Review and Herald, Vol. 47, No. 6. (2/10/1876)

Review and Herald

Feb 10, 1876

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Feb 10, 1876

DO BEASTS HAVE IMMORTAL SOULS?

By Dudley Marvin Canright

BY ELD. D. M. CANRIGHT.

The advocates of the immortality of the soul rely largely for their proof of this doctrine upon man's ability to think and reason. They claim that matter cannot think, cannot reason, and hence there must be an immaterial, immortal principle which does think. To this we object. That the lower animals also think and reason as truly as do men, we think the following illustrative anecdotes sufficiently prove; and hence if the argument proves men to be immortal, it proves the same for animals, for worms, and even for insects.

Our opponents generally stoutly deny this, and claim that animals do not reason—that they simply have instinct. But when they take this position, they deny the plainest and most conclusive facts of everyday life. Rev. J. G. Wood has lately written a book entitled, “Man and Beast,” in which he endeavors to prove that the animals not only do think and reason, have a conscience, affection, etc., but that they will all live hereafter, the same as men. While we seriously doubt his conclusion, we believe that his premises are correct; namely, that the lower animals do possess reason, judgment, and even conscience, as well as men, although, of course, in a very low degree. Mr. Wood has given some three hundred well-authenticated anecdotes illustrating his subject. Many of them are very remarkable. Thinking that the readers of the REVIEW will be interested in these, I herewith give a number of them. Relative to the reasoning power of the beasts, the author says:—

“There is much vagueness of idea on this point, the general tendency being to confound reason and instinct together, and to wonder when one ends and the other begins. For example, there are hundreds of anecdotes, too familiar for quotation or even mention, which are described as wonderful examples of instinct, whereas every one of them is a proof of reason, and has nothing to do with instinct.”

“The well-known and perfectly correct definition of instinct is this: ‘A certain power or disposition of mind by which, independent of all instruction or experience, animals are directed unerringly to do spontaneously whatever is necessary for the preservation of the individual or the continuation of the species.’”

As showing that the dog can reason, he says:—

“For example, I have a letter before me in which is an account of a dog who had been sent into the water after a wooden rail about eight feet long and several inches wide. The animal took it by the middle, and swam with it to the only place where a landing was practicable; but, finding that there was not sufficient space for the long rail, he swam out again, turned the rail around, took one end in his mouth, and so brought it ashore. Presently his master threw the rail into the water again, and this time the dog took it by the end at once in order to bring it in, never seizing it by the middle after his first failure.”

“A little Scotch terrier, named ‘Pepper,’ one of our former pets, was, like most of his relatives, a capital fellow for hunting a rat, a cat, or a mouse. He was our companion when calling on an old lady, where I thought we could take him without any fear of his hunting propensity causing annoyance, as I knew she had no living pet of any description. We had scarcely entered the spacious drawing-room, when, from underneath an Indian cabinet at the extreme end of the room, our dog Pepper saw two large, glassy, yellow eyes, glaring at him with more than natural ferocity. Without waiting to use his power of scent, he rushed fiercely on his imagined foe, which fell lifeless at his feet, Pepper retreating to our side, hanging down his tail, and looking more like the vanquished than the victor.”

“Do any of my readers remember those now unmade cats of pasteboard and black velvet texture, those now non-existent ornaments of former days? Such was Pepper’s foe. Dogs know well enough when they are the objects of ridicule, and, finding we were all laughing at his discomfiture, he returned to the velvet pussy, and in playful mood carried her around the room, evidently wishing to hide his mistake by convincing us that it had only been a sham fight from the beginning.”

“The action of the dog here is very human, and it behaved just as a clever child might be expected to do when it had been deceived, and was afraid of ridicule.”

“I know several instances where domestic animals have discovered that there was something wrong in the arrangements of the house, and have called attention to it. There is a little dog belonging to one of my friends, who one night became very importunate, pulling the skirt of his mistress’ dress, and insisting on her returning downstairs. She was rather alarmed; but the dog drew her to the green-house door, which he evidently meant to be opened. On unlocking the door, she found that she had forgotten to turn off the gas. The little dog had been accustomed to see the gas turned off before the family went to bed, and was too conservative to allow any change.”

