Your ShelfYour Projects

The Gospel Sickle, Vol. 2, No. 6.

Notes and Comments

The Gospel Sickle

Mar 15, 1887

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Michigan · Mar 15, 1887

Notes and Comments.

NOTICE.—Parties receiving this Paper, not having subscribed for it, may know that it is sent to them by the courtesy of some friend. Do not hesitate to take it from the Office, for none will be called upon to pay for any numbers they have not ordered. We invite candid attention to the Contents of the Paper, and when you have read it, please hand it to a Friend or Neighbor.
If all men took the liberty of setting their clocks and watches at whatever hour best pleased them, the affairs of life would go strangely wrong. What incalculable perplexity and misery may result from individual meddling with the moral machinery which points out the minutes and hours of duty, no one can say.
The moral and physical natures of man are so intimately related that it is impossible to live in violation of either of these laws without doing violence to the other. Physical law, therefore, in its sphere, is as sacred and binding upon man as moral law.
Repentance is said to be either legal or evangelical. The former is simply sorrow for sin, or trouble for the past, without a change of life. Thus Judas repented. Matt. 27:1–5. The latter, from another Greek word, is a change of action, an amendment of life. It is a conviction of sin, a deep and genuine contrition for it, as an offense and dishonor to God and a violation of his holy law. It is a hatred of sin and a renunciation of it. Says John, “Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance;” or, margin, “answerable to amendment of life.” Matt. 3:8. “For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death.” 2 Cor. 7:10.
The law of ten commandments, called in Scripture the “lively oracles,” “royal law,” etc., seems to have been exalted purposely above those laws which were merely ritual and ceremonial. That the moral law should have been spoken by God, and then written by his own finger in stone, is significant of its superiority over all other laws. And the fact that when the first tables were broken other tables like the first were prepared, and then God himself wrote the same identical ten commandments, no more, no less, on the second tables, shows the design of the Law-giver to impress the mind of man with the fact that this law was above all,—the supreme and immutable constitution of the Creator of all things.
A recent reviewer of a work on unconditional immortality, utters the following severe though truthful sentence: “The doctrine of the natural immortality of the soul, is the foundation on which the harlot mother sits; and, as she is the mother of harlots, all her daughters have drunk deeply of her spiritual fornication. The whole Protestant world is tinctured with this subtle heresy; and in vain do they oppose the mass, purgatory, and invocation of saints, whose very existence depends upon the popular dogma of immortality, while they maintain, uphold, and defend this foundation.”—Anthropos, p. 69.
Spiritualism might also have been added to this list. For all that sublime jerking, howling, barking, reeling, staggering, rapping, and twitching of half-crazy mediums, the rattling, clattering, thumping, knocking, and tipping of household furniture, the peeping and muttering of officious spirits, is founded on this mighty corner-stone of Protestant belief and religious education.
The following remarks on the Sabbath are taken from the Union Bible Dictionary, by the American Sunday School Union:— “The only weekly feast among the Jews was the Sabbath. Gen. 2:3; Ex. 16:23; Lev. 23. This feast, or festival, did not come into existence, however, with the Jewish worship, but was appointed before the apostasy, as a special memorial of the goodness and power of God displayed in the finished work of creation. It is the opinion of many very learned men, formed after the most laborious and unprejudiced investigation, that it is in some form or other recognized throughout the world as a sacred day. Christians generally admit that the knowledge and observance of the Sabbath were preserved in some form and degree through Noah and his family; nor is it surprising that it is not particularly mentioned in the concise history of the intervening period, which the Bible contains. In the law of the ten commandments, the Sabbath not only is recognized, but its inviolable sanctity and perpetual obligation are both taught us, not only in the language and spirit of the commandment itself, but by its incorporation with that original and fundamental law of God’s government, which was promulgated amidst the thunders and lightnings of Mount Sinai, and engraved on tables of stone.”
