THERE are two points of doctrine against which Satanic energy is especially directed, namely, the Sabbath and the resurrection. But these are made very conspicuous by the Scripture reference to the final triumph of God’s people over the delusions of the last days. In connection with the last messages of mercy to the world, and the warning that the wrath of God will be poured out without mixture upon those who reject these final overtures of divine grace, there appears upon the scene “they that keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.” Rev. 14:12.
Here are the crowning evidences of the nature of the conflict thru which the true disciples of Christ must pass, and the character of the victory which they are to win. Their distinctive triumph is attained after long patience. Their introduction to the reader is prefixed by the declaration, “Here is the patience of the saints.” They will have been “patient in tribulation” (Rom. 12:12), having come “out of great tribulation,” and “washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.” Rev. 7:14. In that victorious moment “the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus” will loom up together as invulnerable, as co-triumphant. The long-continued onslaughts of the enemy will have signally failed. The triumph of the Gospel is the triumph of the law of God—the triumph of His government in the universe.
As to the two specific doctrines, or objects, of Satanic malice, we will note, first, the one in the law,—the Sabbath. The fourth commandment of the Decalog contains the seal of the law, and that which is a “sign” between God and His people forever. If that be broken, the whole law is vitiated. The purpose of Satan is to break down the authority of God, hence the attack upon His law. The Sabbath is specifically a memorial of the true God and His wonderful works. Faithfully to “remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy” would be a perpetual barrier to idolatry. Continued neglect of the Sabbath obligation always resulted in open idolatry in Israel. To such an extent did their apostasy go that the Lord finally turned them over to captivity under idolatrous nations, with the decree that the kingdom should have no more existence until “He come whose right it is” (Eze. 21:25–27); whose throne is forever and ever, and the scepter of whose kingdom is a right scepter. Ps. 45:6.
The captivity in Babylon put an end to formal idolatry among the Jews. After that they were very strenuous in their observance of the Sabbath day. But in time the enemy, taking advantage of their zeal and their proneness to mere formality in worship, led them to add works of their own to the legitimate services of the day. These were multiplied until the Sabbath was made an almost intolerable burden. From one extreme they were unwittingly led to another by the same influence that had misguided them in the first instance. At length the “traditions of the elders” became the basis of their religious doctrine. This was carried to such an extent that when Christ was on earth He said that they had rejected the law of God that they might keep their own traditions. Mark 7:7–9. This was notably true of their Sabbath traditions, and it was because Christ would not indorse their traditions regarding this particular commandment that they the more eagerly sought to put Him to death. See Matt. 12:10–14; John 5:10–16.
As Sabbath-breaking led directly to pagan idolatry, so paganism in turn instituted the Sunday holiday as a leading feature of sun-worship, and a rival of the Sabbath of the Lord. And eventually apostate Christianity so far compromised with paganism as to adopt its “solar holiday” and reject the true Sabbath. Like the Jews, only in another way, they were led to make the commandments of God of none effect by their traditions. Matt. 15:1–9. And this tradition is being made even more prominent in these days as a lever by which the adversary of Christ would overturn the Sabbath of which He is Lord. Mark 2:28. Thus would the enemy strike a vital blow at the observance of the law of God, which is “the whole duty of man.” Eccl. 12:13. Full well this adversary knows that to “offend in one point” is to be “guilty of all.” James 2:10.
Concerning the faith of Jesus, the one prominent point of attack on the part of the destroyer of souls is the resurrection. He knows that “if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen; and if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.” 1 Cor. 15:13, 14. So the resurrection of the dead is a vital feature of “the faith of Jesus.” Before Christ came to earth, Satan had succeeded in poisoning the minds of even the people of God on this subject. The world was full of confusing theories concerning the pre-existence of the living, and a future existence after death. All of these would preclude the necessity of a resurrection of the body in order to attain to an immortal state. Many of the Jews were believers in the immortality of the soul, which would make the resurrection of the body a matter of secondary importance at most; but the Sadducees denied any possibility of a future existence at all. Acts 23:8.
