p. 5 | Both Sides by James White

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Nov 29, 1864

Both Sides.

By James White

At Irasburgh, Vermont, we were happy to meet Bro. N. Orcutt and wife, of Troy, Vt. This is the brother who expressed a wish in the World’s Crisis of April 13th, 1864, that Eld. Preble’s article on the Sabbath question should be put in tract form, and that he wished fifty copies to distribute among his friends. In connection with our mention of the matter, we stated that Eld. Preble’s articles were being published in pamphlet form at the Review Office entire, in connection with Bro. Smith’s reply, and that we would furnish this gentleman fifty or more copies on terms to suit himself. Soon copies of the Review were sent to Bro. O. from different points, and finally the work entitled, Both Sides, was put into his hands, and the truth has been working. We take the following from a note from him received last evening.

“I have this evening been reading the last No. of the Review. I find much that interests me, who a few months since would have scoffed at the precious truths with which it comes filled from week to week.

“We kept the next Sabbath after we met you at Bro. Barrows’, and mean henceforth to keep the ‘commandments of God,’ all of them, that we ‘may have right to the tree of life.’ I may soon write a little of my experience for the Review.

“I took my pen to say that I was much interested in Bro. Waggoner’s article on the mark of the beast, and wish to put it in the hands of a few brothers with whom I have associated, and for whom I feel a deep interest. It may with God’s blessing do them good, and lead them to see the truth.”

Thank God for Both Sides. Let it be scattered abroad, brethren, and let it do its work on the minds and hearts of honest men. We see by the Voice of the West that Eld. Preble has searched through Both Sides, and has taken here and there a phrase, a sentence, or a paragraph, and has strung them together in their most objectionable form, constituting an article for the Voice of the West. Phrases which would appear admirable, and which would be right words in right places, can be made to appear, strung along in this way, the veriest jargon of nonsense. The best author in the world may be made to appear a bigoted novice by such means. And this is the way Eld. Preble treats Bro. Smith, who has so liberally published every word of Eld. Preble’s lengthy articles in connection with his reply.

Why should Eld. Preble manifest so much trouble about Both Sides? It is supposed that he wrote his articles to be read. And one would also conclude that the re-publication of them by Sabbath-keepers, to be read by Sabbath-keepers, would be a matter of joy to him, if he had confidence in his own positions. And cannot the readers of Both Sides judge as to Bro. Smith’s candor, and the fitness of his language? So much fear betrays great weakness somewhere. Does the cause of our opponents require that prejudice should be raised in the minds of the people, (little matter by what means) lest they should fairly see both sides of the Sabbath question, and come to the light as Bro. Orcutt has? But what seems most astonishing is that Eld. Himes should publish such garbled testimony in the Voice of the West. Does he think that justice to his brother Preble demands that he should assist him in the unrighteous work of prejudicing the people against his candid and liberal Christian opponent? God pity a cause dependent upon such efforts for its existence.

Bro. Smith has the reputation of being a fine writer, candid, and select in his language. If he has been unusually pointed and sharp at times in his review of Preble, it was because the bold assumptions of his opponent, demanded plainness. And if Heaven has endowed the reviewer with ability to make error, when compared with truth, appear in its native hideousness, may God help him to use his pen in this good work. One of the most subtle wiles of the Devil is to cry out against style in order if possible to cut off the influence, or to palsy the pen of him who would fearlessly expose error, and vindicate truth.

It is well for Elder Preble that he had not after him such reviewers as Martin Luther and William Miller. It is not style that hurts him half as much as the clear and forcible arguments which have exposed the weakness of his positions.

Do our opponents think that efforts of this kind, and their perpetual misrepresentations, and thrusts at the visions,—all of which is calculated to fire up prejudice in the hearts of narrow-souled bigots—will stop the progress of God’s eternal truth? They are mistaken. The great Advent message gained but little ground with the candid and the good, until it was manifest that the best arguments ministers then had to bring against it was “Wm. Miller’s brick wall about his farm,” “Elder Himes getting rich,” “ascension robes,” &c. Let them garble and misrepresent Both Sides if they choose. This will bring it into notice, and cause it to be read. Let them advertise this work throughout the length and breadth of the land, that it may be read by tens of thousands.

And let such attacks upon Both Sides fire the hearts of believers with a becoming zeal to scatter this work everywhere. A closer battle is evidently coming. Every minister and every brother and sister should be awake. New publications must come forth from the press in quick succession. We have just ordered $5000, worth of paper which will be cheerfully paid by donations from the friends, so that the steam press can keep moving and they receive publications to scatter abroad at their present extremely low prices. May God speed the work.

The readers of the Review will all be happy to hear from Bro. Orcutt.