A great error is prevalent with those entering upon the Christian life. It is this: the young convert is too apt to imagine that the work is finished when the Spirit of God renews the heart and fills it with joy unspeakable. But it is a very great mistake. Strong faith and trust in God are the results of long experience and labor in the Christian life and warfare.
Many Protestant authors give the Bible to the common people, and put out their eyes by their mystical rule of interpretation. But the papal power has denounced the most commonly received version, and has forbidden the translation of the Scriptures into the vulgar tongue, for the common people. The first Canon of the “Council of Toulouse” in 1229, reads as follows:— “We forbid the laity to possess any of the books of the Old or New Testaments, except, perhaps, the Psalter or Breviary for the divine offices, or the Hours of the Blessed Virgin, which some, out of devotion, wish to have; but having any of these books translated into the vulgar tongue we strictly forbid.”—Anderson’s Annals, p. 17.
Eld. J. Blain, a Baptist minister, makes use of the following sarcastic words: “It is a notorious fact that in our theological works a nondescript dictionary is made, with definitions as follows: ‘to be dead’ means to be more conscious; ‘to die’ is to live on in woe; ‘to lose life’ is to preserve a miserable existence; ‘life’ means happiness; ‘to burn up’ means to make a living salamander; ‘to destroy’ is to preserve whole; ‘to devour,’ ‘perish,’ ‘consume,’ etc., mean to make indestructible and immortal; ‘not to be,’ is to be without end!”
The doctrine of the advent of Christ at hand is unpopular; but signs and prophecies fulfilled attest its truth. And when the prophecies of Daniel and John are set before the people, and the fulfillment traced to the present time, the papacy is seen to be the great anti-Christ, and the change of the law of God is clearly seen to be the work of anti-Christ. Then, when this is clearly seen, the warning message of Rev. 14:9–12, has a force in it to bring honest souls who desire to have the truth, to the keeping of the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus. And thus is the light on the Sabbath question brought out with force and clearness.
As man cannot have eternal life without strict obedience to moral law, so he cannot have deliverance from the terrible bondage of sickness and premature death in this world, without strict observance to physical law.
Conversion to God, and faith requisite to salvation, are, and must be, preceded by heart-felt repentance; otherwise, we could be saved without repentance—saved in disobedience and transgression—which is contrary to the teachings of the whole volume of inspiration.
The world’s history from specified dates in the past, the rise and fall of empires, and chronological succession of events down to the setting up of God’s everlasting kingdom, are outlined in numerous great chains of prophecy; and these prophecies are now all fulfilled except the closing scenes.
The following is old, but it will bear reading often: A wealthy man was one day so much amused by the wit of his foolish attendant, that he gave him his cane, but told him that whenever he should find a greater fool than himself he must return the cane. In process of time the rich man neared his death. Sending for this fool, he bade him farewell. “Where are you going?” asked the fool.—“To another world.” “When will you return?”—“Oh, never!” “Have you made preparation for the journey?”—“Alas! I have not.” “Then, master, take back your cane; never could there be a folly so great as that.”

