Review and Herald, Vol. 34, No. 3. (7/13/1869)

Review and Herald

Jul 13, 1869

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jul 13, 1869

“IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL.”

By R. F. Cottrell

The Baptist Tidings has recently given us a little effusion upon this subject. He makes but slight allusions to the Scriptures, as also to the “inner consciousness of which heathens and old philosophers were susceptible.” This alone he does not think is full and sufficient proof of the doctrine; but in his mind doubtless, as well as in many others, it helps make up the deficiencies of direct revelation on the subject. His expression of it is, “There comes an inbred or unextinguishable voice from within that says, ‘Your whole being cannot die.’” The heathen, even, could not obliterate this voice, and so merged the truth it spoke into the doctrine of the transmigration of souls.

Whence did man first get the idea that he could not die? The serpent said unto the woman, “Ye shall not surely die.” On this Dr. A. Clarke remarks: “The tempter through the nachash, insinuates the impossibility of her dying, as if he had said, God has created thee immortal, thy death therefore is impossible; and God knows this, for as thou livest by the tree of life, so shalt thou get increase of wisdom by the tree of knowledge.” Had the spirit of inspiration given as clear an intimation of the immortality of the soul, there would be less necessity of appealing to the “inner consciousness” of the blind and deluded captives of the first deceiver, for the truth of the doctrine set forth in his first and fatal deception.

In speaking of the text in which Paul says that Christ “hath abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel,” he claims that this life and immortality is something relating to man, that the soul “is to be taken for our essential being;” and then very coolly assumes the separate existence of the soul, and its natural immortality—the very points to be proved, and which languish for want of Bible support—and then infers that the immortality brought to light through the gospel is a glorious immortality, in contradistinction to the natural immortality which all possess independent of the gospel. That it may be seen that we have stated his argument fairly, we give his words:

“This being [the soul] we take as capable of existence separate from the body, and irrespective of the moral quality or condition of that being while in the body. This we designate as natural immortality; that is, the simple power or fact of continued being. In another and still higher sense we speak of a glorious immortality;—this perpetuated existence purified, and glorified in the presence of God. It seems to be this “life and immortality,” and the way and means of fully attaining it, that is brought to light in the gospel.”

Now are not all convinced? It is a fact that the gospel offers immortality to those who seek for it by patient continuance in well doing. It will doubtless be a glorious immortality. But since divine revelation contemplates no other immortality than a glorious one; it has entirely omitted the qualifying term. In the above our friend, instead of appealing to that revelation for proof, has done nothing but to supply its deficiencies. The Bible reveals no immortality to sin.

His closing paragraph we give entire, as follows: “This natural immortality, as already explained, which some deny, is utterly antagonistic to the doctrine of soul-sleeping at death, and the doctrine of the immortality of only those who believe in Christ, or become Christians. This last doctrine is itself controverted by the previous one; for if all the souls of the dead sleep in the grave until the resurrection, then, for that length of time the souls of the righteous are dead, and consequently not immortal. While the sleep of the soul in the grave cannot be true of all, if it is of any, for there are some who never died; then what became of their souls? But Jesus declared the whole matter when he spoke of ‘the God of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob,’ as the God not of the dead, but THE LIVING.”

Soul-sleeping is an invidious term, invented by our opponents, found neither in the Bible nor Webster’s Unabridged. The soul, they seem to think, cannot sleep, and they sometimes say that we believe that the soul sleeps with the body in the grave. Does natural sleep affect only the body? Is the “immortal mind,” as it is called, entirely unaffected by it? We do not hold that the soul is an entity separate from the body, and that the one sleeps with the other. The most frequent use, perhaps, of the term soul in the Bible designates the entire person. If we say of a person, He sleeps, no one asks whether it is his mind or body that sleeps. That sleeps that might be awake. We do not say of a stone, It is asleep.

By a very natural figure death is called a sleep. The righteous “sleep in Jesus.” Where do they sleep? From Dan. xii, 2, we learn that both the righteous and the wicked “sleep in the dust of the earth.” They shall “awake.” They “that are in their graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth.”