Not even the disciples of Christ believed that Jesus would be raised from the dead on the third day after His crucifixion. But He had said that He would rise, and Satan, while anxious that He should not be raised, was determined, if possible, to break the influence of such an event in case it should occur. So the priests and rulers were reminded that Christ had said He would rise on the third day, and, ostensibly to avoid imposition upon the people, they asked that a guard be kept at the tomb, lest His disciples should steal the body and declare that He was risen. And so determined were they to squelch all faith in Christ, that when they heard that He was actually risen, they hired the watchmen to say that while they slept the disciples stole the body and carried it away. Notwithstanding the absurdity of the story, it was extensively circulated and believed.
But this was not the end of the strife against the doctrine of the resurrection. It found its way into the Christian church. Paul had to contend against it in at least two forms. In the church at Corinth there were those who said there was “no resurrection of the dead.” 1 Cor. 15:12. And Paul writes to Timothy of two men named Hymenaeus and Philetus, “who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.” 2 Tim. 2:17, 18.
Even unto this day the deceptions and efforts to break down this fundamental doctrine have not abated, but rather increased. The doctrine of man’s inherent immortality is prolific of more variations than any other rival of the resurrection truth that has yet been conceived by Satanic cunning. That is the main fountain from which all the others flow, as indeed from which flow all forms of unbelief. The natural-immortality doctrine would overturn the whole Gospel theory. It says the soul of man never dies; it lives on forever, whether saved or lost. But God’s Word replies, “The soul that sinneth, it shall die.” Eze. 18:4, 20. “Sin is the transgression of the law.” 1 John 3:4. “The wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life thru Jesus Christ our Lord.” Rom. 6:23.
The Sabbath commandment stands out prominently as a representative of the immutable law of God, and the resurrection of the dead is an essential feature of “the faith of Jesus.” For this reason we see all the shafts of Satanic malice, and all the arts of Satanic deception, brought to bear to annul the influence of these vital doctrines. “But the Word of the Lord endureth forever.” 1 Peter 1:25. G.
JUSTIFIED BY KNOWLEDGE.
By Ellet Joseph Waggoner
“By His knowledge shall My righteous Servant justify many; for He shall bear their iniquities.” Isa. 53:11. What knowledge of us has the Lord, and how does He have it? Thus: “The Word of God is living, and active, and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing even to the dividing of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and quick to discern the thoughts and intents of the heart. And there is no creature that is not manifest in His sight; but all things are naked and laid open before the eyes of Him with whom we have to do.” Heb. 4:12, 13, R.V.
There is nothing that the Lord does not know about men; and He knows it not by hearsay, not as the result of inquiry, but from actual experience. The word that creates and upholds is present in every being, for the Word is the life. In every fiber of the body, there is the word of God present. He knows the sins, because He bears them. The knowledge by which He justifies, is the knowledge of experience; for He bears the iniquities.
In the Lord power and wisdom are combined. There is power intelligently directed. His power is His wisdom, and His wisdom is powerful. Thus it is that there is no such thing as chance in the world; force does not act at random, but since it is God’s own power, it acts according to the wisdom of God.
By His wisdom God has established the world, and by His discretion He has stretched out the heavens. By His knowledge He justifies. Thus we see that the wisdom and power that save us from sin is identical with that which created and upholds the universe. What chance, then, is there for anybody to say, “I am such a sinner, that it doesn’t seem possible that the Lord can save me”? Is anything too hard for the Lord? No one need philosophize or draw conclusions; all we have to do is to recognize and admit a simple fact, namely, that the Lord is the Creator. Give to God the glory that is His due. Worship Him that made heaven and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters, and you will never find any place for doubts as to the power of God to do whatever He pleases.
E. J. WAGGONER.
“WHY TARRIEST THOU?”
By G.