THREE WORDS OF STRENGTH.

There are three lessons I would write,— Three words, as with a burning pen, In teachings of eternal light Upon the hearts of men.
Have hope! Though clouds environ round, And gladness hides her face in scorn, Put off the shadow from thy brow; No night but hath its morn!
Have faith! Where'er thy bark is driven, The calm's disport, the tempest's mirth, Know this: God rules the host of heaven, The inhabitants of earth.
Have love! Not love alone for one, But man, as man, thy brother call, And scatter, like the circling sun, Thy charities on all.
—Selected.

THE JUDGMENT OF THE GREAT DAY.-17.

By Uriah Smith

BY U. SMITH.
We have now seen—
1. That in the great Judgment work, the decision of every case is rendered by God, the Father, in the investigative Judgment in the Sanctuary on high.
2. That he then commits all Judgment to the Son, and sends him to execute the same.
3. That the saints have no part to act in the Judgment until the coming of the Lord. The work which is then given to him, he shares with his saints. For his promise is that when he sits upon his throne, all his saints shall sit down with him, as he has sat down with his Father in his throne. Rev. 3:11. A portion of that power which God gives to Christ over the nations, Christ delegates to his saints, that they may share with him in the execution of the Judgment. Compare Ps. 2:6-9; Rev. 2:26, 27.
This fact is very plainly brought to view in Ps. 149:4-9:—
“For the Lord taketh pleasure in his people: he will beautify the meek with salvation. Let the saints be joyful in glory. Let them sing aloud upon their beds. Let the high praises of God be in their mouth and a two-edged sword in their hand; to execute vengeance upon the heathen; and punishments upon the people; to bind their kings with chains, and their nobles with fetters of iron; to execute upon them the Judgment written. This honor have all his saints. Praise ye the Lord.”
This passage is worthy of careful study.
1. When the meek are beautified with salvation, it will be by the change to immortality. They will bear the image of the second Adam as in this life they bear the image of the first Adam. 1 Cor. 15:47-49, also Isa. 33:17, with 1 John 3:2.
2. This beautifying of the saints and exalting them to glory, precedes their participation in the Judgment mentioned in verses 7-9 of this psalm.
3. The two-edged sword in their hand is doubtless the same as that which proceeded out of the mouth of Him whose name is called the Word of God. Rev. 19:11-15.
4. And if we consider this psalm from verses 6 to 9, we shall see that the work of the immortal saints in the Judgment of the wicked is effected by the examination of the book of God, the sharp sword which they hold in their hands (Eph. 6:17; Heb. 4:12), and the written record of their evil deeds; so that the record of their lives will be compared with the rule given them to govern their conduct, and the measure of their guilt be determined thereby.
When God thus commits Judgment to the Son, and the Son ceases forever the work of intercession, the words of Ps. 76:7-9 will be found to be true:—
“Thou, even thou art to be feared: and who may stand in thy sight when once thou art angry? Thou didst cause Judgment to be heard from heaven; the earth feared, and was still, when God arose to Judgment, to save all the meek of the earth. Selah.”
The time when the Son of God saves all the meek of the earth, is when he raises them up from the dust to inherit the throne of his own glory. 1 Sam. 2:8; Matt. 25:31-33; Rev. 3:21. But the adversaries of the Lord will be broken to pieces. Out of heaven will he thunder upon them (Rev. 16:18); he will render decision in strict justice in the cases of all men, and then clothe his anointed king with strength to execute that decision. 1 Sam. 2:10. Indeed, it is because the Son loves righteousness and hates iniquity that he is anointed to do this work. Ps. 45:7; 2:6-9. His arrows will be sharp in the hearts of the king’s enemies (Ps. 45:4, 5), and none will escape his just infliction of wrath. Rom. 2:6, 7.
The binding of Satan precedes the resurrection of the just. This seems evident enough from Rev. 20; but it is very plainly taught in our Lord’s parable of binding the strong man and spoiling his house. Matt. 12:29; Mark 3:27; Luke 11:21, 22. He is evidently bound before the complete slaughter of the wicked in the battle of the great day. Then the righteous dead, represented by the goods of the strong man (Satan), are taken from his prison-house (the grave) by Him who has passed through the tomb and taken away the keys. Rev. 1:18. This is the first resurrection. “Blessed and holy,” says Rev. 20:6, “is he that hath part in the first resurrection. On such the second death hath no power.” As already shown, their characters were previously decided to be holy in the investigative Judgment.
Satan is cast into the bottomless pit, a term which we have seen is applied to this earth during the thousand years of its complete and utter desolation, between the first and second resurrections. And this binding of the Devil is the antitype of the sending away of the scapegoat on the day of atonement. Here to this earth in its chaotic condition, he, as the antitypical scapegoat, is confined, with his terrible load of guilt upon him, while the saints sit in Judgment upon the fallen angels, and upon all the wicked who joined and continued with them in their great rebellion.

IS SUNDAY THE SABBATH?—2.

