Earlier text: The Babylonian EmpireNOTES ON THE INTERNATIONAL LESSON.
By A. T. Jones
AFTER the scene on Mount Carmel, which was the subject of last week’s lesson, Ahab went and told Jezebel all that had been done, and how that the prophets of Baal had been slain. “Then Jezebel sent a messenger unto Elijah, saying, So let the gods do to me, and more also, if I make not thy life as the life of one of them by to-morrow about this time. And when he saw that, he arose, and went for his life, and came to Beersheba, which belongeth to Judah, and left his servant there.” “But he himself went a day’s journey into the wilderness, and came and sat down under a juniper tree; and he requested for himself that he might die; and said, It is enough; now, O Lord, take away my life; for I am not better than my fathers. And as he lay and slept under a juniper tree, behold, then an angel touched him, and said unto him, Arise and eat. And he looked, and, behold, there was a cake baken on the coals, and a cruse of water at his head. And he did eat and drink, and laid him down again. And the angel of the Lord came again the second time, and touched him, and said, Arise and eat; because the journey is too great for thee. And he arose, and did eat and drink, and went in the strength of that meat forty days and forty nights unto Horeb the mount of God.” THUS Elijah was compelled to flee for his life because of his faithfulness to the Lord and in the defense of his commandments. Remember, that with the exception of the rain of that same day, there had been no rain for three years and a half, and all the vegetation had dried up, as was shown in the lesson of August 2. And into this waste, desolate wilderness Elijah was compelled to flee for his life, and when he had gone a whole day’s journey, “he came and sat down under a juniper tree, and requested for himself that he might die.” BUT what a singular reason it was that he gave for wanting the Lord to take away his life, “O Lord, take away my life; for I am not better than my fathers.” Nowadays, in a great many, indeed in most, instances it seems503 to be considered the very pink of perfection to be no better than our fathers were. Just as soon as the duty of keeping the Sabbath of the Lord is urged upon the people, then the plea arises, “Our fathers, for generations back, all kept Sunday, and they were good people and accepted of the Lord, and if we are as good as they were we shall be all right; if they are saved we shall be; if I can be as good as they were that is all I want.” ELIJAH reasoned not so. He had a better idea of the principles of righteousness, of duty, and of allegiance to God, than to offer any such beg-off as that. So has everybody a better idea of consistency than to reason so upon any subject of minor, or even common, importance. No person refuses to ride in a palace car because our fathers had nothing better than a lumbering stage-coach. No person refuses to ride on a steamer because our fathers never saw one. So likewise it is with all advancement in science, art, and human knowledge. Instead of refusing it men take every advantage of it, and try by all means to profit by it. And the man who makes a new discovery in the field of science, of philosophy, or of exploration of a continent, it matters not though his discovery upsets all the accepted theories of men, if his discovery bears the test of the truth in the field to which it belongs, men readily accept it, and the discoverer is honored, and rightly so, as a benefactor of his race in that he has enlarged the view, and added to the sum, of human knowledge. THIS when the matter relates to things of this world. But when the subject is one that concerns the eternal destiny of men; when it is discovered by some one that in matters of faith and morals, men are wrong; then when the way of truth is pointed out, even though it bear every test of truth known to the Bible, that man is held up as a heretic, a propagandist, a troubler of Israel, an exciter of divisions among the people; then, a question upon which hang eternal interests, is calmly put aside with the observations that “Our fathers knew nothing of this, therefore it is of no interest to us; our fathers did not find it out, therefore it cannot be the truth; what matters it, though the Bible does say it is the truth, as it was not obeyed by our fathers, we need not obey it; if we are only as good as they, we shall be safe.” BUT let all such know that our fathers, who were good, did all that they knew, and were accepted of the Lord, in it. “For if there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not.” 2 Cor. 8:12. And unless we do all that we know, or all that we may know, we are not as good as they were. Therefore it is plain that we cannot be as good as our godly fathers were by simply doing what they did. To be accepted of the Lord they had to do all that