Aug. 9 and 10 were terrible days all over New England, Northern New York, and Ontario. The period was distinguished for unprecedented rain-falls, the water pouring out of the skies in torrents, with rain and electrical discharges. The rains were actually tropical in their excess of fury, and the fires of heaven played alarmingly day and night. The thunders roared, crashed, and pierced with terrific sound. Hail such as is seldom seen in the above region fell rattling on roofs and fields. For a space of 600 miles the elements held furious carnival. In many towns the sky became black and it was dark as midnight in the dwellings. Chariots of ruin seemed rolling abroad. In but two Boston dailies I count up as follows: Deaths by lightning, 4; persons who were partially injured by the fluid and either shocked or made unconscious, but recovered, 50; dwellings, buildings, shops, churches, and barns struck and consumed, 50; houses struck and injured, 25; other things struck, 20. This does not include any cases in Ontario.
In addition to these casualties, the city of Washington, D. C., was visited by a terrible tornado. Warwick, in Massachusetts, also experienced one, and Wallingford, Ct., was swept with the besom of destruction; over 50 dwellings were torn to atoms, 30 others were partially demolished, and 50 barns were destroyed. The lives lost numbered 30; 27 of these were buried in one day. The property loss is $250,000. The force of the wind was frightful. Whole rafters and clapboards were carried to Haddam, 12 miles away, and papers were picked up at Peacedale, R. I., 65 miles away! Into all the region where descended the fury of the storm, was carried terror. Men never saw more vivid and dazzling lightning. No such tornado was ever before witnessed in Connecticut, and the one at Washington was “one of the most terrific ever seen there.” At Cambridge, Mass., hail fell two and three inches in length, and an inch square. Many hailstones were the size of hens’ eggs, and one piece of ice weighed four ounces. Balls of fire fell near men, and were seen to roll through dwellings.
Such was the ruin of two days only. Memorable days indeed to thousands. God is behind the storms. He rules. His indignation flashes upon an evil world, and in the thunder he utters his warnings. The season is a marked one, and strikingly phenomenal. The pestilence has struck the South, and a hundred cities are in dread. Its ravages are sudden and malignant to a degree never before known. Death rides on the breeze, and thousands fall before his sickle. I expect storms will rage, pestilences devour, and ruin make havoc with life and property till Jesus comes. There is no safety for any one, anywhere, save in Jesus Christ. Let us hide in him as our eternal refuge. Impenitent reader, fly, O, fly to Christ to-day, yea, now.—D. T. Taylor, in Bible Banner.
BIBLE LESSONS FOR YOUTH.
LESSON XLI.—JACOB'S DECEPTION.
QUESTIONS.
In what esteem did Isaac and Rebekah hold each of their sons? Gen. 25:28.
One day when Isaac had become old, what did he ask Esau to do? Gen. 27:1-4.
What did Rebekah do when she overheard what Isaac said to Esau?
Why did she do this?
What did she do with the skins of the kids?
Why was this necessary?
Was the disguise successful?
When Jacob went in with the savory meat, what conversation passed between him and his father? Gen. 27:18, 19.
What reason did Jacob give for having been able to find the venison so soon? Verse 20.
What did Isaac say after he had felt of Jacob's hands? Verse 22.
What pointed question did Isaac then ask Jacob? Verse 24.
What were Esau's feelings when he returned and found that Jacob had been in before him and obtained the blessing? Verses 30-34.
What did he say of Jacob? Verse 36.
How did he give vent to his feelings? Verse 34.
What touching appeal did he finally make? Verse 38.
What blessing did Isaac then pronounce upon Esau? Verses 39, 40.
Was Rebekah's course right in this matter?
What had God promised?
Of what did Rebekah show a lack?
How should she have done?
How was she punished for her wrong doing?
SYNOPSIS.
Jacob was Rebekah’s favorite, but Isaac loved Esau most.