By Dudley Marvin Canright

BY D. M. CANRIGHT.
The next time that Jesus met with the apostles was on a fishing day. John 21:1-6. They all went fishing, and toiled all night, but caught nothing. In the morning Jesus stood on the shore, and told them where to cast the net to get a good draught. Was this on Sunday? Then it is a working-day. If it were not on Sunday, then Jesus met them on any day, just as it happened. So we see from Acts 1:1-4, that his farewell meeting with them was on Thursday. It was on the fortieth day after his resurrection. Verse 3. By a moment’s reckoning it will be seen that it fell on Thursday, as all agree. Thursday is Ascension Day the world over. So the claim that Jesus always met with his disciples on the first day of the week is utterly false. As we have seen, the day of his resurrection was one of the greatest confusion among his disciples; the next time he met them was on Monday evening, the next time was on a fishing day, and the last was on Thursday. So much for the example of Christ in favor of Sunday-keeping.
A desperate endeavor is made to find evidence for Sunday-keeping from the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-4); but there is not the remotest hint of it here. “And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing, mighty wind.” Verses 1, 2. Then the Holy Spirit rested upon them. But what has that to do with Sunday-keeping? Sunday observance is not mentioned, nor even referred to. It is not stated what day of the week it was, as that was a matter of no importance; for it was the Pentecost which was to be signalized, and not the day of the week.
The very best scholars, even among the observers of Sunday, admit that Pentecost fell that year upon the Sabbath, or Saturday. Prof. Hackett, in his comments on the original text, says, “It is generally supposed that this Pentecost, signalized by the outpouring of the Spirit, fell on the Jewish Sabbath, or Saturday.” Olshausen says, “The fiftieth fell, therefore, it appears, upon Saturday.” Dean Alford, in his “New Testament for English Readers,” remarks, “It is probable, however, that it was on the Sabbath, i. e., if we reckon from Saturday, the 16th of Nisan.” If the day of the week in which that Pentecost fell was to be observed, we should at least expect that we should be informed which day it was. But we are not.
Next Acts 20:7-11 is supposed to furnish some little proof for first-day observance. “And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight. And there were many lights in the upper chamber, where they were gathered together.” Then a young man fell from the window, and being taken up dead, was restored to life by Paul. And when he “had broken bread, and eaten, and talked a long while, even till break of day, so he departed.” We notice these facts: 1. The first day is not called the Sabbath, Lord’s day, or by any other sacred title. 2. This is the only religious meeting upon the first day of the week of which we have any record in the New Testament. This is remarkable, if that were the common day of meeting. But we have a record of eighty-four Sabbaths which Paul kept, and on which he preached. See Acts 13:14, 44; 16:13; 17:2; 18:1-4, 11. 3. Nothing is said about its being their custom to meet on that day. 4. There is no record that they ever met on that day before this occasion or afterward. 5. But what settles the whole matter is the simple fact that it was only an evening meeting. When they assembled, Paul began to preach to them, and “continued his speech till midnight.” After breaking bread, he again talked “till break of day,” and then went on his journey. Evening meetings are frequently held on all days of the week. No one thinks of calling a day holy for this reason. So in the above case; this meeting does not furnish the slightest evidence that Sunday was a holy day. Moreover, this was not an ordinary meeting, but a very uncommon one. It was Paul’s farewell meeting (Acts 20:25); hence it lasted all night. A dead man was raised also, and it was for those reasons that it was mentioned, and not because of any sacredness belonging to the day. Then there is not a particle of evidence here for Sunday observance.
Only one more text mentions the first day, viz., 1 Cor. 16:2: “Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come.” From this a public meeting for Sabbath worship on the first day is inferred. But what is said here about keeping that day as the Sabbath, or even holding meetings on that day? Not an intimation of such a thing is given. Paul does not say that when they came together for meetings they should bring their gifts, nor that they should put them into the public collection box, nor anything of that nature. “Let every one of you lay by him in store,” is the direction; that is, at home, by himself. The original Greek term means by himself, at home, as the best critics on this passage admit.
Now, reader, you have before you all the texts in the New Testament that mention the first day of the week in any manner. You must see that they do not intimate that the day has any sacredness, or that there is an example for keeping it, or any commandment that any one should observe it. The “Lord’s day” of Rev. 1:10 is the seventh day, as may be seen by Ex. 20:8-11; Isa. 58:13; Mark 2:28.
But should we not, then, celebrate the resurrection of Christ?—Yes; but the Lord never told us to keep Sunday for that purpose. God has given us baptism, burial in water, as the fitting memorial of this. “Therefore we are buried with him by baptism,” Rom. 6:4. We are buried in the water just as Jesus was in the earth. Then we are raised up out of the water “also in the likeness of his resurrection.” Verse 5. Again, “Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him.” Col. 2:12. Baptism, then, is the divinely appointed memorial of the burial and resurrection of Jesus. It is appropriate. To be buried in the water and raised out of it, resembles the burial and resurrection of Christ, which it commemorates.
Then why do you keep the first day?—It is simply because you have been brought up to do it. It is a Catholic tradition, without any foundation in the word of God. Do not make void the law by your traditions.

“IN THAT FORM.”

