THE word of God reveals to us two kinds of righteousness, which have been in existence ever since man fell by transgression. One kind is expressed in the following language: “The Lord is delighted for the sake of his righteousness; he will enlarge the law, and make it honorable.” This kind is what we term the righteousness of God as revealed in Jesus Christ, and which makes man a fit subject for the abiding presence of the Holy Spirit. The other is stated by the prophet as follows: “And we all are like an unclean person, and all our righteousness as a soiled garment; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our sins bear us away as the wind.”
Beginning with Adam, after he had disobeyed the Lord, till the present time, man has either enjoyed the one or clung to the other. But tracing the annals of history all through the course of time, it seems very evident that man, due to the perversions of his nature, has been more ambitious of having his own “filthy rags” for a covering, rather than to accept the robe of spotless purity which God has been seeking to impart. While this has been manifest very clearly all through the various stages of the world, the climax of self-justification, in place of the righteousness of God, was reached by the Jews as a nation, which righteousness they really thought was the same as that of the Lord.
From their very inception as a people, it was God’s distinct purpose to make them righteous and holy. This he clearly stated by Moses soon after their liberation from Egyptian servitude. He said: “Ye have seen all that I have done to the Egyptians, and I have carried you about on eagle’s wings, and brought you unto myself. And now, if ye will diligently hear unto my voice, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be to me select of all peoples; for unto me belongs all the earth. And ye shall be to me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation. These are the words thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.”
This same truth we find later in the Bible iterated and reiterated by prophet, priest, and king, encouraging Israel all the time in that idea of righteousness and holiness. It was for this very purpose the Lord said he had separated them from among the nations of the earth, and made them a distinct people. Deut. 7:6; 14:2. Nevertheless, from the very beginnings of their organization as a separate body of people, till the end of the Jewish economy as recognized by Jehovah, they never had fulfilled God’s plan and purpose concerning themselves. In the different periods of their national existence, there were but very few who were willing to submit to God in their entirety, and be adorned with his beautiful garments of salvation and righteousness. The masses never were converted, and consequently were never righteous in God’s sight as he designed they should be.
The only kind of uprightness which has ever been acceptable to the Lord, is the one first described. This is the essence of Christianity; it is also the substance of true Judaism, for the former is but a continuation of the latter. In other words, it has been the only truth which has ever enabled man to enjoy the abiding presence of the Anointed One, and made him capable of understanding the ways of him who liveth and abideth forever.
Since the Lord made this promise to Israel of making them virtuous and upright, it has always been their anxious desire and longing ambition to be just such kind of people. This is a fact among the pious Jews even of the present day. While it is true, as previously stated, that they, in the majority of cases, did not seek it in the properly-appointed manner, nevertheless it was righteousness they wanted; and that quality they must have under any circumstance, at whatever the cost, even if to the Lord it was as a soiled garment. To them, of course, it seemed the genuine thing.
That this is a fact,—that they have always striven after this desirable trait of character,—is very clearly taught by the great apostle to the Gentiles, who surely ought to know, as he had large experience in this line. He says: “For I bear them [the Jews] record they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves to the righteousness of God.” “What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for.” Rom. 10:2, 3; 9:30-32; 11:7. So after all their labors for, and pursuit after, the righteousness of God, they came short of securing it; and neither till this day have they obtained it, because the same vail is upon their hearts.
It is our purpose in this series of articles to illustrate how they have endeavored to become a holy people, filled with “good works” (?) and righteousness (?), which they thought would be suitable to the Lord, but worked out according to their own ideal. However, they have sought to make it appear that they were following God’s plan in the work; and consequently they have used the very means and ways which God has delineated in his word to make people holy by a strict obedience thereto, and then either perverted those truths or else substituted something very much akin, placing a false interpretation upon them, so that the Jews really believe their substitute to be the genuine article. This was Paul’s experience, this has been the experience of many others who have had anything to do with Judaism, so called.