One day, when Isaac had become old, he requested Esau to go to the field, and take him some venison, and make him savory meat such as he loved, that he might bless him before he died. Rebekah, overhearing the conversation, sent Jacob at once for some kids of the goats. These she made into savory meat, which she sent by the hand of Jacob to Isaac before Esau returned from the field. This was done so that Jacob might receive the blessing instead of Esau.
Esau was a hairy man, while Jacob was smooth; so Rebekah disguised Jacob by putting the skins of the kids on his hands, and on the smooth part of his neck, so that he might appear to Isaac to be hairy, like Esau.
“And he came unto his father and said, ‘My father;’ and he said, ‘Here am I; who art thou, my son?’ And Jacob said unto his father, ‘I am Esau, thy firstborn; I have done according as thou badest me: arise, I pray thee, sit and eat of my venison, that thy soul may bless me.’
“And Isaac said unto his son, ‘How is it that thou hast found it so quickly, my son?’ And he said, ‘Because the Lord thy God brought it to me.’ And Isaac said unto Jacob, ‘Come near, I pray thee, that I may feel thee, my son, whether thou be my very son Esau or not.’ And Jacob went near unto Isaac his father; and he felt him, and said, ‘The voice is Jacob’s voice, but the hands are the hands of Esau.’ And he discerned him not, because his hands were hairy, as his brother Esau’s hands; so he blessed him. And he said, ‘Art thou my very son Esau?’ And he said, ‘I am.’”
When Esau came in, and found that Jacob had brought savory meat before him, and had received his father’s blessing, his anguish seemed too great for expression. The scene was a very affecting one. He complained bitterly of Jacob’s injustice. He gave vent to his feelings in a great and exceedingly bitter cry, and said, “Hast thou but one blessing, my father? bless me, even me also, O my father. And Esau lifted up his voice, and wept.”
Isaac finally told Esau that he should live by the sword, and should have plenty of the good things of this life; and that although he had made his brother lord over him, the time should come when that yoke would be broken.
Rebekah did very wrong in taking the course she did, for although God had said that Jacob should be preferred to Esau, she should have waited for him to bring it about in his own way. She showed great lack of faith, and was punished by a lifelong separation from her darling son.
ASCENSION ROBES.
“The Seventh-day Adventists are holding a camp-meeting near Sedalia. What day they will put on their ascension robes is not stated.”—Huntsville Vindicator.
“The Vindicator ought not to speak except when it knows what it is talking about. We suppose when the above was written it was thinking of No-day or First-day Adventists. Seventh-day Adventists have never been time-setters or ascension-robists. They do not believe the hour, day, or year can be told; but they do believe, as the Scriptures affirm, that the righteous may and will know when this mighty event is near, while as a snare it will come upon all the world, and they shall not escape; neither shall scoffers escape.
“The doctrine of the second personal advent of our Lord from Heaven is most prominently set forth in the Bible; it is set forth as the Christian’s hope; and Christians, it is most emphatically declared, may know when it is near. Fanatics have brought reproach upon this most important Bible doctrine, but it is nevertheless the Christian’s hope, and one that those who have studied the prophecies of the Bible are agreed must very soon be realized.”
The above item I clip from the Salisbury (Mo.) Press, published by J. M. Gallemore. It is a matter of devout gratitude to God that such calumnies can be refuted in a secular paper in Missouri.
In the above quotation from the Huntsville Vindicator, we see the real scoffing spirit of which the Bible speaks when it says that in the last days scoffers shall arise; but let us praise God that the third angel’s message has also arisen to vindicate the cause of God and of his people.
LESSONS FOR BIBLE CLASSES.
By G. H. Bell
LESSON XIX.—THE TERMINATION OF THE 2300 DAYS.
QUESTIONS.
1. When did the seventy weeks begin?
2. What proof have we of this?
3. How may we know that the beginning of the seventy weeks is the beginning of the 2300 days?
4. How can you show that the seventy weeks constituted the first part of the 2300 days?
5. When did the 2300 days begin?
6. What apparent error is there in this reckoning?
7. How can you show the reckoning to be correct?
8. How do we know that this mode of reckoning is correct?
9. What was the prediction in regard to the building and restoration of Jerusalem?
10. How was this prediction fulfilled?
11. What was predicted concerning the coming of Christ?
12. How was it fulfilled?
13. What leads to the conclusion that the sixty-nine weeks were to reach to the baptism, instead of the birth, of Christ?
