Review and Herald, Vol. 53, No. 23. (6/5/1879)

Review and Herald

Jun 5, 1879

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jun 5, 1879

THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL.

By Dudley Marvin Canright

ELD. D. M. CANRIGHT.

BISHOP LAW.

In 1755 another bishop in England startled the Episcopal church with his views on the state of the dead. He advocated the sleep of the dead, taking the same views that John Milton had before him. Of his book the historian says:—

“Bishop Law’s Appendix to his Considerations on the Theory of Religion, etc., made its first appearance in the year 1755. In this Appendix were examined, under several heads, all or most of the texts where the words soul or spirit occurred in the Scriptures, and the significations of them in the original languages explained from the several contexts to which they belonged. The cause of the conscious intermediate state was so shaken from its very foundations by the scriptural testimonies brought together in this Appendix, that numbers of its partisans ran in a hurry to lend a hand to support the tottering edifice.”

About this time William Kenrick, Dublin, put forth a book entitled, “The Grand Question Debated, or an Essay to Prove the Soul of Man is not, neither can it be, Immortal; the Whole Founded upon the Arguments of Locke, Newton, Pope, Burnet, Watts,” etc.

We simply refer to these books that the reader may see that the doctrine of the sleep of the dead and the mortality of the soul has had a history, and that it has had plenty of advocates all along. So many books upon this subject would never have been published had there not been a large demand for them; and there would have been no such demand for them unless there had been many believers in the doctrines thus defended.

In 1757, J. Robinson issued a book disproving the immortality of the soul.

In 1759, there was published in England, in three volumes, “Goadby’s Bible.” The editors of this work, in their notes, advocated eternal life only in Christ, and destruction for all the finally impenitent.

Samuel Bourn, of Norwich, England, in four volumes of sermons printed in 1760, argued the doctrine of the destruction, in the lake of fire, of all the incorrigibly wicked. He was a faithful and pious minister.

In 1765, Mr. Blackburn, A. M., archdeacon of Cleveland, England, issued his well-known and valuable book, “An Historical View of the Controversy concerning an Intermediate State.” In this he gives an account of the various works written on this question, from the Reformation till his own time. He reviewed and answered the main arguments advanced to sustain the immortality of the soul. He was a zealous and able advocate of the mortality of man, sleep of the dead, etc. In 1772, he published the second edition of his book, which has had a good circulation, and has given much help to the cause of truth.

JOSEPH PRIESTLEY.

In 1777, Joseph Priestley, a very learned philosopher and divine, wrote two volumes, “Disquisitions Relating to Matter and Spirit,” in which he discussed the relation of matter and spirit, and maintained the sleep of the soul in death. Being a profound scholar and a vigorous writer, and his writings having an extensive circulation, his influence in favor of the sleep of the dead was widely felt. The following sketch of his life is epitomized from the American Encyclopedia:—

He was born in England, in 1733, of Calvinistic parents. He learned Hebrew in his holidays, and with little instruction made good progress in the Chaldaic, Syriac, Arabic, French, Italian, and German. From his youth, he was naturally religious. He was a great student all his life. He was minister first to a congregation in Suffolk, next in Cheshire, and in 1761 he was chosen professor of belles lettres in Warrington Academy. He was an intimate friend of Dr. Frankland, by whose advice he wrote the history of electrical discoveries, which had a wide circulation. In 1768, he was pastor of a large church in Leeds. He received the title of LL. D. from the University of Edinburgh. In 1772, he received a medal from the Royal Society for his philosophical discoveries. His name as a man of science was now honored throughout Europe. He traveled upon the continent, and was introduced to the most celebrated scholars of the age. In 1780, he was pastor of the congregation in Birmingham. He wrote extensively in favor of the American Revolution. In 1794 he settled in America, where he became the intimate friend of John Adams and other prominent men. He was remarkable for his soundness of reason, for patience and zeal in public life, and for kindness in domestic relations. He was one of the first scholars and philosophers of his age. His writings embrace many volumes, which are still published and read extensively.

Thus the reader will see that the doctrine we advocate has been supported by many of the ripest scholars and greatest philosophers of the Christian age.

In 1772, at Leipzig, J. E. Walter published a book in German, maintaining the destruction of the wicked.

In 1789, at Newcastle, Edward Holmes wrote a book to “prove the materiality of the soul, by reason and Scripture.”