they knew; to be accepted of the Lord, we likewise must do all that we know. And in the advancing work of God in the world, points of truth, of which our fathers knew nothing, shine forth from the word of God, we must accept them, walk in the light of them, and live according to them, to be accepted of the Lord in this our day as our fathers were in theirs. “While ye have light, believe in the light, that ye may be the children of light.” John 12:36. “And the law [of God] is light.” Prov. 6:23. AS ELIJAH, away in the wilderness alone, lay and slept under that juniper tree, “Behold, then an angel touched him, and said unto him, Arise and eat. And he looked, and, behold, there was a cake baken on the coals, and a cruse of water at his head.” Although the bitter Jezebel was seeking for his life, and though to escape her wrath, he has fled into the wilderness where he has neither food nor water, yet an angel visits him, and he has the blessed privilege of eating food from an angel’s hand. Blessed privilege, even though it be only bread and water. Bread and water, in the desolation of the desert, from the hand of an angel, is infinitely better than the richest dainties, in the luxury of kings’ palaces, from the hand of a Jezebel. ELIJAH laid him down again and slept, “And the angel of the Lord came again the second time, and touched him, and said, Arise and eat; because the journey is too great for thee.” He did eat and drink and “went in the strength of that meat forty days and forty nights unto Horeb the mount of God.” There the word of the Lord came to him, and he said unto him, What doest thou here, Elijah? “And he said, I have been very jealous for the Lord God of hosts; for the children of Israel have forsaken thy covenant, thrown down thine altars, and slain thy prophets with the sword; and I, even I only, am left; and they seek my life, to take it away.” WE have shown, in previous lessons, the contest that there is to be between the beast and his image and those who keep the commandments of God just before the coming of the Lord. We have referred to the National Reform Party, and its work of forming a union of Church and State in the Government of the United States, for the sole purpose of compelling all people to keep Sunday, in violation of the commandment of God. We have shown that, in opposition to this, God sends a message calling upon all to “keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.” And when this union of Church and State is accomplished, that will be an image to the beast—the papal church. And from the history of all such unions, we may know what will be the inevitable result—persecution of dissenters. WE are not left, however, to infer from what has been, what will be; the word of God tells us plainly what will be the result of such an action. That word says: “And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. . . . And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.” Rev. 13:15-17. Then it will be with these who keep the commandments of God, as it was with Elijah, the representative of these. The new Jezebel then swaying the power of the Government, will seek their lives, to take them away. Then these will have to flee, as Elijah did, and they, as he did, will find drought in all the land, and “the rivers of water dried up,” and all the pastures of the wilderness dried up. Joel 1:14-20; 2. YES, and these too will find, amidst the desolation, as Elijah did, that “He shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways.” Ps. 91:11. These too, as Elijah did, will find even in the desolate wilderness that their “place of defense shall be the munitions of rocks,” that bread shall be given them, and their waters shall be sure; that their eyes too, as his did, “shall see the King in his beauty; they shall behold the land that is very far off.” Isa. 33:16, 17. And when found thus fleeing for their lives, if asked as was Elijah, “What doest thou here?” they can reply as he did, “I have been very jealous for the Lord God of hosts; for the children of Israel have forsaken thy covenant, . . . and they seek my life, to take it away.” But even though the new Jezebel shall seek to take away the lives of those who keep the commandments of God, yet the holy prophet says, “I saw as it were a sea of glass mingled with fire; and them that had gotten the victory over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name, stand on the sea of glass, having the harps of God.” Rev. 15:2. THE LORD calls, now, for those who will be “very jealous for the Lord God of hosts.” He calls for those who will jealously regard his commandments, even at the expense of every earthly thing. He seeks now for those who will “keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus,” against all earthly powers. What doest thou here? Are you very jealous for the Lord God of hosts? A. T. J. The Story of Naboth.
