THE second postulate of Geology, which every true lover of inductive methods must object to assuming as a preliminary to all investigation, is that our globe originated by the hot process, in any manner whatever—whether according to the theory of Kant, La Place, Mädler, Lockyer, or Faye—for they are all alike in teaching that our globe was once fluid throughout.
As to the Earth's Origin.
The pro and con of this, as a theory in itself, may be discussed at some length in some future papers. Just here I only wish to point out how this theory of our earth having originated in such a manner that its interior is or was molten or liquid from heat, not only enters into all modern discussions as to the causes of volcanoes and earthquakes, and the metamorphism of the sedimentary rocks, but by its being the foundation for the hypothetical rise and fall of whole countries—a "pulsating crust," Dawson calls it—forms an integral part of the whole structure of Uniformity. We might note in passing that it is contrary to the account given in Genesis of the origin of our world. But what have we to do with the origin of our world in this science of Geology—a science based principally on an investigation of the fossiliferous rocks, and which can tell us about as much concerning the real condition of the earth's interior as a fly can discover of the pulp of an orange by walking over an inch or two of its surface, and sucking at its rind here and there? As Prof. T. G. Bonney expresses it, "We can see about as much of the earth's interior as of a cricket ball's stuffing through a few pin scratches on the leather." Hence it seems to me the height of absurdity to make any theory regarding our earth's origin a postulate or starting point on which to build anything that we wish to palm off as inductive science.
An Unproven Hypothesis.
That these two propositions, viz., Uniformity and the molten-interior-of-the-earth theory, are, whenever used in our text-books, pure assumptions and not conclusions of Geology, few will, I think, deny. But these, useless and improbable, per se tho we may regard them, and far-reaching as they doubtless are in warping the conclusions of the scientific investigation of the rocks, are yet quite subordinate in their baleful effects on the science to the all-pervading power of the THIRD postulate of this curiously deductive science, viz., that there has been a succession of life on the globe from the low to the high, and that relics of these successive life-forms are pigeonholed in the rocks to reveal this fact to us. It will be largely the business of this and some succeeding articles to show how this idea, beginning as a crude and hasty generalization from a very few imperfectly understood facts, almost instantly expanded into the iron dogma that it is to-day; how it has continued to pervert the teachings of science for a hundred years in spite of its signal failure to explain the facts of the rocks; and how this idea, in fixing upon any fossil type or types as intrinsically older than all or any others, involved, from the very beginning, the utterly preposterous notion that, while one kind of fossils was being deposited in one locality, another and very diverse kind of life positively was not living or being fossilized in another locality—preposterous, I say, for who will claim to possess the supernatural knowledge of the past implied in such a statement?
A Theory that Proves Too Much.
About a century and a half ago, the great French naturalist, Buffon, put forth the generalization that, over all the continents, "the remains of large terrestrial animals occur at a small depth below the surface, showing that they apparently dwelt in these regions at no very remote age; whereas the deeper-lying remains of marine creatures in the same region belong to extinct species, or are related only to forms now inhabiting far distant seas."—Zittal's "History of Geology," etc., page 42.
But this may be admitted as a fairly general truth, while refusing to see how it can be stretched out and patched up into the long, thin line of the "Phylogenic Series," so-called, which, as everybody knows, is practically, in all its details, from the low to the high, the duplicate of the "Taxonomic Series" of our modern world. Moreover, it is hard to see why this argument of Buffon's would not prove the gigantic dinosaurs of Colorado and Wyoming, and the huge amphibians of the Texas Permian rocks, as much modern deposits as any Tertiary or Pleistocene; for they also certainly "occur at a small depth below the surface," which fact ought to prove for them as well "that they dwelt in these regions at no very remote age;" and because, in most cases, nothing but a strong imagination can prove other or "younger" formations stratigraphically imposed upon them.
One Scientific Method.
Of course there is one way of proving the relative ages of strata which we can all acknowledge to be truly scientific. When we find undisturbed strata lying one above another, the lower one is evidently the older of the two; but whether laid down ten minutes earlier or ten million years earlier, how are we to tell, except by assuming the succession of life en bloc, and deciding the matter according to the fossils they contain? And in doing this, we are also tacitly assuming Uniformity, or that these beds, with change of flora and fauna, did not occur by any abnormal action of the elements which might wash different kinds of contemporary faunas and floras into their present positions. But no one pretends that this test of superposition is of any service in comparing the rocks of distant or disconnected regions. How, then, shall we correlate the rocks of distant lands, except we assume that there has been a succession of life upon the globe in a particular order?