George Clarke, London, 1792, in a book of 284 pages, gave a “Vindication of the Honor of God; in a Scriptural Refutation of the Doctrine of Endless Misery and Universalism.”

This doctrine had found many believers and able advocates in America before this time, though it had not attracted so much attention as in England and on the continent. In 1795, an anonymous author published a book of 141 pages, in New York, under the title of “Observations,” in which he advocated the sleep of the dead.

John Marsom, in 1794, in two volumes issued at London, vigorously refuted the restorationism of Dr. Chauncy, and maintained the destruction of the lost, who would never receive immortality, but utterly die. A second edition of his works was called for, and issued.

EXTENT OF THE DOCTRINE AT THE PRESENT TIME.

Coming down to the present century, we find Bishop Timothy Kendrick, in two volumes of sermons issued at London, 1805, devoting sermons two, three, and four to proving that the soul of man dies with the body, and is restored to life at the resurrection and the second advent of the Lord. This was a bold effort for a bishop of the Episcopal church, but the reader will observe that several other bishops and high dignitaries of that church have publicly taught that doctrine. But perhaps no man has dealt a heavier blow against the immortality of the soul than the eminent and learned Dr. Whately, archbishop of Dublin. His popularity as a scholar, and his high position as an ecclesiastical dignitary, have secured to his writings both attention and a wide circulation. His work entitled, “A View of the Scripture Revelations Concerning a Future State,” evidently made many converts to his faith; for it was soon followed by many other books from different ministers in England, advocating the same views.

In 1805, Robert Forsyth, of Edinburgh, in a work on Moral Science, advocated no future immortality and endless life, except for the good alone, who render themselves worthy of it.

A “Member of the Church of England,” in 1817, in a work of 240 pages, printed in London, entitled, “Eternal Punishment proved to be not Suffering, but Privation; and Immortality dependent on Spiritual Regeneration,” etc., set forth the better view of man’s nature, and the destiny of evil.

In 1834, Dr. John Thomas advocated, in this country, in a journal called “The Apostolic Advocate,” the above doctrines, and that neither Adam nor his posterity possessed immortal souls. Immortality was our Lord’s gift, and evil souls would die.

The next year these views were presented in a volume entitled, “Christ our Life,” published anonymously by a clergyman of the church of Ireland, at Dublin; author unknown.

Rev. Reginald Courtenay, D. D., a rector of the church of England, in a London volume of 438 pages, ably written and set forth in 1843, maintained the sleep of the soul, and argued against its natural immortality. A second edition came out in 1857.

This brings us to a time in the history of this controversy in England when these views began to spread rapidly through all parts of the kingdom. Several books in each year have been issued, advocating in some way the mortality of man, the sleep of the dead, and the annihilation of the wicked. Tracts, pamphlets, volumes, and other publications have been many. We could not even name the different authors who have accepted these views. Mention may be made of a few of the more prominent ones.

Rev. H. H. Dobney, an able Baptist minister of England, first published his “Scripture Doctrine of Future Punishment,” in 1844. A second edition was struck off in the United States in 1856. He maintained the mortality of man, his sleep in death, and the destruction of the wicked.

About the same time, Edward White, Congregational minister at Hereford, England, put forth a volume in defense of the same doctrine, entitled, “Life in Christ.”

Ministers in Edinburgh, and in Bristol, and in Plymouth, have spoken out boldly and well in defense of the unpopular doctrine of the mortality of man, sleep of the dead, and destruction of the wicked. J. Panton Ham has done good execution this way. A distinguished advocate of this doctrine has appeared in the Right Honorable Sir James Stephen, Prof. of History, Cambridge, England. Advocates of this doctrine are now springing up all over Great Britain. One paper, The Rainbow, published by Wm. Leask, D. D., 34 Sundringham Road, Kingsland, London, and another, The Bible Echo, Hankow Villa, Birkbeck Road, Leyton Stone, E. London, advocate this long-neglected truth. Also, in Scotland, The Messenger, published by W. M. Strang, Glasgow, does the same.

In a late article, the English correspondent of The Presbyterian, Philadelphia, Pa., says:

“There is, and has been for some time, a good deal of discussion among a limited number of both churchmen and non-conformists on the awful question of everlasting punishment, and it is gradually revealing opinions and arguments which are sure to do much mischief. It has come to pass that the church of England and the Congregational body have men of mark who hold that the wicked and impenitent will not be consigned to endless torment; but will be utterly extinguished and literally destroyed.” He then names several ministers who hold these views. Says The Advance, a Methodist paper, “The doctrine of the annihilation of the wicked is receiving increased attention in Great Britain and in America.”