By Alonzo T. Jones
AT JEZREEL, about twenty-five miles from Samaria, Ahab had a palace. Hard by this palace was a vineyard belonging to Naboth. And Ahab said to Naboth, "Give me thy vineyard, that I may have it for a garden of herbs, because it is near unto my house; and I will give thee for it a better vineyard than it; or, if it seem good to thee, I will give thee the worth of it in money. And Naboth said to Ahab, The Lord forbid it me, that I should give the inheritance of my fathers unto thee." THE LORD had given commandment that the land should not be sold forever, "And in all the land of your possession ye shall grant a redemption for the land." Lev. 25:24. "So shall not the inheritance of the children of Israel remove from tribe to tribe; for every one of the children of Israel shall keep himself to the inheritance of the tribe of his fathers." Num. 36:7. Naboth simply proposed to obey the word of the Lord, and so told Ahab that he could not have his land. But even though the Lord had given no directions on the subject, it was clearly the right of Naboth to refuse to sell his land for the private purposes of the king. For if he had no right to refuse to sell, he had no rights at all in the matter, and was thus placed subject to the mere whim of the king. And if he was obliged to so yield to the wish of Ahab, even though Ahab had given him a better vineyard, what assurance was there that he would not shortly have to give up that vineyard at the wish of the king, as he had given this at the first. Not only by the word of God, but by every principle of justice and right, Naboth was in the right and Ahab in the wrong. FREDERICK THE GREAT once wanted, for a part of his garden, an adjoining piece of ground upon which a wind-mill stood. He sent an agent to buy the ground and the mill. The miller sturdily refused to sell it. At last the agent said, "Not at any price? Could not the king take it from you for nothing if he chose?" The miller replied, "Have we not the Kammergericht [the Imperial Chamber of Justice] at Berlin?" That was as much as to say that, though Frederick wanted the grounds for his own private use, yet if he attempted to take them by force, the miller would appeal to him as king, and that, in justice to his subject, Frederick as king would not allow Frederick as a private person, to take the land against the wish of the owner. Frederick was wonderfully pleased at the answer of the lowly miller, and "Have we not the Kammergericht at Berlin" became a popular saying in Germany. BUT Ahab was not a Frederick. "Ahab came into his house heavy and displeased because of the word which Naboth the Jezreelite had spoken to him. . . . And he laid him down upon his bed, and turned away his face, and would eat no bread." Throughout Ahab's whole career he appears as capricious as a spoiled child, with yet this shortcoming that he had no force of character even in his caprices, but was always ready to be ruled by whatever504 influence affected him at the moment. First he took to wife Jezebel, the very embodiment of imperious infamy; then he allowed her to stir him up to commit more iniquity than all the kings of Israel before him; then, when because of his wickedness Elijah pronounced to him the judgment of the Lord, in drought upon the land for three years and a half, there was no nation or kingdom round about that he did not send to in search of Elijah; and when Elijah finally came to meet him and denounced him to his face, all he did was to simply go, in obedience to Elijah's command, to gather together all Israel and the prophets of Baal to Mount Carmel. Then, when the contest had been decided at Mount Carmel, instead of firmly taking a stand on the side of the Lord, he simply went and told Jezebel all that had happened, and let her exert herself anew in behalf of Baal. And now in this instance with Naboth, because he can't have that vineyard he must go to bed and refuse to eat anything! JEZEBEL, however, had enough self-assertion for ten men, and a regiment of women. She can tell in a minute what to do—she will murder Naboth and his family so that there shall be no heirs, and take everything that he has. All this will she do and be merry about it. "I will give thee the vineyard of Naboth the Jezreelite." And she did. And then, as might be expected, just as soon as she came telling him that Naboth was dead, this weak, wicked, and wickedly weak king "rose up to go down to the vineyard of Naboth the Jezreelite to take possession of it." "AND the