The Onion-coat Theory.
All admit that there are everywhere rocks at the base of the fossil-bearing strata which are non-fossiliferous; and all agree in calling them Archæan. Now, where we find certain fossils next to the Archæan, with perhaps hundreds of feet of beds containing successively very diverse kinds of fossils superimposed upon these lower ones, the presumption is—on the basis of Uniformity—that these beds next to the Archæan are very, very old. But to say that they are intrinsically older than others, even than some that may occur above them in this particular locality, is to assume either—
(1) That these hypothetically "oldest" beds encircled all the Archæan like Werner's onion-coats; or, (2) that while these beds were forming in this locality, other and very diverse kinds of plants and animals positively were not living or being buried in other distant localities.
It would appear that this onion-coat hypothesis was still entertained by Wm. Smith and Cuvier, and the other early nineteenth century geologists, having been inherited from Werner. If so, it was soon abandoned, at least partially, tho not before they had their "phylogenic series" pretty well arranged in detail according to the start got from one or two localities in Western Europe. It was bad enough to conclude that, because the fossils occurred in a certain order in a few localities in England or Germany; therefore they must throughout the whole world occur in this particular order—the "onion-coat" again; but the astounding thing about it is that no one seems ever to have stopped to consider the
Supernatural Knowledge of the Past
implied in the only remaining alternative, viz., the preposterous assumption that, while certain types of fossils were forming in a certain locality, A, other and very diverse fossils positively were not forming in other distant localities, B and C. A notion like this, masquerading in the garb of science, is deserving only of contempt.
A Striking Example in Point.
To illustrate this point, we may consider a more concrete example. There are in various parts of British Columbia, rocks containing valuable coal beds, equal, I believe, to many of the coals of the East. These beds are called "Cretaceous," and the Cretaceous System, as we all know, is classed as the last in the "Mesozoic Series." But in very many cases these beds are found resting on the granite or other azoic rocks which we can not prove ever contained fossils, and, in scores of other cases, no stratigraphical evidence can prove other or "older" rocks between them and the Archæan. In very many localities, also, these beds may themselves be metamorphosed or crystalline, and may make up the whole surface rocks with no others above them.
In Nova Scotia, again, there are also vast coal beds, classed as the true coal-measures, which in like manner rest in places upon azoic rocks, and in others can not be proved to have other or "older" rocks beneath them, or cretaceous or any other rocks above them. And, in spite of their being so many million years "older" than the cretaceous of British Columbia, I think they are not as generally metamorphosed or crystalline as the latter.9The very natural question now arises,
How Are We to Prove,
in any true, scientific sense of the word, that these coal-measures of Nova Scotia are older, and, according to the popular arrangement, almost immeasurably older, than the quite similar coal beds of British Columbia? I doubt if there is a man in America who would, off-hand, undertake to frame any sort of answer at all to such a question, save that the Nova Scotia beds are carboniferous, and the British Columbian ones are cretaceous, and that therefore the former are immensely older than the latter; and the more we consider the matter the more clearly we see that nothing more scientific than this can possibly be given, that in fact we can not undertake to compare these localities, as to age, without assuming entire the succession-of-life idea. They both rest on the Archæan. How are we to be sure that, when the carboniferous plants were living in Nova Scotia, the cretaceous flora did not exist in British Columbia? It would be hard for me to believe in the mental soundness of the man who would profess this supernatural knowledge of the past.
[This subject will be continued next week.]
PATIENCE.
By Augusta W. Heald
BY AUGUSTA W. HEALD.
IT is not natural for the human heart to covet the attribute of patience. It seems rather to the carnal man a virtue scarcely to be desired; and yet this same virtue has a prominent place in the teachings of the Sacred Word. In fact it is to be a particular characteristic of the faithful in the last generation of earth, "Here is the patience of the saints." Rev. 14:12. "Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord." James 5:7.
Surely, the conditions of the last days, as foretold by prophets and apostles, and already witnessed in part, call for the special exercise of this virtue.
The far East and the frigid North are involved in the horror of war. Our sisters in heathen lands and the isles of the sea groan beneath their burdens of idolatry and superstition; while our own more favored land, the boasted "home of liberty," is distracted by the greed of capital and the wrongs of the poor, by the ravages of vice, the social evil, and increasing lawlessness. From every land the piteous cries of the broken-hearted ascend to high Heaven and are "entered into the ears" of the all-pitying Father, "the Lord of sabaoth."