An editorial in The Christian World (Congregationalist), London, England, 1868, says:—

“The many books and pamphlets that have been published of late upon the subject of the future punishment of the wicked confirm the conviction, to which we gave expression a few months ago, that a great number of the most devout and thoughtful persons in our churches are deeply exercised regarding it, and are anxiously desirous of ascertaining the real teaching of the Holy Scripture thereupon. . . . It is not a little startling to find the extent to which this opinion is spreading in our evangelical churches. Several well-known ministers, whose orthodoxy on other points is as firmly fixed as ever, have ventured to brave the opposition, sure to arise, by writing boldly and earnestly in support of this new reading of the many declarations of the New Testament, to the effect that life and immortality come only by accepting the gospel of Christ. These names include a Baptist, the Rev. William Miall, Congregationalist, the Rev. E. White, Rev. Dr. Leask, and many others; and it is stated that one of the rising leaders of this section of non-conformists is about to issue a book on the same side, that will certainly arouse the attention of the whole church to which he belongs. Of the Episcopalian clergy, quite a host have declared themselves on this side, of late. The Rev. William Ker, M. A., Vicar of Tipton, has published a very elaborate argument; and more recently the Rev. Samuel Minton, M. A., minister of Eaton Chapel, Eaton Square, has penned a powerful letter to Mr. Robt. Baxter.”

Rev. Henry Constable, late prebendary of Cork, Ireland, has lately published two excellent volumes on the subject, one on Future Punishment, and one on Hades. In the last ten years, the light upon this subject has been spreading so rapidly that now there are believers raised up, missionaries sent out, and churches established in England, Scotland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Germany, France, Switzerland, Italy, and Egypt. So the good work goes forward.

NOT ADJUSTABLE.

By A. Smith

The obligation of the fourth commandment of the decalogue is believed by many, in consideration of the supposed greater magnitude of the work of redemption as compared with that of creation, to have been transferred to the first day of the week,—on which Christ is said to have finished the work of redemption by rising from the dead,—ever after to be observed in its septenary order as a memorial of that event. But to this proposition objections of considerable weight are apparent:

1. The Sabbath according to the command must be preceded by six days of labor, which was not true of the resurrection day, the one preceding it being the seventh in septenary order from the creation, and termed by the Holy Spirit “the Sabbath according to the commandment.” And since no provision has been made in the Scriptures for two Sabbaths in juxtaposition and opposed in their fundamental principles, we conclude that such an anomaly can only be located where it is placed by the well-known couplet,—

“Next day after never, When two Sabbaths meet together.”

2. But if it be urged that the law was abrogated at the cross, and that the day preceding

that of the resurrection was not therefore the Sabbath, then a period of one and one-eighth days intervened between the crucifixion and the so-called Christian Sabbath, for which no enactment of the Lawgiver has made any provision, and we cannot therefore exercise faith in the supposed change of the Sabbath law. If it could be proved that Christ wrought in the work of redemption just six days prior to that of his resurrection, and that his resurrection constituted no part of that work, it would relieve the question of this superabundant time, and overlap ante-crucifixion time four and seven-eighths days, thus making the amendment or re-enactment of the law antedate its supposed repeal. But if the work of redemption was not limited to the days in question, then no memorial of that event can rest upon any septenary period; and not otherwise limited, it could be as well celebrated on any day of the week, or month, or year.

3. There are three reasons adduced in the commandment for the observance of the Sabbath, none of which can ever be true of the first day of the week.

a. God labored six and only six days next preceding the Sabbath or seventh day. This is not true of the work of redemption, which extends from the fall of man when the promised Seed of the woman purchased for Adam a reprieve and inspired the assurance of his final restoration to all that he had lost by sin, to the time when every creature in Heaven, and earth, and sea, will ascribe glory to God and the Lamb.

b. He rested the seventh day, which Christ did not do on the first day, as he rose from the dead (a part of redemption’s work) on that day, and journeyed into the country with two of his disciples. Strange proceeding for one who would institute a new Sabbath, superior in its sacred associations to the old time-honored and God-instituted day of rest.

c. He hallowed it, or set it apart for holy uses. Not a word of proof that God or Christ ever so hallowed the first day can be adduced from the Scriptures.

