A.—How do you prove that you are now observing the true seventh day in succession from the seventh day of creation week, as recorded in Gen. 2:2, 3?
B.—The first step in the argument to prove that we are now keeping the true seventh day is based on the fall of the manna, a double quantity falling on the sixth day and keeping over the seventh, when none fell. This was 2,500 years after the origin of the Sabbath. See Ex. 16; Gen. 2:2, 3. This wonderful threefold identification and recognition of the order of the days of the week occurred weekly for forty years; and 40x52=2,080; 2,080x3=6,240,—6,240 miracles in proof of the proper count of the days of the week, as it was then generally acknowledged.
A.—Do you say this is proof that no day was lost or gained up to this time?
B.—If we believe the word of God, we must acknowledge that it would be impeaching the wisdom of God, and offering him a gross insult, to assert that he did not give the double portion of manna on the sixth, and withhold it wholly on the seventh day of the week, in true succession from the count as given in Gen. 2:2, 3.
A.—Give your second proof.
B.—You will find it in Ex. 20:8-11. When from Mt. Sinai the ten commandments were given, distinct reference was made to the six days of labor and the seventh day of rest. In this wonderful document the Sabbath is mentioned three times, the seventh day is mentioned three times, and the six days are mentioned three times, as though God foresaw that a large amount of dust would be thrown in the eyes of the people on this very point. Thus the Sabbath law is hedged about by a threefold barrier. We see in Matt. 6:7 that the Lord is opposed to much repetition, hence this threefold repetition is quite significant, occurring, as it does, three times in a law so brief as this.
A.—But if God foresaw that there would be a disagreement on this point, why did he not forewarn the people?
B.—Certainly he did, by introducing the Sabbath law with the word “remember.” As though the whole dispute on this subject arose before his mind, he tersely says, Remember; do not forget. The time will come when men will forget, and will strive to make all forget; but do not forget the Sabbath, remember it always.
A.—What is your third proof that we now have the correct count of the days of the week, as at first given in Gen. 2:2, 3?
B.—In Matt. 24:20, Christ, in giving directions to his disciples as to their escape from Jerusalem, tells them to pray that their flight might not be on the Sabbath. He well knew that this event would occur about forty years after his death, yet he spoke of the Sabbath then known and observed as the true seventh day of Gen. 2:2, 3 and Ex. 20:8-11.
A.—Have you further proof on this point?
B.—In Mark 2:28, Christ calls himself Lord of the Sabbath day. Certainly he would not speak of the day in terms so honorable, claiming it as his day, and then wipe it out from the minds of men by chance, or accident, or plan; but he would refresh their minds on the subject.
A.—But if it is a subject of such great importance, why do not the Scriptures place the sin of desecrating the seventh-day Sabbath on a par with other sins?
A.—Have you any more evidence to prove that we have the correct dates as to the days of the week?
B.—Luke speaks in Acts 13:14, 44; 16:13; 17:2; 18:4, as though he regarded the Sabbath as the seventh day of the week; but in Luke 23:56 he places this point beyond a reasonable doubt, when he says that the women who came to the sepulcher returned and kept the Sabbath according to the commandment. This could only be done by complying with the whole spirit and letter of the commandment, and the very identical day God set apart for this purpose must be kept in order to do this.
A.—But how do you dispose of the reasoning of those who hold that we do not know certainly that we are keeping the very Sabbath day in which God rested?
B.—Christ kept the Sabbath, the true seventh day from creation, and he of course knew which day was the right one. Now the week as reckoned by Christians to-day, is identical with the week mentioned in the New Testament, the seventh day of which was the Sabbath, according to the practice of Christ himself. Therefore, we know that we have the true seventh day. JOSEPH CLARKE.
“BE A GOOD MAN, PAPA.”
