Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Aug 12, 1875
REVERENCE
By Daniel T. Bourdeau
BY ELD. D. T BOURDEAU.
Text: “Surely the Lord is in this place; and I knew it not.” Gen. 28:16.
These are the words of one who was aroused by a realization of sacred things. They were uttered by Jacob upon awaking from a dream in which he had seen the angels of God ascending and descending upon a ladder that was set on the earth and whose top reached to Heaven. He had also seen the Lord above the ladder encouraging him with these words: “I am the Lord God of Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac; the land whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed.”
Jacob was fleeing from the face of his brother Esau. He was homeless and friendless, and did not realize that God was so near him; but upon discovering that he was so closely connected with God and sacred things, his soul was filled with reverential awe, and he was afraid, and exclaimed: “How dreadful is this place! this is none other but the house of God, and this is the gate of Heaven.” But he did not stop here. He made an offering unto the Lord, and made a solemn vow that if God should spare him to return to the spot that he occupied, he would make it a place of worship, “God’s house,” and that of all that God should give him, he would surely give the tenth unto the Lord. After his return from his journey, and from his long sojourn at Laban’s, he took his family, and all that were under him, with him to Bethel, and there sacrificed unto the Lord and engaged in solemn worship. But observe the high sense of sacred things that Jacob manifested to his household and to all that were with him before going to Bethel. “Put away,” said he, “the strange gods that are among you, and be clean, and change your garments.”
In the case before us there is a remarkable exhibition of reverence, which is that disposition that leads us to respect our superiors and those who are older than ourselves, and to treat sacred things generally with that awe and self-abasement that their nature demands. This is one of the noblest dispositions that human beings can possess, as it grows out of the proper use of the organ of veneration, which stands the highest among the moral organs.
To revere our superiors is to give them their just due. It is to give them what their nature, age, position, and experience, demand, viz., honor and an exalted place in our affections, thoughts, words, and actions. To refuse our superiors that honor that we owe them is a worse crime than to rob them of worldly goods. It is robbing them of their character. More than this, in some instances it is killing their character, and using the worst kind of deception, virtually representing them as occupying the second rank and we the first, contrary to the nature of things and the order of Heaven. If irreverence is so great a crime with reference to man, how exceedingly sinful it must be when committed against the great and holy God! But irreverence, manifested with reference to sacred things, or toward those whom God, for wise reasons, honors and exalts above ourselves, is disregarding God’s order, exalting ourselves above God, and thereby showing him great irreverence. Pride and selfishness are at the bottom of irreverence. It is because men too highly esteem themselves, and are too much shut up to themselves, that they fail to render that respect to others which is their due. And how easy it is for the human heart to be deceived here, and to think that is right which is really wrong; that our rights are disregarded, while we disregard the rights of others; and that others slight and abuse us, while we slight and abuse others. And the more the mind runs in this channel, the greater will be its blindness and deception, until it will even dare to murmur against the Almighty, and almost undertake to tear him from his throne. At least, there is a disposition to do this. The mind has been so shut up to self and selfish interests that it cannot discern the nature of sacred things and the claims of superiors. The selfish organs have been so strengthened by undue and perverted action that their demands are imperative, and all the powers of body and mind must serve them. The moral organs are so weakened by disuse that if they act at all they do not act naturally toward God and superiors, but in a perverted manner, in the slavish and degraded service of self, to which everything must bow as to the supreme object of adoration.
This is by no means a fanciful picture. It represents the condition of the world at large and of too many religionists. How easy it is to manifest, apparently, great reverence toward God and sacred things, while self is the object that is worshiped. The heart is deceitful above all things. We should be very jealous over its workings, and should try its secret motives to know what principles actuate us. We should seek to know whether our religious duties are performed that we may get the praise of men and that our selfish interests may be promoted, or whether all that we do in religion is done to the glory of God, and with direct reference to the furtherance of his cause.
We may determine whether our reverence is directed toward God or toward ourselves by the answers that we return to such questions as the following: Am I as faithful in performing those religious duties which are done where no one but God can see me as I am in performing those duties that attract the attention of my fellow-men? Would I perform certain religious duties were it not for some temporal advantage accruing therefrom? Is my zeal in religion relaxed when I fail to receive the approbation of those whom I esteem? Do I revere my superiors as much when they correct me for my errors as I do when they approve me for my virtues? In short, do I do all religious acts as I should were I in the presence of God and Christ, surrounded by the holy angels who worship with perfect submission and profound reverence, and who keep a strict record of our lives and motives in the books? I greatly fear that if all the motives that actuate us in our religious acts were carefully analyzed and laid open before us as they appear to God and holy angels, we would find ourselves to be more deficient even in reverence than we are naturally inclined to think that we are.