For a great length of time, Christians have unwittingly observed as the Sabbath a day that had its origin in heathen mythology, was engrafted into the dogmas of papal faith, and transmitted to Protestants, holding in solution, as it were, the corruptions of both systems. Should Christians who accept the Bible as their only rule of faith and practice any longer respect an institution of such questionable authority? Should they not rather accept those solemn and appropriate memorials which Christ and his honored apostles instituted as mementoes of the Redeemer’s death, burial, and resurrection? “And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you; this do in remembrance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.” Luke 22:19, 20. “For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord’s death till he come.” 1 Cor. 11:26. “In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace.” Eph. 1:7. “Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death; that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.” Rom. 6:4.

How solemn, forcible, and appropriate are these memorials of the grandest scenes in the work of redemption! Instituted by Christ, and honored by his apostles, they compel the respect of every child of God; but the so-called Christian Sabbath has not the sanction of so great authority.

Reader, you who accept the Bible as of divine authority, if you attempt to mutilate God’s law, and adjust it in its application to the sanctification of a heathen festival day, how can you answer him in the Judgment, or what plea can you make in extenuation of your disregard of his own appointed Sabbath? Weigh the subject in the light of eternity, and let no mercenary or selfish motives prompt you in making a decision.

A. SMITH.

The Bright Side.

By L. A. Cartwright

Beyond the shadows and the gloom, Beyond the portals of the tomb, There is a bright side. While here life's sunbeams are so rare, Here is so much of toil and care, Where is the bright side?

It's easy thus to tell another, Be cheerful and rejoice, brother, “Look on the bright side.” But when the trouble falls on you, Not so easy a thing to do, To see the bright side.

A heartfelt look of sympathy, With words and deeds for company, Make a bright side. And those whose own sins are forgiven, May point the weary ones to Heaven, Where there's a bright side.

L. A. CARTWRIGHT.

THE DIFFERENCE.

By L. F. Davis

WHEN the Pharisees saw that the Saviour sat at meat with publicans and sinners, they said to his disciples, “Why eateth your Master with publicans and sinners?” When Jesus heard this question he replied, “They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick.”

Was the Saviour guided by the example of the wealthy and wise? Did he select a certain number from the aristocracy and say, Because these pass the poor, the vile, and the sick by on the other side, so must I, else I shall not gain favor among them? On the contrary, his words were, “I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.” Let us take his example into our midst at the present day, and contrast it with our course as professed followers of him. Shall we, like the wealthy Mrs. B. and Mrs. H. refuse to call upon Mrs. D.? Shall we shun her because in her youth she was led into sin? Shall we pass her coolly by as if from fear of contamination? Would it not be better to say, as did the Saviour when the adulterous woman was brought to him, “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.”

“And while the lamp holds out to burn, The vilest sinner may return.”

Christ left his seat in glory, and came to this sinful world to seek and save even the chief of sinners.

“Since ‘who-so-will’ is bid to come, Shall we not say, there yet is room?”

“Let our own altar furnish coals, To kindle light in other souls; And from our lamp a light be given, To help them find the way to Heaven.” L. F. DAVIS.

SUNDAY DESECRATION.

By E. Lanphear

Many very zealous men are at present worrying about the desecration of the Sunday and Sunday laws in and about New York. The New York Sabbath Committee, so called, are making inquiry as to what shall or can be done in order to save Sunday desecration, and there is now and then an editor that speaks out about this wonderful violation of the law of God; while most of them continue to issue their Sunday dailies. The editor of the Daily Witness claims to issue that paper upon a strictly moral basis, and attempts to reprove other editors for Sunday labor; while he claims that they do no business upon Sunday, save making up religious reports, etc., and quotes the fourth commandment to sustain his position. What wonderful mistakes men make in their zeal to accomplish good in the world. Are they honest and conscientious as they pretend? Can their consciences be void of offense toward God and man while they thus press the observance of Sunday as a Sabbath by quotations from the decalogue? Certainly the fourth commandment refers to no other day but the seventh day as the Sabbath. Is it because they are so blind that they will not see? Is their zeal according to knowledge? How can they expect to reform men where there is no transgression of the law of God. God's word plainly teaches that “where no law is, there is no transgression;” and certainly there is no law of God for a Sunday Sabbath, neither is there an example of Christ or of the apostles ever observing it as a Sabbath, nor of their ever applying the word Sabbath to the first day of the week. Are they not “blind leaders of the blind”? “Search the Scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life.”