It is a matter of prophecy (See Dan. 12:1) that the last generation will pass through "a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation." True, God's people will be delivered; yet, "We must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God." Acts 14:22.
Are we cultivating patience in our every-day life? How can we expect patiently to endure the severest trials if this plant of heavenly growth has not already found root in our hearts? In our daily intercourse with others, in the home, the field, the school, the shop, there are unnumbered occasions to call for the exercise of patience. We may be daily learning lessons which, under God, will prepare us to stand through the "time of trouble."
There are sins to be overcome, there are crosses to be borne by each one, before the righteousness of Christ can be revealed in us, before we can receive the "seal of the living God," and the white raiment wherein alone we are fitted "to stand before the Son of Man" at His appearing.
Will we cheerfully yield our wills, our preference, our rights, it may be? This is not easy, but the harder it seems to us, perhaps the greater the need of this same experience, that so we may gain self-control, and be able in patience to possess our souls.
It is "through faith and patience" that we "inherit the promises." It is only through "the patience and the faith of the saints" that they are enabled to receive that divine grace, which will enable them to "keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus."
Shall we not then "let patience have her perfect work" that we may be found "perfect and entire, wanting nothing," worthy to join the angelic throng in the universal song of praise, "Worthy is the Lamb that was slain"?
Windham, N. H.
PROPHECY AN EVIDENCE OF BIBLE TRUTH.
By Daniel Nettleton
BY DANIEL NETTLETON.
OBSERVATION teaches us that this world, and all things therein, must have had a creator. The Bible tells us by whom and how all things were made. It is the best and most reasonable story of Creation man has ever had or will have. Let us accept the invitation of the Bible, “O come, let us worship and bow down; let us kneel before the Lord our Maker.”
One of the strongest evidences that the Bible is the Word of God to us is the fulfilment of its prophecy. The Bible was written by the Spirit of prophecy. Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. It came not by the will of man. When we believe and take heed to the prophecy of the Bible, we are not following cunningly-devised fables, but are taking heed to the light that shineth in a dark place. None but God can read the future. “Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but He revealeth His secret unto His servants the prophets.” Amos 3:7. God writes twice every prophecy in His Word, once when the prophets spake and wrote the prophecy—the history of the time to come—and again when in His overruling providence the prophecy is fulfilled. The prophecies of the Bible are like the precious stones and metal that lie hidden in the solitude of the earth. They must be sought and found and brought out and polished before their beauty and utility are appreciated. So the prophecies must be read and studied and compared with history before we can see their fulfilment. We find in the prophecies as definite statements concerning men and nations, written many centuries before they were born, as we find on the pages of authentic history written many years after these men and nations have passed away. We have a prophecy concerning Cyrus, king of Persia, made one hundred and seventy-four years before Cyrus was born.
His name, and the work that Cyrus would do in releasing the Jews from captivity, is clearly told. Take the prophecies concerning the Jews. Moses, their great prophet and leader, wrote of their rejection by God, and their dispersion among all nations, as follows:
“The Lord shall cause thee to be smitten before thine enemies; thou shalt go out one way against them, and flee seven ways before them; and shalt be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth. . . . And thou shalt become an astonishment, a proverb, and a byword, among all nations whither the Lord shall lead thee.”
These words were written by Moses thirty-three hundred years ago, before the Jews dwelt in their own land, before any of our modern nations were born. They were written in the old Hebrew language, and have been read every day since by that and other people into whose language their scriptures have been translated.
Now note their fulfilment. Where is the nation to-day in which there are no Jews? You find them in every nation under heaven. They have been preserved a distinct and separate people all these ages. Other nations rise up and preserve for a time their identity, and then are entirely lost, mingled with other nations. Not so with the Jew, scattered among all nations, persecuted or welcomed as citizens, he never loses his national character; he is forever a Jew, fulfilling the words of the prophet, “The people shall dwell alone, and shall not be reckoned among the nations.” This is the Lord’s doings and is marvelous in our eyes.