14. What prediction was made in regard to the crucifixion of our Saviour?
15. How was this fulfilled?
16. What events marked the termination of the seventy weeks?
17. When did the seventy weeks terminate?
18. Explain your mode of reckoning.
19. At the close of the seventy weeks, how much would still remain of the 2300 days?
20. 1810 years from the autumn of A. D. 34, would reach to what date?
21. What do these considerations enable us to know?
SYNOPSIS.
We have seen that the seventy weeks begun in the autumn of the year 457 B. C. The seventy weeks constituted the first part of the 2300 days; so the beginning of the seventy weeks was the beginning of the 2300 days.
2300 years from the autumn of B. C. 457 would reach to the autumn of A. D. 1844. At first thought, this reckoning seems to be wrong; for 457 added to 1844 makes 2301. But the Jewish year began with April, and in the autumn of B. C. 457 about one-half of that year had passed, leaving only 456½ years before Christ. This taken from 2300 shows that it would require 1843½ years to complete the 2300. This would reach to the autumn of A. D. 1844.
We know that this mode of reckoning is correct by the fulfillment of the prophecy in regard to the events of the seventy weeks. The work of building and restoring Jerusalem was completed in the fifteenth year of Darius Nothus, B. C. 408, just seven weeks (49 years) from the autumn of B. C. 457. Just sixty-two weeks (434 years) later, Christ, at his baptism, was anointed with the Holy Ghost, and began to preach the gospel of his kingdom.
Three and a half years later he was crucified,—cut off in the midst of the seventieth week. Three and a half years after the crucifixion, the Jewish Sanhedrim formally rejected Christ; Stephen the martyr was put to death; and Paul, the great apostle to the Gentiles, was converted and commissioned for his work.
This brings us to the autumn of A. D. 34; for taking 456½ years before Christ from 490, it would require 33½ years after Christ to complete the seventy weeks; and 33½ years after Christ would reach to the autumn of A. D. 34. 490 taken from 2300 shows that the 2300 days would extend 1810 years after the close of the seventy weeks; and 1810 added to A. D. 34 makes 1844, the same as in our former reckoning.
By this consideration of the angel’s explanation of Dan. 8:14, we are enabled to know to a certainty that the cleansing of the sanctuary must have begun in the autumn of A. D. 1844.
What is meant by the cleansing of the sanctuary must be considered hereafter.
G. H. BELL.
A CLERICAL SCOFFER.
In the Methodist of Aug. 31, 1878, appears a “Letter from Minnesota, by the Rev. J. Milton Akers.” It is about Seventh-day Adventists, and hence we notice it. He says of them:—
“They used to declare the day and the hour, and we suppose the reason they do not do it now is because they have failed so many times.”
Those who know anything of the history of Seventh-day Adventists know that they have never set any time—day, hour, or year—for the second advent of Christ. And those who know anything of our teaching know that our views of prophecy forever preclude any such idea as the fixing of a definite time for Christ to come. If Mr. Akers knows nothing of us in these respects, he does himself no credit by assuming to give the world information concerning us. If he does know our position on these points, he deliberately falsifies when he makes the above statement. In his lack of discrimination he was doubtless thinking of the First-day Adventists, when speaking of the day and the hour; but to confound that class with Seventh-day Adventists, between whom there is so broad and marked a distinction, is inexcusable in one who assumes to be a public teacher in this matter.
Again he says: “They represent this age of the world by the little toe of Nebuchadnezzar’s image; hence the world is in its last decade, and pretty nearly through, at that—half through the toe nail. They seem determined to pick the ‘end of the world’ out of that little toe.”
