Earlier text: TEN POPULAR OBJECTIONS TO THE SABBATH ANSWEREDBattle Creek Bible Class. July 18, 1868.
By J. M. A.
REMARK. The apostle here pursues and completes the exhortation commenced in the previous chapter, drawn from the comparison of the Saviour with Moses. Before proceeding to consider the character of Christ as a high priest, in comparison with the Jewish priesthood, he proves from an argument based on Old Testament scriptures—which were regarded as good authority by the Hebrews—that there still remains a rest for the people of God; that the promise of rest made to the Hebrews of old, as really pertains to Christians as it did to them, and that there is the same danger of Christians coming short of this promise, through unbelief and disobedience, as there was of those to whom it was first made. Verse 1. Let us therefore fear, lest a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it. Q. From what is this conclusion drawn? A. From the noted example related in the previous chapter, where Israel of old hardened their hearts, and so through unbelief and disobedience came short of the rest promised them. Q. What kind of fear is here recommended? A. That which leads to caution, care, and watchfulness, and makes one continually apprehensive of the possibility of failing to receive the promise. A. God's rest. It is called his rest because it is that which he enjoys, and which alone he can confer. Q. To what is reference probably made, in the phrase, “come short of it?” A. Probably to the journey of Israel to the promised land, where they came short and fell in the wilderness. Verse 2. For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them; but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it. Q. What is meant here by the phrase, “gospel preached?” A. Gospel means good news, or glad tidings, and the meaning here is, that the good news, or glad tidings of rest, is announced to us as really as it was to Israel of old. REMARK. “The translation here given,” says Dr. Barnes, “by no means conveys the sense of the original.” As it is here given it would seem that the gospel, as we understand it, or the whole plan of salvation, was communicated to the Jews as well as to us. But this is not the idea. The discussion has reference only to the promise of rest, and the assertion of the apostle is, that we are evangelized (for such is the literal translation,) as well as they, or that the good news of a promise of rest is made to us as really as it was to them. Q. Why were they not profited by the “word preached?” A. Because they despised and rejected it, as many are in danger of doing at the present time. They lived and died as many do now, as though no such promise had been made, or, as though it was of the smallest possible importance whether they received it or not. They heard, but faith was not mixed with their hearing. It is not enough to hear the word of God, but we must believe it. Verse 3. For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest; although the works were finished from the foundation of the world. Q. What is the meaning of this passage? A. The meaning is doubtless this: God made a promise of rest to those who believe; but those to whom the promise was first made were excluded through unbelief; and the argument, therefore, is, that the promise is still good to believers, inasmuch as God designed that some should enter into his rest; or that it should not be provided and offered in vain. For Scripture proof that God has a rest which he calls his own, reference is made to the creation, when he finished his work and rested the seventh day. Q. But it reads, do enter, &c.—in the present tense. How reconcile this with the idea that the promise is future? A. In Scripture the present tense is often used where it clearly means the future. As an instance, Paul says, in chap. xii, 22, “Ye are come unto Mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, &c.” Q. “If they shall enter,” &c. What contingency is here designed to be expressed by the word if? A. Not any. The literal meaning is, “They shall not enter, &c.” See chap. iii, 11. Verse 4. For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all his works. Q. Does the apostle introduce this text to prove anything respecting the Sabbath? A. No. He brings it to prove that God’s rest was not limited to the promised land of Canaan, but that his rest had claims to more ancient authority. Verse 5. And in this place again, If they shall enter into my rest. Q. What does Paul mean by “this place again?” A. He means that God spoke in this place again, concerning his rest,—i. e. in the 95th Psalm, to which reference had been made so often. Verse 6. Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief. Q. From the apostle’s argument in the previous verses what is his conclusion? A. He holds, from the proof given, that it yet remains that some must enter into his rest, and as those to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief, it therefore follows, by clear inference, that those who believe will enter in. Verse 7. Again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, To-day, after so long a time; as it is said, To-day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts. Q. What can you say of what is stated in this verse? A. It seems to be an additional thought of the apostle, that came to him while stating his conclusion, as commenced in the 6th verse and finished in the 9th. He quotes from this same 95th Psalm, and his object is to show that the promise was not confined to ancient Israel, but that “after so long a time,” nearly 500 years, David regarded the promise as still existing, in that he limited a certain day wherein man might still be invited to partake of it, saying, To-day, &c. Verse 8. For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day. Q. What can you say of Jesus in this passage? A. It means Joshua (see margin), the successor of Moses, who led Israel into Canaan. Jesus means one who saves, or Saviour, and is the Greek mode of writing Joshua. Paul here further proves that the promised rest does not relate wholly to the land of Canaan; if it did, David would not have spoken, so long after, of another day. Verse 9. There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God. A. It is the apostle’s conclusion, plainly stated; that, according to the Scriptures, there must, and does still, remain a rest (or keeping of a Sabbath, margin,) promised to the people of God. We may conclude from the literal signification of this rest, that it will be the observance of a sacred repose, like the “keeping of a Sabbath,” the same as God enjoyed when he rested on the seventh day from his work of creation. Q. Is the Sabbath—properly so called—here referred to? A. It is not. The word here rendered rest, is not the same original as Sabbath. Manner or quality seems to be referred to rather than time. Q. Why Paul’s anxiety to prove that there still remaineth a rest for the people of God? A. A new system of religion had been introduced. The Jewish rites and ceremonies had been supplanted by the Christian. These Hebrews, to whom Paul was writing, were asked to abandon forever their long-cherished mode of worship, to which they were so much attached, and accept, instead, the simplicity of the Christian religion—Paul introduces Christ to them as the grand center, or great high priest, of the new system. Before accepting all this, the query might naturally arise in the minds of the Hebrews, whether the promise of God did actually reach beyond their dispensation; or whether, if their ancient system was to be done away, and cease forever, the promise did not also cease with it. It seemed, therefore, important under such circumstances, to convince them beyond a doubt that the promise was still good, and that they had still better reasons to hope and labor under the new system than under the old. Unless he could convince them thus it would be useless to further urge upon them the claims of Christ; but having thoroughly enlightened them on this point, he is prepared to present to them Christ as their great high priest, and proceed to consider his character as such, in contrast with the priesthood of the former dispensation. Verse 10. For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his. Q. Does not this prove the immortality of the soul, and that people now enter into rest when they die? A. Do not think it does. This is another instance of the use of the present tense to express what will take place in the future. The meaning is, that he who shall be so fortunate as to enter into the heavenly rest, will then cease from his own works, as God did from his, when his creative work was completed. Verse 11. Let us labor therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief. Q. Is the labor that we are here exhorted to perform, the same as the works referred to in verse 10? A. Doubtless it is. To finally overcome, and gain the heavenly rest, this exhortation of the apostle must be heeded. The failure of the Israelites to enter the rest of Canaan is given as an example of unbelief; and indeed it is said, 1 Cor. x, 11, that “all these things101 happened unto them for ensamples; and they are written for our admonition,” &c. J. M. A. METRICAL VERSION OF PSALM XXV.
By J. H. W.
1 To thee alone, O Lord, my soul would cling; 2 In thee alone I trust, O God, my King.
Let me not be ashamed while thee I praise;
Let not my foes a shout of triumph raise. 3 Yea, let not one that loves thy glorious name,
And waits before thy courts, be put to shame.
But let them be ashamed, who, without cause,
Trample upon thy good and righteous laws. 4 Show me thy ways, teach me thy paths, O Lord, 5 Lead in thy truth; teach me thy sacred word.
For thou the God of my salvation art,
On thee all day I fix my waiting heart. 6 Remember all thy mercies, kind and sure;
Thy loving-kindness ever shall endure. 7 Remember not the follies of my youth,
Nor my transgressions of thy law of truth.