word of the Lord came to Elijah the Tishbite, saying, Arise, go down to meet Ahab . . . behold, he is in the vineyard of Naboth whither he is gone down to possess it." And there as Ahab stands with satisfaction contemplating his new possession, suddenly there strikes upon his ear a voice, as thunder out of clear sky, exclaiming, "Hast thou killed and also taken possession?" Ahab cries out, "Hast thou found me, O mine enemy?" The stern reply is, "I have found thee; because thou hast sold thyself to work evil in the sight of the Lord." "In the place where dogs licked the blood of Naboth shall dogs lick thy blood, even thine." "The dogs shall eat Jezebel by the wall of Jezreel. Him that dieth of Ahab in the city the dogs shall eat; and him that dieth in the field shall the fowls of the air eat." It is very natural for those who have sold themselves to do evil to count as their enemies those who reprove them and point out their sins. But there is no escape. It may long be delayed, but, sooner or later, "Be sure your sin will find you out." And it is vastly better for us to find out our sins, and put them away, than at last to have them find us out, when it is too late to put them away. AHAB'S covetousness ended in murder and robbery. "Take heed, and beware of covetousness; for a man's life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth." Luke 12:15. "Thou shalt not covet." Covetousness is the leading sin in the transgression of any commandment of the decalogue. Not one of the commandments can be broken but that covetousness leads in the transgression. Covetousness itself is idolatry (Eph. 5:5; Col. 3:5), and covetousness in all its forms is summed up in one word—selfishness. May we all remember the Saviour's warning, "Take heed, and beware of covetousness." And may we, with David, ever pray, "Incline my heart unto thy testimonies, and not to covetousness." Ps. 119:36. A. T. J. "HONOR all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God." 1 Pet. 2:17. The Church. No 17.
By Editor
WE have said that our test of church fellowship is "the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus." Rev. 14:12. And it has been shown that we admit of no church membership without baptism. This is a gospel ordinance—a part of the faith of Jesus. And it has been shown, which indeed needs no proof, that there can be no right to church privileges without church membership. But this is only one side of our platform; but one part of our message. The commandments of God are primary; they are of paramount importance. And if we would not admit to our membership one who rejects an ordinance of the faith of Jesus, much less should we admit one who rejects the commandments of God, or any one of them. We say the commandments of God are primary—are of paramount importance. But the tendency of the present time is to make them secondary; and even to make them of little or no importance at all. Many who profess to believe and to reverence the Scriptures, do not like to hear the preaching of the law. Even in those churches which were founded on opposition to the antinomian heresy, some ministers now reject the commandments of God. As an example, a Mr. Woodward of the M. E. Church in California, published a pamphlet in which he says explicitly that the ten commandments are not binding—that Christ abolished them. This work was indorsed by Dr. Stratton, president of the "University of the Pacific," and highly recommended by the Christian Advocate of San Francisco. And Dr. Stratton took pains to speak disparagingly, and even contemptuously, of those who advocate the observance of the ten commandments as Jehovah himself proclaimed them. But we are happy to say that the position taken by Mr. Woodward and his indorsers is not according to the Methodist faith as expressed by the standard authorities of that church. To show that we truly represent that church we give a few extracts. In a work on church doctrines we found the following words:— "The Methodist Conference under Wesley in 1770, declared that the universal immorality then prevailing was because of the widespread opinion that Christ had annulled the moral law, and that evangelical freedom dispensed with the ten commandments." "Wesley's Notes" on this conference drew forth upon him, and upon the work of the Methodists, severe criticisms from certain dignitaries of the established church. And these in turn brought out "Fletcher's Checks to Antinomianism," a work worthy of the careful reading of every searcher for Bible