THERE was no long, drawn-out process in the conversion of Saul, the persecutor of Christians. He was very soon at work for the Master when once he saw the truth. Some of the very characteristics which made him a persecutor made him also a ready worker when they were consecrated to God. He was learned in the Jewish religion and in general knowledge. He had a zeal for God, and was intensely energetic and active. So, when he was smitten down by the Lord, while on his journey to Damascus, and learned that it was indeed the Lord, his first question was, “What shall I do?”
Instantly he had changed masters. Up to that moment he had been doing with all his might the work of his old master, the enemy of Christ; but he begins at once to obey a new Master—One who spake with authority. Obediently he goes into Damascus, and is told what to do by one of the very sect which he had been trying to destroy. By this obedience and humbling himself by fasting and prayer, he was blessed by the restoration of his sight. Then he is told what further work and blessing the new Master has for him.7
A man brought face to face with his error—such cruel, tyrannical error—would naturally feel a backwardness about going in among the brethren of the church, feel an unfitness for even baptism, a distrust of self, and a disposition to hold back; and so did Paul. 1 Tim. 1:12-16. And many a pastor would have held Saul back from baptism for a period of probation; he would have been afraid to take him into the company for fear of treachery. In fact, this was Ananias’ feeling when he first heard of Saul’s conviction. And this was the feeling of the disciples at Jerusalem toward Saul even three years later. Acts 9:26.
But the Lord was directing in this case. When Saul was put into Ananias’ hands for instruction, he was there with a humble spirit, a “broken and a contrite heart.” Ananias was led by the Holy Spirit, and he could discern the spirit of the penitent. Under such circumstances there was no risk in urging him forward. The candidate was of mature age, had already many qualifications which needed only to be consecrated, and the Lord had need of him.
The enemy would have advised delay. There might be some mistake about it, and the man might go to persecuting again. But to the spiritual-minded man, one who is “devout” “according to the law,” the Spirit’s guidance is always certain. Ananias had seen the “scales” drop from the convert’s eyes, and knew they had dropped from his heart also. There was danger in delay. There is always more danger in delaying duty, in delaying obedience, than in being prompt when it is presented. Saul had made a good start, but only a start. The Gospel had been preached to him, and he had accepted it; but had he stopped there, he would have been lost just as surely as tho he had not been convicted. So often men are convicted of duty, but obedience is not convenient just at the time. The enemy says, Wait a little while, till this or that work is accomplished; wait till others are ready to obey also; wait till you feel sure that you can hold out; wait, it would be awful if you should go ahead and then fail; wait, till you are in earnest; don’t let Ananias over-persuade you; be “fully persuaded in your own mind.”
But God says, “Now is the day of salvation;” “to-day, if ye will hear His voice, harden not your hearts.” There is nothing that so hardens the heart as delay. The most urgent duty can be put off until it ceases to be urgent, till it is no longer deemed to be duty, till it seems to have been a delusion, and the Spirit’s call makes no more impression. The man who knows that in his worldly interests delays are dangerous, will delay obedience to the Voice that calls him to duty in seeking the welfare of his soul. If Matthew, the customs collector, had delayed when Jesus said, “Follow Me,” he might not have found the Lord again. Had he waited to “straighten out his business,” or to make arrangements for its conduct in his absence, his mind would have again become so engrossed in his lucrative calling that he would have been loath to leave it. Had Zaccheus not “made haste” to “come down” and receive the Lord when the opportunity was presented, the Saviour would have passed by his house.
So the word to Saul was, “And now, why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling upon the name of the Lord.” Ah! there was point in that; have the sin washed away. Harbor it no longer; it is clinging to that pet sin that clogs the way to freedom in Christ. It is that sin of unbelief that causes all the tarrying in the face of duty; and some petty lust of the flesh hinders the exercise of faith. The water of baptism does not wash away sin, but it is the prescribed public confession of faith in Christ, and thru the obedience of faith He washes away the sin and makes a clean new creature.