Who believes that a person, or soul, becomes immortal on becoming a Christian? We know of no one that holds so. The Christian has the promise of immortality, the sinner has not. One of the ablest defenders of our faith teaches that “this mortal shall put on immortality” at the resurrection of those who “sleep.” 1 Cor. xv, 51–54.

What became of the souls of those who “never died”?! We think from the fact that they never died that they are still alive. There is a slight difference, to say the least, between dying and being taken up alive to God, as Enoch and Elijah were.

But since Jesus “cleared the whole matter” in his controversy with the Sadducees, let us notice his argument. They denied the resurrection of the dead; he affirmed. Taking Moses, in whom they professed faith, for his authority, he formed what we think was a logical argument. 1. God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. 2. He declared himself the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, after they were dead. 3. Therefore they shall live again. Our Lord was not so illogical as to set out to prove the resurrection of the dead and bring out the conclusion that they are now alive, and consequently need no resurrection. Those who never died need no resurrection.

But our friend of the Tidings has “been disgusted with seeing an offer paraded before the public in secular and other papers, made by a very wise and benevolent man,” as he supposes, “of $20 for every passage of Scripture that mentions” the immortality of the soul. He is not positive as to the design of the person, whether it is benevolence, or “to let the world know that he knows that the Bible does not have such an expression in it.” We do not know who has made the offer alluded to; but we will suggest one more possible reason for making it. There are multitudes, who have the Bible upon their shelves, who, from the preaching that they hear, really believe that it abounds in such expressions as immortal souls, never-dying souls, and deathless spirits; and it might be the design of our unknown friend to get such persons to take down the Bible, brush off the dust, and read it for themselves. All lovers of the Bible must admit that this would be a benefit. And as the pocket nerve is extremely sensitive, in these days of the world’s dotage, the offer of $20 might excite some to search for that which they so confidently believe can be so easily found. And we may suppose as a reason for putting it in secular papers, that religious editors might be so disgusted with it, that they would rather let the people remain in ignorance of the Bible, than to publish it. The truth is, neither the expressions alluded to, nor their equivalents, nor the ideas and doctrines they represent in the popular mind, are to be found in the Scriptures.

Would it not be well to read the Bible, believe its teachings, practice its precepts, and discard the fables and doctrines of men which have supplanted it in the public mind? This we are determined to do. R. F. COTTRELL.

NOT KNOWING.

I know not what shall befall me, God hangs a mist o'er my eyes; And so each step in my onward path he makes new scenes to rise, And every joy he sends me, comes as a strange and sweet surprise.

I see not a step before me, as I tread on another year, But the past is still in God's keeping, the future his mercy shall clear; And what looks dark in the distance, may brighten as I draw near—

For perhaps the dreaded future has less bitter than I think; The Lord may sweeten the waters before I stop to drink; Or if Marah must be Marah, he will stand beside its brink.

It may be he has waiting for the coming of my feet, Some gift of such rare blessedness, some joy so strangely sweet, That my lips shall only tremble with the thanks they cannot speak.

Oh, restful, blissful ignorance! 'Tis blessed not to know, It keeps me so still in those arms which will not let me go, And hushes my soul to rest in the bosom that loves me so!

So I go on, not knowing; I would not if I might. I would rather walk in the dark with God, than go alone in the light; I would rather walk with him by faith, than walk alone by sight.

My heart shrinks back from trials which the future may disclose, Yet I never had a sorrow but what the dear Lord chose; So I send the coming tears back with the whispered word, “He knows.” —Congregationalist.

ENOCH.

By George I. Butler

The case of Enoch is naturally suggestive of thought to Advent believers. About one thousand years after the creation of the world, a man ascended up to God without tasting death; with one exception the only case on record during six thousand years. Hundreds of millions have come upon the stage of life, been smitten down, and returned again to dust. The funeral train, the hearse, and the grave, have ever been familiar objects to the race of man; so much so that no one questions the certainty of their own acquaintance with them. But here is a notable exception held up before man for nearly fifty centuries. It has not, then, been inevitably necessary that every man should die. Such a case should interest all, especially those living in the last age of the world, near the final consummation, when, if saved at all, they must be saved as Enoch was.