truth. And Dr. Clarke and all eminent Methodists have spoken decidedly on the subject, in perfect harmony with the position taken by Wesley and Fletcher. Bishop E. O. Haven wrote an excellent work on the ten commandments, entitled "The Pillars of Truth." Bishop Simpson delivered the best series of lectures that has ever been given in the "Yale Lecture Course on Preaching," in which he spoke as follows:— "The law of God, in its great and solemn injunctions, should be distinctly set forth. Our congregations should be gathered as around the base of Mount Sinai, while from its summit is heard the voice of God in those commandments which are unalterable and eternal in their character. The effect of those utterances will be, that consciences will be awakened and hearts will tremble. Some will say, with Moses, 'I do exceedingly fear and quake,' when they behold the majesty of the law, the purity of God, and their own impurity. Others may be repelled, and will say, 'Let not God speak to us any more.' Some will object to the sternness of the law, and will say, 'Prophesy smooth things;' but still that law must be preached. It brings the sinner to a recognition of his sins in having transgressed God's holy law, and shows him the fearfulness of the doom which is impending over him. The law must be followed by the gospel; the awakened sinner must be pointed to the Saviour, that he may see and feel that, deep as are the stains of his transgressions, the blood of Christ can wash them all away. There are many preachers who love to dwell on the gospel alone. They talk sweetly and beautifully of the fatherhood of God. This is well. It is more than well, it is essential. But sometimes they go beyond this, and declaim against the preaching of the law—intimate that it belongs to a past age, a less civilized society; that men can best be moved by love alone, and they rely wholly on its attractive power. Such a gospel may rear a beautiful structure; but its foundation is on the sand. No true edifice can be raised without its foundations being dug deep by repentance toward God, and then shall the rock be reached, and the building shall be through faith in Jesus Christ. The law without gospel is dark and hopeless; the gospel without law is inefficient and powerless. The one leads to servitude, the other to antinomianism. The two combined produce 'charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned.'" Thus, according to Bishop Simpson, the work of Mr. Woodward, is built on the sand, though it is recommended by a D. D. and a Christian Advocate. According to the constitution of the M. E. Church, Mr. Woodward is not orthodox. But the fact that he has written in direct denial of the standards of the Methodist Church, and that he is indorsed by prominent men, and that his work is favorably received by so many, in his denomination, proves our assertion that even in those churches which stand in outspoken opposition to antinomianism, the tendency is toward a denial and rejection of the law. The more Mr. Woodward's work is indorsed, the stronger is the proof that the Methodist Church is drifting away from the basis on which it was founded, and from the landmarks by which it has constantly been guided until recently. And what is true of this church in California, is true of it in other parts of the country. And it is true also of other denominations, as we could easily show. We will now illustrate the relative position and importance of the commandments and the faith—the law and the gospel—by the following occurrence:— Several years since, a minister of an antinomian denomination (the Disciple) declared in a sermon that, even if the ten commandments were binding, we find duties and institutions of the gospel of much greater importance. Soon after he made this statement, one of his own members, whom he himself had baptized, committed murder, thus breaking one of the ten commandments. We had the privilege of asking him this question before a congregation: "Here is a man who has been baptized, who has embraced the gospel as you teach it, and now has broken one of the ten commandments. Is he therefore a better man than he would be if he had kept the commandment, and never been baptized?" He had to confess before the people that he was not better, but would have been a better man if he had kept the commandment and never been baptized. And why was this so? It was because violation of one of the ten commandments neutralized his baptism. The gospel is necessary because the law has