It is a fact recognized by the spiritual-minded Jews of all times that the services connected with the tabernacle in the wilderness had a deep spiritual meaning; that God always intended by those objects to teach his people great truths concerning the Messiah, and salvation through him; and that in those types and symbols were incased great truths, which to Israel meant deliverance from sin, and freedom in God. That this is true is shown in scores of places in both Old and New Testaments. They had the Gospel back yonder; they had Christ there; salvation through Christ was theirs; and eternal life as a result of believing in the Messiah was familiar to them. See Heb. 4:1, 2; John 5:39; 2 Tim. 3:15; John 5:40. Many other passages might be cited.
When, however, great apostasy set in among the nation, they lost sight of the true meaning of those ordinances and their spiritual interpretation, and gradually the idea was developed that to secure the favor and righteousness of God, all that was necessary to be done was in the observance and performance of those objects merely from an external point of view. In this way, they lost sight of God and his work for them, and attempted to do for themselves that which he only was able to perform. Hence to keep up appearances that they were still the select of God, and are such yet, they who twist, mangle, and wrest the Scripture in the manner best suited to themselves.
As an illustration of the above, I quote from a Jewish prayer book, on the subject entitled “Ethics of the Fathers.” It says, “All Israel have a share in the world to come, for it is written, ‘And all thy people shall be righteous, forever shall they possess the land, the sprout of my planting, the work of my hands, that I may be glorified.’” This of course is taught to mean that those only are Israelites who are born Jews according to the flesh.
The way by which this perversion of God’s truth was brought about will be treated in our next.
F. C. GILBERT.
HOW THE SABBATH WAS CHANGED.
By M. E. K.
Not many years ago, had a professed Christian of any of the great Protestant churches been asked, How was the change from the observance of the seventh day to that of the first day brought about? the answer would probably have been, By command of Christ and his apostles. They could not then, any more than now, produce statements from Christ nor his apostles to prove their declaration, nor could they even find any clear inferential evidence that Christ or his apostles ever in any way disparaged the weekly Sabbath, but still, somehow that impression had taken root, the popular prejudice favored it, and, like a noxious weed in a fair garden, for a long time it resisted all efforts to dislodge it. The influence of Puritanism may be clearly seen in this tenacious clinging to the idea that the Sunday is the Christian successor of the Jewish Sabbath, and that it has for its support all the moral force of the ancient law of the Sabbath. That theory has been like a wall of error resisting the power of the truth to batter it down, but at the present time it certainly is beginning to give way. Few persons with any pretensions of scholarship are now found who are bold enough to assert that Sunday rests upon the authority of the fourth commandment, or that the change from the observance of the Sabbath to that of the keeping of Sunday was quickly done under absolute and unequivocal divine direction.
Two causes have united to bring in this change of sentiment in regard to the Sabbath, a primary and a secondary cause. The primary cause is the truth of the Scriptures, which is squarely opposed to this transfer of the Sabbath theory, and the application of this truth to the reason and consciences of men, which has been done most persistently and earnestly during the last forty years by that people who, in the providence of God, have been set for the defense of the Bible truth that only one Sabbath day was ever given to mankind, that this day is the seventh day under all dispensations, and serves the same purpose for them all. The people who are engaged in this work are not great in point of numbers, tho they are constantly receiving accessions; nor remarkable for their ability or education, yet comparing favorably with others; and hence their success in gaining adherents, and at the same time causing their opponents to change their attitude toward the question, is an evidence that it is the word of God which they handle, which is both the fire and hammer which break the rock in pieces, and under which the strong wall of opposition is being at least slowly battered into another shape. The primary cause, then, of this change of front upon the subject of the Sabbath, which the adherents and defenders of the Sunday-sabbath have now largely accepted, is that the truth preached by the people symbolized6 (54)by the angel of Rev. 14:9-12 has broken the defense of the opponents and caused them to make a new alignment on the field of scriptural contention.