E. LANPHEAR.

Plainfield, N. J.

CONVERSION

By Mrs. B. Ayers

The conversion of the soul from sin to a pure and holy life is a progressive work, a succession of steps upward from a sin degraded state. It is the surrender of one's self to God as “clay in the hands of the potter,” to be molded into a vessel fit for the Master's service, or as gold subjected to the refining process till the dross is consumed and we reflect the image of Christ.

As fallen beings, our desires and inclinations are at variance with God's will. We grope in the darkness of sin, indifferent to the claims of God upon us, intent only upon self-interest, and filled with self-love. We are “aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world.” Eph. 2:12. “When we were in the flesh, the motions of sin, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.” All may not come under the description of Paul in Rom. 1, nor like Saul have been guilty of breathing out “threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord.” Yet “all have sinned,” and through sin are subject to the penalty of a broken law, which is death.

God's law, the great rule of right, the test of character by which we must be judged, convicts us of sin, and shows us to be guilty before God. Convinced of sin, the awakened conscience seeks a remedy. In the light of God's law we see ourselves dwarfed, deformed, and degraded by sin. Our former self-confidence is gone, and deep sorrow fills the soul. We cry out, like the publican, “God be merciful to me a sinner.” We search with humble, contrite hearts to know how we may escape from the depths of evil into which we have fallen. The desired instruction is found in the word of God: “He that covereth his sins shall not prosper; but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy.” Prov. 28:13. “Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease to do evil; learn to do well.” Isaiah 1:16, 17. “Seek ye the Lord while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near: let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.” Isa. 55:6; 7.

Here are several steps to be taken in the new way; viz., confession of sins, forsaking them, ceasing to do evil, learning to do well, forsaking evil thoughts, and returning unto the Lord. When we do this, we have the blessed assurance that our God will have mercy upon us, and abundantly pardon. “Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord; though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.” Isa. 1:18. “Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price.” Isa. 55:1.

But how are we to come? “Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.” Matt. 7:7. We must have faith in God and in his promises; for “without faith it is impossible to please him; for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.” Heb. 11:6.

Is it the will of God that we should be saved? “As I live, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?” Eze. 33:11. “If we ask anything according to his will, he heareth us; and if we know that he hear us, whatsoever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we desired of him.” 1 John 5:14, 15. “Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them.” Mark 11:24.

Do we earnestly desire salvation from sin? Are we heartily sorry for the sins we have committed? Then, as it is God's will that we should be saved, and as we desire salvation, we may seek his forgiveness, believe, and be admitted into his loving favor.

When we have left the broad road, have turned our feet into the way of life, have entered into covenant with the people of God, and taken a public stand for the truth, we soon become conscious that we have an active foe to encounter, and many battles to fight against old besetments and former bad habits. We find our condition described by Paul in Rom. 7, and with him we cry out, “Who shall deliver me from the body of this death?” The loathsome carcass of sin clinging to us holds us down, and the savor of our attempted good works is so mingled with the stench from this body of sin that they are judged to be evil.

And now we resolve to follow the instruction of Paul in Rom. 12:1, 2, by presenting our bodies upon the altar as a “living sacrifice.” We take up the prayer of David: “Hide thy face from my sins, and blot out all mine iniquities. Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me.” “As the hart panteth after the water brooks, so panteth my soul after thee, O God.” In earnest faith we cry, and the Lord hears us. He takes our feet from the miry clay, and places them upon a rock; and he puts a new song into our mouth, even praises to our God.

In the gift of his Son, God has made ample provision that whosoever should believe on him might not perish, but have everlasting life. “Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God.” 1 John 3:1. It is our privilege to be heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ, to an inheritance incorruptible, undefiled, and that fadeth not away. In the strength of God we may go on unto perfection, endeavoring to come to the unity of the faith and the bond of perfectness in Christ, till we shall reflect his image, and shall see him as he is.

MRS. B. AYERS.

WRITING LETTERS.

By Eliza H. Morton

As those connected with V. M. societies have many letters to write, a few words upon this subject through the columns of the REVIEW may not be out of place.

It requires considerable skill to open and conduct a correspondence with strangers. It is not well to be too hasty in regard to introducing doctrinal points into letters. It is generally the better plan to let tracts and papers do the doctrinal teaching until questions are asked by the readers; then, explanations can be made and earnest appeals written. Letters should be stamped with the individual character of the writer. Thoughts should be penned as they would fall from the lips in conversation. The studied elegance of a rhetorical essay is not appropriate for epistolary writing. Neatness and correctness should be cultivated, and combined with a natural, simple, free and easy style.