been transgressed; but the gospel is of no effect to him who persists in disobeying the law. This is truth, beyond dispute. And it follows, as we have asserted, that the law is paramount. And, therefore, if it is right to reject from our fellowship him who rejects the ordinances of the gospel, much more is it right to reject him who rejects the commandments of God, or any one of them. The conclusion is easily reached, and it is unavoidable. We cannot admit to church membership any one who is a rejector of the law of God, and if not to church membership, then not to church privileges. If it would be inconsistent to admit to our communion, or to go to the communion of, those who are not baptized, it is most assuredly inconsistent to partake of the communion with those who do not keep the commandments of God. Some persons (mistaken ones, we think,) have urged that if we commune with those who are not baptized, we shall increase their confidence in us, and so increase our influence over them, and thereby lead them to accept the truth on this subject. But the opposite is the truth. In like manner, and with equal inconsistency, have some urged that by keeping the Sunday they will retain their influence over Sunday-keepers, and thereby lead them to keep the Sabbath! A little reflection should teach them that their example will neutralize all they may say in favor of the truth. And nobody will highly regard a truth which you advocate in words but disregard in your life. By uniting in church privileges with those who are in material errors we indorse their standing, and so confirm them in error. Experience has shown that this has always been the effect of such a course. The following paragraph we copy from "Howell on Communion," as an illustration of this fact:— "The father, I suppose we may so call him, of open communion, was the justly celebrated John Bunyan, author of the Pilgrim's Progress, and numerous other reputable works. He was pastor of the Baptist Church in Bedford, England. This venerable church admitted Pedobaptists, and as they were allowed all other privileges they could not be denied membership, or what was the same thing, the right of suffrage in the church-meetings, for it would be preposterous habitually to commune with a man and then not permit him to vote in ordinary matters, relating to the order and instruction of the congregation. The Bedford church was not so illiberal. But the consequences were fatal. The Pedobaptist party soon became the most numerous. On the discovery of this fact, they immediately took effectual measures, routed the Baptists, took possession of the meeting-house, called a Pedobaptist pastor, and from that time have generally held possession. 'Such was the state of the church,' says Mr. Kinghorn, 'with which he was long connected, that on his death they chose a Pedobaptist; and from the year 1688, in which he died, to the year 1788, when Mr. Joshua Symonds died (one hundred years), the ministers who succeeded him were Pedobaptists, except the last, who, some years after his settlement with the church, changed his sentiments and became a Baptist. This took place in 1772, and though Mr. Symonds continued at Bedford, it was on condition that he should not introduce the controversy [on baptism] into the pulpit, nor into conversation, unless it was first mentioned by others. We have also been informed that one instance occurred in 1700, and another in 1724, in which the church refused to grant a dismissal to members who desired to unite with Baptist churches in London, because they were strict communion churches.' Mr. Symonds was succeeded by Pedobaptist ministers. Here is a practical illustration of the advantages of open communion." If it were true that our influence over others is increased by communing with them, and that they are thereby led to examine and embrace the truth, then we might with reason expect to find those churches most influential and prosperous which practice open communion. But such is not the case. The "Free Will Baptists" have made thorough trial of promiscuous communion, but they have not been as influential and prosperous as their brethren who had to bear the reproach of the title of "close communion." And this justifies our remark that free communion does not attract to an important truth held by us, but rather relieves the conscience of those not holding the truth. Instead of helping them we injure them by such a practice. "TEACH me, O Lord, the way of thy statutes." The Sabbath a Sign.