There are other prophecies equally as marvelous. The prophecies of the Messiah are of interest, and profitable for study. Jesus Himself referred to these as evidence of His Messiahship: “And beginning as Moses and all the prophets, He expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning Himself.” Luke 24:27. The time prophecy of the twenty-three hundred days of Daniel 8 and 9 is positive and very definite in stating the time for the Messiah. Take any reference Bible and look up the references to the words of the prophets, and compare them with the facts concerning Jesus of Nazareth, and you will see His life of ministry is a fulfilment of the prophecy, and so He must be the Christ.
In the second, seventh, eighth, and eleventh chapters of Daniel we have the rise and fall of all the great nations of earth foretold. We read of the fulfilment of these prophecies in our histories. The great struggle in which Russia and Japan is now engaged is spoken of by the prophets of the Bible; in fact a complete history of the world is found in the Bible from the beginning to the close of time. The second coming of Christ and the establishment of His eternal kingdom is also plainly told: “And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey Him.”
There are people who do not like the Bible and would destroy it if they could, but, thank the Lord, the Bible can not be destroyed. It is indestructible. It came to stay. Jesus said, “Heaven and earth shall pass away; but My words shall not pass away.” Isaiah sang, “The grass withereth, the flower fadeth; but the Word of our God shall stand forever.” The enemies of God’s Word have not injured or hindered God’s truth. “We can do nothing10against the truth, but for the truth.”
True, the messengers of truth have suffered some, but
“Truth crushed to earth shall rise again,
The eternal years of God are hers.”
The truth of the Bible has been arrested and imprisoned, handcuffed and shackled, placed behind iron bars, chained down to stone floors, but it is the truth still, and is on its road to complete and final victory. There are some 200,000,000 copies of this blessed Book. It is spoken and printed in nearly all the languages of earth. The story of the babe in the ark of bulrushes, and the Babe of Bethlehem in the manger, is being told and sung by nearly all the nations of men; and soon the song of Moses and the Lamb will be sung on the sea of glass by the triumphant church of God.
The Bible meets the demands for which our souls long. Men in their normal condition long for holiness, for purity. But man is not naturally pure. Facing God’s holy law, every mouth is stopped and all the world becomes guilty before God. We know we can not make ourselves righteous. In this work of making our hearts pure, vain is the help of man. “Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.” But God’s Book tells how we may be righteous and pure. When we accept of God’s Word as it is in truth, it works in us righteousness, even the righteousness of God, to all, and upon all them that believe.
“This precious book I’d rather own
Than all the golden gems
That are in monarchs’ coffers shown,
Or all their diadems;
Were all the seas one chrysolite,
This earth a golden ball,
And diamonds all the stars of night,
This book were worth them all.”
THE REFORMER.
AH! wouldst thou change a people's creed,
And strive to end the grinding greed,
In Church and State?
In thine own soul must sow the seed,
And with thyself in anguish plead
'Gainst greed and hate.
Who thinketh truth can feel the need;
Who loveth truth can master greed—
With love, not hate.
Who acteth truth can nations lead,
And thus the world's great famine feed,
In Church and State.
—Selected.
THE DEATH OF THE TESTATOR.
“FOR where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.”
The death of the testator establishes, confirms, the testament or will, and fixes its provisions,—makes them forever sure and unalterable. Whatever change is to be made in the terms or provisions of the testament, must therefore be made before the testator dies.
The death of Jesus, the Maker of the new or everlasting covenant, established beyond any possibility of change every term and provision of that covenant. From the manner in which some have reasoned, it would almost appear as tho they thought the New Testament was not made until the death of Christ. A man’s will or testament can hardly be made after his death! The terms of the new or everlasting covenant, with its object, were determined in eternity before, as we have seen, and were known from the beginning of creation by every intelligent being whenever the time for their unfoldment arrived. It required the death of the Maker of those terms and provisions to make them everlastingly sure.
Established by His Death.
The death of Jesus established the covenant-testament, because that death was a victory over the devil, and sin, and death, for Jesus Himself, and through Him for all who ever believed in God, and in His plan for saving sinners, and whoever would believe in that plan. The plan rested on the victory of Jesus. That plan was all in the covenant-testament from the beginning, and the object of all was the establishing of everlasting righteousness, with all its blessings. It meant the redemption and restoration of the lost dominion of earth, the redemption and salvation of believers from Adam to the end of the ages, and the perpetuation of eternal life to every intelligent being in the universe outside of the earth, who were also included in the covenant, but who had not broken it.
The Significance of the Testator’s Death.