But as thy mercy is, so let thy word
Be unto me, for thy name's sake, O Lord. 8 Upright and good is God, our heart shall say,
Therefore will he teach sinners in the way. 9 They that are meek he will in judgment guide,
The meek shall in the way of right abide. 10 His paths are truth and mercy, to reward
Such as his testimonies do regard. 11 Not for my sake, but for thy glorious name,
Pardon my sin, and keep my face from shame. 12 What man in fear to all thy words takes heed?
Him in the way of right the Lord shall lead. 13 His soul shall dwell in ease and quietness;
His children shall the promised land possess. 14 Even the hidden secret of the Lord
Shall be with them that tremble at his word.
And plainly to their sight shall he reveal
The covenant and counsel of his will. 15 Mine eyes with pleasure shall his glory greet;
From danger he shall pluck my wandering feet. 16 Unto me, in thy grace and mercy, turn.
Afflicted, desolate, my soul doth mourn. 17 The troubles of my heart are spread abroad,
Bring me from all my deep distress, O God. 18 Upon my pain and my affliction look,
Forgive my sins, and blot them from thy book. 19 Behold my foes, how many and how great,
Who do my soul pursue with cruel hate. 20 Oh! keep my soul secure, my gracious King;
From dangers near do thou deliverance bring,
Nor let me ever yield to sin and shame,
For all my trust is in thy holy name. 21 Let honesty and right in life and word,
Preserve me, for I wait upon thee, Lord. 22 Thou God of Israel, redeem thine own,
Thy chosen race, who worship at thy throne. 2 Kings xiv, 9. And Jehoash the king of Israel, sent to Amaziah king of Judah, saying, The thistle that was in Lebanon sent to the cedar that was in Lebanon, saying, Give thy daughter to my son to wife; and there passed by a wild beast that was in Lebanon, and trode down the thistle. Thistle, cedar. The orientals still speak of their rulers under the similitude of different trees. Some men are always known by the name of certain trees. Thus a person who is tall, and stoops a little, is called the cocoa-nut tree, and he who has long legs and arms, the banyan, which spreads its arms, and lets fall its supporters to the ground. It is therefore not very improbable, that Jehoash was known by the name of the cedar, and Amaziah by that of the thistle.—Roberts. HEZEKIAH PUNISHED FOR SHOWING HIS TREASURES.
Chap. xx, 15. And he said, What have they seen in thy house? And Hezekiah answered, All the things that are in my house have they seen; there is nothing among my treasures that I have not showed them. The king of Babylon, knowing that Hezekiah had refused submission to the Assyrians, seems to have proposed to enter into a confederacy with him against that potent nation, and Hezekiah hearkened unto them, and, in order to convince the ambassadors that he was a desirable ally, he showed them all his treasures, and armor, and preparations for war, of every kind, from pride and ostentation. He seems likewise to have missed the opportunity of instructing the Chaldeans concerning the perfections &c., of Jehovah, who had wrought the miracles which had excited their attention. Though Hezekiah's sickness preceded Sennacherib's invasion and overthrow, it is probable this embassy arrived after that event; when Hezekiah's exhausted treasuries had been abundantly replenished by the spoil of the Assyrians.—Scott. Chap. xxiii, 10. And he defiled Tophet, which is in the valley of the children of Hinnom, that no man might make his son or his daughter to pass through the fire to Molech. Jerome says, Tophet was a fine, pleasant place, well watered with fountains, and adorned with gardens. The valley of the son of Hinnom, or Gehenna, was in one part; here it appears the sacred rites of Molech were performed; and to this all the filth of the city was carried, and perpetual fires were kept up, in order to consume it. Hence it has been considered a type of hell; and in this sense it is used in the New Testament.—Dr. A. Clarke. Chap. xxiii, 11. And he took away the horses that the king of Judah had given to the sun, at the entering in of the house of the Lord, by the chambers of Nathan-melech the chamberlain, which was in the suburbs, and burned the chariots of the sun with fire. The worshipers of the sun represented that luminary by a man seated in a chariot drawn by swift and furious horses, and therefore they dedicated to him horses and chariots.—Scott. The Hindoos believe that the sun is drawn in his course by seven horses, and the deity sits in his one-wheeled chariot.—Roberts. The Greeks believed the sun was drawn by four horses, named Pyrois, Eous, Æthon, and Phlegon.—Lempriere. THE LORD'S HOUSE AND KINGDOM.