By Editor
Leaving home this morning for the office, we kissed our little four-year-old good-by, saying to him, “Be a good boy to-day.” He somewhat surprised me by replying, “I will. Be a good man, papa.” Sure enough, we thought. We need the exhortation more than he, and who could give it more effectually than this guileless prattler? The words of the little preacher have been ringing in our ears all day, and whether we wrote letters or editorials, notified an irate correspondent whose effusions we could not publish, or pruned down a too lengthy report, we seemed to hear the sweet child-voice saying, “Be a good man, papa.” If the exhortation had been given by Paul or Peter, would it have had more force than coming from this little apostle of innocence? We think not, at least to our heart. Oh, how many little children, if not in words, yet by the helplessness of their lives and the trustfulness of their little hearts, are pleading, most eloquently, “Papa, be a good man!” May their tender admonition be blessed of God to the rescuing of many precious souls from the wreck and ruin of sinful lives!—The Christian.
WHAT THE GERMANS CALL SATURDAY.
By Heinrich Nielsen
It is a curious fact that the Germans often call the seventh day the Sabbath, and frequently without knowing this themselves.
For the English word Saturday (Anglo-Saxon, “Saterdag,” Saturn’s day), the Germans employ either „Samstag“ or „Sonnabend,“ of which two the former is most frequently employed, and especially so among the inhabitants of the southern part of Germany.
Just as we in English divide this language into Old, Middle, and Modern English, so we divide the German into Old, Middle, and New German. Now, in order to find out the original signification of the German word „Samstag,“ we need not trace it back any further than to the Middle German period, where we find it called “Samztac,” the literal meaning of which is no less than—Sabbath-day (German, „Sabbathstag“).
From the above, we may certainly conclude with safety that our German forefathers knew that the seventh day was the Sabbath, as they otherwise would not have been very likely to call it so. Now, to prove that the New German word „Samstag“ means Sabbath day, we have only to make a syllogism in its most simple form: „Samstag“ is derived from “Samztac” and signifies the same; “Samztac” signifies Sabbath day; hence Sabbath day is the true meaning of „Samstag.“
HEINRICH NIELSEN.
THE TEACHER TAUGHT.
By C. S. Warner
At a Wesleyan Methodist church in a town in Ohio, Sunday, March 9, a teacher of a class of little boys and girls, while giving general instruction, said that when good men die they go right to Heaven, but when the bad die they go right to hell. One of the little boys asked the teacher if there was not a day of Judgment, to which the teacher answered, “Yes.” “Then,” said the boy, “if people go right to Heaven or hell at death, what need is there of a Judgment?” The teacher could not answer.
Another boy then asked why people differed so much about the observance of the Sabbath. The teacher said that Christ sent his disciples out to teach the people that the Sabbath had been changed to the first day of the week. The first boy then asked, “Where in the Scriptures do you find that?” The teacher hesitated a moment, and then said, “It is not in the Scriptures.” “Oh,” replied the boy, “if it is not in the Scriptures, it does not concern us.” “Well,” said the teacher, “when you are converted, you will understand it better.” “But,” replied the boy, “some have been converted right in this house lately, and have commenced to keep the seventh-day Sabbath.” The teacher was dumb before him. This boy’s parents were Sabbath-keepers. In this case the Lord, through this little boy, taught the teacher, a man who sets himself up as a religious guide of the people. C. S. WARNER.
CLEANING THE TEMPLE.
By D. H. L.
Did Christ cleanse the temple twice? Matt. 21; John 2. Matt. 21 evidently gives a continuous narrative circumstantially related, while John 2 touches upon several of the principal acts and sayings of the Saviour’s life, without particular reference to the succession of events. In this chapter are mentioned that first miracle in Cana of Galilee, verses 1-11; the visit to the temple, verses 13-17; the memorable saying of verse 19; and the recollections after the resurrection, verse 22,—reaching, in point of time, from the commencement of Christ’s ministry to his resurrection. If this criticism be true, then Matt. 21:12, 13 and John 2:13-17 record the same event. D. H. L.
