He cries to you, to me, “Behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man [great or small] according as his work shall be.” Rev. 22:12.
O sleeper, awake! O worldly professor, thinking thou art safe because thou keepest the Sabbath in appearance, but not in heart, arouse thee! O idler in the Lord’s vineyard, having life, yet listless, careless of the Lord’s work, up, up, and seek the Lord to serve. Say, “Here am I; do with me as seemeth good to thee.” The time is short; the night of the world is at hand; the day of grace is far spent; call upon father, mother, brother, sister, child, neighbor, friend, and enemy if thou hast one, to flee from the wrath to come. Now, the Lord says to thee, “Son, go work to-day in my vineyard.” May you and I receive “the amaranthine crown of glory.” 1 Pet. 5:2–4.
Y—Y.
Somersetshire, England.

Modesty Before Honor

—Begin with modesty, if you would end with honor.

BIBLE STUDY WHICH GOD WILL APPROVE.

By J. M. Hopkins

BY J. M. HOPKINS.
PAUL wrote to Timothy, “Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” 2 Tim. 2:15.
The principles regulating the use of language must be observed in the study and application of Bible teachings, as well as elsewhere. It is because those principles are disregarded that so many are able to “prove anything by the Bible,” or to prove that it is self-contradictory. It is by a departure from those principles that the numerous theorists are enabled to sustain their respective theories, and thus keep alive the Babylon of the age.
All know that many words that are in common use, and of frequent occurrence in the Bible, have more than one signification, sometimes five or six, and the correct meaning in any given case must be determined by the general tenor of the subject under consideration; otherwise the subject will suffer violence at our hands. This should be done with a view to harmonize one with another, and thus let the teachings of all stand out bold and clear as the saying of one, causing unity of testimony and strength of argument. This can be done in every instance by giving the true signification to the terms used.
On the other hand, by giving an assertion made by one writer a limited signification, and that made by another writer on the same subject the broadest signification, a difficulty arises and the skeptic exclaims, “A contradiction.” But all the contradiction there is, is caused not by any conflicting statements of the writers of the Bible, but by the erroneous renderings of expositors.
A few cases will serve to illustrate, and perhaps remove a difficulty from the mind of some reader. Of the destiny of the wicked, Mal. 4:1 says: “For, behold, the day cometh that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble; and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.” Again, Obadiah says, “They shall be as though they had not been.” Verse 16.
Language more forcibly setting forth the annihilation of the wicked, as conscious beings, could not be used. But the objector, seeking to sustain the doctrine of the consciousness of the wicked throughout eternity, cites Rev. 20:10: “And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night forever and ever.”
According to popular theology, these passages are directly contradictory, and the infidel loses no time in making capital of it. But is there not some consistent way to harmonize them?
According to different lexicographers the terms “forever and ever” in the New Testament, translated from the Greek aionios and aion, may have the broadest, or they may have a limited signification. We quote but one, Schrevelius: “An age, a long period of time; indefinite duration; time, whether longer or shorter.”
With this fact thus before us, we can easily reconcile the teachings of Malachi with those of John. While a duration of time will be occupied with the punishment of the wicked, it does not necessarily imply eternity. Rev. 20:10 does not necessitate it, other scriptures forbid it; and thus by giving the “forever and ever” of Rev. 20:10 its true meaning, by being guided by that principle which prevails in the use of words, we find no discrepancy between the two statements in question.
But as further proof, if possible, let us notice the “forever” of another passage. In the Jewish age, servants were permitted to go out free in the seventh year. But in case a servant wished to remain with his master, it was necessary to place a mark upon him, that he should thereafter be known. Thus we read, “Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the doorpost; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him forever.” Ex. 21:6. Any rational being knows that the relationship of master and servant will not be sustained throughout eternity; hence the “forever” must be limited to the mortal life of one or both parties. Thus it is in all the Bible. The subject must determine the sense of the language used; otherwise we shall do despite to the word of inspiration.
Another case: Those who teach that there is no holy time in this dispensation, cite as proof the words of Paul in his epistle to the Romans, chap. 14:5: “One man esteemeth one day above another; another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.” This is claimed to sweep all holy time from this dispensation, leaving man under no obligation to observe any day. But how will this position harmonize with other scriptures? Read Rev. 1:10: “I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day.” This language was written thirty-six years after Paul’s epistle to the Romans; and how, we ask, could John recognize the “Lord’s day” then, if there was none thirty-six years before? Since, then, there was holy time in Paul’s time of writing, how shall we understand the sweeping term “every day”? We reply, By being governed by the subject, a key to which we find in verse 2: “For one believeth that he may eat all things; another, who is weak [in the faith, verse 1], eateth herbs.” Here Paul speaks of eating, and also of eating “herbs.” By referring to Ex. 12:8 we get Paul’s meaning: “And they shall eat the flesh in that night, roast with fire, and unleavened bread; and with bitter herbs they shall eat it; . . . it is the Lord’s passover.” Verse 11. Thus we see that Paul makes no allusion whatever to the Sabbath of the Lord, but his term “every day” must be restricted to those typical days, which, like the passover, ended at the cross, else he conflicts with John, which cannot be.
Another text of Scripture clearly proves that the term “every day” may have a limited signification. When the Lord rained bread from heaven, he commanded Israel to “gather a certain rate every day.” Ex. 16:4. But we read in verse 26, “Six days ye shall gather it; but on the seventh day, which is the Sabbath, in it there shall be none.”
Other instances might be named (See 1 Tim. 4:4, 5, in comparison with Isa. 66:15–17); but we have shown that in order to understand the Bible we must be governed in our researches by the subject of the writer, and compare his words with all other scriptures bearing upon the same subject. If our preconceived views may not correspond with the united testimony of Inspiration, let the “views” drop, and take instead the blessed, holy word of God, and build upon that. Jesus prayed, “Sanctify them through thy truth; thy word is truth.” John 17:17. David said, “Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.” Ps. 119:105. “And take the . . . sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.” Eph. 6:17.
We transcribe below a few lines of poetry from an anonymous writer, as they are forcible, and to the point:—
“’Tis one thing now to read the Bible through, Another thing to read to learn and do; ’Tis one thing now to read it with delight, And quite another thing to read it right. Some read it with design to learn to read, But to the subject pay but little heed; Some read to bring themselves into repute, By showing others how they can dispute; Some read it for the wonders that are there, How David killed a lion and a bear; One reads with father’s glasses on his head, And sees the thing just as his father did; Another reads through Campbell, or through Scott, And thinks it means exactly what they thought. So, many people in these latter days, Have read the Bible in so many ways, That few can tell which system is the best, For every party contradicts the rest.”
Reader, “How readest thou?” Luke 10:26.