“Some years ago there was a dog at Margate which knew the use of money. He used to beg for pence, and take them to a baker to be exchanged for biscuits at a shop in the narrow, hilly lane, which is pleased to assume the title of High Street. One day the baker, wishing to see how the dog would behave if he played the animal a practical joke, took his penny and gave him a burned biscuit. The next time the dog had a penny, he took it to the baker as usual, showed it to him, and then went off to another baker who lived nearly opposite. This he afterward did invariably, showing the penny to the baker who had offended him, and then transferring his custom to the rival on the opposite side of the narrow street.”

“The whole of these proceedings were dictated by pure reason, and instinct had nothing to do with them. It was, in fact, doing on a small scale precisely what the dog’s master would have done on a large scale if a tradesman had taken his money and given him a bad article for it. He would have withdrawn his custom from the offender, and given it to another man who he thought would serve him more honestly.”

“No one can say that instinct had anything to do with these proceedings, the dog in each case deducing a conclusion from premises, and deducing them rightly. Had a child acted in the same manner, we should have thought it a very clever child; but we certainly should have attributed its action to reason, and not to instinct, and I do not see that we have any right to attribute reason to the one and to deny it to the other.”

“Another dog, a little Maltese poodle, named ‘Pop,’ was unusually full of tricks and oddities. He was fond of a game at hide and seek, a key being hidden for him, while he buried his face in the sofa-cushions. Sometimes he would be guilty of cheating, and would slyly peep out to see where the key was being hidden; but when reproached with the two simple words, ‘Oh, Pop!’ he would put down his head again, and be very much ashamed of himself.”

“On one occasion, when the Teviot and the Tweed were in flood, a little dog ventured incautiously into the Tweed, and was rapidly carried down the stream, struggling and yelping as it was hurried along.”

“It so happened that the miller’s dog, while carrying his master’s breakfast to him, saw the little dog in distress. He immediately put down his burden, turned, and set off at full gallop down the stream. When he had got well below the drowning dog, he sprang into the river, swam across, and so exactly had he calculated the rapidity of the river and his own speed that he intercepted the little dog as it was being helplessly swept down the current, and brought it safely to land.”

“When he got his burden safely on shore, the dog, instead of displaying the least affection for it, cuffed it first with one paw and then with the other, and returned to the spot where he had deposited his master’s breakfast, and carried it to him as usual.”

“How is it possible to refer the proceedings of this animal to mere instinct? Had a negro slave performed them, we should have used them (and with perfect justice) as arguments that so intellectual and trustworthy a man ought not to be the property of an irresponsible master.”

“A correspondent of Land and Water gives an interesting account of a proceeding on the part of two long-horned cows. The door of the hay-chamber opened outward, and was fastened by a latch lifted by the finger thrust through a hole in the door. The cows had seen this done, and, if left alone, would invariably open the door by inserting the tip of a horn into the finger-hole, lifting the latch, and then drawing the door toward them. He also describes the mode in which a cat opened a kitchen door, by jumping up and hanging on the handle of the latch.”

“The same correspondent mentions a horse which was accustomed to pump water for himself. The pump was in a corner of the horse-box in which the horse was shut for the night, and the coachman used to be puzzled at the fact that when he came in the morning the end of the stable was always an inch or so deep in water. At last he suspected that the horse might have been the delinquent, and so fastened him up without giving him any water, and watched him, unobserved, when let loose in the morning. The animal went at once to the pump, took the handle in his teeth, worked it up and down, and, when the water was in full flow, placed his mouth under the spout to drink. He could not endure being watched while pumping, and, if he saw any one observing him, would rush at him with open mouth in order to scare him away.”