By R. F. Cottrell

BY R. F. COTTRELL.
When a minister of the gospel says he thinks the ten commandments are not now binding in that form in which they are given in the Old Testament, does he not know that he is quibbling? When he pretends that the Saviour, in Matt. 5, made them either more or less than they ever had been, doesn’t he know better? Does he really believe that those “of old time” could hate a brother and not be a murderer? or look upon another’s wife with impure desire and not be an adulterer in heart?
If the ancients, as he pretends, might indulge hatred and lust, and yet not be murderers and adulterers in God’s sight, as judged by his law, the decalogue, then there will be two classes in heaven, one with the heart all unconverted, living in hatred, lust, and covetousness, though not committing the very acts of murder, adultery, or theft, and the other class living under the new “form of the law,” as given by Jesus, which demands that the heart itself be cleansed from every sinful desire, made holy and pure, like Jesus and the angels, whose society they are fitted for by this genuine and thorough conversion.
If such two classes of character are to be admitted there, it will necessitate a partition more formidable than the Chinese wall. But if none but the truly converted are saved, then the law of God was just as broad as it is now, when David said by the Spirit, “The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul;” and those who argue that Christ enlarged or diminished that law are either self-deceived, or wicked deceivers.
The truth is, Cain was a murderer before he shed his brother’s blood, and David was an adulterer when he formed his design in regard to the wife of Uriah. And our friends might know, if they would, that all such silly evasions of the law of God, as it is, would never have been resorted to had not “the Church [of Rome] put in place of the Sabbath the day we now call Lord’s day.” But to sustain this change of “times and laws” by the “man of sin,” no one would now argue that Jesus changed the decalogue in the least.

“AM I MY BROTHER'S KEEPER?”

By S. M. Spicer

The scene in which this language was uttered forms a most striking preface to the dark annals of a sin-cursed race. Indeed, it seems as if the first out-speaking or manifestation of fallen human nature, descended at one leap to the darkest depths of crime, comprehending at once almost the whole catalogue of human folly and wickedness.
When envy was permitted to enter the bosom of the first murderer, he probably had no idea of the darker links of crime which were to follow in the chain. He thought not how soon that bitter hatred would spring up which dealt the murderous blow. And, next, what a fearful falsehood! as he said “I know not” when God called to him, “Where is Abel, thy brother?” Thinking to hide the truth from God, how little he knew of the character of that all-wise, holy Being! Next follows the bold, insulting question, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” as much as to say, You have no right to ask me such a question. When we look over the astonishing features of Cain’s crimes, we wonder at God’s forbearance, and that he did not at once blot out the life of the vile offender.
But we have introduced this chain of crimes for the purpose of considering at this time the last item as given in the narrative, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” Cain’s purpose in this question was not only to conceal the terrible crime committed, but to ignore all responsibility of obligation toward his brother. This seems comparatively the smallest item among his crimes; yet the principle involved lies at the foundation of the second great command of the law, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” A recognition of the specific duties herein required forms the basis of the social compact, and every failure to meet individual obligation and responsibility tends to loosen the bonds and interrupt the harmony of society. It was an all-wise God who fully understood the nature and relations of his creatures, who announced the laws by which they should be governed; and his omniscient eye, noting not only the outward act but the inner motive, can easily determine the character and desert of every individual.
But practically on this question, when and how do we virtually ask, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” We answer: In our own family circle, when we show unkindness to any member, or even indifference to what is necessary to his welfare and happiness. In the neighborhood, when, scrambling to make every surrounding circumstance contribute to our personal interest or gratification, we forget or disregard the rights of all around us. In the church, when we see a brother or sister falter or turn aside to the ways of sin, and neglect to kindly warn of danger and entreat to return to righteousness. In our listlessness, when we are called upon as God’s stewards to use every talent he has given us, to assist in giving bread of life to every hungry, thirsting soul, and to hold up the light of truth, till it illumines the darkest corners of the earth.
We ask this question in our lives of indifference, as we mingle day by day with the multitude traveling on their thoughtless way. How seldom we even think of the eternal consequences pending while that giddy throng is drifting, by course of influences, through the devious paths of sin on, on toward the vortex of ruin! “Am I my brother’s keeper,” that I should be interested to notice his condition, to speak a warning word, to point out his danger, or to kindly persuade him to choose a better life and its glorious rewards? In the busy walks of life, how many cross our path all unthinking, if not ignorant, of the better way, and soon after, perhaps, suddenly drop into eternity unprepared, unwarned, when perhaps a transient word from our lips might have been blessed to the saving of a soul from death?
“Am I my brother’s keeper?” says the employer in the various manufactories of our land while the busy laborers toil on, and he knows comparatively nothing of their homes or homeless condition. Often, some one may be sent adrift by trivial circumstances, and be compelled to seek from place to place the means of subsistence, again and again repulsed, meeting not one kind inquiry or word of encouragement. Who knows or thinks how many, thus disheartened by neglect or injustice, may have been swept down into the common current of destruction? How many fill drunkards’ graves because a brother did not care to warn or keep him from the first temptation! How many of the worst criminals might trace back their dark pathway of sin to a time when, with heart and hand yet unstained, they failed to find a “brother’s keeper”! When the books are opened at last, what fearful records will reveal the neglect and unfaithfulness of those who, all along time’s history, have said, “Am I my brother’s keeper?”—S. M. Spicer.