This language not only states throughout that which is utterly false, like that first quoted, but it is also scurrilous and low. Seventh-day Adventists have never said that the world was in its last decade; nor has he or any one else heard them saying anything about the “little toe” of Nebuchadnezzar’s image, nor about being “half through the toe nail,” nor about “picking the end of the world out of that little toe.” These expressions could have been prompted by nothing but the essential vulgarity of his own nature. We speak of the image as Daniel speaks of it. That the image symbolizes consecutive kingdoms, all commentators agree; and the last stage of the fourth kingdom is represented by the feet and toes. Has Mr. A. ever read the second of Daniel?
Can the reader endure another quotation? This, for instance: “They have made many predictions as to the second advent of Christ, but every prediction has failed. A prophet whose every prediction has failed, but who continues to make a new one upon the heels of every failure, simply stultifies himself in the estimation of every intelligent man and woman. A man who continues to make predictions under such circumstances betrays an asinine stupidity and stubbornness by a seeming determination to succeed at last in spite of the fiat of Omnipotence.”
These statements are of the same piece with the others quoted. Positions are assumed for us which are absolutely false to the very last item; and then he falls to berating and insulting us for views which we never have entertained. Where are some of the predictions we have made “as to the second advent of Christ,” which have failed? We ask for just one, to say nothing of the “many” claimed. What does a man who takes the course Mr. A. has here taken, do toward stultifying himself? Has he the manliness, not to say Christianity, to retract false statements, which he has without provocation published to the world, to the injury of some of his fellow-men?
But the strangest part of his article is the following. Speaking of the success of S. D. Adventists, he says:—
“We account for their success on one of two principles,—natural depravity or mental imbecility, or both.”
Is the man trying to frame sentences which will sound smart, without any reference to logical sequence or common sense? or what is he trying to do? Look at the facts: We urge upon men everywhere repentance toward God and faith in Christ. As one motive to this we present the fact, prophetically used by the New Testament writers themselves, that the end of all things is at hand, that the great day of the Lord is near, when it will be too late to obtain mercy and find pardon. We hold up before them the commandments of God, which Solomon declares present the whole duty of man. Eccl. 12:13, 14, and which Paul says the carnal mind is not subject to, Rom. 8:7; and by which James says we are all to be judged. James 2:10-12. In view of the terrors of a soon-coming Judgment, we call upon them to obey, and warn them that without a renunciation of, and entire freedom from, all the works of the flesh they cannot be saved. Gal. 5:19-21. We meet with some success. A few are found disposed to heed the warning, and try to prepare for the coming of Christ. And Mr. A. accounts for this on the ground of “natural depravity”! Oh! the natural depravity of man likes all these things immensely, does it not? Perhaps the reader will here discover that some of the epithets which Mr. A. has introduced might appropriately be applied to other parties than those he intended.
In reference to the Sabbath question he contents himself with a few assertions, and one attempt at argument. Of his assertions this is chief: “Even a tyro in Bible history and doctrine ought to know that the Jewish Sabbath was a temporary institution that began with the Exodus and ended with the resurrection of Christ.” Then Dr. A. Clarke, who used to be good authority with Methodists, never attained to the standing of a tyro in this matter; for he dated the Sabbath, the same one which the Jews kept, from creation not from the exodus; and Wesley, whose views were once not obsolete among Methodists, was in the same unfortunate condition; for he says (Works, vol. xi. p. 360): “The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God.” It is not thine, but God’s day. He claims it for his own. He always did claim it for his own, even from the beginning of the world.” The same may be said of such commentators as Henry, Scott, Bush, Dwight, Watson, etc. We greatly prefer the society of these men on this question to that of “the Rev. J. Milton Akers.”
His attempt at argument is based on Heb. 4:9. He says, “If ‘a keeping of a Sabbath’ ‘remains,’ it is as clear as a demonstration that ‘a keeping of a Sabbath’ must have ‘departed.’” But Dr. Clarke reasons that the “rest” of which Paul speaks is the “rest in glory that remains for the people of God.”—Com. on Ex. 20:8. This is in harmony with Paul’s reasoning; for he shows that it is by a life of faith and obedience that we are to “labor to enter into that rest.” Is it thus that we are to enter into the rest of Sunday-keeping, which Mr. A. would have us understand is the rest that remains? That would be absurdity run mad.