“A mule, which belonged to a convent, was greatly averse to work. There were six mules, each being worked one day of the week in regular order. This mule knew its own day perfectly well, and on that morning it always tried to keep the servants out of the yard by backing against the door.”

“The following account of a horse was sent to me by a clergyman:—

“I had long entertained the idea of sending you a brief account of an instance of reason which occurred to my own knowledge, and, indeed, at our own door.”

“A neighbor possessed a young foal, which, with his mother, used to pass our house daily, early in the morning, during our breakfast-time, and had a habit of straying upon a piece of waste ground which then occupied its front, but has since been enclosed and formed into a front garden. My daughter, who is extremely partial to horses, used to run out and offer the little animal a piece of bread.”

“This went on regularly, until at last, when he was between two and three years old, he would not wait for the bread, but used to go to the door, plant his fore feet on the steps, so as to gain sufficient elevation, and then lift the knocker with his nose, afterward waiting for the expected morsel.”

“Here we have the two qualities of memory and reasoning displayed in a most unmistakable manner. Indeed, if we suppose that a dumb man had acted as the horse did, we should have been disposed to marvel at the way in which human reason could communicate ideas without the aid of speech. In this case, the memory of the animal enabled him to expect his daily dole of bread, and his reason—not his instinct—taught him that when the knocker was sounded some one came to the door. It is evident that the horse had seen the knocker used, had noted the result, and had followed the example, using, of course, his nose in lieu of a hand.”

“Mr. J. Nelson Smith tells me that, while examining one of the American mines, he saw a horse which was doing his work without the assistance of any driver. As soon as his cart was filled with ore, one of the miners gave his signal, and the animal went off to the spot where his load was to be ‘dumped,’ waited until the cart was unloaded, and then returned for another load. The strangest point in his conduct was that he had to take a certain number of loads daily, and knew when his task was finished as well as did any of the men. Mr. Smith happened to be present at the time when he deposited his last load for the day, and, on seeing him trot off quickly in another direction, was told that he knew his work to be finished, and that he was going home, where he would meet a kind reception from his mistress.”

“In places where pheasants are preserved, it is customary to give them their food in such a way that other birds cannot get at it. This is done by placing it in a feeding-box, which is closed by a lid, communicating by a lever with a perch. The weight of the lid is so adjusted that when a pheasant stands on the perch the lid is raised, and the bird can get at the food. The pheasants soon learn the object of the perch, for, when these boxes are first introduced, a few beans are laid on the outside of the lid. The bird gets on the perch in order to reach them, and so exposes the stores of food in the box.”

“Such an arrangement is made at Mountquharry, Cupar, Fife; and one day a gentleman was watching the pheasants and their boxes on the lawn just before the house, and saw a crow also watching them. Presently the crow flew to one of the boxes, settled upon the perch, and expected the box to open. The bird, however, being much lighter than a pheasant, was unable to lift the lid in spite of all its efforts. After several ineffectual attempts, it flew off to a tree where there was another crow, and a grand jabbering ensued. The two crows then flew to the feeding-box, both settled on the perch, and their united weight was sufficient to raise the lid.”

“It is impossible to attribute this proceeding to anything but reason. Instinct is wholly out of the question in such a case as this. The bird first watches the pheasants, and learns that by settling on a certain perch the box is opened and the contents attainable. It then proceeds to follow the example of the pheasants, judging that the same result would follow. Finding that, although it acted exactly as did the pheasants, the lid was not raised, it set itself to discover the cause of failure, and, as we have seen, succeeded in so doing. Having reflected that the pheasant could lift the lid on account of its superior weight, the bird calculated that two crows might be equal in weight to one pheasant. So it goes off to find a comrade, explains the state of things in its own bird language, and the two then co-operate in producing the desired effect. No human being could reason more correctly, or reduce its theory to action more successfully.”