1 Chron. xxii, 14. But I will settle him in mine house and in my kingdom for ever; and his throne shall be established for evermore. In the parallel passage, the Lord says to David, thine house, thy kingdom; here, [16, 17.] mine house, &c. The Lord was Israel's king; and David and Solomon were his vicegerents, as well as types of the Messiah, in whose church and kingdom all these promises and predictions have their grand fulfilment; which shows that this principally belonged to the Messiah, of whom David was but a figure.—Patrick. DAVID'S PREPARATION FOR THE TEMPLE.
Chap. xxii, 14. Now, behold, in my trouble I have prepared for the house of the Lord, a hundred thousand talents of gold, and a thousand thousand talents of silver; and of brass and iron without weight; for it is in abundance; timber also and stone have I prepared; and thou mayest add thereto. The gold and silver here mentioned, if computed by the ordinary weight of the talent, would amount to eight or nine hundred millions sterling; and this enormous quantity would have more than sufficed to erect an edifice, as large as the temple itself, apart from its courts, of solid gold and silver. Compared therefore with the size of the temple, and with the gains of Solomon, when the precious metals became common at Jerusalem, (1 Kings xiv, 14, 28.) it is generally concluded, either that some mistake has taken place in the numeral letters, or that a talent of inferior weight and value is meant. David had collected this wealth for the temple in his trouble, or in his poverty. He had set out in life very poor; he had passed through a constant succession of trials and troubles, not only before he came to the kingdom, but during his whole reign; and all his prosperity was the result of the Lord's singular kindness, in making him a gainer by all the attempts of his numerous enemies. He seems also to speak of his preparation as a small matter, whether compared with the greatness of the Lord to whom it was dedicated, or with his own obligations to him.—Scott. DANGER OF RICHES.
By John Wesley
AN ADDRESS TO THE METHODISTS BY JOHN WESLEY.
O ye Methodists, hear the word of the Lord! I have a message from God to all men; but to you above all. For above forty years I have been a servant to you and to your fathers. And I have not been as a reed shaken by the wind; I have not varied in my testimony. I have testified to you the very same thing from the first day even until now. But “who hath believed our report?” I fear, not many rich; I fear there is need to apply to some of you those terrible words of the Apostle, “Go to now, ye rich men! weep and howl for the miseries which shall come upon you. Your gold and silver is cankered, and the rust of them shall witness against you, and shall eat your flesh, as it were fire.” Certainly it will, unless ye both save all you can, and give all you can. But who of you hath considered this, since you first heard the Will of the Lord concerning it? Who is now determined to consider and practise it? By the grace of God, begin to-day! O ye lovers of money, hear the word of the Lord! Suppose ye that money, though multiplied as the sand of the sea, can give happiness? Then you are “given up to a strong delusion, to believe a lie;” a palpable lie, confuted daily by a thousand experiments. Open your eyes! look all around you! are the richest men the happiest? Have those the largest share of content, who have the largest possessions? Is not the very reverse true? Is it not a common observation, that the richest of men are, in general, the most discontented, the most miserable? Had not the far greater part of them more content when they had less money? Look into your own breasts. If you are increased in goods, are you proportionately increased in happiness? You have more substance: but have you more content? You know that in seeking happiness from riches, you are only striving to drink out of empty cups. And let them be painted and gilded ever so finely, they are empty still. O ye that desire to be rich, hear ye the word of the Lord! Why should ye be stricken any more? Will not even experience teach you wisdom? Will ye leap into a pit with your eyes open? Why should you any more fall into temptation? It cannot be, but temptation will beset you, as long as you are in the body. But though it should beset you on every side, why will you enter into it? There is no necessity for this; it is your own voluntary act and deed. Why should you any more plunge yourselves into a snare, into the trap Satan has laid for you, that is ready to break your bones in pieces; to crush your soul to death? After fair warning, why should you sink any more into foolish and hurtful desires? Desires as inconsistent with reason, as they are with religion itself. Desires that have done you more hurt already, than all the treasures upon earth can countervail. Have they not hurt you already, have they not wounded you in the tenderest part, by slackening, if not