REPORT FROM BRO. HULL by M. Hull

Publishing Committee · Battle Creek, Mich. · Apr 9, 1861

REPORT FROM BRO. HULL.

By M. Hull

FROM Knoxville I went to Pleasantville, anticipating a good time with the brethren. I expected to preach exclusively on practical subjects. But in this I was disappointed. Elder Russel was there, as pugilistic as a young Heenan. He and his brethren were determined to have a fight, whether or no. I gave the first discourse on the first message, which Elder Russel reviewed the next night. He argued that the three messages must all go forth at once in the days of the apostles; for Paul declared the whole counsel of God. If the messages are in the counsel of God, Paul preached them; if not, Mr. Hull is wrong in preaching them.

I made a lengthy argument on the fact that some things which are true at one period of time are not true at another. All of which Mr. R. met with the statement that the phrase "present truth" was not in the Bible. [Perhaps he never read 2 Pet. i, 12.—Ed.] Therefore it was an anti-Bible phrase; and the phrase being anti-scriptural, the idea must be also.

After he got through with his harangue on that subject he ran off on to the law question. He was under the new law—the old said, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor and hate thine enemy." But the new law says, Love your enemies, &c.

The next morning I reviewed his discourse. I denied that Paul declared the whole counsel of God. James taught the church to have the sick anointed, but Paul did not. Therefore James taught more than "the whole counsel of God," or Paul did not teach it all. Paul does not say that he declared the whole counsel of God; but he says, "I shunned not to declare the whole counsel of God;" i. e., he did not dodge any point when it was necessary to speak upon it.

I denied that the Old Testament commanded us to love our neighbor and hate our enemies. The Saviour does not say that the Old Testament says, "Hate thine enemies;" but he simply says, "It hath been said," &c.

If asked by whom this saying was made, I answer, You will find it in the Jewish Targums.

It could but excite one's mirthfulness to hear Mr. R. try to prove that the above saying was in the Old Testament. His argument was this: 1. The Old Testament says, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." Lev. xix, 18. 2. It says, "Thou shalt abhor an Edomite." Now put the two together and you have got, "Love thy neighbor and hate thine enemy." If the Bible had said what Eld. R. pretended to quote from it, it would have been much like the man's proving that Christians ought to hang themselves. Said he, "The Bible says, Judas departed and hanged himself." Again it says, "Go thou and do likewise." But the Bible does not say, "Thou shalt abhor an Edomite," but it does say, "Thou shalt not abhor an Edomite." Deut. xxiii, 7. In this Elder R. will be compelled to rest under the charge of willfully bearing false witness against the Bible, or being ignorant of what the Bible does say, and that too, while looking right at it.

In the Elder's first discourse he taught that all three of the messages must go forth in the days of the apostles or be another gospel. But in his second discourse, the three messages went forth at three distinct periods of time; for the second followed the first, and the third followed them. Hull is wrong in proclaiming the third angel's message, i. e., he is ahead of time; for Babylon has not yet fallen. The fall and destruction of the great city are the same events.

Mr. R. argued that Babylon would fall when one like the Son of man came to reap the harvest of the earth. This placed the second and third angels' messages over in the "everlasting kingdom." The Lord gave freedom in reviewing his discourses, for which we all felt to praise him.

From Pleasantville I went to Knoxville to attend to the ordinances. We met at Bro. Garretson's, and after spending two or three hours in self-examination, we partook of the ordinances. The blessing of the Lord attended. All showed the good Spirit. Our little cups were more than filled with joy while engaged in the humble ordinance of washing each others' feet.

I next went to Newbern. Here I found matters in some particulars, better than I expected. The tent meeting had had a better influence than we anticipated. The interest has not abated there in the least. The trouble there is, that we cannot get a house large enough to hold the people. I delivered three discourses in Newbern. Some others united with the commandment-keepers in this place. I was sorry to be compelled to leave some wishing to attend to the ordinance of baptism. But I could not attend to it and reach my next appointment. I hope to visit the brethren at Newbern again before tent season.

I reached Ottawa on the 15th ult., in time for my appointment. My congregations were very large, so large that the house was usually crowded to overflowing for two hours before meeting-time. Some of the brethren at Ottawa are in earnest for the heavenly land, while I fear that others are only half-hearted. Some others were added to the church here. Five were baptized.

We set things in order so that I think the church will get along well. Here we had another communion season, and the Lord gave us a rich blessing, for which we praise him. The brethren are determined to sustain the southern Iowa tent this summer.

I preached once in Occola as I passed through. Here there is the best interest that ever has been in this place. They even tried to hire me to pitch the tent in Occola this season. But Occola is not unlike other places. The cry of "Come over and help us" comes in from every quarter. O Lord, send out more laborers.

M. HULL.