“Here are some parrot anecdotes, all perfectly original:—

“A parrot, belonging to one of our servants, very soon knew us by name, and could distinguish the tread of its favorites, showing its joy by ruffling its feathers, and making an odd noise in the throat. ‘Polly’ was very tame, and was sometimes allowed to walk about the house, always announcing its arrival in a room by ‘Polly going a-walking.’ In hot weather, she enjoyed having water poured over her, and when satisfied would say, ‘That’s enough.’”

“She used to tease our large dog by whistling loudly, and calling him ‘Bran! Bran!’ on which he ran in and looked around, and on the cook coming in, Polly would say reprovingly, ‘Go back, Bran, go back!’ Out went Bran, and by and by, when the cook’s back was turned, the same scene was acted over again, until Bran grew wiser and neglected the call.”

“Polly was a very accomplished bird, and, when quite alone, could be heard going through her acquirements. She sang, ‘Cheer boys, cheer,’ very plainly, and could dance. If any stranger went into the kitchen, and no one was there, Polly called out, ‘Somebody’s wanted;’ and she has more than once startled people by saying, ‘What’s your business?’”

“We used to go in and see Polly before we went to bed, and she always said ‘Good-night’ several times, each time in a different tone of

voice. She called mamma, ‘my dear,’ until told that it was not respectful, after which she always said ‘ma’am.’ The remarks this bird made were so opposite that it really seemed at times as if it understood what was going on.”

“A rather amusing instance of reason in a dog has been narrated to me. The animal was a Newfoundland, and of a quiet disposition. There was, however, a much larger and quarrelsome dog of the same kind, who was frequently meeting ‘Lion,’ and taking every opportunity of molesting him.”

“One day the big dog met him, and evidently bent upon a fight. Whereupon Lion, knowing that he was no match for his antagonist without some aid, ran off to a neighboring manure-heap, and rolled himself over and over in it, until he was completely covered. He then went back to his enemy, challenged him, fought him, and beat him thoroughly, and after that victory, the big dog always gave Lion a wide berth.”

DON'T TAKE IT TO HEART.

By Georgiana C. Clark

There's many a trouble, Would break like a bubble, And into the waters of Lethe depart, Did not we rehearse it, And tenderly nurse it, And give it a permanent place in the heart.

There's many a sorrow Would vanish to-morrow, Were we not unwilling to furnish the wings; So, sadly intruding, And quietly brooding, It hatches out all sorts of horrible things.

How welcome the seeming Of looks that are beaming, Whether one's wealthy or whether one's poor! Eyes bright as a berry, Cheeks red as a cherry, The groan and the curse and the heartache can

Resolved to be merry, All worry to ferry Across the famed waters that bid us forget, And no longer tearful, But happy and cheerful, We feel life has much that's worth living for yet.

—GEORGIANA C. CLARK, in Christian at Work.

THE SIN OF UNBELIEF.

By J. O. Corliss

UNBELIEF in the teachings of God's word is the besetting sin of the present generation. Go where you will, or enter any society you may, the same disposition is apparent. But it does not stop here. Much of the literature of the day abounds with sentiments that dishonor the Bible, and has a pernicious influence upon the minds of those who are brought in contact with it. This mischief is not carried on by an avowed distrust of God or his word; but, under cover of divine authority, unrestrained license is given to join hands with the world in all its pleasures, or, in other words, to follow every inclination of an unregenerate heart.

In a sermon on the Signs of the Times, delivered by the Rev. George B. Porteous, of Boston, he said: “The idea is gradually advancing into orthodox thought and literature that God meant to exclude man from nothing that gives pleasure, but from whatever gives pain. Hence the prohibitory policy in regard to amusements is being abandoned as a false policy and a fatal mistake, and it is seen that the right policy is to permit nothing to pass by us without stamping upon it a moral value.”

After the above manner, many who have risen to eminence as teachers of God's word advance ideas which can only tend to confirm their hearers in the ways of the world. And in order to arrest doubts, should any occur, Christ is represented as having cast out all devils, therefore none exists to tempt or lead astray the unwary, and consequently every thought and desire, whatever it may be, is of heavenly birth. “It is true,” said this Boston preacher, “that the orthodox church to which I belong, still entertains the old idea of the devil and of hell, yet I regard it as a cause of non-development, a retarding element in civilization.”