As a whole, this “Letter from Minnesota” is a disgrace to its author; and we are sorry that the Methodist has seen fit to sully its otherwise fair record by giving it publicity.
In this scripture we have an account of the conflict between those powers represented by the beast, the kings of the earth, and the false prophet, on the one hand; and on the other, One seated upon a white horse, called King of kings and Lord of lords, who can be none other than our Lord Jesus Christ.
This scene evidently transpires at the second coming of Christ. The armies of Heaven, which follow him, are the angels of God. No objection to this view is found in the statement that they are clothed in fine linen white and clean. Verse 14. The white linen of the bride, the Lamb’s wife, is, to be sure, called the righteousness of the saints; but the application of this term to these heavenly armies does not prove them to be redeemed saints, and locate this scene at the end of the thousand years, when these saints are to take part in the execution of the judgment of the wicked. For in Rev. 15: 6, the angels who have charge of the pouring out of the seven last plagues are clothed in pure and white linen. These are not saints; but the linen in this case, as doubtless in Rev. 19: 14, denotes that no shade or suspicion of blame rests upon the justice of God in the infliction of the terrible judgments which come upon the wicked.
The reference to treading the winepress at this time, verse 15, does not locate the scene at the end of the thousand years; for Isaiah uses the same expression, and says that it is when the “day of vengeance,” and the “year of the redeemed” comes. Isa. 63: 3, 4. This comes at the second coming of Christ. Then he treads the winepress of Isa. 63: 3, and Rev. 19: 15.
Furthermore, in Rev. 20: 10, in a description of a scene which transpires at the end of the thousand years, we read that the devil is cast into the lake of fire where the beast and the false prophet were cast, as it would read if the ellipsis were correctly supplied. When were they cast there? At the second coming of Christ, a thousand years before, as recorded in Rev. 19: 20.
In reference to these expressions, battle, lake of fire, treading of the winepress, etc., we must, to avoid confusion, bear in mind that there is a battle, a lake of fire, and a treading of the winepress at the beginning of the thousand years, the same as at the close, the apparent difference being that the latter scenes are of more stupendous magnitude and power.
SEVENTH-DAY BAPTISTS AND SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISTS.
By John Nevins Andrews
God made the Sabbath to commemorate the creation of the heavens and the earth. The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord. Because the Creator rested on that day, he set it apart to a holy use, and made it the sacred duty of all intelligent human beings to hallow his rest-day. The gospel of Christ has never changed this precept. It is still a part of the moral law, and will never cease to be a part of man's duty toward God while the law of God shall exist.
It is deeply to be regretted that there are only two of all Christian denominations, the Seventh-day Baptists and the Seventh-day Adventists, that hallow the Sabbath of the Lord. These together constitute only a small portion of those who bear the name of Christian. Between these two bodies there are some doctrinal differences; but in practice they are not essentially different. However much they may desire to be at peace with other denominations, they cannot avoid considerable antagonism. The observance of the seventh day is in itself a rebuke to all those who neglect it. But this is not all. It is the duty of those who keep the Sabbath of the Lord to instruct those who do not keep it concerning this important duty. The effort to fulfill this duty toward others brings the Sabbath-keepers of necessity into collision with those who desire to perpetuate the present practice of walking contrary to the commandment of God.
It is therefore inevitable that there should be controversy between those who obey and those who transgress the fourth commandment. But is it necessary that such should be the case between the two denominations that seek to obey all the precepts of the law of God? We think not. In several doctrinal points they differ, but in the matter of duty toward God they are agreed. In practice they are substantially one. God has placed upon these two bodies of Christians the duty of upholding the truth concerning his holy Sabbath, which all other men trample in the dust. Those engaged in this sacred work are in comparison with their adversaries like the army of Gideon in its conflict with the host of Midian.