The first great thing to be accomplished is to gain the respect and confidence of the individual with whom a correspondence is opened. Having gained this ground, it is easy to find avenues that lead to the heart. Character is often strikingly revealed by letters, especially when addressed to those whom the writers regard as friends. The true feelings of the soul will creep into the words written, and often an unguarded sentence will reveal whole chapters of the inner life. The true missionary will watch for these opportunities, and be inspired by them to write tender, sympathizing, loving words that cannot fail to touch the heart and melt it to tenderness. The highest results cannot be accomplished unless God's Spirit accompanies the effort.

There is danger of becoming discouraged in this branch of the missionary work, for the reason that many letters are sent forth and few answers received. It is often the case that individuals begin the work with much zeal, but after mailing some twenty or forty letters and receiving only a few encouraging answers, their interest abates, and they cease to labor. This is unwise, as I shall endeavor to show. Many letters sent out by V. M. workers are addressed to a class of people who are not accustomed to writing letters. Many kind-hearted, honest people are oppressed with household cares, and are averse to handling the pen, and therefore neglect to answer the letters they receive. The following extract expresses the feelings of many mothers:—

“I received your kind letter a long, long time ago, and I hope you will pardon me for neglecting to answer it. It is so great a task for me to write that I never write a letter unless I am obliged to; but I do enjoy receiving them. I wish I could have one every day.”

It is often the case that these busy, tired

mothers read and re-read and derive much benefit from the letters they receive, although they feel incompetent to answer them. Several instances of this kind have come to my notice of late.

Letters that are not kindly received at first, sometimes work out good results in time.

Dear sisters, God knows that it tries your patience to work on day by day and see no fruit, but eternity will reveal marvelous things. Perhaps you may not be permitted to gather many sheaves in this life, but remember that unselfish deeds will be rewarded in the hereafter. The lines you pen in weakness may melt many hearts to tenderness. Continue to sow the seeds of kindness, and water the soil with tears and prayers, and God will give the increase.

ELIZA H. MORTON.

Allen's Corner, Me.

SAVED OR LOST.

By N. A. Porter

SAVED or lost! Which shall it be with us? Reader, this is an important question, one that has a direct bearing upon our eternal welfare. Shall we have a home in the kingdom of God with the saints, or shall we be destroyed with the devil and his followers?

Let us compare the final condition of the two. If we are saved, what awaits us? Let us look forward to the time when the Lord comes to take his people home. The graves are opened, and the righteous dead come forth, not as they died, but relieved from the marks of the curse; “then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.” 1 Thess. 4:17. A home in the kingdom of God is then to be shared with angels, with the Son of God, to see him face to face, to converse with him, to live with him through all eternity, where there is no sorrow, sickness, or death. Those who are saved will have the privilege of eating of the tree of life, of walking the streets of the new Jerusalem, and of living through all eternity on the earth made new. Eternity! The mind is unable to grasp its meaning; it is lost in wonder.

But if we are lost, what then? Again let us look forward to the time of the resurrection of the wicked. The dead are raised, but their appearance is the same as when they died,—no such glorious change as in the resurrection of the righteous. You can see the marks of sin upon them. There is the evil eye, the look of malice, and all the evil traits of character which they bore during life. Now what is their end? Are they caught up into the air as the righteous were? No, far from it. But fire is rained down upon them from heaven, and they are destroyed forever; for “the wages of sin is death.”

Now, dear reader, which will you choose? To serve God for a short time here, enjoy his blessings, and have a home in his kingdom? or will you walk in the path of sin and be lost at last? Time is short. Life is uncertain. Let us choose the right way, and work out our salvation with fear and trembling.

N. A. PORTER.

FOUR SERMONS.

By The Prophet Ezekiel

BY THE PROPHET EZEKIEL.

SERMON I.—TO PREACHERS.

So thou, O son of man, I have set thee a watchman unto the house of Israel; therefore thou shalt hear the word at my mouth and warn them from me. When I say unto the wicked, O wicked man, thou shalt surely die, if thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his ways, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand. Nevertheless, if thou warn the wicked of his way to turn from it, if he do not turn from his way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul. Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live. Turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways, for why will ye die, O house of Israel!