Could such sentiments as these be confined to the congregations in which they are uttered, their power would not be so great, but they are reported and published in leading journals, and scattered broadcast through the country. This influence is met everywhere by those who go out with Bible in hand to battle with superstition and error. We cannot then justly wonder at the strange conceptions entertained by many of what God requires of them, when so little confidence is maintained in his revealed word that much of it is regarded as non-essential.

Upon being pressed to give his views on the Sabbath question, which was being canvassed at that time in the village, the Methodist minister said: “I believe the seventh day is the Sabbath according to the Bible, but it makes no difference whether we keep it or not;” thus denying the authority of that word which he had been commissioned to hold up before the world as the epitome of all truth, and the standard by which all actions will be weighed in the Judgment; but, in this instance, giving them to understand that they might violate its precepts with impunity.

Said our Saviour, when speaking of the necessity of having importunate faith in God, “Nevertheless, when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?” We see the omens of his approach thickening around us, and in proportion as these are made manifest, unbelief, which is not the least of these signals, increases on every hand, and the church, united with the world, lowers the standard of Christianity, until faith and the power of godliness seem like attainments of other days. Sin is deceitful at the best, and it loses none of this characteristic by coming to us in the form of unbelief, but only tends to harden our hearts, and lead us captive at the will of the enemy. Then let us take heed lest there be in any of us “an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God.”

J. O. CORLISS.

THE NEW COMMANDMENT.

By Chas. B. Reynolds

There is no virtue which the contemplation of the sufferings and death of Jesus more strongly inculcates than charity—love. The Saviour implores us by that quickening spirit of love and consolation which he sheds through the hearts of his followers, by those blissful hopes of immortal joys he has purchased for us, by that infinite and unutterable love which his suffering life and agonizing death displayed for us, that “we love one another.”

In his notes on John 13:34, Albert Barnes, the great Presbyterian commentator, says:—

“A new commandment. This command he gave them as he was about to leave them, to be a badge of discipleship, by which they might be distinguished from all others. It is called new, not because it was not before commanded to love our fellow-men; for one great precept of the law was that we should love our neighbor as ourselves. Lev. 19:18. But it was new because it had never before been made the thing by which any class or body of men had been known and distinguished. The Jew was known by his external rites, by his peculiarity of dress, &c.; the philosopher, by some other mark of distinction; the military man, by another, &c. In none of these cases had love for each other been the distinguishing and peculiar badge by which they were known.”

“But in the case of the Christians they were not to be known by distinctions of wealth, or learning, or fame; they were not to aspire to earthly distinctions; but they were to be distinguished by tender and constant attachment to each other. This was to surmount all distinction of country, of color, of rank, of office, of sect. Here they were to feel that they were on a level, that they had common wants, were redeemed by the same sacred blood, and going to the same Heaven. They were to befriend each other in trials, be careful of each other's feelings and reputation, and deny themselves to promote each other's welfare. See 1 John 3:23; 1 Thess. 4:9; 1 Peter 1:22; 2 Thess. 1:3; Gal. 6:2; 2 Peter 1:7.”

“In all these places the command of Jesus is repeated or referred to, and it shows that the first disciples considered this indeed as the peculiar law of Christ. This command or law was moreover new in regard to the extent to which this love was to be carried; for he immediately adds, ‘As I have loved you, that ye also love one another.’ His love for them was strong, continued, unremitting. And he was now about to show his love for them in his death. Chap. 15:13. ‘Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.’ So in 1 John 3:16, it is said that ‘we ought also to lay down our lives for the brethren.’ This was a new, an unseen expression of love; and it showed the strength of attachment which we ought to have for Christians, and how ready we should be to endure hardships, to encounter dangers, and to practice self-denial, to benefit those for whom the Son of God laid down his life.”