PREPARED
We all like to drink from a fountain which overflows. Gushing springs are sweet. The teacher should know more than she is required to teach; then teaching is easy, and to be taught is easy. But when the teacher neglects all preparation until Sabbath comes, or goes before the class without study, and tries to satisfy her class by pumping at a well which has nothing in it, she disgusts herself with herself, and disgusts her pupils, both with herself and the truth. Overflow, and then it will be easy for you and them.—Selected.
FROZEN KINDNESS.
This world is full of kindness that never was spoken, and that is not much better than no kindness at all. The fuel in the stove makes the room warm; but there are great piles of fallen trees lying among rocks and on top of the hills where nobody can get at them, which do not make anybody warm. You might freeze to death for want of wood in plain sight of all these fallen trees, if you had no means of getting the wood home and making a fire with it. Just so in a family; love is what makes parents and children, and brothers and sisters happy; but if they take care never to say a word about it,—if they keep it a profound secret as if it were a crime, they will not be much happier than if there was no love, among them; the house will seem cold even in the summer, and if you live there, you envy the poor dog when everybody calls him “poor fellow.”—Selected.
Our Basket.
“A little balm, and a little honey, spices, and myrrh, nuts and almonds.” Gen. 43:11.
UNREASONABLE haste is the road to error. To extol one’s own virtue is to make a vice of it.
A KIND “No” is less offensive than a rough “Yes.”
A JUDICIOUS silence is better than truth spoken without charity.—DeSales.
AN ingenuous mind feels in unmerited praise the bitterest reproof.—Bossuet.
To rule one’s spirit is the first step under God toward ruling one’s destiny.
TRUTH is the foundation of all knowledge, and the cement of all societies.—Dryden.
THE Lord’s work is not humdrum, routine work, that may be done carelessly and without thought and effort.—Christian Observer.
EVERY saintly old man, wherever he may be found, is a living witness to the truth of religion, and to the worth of a righteous, godly life.—Evangelist.
THE conversion of a soul is often attributed to means which appear to be more efficacious than others, simply because they were the last in the series of influences by which the person was influenced.—Christian World.
BLESSED is the man who knows enough to keep his mouth shut. Some people live sixty years without learning the art. Indeed, the older they grow the wider their mouths open. A man or woman who is a gabbler at forty-five is a dreadful affliction to a house, or church, or community.
HE that knows how to pray, has the secret of safety in prosperity and of support in trouble; the art of overcoming every enemy, and turning every loss to a gain; the power of soothing every care, of subduing every passion, and of adding a relish to every enjoyment.—William Jay.
IF the banks and bed of a river are formed of black mud, the stream which flows through them, though it may have been very clear and bright when it first bubbled up at the fountain, will soon become thick, and dark, and muddy. So the thoughts which pass through an impure mind, a mind loving what is vile and evil, become unholy and impure.
THE TABERNACLE.
This building is now completed; and for the past few weeks, Sabbath-school and meetings have been held in it. We are therefore prepared to speak more definitely concerning it. Our readers have doubtless looked for a description of the building before this; but a full description cannot well be given without engravings showing the ground plan, elevation, and exterior view. These will be provided in due time; but we wish to say a word about it to give the reader something of an idea of its structure before the dedication, April 20.
The building stands on the site of the old church, on Washington St., facing east upon the public square. It is 105 by 130 feet. Frame of wood veneered with brick, like the Sanitarium and the new Office building. There are four large entrances, through vestibules, one at each corner, facing south-east, north-east, north-west, and south-west, respectively. In this respect it is a good symbol of our message, which is gathering into its fold precious souls from the four quarters of the earth.
The interior arrangement consists of a large central audience room 65x85, entered directly from each vestibule through folding doors. Around this, on the north, south, and east sides, are three vestries, those on the north and south being respectively 21x52, that on the east 23x73. Doors from these vestries open also into the vestibules, so that any room can be entered without going through any other.
The main audience room will seat about nine hundred persons; the north and south vestries, two hundred and fifty each; the front vestry, three hundred and fifty.
The vestries are separated from the main audience room by sliding partitions, containing ground-glass windows for the free admission of light. These partitions are hung on weights, and can all be thrown up by a few persons in a moment of time, thus transforming the entire lower floor into one vast room, capable of seating over seventeen hundred persons, all within sight and easy hearing distance of the pulpit.