utterly destroying, your “hunger and thirst after righteousness?” Have you now the same longing that you had once, for the whole image of God? Have you the same vehement desire as you formerly had, of “going on unto perfection?” Have they not hurt you by weakening your faith?” Have you now faith’s “abiding impression, realizing things to come?” Do you endure, in all temptations, from pleasure or pain, “seeking him that is invisible?” Have you every day, and every hour, an uninterrupted sense of his presence? Have they not hurt you with regard to your hope? Have you now a hope full of immortality? Are you still big with earnest expectation of all the great and precious promises? Do you now “taste the powers of the world to come?” Do you “sit in heavenly places with Christ Jesus?” Have they not so hurt you, as to stab your religion to the heart? Have they not cooled (if not quenched) your love of God? This is easily determined. Have you the same delight in God which you once had? can you now say,
> “I nothing want beneath, above,
> Happy, happy, in thy love!”
I fear not. And if your love of God is in any wise decayed, so is also your love of your neighbor. You are then hurt in the very life and spirit of your religion! If you lose love, you lose all. Are you not hurt with regard to your humility? If you are increased in goods, it cannot well be otherwise. Many will think you a better, because you are a richer man; and how can you help thinking so yourself? Especially, considering the commendations which some will give you in simplicity, and many with a design to serve themselves of you. If you are hurt in your humility, it will appear by this token: you are not so teachable as you were, not so advisable; you are not so easy to be convinced; not so easy to be persuaded; you have a much better opinion of your own judgment, and are more attached to your own will. Formerly one might guide you with a thread: now one cannot turn you with a cart-rope. You were glad to be admonished or reproved: but that time is past. And you now account a man your enemy because he tells you the truth. Oh, let each of you calmly consider this, and see if it be not your own picture! Are you not equally hurt, with regard to your meekness? You had once learned an excellent lesson of him that was meek as well as lowly in heart. When you were reviled, you reviled not again. You did not return railing for railing, but contrariwise, blessing. Your love was not provoked, but enabled you on all occasions to overcome evil with good. Is this your case now? I am afraid not. I fear, you cannot “bear all things.” Alas, it may rather be said, you can bear nothing; no injury, nor even affront. How quickly are you ruffled! How readily does that occur, “What! to use me so! What insolence is this! How did he dare do it? I am not now what I was once. Let him know, I am now able to defend myself.” You mean to revenge yourself. And it is much, if you are not willing, as well as able: if you do not take your fellow servant by the throat. And are you not hurt in your patience too? Does your love now “endure all things?” Do you still, “in patience possess your soul,” as when you first believed? Oh, what a change is here! You have again learned to be frequently out of humor. You are often fretful: you feel, nay, and give way to peevishness. You find abundance of things go so cross, that you cannot tell how to bear them. But to return. Are not you, who have been successful in your endeavors to increase in substance, insensibly sunk into softness of mind, if not of body too? You no longer rejoice to “endure hardship, as good soldiers of Jesus Christ!” You no longer “rush into the kingdom of heaven, and take it as by storm.” You do not cheerfully and gladly “deny yourselves, and take up your cross daily.” You cannot deny yourself the poor pleasure of a little sleep, or of a soft bed, in order to hear the word that is able to save your souls! Indeed, you “cannot go out so early in the morning; besides it is dark; nay, cold, perhaps rainy too. Cold, darkness, rain; all these together, I can never think of it.” You did not say so when you were a poor man. You then regarded none of these things. It is the change of circumstances which has occasioned this melancholy change in your body and mind; you are but the shadow of what you were! What have riches done for you? In time past, how mindful were you of that word, “Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thy heart; thou shalt in any wise reprove thy brother, and not suffer sin upon him!” You did reprove, directly or indirectly, all those that sinned in your sight. And happy consequences quickly followed. How good was a word spoken in season! It was often as an arrow from the hand of a giant. But which of you now has that compassion for the ignorant, and for them that are out of the way? Gold has steeled your hearts. You have something else to do. AN ANCIENT COMMENT ON SAUL AND THE WITCH OF ENDOR.