The victorious death of the Testator meant that His own divine character and the character of the Father were vindicated. We have learned in other studies that that character was revealed in this everlasting covenant-testament in the facts of creation, and is expressed in words in the law of God. It is at this point that the significance of the death of Jesus appears, as related to the law of Ten Commandments and the Sabbath. Inasmuch as the death of the Testator establishes and fixes the terms and conditions of the everlasting covenant-testament, and the everlasting covenant-testament is expressed in the positive principles and statements of the Ten-Commandment law, this law is therefore established by the death of the Testator beyond possibility of change. Unless this law was changed before the death of the Testator, it stands unaltered forever by reason of the foregoing facts.
And why should it not stand, seeing it is the expression of the character of our Creator-Redeemer? There is no question about it in most minds, except over the Sabbath commandment. But unless a change was made before the Cross, and by the Testator Himself, the seventh-day Sabbath must stand with the rest of the testament. What was the example and teaching of Jesus Himself in regard to the question? He was accused of being a Sabbath-breaker. But in every case He made it very plain that He was not breaking the Sabbath, as He had ordained it to be kept. He did condemn the traditions that had placed burdens upon the people in its observance, and taught that it was the will of God that it should be a day of delight and joy and soul-rest in doing good. He was accused of speaking against the law and the prophets. But He said: “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in nowise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.”
Not Abolished, but Magnified.
Why should it pass away or be destroyed, seeing it represented the divine character revealed in creation and in redemption? How could it, in part or in whole, be altered or destroyed without changing the elementary provisions of the everlasting covenant-testament, which was altogether good, and could not be changed without altering the revelation of divinity? It was based on the facts and principles of creation and redemption, and how could Jesus have changed or destroyed it without changing some of those facts, which it would be impossible to do? Jesus, the Creator, was perfect and good altogether; Jesus, the Redeemer, was good and perfect altogether. In Him was the fulness of the Godhead manifested. In Him was represented every good gift to His creatures. “Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with Whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.” Why should there be a change of Sabbath or law? No; instead of changing or destroying the law, Jesus magnified it, and applied it in practise as it had not been applied by the scribes and Pharisees.
Redemption Is Creation.
It has been urged that redemption is greater than creation, and therefore the day on which Jesus rose from the dead should be honored as the memorial of Redemption. A moment’s thought will show that redemption involves creative power, and is therefore creation in a re-creation. This point has been studied at length in this series. The everlasting covenant-testament is wrapped up in creation, and the redemptive element is an integral part of the covenant from beginning to end. Redemption can not be separated from creation, and we have clearly shown that the Sabbath—the emblem of eternal rest—is the sign and memorial both of creation and redemption. The Bible nowhere teaches, not even by implication, that the first day of the week is to be observed as a memorial of the resurrection. No sacred significance whatever is attached to that day of the week any more than to Friday, the day on which the Saviour was crucified. The facts of the Saviour’s death and resurrection are commemorated, as to their significance, in the Lord’s Supper, and in the rite of baptism, but there is no teaching respecting the observance of days in connection with these rites and ceremonies. If the day of Jesus’ resurrection is worthy of special honor, then certainly is also the day of His death, for if there had not been a triumphant death, there would have been no resurrection. One is as important as the other, and just as significant.
No Substitute Sabbath Possible.
As stated, the record is silent on the point of first-day observance, for really there is nothing to be said. The fact, however, which determines the principle upon which the question rests, is that of the testament and the death of the Testator, and what that death signified relative to the New Testament. As the seventh-day Sabbath was and is an integral part of this testament, and no change was made by the Testator before His death, and there is no instruction concerning a change, His death confirmed and fixed the point forever. The final record on this question at the time of His death is that the disciples, after the burial of the Saviour, returned and rested on the Sabbath, “according to the commandment,” and after the Sabbath, as the first day of the week drew on, they came again to the sepulcher. Luke 23:56, etc.
Fact? or Supposition?
The application of this principle also excludes the suggestion that one sometimes hears, that, while there is no positive teaching or command for the change, there were subtle hints looking toward a change; that love looked forward to the new dispensation with a special token of regard for the Master, and that probably full instructions were given to the disciples and believers respecting this matter by the Saviour11during the forty days in which He met with them after His resurrection. No! Such suggestions are not in harmony with the Lord’s Word. Quite impossible for the testament to be changed after the death of the Testator. No! The terms of that testament are based on unchangeable facts, and permit no thought of such a suggestion. The truth is far better than a supposition, especially a supposition with no foundation.