God is love; his law is love; Christ is love. Love is the very life of the religion of Jesus. It is the animating spring of every other grace and virtue—the eternal center to which all other virtues and graces tend. Love constitutes the inseparable badge of the disciple of Christ. Unless we have the Spirit of Christ we are none of his. Animated by this divine principle of love, we shall uniformly endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. Regarding one another as destined to be dwellers in the same city of eternal love; resting for pardon on the same precious blood; quickened by the same almighty Spirit; preparing for the glorious inheritance by the same course of suffering and trial; fellow pilgrims through the same vale of tears to a blissful and eternal rest; we should be united in the most sacred and endearing emotions of tenderness and kindness, by the most affectionate and powerful ties.

Oh! what an exalted exhibition of holy joy and peace would the world present, did this spirit of divine love pervade and animate every heart! This vale of tears and misery, where discord, suspicion, envy, and revenge, blast the few joys which lie scattered along the path of life, would be converted into a very paradise of love and peace. We can never attain Heaven until we attain this love.

We claim to have very solemn reverence and tender respect for the last wishes of our dear loved ones. Shall we fail to regard the dying admonition of our blessed Saviour? Shall we fail to obey his dying counsel, “Love one another”?

True love will induce us to desire the happiness of others and to promote their interests. It will cause us to ignore self, and to find our greatest delight and happiness in endeavoring to promote the delight and happiness of those around us.

May we perseveringly seek to attain to perfect obedience to the last wishes of our absent Lord, and may we manifest our love to God by our love to one another. Dear brethren and sisters, “let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.” CHAS. B. REYNOLDS.

SUNDAY-KEEPING TROUBLES.

The N. Y. Independent of Feb. 3, 1876, has the following article on Sunday and the Allegheny Presbytery:—

“The true theory of the Sabbath as an ordinance, and as to its observance, has received discussion enough to have settled it long ago, if it could have been thus settled. But little more than this seems to have been yet agreed upon by Christian people—and we have now no concern with others—that a seventh day of rest should be observed, in which religious services should have a prominent part. Most of us go further, and hold to a Lord’s day made sacred by Christian tradition, and which is the heir of the Sabbath of the fourth commandment. But the strictness of the Puritan observance now finds few to defend it, and fewer to practice it.

“Pittsburgh, Pa., is now the center of a considerable excitement on this subject. Professor Hopkins, of Auburn Seminary, who is famous for saying things that stir up strife, lately astonished the good people of Pittsburgh by denying the divine authority of our Sabbath. The Allegheny Presbytery has taken the matter in hand and sent a message of complaint to the Presbytery of Cayuga. Doubtless the valiant and independent Professor will make a vigorous defense.”

“Another offense has called for sharper treatment. One of the proprietors of the Pittsburgh Sunday Leader is a member of Sewickley Presbyterian church, a church belonging to Allegheny Presbytery. This fact having been mentioned at a meeting of Presbytery, that body, by resolution, in June last, instructed the session of Sewickley church ‘to take such action as they may judge best suited to remove from themselves and the Presbyterian church the reproach connected with the publication of the Sunday Leader by a member of that church, and to report their action to Presbytery at its fall meeting.’ The session considered the matter, and replied that they considered it unwise and inexpedient to make this a case of discipline. Presbytery in September last responded that the action taken did not meet their views, and sent the case back to session for further consideration, with instructions to report. The session in December, ‘having reconsidered the subject,’ sent up another refusal to press the matter to an act of discipline, alleging,

“1. That the member complained of ‘does not hold or own a majority or controlling interest in the Sunday Leader.’

“2. That he is not its acting or responsible editor.

“3. That there are other members of our own church, and multitudes more in the Presbyterian church at large, who own and hold stock in our railroad companies, steamships, publishing companies, manufacturing companies, etc., etc., who stand in the same or similar relations to the church, the Sabbath question, and the fourth commandment; and we cannot consistently or conscientiously proceed against one member and not proceed against all, while the church at large fails in discharging the same obligations the Presbytery requires of us.