As he was the first man who received immortality and escaped the chilling touch of death, so he is the first one who prophesied of the coming of Christ—the first Adventist. “And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousand of his saints, to execute judgment upon all,” &c. Jude 14, 15. This glorious scene, the theme of holy men in all ages, passed before Enoch in holy vision some five thousand years before it was to take place. So early in the history of the world do we know the Advent doctrine to have been taught. How brilliantly it must have lightened up all the intervening dark centuries before this eminent man of God. He himself was permitted to live right on till it should take place.

As God never does anything without good reason, it is proper to inquire, Why did he select this man, and bestow this wonderful honor upon him? This becomes an interesting question to those who hope to be translated as Enoch was. As God is unchangeable, the same causes will produce the same effects, even in our day. Inspiration tells us, “And Enoch walked with God three hundred years.” “And Enoch walked with God; and he was not; for God took him.” Gen. v, 22, 24. Paul says he was translated: “For before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.” Heb. xi, 5. In these few words we have the full answer. God is not a respecter of persons, but he is of character.

Why could not many have been translated? We believe they could, had they lived as Enoch did. So far as we can see, his spiritual advantages were not greater than the other patriarchs who lived in that age. He certainly did not possess many aids to religion that we have. He had not the written law of God. The perfect life of Christ was not written out for his perusal. The threatenings and warnings against sin, and the precious promises of God, he had not, as we have, all scattered through the blessed volume of God’s word. He lived in a wicked age. Yet, in spite of these seeming disadvantages, he “walked with God.” This implies a very intimate relation—a close acquaintance. To walk with one for three hundred years, how well acquainted they would become.

Walking implies progress. As God never retraced his steps, never has to go backward, Enoch would have to make a continual progress if he walked with God. No chance then for spiritual naps, serving God and then backsliding, losing all that had been gained. He continued this for three hundred years, a period more than three times as long as our nation has had an existence. Surely, Enoch must have found the Lord a very pleasant companion to walk with to have continued in his company so long.

There are many nowadays who seem to think the service of God irksome. If they give a little time to matters of religion in the winter season, when they have not much else to do, or at some general gathering, when a great effort is being put forth by the Lord’s servants, they seem to think it is something extraordinary, something out of the common course, and they wait with impatience for the time when they can engage in worldly concerns, and make up the “lost” time, recover that which has been thrown away. Many others never get time to leave off their worldliness at all. It is world, world, all the time, every day. They can’t go to meeting; if they did, the property might suffer some little loss. The risk of losing the Spirit of God and eternal life may be run, but of a few dollars, never. The idea of “walking with God,” of having the testimony that we “please God,” right along, year after year, is not thought possible. Indeed, in some cases, it is to be feared, it would not even be thought desirable, lest we might have to give up some things we now love. The religion Enoch had is not plenty in these days; but it must be plenty if we are ever translated as he was.

Clarke says that the word from which “walked” was translated, has the sense of “he set himself to walk, he was fixedly purposed and determined to live for God.” I will notice a few places in the Scriptures where the same idea seems to be referred to. The Lord says to Abraham, “Walk before me, and be thou perfect.” Gen. xvii, 1. Abraham it seems obeyed this command. Gen. xxiv, 40. He did walk before the Lord. This is the reason why Abraham is called the “friend of God.” Hezekiah, in his wonderful prayer to God that his life might be spared, uses the following language: “O Lord, remember now how I have walked before thee in truth and with a perfect heart, and have done that which is right in thy sight.” 2 Kings xx, 3. His petition was granted. The Psalmist says, “I have set the Lord always before me;” and, as Paul says of Moses, “He endured as seeing him who is invisible.”