By Dudley Marvin Canright
HIPPOLYTUS, a Christian father and a bishop, who wrote about A. D. 220, among other things, has a few words of comment on the above-named subject. I think that he takes a correct position on it; at least it shows how those early fathers regarded the case of the Witch and Samuel: they believed it to be all a deception of the Devil. Thus he says:103 “The question is raised, whether Samuel arose by the hand of the sorceress or not. And if, indeed, we were to allow that he did rise, we should be propounding what is false. For how could a demon call back the soul, I say not of a righteous man merely, but of any one whatever, when it had gone, and was tarrying one knew not where? But he [an objector] says, how then was the woman dismayed, and how did she see in an extraordinary way men ascending? For if her vision had not been of an extraordinary kind, she would not have said, I see gods ascending out of the earth. She invoked one, and how did there ascend many? What then? Shall we say that the souls of all who appeared ascended, and those, too, not invoked by the woman, or that what was seen was merely phantoms of them? Even this, however, will not suffice. How, he urges further, did Saul recognize what appeared, and do obeisance? Well Saul did not actually see, but only, on being told by the woman that the figure of one of those who ascended was the figure he desired, and taking it to be Samuel, he consulted it as such, and did it obeisance. And it could be no difficult matter for the demon to conjure up the form of Samuel, as it was known to him. How, then, says he, did he foretell the calamities that were to befall Saul and Jonathan at the same time? He did foretell, indeed, the end of the war, and how Saul would be overcome, drawing that as an inference from the wrath of God against him. Just as a physician, who has no exact knowledge of the science, might yet, seeing a patient past cure, tell of his death, though he made an error as to the hour, so, too, the demon, knowing the wrath of God by Saul’s deeds, and by his very attempt to consult the sorceress, foretells his defeat and his death at the same time, though in error as to the day of his death.”—Ante-Nicene Christian Library, Vol. vi, pp. 423, 424. Just so are the demons working now through mediums. D. M. CANRIGHT. BRIEF HISTORY OF THE SANDWICH ISLANDS.
By James Sawyer
The most of the following history was from the pen of one who resided at the Sandwich Islands for several years. The language of the Sandwich Islanders is radically the same as that spoken throughout Polynesia, at the Society and Friendly Isles, and at New Zealand. I have in my possession works printed in the native tongue from separate groups which were obtained sixteen years ago (not six years ago as stated in a former No. of REVIEW), which attest this fact. The government is a despotism. The rank of king and chiefs is hereditary. All rights of property and power are vested in the throne, and are at the disposal of the king whose will and word alone are law, although in important measures he generally takes the sentiments of the chiefs in council. Rank is hereditary in the females as in the males, in the three grades of the upper class. Polygamy exists among the chiefs. Of the men, sometimes one has three wives (and half-sisters at that); and one woman sometimes has two husbands. All chiefs have large landed estates under the king, and derive their support from yearly taxes upon them. Like the king, and governors of the different islands, they have every right,—even to that of life over the occupants of their plantations, and all other people of the common class. Besides a profusion of melons, cocoanuts, bananas, sugar cane, &c., of which they are constantly eating, the chiefs have regular meals of baked dog or pig, and pickled or raw fish, and poe, four times a day,—once in the morning as soon as they arise, another at 10 or 11 o'clock A. M., a third about 4 P. M., and a fourth at 9 or 10 in the evening. Their food was formerly served in wooden dishes, but now generally in china ware. It is placed on the ground before a group who, lounging on their mats in the attitude of the ancient Romans, partake of it with one hand, while they recline upon the other. Servants separate the meat with their hands, wiping them occasionally in their mouths or on their bare arms or legs, after which all eat from the same dishes, using their fingers instead of forks and spoons. Whatever pets the ladies have, whether pigs or dogs (and most have one of either), share from the common dishes without disturbance, unless they should be so ill-bred as to put their forefeet as well as their noses into their food, when a gentle