We urge this subject upon the serious consideration of our readers because of the sacred principles that it involves, and because its claims are almost universally disregarded. Irreverence is manifested to an alarming extent in the greater portion of the rising generation. In fulfillment of the divine prediction, 2 Tim. 3:1–3, most of the children and youth of this age are proverbial for their lack of respect for superiors and gray hairs, for disobedience to parents, ingratitude, profanity, and general insubordination. This lack grows up with them as they advance in years; and, having failed to yield to and revere superiors, it is almost impossible for them to submit to and reverence God. And unless persons possessing this trait get thoroughly converted, their selfishness, hatred of restraint, and domineering ways, must cause great unhappiness to themselves and to others, and must be a prolific source of trials wherever they go, especially if they find their way into the church; for of all kinds of irreverence, that kind is the most to be dreaded which is manifested under the cloak of religion, and which often appears in the shape, and under the pretense, of great reverence for God and sacred things, while self is really the great object toward which reverence is directed.
Irreverence is manifested in various ways. It caused Satan and his angels to rebel against the government of Heaven, and it causes the mass of our race to make it a light thing to transgress the law of the Most High, and to consider, as non-essential, those portions of divine truth which conflict with the desires and ways of the carnal heart. It opposes that religion which does not follow the popular channel. It despises restraint and the self-denying path the Redeemer trod. It does not readily discern the difference between the holy and the profane; between what God has sanctified, and what he has not sanctified; between what he has set apart to a holy use, and what he has given man for common purposes. It is dull to see, and slow to restrain, disorder and untidiness in divine worship or in the house of God. It sometimes enjoys coarse ways and expressions in worship. It would regard Jacob as being too particular when he enjoined cleanliness on those who went with him to worship the Lord, and would pronounce Moses proud or over-nice when he commanded the children of Israel to wash their clothes when about to hear Jehovah proclaim his holy law on Mount Sinai, or when he enjoined upon the priests to be clean in person and in dress when they ministered in sacred things.
Irreverence makes children think that their parents are greatly indebted to them, and that it would be too old-fashioned and beneath their dignity to consult their parents or superiors in important matters, or manifest childlike gratitude for favors received. It leads children to regard it as an outrageous thing, as insupportable bondage, to receive instruction or correction from those who have their well-being at heart, and would even give their lives to save them. It induces children to rise up above their parents, and treat them disrespectfully, and overlook their virtues, in view of errors that they may commit while bearing burdens and cares that the young cannot realize until they have had more experience.
Irreverence causes uneasiness in secret prayer, and induces many to rise from their knees before they have realized the blessing of God. It leads professors to read the word of God hastily, as though they were performing a wearisome duty, and to speak carelessly of God and sacred things, in singing, in prayer, and in testimony in social meetings. It prompts some who even have a form of religion, to quote scriptures jokingly, and induces many to withhold means from the Lord’s treasury. It led ancient Israel to murmur in the wilderness, and at subsequent periods in their history, and caused them to speak evil of dignities, and thereby murmur against God; and it does not act less in this direction in these last days than it did anciently. Says Paul, “Neither murmur ye, as some of them also murmured, and were destroyed of the destroyer. Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples; and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.” I Cor. 10:10, 11.
Language, and our finite comprehension are inadequate to fully set forth the evils of irreverence. May God by his truth and Spirit impress our minds with its exceeding sinfulness, and enable us fully to overcome it in all its workings and manifestations. If angels were cast out of Heaven because of their irreverence, can we expect to be admitted into Heaven while our characters are stained with the same shameful and debasing sin?
Before concluding my remarks, I wish to correct one impression that Satan makes upon minds through the deceitfulness of sin, which is this: That true reverence debases the soul, and brings bondage, unhappiness, and misery.