Shall there be strife between these two denominations that are alike loyal to the law of God? God forbid. The Seventh-day Adventists claim to have a special work to accomplish in the proclamation of the Bible Sabbath in connection with that of the doctrine of the near advent of Christ; but they recognize the Seventh-day Baptists as the lineal successors of the long line of witnesses by whom God has in all ages preserved the knowledge of his Sabbath in the earth. There is work for each of these denominations, and there is no need that they should be adversaries to each other. It is better to wait till there are fewer adversaries of the Sabbath and more that are its friends. The Seventh-day Adventists obtained a place as Sabbath-keepers at a great price; but the Seventh-day Baptists were free-born. There is but one thing in which they should provoke one another, and that is as to which shall most perfectly keep the commandments of God and most successfully teach them to others.
But what shall we do with respect to the doctrines in which we differ? Shall we, for the sake of uniting the two denominations, sacrifice anything that either side believes to be Bible truth? By no means. A straight line is the shortest course in the moral world as well as in the natural. Let both parties walk in the light as God has given them to see it. Let both ask God to give them grace to see whatever of truth they do not now see. If this course be taken, truth will never be sacrificed to expediency, and bigotry will not make enemies of those who should be friends and helpers.
We regret that differences of opinion with regard to doctrine exist. But as we have each our own organization, we can obey the truth as we understand it, without either denomination becoming responsible for what it deems error in the other. The question of the Sabbath is fast becoming a question that must engage the public attention. Is it not possible, is it not best, that its friends should be friends to each other? The friends of the Sabbath should not quarrel till the Sabbath itself becomes more universal.
But do not the Seventh-day Adventists seek to break up the Seventh-day Baptist churches, and to gather the Baptists into the Adventist organizations? We regret that this has been done in a few instances in the past. But as we add nothing to the number of commandment-keepers by this, we have no wish to do any such work as that of weakening or pulling down the Seventh-day Baptist organization. We should indeed rejoice if the Seventh-day Baptists, while maintaining their own organization, could see with us that our Lord is soon to return. We hope this may yet be the case, but shall never try to hasten such a result by warfare between us and them.
But do not the Adventists speak hard things of such of their number as go to the Baptists? We answer emphatically, No. We know of several who have done this in an honorable manner, and they have never had occasion to complain of hard words or unkind treatment from us. A recent case, however, has called out some unpleasant words. Perhaps it would have been better if the matter had passed unnoticed by us. But it is proper to say that the person in question has taken a course toward us which we are sure our Seventh-day Baptist brethren would not justify if they understood it. We do not esteem as valuable acquisitions men who come to us denouncing the Seventh-day Baptists, and we think our Baptist friends will form the same judgment in the end of those who go to them in this manner from us. It would be better to make some inquiry in all such cases before allowing such men to speak words of bitterness for the gratification of their own ill temper. We cannot afford to endanger the peace between our two bodies by giving to such men their say without knowing whether they are speaking justly or unjustly.
We must sustain relations of some kind with the only other denomination besides ourselves which sanctifies the seventh day. It is far better that such relation should be friendly than unfriendly. The cause of the Sabbath should be dearer to us each than any mere denominational interest. We must have patience with each other's faults. We must seek earnestly to correct our own faults. The world is large enough for us both to do some work for God without constantly jostling each other.
We are about to open a mission in Great Britain; but we hope to labor in that country in such a manner that we shall give no occasion of complaint to the Seventh-day Baptists. Bro. Wm. M. Jones, of London, has acted toward our European mission in the most honorable and Christian manner. He has taken a deep interest in the Seventh-day Adventists. But it is due to Eld. Jones to say that he is not an Adventist, but a Baptist. But as a friend of the Bible Sabbath, he rejoices at every effort made in behalf of the fourth commandment by whomsoever made. The writer has had the privilege of an intimate acquaintance with Eld. Jones. We have differed on some points, but without controversy. Eld. Jones has faithfully sought to promote the Seventh-day Baptist interest, while I have equally sought to promote that of the Seventh-day Adventists. Eld. Jones and the few Seventh-day Baptists of Great Britain have done an important work in behalf of the Sabbath. They have distributed many thousand copies of his Sabbath Memorial, and some millions of pages of Sabbath tracts. This good work he and they still carry forward with great interest.