“4. Finally, we decline proceeding further in this case, as in our judgment it is not for the peace and best interest of the church for us to do so until the entire subject of Sabbath observance and the requirements of the fourth commandment are clearly defined and settled by the General Assembly of the Presbyterian church in regard to all such members as are referred to in our third point.”

“Presbytery voted the answer not satisfactory, and also that the session ‘be required and directed to take up and issue the case in question,’ and report as before. Thus the matter rests at present, so far as relates to the mere publication of a Sunday paper. But at the December meeting of Presbytery, another count was added to the indictment as follows:—

“2. That the persistent efforts of the Pittsburgh Sunday Leader to break down the faith of the people in the divine obligation of the Christian Sabbath are most pernicious in their influence, and render any responsibility for such teachings a proper matter of discipline in any one who is a member of the church.”

“The answer of the session will be due at the April meeting of Presbytery.

“We do not care to discuss the merely ecclesiastical questions raised here, such as whether a presbytery has authority to interfere with a case of local discipline after the church session have twice considered it and acted on it, and no member of the church appeals or complains; whether it is regular for a presbytery to institute proceedings against a member of a church by resolution, without formal charges, without an accuser, and without proofs; whether a church session has any and how much discretion in matters of local discipline. They belong rather to denominational organs. We only wish to express a hope that the Presbytery, in its zeal to defend this vital institution of religion, will base its action on tenable grounds. We do not see how any man can be retained in church fellowship who is guilty of unrepented crime or who uses his money to destroy the Christian religion; but it is a strange phenomenon that a presbytery should demand that a man be disciplined for owning stock in a paper which teaches precisely the same doctrine as is defended by an accredited theological professor in the same church. Perhaps the General Assembly will set this all right at its next meeting.”

Who Can Be Against Us: Faith Against Overwhelming Odds

By Spencer

Who?— “If God be for us, who can be against us?” When Antigonus was ready to engage in a sea fight with Ptolemy’s armada, and the pilot cried out, “How many more they are than we!” the courageous king replied, “’Tis true if you count their numbers; but for how many do you count me?”

Our God is sufficient against all the combined forces of earth and hell. We are, therefore, commanded to cast all our care on him, for he careth for us. —Spencer.

THE PROMISE.

By M. Wood

THE promise of God is, “I will receive you; and will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.” 2 Cor. 6:17, 18. But there are certain conditions to be complied with before God can consistently fulfill his promise to us. He cannot own us as his dear children so long as we have fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness. Says John, “Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.” To be recipients of God’s love we must love him. Hence he says, “If a man love me, he will keep my words; and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.” John 14:23.

In order that none need be at a loss to know whether they love the Lord and his people, John says, in chapter 5:23, “By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments. For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments; and his commandments are not grievous.” Obedience is the surest pledge of fidelity to God’s authority that mortal man can offer to his Creator. The words of Inspiration are, “To obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.” May the Lord so sanctify our hearts that we may have no relish for the vanities of earth, but manifest by our works that we are dead to the world, and alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.

He who forsakes the world for the Lord’s sake will be received by him to sweetest fellowship and purest joys. If we walk in the way of his commandments, God will receive us when the world frowns upon us. “I will be a Father unto you.” All that a father can do, God will do, and as much more as he excels in love, wisdom, and power. He will wipe away our tears, soothe our sorrows, carry our burdens, and supply all our needs. He will provide us a princely portion; for we shall be heirs of God and joint heirs with Jesus Christ. He will bestow upon us unsearchable riches, even an inheritance that is incorruptible, undefiled, and that fadeth not away. He has promised a hundred fold in the present life, and in the world to come, life everlasting. The precious gospel is the title-deed of our glorious inheritance, the Holy Spirit is the witness of our adoption, and the arm of Jesus is our support and stay. “Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.” 2 Cor. 7:1.

M. Wood.

“THE SEA AND THE WAVES ROARING.”