The idea in these scriptures seems to be of making progress spiritually, with a lively sense of the fact that God’s eye is directly upon us, scanning our every movement, seeing and knowing of every act, and word, and motive. Could we ever realize this, and endure as Moses did, realizing that God’s eye is looking us through and through, what progress we could make. And then add to this the idea of having God for a loving companion, ever by our side; not merely for a day, or a month, or a year, but every day, every month, and every year, how different would be our religious experience. We do so little of this now, that God, instead of being a companion, an old acquaintance, is a stranger, and we are apt to feel embarrassed when walking with a stranger. If we would practice more, we should find him a very delightful companion, as Enoch did.

Micah, in chap. vi, verse 8, that wonderful verse, throws some additional light on this point. He says, “What doth the Lord require of thee but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to humble thyself to walk with thy God.” Margin. It is impossible to walk with God till a man humbles himself. Humility gives us true views of God and ourselves; shows us what we are, poor, wretched, weak, and lost, were it not for the wonderful mercy of God. The views we naturally take of ourselves are absolutely untrue. Should God become a familiar companion of ours under such circumstances, it would certainly prove our ruin. And while thinking thus of ourselves, we don’t deserve such a companion. All the Lord wants is to have our eyes truly opened by humility, to see the real relation existing between ourselves and him. Then he is ready to stoop low down to our weak, wretched condition, and become our familiar companion.

Walking with Enoch three hundred long years! Wonderful love and condescension! How many of us are willing to thus humble ourselves as Enoch did, for the privilege of having such a companion? All who follow Enoch in his ascension will have to do it in his humiliation. All who are translated alive as he was, will have to walk with God as he did, and gain the witness with him that they please their Maker. Then the heavens may pass away with noise, all creation be shivered, islands and mountains disappear; yet their eternal happiness will be secure; their Friend will continue to be their companion. GEO. I. BUTLER. Sigourney, Iowa, June 25, 1869.

THE ANCIENT PHILOSOPHERS DID NOT BELIEVE THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL.

By Dudley Marvin Canright

THIS, I know, is the reverse of what is generally asserted of them, but yet it can be maintained. We will briefly notice a few of the leading ones, and the schools or sects founded by them. Among these Aristotle is one of the most prominent. He was a Greek, born at Stagira, B. C. 384. He was a disciple of Plato, and founded a flourishing school whose influence has been mighty through many ages, and is felt to this day. His school was called the Peripatetic. That he rejected the notion of the soul's immortality is abundantly proved. Says Dr. Horne, "Concerning the nature of the human soul, various and most contradictory sentiments prevailed: its existence after death was denied by many of the Peripatetics, or followers of Aristotle, and this seems to have been that philosopher's own opinion." The Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge says of Aristotle, "The soul of man he considered as an emanation from the Deity, but says nothing of its immortality." Tatian says, "Aristotle impugns the immortality of the soul." Though I have before me many more testimonies to the same effect, this must suffice as I have not room for them.

THE EPICUREANS.

Epicurus, the founder of this school, was a Greek, born B. C. 341. Says Enfield, "The Epicurean sect . . . continued to flourish through a long course of years under the Roman emperors." They were very numerous. Mosheim says that whole armies could be formed of them in the first century, they were so numerous. Paul met them at Athens, and they mocked at the resurrection. To them he refers when he says, "If the dead rise not, let us eat and drink; for to-morrow we die." This was their doctrine,—nothing after death. Their disbelief in the immortality of the soul is so notorious that we need to offer but little proof of it. Buck, in his Theological Dictionary, says of the Epicureans, "They denied the immortality of the soul, and the existence of angels." Dr. Alger writes, "Pliny, in his Natural History, affirms that death is an everlasting sleep. The whole great sect of the Epicureans united in supporting that belief by the combined force of ridicule and argument." Knapp, and Enfield, and others, say the same. Here, then, was a whole great sect for ages who denied the soul's immortality.

THE ACADEMICS.