The pulpit is placed on the west side, the platform on which it stands, filling and extending somewhat in front of a large arched recess. In the back of this recess is a triple window, on the left sash of which is painted as a motto Rom. 3:24; on the central one, the ark and the law of God, the ten commandments; and on the right, Rev. 14:12.
From the pulpit a passage leads to the rear vestibules on either side; and from these passages stairs ascend to rooms over said vestibules, which are to serve as committee rooms. From each side of the pulpit, steps ascend to the gallery, which extends around the remaining sides of the room, on a circle forty-five feet in diameter. The gallery also extends to the front over the front vestry, furnishing seating room for eight hundred persons. Two stair-cases lead from the gallery into each of the front vestibules. Wall seats, and extra seats in aisles and vacant spaces, can be made to accommodate about seven hundred more. This makes a total of thirty-two hundred, who can be accommodated in the building in case of a crowd. All doors above and below swing outward.
The gallery-front is supported by iron pillars. These, extending upward above the gallery, form a support for the roof. The space within the circle is finished up with a dome, terminating in a large sky-light, twenty-five feet in diameter, fifty feet from the floor. A continuous row of small windows above the gallery admits abundance of light above, giving to every part a bright, cheerful, and inviting aspect.
The basement extends under the whole building. In this, just under the floor, is a net-work of steam pipes, taking steam, through a pipe laid under ground, from one of the forty horse-power boilers of the Office. The heat is thus evenly distributed under the entire floor, and passes up through little registers in every pew. It is just as warm in one part of the house as another, and the heat is brought where it is most needed,—around the feet and lower limbs. The heating system is very pleasant and efficient. No fire is built in the house.
The regular Sabbath audience now comfortably fills the main audience room. For Sabbath-school and social meetings, it is very convenient. Thus when the scholars gather for Sabbath-school at nine o’clock Sabbath morning, they pass to the places assigned to their respective divisions in the different vestries and the main room. The partitions are thrown up, and the school is all together for the general opening exercises. The partitions are then drawn down, and the divisions in the different rooms are thus almost as much by themselves as if they were in separate buildings. Class recitations being ended, at a given signal, the teachers and officers throw up the partitions, and the school is one again for general closing exercises, without a scholar leaving his seat.
In the afternoon, the social meeting is divided to avoid having too large a company in one, the divisions occupying different rooms, and carrying on their worship without interfering with each other. The house is an easy one in which to speak, and the acoustic properties are good. All are more than pleased with the building, and more and more convinced that it is just what is needed. It is finished up in a plain and not unnecessarily expensive manner, and supplies a want which the cause here has long felt. And now we want to see it appropriately and solemnly dedicated to the worship of God. In this the help of all the brethren and sisters who can come, is wanted. The foregoing description is designed only as an introduction to the invitation which is hereby extended to all to come to the General Conference and dedication, April 17-21. We want to see the house filled, from floor to topmost seat in the gallery. We want to see such fervency and enthusiasm as the present progress of our cause now warrants, and we want to experience such a blessing from the Lord as shall consecrate the house, and shall consecrate all the people anew to his service.
It is not a cunningly devised fable which is now beginning to move powerfully the people of the earth; but it is the most marvelously and harmoniously arranged, nicely balanced, and strongly fortified system of truth, that has ever yet been developed by the fulfillments of prophecy, and the concurrent testimony of the word of God. This truth is going on to speedy victory; for the end is at hand. It is in the interest of such a truth that this house has been erected. Come to rejoice in the accomplishment of this work. Come to see; come to hear; come to help; come to receive. The blessing of the Lord maketh rich.
ARE THEY HONEST?
The question, “Is he honest?” is quite a serious one to raise in regard to any individual. It is still more so when we are obliged to apply it to a whole class, and ask, “Are they honest?” Yet the course taken by the opponents of the Sabbath of the Lord; their tortuous and self-contradictory reasoning; their frequent, and apparently willful, suppression of half the truth, which turns the other half into a lie, compels us to ask this question respecting them.