The cleansing does not come thru the obedience of form, but thru the obedience of faith. “Thy faith hath made thee whole,” was the blessed assurance of the Saviour to the loathsome leper. But the leper had not neglected the prescribed form for his cleansing. The word had been to ten of them, “Go show yourselves unto the priests,” and “as they went, they were cleansed.” It was not the act of going that cleansed them. God did that because they obeyed, thereby showing their faith in His word. If they had not gone as He said, they would not have been healed.
True faith never tarries when God speaks the word. When the Lord says, “Stand still, and see the salvation of God,” it is only that the salvation may be hastened. When He says, “Go forward,” tarrying means loss to the soul. Has God convicted you of sin? then don’t tarry; but at once put yourself in position to have it washed away. Has God’s Word shown you that “sin is the transgression of the law”? 1 John 3:4. Have you seen that you are living in disobedience of that law? (Remember that practical obedience or disobedience always includes manifest action.) Then, “why tarriest thou” in such a condition? Arise, seek justification thru faith in Christ, then “walk by faith,” fearing God and keeping His commandments, which is “the whole duty of man.” Eccl. 12:13. G.
THE PERSONALITY OF THE SPIRIT.
LAST week we studied for a little while the Spirit as the life of God, pulsing forth from the great central Heart of the universe—the ineffable Jehovah, a personal Creator, a personal Saviour, a personal Friend—to all parts of His living creation, and bringing Him into actual touch by these life-currents with every living creature. These great life-currents make possible actual contact with the Great God.
It is true that all live thru Him, fed by His life; but it makes a difference how it is received. To the man that is carnal the Spirit is received thru the flesh, and the life force becomes perverted; it does not animate and control the man as the Spirit of God. The mind is carnal, controlled by the flesh; the person has life, but he has not the Spirit of God. But on the other hand, to Him, who is in harmony with God's will, the great life-current comes as the Spirit of God, bringing His presence into the heart, His life into the mortal flesh. In other words, it makes personally present to every soul who thus receives it Jesus Christ, his Saviour and Friend. This union with the will of God and the giving of His Spirit is thus set forth:—
“If ye love Me, keep My commandments. And I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter, that He may abide with you forever; even the Spirit of truth; whom the world can not receive, because it seeth Him not, neither knoweth Him; but ye know Him; for He dwelleth with you and shall be in you.” John 14: 15-17.
“He that hath My commandments, and keepeth them, it is that loveth Me; and he that loveth Me shall be loved of My Father; and I will love Him, and will manifest Myself unto him.” Jesus answered and said unto him, “If a man love Me, he will keep My words; and My Father will love him, and we will come unto Him, and make our abode with Him.” Verses 21, 23.
“But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in My name, He shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.” Verse 26.
Whom did Christ promise to send?—“The Comforter,” “the Holy Ghost [Spirit],” “the Spirit of truth.”
What did He promise in regard to Himself and the Father?—“I . . . will manifest Myself unto him.” “We will come unto Him, and make our abode with Him.”
How would Christ manifest Himself?—By the Comforter, “whom the Father will send in My name.” “I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter, that He [the Father] may abide with you forever.”
What are the conditions?—Love Him; keep His commandments.
The Father is manifest in Christ, who comes in the Father's name. “All things that the Father hath are Mine: therefore said I, that He [the Spirit] shall take of Mine, and shall show it unto you.” John 16: 15. Christ and the Father are manifest thru the Spirit, which is sent or given in Christ's name. For the Spirit “shall not speak of Himself; but whatsoever He shall hear, that shall He speak; and He will show you things to come. He shall glorify Me; for He shall receive of Mine, and shall show it unto you.” John 16: 13, 14. “For thru Him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.” Eph. 2: 18.
The evident conclusion, therefore, of all this is, that the personality of the Spirit is the personality of Jesus Christ, whom the Spirit manifests, or reveals. But how can this life outflowing from the Great Central Fountain everywhere, “poured out,” “shed forth,” by the Master, manifest personality?—Very easily to the Infinite One. We can see it better perhaps by the Gospel which God teaches to us in the revelations and discoveries of science.