This school originated with Socrates and Plato. In time it was divided into the Old, the Middle, and the New. They held everything to be uncertain, and that nothing could be positively known. Of them the learned Bishop of Gloucester says, "This they held to be the case even in the most important subjects, such as the soul. And in the most interesting question concerning it, as whether it was, in its nature, mortal or immortal." The Religious Encyclopedia bears this testimony: "Among the Academics, the existence of God, the immortality of the soul, the preferableness of virtue to vice, were all held as uncertain. This sect and that of the Epicureans were the chief that were in vogue in the time of Christ's appearing, and were embraced and supported by persons of high rank and wealth." Then the soul's immortality must have been generally discarded at that time.

THE PYRRHONISTS.

They were professed skeptics,—believed nothing, much less the immortality of the soul. Says Warburton, "The ancient Greek philosophy may be all ranged into the Eleatic, the Italic, and the Ionic lines. The Eleatic line was wholly composed of Atheists of different kinds, as the Democritic, the Pyrrhonian, the Epicurean, &c., so these come not into the account" as believers in the immortality of the soul.

THE STOICS.

Another celebrated sect of philosophers was the Stoics founded by Zeno, at Athens. He died B. C. 264. It became much noted and greatly patronized. Paul met them at Athens. The Stoic, as well as the Academic school, was patronized by many eminent men in the Roman republic. The most distinguished lawyers were, as we have seen, inclined toward this sect. A few testimonies will show what position they took on the subject before us. Says Mr. Jones, "The Stoics denied the immortality of the soul." Warburton says of Zeno, "We know too that the philosophical principle of his school was, that

the soul died with the body." Mosheim writes of the Stoics, "It is well known to the learned world that this sect denied the immortality of the soul." Alger says of them, "They all agreed that there was no real immortality for the soul." Here then was another great sect who flourished for ages, that denied this doctrine.

Thus we have seen that of the different sects of philosophers, the Aristotelians, the Epicureans, the Academics, the Pyrrhonists, and the Stoics, all denied the immortality of the soul. This leaves only the Pythagoreans and Platonists. Did they believe it? They professed to teach it, but it was only on the plan of emanation and absorption, which, as I have shown, is virtually annihilation. In the face of these facts how can men have the assurance to assert that this doctrine has been universally believed in all ages of the world? This assertion cannot be maintained, as it is contrary to the facts in the case. The very learned Bishop Warburton, who has studied and written so largely upon this point, though a firm believer in the soul's immortality, makes these very candid statements about these ancients who professed to believe in future rewards and punishments, such as the Platonists, and Pythagoreans, the only ones who can be claimed as believing the soul immortal. He says, "Now, though after reading their history, reflecting on their character, and examining their writings, with all the care I was able, it appeared to me that these men believed nothing of that future state which they so industriously propagated in the world; and, therefore, on this, as well as other accounts, deserved all that asperity of language with which they are treated by the sacred writers; yet the contrary having been long and generally taken for granted, and their real opinion often urged by our ablest divines, as conformable and favorable to the Christian view of a future state, I suspect that what I have here said, will be exclaimed against as an unreasonable and licentious paradox. But, for all this, I do not despair of proving it a certain, though an unheeded, truth."

Yes, it is an unheeded truth which facts fully prove. Very few indeed of the human race have ever believed the immortality of the soul. D. M. CANRIGHT.

Sigourney, Iowa.

Similitudes

SIMILITUDES.—1. Lettuce and peppergrass grow in a single month, but the oak requires centuries.—Valuable possessions are of slow growth.

Sanctified Afflictions

SANCTIFIED afflictions are like so many artificers, working on a pious man's crown, to make it more bright and massive.

AN INTERESTING LETTER.

THE following is from the pen of that devoted servant of God, our lamented Sr. Hannah More. Although a private letter, it is placed at our disposal, and we give it for the benefit of our readers, who will doubtless be much interested in its contents. It is an account of her return voyage from Africa, written shortly after her arrival in this country:

As Sr. H—— wishes me to give you at least a few items relative to my voyage, I will endeavor to do so, as you can thus see the care which God manifests for his children, and rejoice in his dispensations, however dark they may for a time seem to us.