In the World’s Crisis of March 5, 1879, appears an article by H. F. Carpenter, headed, “The—Not Two—Which?” in which he denies that the Bible makes any distinction between laws moral and laws ceremonial, and bases that denial on the fact that the expression “the law” is used in the New Testament, but “never once the two laws.”
He then says, “Now, my friends, which of your two laws is the law? The ten commandments, I hear you say.” Following this, certain references are given in which the term “the law” occurs, showing the most astonishing confusion in his mind in regard to the matter. He then adds, “Perhaps you regret saying that the law meant the decalogue, and wish to change it and have it mean the ceremonial.” Quoting, then, several texts in which the words “the law” refer to the moral code, he adds, “Are these things said of the ceremonial? Certainly not. But they are said of the law, consequently the ceremonial is not the law. What a muddle we are in! What has mixed us up so? Trying to make two of one.”
No, sir! The muddle is one of your own manufacture. It is one in which S. D. Adventists never find themselves. It is a very easy thing to represent them as believing that “the law” must mean one and the same thing in all places; and to one who believes that the ninth commandment of the decalogue has been abolished, the temptation to do so for the purpose of carrying a point, is too strong to be resisted.
With an air of apparent triumph he asks, “Supposing for a moment this [the idea of two laws] to be true, to which of these laws does the Scripture apply the expression, the law?” Nothing can be more simple and easy than the answer. The Scriptures sometimes apply it to one and sometimes to the other; and no S. D. Adventist, so far as we are aware, ever took any other ground. Had not Mr. C. carefully kept this fact out of sight, and represented just the opposite as being true (whether intentionally or not we will not press our opinion), his whole article would have been spoiled.
We ask the reader to look a moment candidly at this question of the two laws. Why are such frantic efforts made by our opponents to break down this distinction? An effort so unreasonable shows that they are under some terrible pressure. Is it not a fact that this distinction does exist in the very nature of things? Are there not laws which are moral, and only moral, in the generally-accepted signification of that term? Are there not also laws which are ceremonial, and that only? Any one possessed of a particle of either sense or candor will admit both these propositions. Then, secondly, does the Bible have anything to say about both these kinds of law? Every one knows that it does. Now, thirdly, is the Bible as accurate as other books? Is it a book of common sense? When it treats of laws which are distinct from each other, being of an entirely different nature, does it recognize that distinction, or does it blunder through the whole subject, and mix up all laws in the most bewildering confusion? Why do despite to the good sense of the word of God, to say nothing of its inspiration?
Now this is all that we claim concerning moral and ceremonial laws; that is, that the Bible recognizes the same distinction which we find in all the lexicons, which every one acknowledges, and which does exist in the very nature of things; and that it says certain things about the moral law, and other things about the ceremonial; namely, that the latter, as the shadow, has lost itself in Christ, while the former still remains to be practiced and taught till the earth shall pass away, if we would be great in the kingdom of Heaven. Matt. 5: 19.
And Mr. Carpenter himself acknowledges this distinction; for quoting Ps. 19: 7; Matt. 5: 17; Rom. 7: 7; 1 Cor. 15: 56, he says: “Are these things said of the ceremonial? Certainly not.” Here he unconsciously suffered his innate good sense to get the better for a while of his artificial theology, and give utterance to a little truth. But it was not intentional; for he immediately chokes it down, and commits himself to this contradictory and fatal position: “The law is one thing and one only, and that one thing embraces all God’s precepts and judgments given to Israel, whether moral or ceremonial.”
Now Christ did abolish and take out of the way some law. If there is but one, he abolished all law. Then when, where, how, and by whom, was a new one enacted? or haven’t we any yet? and as “sin is the transgression of the law,” and “where no law is, there is no transgression,” and “sin is not imputed when there is no law,” is there any sin in the world now? And if so, by what is it shown? We have been waiting twenty-five years for these no-lawyers to give us their system of theology and answer these points; but as yet they have failed utterly to meet the issue. Like the cuttle-fish, which ejects from its ink-bag a muddy fluid to darken the water and cover its retreat, so all these men do is to try to raise a dust to blind the eyes of the investigator and to conceal their position.