CONFESSION AND FORGIVENESS.

By M. E. Steward

BY MRS. M. E. STEWARD.
“If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins.” 1 John 1:9. Confession is here made a condition of forgiveness; but how many take extreme views on this point, and consequently abide continually under a cloud. This was the experience of the writer, for many years. Fearing hypocrisy, I would, in social meetings even, confess passing thoughts and feelings which I supposed revealed my evil propensities. There are times, of course, when our faults should be spoken of, and “the plaster should always be as large as the sore;” but what use in making it much larger? Why inform the public of sins against individuals (to whom we should ever humbly and faithfully confess), thus putting a weapon into the hands of the enemies of the truth? Such a course only proclaims our dishonor of Him whom it is our duty to glorify in our body and in our spirit, which are God’s. 1 Cor. 6:20.
We should be careful how we take extreme views of Bible requirements. If we will pray in faith for a sanctified judgment, and then use it instead of being led by impressions alone, shall we not be less likely to bring darkness into meetings by uncalled-for confessions? How much stronger in God we might become, and how much better fruit would our testimonies bear, should we pass out of the former part of the above text, having been faithful in confessing our sins, and rest in the latter part of it,—forgiveness. How touchingly kind—what a help to our faith—the words of the apostle, God is “faithful and just to forgive.” If it be our duty to confess, is it not just as much our duty to believe that God forgives? Precious freedom wherewith Christ makes us free.
Dear brethren and sisters, how much honor have we when truly brought to Jesus by declaring our liberty through his merits, rejoicing in his gift of innocence! This is not only his due, but our sweet privilege; and while we realize what the dear Saviour is to us, we love and prize him as we could not before. Jesus invites us (Matt. 11:28,) “Come unto me, . . . and I will give you rest.”
“Rest in Jesus’ smiles—forgiven.”
With such an abiding place, how carefully must we live to never grieve Him who saves us.

HARD CIDER AND DRUNKENNESS.

By Dudley Marvin Canright

[We are sorry to find a few Sabbath-keepers who refuse to sign the total pledge, because they want to drink hard cider. Such may enjoy reading the following lines on the subject. D. M. CARNRIGHT.]
One day a cloud, in passing by, Let fall some rain-drops from the sky.
Softly they stole, by slow degrees, Down to the roots of apple trees.
And all the thirsty rootlets cried, “But for your coolness we had died.”
The brave boughs, brightened by the sun, Were decked in blossoms, every one;
And earth forgot her winter gloom When all the orchards were in bloom.
The springtime hurried on till, lo! The grass was white with petaled snow;
And hidden by the rustling leaves, In globes of green a mystery weaves.
There sunbeams, darting through the skies, Painted themselves in wondrous dyes,
Till men beheld a fruit so rare Olympian gods might crave a share.
In ample cellars, luscious piles Were stored to waken happy smiles; And many and many a heaping load Was trundled down the dusty road.
The merry farmer, blithe and gay, Whistled and sang along the way,
His happy pulses all athrill, While journeying to the cider mill.
One autumn hour the creaking press Crushed out the apples’ loveliness,
And through the tissues, once so firm, Oozed the life-slime of the dead worm.
And now and then the flowing rill Some rotted core made fouler still.
The farmer took the barreled foam, And bore it gaily to his home,
And through the chill months of the year He kept his cider pitcher near.
A dozen times a day he quaffed The filthy, but seductive draught;
And while he wiped his dripping lip, He laughed to see his young son sip,
Until at last his boy had learned To love the cup he should have spurned.
A murderer on the scaffold told Of a fair youth, with locks of gold, Who by his father’s fireside sat, In wind-swept eves, in pleasant chat.
A boy companion often there, The friendly, sparkling glass would share, Till by-and-by, alas! both knew The taste of wine and cider, too.
They sought the dram-shop side by side, They lost all noble, manly pride, And in a drunken brawl a knife Was lifted, that let out a life.
“To-day,” he cried, “his eyes might ope, And I not need this strangling rope, “If in my home had never been That tempting draught that leads to sin.”
“’Twas from my father’s apple tree The cider rolled that ruined me!”
A gray-haired man by his lone hearth, Looks out upon the dreary earth, And ever in his ears will ring That dying wail, that awful thing, “’Twas from my father’s apple tree The cider rolled that ruined me!” —Mrs. G. W. White, in Cleveland Herald.
Continue reading: WHY BLAME WM. MILLER?