After I decided to return to America, I learned that some American vessels were in the harbor at Freetown, Sierra Leone, Africa. So I engaged a young man to go on board and secure me a passage. The ship Africa was loaded, and ready for sailing, but refused me a passage. Next the Ann Elizabeth was boarded, and the captain demurred; said his accommodations were poor, but proposed I should go and see for myself. Accordingly I got a sedan chair, as that was the only conveyance I could obtain, and the distance too far in my poor health for me to walk, then the captain peremptorily refused me a passage, as he was full, having missionaries already shipped for the voyage. Next the Helen Maria was boarded to see if she would take me, but she would not. It seemed that I could not get a passage home any way; but I felt that the hand of the Lord was in it, though dark the dispensation. Still I felt disappointed, though I tried to be resigned to the will of God.

A kind missionary sister sent her palanquin for me to visit the liberated school at their station at Charlotte, among the Sierra Leone Mountains, about ten miles. While there, Rev. Mr. C., whom I requested to inform me of any chance there might be, wrote me that a vessel was about to sail in two days, and if I could be ready they would take me. I was so poorly, I felt it quite impossible to pack, and get ready, especially as I had my bed and some things to dispose of, and he would not wait a moment. Next he informed me that captain Matson, of the brig Chanticleer, bound for Boston, would take me if I would put up with the accommodations. He would give up his own room to me, and would sail in about a week or so. This seemed to be the indications of Providence. So the palanquin was ordered to convey me to Freetown. The supercargo called, and I had a pleasant interview with him. He had heard me spoken of in Hartford, Conn., and seemed quite a gentleman. In a few days we saw the flag at half mast, and learned that Mr. Southerly, supercargo of the brig Chanticleer, was dead. Indeed, we saw the hearse pass the mission house. We knew the yellow fever was in the harbor and in town also.

My mission friends said they would not go on that vessel at the risk of their lives, if they were in my place. So I wrote to the captain to decline his kind offer, at the same time giving my reasons. He replied that Mr. S. died of African fever; that the physician attending said there was nothing contagious in the disease, and his opinion was, that it was overwork in a tropical climate, or a sun-stroke, that caused his death. Said that he had had the ship fumigated, disinfected, and painted outside and in, and he was not a bit afraid, adding, “Though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for thou art with me,” &c.

My friends, instead of interposing, said that sea captains should not be more courageous than missionaries. So I wrote that I would go, and in a week or little more was on board.

Before this the African had returned to port damaged so much that her goods had to be re-shipped on the Chanticleer, and she was condemned as unseaworthy. The facts were, when a few days out, one dark, foggy night, the watch and pilot at the helm, saw, as they thought, a school of porpoises, a kind of fish. The dog on board saw the same, and barked, and ran into the cabin and awoke the captain, who only inquired if the dog was going mad, and threw his boot at him as a reward for his faithfulness in awakening him. He lay in his berth till the ship struck, and was stranded on shoals. Though broken in, still when the tide was full, they managed to get her off, and by corking and keeping the pumps at work they managed to get back to Freetown.

Captain M. and the cargo came with me on the Chanticleer. The Ann Elizabeth was in the harbor when we reached Boston, and when the pilot came on board, he said that her captain was on trial for running into a vessel, and had previously been tried for flogging one of his seamen in so inhuman a manner as to cause his death. Don't you think I rejoiced that I did not ship on either vessel? As for the Helen Maria, she had not reached Boston when I left. The captain of the Chanticleer was kind to me, and, though very sick during most of the voyage, I got on as well as could be expected.

Two of the sailors died on the voyage, and were buried at sea: a solemn sight to witness. But the sea, as well as the land, will give up her dead ere long, and it matters little where we die, but much whether we are prepared. HANNAH MORE.

“Dey Don’t Die Dat Way.”

THE comment of a colored preacher on the text, “It is more blessed to give than to receive,” is inimitable for its point as well as eloquence. “I’ve known many a church to die ’cause it didn’t give enough; but I never knowed a church to die ’cause it gave too much. Dey don’t die dat way. Brederen, has any of you knowed a church to die ’cause it give too much? If you do, just let me know; and I’ll make a pilgrimage to dat church, and I’ll climb by de soft light of de moon to its moss-covered roof, and I’ll stand dar and lift my hands to heaven and say, ‘Blessed are de dead dat die in de Lord.’”