True exaltation consists in bringing all the powers of body and mind into submission to the will of God and in harmony with the principles of holiness, so that all our faculties will be engaged in the exalted service of God in that sphere of usefulness to which they are best adapted, thus answering the noble object for which they were made. And to revere God, superiors, and sacred things, contributes more to bring about this glorious result than any other action of the soul. Is reverence, therefore, a debasing trait of character? Is not rather irreverence that trait which above all others debases the soul in bringing it out of harmony with itself, with its Creator, and with all that is good and praiseworthy? How strange it would be for one to become so perverted in his mental and physical vision as to call Heaven low with reference to the earth. This is not so strange however as for persons to become so perverted in their moral vision as to call reverence debasing and irreverence exalting.
Reverence brings bondage to the old man, but great freedom to the new man. The old man should be bound, and crucified, and wholly banished from us. Unless it is, it will bind us to corruption and death. It will do us good to have irreverence, pride, and selfishness, die in us, and to have the opposite traits reign in their stead. Then shall we be restored to our proper balance. Then shall all our powers act properly and harmoniously with reference to those objects to which they are best adapted in the nature of things. Then shall we find peace and real contentment, our worst foes having been overcome. Then will the Holy Spirit find a place in our hearts, and abide with us with all its comforting and restoring blessings; for we shall turn all our blessings to the glory of God.
The irreverent, the proud, and the selfish, are like the troubled sea that casts up mire and dirt. They are never satisfied, never truly happy. They are out of order, like a machine that needs repairs, and does not and cannot run smoothly. Their conscience condemns them. They crave that which belongs to another; and, if they get it, their better nature says, “There is something wrong; you are man, and not God; you are getting out of your place.”
The honor you seek belongs to your superiors, or belongs to God. To obtain this honor, you undertake a work that you are unable to perform aright perhaps. You take responsibilities that others should bear. Give God the reins and the honor, and fill the place that you are adapted to fill. Then50shall you find rest to your souls. Imbued with the meekness and reverence that Christ possessed, your yoke will be easy and your burden light.
Dear brethren and sisters, sinners and backsliders, when we feel that all is not right, and are inclined to chafe and worry, not really knowing why, let us try the remedy Christ offers us, and learn of Him who was meek and lowly in heart. How many have made sad blunders, and brought sorrow and misery upon themselves by irreverence, by having their own way and disregarding the counsel of superiors.
Let us not be deceived by the thought that there is no pleasure in reverence. Those pleasures are of the highest type which grow out of the proper use of our higher powers. Veneration is that faculty which above all others links us to our Creator. Its proper exercise affords the greatest happiness that rational beings can enjoy. In this largely consists the happiness of angels, who worship day and night with the most profound reverence, awed by a sense of God’s holy and exalted character, and filled with devout gratitude in the free enjoyment of his rich blessings. If we are unlike the angels in character here, how can we expect to enjoy their society in Heaven?
Coming.
By H. M. Van Slyke
Coming soon, to rend assunder
Every vain and worldly tie;
Coming soon, to fill with wonder
All who love and make a lie.
Coming, as the lightning flashes
From the east unto the west;
Coming too, ’mid fearful crashes
Tok’ning no millennial rest.
Earth shall feel the awful shaking
When the mighty Conqueror comes,
Mountains falling, valleys quaking,
Cannot quell the horrid groans.
Yet from out the wreck, an anthem,
Not of grief, nor yet of fear,
“Lo, our God, we’ve waited for him,”
Sweetly falls on prophet’s ear.
Sighs and sorrows then are over,
Bliss and peace forever reign;
Hallelujahs sounding ever,
To the Lamb that once was slain.
O sinner, turn, while yet there’s time,
Come, the Saviour calls to thee,
And freely offers love divine,
Love that makes the guilty free.
Come and taste his gracious sweetness,
Bread that fills the hungry soul;
Bow the knee to God, in meekness,
Spurn the tyrants long control.
Then with love and joy thou’lt greet him,
Coming with the angel throng;
With the righteous dead shalt meet him,
Joining in redemption’s song.
H. M. Van Slyke.
Hamilton, Mo.
CONSTANTINE.—NO. 4.
By Joseph Harvey Waggoner
BY J. H. WAGGONER.