In thus describing the primary cause of this change of front which those who would support an unscriptural sabbath have been compelled to assume, the secondary cause is also suggested; but it may be further treated. Under the constant pressure of those who present the simple, clear truths of the Bible that the Sabbath is as unchangeable as its divine Author, and that there is no evidence in Scripture or history of any change of the Sabbath by divine appointment, those who would still sustain Sunday have gradually yielded their old position, and have taken up a new, and, to their minds, a more advantageous position. They now claim no warrant in the Scriptures for the change, make the Sabbath a thing of small account, and allow that the change was effected gradually through long series of years. Thus Professor Salmond in his new book, entitled “The Sabbath,” says: “No word of Christ, no decree of the apostles, is on record abrogating the seventh day and appointing the first.” The book reviewer in the Biblical World, quoting the above statement, adds, “And had there been such, it presumably would have been put on record,” and then quotes again from Professor Salmond as follows: “Rather was it (the change) by a gradual way, under the sense of a divine propriety and the suggestions of apostolic practice,” that the change came about. This confession at once removes the act of the change of the Sabbath from where it can gain any authority of Christ and his apostles, and places it where it belongs, in the times when the innovations and changes which led to the formation of the Papacy were superseding in the church the teachings of Christ.
The change from presbyter or bishop to metropolitan bishop, to archbishop, to pope,—in short, the whole paraphernalia of apostasy,—is assumed step by step, and under conditions and circumstances which were believed to be “under the sense of a divine propriety and the suggestions of apostolic practice.” We therefore assert without fear of a successful contradiction that every one of the innovations which are peculiar to the Papacy may be sustained by the declaration that they were enacted “under the sense of a divine propriety,” as easily as the change of the Sabbath may be so excused and warranted. Even the defenders of this notion of the authority of Sunday-keeping are not perfectly satisfied with it, and the book reviewer before referred to, pertinently says that “perhaps we still need to ask ourselves more precisely what is the nature of the Christian Sunday as derived from its predecessor, the Jewish Sabbath, and as derived from its own peculiar accession and significance.” Such a confession demonstrates that the supporters of Sunday are, and have been, on the wrong track; for after centuries of study, discussion, and change of opinion, they are not yet settled as to the origin of Sunday and its status in the Christian church.
In all this discussion there are for us, who accept the scriptural idea of the Sabbath, some crumbs of comfort. Every retreat, every change of position, of the advocates of Sunday, leads some honest soul who has been groping in this Sunday fog to see the light of the Sabbath of the Lord shining like a bright star from creation until now. To one who has confidently believed that the obligation to observe the Sabbath was transferred by divine authority to Sunday, it is a severe shock to learn that such is not the case, and that Sunday-keeping is on a level with many practices which he has been taught to look upon as of papal origin. Under such a shock many transfer their allegiance to the Sabbath of the Bible, whose foundation never changes, and whose claims for allegiance and obedience are always truthful, consistent, and harmonious. We have no reason to be discouraged in our work of heralding God's idea of his Sabbath; the walls of error are crumbling; the honest will see the light and rejoice in it. M. E. K.
CONGRESSIONAL THEOLOGY.
By W. N. G.
THE kind of theology that finds its way into politics is invariably unscriptural, just as the kind of religion that seeks political preferment is foreign to the Spirit of Christ. This fact is brought forcibly to mind by a recent theological effort in the House of Representatives. A time was set apart for delivering eulogies upon the life and political record of Hon. Charles F. Crisp, deceased, Speaker of the House in the last Congress. The report says that Representative Deamond, of Missouri, “departed somewhat from the beaten path of such discourses, and considered the future of the departed.” He is then quoted as follows:—
His spirit, where? Has its existence terminated with the existence of the body? Whatever philosophy may say, man rebels at the thought. The hope, sometimes clung to in desperation, sometimes clung to in brightest anticipations, that there is a hereafter, and that men live in that hereafter, none of us will give up. The philosophy of ages of calm reasoning can not banish it. It springs as an inheritance of humanity, as an instinct in the soul of every being that breathes. We believe—our hopes, our affections, all that we hold near and dear in life, admonish us to believe and constrain us to believe—that our friend has not perished, but in a higher and nobler sphere this great intellect, this loving spirit, will flourish and expand and achieve new and perform new acts of glory and of grace.