tap will remind them of better manners. The houses of the chiefs are generally large, from 40 to 60 feet in length, 20 or 25 in breadth, and 18 or 20 in hight at the peak—all in one apartment, without windows or opening for light or air, except a wide door. Every chief has from 30 to 50 or more personal attendants. These have different offices. One is a pipe-lighter, another a spittoon-carrier, and others prepare and cook the food, &c. All, from the bosom friend to the pipe-lighter, eat from the same dish with their master. This portion of the inhabitants spend their lives principally in eating, and drinking, lounging, and sleeping, in the sports of the surf, in hearing the songs of the musicians, and in witnessing the performances of the dancers. The common people of the Sandwich Islands are called kanakas. They are a wretched people, blind in heart, and abject in poverty. The greatest wealth they can boast consists of a mat on which to sleep, a few folds of kapa, or native cloth to cover them, one calabash for water, and another for poe, and a rude implement or two to cultivate the ground, and the instruments used in their simple manufactories. Kalo, potatoes, and salt, with now and then a fish, constitute the general food, while all else they grow or take, and every result of their labor goes to meet the taxes levied by the king and his governors, and their chiefs. The spontaneous productions here are more limited than in the Society and South Sea Isles. Kalo is the principal food. It belongs to a genus known in parts of America as the Indian or French turnip. The roots of the plant are kept covered with water for from 9 to 15 months, though they continue for two or more years improving in quality to the end of that time. The kalo, after being cooked, is made into what is called poe. This laborious though simple process, made by beating and moulding, turn it into an adhesive mass like dough. It is then set aside into a calabash for fermentation. It is eaten by thrusting the forefinger of the right hand into the mass, and securing as much as will adhere to it, and passing it to the mouth with a hasty turn of the hand and finger. Next to kalo is the sweet potatoe. The building of what houses they have, construction of canoes, making of fishing nets, &c., is assigned to men, while the manufacture of cloth and mats belong to the women. The cloth is of tedious manufacture. It is the interior bark of the paper mulberry, beaten with a square stick of hard wood. Notwithstanding the variety of apparently-necessary employment both to women and men, few of either sex devote more than 4 or 5 hours out of the twenty-four to work. They partake of the indolence of character incident to the inhabitants of tropical climates, and sleep and lounge away more than half their time. The strongest inducement to labor, the right of property, is entirely unknown. Two thirds of the proceeds a native brings to market, unless by stealth, must be given to his chief, and often the whole is taken. Their birthright is slavery. Some of their houses or huts would make a miserable pigsty, and the inmates live like pigs, on a bed of dried grass filled with fleas and vermin. Many kanakas, in the Pacific Isles, pick these vermin from one another and eat them. The cutaneous disease known by the name of itch, prevails much among the common people, and not much effort is made to rid themselves of it. Frequent and hideous marks of a scourge clearly proclaim the curse of a God of purity. It annually consigns hundreds of the people to the tomb. It converts thousands, while living, into walking sepulchres. The majority are more or less disfigured by eruptions and sores, and many are as unsightly as lepers. While the lower class suffer their heads and clothes to harbor lice and unblushingly eat them, they are quite fastidious about eating in a dish where a fly has been drowned. The baking is performed in the following manner: A hole is made in the ground a foot or two deep, and five or six in circumference, placing a layer of stone on the bottom upon which light wood is piled and a fire kindled. Other stones are laid upon the fire. The wood is burned, and the top stones taken off. Kalo, fish, pig, or dog, wrapped in leaves of banana, is laid on the bottom stones and covered with the other heated ones. A little water is poured on the pile and the whole buried with earth. Have seen the same process at New Zealand. The inhabitants are cruel to the helpless and afflicted. The customary way to treat lunatics is to stone them to death. The helpless and dependent are cast away from the habitations of their relatives, to die unpitied. The most evident proof of a want of natural affection amongst