Eld. Wardner, during the period of his mission in Scotland, distributed an immense number of tracts, and saw the conversion of some valuable persons. In our work in Great Britain, we hope to treat the Seventh-day Baptists in such a manner that we shall be helpers to them and they to us. There are two churches, the remnants of the ancient Seventh-day Baptist churches of England. We would gladly see these little churches strengthened and enlarged. There must not be strife between us; for we are brethren. J. N. A.
The Unchanging Truth of God's Commandments
No number of years or centuries can change wrong to right, nor make that which was false at first become the truth. Each commandment of God's law is truth—unchangeable truth. Ps. 119:142, 151, 160. No matter how long they have been trodden under foot, they are the truth still.
ARE WE AWAKE?
By R. F. Cottrell
Those who believe and love the truth can but rejoice as they see the result of the “broader plans” for its dissemination among the peoples and nations of the earth. God’s providence is over his work; therefore the spread of the truth, as we now see it, is a demonstration of the truth of the message we bear as being sent of Heaven; and not only so, but that the work of the gospel will speedily be brought to a close.
But who realizes the importance of this time, in which the probation of our race is so soon to be closed forever? What manner of persons ought we to be, in all holy conversation and godliness! And how should we be stirred with a zeal to labor for the salvation of our fellow-men! But while the last message is doing its solemn and fearful work, the mass of the people, young and old, are becoming intoxicated, delirious, insane, in their pleasure-seeking, and the mass of professed Christians are lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God.
Shall we who know the truth be carried away with the same spirit? Shall the young among us be light and vain, like the world around them? Can those who have solemnly covenanted to give their lives to the service of God, forget their obligation and their vows, and give their influence with those who know not God and obey not the gospel? Can they be merry and dance on the edge of that precipice—that yawning gulf—which lies before the ungodly world? Forbid it, Heaven!
Said an apostle, “Young men exhort to be sober-minded.” Another, “The end of all things is at hand; be ye therefore sober and watch unto prayer.” Sobriety is always suitable to the child of God; but how emphatically so as we approach the end of all things.
Now is the time to labor in the cause of God. Now is the time to exert ourselves to save men. Now is the time to give our means for the spread of the truth, and ourselves to the work. And for ourselves personally, now is the time to seek God in earnest and live lives of consecration to his service. Shall we be, can we be, indifferent? May God help us to arouse to a lively sense of the present truth and of our obligation to him and those for whom Christ died, and who are in imminent danger of perishing.
R. F. COTTRELL.
THE DANGER OF RICHES.
By Roswell F. Cottrell
“But they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition.” 1 Tim. 6: 9.
The declarations of the Saviour concerning the danger of the rich, that it is even next to impossible that they should ever enter the kingdom of Heaven, are read and assented to by thousands; but who believes them? who fears riches? Wealth used in the right way will harm no one; but the danger is that very few will use it so. The poor will perhaps say, “If I had money, I would show the world how to use it in the cause of God and humanity.” But they do not know what they would do, and cannot, till they have the trial. As wealth increases, it steals the affections. The love of money is never satisfied. It never says, It is enough. And in the ardent pursuit of riches there are snares and temptations to evil. Besides this, foolish and hurtful lusts demand gratification; and how few there are who will practice self denial for the cause of God!
Here are persons who think they are too poor to give anything to the cause. Indeed, they have hard work to get a living, and are rather objects of charity themselves. But still you will see them defiled with tobacco or indulging in foolish and hurtful lusts—some expensive, and not only needless, but injurious, habits. Where do they get their money to pay for these indulgences? Are they willing to deny themselves these for the cause of God? This would not harm them, but be a real advantage to them personally. But if they were only rich, how liberal they would be!