But just as clearly as we are told that there is a law which Christ did abolish, we are also told by Christ himself that there is a law which was not to change in one jot or tittle while heaven and earth endured,—commandments which his disciples were to faithfully do and teach, as they valued Heaven itself. What law was this? How can the same law be both established and abolished at the same time?
If the reader wishes to involve himself in a “muddle” that is a muddle, and in absurdities and contradictions without end, let him try to harmonize this one—no—new law position of these anomalous expositors with the declarations of the New Testament. We have not space to draw out the particulars, twenty-five at least, in which he would find the Bible, according to this view, contradicting itself; nor is it necessary to restate an argument which has been so often repeated. Any advocate of the single-law theory has but to read Eld. Canright’s pamphlet on the two laws, published at this Office, to become ashamed of his position, if he is still susceptible of that emotion.
We look with pain upon the work of these men, who, to get rid of the Sabbath of God, are fighting his law. They are warring against an instrument which comes to us bearing the authority of Jehovah, and clothed with the holiness of the highest Heaven. “The law is holy, just, and good,” says Paul. They are warring against a law with which the carnal mind is at enmity, but in which the spiritual man delights; a law which the Saviour, by his teaching, sinless life, and sacrificial death, magnified and made honorable; for he died to bring man’s deformed and guilt-stained character back into conformity with that righteous law, by which we must all be judged at last. Jas. 2: 10-12.
We know that these men are preparing for a terrible disappointment unless they change their course. In words of startling import, Christ says, “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of Heaven, but he that doeth the will of my Father in Heaven.” Matt. 7: 21. Doing the will of God is keeping the commandments, or law of God. Search carefully, and see if it is not so. And when he speaks of the many who have not done this, but who will still say, Lord, Lord, he says: “I will profess unto them, I never knew you; depart from me, ye that work iniquity”—ἀνομίαν, violation of law!
We warn all those who in word, or heart, or life, are fighting against God’s law, breaking any commandment and teaching men so, to desist from their unholy work. The day of the Lord is at hand, when every wall daubed with untempered mortar will fall, and every effort to mislead and deceive ourselves or others will receive its just reward. In the name of all that is true in this world, or desirable in the world to come, we exhort them to prepare for Him who is soon to appear on the great white cloud, by coming into a place in which it may be said of them, “Here are they that keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus,” Rev. 14: 12, 14, and to them at last, “Blessed are they that do His commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life [from which man was driven for violating law at first], and may enter in through the gates into the city.”
DO YOU PRIZE YOUR FREEDOM?
THOSE who have the privilege of enjoying their faith in the third angel’s message without restraint, and who perhaps also have the sympathy and cordial co-operation of their friends, should greatly prize such privileges. Look at the following case, and be not unmindful of101what you enjoy, nor ungrateful to God for your better situation.
A brother writes from Wisconsin that he is advanced in years, and quite broken down in health, and has lost his eye-sight, so that he cannot read the REVIEW for himself; and that those upon whom he is dependent reluctantly do as much as to bring him his paper from the post-office. He has taken the paper eighteen years, and prizes it still as highly as ever; but now he says he may as well stop it for himself. Yet he is not unmindful of others who may have more privileges, and hence he sends two dollars, that through the missionary society the paper may be sent to some one who may be benefited by it. We believe the Lord’s blessing will follow such a donation, and that the giver will behold the results in the kingdom of Heaven.
THE TEXAS CONFERENCE.
By James White
THE Texas Conference is small. Probably there are not more than three hundred Seventh-day Adventists in this large State. The emigration to this State is great. The people come from all parts in covered wagons. Thousands who are pouring in, have not so much as heard of a Sabbath-keeper in the world. I never saw people so eager to read as these. This is a vast missionary field, and yet it has received but little help from the General Conference. Texas has not been helped to the amount of two hundred dollars. Their tract and missionary society is about seven hundred dollars in debt. But they have, as we are glad to report, one thousand dollars on hand in books and cash.