By Ellet Joseph Waggoner
LAST week we quoted a paragraph which stated that the Sabbath was a ceremonial institution, given to commemorate the deliverance from Egypt, and that it was only a sign for the Jews, a distinguishing mark. The first statement we considered, showing its fallacy; this week we have briefly to consider the Sabbath as a sign. We shall quote the texts referred to by Dr. Dobbs. Ex. 31:13: "Verily my Sabbaths ye shall keep; for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the Lord that doth sanctify you." Eze. 20:12: "Moreover also I gave them my Sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the Lord that sanctify them." Eze. 20:20: "And hallow my Sabbaths; and they shall be a sign between me and you, that ye may know that I am the Lord your God." These three verses tell us plainly what purpose the Sabbath served as a sign. Strange to say, it was not a sign between the Jews and the Gentiles, not a mark of national distinction, but that the people might know the God of Heaven. Each one of these verses tells the same thing. It was a sign by which they might know the Lord. But mark: It was the Sabbath when hallowed that enabled them to know the Lord. The Sabbath institution, a mere theory, could have no such effect; but when they kept the Sabbath, they could know the true God—the God that would sanctify them. Heathen gods could not sanctify; and since the people could not know the true God unless they kept the Sabbath, it follows that keeping the Sabbath was necessary to sanctification. And this is just as true now as it was then. Right here we have one strong evidence that the Sabbath was designed for all men. Thus: It is very certain that God wants all men to acknowledge him and to give to him the reverence and homage which is his due. It is hardly necessary to quote Scripture proof of this, since none will deny it. We will refer to one or two. "Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honor and power; for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created." Rev. 4:11. Paul also said that God "commandeth all men everywhere to repent." Acts 17:30. This repentance is to be "toward God." Acts 29:21. Now if all men everywhere are called upon to show repentance toward God, it is evident that it is the duty of all men to know and serve him. Again, those who know not God are to be punished with everlasting destruction. 2 Thess. 1:8, 9. It is evident, then, that it is the duty of all men to know God. But the texts above quoted, say that it was only by keeping the Sabbath that the children of Israel could know who was God. If it was the keeping of the Sabbath that caused them to know the true God, it must be the keeping of the Sabbath that insures a knowledge of God to other people. Therefore since God wants to be known by all, he wants his Sabbath to be kept by all. But how is it that the keeping of the Sabbath can perpetuate the knowledge of the true God? Read the words of the Lord concerning the Sabbath, in Ex. 31:17: "It is a sign between me and the children of Israel forever; for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed." Now we have it. The keeping of the Sabbath causes our thoughts to turn to the creation, and thus we remember the true God, for it is his creative power that distinguishes him from false gods. "For all the gods of the nations are idols; but the Lord made the heavens." Ps. 96:5. "The gods that have not made the heavens and the earth, even they shall perish from the earth, and from under these heavens. He hath made the earth by his power, he hath established the world by his wisdom, and hath stretched out the heavens by his discretion." Jer. 10:11, 12. Now the only thing whatever to keep this truth prominently before the minds of men is the Sabbath. That and that alone is the memorial of the creation. Some may say that the works of creation are ever before us, and that we can ever keep the Creator in mind. But God foresaw that without the Sabbath man would not remember him, and the result has demonstrated his wisdom, for the people who disregard the Sabbath, very soon forget God. Without the weekly rest, in which they can meditate upon God's great power, they will soon cease to think of him at all; but the proper keeping of the Sabbath insures continual remembrance of God; for the Sabbath, to be kept properly, must be remembered throughout the week. "But," says one, "the Sabbath, after all, was a sign only to Israel." This brings us to a brief consideration of why the Israelites are especially mentioned, and why it was that only the Israelites were gathered about the base of Sinai, to hear the law. Two reasons may be given:— 1. Of all the people on earth, the Jews alone retained the knowledge of the true God. Abraham had been called to separate from his heathen relatives, in order that he and his descendants might not, by heathen associations, be turned from their allegiance to him. God called Abraham for the same reason that four hundred years before he had chosen Noah,—because he alone was righteous. The people of the country in which he and his descendants were sojourners, were those who had sold themselves to the devil, and the Egyptians, to whom the Israelites were in bondage, were gross idolaters. In all the earth there was but one people, and that was Israel, that could have been induced to hearken to the voice of God. The law was therefore intrusted to them, with repeated injunctions not to forget it, in order that the knowledge of God might not become wholly extinct. Their duty was to hold up its light so that the nations might see it, and thus some be led to glorify God. 2. Because Israel alone had preserved the knowledge of the true God, he made a special promise to them, on condition that they should continue in his law. This was the first covenant, and when that was broken he made another, not with the Gentiles, but with the same people—with the house of Israel and Judah. Jer. 31:31-34. The promises of God are to none but the Israelites (Rom. 9:4), and therefore all who are saved must be of Israel. Rom. 11:26. The heavenly city, into which the redeemed shall enter, has but twelve gates, and on these gates are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel. Rev. 21:12. We can readily see the reasonableness of this, when we remember that "Israel" signifies, "one who prevails," for none but the overcomers, those who prevail, can expect a place in the kingdom of God. And in this we find the strongest proof that God designed the seventh-day Sabbath to be kept by his people in all ages, because it is to be a sign between him and his people Israel forever. Camp-Meeting in Eureka, Cal.