In contrast with this effusion, we call to mind a few expressions found in the Word of God on the subject of the dead; for instance this: “The living know that they shall die; but the dead know not anything, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten. Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion forever in anything that is done under the sun.” Eccl. 9:5, 6. “Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.” Verse 10. “Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help. His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.” Ps. 146:3, 4. “His sons come to honor, and he knoweth it not; and they are brought low, but he perceiveth it not of them.” Job 14:21.
In Mr. Deamond’s eulogy of the doctrine of post-mortem activity—the root and ground of both ancient and modern Spiritism—he says, “The philosophy of ages of calm reasoning can not banish it.” That is true, for the reason that it is the “philosophy of ages” that supports it. It is the Word of God that banishes it from the minds of those who believe his Word in preference to the “philosophy of ages.”
We are now in the days when demands are being made upon Congress, as well as upon State Legislatures and municipal councils, for religious legislation. We are in a time when courts are called upon to render decisions in matters of religion. The foregoing is an illustration of the unreliability of Congressional theology. The Word of God is the only true standard of religious doctrine, and we ask the candid reader, Do you want a body of men to legislate in religious matters for you whose ideas of theology are so at variance with Scripture truth?
About five years ago we had another illustration of Congressional theology that was even worse than this. This may have been the result of ignorance of the Scripture, but that was a case of deliberate perversion. The proposition then was to enact law upon the Sabbath question, and an act was passed to close the World’s Fair on Sunday, ostensibly on the basis of the fourth commandment. The theological lawmakers that composed the two houses of Congress at that time actually enacted that Sunday, the first day of the week, is the Sabbath of the fourth commandment, which says that “the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God.”
Now it is conceded that our Congressmen are men of more than ordinary intelligence; and it is not probable that such bodies will in the future be any more intelligent than those of the past or present. They are chosen representatives of the people at large; and the people of all parties always claim (especially during election campaigns) that their candidates are the very best men for the position. Yet the instances which we have cited are sufficient to show the fallibility of such bodies in matters of theological import, even as the newspapers and other authorities are continually showing their failures in secular matters.
Therefore we see the wisdom of our forefathers in establishing a government in which it was designed that there should be absolute separation of Church and State. The Lord ordained that in this sinful world there should be civil government, and he gave the management of that ordinance into the hands of men. That he has left it in human hands is shown by the great and conflicting variety of governments now existing in the world, and by the fact that the most tyrannical are often the most enduring. But the regulation of his own kingdom has been retained in his own hand, as a separate interest. “My kingdom is not of this world,” says the Saviour; therefore the men of this world have nothing to do with it. His commissioned servants who are to carry on his work here are such as are willing to be led in humility and self-sacrifice by the Spirit of truth, the word of God being their sole code of laws. This work is to take out of the world a people for his name; to take them from “every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people.” And these are to be sanctified through the truth, which is the word of God (John 17:17), and not through Congressional theology or civil law in any form.
Yet the great mass of professing Christians, led by the ministerial classes, will go on petitioning and petitioning the various legislative bodies to take into their own hands the work of setting up religious standards for the people. But the believer in God’s word will heed the injunction, “Be not deceived; God is not mocked; for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.” “He that taketh the sword, shall perish with the sword.”
W. N. G.
Clear Up Misunderstandings
By Phillips Brooks
You who are letting miserable misunderstandings run on from year to year, meaning to clear them up some day,—if you could only know and see and feel that the time is short, how it would break the spell! How you would go instantly and do the thing which you might never have another chance to do!—Phillips Brooks.