The story of the vision of the cross not only rests on the authority of Constantine alone, and was varied to suit different parties, but he said the vision was seen by his army, which is beyond all question a fabrication. No writer ever mentions such a thing; it was not a matter of current report, as says Mosheim:—
“For though Constantine says that his soldiers saw what he saw, yet Eusebius derived his information solely from the emperor, and he names no other witness. . . . In his Ecclesiastical History, which afforded the fairest opportunity for introducing so important a matter, there is no mention of it whatever. This shows that when he wrote his history, that is, prior to the year 324, he was ignorant on the subject; and that it was not then generally a subject of conversation. Again, in his Life of Constantine, he frankly acknowledges that this prodigy seems almost incredible; but that it would be wrong to question the emperor’s veracity; which is as much as saying, ‘I believe the facts were as I have stated, because my most gracious lord bids me believe them; but if another person had told them to me, I would not believe them.’”—Hist. Com., vol. ii, p. 475.
Eusebius professed to receive it from the emperor accompanied by an oath which Stanley does not consider of sufficient weight to prove it true. He says:—
“That the emperor attested it on oath, as the historian tells us, is indeed no additional guarantee for the emperor’s veracity; because, like princes professing piety in modern times, he appears to have been in the constant habit of adding an oath to almost every asseveration.”
And Mosheim further informs us that the artifice of inspiring the soldiers with confidence by means of pretended prodigies, was not peculiar to Constantine. Thus he says:—
“At the time the cross is said to have appeared to him, Constantine’s great solicitude most certainly was not to establish and extend the Christian religion, but to vanquish Maxentius. Besides, Constantine was not then himself a Christian, and he used this vision, not to aid the Christians, but to animate the soldiers.”
That it was “a military wile or stratagem,” he says, “receives some countenance from the example of a similar artifice employed by Licinius; for soon afterwards, when Licinius was about to engage in battle with Maximin, he pretended that an angel appeared to him by night and taught him a form of prayer, which, if the soldiers should repeat, they would certainly gain the victory.”—Hist. Com., vol. ii, p. 473.
There is great question among authors whether there was any foundation at all for the story; some, willing to spare the reputation of Constantine and Eusebius, think that a dream or freak of a disordered imagination might have given rise to the report of the vision. Thus Mosheim:—
“Constantine was a vain man, and greedy of praise and glory, as his conduct shows; nor do his friends wholly deny it. I therefore think it will not be temerity to suppose he added somewhat to the truth; and perhaps he changed a mental and nocturnal vision into a day vision with the bodily eyes, for the sake of appearing great and favored of God in the estimation of the citizens, and particularly the bishops.”—Hist. Com., vol. ii, p. 476.
Socrates, who gives some credit to Eusebius, for it was easy to palm off such things in that age of “pious frauds,” states that Constantine was in great perplexity of mind when the vision was received:—
“While his mind was occupied on this subject, and he was hesitating what divinity’s aid he would invoke for the successful conduct of the war, it occurred to him that Diocletian had profited but little by the pagan deities, whom he had so sedulously sought to propitiate; but that his own father, Constantius, who had renounced the idolatrous worship of the Greeks, had passed through life far more prosperously. In this state of uncertainty, a supernatural vision, which transcends all description, appeared to him.”—Socrates’ Eccl. Hist., p. 3.
This statement by Socrates certainly gives an air of probability to the suggestion of Mosheim, in which others have concurred, that in his trouble and uncertainty the emperor had a dream, or that he was so highly wrought upon that the cross which the Christians so highly regarded was presented to his imagination as the means of triumph. And we can only reconcile the statements of historians with the supposition that a dream, which was supposed to be supernaturally given, was afterward converted into a miraculous vision. Thus Sozomen speaks as follows:—
“He regarded the cross with peculiar reverence, on account both of the power which it conveyed to him in war, and also of the divine manner in which the symbol had appeared to him.”—Sozomen’s Hist., p. 16.
These words are quite consistent with the idea that the cross was presented in a dream which was supposed to be specially given of the Lord to lead him to reverence that cross. And on no other supposition can we understand the following testimonies:—
“Eusebius gives the narration on the sole authority of Constantine who imagined that he had seen this cross; it was natural that in the troubled sleep of the emperor, on the eve of so eventful a battle, his dreams should be vivid, and their impression strong; but it is remarkable that Eusebius gives no evidence from the thousands of persons in the army, who must have seen it, if it were really a miraculous display of divine power, neither Sozomen nor Rufinus, who wrote so soon after, make any mention of it. And it has been thought that Eusebius, hearing the emperor narrating his dream, mistook him as narrating a fact; for Constantine always stated that he was influenced by a dream, in making use of the sign of the cross in his army.”—Fowle’s Acts and Monuments of the Church, Note, p. 59.