FIRESIDE ANGELS.

By M. E. W.

THERE are bright and happy spirits, Round the dazzling throne above, Singing sweetly—ever singing, Of the Saviour's wondrous love. Through the long bright day of Heaven, There they wait his blessed will, Till some message shall be given, Swiftly then his word fulfill.

If to earth the loving mandate Bids them fly on wings of light, Bringing words of peace and comfort, Down from Heaven they take their flight; Swiftly they perform his pleasure, Lovingly they whisper here, Till the tears cease their full measure, And the lone heart leaves its fear.

To these blessed, waiting spirits, God has given a beauteous name, Angels they are called in Heaven, And on earth we say the same. But unto these bright ones only Words of love do not belong, Some there are of earthly beings, Who unite the same sweet song.

Speaking love, and peace, and comfort, To earth's weary, troubled ones, Stretching out the hand to help them, And dividing e'en the crumbs. Ever watching, ever ready, That occasion may be given, To assist the straying, needy, Aid them on the road to Heaven.

In the little household circle, Oft a kindly heart is found, Full of thought for others' pleasure, Blessings scatter all around. May be that the words of Jesus, In his book they sometimes see, If ye've done a kindly action, Ye have done it unto me.

Oh! the light from their glad faces Makes a little heaven below! So we've named them fireside angels; Yes, their love from Heaven doth flow. And they do their Master's bidding, Just as truly through the day, As if from the world of glory Jesus sent them all the way.

M. E. W.

A WORTHY EXAMPLE.

By Adolphus Smith

A SHORT time since, while riding in the cars, I overheard a conversation between several gentlemen, on the subject of tobacco using. Becoming interested, I joined with them, and learned the following facts:

The first speaker had, several years before, entered into a compact with a friend, never again to use tobacco. Not long after, on visiting his friend, he found him smoking. “I expostulated with him,” said the speaker, “but to no purpose. He continued the use of tobacco, and soon added to it, that of ardent spirits; until he became a confirmed inebriate. I have never tasted tobacco since, although I have seen the time when I would have given ten dollars for the privilege of smoking a single cigar, could I have done so without danger to my principles. I would not use tobacco again for one thousand dollars.”

What a worthy example for the Christian is furnished in the experience of this man of the world.

How many from religious motives undertake to quit the use of tobacco, only to make a miserable failure. It is impossible to engage successfully in any work of reform without the exercise of considerable firmness.

Is it right, Christian brother, to use tobacco? If it is, then print upon the cover of your tobacco-box, 1 Tim. iv, 4; when you fill it in the morning, lift your voice in a prayer of thanksgiving to God; and when you draw back from the table, and fill your mouth with fine cut, ejecting it over the table at every breath, give thanks to Him who regards the widow and the fatherless, and hears even the young ravens when they cry.

If you cannot do this, put away this body-defiling, soul-destroying poison forever.

ADOLPHUS SMITH.

Virtue Above Pleasure and Wealth

Do n't sell virtue for pleasure or wealth.

THE SON OF GOD KEPT HIS FATHER'S COMMANDMENTS.