The Ticonderoga Expedition
By Chas. Morris
CHAPTERS IN THE UNITED STATES HISTORY. NO. 10.
BY PROF. CHAS. MORRIS.
Ticonderoga.
The Colonists Gather about Boston—The Colonists All for War—Advance of the Green Mountain Boys against Ticonderoga—Dispute between Ethan Allen and Benedict Arnold—How the Fort Was Taken.
The battle of Lexington, as the conflict of April 19, 1775, is called, proved like the touch of a firebrand to gunpowder. All New England was ripe for revolt, and as fast as the news of this event spread, men seized their arms and declared for war. During the night that followed the retreat from Concord, the farmers of Massachusetts streamed on all sides towards Boston. By the 20th the men of the neighboring colonies were in motion. Rhode Island sent its contingent of patriots. John Stark, the New Hampshire veteran, marched south with an ardent band. When the news came to the old soldier, Israel Putnam, at his home in Connecticut, he was engaged building a stone wall on his farm. Flinging off his leather apron, he mounted his horse, and within eighteen hours reached Boston, a hundred miles distant. New England had blazed into war. Before the month was out Boston was besieged by thousands of hardy volunteers.
The tidings sped south with remarkable rapidity for that day, and by the 10th of May they had reached Savannah, Ga., and found the men of that remote colony as earnestly patriotic as those of the actual scene of war. The news crossed the mountains of Carolina to the frontier settlements of Kentucky made by Daniel Boone and his followers. Here it reached a group of hunters encamped in the wilderness. In their patriotic warmth they at once named their camp Lexington, and Lexington the place continues to this day.
The story of the siege of Boston is too familiar to be here repeated. We all know how the battle of Bunker Hill was fought, and how the regulars learned there that the colonists were foes not to be despised. We all know how Washington was appointed commander-in-chief, and spent months in making soldiers out of the farmers that invested Boston, and how he finally drove the British out of that beleaguered town.8
Meanwhile other events were taking place elsewhere. It is with some of these events that we propose in the present paper to deal.
On the divide between Lakes George and Champlain stood a famous fort, which had played its part in the colonial wars,—time-honored Ticonderoga. It was garrisoned by English troops, and well supplied with munitions of war. These munitions the patriots sadly needed, and determined to have. Down from the green hills of Vermont marched at speed a company of lusty mountaineers, large, strong, hardy men, dressed in the homespun of their household looms, but all with rifles in their hands, and all knowing well how to use them. At their head marched a large-framed, keen-eyed frontiersman, Ethan Allen, who for several years had been a leader in the dispute with New York for the separate existence of Vermont. At the first hint of the outbreak of Lexington these men had dropped their axes, left their plows in the furrows, seized their rifles, and hastened south, with Ticonderoga as their goal, and the stalwart Ethan Allen as their captain.
The Green Mountain boys were not the only ones with this object in view. Massachusetts and Connecticut both had their eyes on the old stronghold. Connecticut sent a sum of 300 pounds to Vermont for the aid of Allen and his men. It also sent spies to learn the condition of the fort. One of these, Noah Phelps by name, entered the fort disguised as a countryman, pretending that he wanted to be shaved. He used his eyes and tongue while the barber was wielding his razor, and found that worthy as ready to talk as men of his trade generally. When Phelps left the fort with a clean face, he was fully informed as to the means of its defense.
As Allen hastened to the fort, he sent men out on all the roads to intercept passers, and prevent word of the movement reaching the commandant. By the 8th of May all was ready. Allen, with 140 men, was to march by land directly on the fort. Captain Herrick, with 30 men, was to drop down the lake with boats, and join Allen before the fort. But just as all was ready for the advance, an unexpected difficulty arose. Out of the forest came an officer, alone, except for a single servant, and hurried to the camp. It was Benedict Arnold, of later infamous memory, but long one of the ablest American officers. He had been appointed colonel by the governor of Massachusetts, and commissioned to raise men and proceed against the fort.