A few years ago men at a distance could communicate with each other only by letter or messenger, at the slow speed that the best of post horses. The letters of our friends, their peculiarities of composition and hand-writing, in a way revealed to us their personality; but days might be between the writing and reading of the message, and when received by us the hand might be cold and pulseless that wrote it.
Then came the telegraph, bearing quick messages, but little or no personality. Then came the telephone, and thru that we are brought into wonderful touch with our friends. They may be hundreds of miles distant; but we hear their words, we distinguish their voices; they are practically present. In some offices each department is connected with the manager's room by a telephone. Each and every department may connect with him at the same time. Any message which he has to communicate he can give to the foreman of every room at the same time. Each one listens to the manager's voice, and he is in a sense personally present with each one, altho not one of these departments is in sight of the manager or in ordinary speaking distance from him or each other.
This feebly illustrates how Christ is connected by His life, His Spirit, with every soul in perfect harmony with His will, and can speak to each and all, bringing to their mind the words of truth, calling to remembrance the instruction needed, and transmitting all the power of His endless life. He is a precious personal Saviour to each one.
SHALL WE SEEK TRUTH OR CONTROVERSY?
By T.
SOME of our exchanges seem to take a particular delight in controversy. They frequently quote paragraphs from our columns and give what they think are conclusive arguments against us. Having done this, they challenge us to defend our position.
The SIGNS OF THE TIMES takes no equivocal or wavering positions. We are seeking to present what we know to be truth, and are persuaded that this work is so important that controversy should be avoided if possible. We seek to present truth that is self-commendatory to every one who is more anxious to know the right than to maintain some theory. That many will try to overthrow what we are doing may be expected. But we have not the time to follow those who would argue against us. Should we attempt to do so, we would fill our columns with a lot of controversial matter that would not be the most interesting, neither would it do the most good. We are resting in the confidence that what we say is based on the Word of God, and we consider that His Word is strong enough to stand for itself. We do not need to be running with props every time something is said against it.
And then those who are disposed to argue, do not, as a general thing, expect to have their minds changed. Then what is the use of arguing with them? For instance, one of our “liberal” contemporaries scoffs at our hope of the soon-coming of Christ, and undertakes to show that it would be quite impossible for Him to return to this earth, because the earth has moved so many millions of miles in space since the Master’s ascension, over 1800 years ago. It is argued that the earth has gone so far during that time that it would have been a physical impossibility for Him to have kept up with it, and therefore He could not return to it.
We might reply to the foregoing by saying that the Christ who has promised to return to this earth is the same One who made it in the first place and who gave it all of this great motion in space. And it seems perfectly easy to us for the One who made all these great planets to visit one of them any time He sees fit, no matter how fast it is going.
But we are aware of the fact that our friend who presents the objection will not be likely to see much in this or any other reply we might make. Then what is the use in shedding ink in such debating? We can see no good coming from it, and are not in need of amusement.
We shall ever stand ready to do anything in our power to answer the honest inquiries for truth in that particular field where we have made a special study. But those who wish to argue merely so that they may ventilate their opinions; those who make it manifest that they are cavilers, together with those who tend to go into fine-spun theories which serve only to mystify, must not feel hurt when we refuse to notice them, even tho they challenge us ever so earnestly and publicly. T.
REVELATION OF FATHER AND SON.
“God is one,” Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. “No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him.” John 1:18.
It was Christ’s mission not to declare Himself, but the Father, and in all His ministry on earth Himself was never revealed. So full and true was His work in this respect that He could declare: “No one knoweth the Son, save the Father; neither doth any know the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son willeth to reveal Him.” Matt. 11:27. “He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father.” John 14:9. The Spirit of infinite love possessing the Son constrained Him to reveal only the infinite love of the Father.
But is not the Son to be revealed? Must the earth lose the wonderful revelation?—Nay, not at all. Jesus said in that wonderful prayer for His disciples: “As thou didst send Me into the world, even so sent I them into the world.” John 17:18. Therefore as He revealed the Father who sent Him, even so are Christ’s disciples to reveal the One who sent them.