By Editor
CONSIDERING that the cause is so new in Humboldt County the attendance was good at the Eureka camp-meeting. The number camping upon the ground was nearly 100. Some in the city of Eureka lived at their homes. As it was in the season of haying in that county, some were necessarily detained at their homes. The brethren counted up fifty Sabbath-keepers in the county who did not attend. We think some of them might have attended had they made a strong effort; but some were new in the faith, and probably did not realize the difference between our camp-meetings and others. Hereafter this will not be the case. The meeting was truly a good one—all that we could hope for. Early prayer-meeting as usual, at 5:30. At 8, prayers in companies in the tents. At 9, instruction was given in Sabbath-school work, class records, etc., and in church records, and questions were answered. At 10:30 each morning, except Sabbath and Sunday, Bible-lessons were given on the prophecies, the Sanctuary, and the Atonement. At 2:30 and 7:45 P. M. preaching. At 5 P. M. there was also instruction on special subjects, or meetings for the young; and at 6, meetings for the children. It might seem that these were too many meetings to be profitable, but they were so varied as not to be at all tedious. The interest in all the exercises increased from the beginning to the close. Sabbath-school was held upon the ground each Sabbath; the first was good, though but little time was afforded for preparation. Seventy-seven were in attendance. The editor of the SIGNS acted as superintendent, and reviewed the senior division; Elder E. R. Jones took charge of the B division, and Elder Loughborough of the C division. Sister Ella Baxter acted as secretary. The contributions amounted to $5.05. The second Sabbath the organization was improved; more classes were formed. There were ninety-six members; seven classes in the A, two in the B, and four in the C division—thirteen classes in all. It was a model school for order, and might be so considered in every respect, for scholars and teachers brought together from so many different places, and most of them having but a limited experience. The contributions amounted to $10.95, making $16 for both schools, all of which was given to the State Association. The children's meetings were under the charge of Elder Loughborough, assisted by others as he chose and did much to benefit the meeting as a whole by fixing the minds of the children on sacred things. The interest in them increased from the first. On the afternoon of the last Sabbath twenty-seven came forward for prayers; of these eleven were baptized in the bay on Monday morning, and a few others were received into the church, having previously been baptized. It was voted to have a camp-meeting in Humboldt County next year, and that a camp-meeting fund be raised for that part of the State. For this purpose $393 were subscribed, and $74.50 paid down. This is as it should be; it will secure the camp-meeting, and save trouble and expense to the Conference, by keeping in that county much material which would otherwise need to be shipped from Oakland each year. It should be the same in Nevada and in Los Angeles County. We do not know that we ever attended a meeting of this kind which gave greater satisfaction to the brethren and sisters than this one in Eureka. All appreciate the instruction given on the various subjects. The class exercises on Bible subjects were conducted by Elder Loughborough and the editor of the SIGNS; black-board instructions to church clerks were given by Elder Loughborough and illustrations of Sabbath-school records by the editor. Questions on Sabbath-school work were answered by all the ministers present. The closing meeting, August 10, was a service of praise, and a good season. Though, during most of the time of the camp-meeting, we suffered greatly with an ulcerated tooth, we had special cause for thanksgiving that we were enabled to keep up our writing for the SIGNS and do our full share of work in the meetings. After another smooth sea passage we arrived in Oakland, Thursday, August 13, accompanied by Brn. Loughborough and E. R. Jones, who will go to the Nevada camp-meeting, which begins August 27. "REMEMBER the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work; but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do any work." Ex. 20:8-10.