By Wm. Penniman

D. T. TAYLOR, in a work entitled, “The Coming Earthquake,” on page 39, says:—“Excluding all other countries, there have been felt in Western Europe alone, since the beginning of the Christian era, two thousand one hundred and fifty-six (2156) earthquakes, of which seven hundred and seventy-three, or more than thirty-three per cent., belong to the first sixty years of the present century.” Facts prove that they have been wonderfully and fearfully on the increase for the past fifteen years. Scientific observations have demonstrated that as is the ratio in which earthquakes on land increase, so is the ratio of increase in the agitations of the sea.

The following, from the New York Weekly Witness of Jan. 6, 1876, in regard to earthquakes (only the most destructive are mentioned), maritime disasters, etc., shows that earthquakes destructive of life are still on the increase, and that the world is not only “far from having attained safety in navigation on ocean, lake, or river,” but that it has little ground for hope that it will attain it. “The sea and the waves roaring” is one of the signs of which Christ speaks, and he says, “When ye see all these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand.” Luke 21:31.

“The loss of life and property through earthquake, storm, and flood, has been very large. In Iceland, volcanic eruptions have taken place on a grand scale, and they continued far into the year. The town of Arecibo, Porto Rico, was entirely destroyed by an earthquake; six cities of New Granada fell victims to a similar subterranean agitation, and the number of persons who lost their lives in that calamity is estimated at 16,000. Asia Minor had a similar visitation, in which two thousand people perished; and huge waves, evidently the result of volcanic action, swept over some populous islands in the South Pacific. A vast amount of property and many lives were lost in storm and floods which took place in the south of France. Inundations in the valleys of the Susquehanna and Delaware did much damage. The town of Kirm, in Rhenish Prussia, was visited with a water-spout, and Buda-Pesth, in Austria, was similarly afflicted. The September storm along the coast of Texas will long be remembered as an appalling event. At Indianola a hundred lives were lost. The British coasts were repeatedly swept by dreadful storms. Lately, in a hurricane in the Philippine Islands, many dwellings were demolished, and two hundred and fifty persons were killed.

“Among other disasters are the burning of Osceola, Pa., the destruction of the Roman Catholic Church at Holyoke, Mass., and the loss of seventy-five persons on the occasion of celebrating the feast of Corpus Christi; the Virginia City fire; the burning of Iquique, Peru; the prairie fire on the North Laramie, which lasted about a month; the fall of a floor of a school-house in a Swiss village, which terminated in the death of about eighty persons; the fire at Oshkosh, Wis.; and the fall of the roof of St. Andrew’s Church in this city.

“Maritime disasters were unusually numerous and severe. The diabolical intention of the man Thomassen to blow up the steamship Mosel with dynamite, and the effect of the explosion of the chest on the pier at Bremerhaven will be fresh in the recollection of all. Fifteen persons perished in the wreck of the Italian bark Giovanni, which was stranded at Cape Cod; one hundred, in the steamer Gottenburg, which plied between Van Dieman’s Land and Australia; three hundred and eleven, in the Schiller off the Scilly Isles; seventy-six, through the sinking of a ferry-boat on the river Mur, in Austria; fifty, in the wreck of the Vicksburg, of the Dominion line; sixty, in a lighter which was lost in the Tagus; one hundred and ninety-nine, in the steamship Pacific; all on board, passengers and crew, in the burned City of Waco, off Galveston; forty, in the schooner Sunshine, between San Francisco and Coos Bay; eleven, in the steamer Sunshine, which was sunk in the Hudson; and fifty, in the Deutschland, which was stranded on the Kentish Knock. Such are the most notable calamities that have happened to merchant vessels. The fatal collision of the Royal Yacht Alberta with the Mistletoe in the Solent has been a very painful occurrence. In the sinking of the British iron-clad Vanguard, the burning of the British training-ship Goliath, and of the French man-of-war Magenta, show that even great maritime nations require to devote additional thought to measures which will insure the safety of the navies on which they must depend so much.” Wm. PENNIMAN.

Continue reading: REDEEMING LOVE