Earlier text: Why Watch and Wait?NOTES ON THE INTERNATIONAL LESSON.
By W. N. Glenn
THIS psalm expresses unbounded confidence in the Lord, in the strongest possible terms, even in the most difficult situation. "The Lord is my light and my salvation." What more could he be? The writer adds, by way of emphasis, "The Lord is the strength of my life." Now what he was to David, he will be to any one who will delight in his service, and implicitly trust him under all circumstances. A light is for a guide, and God has given us the only true light in existence—the Scriptures of truth. "Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path." Ps. 119: 105. All other pretended lights are but darkness. "To the law and the testimony; if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." Isa. 8: 20. "Take heed, therefore, that the light which is in thee be not darkness," is the warning of Him who is our salvation. THE second and third verses teach us to trust God in times of present trouble. David had had much bitter experience with enemies, from the very beginning of his public life, and he learned to lean upon God even "though an host should encamp against" him. This dependence always led him to give thanks for deliverance, and to recognize the hand of the Lord in the discomfiture of his enemies. Of all the sins laid at David's door, we have no record of his being boastful. His testimony in Ps. 46: 1 is that "God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble." Just what man needs is present help; although this is the point where faith is generally weak, yet present trouble is that which really concerns him most. If one can pass present trial, and through it learn a lesson of confidence in God, he is better prepared for future emergencies. It was confidence in present help that sustained Elisha when surrounded by the host of the king of Syria, and he was enabled to say to his servant, "They that be for us are more than they that be with them." 2 Kings 6: 16. Herein is one great benefit of having a High Priest which can be "touched with the feeling of our infirmities." "Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need." Heb. 4: 15, 16. IN the fourth verse the psalmist expresses one supreme desire, namely, to dwell in the house of the Lord, all the days of his life; and "to behold the beauty [or excellence] of the Lord." As he could not expect to dwell in the house of the Lord at Jerusalem, which would not be built till after his death, we must infer that this "one thing" that he so much desired and sought after was eternal life in the kingdom of God. There and there only could he expect to see the "beauty of the Lord." We are told through Isaiah that to him that "walketh righteously, and speaketh uprightly," bread shall be given and his water shall be sure; that his eyes shall see the "King in his beauty" and "behold the land that is very far off." Isa. 33: 15, 16. If it was wisdom for David to make this the "one thing" which he desired, is it not wisdom for us to follow the advice of the Son of David: "Seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things [food and raiment] shall be added unto you"? Matt. 6: 33. "For in the time of trouble he shall hide me in his pavilion," &c. Verse 5. This is not only applicable to David's time and circumstances, but is also prophetic. It holds good for all time. Read also Ps. 91 throughout, which is a promise of deliverance from the plagues of the last time of trouble upon the wicked, as shown in verse 8. This same time is brought to view in Dan. 12: 1, a time of trouble such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time; but the Lord's people "shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book." "TEACH me thy way, O Lord, and lead me in a plain path, because of mine enemies." Verse 11. In Eastern countries a public way was a very prominent feature. Kings and emperors built highways as memorials of themselves; as well as for public convenience. Being constructed in a very substantial manner, hills being graded or cut and ravines being filled, these ways remained for hundreds and thousands of years, and were so plain that they could not be mistaken. There are in existence to-day portions of the famous Appian Way, over which St. Paul traveled from Puteoli to Rome (Acts 28), and which was constructed by Appius Claudius some three hundred years before the Christian era. Christ used a well-understood figure when he said, "I am the way," &c. John 14: 6. See also Isa. 35: 8, 9. It was said of John the Baptist, that he was "the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight." Matt. 3: 3. Then the Lord has a way, and he would have us walk in it. Isa. 30: 21. But let us note how John the Baptist went about preparing the way of the Lord, and we may get a clue to what that means. The first thing he did was to call upon the people to repent, for the kingdom of Heaven was at hand. What next? Those who heeded the warning were baptized by him, confessing their sins. "Sin is the transgression of the law." Then John's idea of preparing the way was to have the law properly observed before the King's arrival. There were grave impediments in the way, which the King would not approve when he should come. "Cast ye up, cast ye up, prepare the way, take up the stumbling-block out of the way of my people." Isa. 57: 14. There were general and gross violations of the law, and to have everything in an acceptable condition when the King should come it was important that they