Learning what was afoot, Arnold had hastened through the woods to the camp of the mountaineers. It was near nightfall. The advance party of Allen’s men was on the eastern side of the lake, preparing to cross. Arnold crossed with them, but, on reaching the other side, claimed the command by virtue of his commission. A hot dispute followed. Allen had no idea of giving up his command to this stranger, however he might insist. Arnold had the commission, it is true, but Allen had the men, and at that stage of the war, men counted for more than commissions. The debate waxed so hot that the Green Mountain leader quite lost control of his temper, and was on the point of settling the difficulty by ordering Arnold under arrest, when one of his friends suggested a safer plan. Why could not the two officers march side by side and both lead? This compromise was accepted, and the dispute came to an end.
It was now near daybreak. Eighty-three men had landed. The boats had returned for the others. But there was no time to lose if they wished to take the fort by surprise. A farmer’s boy of the vicinity offered to act as guide, and the advance began, Allen as leader, Arnold as a volunteer.
Soon the stockade was reached. All remained quiet. A wicket stood invitingly open, and Allen and his men went through it at a charge. A sentinel posted there pulled trigger, but his piece missed fire, and he ran back shouting the alarm. After him came the leaders, and behind them their men, at a double-quick pace, and before a man of the garrison had appeared, the fort was won. Most of those within the fort were still asleep, but their slumbers were rudely broken by a vigorous Indian warwhoop, from the lusty throats of the mountaineers, the first that had been heard within those walls since the days of Montcalm and his savage allies.
The garrison numbered less than fifty men, and resistance would have been useless with nearly double that force of riflemen on the parade ground of the fort. Allen forced a sentry who had been captured to lead him to the quarters of the commander, Captain De Laplace. Reading in his chamber, the mountaineers called on him loudly to surrender. The captain, half dressed, appeared with an alarmed face at the door.
“By whose authority do you demand surrender?” he asked.
“In the name of the Great Jehovah and the Continental Congress,” thundered the Green Mountain leader.
This demand, backed by a drawn sword and by cheers of triumph outside, could not be resisted, and the fort was surrendered without a blow.
In this easy fashion was taken one of the most important fortresses in America, with its large stores of cannon and ammunition, then sadly needed by the army at Boston. The stores included 120 cannon, with many small arms, all of great value to the patriot cause. The next day Seth Warner, another Green Mountain leader, captured the fort at Crown Point, and added a hundred more cannon to the much-needed supply.
WHY I KEEP THE SABBATH.
By C. T. Shaffer
ABOUT six thousand years ago the Lord made the heavens and the earth, and all that in them is, in six days. On the sixth day he made Adam (the man and woman, Gen. 5:2) to have dominion over the works of his (God’s) hands (Ps. 8:6). At the close of the sixth day God inspected his work and pronounced it “very good.” Then, calling our first parents up before him, he gave them dominion over it and commanded them to keep it. Their posterity were to be joint heirs in the possession. Then the Lord Jesus—for it was who had made all these things—gave man a deed or covenant to insure to him this dominion in its Eden beauty and purity for their home.
This deed or covenant tho conditional was unlimited. It was made as eternal and enduring as God himself. Several agreements were subsequently entered into and made between God and man after the fall, and tho each of these minor covenants were duly made, ratified, and sealed, they should in nowise be confounded with, or be allowed even to seem to abrogate, the everlasting covenant upon which they were made and the seal of which each bore.
The everlasting covenant between God and man was duly recorded and ratified by Almighty God, and the great seal of his kingdom attached thereto. By affixing this seal the Lord pledged all the power and authority of his kingdom to assure and protect man in happy and peaceful possession of his home and dominion.