CHRIST'S COMING WILL BE LITERAL.

By Wm. Penniman

MANY of the so-called divines of the day attempt to prove that there will be no literal coming of the Saviour. A doctor of divinity with whom I am acquainted attempts to overthrow the true meaning of Acts 1 : 11, by claiming that the Greek word tropon means not manner, but character. So when the angels said, “Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven,” they did not mean that he would come literally, but spiritually, with the same character. This position amounts to nothing. This expression is pointless and without meaning, if you undertake to spiritualize it so as to get rid of the literal coming of Christ. By using the word “character” instead of the word “manner,” he undertakes to overthrow the literality of the whole text.
The primary meaning of tropon, as given in Greenfield’s Greek Testament, is mode, manner, way. It is also thus defined in Liddell and Scott’s Greek Lexicon. Both of these authors give character as one of the definitions, but as they do not give it as the primary sense of the word, we are not bound to accept it, especially as it does not harmonize with the true sense of the text.
Yet even admitting that the word means character, what is the great difference? What was the character of the Saviour’s ascent into heaven? or what characterized it?—Literality. He ascended up into heaven bodily, and a cloud received him out of the sight of those who gazed upon him. Now what will be the character of his second coming? or what will characterize that event?—Literality. “Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him.” Rev. 1 : 7.
Examining the text in question more carefully; notice that it reads: “This same Jesus.” The angels doubtless knew that some would not believe in his personal coming, and that some doctors of divinity, in the last days, would write and preach against it; hence the forcible language they used to encourage and comfort the disciples.
“Yes,” says the objector, “it is the same Jesus, but his coming is not the same. He does not come visibly to the human eye; he comes spiritually to reign in the hearts of his people.” This is certainly a spiritual manner of getting rid of the teachings of the text. We would ask if Christ’s ascension into heaven was simply of a spiritual character, or was it literal? If it was literal, then we must look for a literal coming; for the text reads, “This same Jesus shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.” It plainly follows, then, that if his ascent into heaven was personal, visible, and consequently literal, as he was seen by literal eyes, and a cloud received him out of their sight, then the same Jesus, no substitute or deception like the appearance of Samuel to Saul, but the real Jesus, who was on earth doing his Father’s will, who was crucified, and whom Thomas handled, will again come to earth.
If he is to so come in like manner, his coming again will be visible and literal, and as a cloud received him out of their sight, so he will be seen coming in a cloud. “And they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.” Matt. 24 : 30. “And ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.” Mark 14 : 62. “If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself.” John 14 : 3. “For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet of God.” 1 Thess. 4 : 16. See also 2 Thess. 1 : 7; Titus 2 : 13; 1 John 3 : 2.
Have we not abundance of proof that his coming will be literal? Then instead of crying: “My Lord delayeth his coming,” or will not come at all, or if he does, it will be a spiritual coming, let us believe that his coming is near, and prepare for it, and for the things that are coming upon the earth.—Wm. Penniman.

A Bad Life

A BAD LIFE.—Wilmot, the infidel, when dying, laid his trembling, emaciated hand upon the sacred volume, and exclaimed solemnly, and with, unwonted energy, “The only objection against this book is a bad life!”

WHERE IS MY HEART?

By R. F. C.