repent and observe his commandments. In the first psalm we find a contrast which makes this point still plainer. "Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners," &c. (So sinners have a "way" also.) "But his delight is in the law of the Lord." Then the opposite of the sinner's way is a delight in the law of the Lord, which must be the "way of the righteous," further contrasted in the sixth verse with the "way of the ungodly." It is conclusive then that the way of the righteous is the Lord's way, for a blessing is assured to those who walk in it. "Blessed are the undefiled in the way, who walk in the law of the Lord." Ps. 119: 1. But if it was so important to have a return to the observance of the law that the way might be prepared for Christ's first advent, when his mission was all love and mercy, how much more important to be found with the way prepared, and the law intact, when he shall come the second time to take "vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ." 1 Thess. 1: 8. W. N. GLENN. ON the revenue from the sale of liquors Wesley said: "However, what is paid (the duty) brings in a large revenue to the king.' Is this an equivalent for the lives of his subjects? Would his majesty sell 100,000 of his subjects yearly to Algiers for £500,000? Surely, no! Will he then sell them for that sum to be butchered by their own countrymen? 'But otherwise the swine for the navy cannot be fed.' Not unless they are fed with human flesh! Not unless they are fatted with human blood! Oh! tell it not in Constantinople that the English raise the royal revenue by selling the flesh and blood of their countrymen." WE get a sense of the horrible evils of the drinking curse when we read, in a report by the chaplain of the Magdalen Asylum, of this city, that of eighty-nine fallen women in the asylum at one time, all but two had fallen through drink. A lady missionary among this class says that of two thousand known personally to her, there were only ten cases in which intoxicating liquors were not in large part responsible for their fall. Here is another illustration of the immense blessing to be expected from prohibition.—N. Y. Independent. THERE has been introduced into the New York assembly a bill which prohibits the sale of cigarettes or tobacco to minors under sixteen years of age. A law to that effect already exists in New Jersey, and its example might advantageously be followed in other States. EVERY moderate drinker could abandon the intoxicating cup if he would, and every inebriate would if he could. "Rule and ruin," is the motto of alcohol. Extremes to be Avoided.
By Editor
THERE seems to be a natural tendency in the human mind to go to extremes. In what we like or dislike, what we believe or disbelieve, we naturally partake of a partisan spirit, and elevate one side too high, and thrust the other down too low. In this article it is our object to point out what we consider dangers, or dangerous errors, into which there is a liability to run on the subject of punishment; on the infliction of the penalty of the divine law. That there has been a recoil from the belief in eternal torment, from the terrible descriptions of the unending burnings and agonies of the lost, is too well known to call for a word of proof. Not only have "the common people" rejected that old view, but the ministry, even the Methodist ministry, have rejected it; not, perhaps, in theory, but in fact, or in their minds and feelings. We feel warranted in making this statement by the report of a Cincinnati paper, four years ago, at the General Conference, when a reporter asked a number of bishops and other eminent men in the church; and they readily disavowed their belief in torment in literal fire. Now in repudiating that point in the long-time faith of the church, they of course accept the idea that the Scripture expressions on that subject are figures of speech, and not literal descriptions of that which shall be. And that is exactly what the Universalists always believed, and the orthodox always denied. The real ground of controversy, so long contested by the orthodox and the Universalists, has been yielded by the former. They profess to believe just as they did of old, but it is in an "accommodated" sense, as the German Neologists take the Scriptures, or in their "spiritual meaning," as the American churches denominate the same thing. Of course there are exceptions; it would be strange indeed if there were not. We are happy to say that Bishop Merrill has not conceded an inch of ground to the Universalists. Only one reason can be given for this general declension from the old faith on that point. The descriptions of eternal torment, of the eternity of the torment, and of the eternally increasing torment, were so terrible, so shocking to our human sympathies, that there was a natural recoil from their horrors. But in rejecting that faith they have not adopted anything in its stead; so that the people are left without any definition of the penalty of sin to be finally inflicted by the Judge of all the earth. What spiritual fire and brimstone may be, no one has undertaken to inform the world. It is only a matter of endless conjecture. Then, taking up Professor Stuart's system of "hermeneutics," wherein the book of the Revelation is treated as a highly-colored "drama," or a "panorama" of events then past, or transpiring in the time of the apostle, and we have the whole subject set aside, to the great peace and comfort of all carnally-minded people! For