Among the works of the hand of God was the creation of the Sabbath, and the placing of it here upon this earth. Mark 2:27; Gen. 2:2, 3. The Sabbath God declared to be the seal or sign of the everlasting covenant (Ex. 31:16, 17; Gen. 2:2, 3), and God commanded man to “keep it” (Gen. 2:1–15).
Also, for this cause it is written in our favor (2 Tim. 2:19), who through Christ are Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise, “the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his.” And on our part he commands us to “hallow my Sabbaths; and they shall be a sign between me and you, that ye may know that I am the Lord your God.” Eze. 20:20.
O, how blessed! On every seventh day since the work of creation began this earth and its inhabitants have in their turn been visited of God. He looks and is pleased,
“When He sees on the ransomed His seal.”
Spreading his hands over them in divine benediction, he breathes upon their adoring hearts the assurance of their portion in the everlasting covenant. In this holy day in double blessing he knoweth them that are his, and we know that he is ours. Confessing us before the Father, he says, “Behold the children thou hast given me,” and we, confessing him before men, say, “Behold our God.”
Sweet Sabbath, blessed Sabbath, holy Sabbath, the seal of the Christian’s hope in the power and love of God, may our hearts ever remember thee, and never think to debase their exalted nature and character to the low level of a physical rest day!
Vile men, in order to abuse thee, contemn thee and set up a rival, but our God shall laugh, he will have them in derision, he will break their bands asunder. Through Christ, the Author of our salvation, we are more than conquerors. We are well able to go up and possess the goodly land, “prepared for us from the foundation of the world.” The Captain of the Lord’s hosts has come down to lead us in gloriously. He will not lead us directly through the Philistines’ country, lest we see war and our hearts faint, but he will hide us for a moment, until the heathen be dispossessed, then we shall enter in, for he has given us the right. “Obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people; for all the earth is mine; and ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation.” Ex. 19:5, 6.
This is why I keep the Sabbath; the love of God constraineth me. He has pardoned my sins for Christ’s sake; he dwells in my heart by faith; this faith works by love; this love casts out all fear. “Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be; but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.” 1 John 3:2.
Jesus kept the Sabbath, and has therein left us an example that we should walk in his steps. The servant is neither greater nor better than his Lord.
C. T. SHAFFER.
Avon, Mont.
THE JUDGMENT TEST.
The test of the judgment will be love. Christ will search every man for proofs of loyalty. The proof is to be found in his constant endeavor to obey the laws of God. All divine law centers in love, and whoever shows himself under the control of love by seeking to benefit his fellow-man is reconciled to God and acceptable to Christ. Whoever is actuated by a spirit of love is moved no less by the influence of faith, for he does his good deeds because he believes in God and desires to please him. We are to “be judged for the deeds done in the body,” but these deeds are done either from motives of love or selfishness. Here is not the ground of salvation, but the test by which salvation is determined. If we have accepted Christ in recognized faith, the act will show itself in love. If we have never known the historic Christ, and have lived and died under heathen conditions, we may yet be saved, provided a life of love shows that we are joined in spirit to our God, and have a faith faculty which would have blossomed out in unmistakable faith in Christ had the Sun of Righteousness risen and shone upon it.
The result of the judgment will be irrevocable. The language of our Saviour on this point is explicit: “These shall go away into eternal punishment; but the righteous into eternal life.” The word is the same in both clauses, and whatever its force in one, it has the same force in the other. Whatever the word translated “eternal” may be thought to mean, the whole sentence plainly means that Christ is the Supreme Judge, that there is no appeal from his decisions, and that the lot of those who have appeared before his judgment seat is fixed and a finality. From Christ’s decree there is no escape. Each goes to his own place according to his merit or demerit, and there he stays.—Christian Work.
THE GRATEFUL SAMARITAN.
By Dr. R. R. Meredith
ONE “turned back, and with a loud voice glorified God, and fell down on his face at his feet, giving him thanks; and he was a Samaritan.” Those who show most gratitude are often those from whom we have reason to expect the least. They were Jews, to whom were committed the oracles of God, and who had the temple, who went away ungrateful. The Samaritan, with only half a Bible, and excluded from the temple, “returned to give glory to God.”