these heathen is the crime of infanticide. In some districts where but little good mission influence has been exerted, two-thirds of the infants born, die by the hands of their own parents before attaining the first or second year of their age. This crime is sometimes provoked by the simple necessity of a half hour's additional labor per day for the support of the child until it can get its own living, and sometimes because its helplessness would interfere with the freedom or pleasure of the mother. The climate is peculiar for the latitude, raining but a few times during the year. The land is watered by conducting streams, which rush from the mountains, by artificial courses. The houses are generally not more than 8 or 10 feet long, 6 or 8 broad, and from 4 to 6 in hight, having one small hole for a door, the only opening for light or air. Many parts of the islands wear a forbidding and desolate aspect. In some parts the coasts are barren sand beaches, interrupted by heaps of black lava. They are, in fact, a vast heap of rocks in the mighty ocean, with here and there a luxuriant valley thronged with inhabitants. This was the character of the Sandwich Islands not many years ago. There is one lesson which we may learn from considering their character, that is, To avoid their indolence and excesses that we may not share in the inevitable woe which follows such vices as are practiced by them. JAMES SAWYER. OUR FRIENDS; WHO ARE THEY?
By H. C. Miller
So selfish are we by nature, that we are unable to tell, without the help of God, who are our friends. Naturally we love praise, love to be told of our good deeds, to be called righteous; love to think thus of ourselves. And this is found running through our whole being, so that he who pampers to our fleshly desires is esteemed our truest and best friend. Are we sick, neighbors crowd to our bedside in kindness, but with misplaced kindness, to comfort and to minister. One brings a nicely-prepared custard or pie, another a cake, another a fowl, a fourth a bottle of wine of her own make, some a jelly, some a stew; while yet another thought not to bring anything, but earnestly unites his voice with the rest in urging to eat, or we shall starve. Now, though nature is staggering under her load, and is laboring hard to put off, and needs rest, quiet, and abstinence from food, yet how readily we incline to receive such advice as good, and the givers as our truest friends. Perchance one, and only one, lifts up the warning voice, and calls for truth and right; tremblingly, yet lovingly, demands a denial of the lusts, and a crucifying of the flesh. He is viewed as an enemy. This reminds us of Paul's question to the Galatians: “Am I therefore your enemy, because I tell you the truth?” Gal. iv, 16. This is after he has reproved them for turning again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto they desired again to be in bondage. “Art thou he that troubleth Israel?” was asked in this same spirit which yet esteemed the four hundred false prophets to be true friends, and stood ready to support them. “And the king of Israel said unto Jehoshaphat, there is yet one man, Micaiah the son of Imlah, but I hate him; for he doth not prophesy good concerning me, but evil.” 1 Kings xxii, 8. “And all the prophets prophesied so; saying according to the king's desire, and the messenger sent for Micaiah said: “Behold, now, the words of the prophets declare good unto the king with one mouth; let thy word, I pray thee, be like the word of one of them, and speak that which is good,” that is, say just as the king would like to do, whether it is true or not. Micaiah comes into the presence of the king, in the midst of his esteemed friends, and prophesied, but his words pleased not the king. Singular fellow, to dare to speak differently from others; but he spoke the truth. He was the king's true friend. “And the king of Israel said unto Jehoshaphat, Did not I tell thee that he would prophesy no good concerning me, but evil?” Many look upon those who bear a straight testimony in regard to their faults, who tell them the truth, as enemies, when they are their true friends. They do not object to being told of some of their smaller faults, if the testimony is so mingled with praises of their good deeds as to be no longer sharper than any two-edged sword, but an emollient, soothing to the pride. But God does not so desire. “Help Lord: for the godly man ceaseth; for the faithful fail from among the children of men. They speak vanity, every one with his neighbor, with flattering lips, and with a double heart do they speak. The Lord will cut off all flattering lips, and the tongue that speaketh proud things.” Ps. xii, 1-3. H. C. MILLER.