whether this dramatic scene be considered in a serious or comical light, must depend altogether on the frame of the mind of the beholder. In either case it can be of no possible interest to us in this generation! It may be inquired if that fanciful view of Professor Stuart was ever received by orthodox people. Yes; in its time it was well spoken of by ministers and church papers. Why? Oh, it was accepted in their extremity as a check on Adventism. But Adventism rests on the sure basis of God's word, and outlives all the "checks" which are vainly thrown in its path. But not all who reject the horrors and fallacies of the recent church faith—for it was part truth and part fallacy—have consented to float on an open sea without compass or rudder. Many, by reading the Scriptures, have settled into the conviction that they actually mean what they say, and that "The soul that sinneth, it shall die;" Eze. 18:4; that "all the wicked will God destroy." Ps. 145:20. When we consider that the popular belief—if it can be called a belief—is nearly a negation; that in rejecting the scenes of imaginary horrors they have rejected the most positive statements of the divine word, this faith that the wages of sin is death, or everlasting destruction, is one of singular merit. 1. It rests upon the plain, literal reading of the Scriptures, given in hundreds of texts. It is not a doctrine of inferences. 2. It is free from all the objections that press around the theory of unending torment. 3. It does not have to evade any of the explicit statements of the Bible concerning torment in a lake of fire and brimstone. Death and destruction may assuredly be inflicted in a lake of fire. Having arrived at this conclusion, is the subject thereby free from danger by extremes? We think not. Many who have adopted this view, which we think to be in full harmony with the Scriptures, have had their minds influenced by the recoil from the former faith, and have shown the effect in their teachings in regard to this penalty of the law. We cannot better illustrate our meaning than by quoting from the late George Storrs. He said:— "The wages of sin, then, is not suffering, but death. It is not dying, but death. It is not the pain of dying, but to have life extinguished—to be dead; that only is death. . . . No pangs, no struggles, nor agonies, connected with dying, are death, or any part of death." That this was spoken in an argument made to prove that the wicked will not have a resurrection does not affect our present purpose. We have heard the same position taken by those who do believe in the resurrection of the unjust. In our pamphlet entitled, "A Vindication of the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Unjust," published in 1870, we made the following remarks on Mr. Storrs' view of the infliction of the penalty:— "1. Our ideas of the penalty of the law must always stand corrected by the exposition and practice of the divine Lawgiver. His first announcement of the penalty was this: 'Thou shalt surely die.' But Mr. Storrs says it is not dying, but 'to be dead.' If so, it should read, Thou shalt surely be dead. The soul that sinneth, it shall be dead. The wages of sin is to be dead. But such terms are never used in the Scriptures. The phrase, shalt die, clearly points to the process whereby he should become dead. I am aware that this statement of Mr. Storrs is often reiterated in controversies on the subject of life and death; but it is erroneous nevertheless. 'The soul that sinneth, it shall die'—not shall be dead. Now if Mr. Storrs could devise some means whereby the sinner can be dead without undergoing the process of dying, then with more show of reason might he endeavor to disconnect the pangs, struggles, and agonies connected with dying, from the penalty. But the divine expressions include the process of dying—shalt die—and his assertion contradicts both reason and Scripture. We do not deny that the penalty reaches to the state of being dead; for there is no such thing as death unless that consummation be reached. But we do deny that it excludes the act of dying, with its pangs and agonies. Both are included in the penalty. "2. If 'to be dead' were alone the penalty, and the pangs, etc., of death, were 'not the penalty or any part of it,' then all the 'pangs, struggles, and agonies, connected with' the infliction of the penalty, death, are so much over and above the penalty, and, of course, according to Mr. Storrs' showing, so much of manifest injustice on the part of the Being who inflicts the penalty! And it would therefore be necessary for God to insure an easy, peaceful death, to the sinner, in order that he might be dead, in accordance with justice, that is, without having added to the 'penalty clearly indicated,' 'pangs, struggles, or agonies,' which are no part of the penalty, and cannot, therefore, be justly inflicted! But against this we say:— "3. God has not only threatened death to the evil-doer, but he has also threatened 'tribulation and anguish,' torment with fire and brimstone, plagues with grievous sores and pains. And all the illustrations given in the Scriptures, of the justice and wrath of God against sin, include such ideas as these. Now these are the desert of sin, and part of its penalty, or they are not. If they are, then Mr. Storrs' exposition of principles is without foundation in truth. But if they are not, as Mr. Storrs asserts, then, according to his theory, these threats can never be fulfilled without God thereby proving himself