To rightly reveal the Father, Jesus possessed the same Spirit. “The Spirit . . . abode upon Him.” John 1:32. He was the “only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.” John 1:14. Having the Spirit of the Father, being one with the Father, He could do no otherwise than reveal the Father.
So to reveal Christ we must have the Spirit, the mind of Christ. “Let this mind be in you, which also was in Christ Jesus.” Phil. 2:5. This was the mind of emptying self that Love might be revealed. “But if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His.” Rom. 8:9. He who has the Spirit of Christ can do no otherwise than to reveal the One whose Spirit he possesses. And thus Christ will be revealed to the world by His own begotten children, those dying daily to self, and daily letting Christ live His life in them. Gal. 2:20.
Christ was “the Word of God,” because He spake only for the Father. “The words that I say unto you I speak not from Myself; but the Father abiding in Me doeth His works.” John 14:10. So the children of Christ “are an epistle of Christ, . . . written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God,” because they are revealing not themselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord. 2 Cor. 3:3.
Christ was “the faithful and true witness” of God; but, Christian readers, are we faithful witnesses of Jesus Christ? Are we revealing Him or self to the world?
SUNDAY
By T.
SUNDAY, the first day of the week, has come to be regarded by the great majority as the Sabbath of the Lord. But does the Bible teach it? Has the Lord appointed Sunday as His day of rest?
It is claimed that Christ and His apostles changed the Sabbath from the seventh day of the week (Saturday) of the old dispensation, to the first day (Sunday) of the new. But what is the basis for such a claim? Such an important matter should be found in clear words in the Bible in order for us to give it credence. We do not want to be found on the wrong side in the Judgment day, and therefore we should take pains to know that we are right.
When we inquire of the Bible for what Christ has said about the change of the Sabbath from “Saturday” to “Sunday,” we find it absolutely silent. There is not a single word of evidence left on record to show that Christ even so much as mentioned “Sunday,” or the first day of the week, in all His ministry.
There are only eight places where the first day of the week is mentioned in the New Testament. And any one can see that if Christ had declared His purpose of making a Sabbath of that day, the statement of it would have to be found in one of these eight scriptures. The first mention of the first day of the week (Sunday) is in the following verse: “In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulcher.” Matt. 28:1.
The second and third mentions of it are in Mark, and read: “And when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint Him.” “Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, He appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom He had cast seven devils.” Mark 16:1, 9.
The fourth mention of the first day of the week is found in the text which reads, “Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulcher, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them.” Luke 24:1.
The fifth and sixth mentionings of the first day of the week are found as follows: “The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulcher, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulcher.” “Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.” John 20:1, 19.
The foregoing six passages are all the mentions that are made in the four Gospels of the “first day of the week.” All six of these texts are talking about the same thing. They are telling that the resurrection of Christ was on that day, but they are absolutely silent upon the subject of Sunday being made the Sabbath.
The next New Testament mention of the first day of the week reads thus: “And we sailed away from Philippi after the days of unleavened bread, and came unto them to Troas in five days; where we abode seven days. And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.” Acts. 20: 6, 7.
The foregoing words from the book of the Acts simply state an incident that occurred on the first day of the week. There is no suggestion or mention in the text that Sunday has been made the Sabbath. All theories, dogmas, and prejudices being put to one side, it must be admitted that there is no command, nor anything that is in any manner of the nature of a command, for Sunday observance in any of these New Testament texts examined so far.
It has been suggested that since this text from Acts says that it was “upon the first day of the week when the disciples came together to break bread,” therefore it must have been a regular meeting day. And if it was a regular meeting day, it must have been made into a day of rest. But such a suggestion is nothing more than an inference. The text says no such thing, and neither does any other text tell it. And besides, there is a text which shows that it was the custom of the early Christians to break bread on all days. The text reads: “And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, praising God, and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.” Acts. 2: 46, 47. They continued daily in the temple and in the breaking of bread, and the Lord added daily to their numbers. Hence it is plain that since they were in the habit of breaking bread every day, it could not make a Sabbath of a day, neither show it to be a Sabbath, to have it stated that bread was broken upon some particular day.