At their camp-meeting and Conference last November, twelve hundred dollars was pledged to the tract and missionary society, all to be paid during the year 1879. But ready cash is almost out of the question. The preachers that labor in this State are poor men. Two tents are ordered. If the preachers can collect enough for running expenses the present season, they will do well.
In view of the foregoing facts, of which we have personal knowledge, we suggest that the President of the Texas Conference can hire the money to purchase the tents until cotton season, when the brethren will have some money. When the Texas brethren shall pay for these tents, the General Conference and the REVIEW Office will place to the credit of the Texas Conference and T. and M. Society the entire amount of the cost of the tents they use and pay for.
The statement of the case is now before those whom this matter may concern. If our brethren in Texas purchase and support one tent, they will be credited on their account at the REVIEW Office the cost of one tent. If they support two tents, they will be credited the cost of two. And if they can furnish laborers and support for three tents, they will receive credit on their account for the cost of the three.
And further, at any time when the brethren of the Texas Conference are ready for a good class of one hundred, Elders Smith and White will hold a Biblical Institute with them. We suggest that the first of next November, in connection with their Conference, at the camp-meeting, would be a good time. God bless the Texas Conference. It is small; but there is room and material in this vast field for one of our strongest Conferences. JAMES WHITE.
THE SABBATH QUESTION IN ENGLAND.
By John Norton Loughborough
In my last communication I referred to the controversy in the Southampton papers on the Sabbath question. Three more articles have since appeared, one of them from the rector of one of the established churches of the borough. It was an attempt to reply to the question concerning the days of the week. There was nothing especially new in it, but he took so many conflicting positions that they seemed to need fastening together. They were in substance as follows:—
1. The fourth commandment still requires obedience. 2. The Sabbath of the Jews was abrogated, but the Sabbath of the decalogue is still binding. 3. The original Sabbath law was given in Gen. 2:2, 3, and each successive generation, without a single exception, has recognized it by keeping one day in seven. 4. One day is just as good as another, so all days are alike. 5. The day given to the Jews was a different day from the creation Sabbath. 6. “The first day of the week, signalized by the event of Christ’s resurrection, was immediately and without question observed by the Christian church as the Sabbath of rest, or the Lord’s day, and that forever after.” 7. “From the day of Christ’s resurrection, the first day has never passed without the gathering of Christians together in his name.” 8. “To sum up, then, our warrant for the change of day may be traced to the authority of the Lord himself; for as the apostles were careful to deliver nothing relating to the worship of God except on express revelation from Christ, so it is not to be supposed that without any direct intimation from him they could have ventured to depart from the observance of the old Sabbath, and to solemnize another day throughout the Christian church.”
The reader will bear in mind that these were the assertions of the rector. Instead of pointing his readers to the texts to show that the day of the Sabbath had been changed, as demanded by “Inquirer,” he said “instances” of first-day observance “would occur abundantly to every one in the reading of the New Testament.”
The other two articles relate more especially to how Sunday should be kept. I have seven of these articles carefully laid away, and it may be we shall yet have an opportunity to say something concerning them to the people of Southampton borough.
Not many days ago, a curate of one of the established churches officiated, owing to the illness of the rector of the said parish. In the course of his remarks he made reference to a sect of pious Jews, and said, “They keep a different day from what we keep; they keep Saturday.” And he added, “I don’t think we are keeping the right day.”
Minds are being agitated on this important question. Our daily prayer is that the Lord will give us heavenly wisdom to so labor that souls may be gathered to his truth and to the heavenly garner.
Two texts come home with special weight to my mind. One, the words of Christ: “As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.” John 15:4. The other text is the words of David: “Restore unto me the joys of thy salvation, and uphold me with thy free spirit; then will I teach transgressors thy ways, and sinners shall be converted unto thee.” Ps. 51:12, 13. We pray the Lord to make us indeed living branches in the heavenly vine; then our labors will not be in vain.