Then here are the young—the youth and children. Of course they have no means! They think it preposterous to ask them for means to aid the cause of God. But the extras in dress and the mere ornaments cost something. How do they contrive to find money for these? And do they never indulge the appetite with candies and ice-cream, and such-like useless and injurious things? Now if the love of God, the cause, and souls for whom Christ died, were uppermost in their heart’s affections, would they not find some way to help in the cause and thus demonstrate their love? Perhaps they earn a little money, or parents or guardians give them something. Do they know that a tenth of it is the Lord’s? Are their minds exercised, first of all, to see how they can use it where it is needed in his cause? Is it not rather the first thing to think how much of vanity and self-indulgence the whole of it will buy, with regret that it will go no further in that direction?
“But godliness with contentment is great gain. For we brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out. And having food and raiment, let us be therewith content. But they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition. For the love of money is the root of all evil; which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.”
Who wishes to pierce himself through with many sorrows? Who would be drowned in destruction, even utter perdition? Who, then, will be warned? Who will cease the strife for wealth? Who will rather serve God with the means intrusted to him, and be content? Is there any danger in riches, and in their pursuit? Why, then, so ardently pursue them? Is godliness with contentment great gain? and is the giving of alms of such things as we possess sure to bring a reward? Then why not “trust in the Lord, and do good”?
R. F. COTTRELL.
EDITORIAL NOTES.
By Editor
The items given this week in our new department, “Notes of News,” are as good as a chapter on the signs of the times.
Please come to order, and let Folly teach you one of the most important lessons a person can ever learn. See the poetry on our second page.
“Life and Health” is the title of a new health journal just started at Wernersville, Pa., by Dr. Thos. F. Hicks. Price, 30 cts. for a volume of 6 numbers. Address, “Life and Health,” Wernersville, Pa.
The East.
More conflicts are evidently approaching. The vaunted peace of Berlin is now seen to be only a truce, and one which promises to be very brief at that. The papers are filled with reports of the mysterious movements of Russian troops, their continued hold on places in the vicinity of Constantinople, the probability that the British fleet will return to its former position, the Mussulmans arming in the Rhodope hills, Mohammedans resisting Roumanian rule, etc. The coming winter seems as likely to be a winter of carnage in that region as was the last.
Not a Bad Illustration.
“ARE you going to fight the Seventh-day Adventists?” was the question lately asked of a first-day Adventist preacher. “No,” said he, “I am not; for those Seventh-day Adventists are like a dry mullein stalk: the more you strike them, the more the seed will scatter.”
The Sabbath in England.
THE Methodist Recorder, of London, after remarking that no special procedure has appeared on the part of either the friends or the enemies of the Sabbath, and that, “so far as legislative action or public movements are concerned, the question of Sabbath observance remains materially unchanged either for the better or for the worse,” says:—
“Despite, however, the apparent lull of the moment, it is evident to every thoughtful man who has observed of late years the signs of the times, that we are approaching a crisis in the history of the Sabbath, and, perhaps, in the history of the Christian religion.”
The Sabbath in California Politics.
IT is proposed that the Sabbath and Christian religion be acknowledged in the new constitution of California. This proposition is awakening some discussion in that State. The proposed articles upon which the agitation turns are these:—
I. The first day of the week to be made obligatory upon all as the Sabbath—notwithstanding the conscientious dissent of both Jews and Seventh-day Christians.
II. Jesus Christ to be recognized as the ruler of nations.
III. Church property to be exempt from taxation.
Correspondence in reference to these propositions lately appeared in the San Francisco Evening Bulletin, W. E. Ijams opposing and N. R. Johnston advocating them. Ijams urged that Christianity was never so pure as when it asked no favors from the State, as witness its history from Nero to Diocletian; that with political influence it becomes a monster of persecution; and that “it is an ill omen when any form of religion finds it necessary to appeal to legislative bodies for the sanction of its dogmas.”
On the other hand, Johnston urged that the people of California, with few exceptions, are believers in Christianity and the moral law of the Bible; that Christianity has been declared to be the common law of the land; and that as the moral law is given to the State, Christians have a right to ask and expect the State to enforce its own law,—the law of the Sabbath.