There remains one more New Testament mention of the first day of the week. It reads: “Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye. Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come.” 1 Cor. 16:1, 2. There is no semblance of a command for Sunday-keeping in this text. Paul was going to take up a “collection for the saints” when he got down to Corinth, and this text shows that each one was to “lay by him in store” upon the first day of the week, something to put in that collection when Paul came that way.
We have now examined every New Testament mention of the first day of the week, and there is to be seen no intimation of a command for Sunday observance. Those who observe Sunday for the Sabbath do so without any Bible authority, and not only that: in keeping Sunday they disregard the plain command of the Lord to observe the seventh day.
T.
Question Corner
1153. Mrs. B.—The so-called “letter written by Jesus Christ” is one of the many palpable frauds palmed off on a credulous public. This is so manifest in the language of the “letter” that we do not see how any observant Bible-reader could believe it.
1154. R. N. H. Marriage Relations.—We do not see why the prohibitions contained in Lev. 18:6-24 and 20:10-21 in reference to sexual relationships are not still in force. They are all based on moral considerations. “But,” you ask, “would it be wrong for any man to contract marriage with his uncle’s widow (either paternal or maternal), there being no blood connections?” At the very least, we reply, it would be exceedingly bad taste. It is a mixing up of relationships which confuses the mind and spiritual discernment. Think of the confusion of relationships in such a union. The widow may have children by both husbands, the uncle and the nephew. The latter husband is step-father and cousin to these children; the woman is the aunt and wife of the second husband; he is her nephew and husband; she is the mother and cousin-by-marriage of her own children; her children by the second husband are half brothers or sisters of both of the children of the second husband; and these children are also cousins. Relations which work out such confusion do not seem to us right.
1155. A. B.—You ask, “Is it right to stay with a neighbor’s child while its parents attend a dance?” What would you do, leave it alone? If parents do wrong, so much the more the child should be protected and cared for. What the parents do is another thing. Let that be a matter of good missionary work with them.
ONE MAN OWNERSHIP.
The Springfield Republican quotes a little speech from Mr. John D. Rockefeller at a Fifth-avenue Sunday-school, in which he said:—
“I am engaged in a business that for thirty years has paid out each working day an average of $60,000 or $70,000 in money, or about $22,000,000 or $23,000,000 each year to laboring men. For thirty years of the forty that I was in that particular business, the aggregate so paid was between $600,000,000 and $700,000,000. And that I regard as the best kind of giving.”
But the Republican queries whether Mr. Rockefeller’s fortune is not as much a gift from those who labored to produce it. That paper says:—
“Mr. Rockefeller is credited with owning a majority of the stock of the Standard Oil Company. This stock now has a market value of over $800,000,000, of which nearly $300,000,000 has been added on since the November election. If he owns nothing else whatever, he must therefore be worth some $400,000,000, and his share of the Standard Oil employment or wages paid during thirty years we may thus place at say $350,000,000, and his share of the average number of workmen employed must have been about 20,000. Hence it is made to appear that while paying out $350,000,000 to 20,000 men, he has paid to one man, himself, some $400,000,000, and under these circumstances he might well choose some other subject for a public address than the credit still due him for giving honest work to other men. It smacks too much of an assumption of one-man ownership, not only of the bounties of nature, but of everybody dependent thereon. The great captains of industry fill a needful place and perform valuable services, for which, in many cases, they are vastly overpaid; but when they presume, as apparently in this case, to be the primary creators of wealth and work, and that there would be no work without them, they arrogate just a trifle too much to themselves.”
But one-man ownership of all things is the spirit of the natural man; it is the ambition which ruled Lucifer. Mr. Rockefeller is not alone in the ambition.