Mosheim also concedes a dream as the origin of the story; thus:—
“Nor do we think it sufficiently proved that the divine power interposed here to confirm the wavering faith of Constantine by a stupendous miracle. The only hypothesis, then, which remains is that we consider this famous cross as a vision, represented to the emperor in a dream, with the remarkable inscription, Hoc vince, i. e., In this conquer; and this opinion is maintained by authors of considerable weight.”—Eccl. Hist., pp. 79, 80.
But the editor of Mosheim thinks that in the above he has conceded more than the facts will warrant, and considers it quite incredible. There has evidently been made an effort to make the supposition of the dream conform as nearly as possible to the story of the vision. It is, indeed, hardly supposable that, if he had a dream, he saw the inscription given. That was doubtless an afterthought. Mosheim’s note to the above contains the following:—
“This whole story is attended with difficulties which render it, both as a miracle and as a fact, extremely dubious, to say no more. It will necessarily be asked whence it comes to pass, that the relation of a fact, which is said to have been seen by the whole army, is delivered by Eusebius, upon the sole credit of Constantine? This is the more unaccountable as Eusebius lived and conversed with many who must have been spectators of this event, had it really happened. . . . The sole relation of one man concerning a public appearance is not sufficient to give complete conviction; nor does it appear that this story was generally believed by the Christians, or by others, since several ecclesiastical historians, who wrote after Eusebius, particularly Rufin and Sozomen, make no mention of this appearance of a cross in the heavens.”—Mosheim, Eccl. Hist., Note, pp. 79, 80.
And so also Keightley admits the dream only:—
“This legend is related by Eusebius, on the authority of Constantine himself; but his narrative did not appear till after the death of the emperor, and in his earlier work, the Ecclesiastical History, he is silent respecting it. Another contemporary mentions only a dream, in which Constantine was directed, on the night before the battle with Maxentius, to inscribe the sacred monogram on the shields of his soldiers; and adds that his obedience was rewarded with victory. We take not on us to decide how much of fiction or of error there may be in the legend; but that no actual miracle was wrought we venture to affirm without hesitation, in accordance with our fixed opinions on the subject.”—History of Rome, p. 315.
No doubt Sozomen believed there was a dream as above stated, but no more. And Mosheim, Historical Commentaries, vol. ii, p. 476, says, “Neither had Rufinus heard anything of it, for he likewise speaks only of a dream.” This renders it still more probable that a dream, by a fraud which was not considered sinful in those days and under those circumstances, was turned into a miraculous vision, to suit the purpose of the narrator.
Milman regards it in the same light in which it is presented by Socrates. He says:—
“And so for the first time the meek and peaceful Jesus became a god of battle; and the cross, the holy sign of Christian redemption, a banner of bloody strife. This irreconcilable incongruity between the symbol of universal peace and the horrors of war, in my judgment, is conclusive against the miraculous or supernatural character of the transaction.”
“If at this time Christianity had obtained any hold upon his mind, it was now the Christianity of the warrior, as subsequently it was that of the statesman. It was the military commander who availed himself of the assistance of any tutelary deity who might insure success to his daring enterprise. Christianity, in its higher sense, appeared neither in the acts nor in the decrees of the victorious Constantine after the defeat of Maxentius.”—Page 288.
This idea of adopting a “tutelary deity,” who should be propitious in battle, was purely pagan, and there is sufficient evidence that Constantine did not renounce this pagan view while fighting under the labarum, or sign of the cross. It was not to him an emblem of peace, but a pledge of conquest, a token of victory.
We have said that such a dream was only probable, as furnishing an explanation of the origin of the story. But there is no certainty that even that was an actual occurrence. Waddington thinks the emperor himself was deceived by some appearance which his enthusiasm, perhaps by the weakness of sickness or passion, or the excitement of events, converted into a miracle. Of this idea he says:—
“It is the only supposition which can save both the intention of the emperor, and the veracity of the historian.”—Eccl. Hist., p. 83.
But this will be hard to accomplish, put whatever construction upon the story we will. For if Constantine and his army did not actually see this day-vision, how was it possible for him to be deceived so as to believe that they did? It would hardly be possible to save the emperor’s reputation, even allowing the fact of the dream. On the other hand, if the vision was seen by Constantine and his whole army, how could it be that Eusebius should be ignorant of it for about twenty-five years after its occurrence, and then learn it only from Constantine? And how, then, should all his contemporaries be dependent on him for a knowledge of it? Look at it in any light we please, it bears on its face the evidence of fraud on the part of Constantine, and great credulity, if not duplicity, on the part of Eusebius.