Have I a treasure in heaven? My heart is with my treasure. Where is my heart? Are my affections on things above? or are the things of earth first and foremost in my mind? Am I planning how I may work for God and my fellow-men? Is the advancement of the cause of God in the world my leading object? or is my mind absorbed in plans to accumulate worldly wealth? If I will examine my waking thoughts, I may discover their tendency. Am I so pressed with worldly business and thoughts of other things that I have no time for this careful and prayerful examination? Alas! then, where is my heart? Am I more anxious to increase my possessions than to use what I have in the cause of God? Do I earnestly desire a part in the work of God? Is it my meat to do the will of God, and help in the cause of human salvation?
Let us be sure, my brethren, in regard to where our interest is. The chaff will surely be sifted from the wheat and blown away. God knows where our affections are, if we do not. We may set them on things above, we may have a part in the work of the Lord in the closing message of the gospel. Let us make this the great and all-important object. Let us be more anxious to use our talents of influence, of ability, of means, in the cause of truth, while we have the opportunity, than we are to increase our worldly wealth. Brother, sister, where is your heart? R. F. C.

Loving God and Enemies

BLESSED is he who loveth God, and his friend in God, and his enemies for God.—St. Augustine.

Be Charitable Before Wealth

By Sir Thomas Browne

BE charitable before wealth makes thee covetous, and lose not the glory of the mite. If riches increase, let thy mind hold pace with them; and think it not enough to be liberal, but munificent.—Sir Thomas Browne.

A COVENANT BY SACRIFICE.

By R. F. C.

The work of human redemption and salvation is a work of sacrifice. Christ has made the great sacrifice, and he bids us take up the cross and follow him. And unless we do this, he assures us that we cannot be his disciples. Therefore, when the great gathering day comes, the command is, “Gather my saints together unto me; those that have made a covenant with me by sacrifice.” Ps. 50: 5. The saints—those who will be gathered when the angels are sent forth to gather the elect—are such as have made a covenant with God by sacrifice.
A sacrifice costs something. David said he would not offer a sacrifice to God which cost him nothing. I remember hearing the question raised, in a conversation between two ministers, whether anything could be properly called a sacrifice except the slaying of an offering. This is not its only scriptural sense. It is used otherwise in both Testaments. “The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.” Ps. 51: 17. “But to do good and to communicate forget not; for with such sacrifices God is well pleased.” Heb. 13: 16. When the Philippians sent of their goods to supply the necessaries of life to the apostle Paul, he declared their action to be “an odor of a sweet smell, a sacrifice acceptable, well pleasing to God.”
Now we have the opportunity to offer sacrifices to God equally acceptable. We can serve the cause of God, blessing and saving men, by the use of those things which he has put in our hands. It may cost us some self-denial to surrender to God what he has intrusted to our care as stewards. He gives us our living out of his goods; but we are apt to think we need all we have and more. We are little disposed, naturally, to make a sacrifice. If we had an abundance, a thousand times more than we could use, how liberal we would be! This would not be a sacrifice. The thought is deceptive. The person that has a great abundance is no more inclined to be liberal; and if he was, he would know little of real sacrifice. For what purpose was the account of the poor widow and her two mites put upon record? Was it not to teach us to “trust in the Lord, and do good”?
Is the reader making a covenant with God by sacrifice? Some have for years rejoiced that God has given them the truth. It has come to them by sacrifice—the sacrifice of the Son of God, and a sacrifice on the part of those whom God has used as instruments—and they have not yet learned that God requires them to make a sacrifice to give the truth to others, that they may be saved. They talk of following Christ, yet are making no sacrifice, even of giving of their abundance to save their fellow-men!
Be not deceived. “If any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.” Some think they are too poor to give even a small amount of means in the cause. In such cases it will often be found that they are not too poor to use means for useless and hurtful indulgences. They find means to indulge the appetite with those things which are neither food nor drink, but are an injury instead of a benefit. They find means to make a costly offering to perverted appetite. Can they not do something in the cause of God and perishing humanity? Can they not at least sacrifice these idols? This would be something, if they did no more. But if they would cease to sacrifice to idols, they would have something with which to serve God. Let us each ask ourselves, Are we making a covenant with God by sacrifice?
R. F. C.
Continue reading: A LAW FOR RESTING ON SUNDAY