unjust!" We have heard it said, and no doubt with honest intention, that the second death would be instantaneous, as no one could live a single moment in fire and brimstone. This is presumption; it is a conclusion not at all consistent with the declarations of the Scriptures. It is forbidden by the fact that all will be rewarded according to their works; that it will be more tolerable for some than for others in that day. The danger which we wish to guard against is that of belittling the penalty of the divine law. Take Rev. 14:10, 11; put any construction which is possible, within the bounds of reason, upon this language, and it gives the idea of something extremely terrible. It is either this or it is nothing. If it is not torment, if it is not in fire and brimstone, and if it is not continued through a series of days and nights, then we fail to see what can be made of it. We are well aware that, in regard to the question of duration in this text, similar words are used in Isa. 34:9, 10, where all admit that the time is limited, that it is not unending. And we know that forever is used in Ex. 21:6, where the period indicated might end in a moment, because it means during a man's life, which might end at any time. But the terms used in Rev. 14:9, 10, do not admit the idea of instantaneous death, or of merely momentary torment. And we question the propriety of that method of reasoning by which it is proposed to determine the amount of punishment which may or may not consistently be meted to transgressors of the law of God. What justice requires, whether an eternity of torment, or a speedy death, is not ours to determine. We do not and cannot know, in this state where "we know in part," the sinfulness of sin, the justice of God, nor the interests of justice which may be involved before all the universe; we are not competent to sit in that tribunal. All that we can know of the issues of that day must be by direct revelation. And the Scriptures speak in no uncertain tones. "The wrath of God" will rest upon the sinner; the terrors of that wrath we cannot measure. "The wages of sin is death," and they who prove themselves unworthy of eternal life, who will not come to Christ, the only Saviour, that they may have life, will "utterly perish in their own corruption," and the indignation and anger of the Lord will cease in their destruction. Isa. 10:25. While we fully believe in the utter destruction of the wicked—that they will be left neither root nor branch, and be as though they had not been,—we believe also that "the terrors of the Lord" are as far beyond our conception as are the joys and glory that God hath prepared for them that love him. Let us not detract from that reverence and awe with which all should listen to his words. The Resurrection.
By Ellet Joseph Waggoner
IN the preceding articles concerning the coming of the Lord, we have learned that he will certainly come, that his coming will be manifest to all, that it is for the purpose of receiving all his disciples to himself, and that this is accomplished by the resurrection of the dead and the translation of the living. One or two more texts on the subject of the resurrection will be sufficient. When Job was suffering the deepest affliction, and at the point of death, he asked: "If a man die, shall he live again?" This was a very pertinent question for a man in his situation. Notice the form of the question: Not, "Shall he continue to live?" but, "Shall he live again?" This expression shows clearly that Job made a plain distinction between life and death. "Again" signifies "another time," and indicates that an interval of time has elapsed since the same thing occurred or existed before. Job anticipated a time in which there would be no life, in which he would not exist, and he asked whether life would ever be restored. But he asked the question only to answer it, for he immediately added: "All the days of my appointed time will I wait till my change come. Thou shalt call, and I will answer thee; thou wilt have a desire to the work of thine hands." Job 14:14, 15. Now we may ask, When will the Lord call and be answered by those who are dead? Christ himself furnishes the answer: "For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; and hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man. Marvel not at this; for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth." John 5:26-29. And David says that it is at his coming that the Lord calls to his people. Ps. 50:3, 4. Isaiah, in prophetic vision, saw the end of the world, and the coming of the Lord. Speaking of the triumph of the righteous, he said: "He [the Lord] will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord God will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the rebuke of his people shall he take away from off all the earth; for the Lord hath spoken it." Isa. 25:8. If the Lord has spoken it, it must be done. Paul tells how and when it will be done: "Behold, I show you a mystery; we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump; for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed." 1 Cor. 15:51, 52. Here, then, is the "change" of which Job spoke. It is a change from death to life, from mortal to immortal. And in what state did Job expect to be until this change should come? In death, for it was that of which he was speaking. The apostle also says that the dead as well as the living are to be changed. And here we find death called a sleep. We shall not all sleep, but both dead and