p. 15 | J. D. MONTGOMERY by J. D. Montgomery

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Washington, D. C. · Feb 13, 1913

J. D. MONTGOMERY

By J. D. Montgomery

Slothfulness

J. D. MONTGOMERY

SLOTHFULNESS is said to be “disinclination to physical exertion.” There is a growing tendency toward disinclination to physical exertion among certain classes. They would probably resent the idea of indolence, of being lazy, yet the disinclination to sufficient exercise seems to be present nevertheless. There is a large class of people who for one reason and another find it hard to incline themselves to proper physical exertion.

No one deserves what he does not earn; he should not expect anything for which he is not willing to labor. “Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise: which having no guide, overseer, or ruler, provideth her meat in the summer, and gathereth her food in the harvest.” Prov. 6:6-8. She provides her necessities in a favorable time against the time of need. “If any provide not for his own, and especially those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.” Industry is a Bible principle, and to neglect it or reject it is to deny the faith and become worse than an infidel.

“Slothfulness casteth into a deep sleep; and an idle soul shall suffer hunger.” Prov. 19:15. Another text similar to this: “How long wilt thou sleep, O sluggard? when wilt thou arise out of thy sleep? Yet a little sleep, so shall thy poverty come as one that traveleth.” Prov. 6:9-11. The indolent man does not properly provide for his family, and consequently does not represent correctly the religion of Jesus Christ.

Besides this, there is an unfavorable effect upon the body itself if it is inactive. The effect of indolence upon the body may be gathered by this text: “The fool foldeth his hands together, and eateth his own flesh.” Eccl. 4:5. The flesh of the body is consumed by itself from too much folding of the hands. Another: “By much slothfulness the building decayeth; and through idleness of the hands the house droppeth through.” Eccl. 10:18.

The idler sees obstacles to his progress where none exist. “The slothful man saith, There is a lion in the way; a lion is in the streets. As the door turneth upon his hinges, so doth the slothful upon his bed. The slothful hideth his hand in his bosom; it grieveth him to bring it again to his mouth. The sluggard is wiser in his own conceit than seven men that can render a reason.” Prov. 26:13-16.

Bible Hygiene and Sanitation

The science of the prevention of disease is a Bible science. The art of prevention eclipses the art of cure beyond any comparison. “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure,” says the old adage, and we have never heard it successfully disputed.

It is the work of true health reformers to teach the people how to live to avoid disease. It is this phase of the subject that points the patient to the One who is the author of good health. A wicked man may give medicine and enforce rules of living until health is restored to the sick; but it is only the Christian doctor or nurse who will persuade the patient to repent of his past mode of living and abandon it for that which is required by the Word of God. Health thus becomes to him “thy saving health,” and disease the result of transgression. To those who reform their mode of living merely to escape the results of bad living, this phase of the subject does not appeal.

The Bible has very little to say about the cure of disease, but has much to say about how to avoid it. God gave to Moses the best system of sanitation, and the simplest, withal, that has ever been used by mankind. The system was

merely the system of cleanliness. Modern sanitation and hygiene is merely a complicated system of cleaning up and keeping clean. In fact, if we keep matter in its rightful place, or in other words, keep clean, there will at least be no filth diseases. Dirt is matter out of place. So germ life may not be so harmful unless it gets into the wrong place. Hence the importance of cleaning up and keeping clean.

In leprosy we have what is in our time known as practically an incurable disease. Rarely indeed do we hear of a cure from leprosy. In the days of Moses, the cure of this disease was provided for, in that rules were given for the reinstating of the patient after he was cured. When he was cured, he was to show himself to the priest, who was both doctor and preacher, for examination. If he was found to be free from his infection, he was instructed to ‘wash his clothes, and shave off all his hair, and wash himself in water, that he may be clean: and after that he shall come into the camp, and shall tarry abroad out of his tent seven days.’ Lev. 14:8. Even after he was entirely free from outward symptoms, the man was to tarry away from his family yet seven days longer for fear the infection might break out again.

In Leviticus 15 is recorded the method of dealing with another infectious disease. Some very rigid restrictions were thrown around cases of this kind to prevent communication of the disease to other persons. They are rigid but very simple. Any one can understand them and carry them out. If any one even touched the patient, or his bed, or any vessel that he had used, the infected one was to ‘wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even.’ To be ‘unclean until the even’ meant that he was to isolate himself from the presence of men for the remainder of that day to allow the air and sunshine to complete the work of disinfection.

When the patient himself recovered, he was to ‘number to himself seven days for his cleansing, and wash his clothes, and bathe his flesh in running water,’ and be clean. This isolation of infectious and contagious diseases prevented an epidemic. One man was not permitted carelessly to infect his fellows. If one became infected and failed to follow instructions for cleansing, he was stoned to death. To forget or neglect these instructions classed one as a criminal, and his execution speedily followed.

The execution of these simple methods for sanitation in the camp of Israel resulted in a camp of very low mortality. Only when the people broke away from the rules of the camp and indulged in things that caused disease, do we find any record of disease among them.

It may be that if our modern methods of sanitation included more fresh air and sunshine, we should reap greater results. Fumigation, disinfection, and other things now in use, could well add the old-time measures of air, sunshine, running water, and isolation, and profit thereby.

Newark, Ohio.