Obedience the Test of Love.
And then, too, what higher honor can possibly be given to the Master than the honor given Him in the Sabbath ordained by Him, and kept by Him in harmony with the abiding principles enunciated by Him all the way from the beginning, looking forward to His mission on earth as Man? What higher expression of love does He ask for than for us to welcome Him into our very lives, and follow in His footsteps? The New Testament, the everlasting purpose of Jesus Himself, is the very quintessence of the law of love. “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” This is what Jesus did to establish the promises and conditions and terms of the everlasting covenant-testament. “Come unto Me . . . and . . . rest,” He said. And in order that we might enter securely into rest, He died.
The depth of meaning attaching to the Sabbath of that testament grows. That is the day of which Jesus is Lord. That is the day that was made for man. By His own example Jesus showed us how to use the day in order to make it a delight and a joy. Let us, in loving obedience, give Him the honor due Him as Creator-Redeemer.
(The next article in the series is entitled, “Sabbath and Sunday.”)
THE SABBATH
By L. A. Phippeny
BY L. A. PHIPPENY
A SABBATH-SCHOOL BEFORE THE TIME OF ROBERT RAIKES.
By G. W. Caviness
IT may not be known generally that one Ludwig Hoecker founded a Sabbath-school in Ephrata, Pennsylvania, in the year 1740, or thereabout, and that this Sabbath-school continued until near the time of the Revolutionary War. Also, that there was a company of Sabbath-keepers living at that place, among whom were men of ability and education, who established a printing-press and published some notable works.
Of the truth of the above statements, I quote from an article published in the New England Magazine for the month of May, 1902:
The outskirts of civilization in those days were the banks of the Susquehanna. Into these western wilds had come, in 1720, a strange sectary, one Conrad Beissel, loosely connected with the Dunkers, who had settled thereabouts. He had been at one time a sort of pastor to the little flock at Pequae, but his extreme views on celibacy and the observation of the seventh day as the Sabbath, had separated him from the other sectaries, who were plain, common-sense farmers, with no special peculiarities in their religious views save in regard to immersion. He was a young baker, who thought himself, to a certain extent, inspired, and "had queer theosophic fancies." These led him to a hermit's life in the woods, in which he was presently joined by others like-minded. After nearly twenty years of asceticism in the wilderness, Beissel began the buildings which grew into the future cloister of Ephrata, some of which still stand. And here for thirty years a monastic life grew and flourished in the Pennsylvania of Franklin and of the Stamp Act. Beissel, or "Father Peaceful" (Friedsam), as he was known in religion, was the head. His followers erected buildings; they farmed; the brethren, in their white Benedictine garb, pulling the plough themselves at first, in the place of the oxen they were too poor to possess; they had paper and flouring mills, and a press from which issued the great "Martyr Book" of the Dunkers, a splendid specimen of book-making, 1,500 folio pages, the largest book published during the eighteenth century in America. It was translated from the Dutch by Peter Miller, their learned and devout prior, and printed on paper manufactured by the brethren. Among other monastic arts, illumination flourished, and a peculiar and impressive sort of music, in which Beissel himself trained them. One of the brethren, Ludwig Hoecker (Brother Obed), independently anticipated Robert Raikes by many years, and founded a Sabbath-school, about 1740, which endured until near the time of the Revolutionary War.
Many of those who first or last felt the mysterious influence of Beissel, were men of character and ability. By far the most learned was Peter Miller, afterward Beissel's successor as head of the community. A graduate of Heidelberg, the Presbyterian minister, Andrews, wrote of him: "He is an extraordinary person for sense and learning. We gave him a question to discuss about justification, and he answered it, in a whole sheet of paper, in a very notable manner. He speaks Latin as readily as we do our natural tongue."
After his Presbyterian ordination, Miller was pastor at Tulpehocken for some years, where he fell under the influence of Beissel; he was baptized by him, and entered the community of Ephrata as Brother Jaebez. Acrelius testifies to his linguistic and theological learning; he was a member of the American Philosophical Society in Philadelphia. The legend which tells how, during the Revolution, he procured the pardon of a deserter, his personal enemy, by his intercession with Washington, may have but little foundation, yet it testifies to the opinion held of his meek and noble character.