Gratitude, like help, comes often from unexpected sources. His gratitude was not unrewarded. The nine were cleansed; but the Samaritan’s restoration was hallowed by Christ’s approval, and now succeeded by another mercy—richer even than his inestimable cure. There is a health of the soul of which he now became a partaker. It is to be supposed that his life was henceforth devoted to the service of his Lord. His companions, having filled their vessels, have gone their way. He, having tasted, elects to dwell beside the stream forever.
Thus would our Lord ever have us do. The gift, of all others, he would bestow upon us is himself. All others are given for this end, that we may seek him. Our gratitude must carry us into his presence. We can not send our thanks to him—we must take them. He who offers himself to you, as once for all he gave himself for you, will not have your thanks separate from yourself. Thankfulness is evermore the source of new blessings to the soul; it is the strongest motive to service here, and the best preparation for the spirit and life of heaven.—Dr. R. R. Meredith.
Indifference of Ministers.—
When asked if he were satisfied at the result of his recent meetings in New York City, Mr. Moody, as quoted in the Independent of December 17, said:—
“Satisfied? I am not satisfied. I never expect to be satisfied. I did not come to New York to reach sinners, but to reach Christians. I wish them to live on a higher plane, to be conformed to the image of Christ. If that result has not been reached, my work here will be of little avail, and the result will soon pass away like a cloud.”
His great desire he thus expressed:—
“Preachers must cease speculating in theology and lead their people back to the old paths.”
And yet, notwithstanding the fact that crowds came to hear the evangelist, the Independent remarks:—
“It must be said in all frankness that, while the evangelist has preached the old-time doctrines with the fervor of John the Baptist and with the love of John’s Master and his, comparatively few of the pastors of the leading churches have been at all regular in their attendance at his meetings. This may not have been disappointing to Mr. Moody, but it has been to those who urged him to hold these meetings.”
But the great trouble is that the pastors of the leading churches do not believe the doctrines which9Mr. Moody preaches. Here is an extract, for instance, which the great majority of the leading ministers do not believe:—
“Sometimes I am asked whether the doctrine of the second coming of Christ before the millennium does not discourage me in working for the salvation of others. Discourage me! Why, I have worked ten times harder since I got hold of this doctrine. A vessel is going to pieces on the rocks. God has given me a life-boat and said, ‘Save all you can.’ God will come in judgment to this world; but the children of God do not belong to this world; they are in it, but not of it, like a ship in the water; and their greatest danger is not the opposition of the world, but their own conformity to the world. This world is getting darker and darker; its ruin is coming nearer and nearer; if you have any friends on this wreck unsaved, you had better lose no time in getting them off. But some one will say, ‘Do you then make the grace of God a failure?’ No, grace is not a failure, but man is.”
Now all this is the simple truth of God, truth which God has given us over and over again in his Word, that he may warn the world of his coming judgment. Yet learned men point to an imaginative roseate future, exalt man, and deceive the unwary. Would to God that the shepherds might awake; but if they do not, let each member of the flock arouse.
The Father’s Reward for Faithful Service
By H. A. Boardman
LISTEN, ye who are striving to subdue your own vagrant passions, ye who are mourning over sin, ye who are doing good in secret, ye who are patient under wrong, ye who are bearing affliction without repining, ye who are dedicating your personal efforts to the cause of Christ—this scripture has its balm and its encouragement for you all: “If any man serve me, him will my Father honor.” Toil on, suffer on. His eye is upon you. His pen records your every act and word, your every pang and aspiration. And when at length the day of reckoning comes, you will forget the trials of the way in the fruition of that “exceeding and eternal weight of glory” with which God will requite the poor service you have rendered your Saviour.—H. A. Boardman, D.D.