living shall be changed. "For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory." 1 Cor. 15:53, 54. Death is not swallowed up in victory till Christ comes. The saints do not shout, "O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?" until the voice of the Son of God calls them forth from their tombs. And what does this prove? That death and the grave have for a time triumphed, and held them captives. If it were not so, if the saints had passed at death immediately to a state of eternal bliss, they could not be obliged to wait until the coming of the Lord to shout their victory. They could at once voice their contempt for its weakness; or, more consistently, they could ascribe to it thanksgiving and praise for having liberated them from the toils of earth, and ushered them into the joys of Heaven. Now we ask, What is the necessity for a resurrection of the dead? If the faithful of past ages are now "safe in the arms of Jesus," as is so often taught and sung, what more can they need? Of what benefit to them will a resurrection be? None at all. The Bible doctrine of the resurrection is directly opposed to the theory that men are taken to Heaven at death. The Bible writers rested their entire hope in a resurrection; and this proves that they had no idea of the possibility (since they must die) of being with Christ in any other way. Paul said that he counted all things loss for Christ, and for him gave up everything, and was willing to know the "fellowship of his sufferings," and be "made conformable unto his death." And what for? "If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead." Phil. 3:11. Why did he esteem it so all-important to attain unto the resurrection of the dead? Let him answer: "If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not?" 1 Cor. 15:32. He had no hope in anything else. Let him once be convinced that the dead would not rise, and all incentive to action would have been taken away from one of the most tireless and zealous men that ever lived. Surely, then, the resurrection is a doctrine of no small importance. In order to try to harmonize the doctrine of a final resurrection with the theory that the spirits of the good are taken to Heaven immediately upon the death of the body, it is claimed that they do not receive the fullness of their reward until the resurrection. But this theory is overthrown by Paul's words: "What advantageth it me, if the dead rise not?" Is it nothing to be in the presence of God and Christ and the angels? Is it nothing to be exempt from pain, and free from the assaults of Satan? Certainly to gain such a state, even if it were not the fullness of joy, is worth a great deal of effort. Paul's words show that he had no knowledge of any benefit that would accrue to the dead except through the resurrection. And if he taught men to place all their hope in the coming of the Lord and the resurrection, who shall dare to teach otherwise? If he did not know the exact truth in regard to the matter, to whom has a later revelation been made? So true are all the words of Paul that even an angel from Heaven would bring a curse upon himself if he should teach anything different. Gal. 1:8. In view of the testimony that has been quoted to show that the resurrection takes place at the coming of the Lord, it is hardly worth while to notice the position that it is at death; that the rising of the soul or spirit from the body is the resurrection. This theory makes the saints be with the Lord at death, and thus makes death to be the coming of the Lord, which we have seen is a false and absurd position. There were some in Paul's day who taught that the resurrection was past, and he said that they had erred concerning the truth, and were overthrowing the faith of some. 2 Tim. 2:18. Nothing could more surely overthrow faith than such teaching, for who that accepted it could have any belief in the promises of a future second coming of Christ? It is as impossible to harmonize the theory of a past resurrection, or a resurrection at death, with the doctrine of the second coming of Christ, as to mix oil with water. In closing, we will call attention to Rev. 20:4-6. John says: "I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, . . . and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years." "Ah," says one, "that is what I believe; the souls of the martyrs went at once to live with Christ." Let us see; these are not all the dead that John saw. He continues: "But the rest of the dead lived not again till the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection; on such the second death hath no power." Now notice: "The rest of the dead lived not again till the thousand years were finished." Then the dead that John first saw were living again. And if living again, this must be the second life, which is separated from the first by an interval called death. Then death and life are not the same. And this "living again," after an interval, is called a resurrection. Then what is the resurrection? It is the "living again" of those who have been dead, and not the continued existence of something that has never died. Those who do not have part in the first resurrection, do not "live again" until the thousand years are finished. Then they have a resurrection. Now allowing that "the rest of the dead" died at the very beginning of the thousand years, and we have their death and their resurrection separated by a period of a thousand years. That does not look like a resurrection at death. E. J. W.