The article from which the above is taken is one of a series on the early history of the Pennsylvania Germans, and shows that the Sabbath was known and observed by some remarkable men among the early settlers of that commonwealth. Also that a Sabbath-school was founded in what is now the United States long before Robert Raikes founded a Sunday-school.
If some one would investigate the early history of Ephrata, Pa., they might find interesting facts on the Sabbath question.
G. W. CAVINESS.
How They Became Convinced
By Editor
[Believing it would be of interest to our readers, the editor of the SIGNS OF THE TIMES has asked Sabbath-keeping ministers and evangelical workers to tell in a few words the scripture or scriptures, the truths and principles, which constrained them to accept the unpopular truth of the seventh-day Sabbath. These testimonies must not exceed 500 words. Let us hear from all.]
CXCI.
I BECAME interested in the true Sabbath when a child. The older members of my father's family argued that Sunday was the first day of the week. I was very sure that it was the seventh day. When told that I was mistaken, I said, "The seventh day is the Sabbath, for the Bible says so." From that time I could not be satisfied with Sunday.
When quite young I was converted through reading the Bible and secret prayer. Then I prayed earnestly for the whole truth, and to know what church the Lord would have me join. I decided to give my whole lifetime to the search for truth until I found it.
My father attended a tent-meeting one day when in a town thirteen miles away. He brought home one little tract, which I read and preserved five years, waiting for an opportunity to send for other publications listed on the last page. Father said the preachers were Seventh-day Adventists. What does that mean? I asked. He answered, "They keep the ancient seventh day, and not Sunday, for the Sabbath. They believe in the soon-coming or advent of Christ. They do not set time, as we have been wrongly informed."
That name awakened in me an interest in the true Sabbath and people of God that never left me. A few years later I heard two or three sermons at a tent, and became intensely interested in the subject of the Sanctuary. I was too bashful to speak to the minister, but another tract fell into my hands which I kept also.
At the age of twenty I sent to the office for copies of the Review and Herald, and subscribed for a year. I have been a constant reader of that paper ever since—a period of over twenty-two years. I also sent for a work on the Sanctuary question, and for the "History of the Sabbath," and other books. I continued searching my Bible in connection with these publications, and in six months received all that I had hoped for in a lifetime. One short winter (1882-83) of study and prayer settled the question forever.
I have been keeping the Sabbath ever since and have always felt that I owed the balance of my earthly lifetime to the work of placing these publications in the homes of the people. This I am now doing, by the aid of a wagon filled with Bibles and Seventh-day Adventist books, tracts, and papers.
DANIEL GRABER.
CXCII.
IT was the study of the second, seventh, and eighth chapters of Daniel, with the thirteenth and fourteenth chapters of Revelation, that led me into the truth.
W. H. GRAYSON.
CXCIII.
IN 1863 two strange ministers came to our town and pitched a tent. My parents, who were members of the Christian Church, attended these services. My mother was among the first to embrace the Sabbath reform. Soon after this the pastor of our church called on us. At this time I was only sixteen years old. But I took a great interest in hearing discussions on Bible subjects.
The minister said to mother that he understood she had gone over to the Adventists. Mother replied that she had begun to keep the true Sabbath; and that as a Christian she professed to follow the teaching of the Bible. She then brought the family Bible and asked the minister to show her some authority for Sunday-keeping. This he did not attempt to do, but laid the Bible down and told her that the rules of the church required the members to keep Sunday. Mother replied that the Christian Church had no creed but the Bible, and she proposed to stand by that creed. This satisfied me that there was nothing in the Bible for Sunday-keeping.
Soon after this I began to study the Bible for myself, and became convinced that Sabbath-keeping is an act of worship, whereby we acknowledge God as Creator, whereas by keeping Sunday we acknowledge the authority of the Roman apostasy. Since that time I have endeavored to observe the Bible Sabbath.
C. H. BLISS.
CHRISTIANITY.
To know God and to do His will, to accept gratefully what He sends us and to do what He bids us, to pray as we would talk to a friend, to trust when we can not understand and to believe Him kind even in things that hurt, to keep unspotted from the world's sin and unselfish toward the world's need, to love those whom we can not like and hate no one, to keep the gold of silence where we can not give the pearls of praise, to be true when others are false, brave in the midst of cowardice and kind in return for injuries, to pity our enemies, enjoy our friends, and serve our heavenly Father above by helping His earthly children below; in fact, to be like Christ in love and life, that is Christianity and the ideal to which the Book of books ever leads us.—Selected.