J. N. Loughborough.
THE TITHING SYSTEM.
By A. S. Hutchins
SHALL we “render unto God the things that are God’s”? In all our churches where the subject of tithing has been introduced, I think, so far as I have knowledge, the larger portion, or nearly all of the brethren and sisters, have signed the pledge to pay one-tenth of their income into the S. B. treasury.
There are those who no doubt will sign the pledge yet, and conscientiously act in harmony with the requirement of the word of God in this matter; while others may not venture to pledge to give unto the Lord one-tenth of what he in love and mercy shall bless them with strength and ability to gather, or that may, without any personal effort on their part, drop into their hands.
He who was rich, for our sakes became poor, that we through his poverty might be rich. And are we afraid to promise to do in temporal things what is required of us to carry on the last work of the church of God?
Should the Son of God ask some who profess to love him and his cause, and talk of hoping to meet him when he cometh, questions as pointed as he did James and John (Matt. 20:22), I fear they would not say unto him, “We are able.”
The first quarter of the present year is nearly past. How is it about the “tithes and offerings” for the present quarter? Are you conscientiously saving the Lord’s portion of your income? Or is it so small for this quarter that you give little attention to it? If so, you may justly fear that when you receive more, you will be negligent then.
“He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much; and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much.”
Angels watch the development of character, and weigh in just balances moral worth. Soon life’s record will be made. A few more fleeting years, and the Master will come forth and pronounce a blessing upon those who have “been faithful in a very little.”
The habit some have fallen into of paying no attention to systematic benevolence and T. and M. pledges is a bad one. Again, to let a debt accumulate for our periodicals and leave the T. and M. society to pay this, when with suitable care and attention to the subject at the right time, these could have been paid as well as other obligations, manifests a great lack of fidelity to God, to his people, and to our own spiritual interests.
On a certain occasion Jesus desired to impart some important instruction to his disciples; to this end, he “called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them,” and taught them wherein to imitate him. May not the followers of Christ learn from a child at present?
Within a few months I have seen children weep for fear their names would not be entered on the S. B. book again. Some little children are so trained, even in very poor families, that when they earn or receive a few pennies, they always conscientiously count out one tenth for the cause of God. An earnest worker tells of a little boy who said, “We can give the Lord one-tenth as well as not; for he gives us all we have, and we can give back one-tenth.” “Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above.” “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s.”
A. S. HUTCHINS.
HEALTH
By R. F. Cottrell
AGAIN I wish to express my decided belief, founded upon obvious scientific facts and testimonies of the Spirit, and confirmed by experience, that a plain diet of grains, fruits, and vegetables, prepared in the most simple manner, free from grease and other condiments, is the best and most wholesome, and will richly repay us for all the self-denial it costs, in exemption from colds and pains, and distressing ailments of numerous kinds.
No one can give specific rules to regulate diet under all circumstances. All are left free to act for themselves. But it is our wisdom to act according to our best light. If we believe the testimony that animal food is not the best, it becomes us to act in accordance with this faith. If the meat-eater is more liable to disease, even to a tenfold degree if he eats largely of it, then it certainly is our interest, to choose a more healthful diet. It is certainly best to prefer life to death, and health to disease.
The testimony of those who have thoroughly tested the effect of both animal and vegetable diet, ought to have some weight. For myself, while others are suffering from severe colds, I still am exempt. Not that I do not take colds at all, but they do not abide with me; they go as readily as they come. And rheumatic and neuralgic pains and troubles, with which I have been acquainted in former times, have left me, so that I only remember them as things long since passed away.
As a people professing the faith which we do, it is my settled judgment that we ought to make progress toward a pure diet of grains, fruits, and vegetables, free from animal fat and other condiments. Butter cooked in food is much worse than it is when spread upon our bread, and eaten in its natural state. The less of it in any way, the better. R. F. COTTRELL.