The reader may have noticed, in a quotation given from Waddington, that that historian says Eusebius “does not even profess those rigid rules of veracity which command universal credit.” This is an impeachment of Eusebius which may surprise many who have been accustomed to regard the testimony of Eusebius as reliable beyond all question. But before blaming Waddington for this statement, it would be well for the defender of Eusebius to consider well whether it is possible to extricate the eminent bishop from the dilemma in which he has involved himself by his version of the story of the vision of the cross. We do not ask merely what may be probable, but what view of it is possible by which he may be rescued from the reproach of having sacrificed the truth upon the shrine of his hero. And from this we turn to find other historians taking as strong ground against the reliability of Eusebius as does Waddington. Thus Gibbon, in a quotation already given, says:—
“And the courtly bishop who has celebrated in an elaborate work the virtues and piety of his hero, observes a prudent silence on the subject of those tragic events.” Certainly it is not the part of a faithful and candid chronicler of events to pass over such actions, and those so well known as Constantine’s unnatural slaughter of the members of his own family. Neander ascribes the course of Eusebius to the fact that he was so blinded by the favor of Constantine and the splendor of his court that he really believed the emperor was specially inspired! But he who is so blinded by pomps or favors that he cannot discern the criminality of such acts as Constantine was guilty of as late as 326, can scarcely be relied upon to guide in a just view of interesting and important events. Or, if he was not blind to the criminality of those things, he is still more worthy of blame in passing over the crimes in silence and lauding the perpetrator as a pure Christian and inspired warrior and statesman.
Obedience.
By Olive E. McCord
THERE is nothing more lovely in the character of a child than implicit obedience. Obedience lends a charm to all other graces, and though the features of the child may possess little that is attractive to the casual observer, yet to those who may witness the ready, cheerful obedience rendered to superiors, there is a grace in every motion.
We are told of the Lord Jesus that after he had astonished the learned doctors in the temple at Jerusalem by his wise questions and answers, he returned home with his parents, and was subject to them. Jesus, the Son of God, given as our great example, did not think it beneath his dignity to submit to authority; but how many children in these days seem to look upon the least restraint as an uncalled-for severity. They are often loth to perform the duties assigned them, however slight. Children do not realize that men and women are governed by rules of right and propriety, so that to learn strict obedience in youth is to form a firm basis for the trying period of more mature years. They who in their youth cultivate a cheerful, obedient spirit are far more likely to become good citizens and noble Christians than those who pursue a directly opposite course and complain at every restraint, thus sowing for themselves and others the seeds of shame and sorrow.
“Honor thy father and thy mother, that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee,” is the command written amid the thunders of Sinai by the finger of God. And by following this command, how much pleasure children have it in their power to give. It is not to be expected that children can know as much as those who have experienced care and contended with the ever-varying vicissitudes of this life; yet it has become no very unusual occurrence to see those who, by their language and deportment, seem to think themselves far superior in experience and wisdom to their gray-haired grandparents and other elderly friends.
“He that being often reproved hardeneth his neck, shall suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy.” Prov. 29:1. Some children seem to think that their saucy replies, when addressed, are an evidence of their own sharp wit, whereas observers are often grieved and disgusted at their impertinence. A traveler once sought entertainment at a humble house along the way, in which he found quite a large family of children. When night came on, all gathered around the cheerful fire. The stranger, being a lover of children, noted their different dispositions and conduct; all were more or less noisy and inclined to impertinent disobedience, except one, a little daughter, who, being so plain and quiet, had not attracted the attention of the guest. But as the evening wore on, and the other children grew more turbulent and rebellious against parental restraint, this little girl, who at first seemed to possess no charms, became conspicuous by her gentle obedience to her parents, and her ceaseless endeavors to soothe and quiet the murmurings of her brothers and sisters. The stranger wondered, as he witnessed the scene around him, how he could have thought her face plain and unattractive; for by her behavior it had become clothed with grace and beauty.
Obedience is the key to favor with God; and what an infinite pleasure remains to the child who chooses the path of wise submission to superior judgment! It is a crown of glory to both children and parents. And when the period of manhood and womanhood is reached, youthful obedience will be found a safe foundation whereon to establish noble aims and honorable purposes, which, when accomplished, may bless the world.