SERMON II.—TO CHRISTIANS.

Therefore, thou son of man, say unto the children of thy people, The righteousness of the righteous shall not deliver him in the day of his transgression. As for the wickedness of the wicked, he shall not fall thereby in the day that he turneth from his wickedness; neither shall the righteous be able to live for his righteousness in the day that he sinneth. When I shall say to the righteous that he shall surely live; if he trust to his own righteousness, and commit iniquity, all his righteousness shall not be remembered; but for his iniquity that he hath committed, he shall die for it.

SERMON III.—TO SINNERS.

Again, when I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; if he turn from his sin and do that which is lawful and right; if the wicked restore the pledge, give again that he had robbed, walk in the statutes of life, without committing iniquity, he shall surely live, he shall not die. None of his sins that he hath committed shall be mentioned unto him. He hath done that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live.

SERMON IV.—TO OUR WISE MEN.

Yet the children of thy people say: The way of the Lord is not equal; but as for them their way is not equal. When the righteous turneth from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, he shall even die thereby; but if the wicked turn from his wickedness, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall live thereby. Yet ye say the way of the Lord is not equal. O ye house of Israel, I will judge you every one after his ways. Chap. 33 : 7–20.

Voltaire's Remains.

When he died at Paris, in May, 1778, the church there refused sepulture to its arch-enemy, and his body was interred at Scellieres, in Champagne. During the revolution the national assembly decreed that Voltaire's remains should be brought to Paris, and they were accordingly deposited in the Pantheon with great pomp, in 1791. Thither, too, presently came the body of Rousseau. One dark night in May, 1814, when the Bourbons were enjoying their own again, some of the faithful, indignant that the bones of such enemies to religion should rest in consecrated ground, threw them pell-mell into a sack, and carried them to a point in the suburbs near Bercy, where there was a large vacant lot belonging to the city. Here a hole had been already dug, and the contents of the sack were shaken into it and covered with quick-lime. The hole was then filled in, and the conspirators trampled down the earth. Voltaire's heart had been saved by a friend, in whose family it remained until 1864. On its then being offered to the government, Napoleon III. decided that it should be placed with the body. On consulting the archbishop of Paris, that functionary suggested the expediency of verifying the actual presence of Voltaire's remains. An investigation followed, and the truth came out. The heart was then placed in the national library, and a portion of the brain appropriated by the surgeon at the autopsy was publicly sold. Its present whereabouts is unknown.

DEUTERONOMY 14 : 21.

By T. B. Rice

Since my connection with the Advent people, my attention has often been directed to the scripture above referred to, which some suppose indicates that God's people may join in the great swine-traffic of the world. After carefully considering the text, I conclude that the animals there referred to are clean, since we find that the only objections God urged against their use was their dying of themselves or being torn of beasts. Lev. 17 : 15. If such were the only objection to their use as food by God's people, it follows that no reference is made to the hog, as some suppose. A clean beast might have been wounded or strangled, causing death. Now it would have been unlawful for that people whom God designated as a peculiar and holy people to eat of such meat. Yet if the animal was not diseased—for we cannot think that God, who is no respecter of persons, would authorize the Jews to dispose of an animal infected with hydrophobia or some other disease calculated to endanger the lives of those using it—it would be good and wholesome food for the heathen, who at that time were accustomed to the use of swine's flesh.

I do not understand that God gave Israel permission to regale the stranger within their gates upon swine's flesh, because they (the Jews) were forbidden to even so much as touch the dead carcass of a hog. Deut. 14 : 8. If they were not allowed to touch the dead carcass of one of those loathsome, filthy creatures, how could they be permitted to serve it upon their tables?

We should be consistent. But when we declaim against the use of swine's flesh, and at the same time keep a few of these animals rolling in the filth of our barnyards to sell to our neighbors, I fail to note the consistency.

But some one is ready to urge that people will have such food, and hence we may just as well share in the speculation as others. To this objection I reply: The saloon keeper, with equal propriety, may use the same logic to justify his nefarious business of selling liquor poison to his neighbors; and if swine's flesh germinates as many dangerous diseases as scientific men claim, I cannot discriminate between the sin of the liquor dealer and the pork dealer.

Brethren, let us "show our faith by our works." Let us banish from our premises those filthy scavengers, and be clean, holy, and pure. T. B. Rice.

Continue reading: WHAT I BELIEVE