And now let us examine the testimony of the Scriptures concerning the results of disobedience, and the rewards ever attending a humble submission to a righteous command; for, though obedience is a virtue so highly commendable in youth, it is not a virtue restricted to that period of life. When we read51the first chapters of Genesis, we are confronted with the direful results of disobedience; and as we continue our search down to the moment when God fulfils his threatened punishment against that sinful age, one instance of obedience stands forth brightly amid the reckless wilfulness that led men to disregard God's solemn warnings. Noah, though no doubt ridiculed by the generation in which he lived, heeded God's command, thus preserving himself and family from the flood which engulfed a disobedient world. Noah was righteous before God, that is, he obeyed him. And he was preserved in sacred history a monument of trusting obedience.
Paul, when relating his conversion and Christian experience before King Agrippa, says, “Whereupon, O King Agrippa, I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision.”
Now, we will suppose for a moment that Noah and Paul acted concerning the especial commands given them in the manner so habitual to some in these days. Suppose that Noah, when warned by God to build the ark, had replied, “To do this will require a great amount of severe labor, and after I have toiled to complete it, the flood may not occur, and then I shall not need it.” Had he thus answered, he would have perished with the ungodly world. But instead of such rebellious inattention to the Lord's merciful commands, we find it recorded of him, “Thus did Noah; according to all that God commanded him, so did he.”
Paul had gone to Damascus, “breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord;” yet at God's command he instantly became indifferent to the opinions of men. “And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God.” And all who desire to obtain that which is worth the possessing in this life, or the life to come, must walk humbly in faithful obedience to our Father's commands, and the everlasting inheritance, life and immortality through Jesus Christ our Lord, will be the sure reward.
Olive E. McCord.
Oregon City, Oregon.
Blessings.
By F. R. Richmond
WHEN God placed our first parents in the garden of Eden he surrounded them with everything that could be required for their perfect happiness. We naturally think that were we to have the blessings given to them we would be very thankful, and zealous in obeying the Giver. With their example, and having seen the result of their course, we might not fall in the same way they did; but what use are we making of the blessings we now have?
Persons often look upon the blessings of others, especially upon riches, and say, “If I possessed these, I would make good use of them;” but how few carry out this good resolution when the means are actually placed in their power.
Promises made in adversity are too often forgotten in prosperity. The Lord desires that we should have, and he will give us, all we will put to a good use. “No good thing will he withhold from them that walk uprightly.”
Children that have everything they desire are not apt to appreciate the kindness of their parents; while those whose parents are in such circumstances as to render it necessary for them to deny their children in many ways will love and sympathize with their parents, though they may not always see that it is for their good to be denied. The Lord deals with us as with children; “for he doth not afflict willingly nor grieve the children of men.” Says David; “Before I was afflicted I went astray; but now have I kept thy word.” Again, “It is good for me that I have been afflicted; that I might learn thy statutes.”
The danger from receiving great blessings is well shown in the case of Saul, who was made king of Israel when he was little in his own eyes and submissive to the will of God; but when he was exalted he departed from the Lord; also in the case of Solomon, and of the children of Israel as a nation; when they were in prosperity they soon forgot the source of their bounties and turned to idols; but in their distress they returned to the Lord.
God has blessed man by causing the earth to bring forth a bountiful supply of provisions, so that all might have plenty; but much grain, instead of going to feed the hungry, is made into intoxicating drink; and much labor and land, instead of being used to benefit mankind, is used in cultivating tobacco and other worse than useless articles. The earth produces a sufficient amount of clothing for all, but instead of being equally distributed among those who need it, much is consumed in gratifying the pride and vanity of the gay. The telegraph, railroads, sewing-machines, and the many other inventions, would be much greater blessings to humanity, if used only for good purposes.
When nations become rich, their wealth is used for the destruction of their fellow-beings in war. Thus, while adversity is often a blessing in disguise, apparent blessings are frequently turned into curses. It seems to be human nature to spend the surplus of blessings in doing evil. Well is it for man that he is required to earn his bread by the sweat of his brow.
This subject has a bearing upon each one of us personally. Are we using the blessings God bestows upon us to his honor and glory? We pray for blessings; do we pray aright? Says James, “Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts.”