This declaration may well be termed an article of faith with those who reverence the moral law. They regard that law as the perfect standard of right, and they look to the life of Christ as the perfect example of that law lived out. They know that in the sight of the law of God all other members of the human race stand condemned. But in the example of Christ the precepts of the moral law are shown to be as worthy of our admiration in real life, as they appear to be in theory upon the pages of inspiration. Does the law of God require us to love him with all our soul, and with all our strength? Behold in Christ the perfect example of this supreme, ardent, never-failing love. And if we ask for the exemplification of loving our neighbor as ourselves, behold in Jesus the perfect pattern of this unselfish love. His life was wholly devoted to doing good to mankind. He went about doing good, but never that he might thereby become great among men. He sought never to benefit himself as the object of his labors, but always to do good to the needy, the suffering, and the distressed. And how reverently did he honor his Father, and worship before him. He claimed, indeed, to be the Son of God, but how singly did he walk with reference to the glory of God! And how high did he elevate the nature of the divine existence in his discourse, when to the woman of Samaria, he said, “God is a Spirit; and they that worship him must worship him in Spirit and in truth.” John iv, 24. How reverently did he take the name of God, even in prayer. And how did he inculcate the same reverent spirit in ourselves, when he taught us to pray, “Our Father which art in Heaven, HALLOWED BE THY NAME.” How great the pains taken by him to put away the Pharisaic traditions by which Satan had converted the merciful institution of the great Creator into a yoke of bondage. How tenderly did he care both for his people and for the rest-day hallowed for mankind in Eden, when he bade his disciples pray that their flight out of Judea should not be in the winter, nor upon the Sabbath-day. Matt. xxiv, 20. And how our Lord honored his parents in their lowly life of poverty. How he forgot his own terrible anguish upon the cross, to care for his widowed mother, when he said to his best-beloved disciple, “Behold thy mother.” John xix, 26, 27. What precepts of love toward our enemies did he inspire in word, and exemplify in act. What purity of life did he inspire by his example, and by his precepts, make to reach even to our hearts. And even his worst enemies could never accuse him of one selfish deed, one malicious, or heartless, or untruthful word, nor one selfish thought or motive. He said that he had kept his Father’s commandments. John xv, 10. Who will dare to deny this statement? Indeed, he asked his enemies, “Which of you convinceth me of sin?” John viii, 46.

“Sin is the transgression of the law.” But in Christ there was no sin. 1 John iii, 4, 5. He was indeed the Lamb of God, without blemish and without fault. And now if we would know the secret of our Lord’s perfect obedience, we shall find it revealed in the fortieth Psalm:

“Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened; burnt-offering and sin-offering hast thou not required. Then said I, Lo, I come; in the volume of the book it is written of me, I delight to do thy will, O my God; yea, THY LAW IS WITHIN MY HEART.” Ps. xl, 6–8.

The Son of God here testifies concerning himself, through the Spirit of prophecy, that he came at his first advent with the law of God in his heart. Not the law pertaining to sacrifice, for that, God did not desire. It had answered its purpose and was to meet its antitype in his own death. But it was the moral law which he had in his heart, that made his own great sin-offering necessary.

And our Lord coming into the world with the law of his Father in his heart, breathed its spirit in every word, and lived its meaning in every thought and motive. When he laid down the golden rule he made its authority to rest upon the fact that it was the substance of the law and the prophets. Matt. vii, 12.

Our Lord came into our world, from his Father, with the Father’s perfect law within his heart. He purposes to take back to his Father, when he shall come again, a people, every one of whom shall have the law of God within their hearts. Many persons suppose that the New Testament proposes to save men by doing away with the moral law and releasing men from its obligation. Never was a greater mistake made. The New Testament designs to save men by taking out of their hearts the carnal mind, which is enmity against God, and not subject to his law, and then placing that law in the heart and mind. Jer. xxxi, 31–34; Rom. viii, 3–7. When men have this law thus established in their hearts and minds, they will be in character like Christ. “The righteousness of the law” will be “fulfilled in them” because they will not walk after the flesh, but after the Spirit. They will, like the Son of God, keep the commandments of the Father’s law. And when they shall be examined in the day of Judgment, they will stand justified in the sight of the just Judge, as doers of his law. Rom. ii, 13.

Surely it was not an evil thing that our Lord had his Father’s law in his heart. And it cannot be a pernicious thing for us to have that law in our hearts also. Nay, unless this sacred code be there written, we shall never be heirs according to the New Testament. Our Lord’s life was the perfect example of this law obeyed. In fact, that was the very excellence of his life. Our lives must be like his. He taught the precepts of the law of God. He has said that if we also do and teach them we shall be great in the kingdom of God. Matt. v, 17–19. We must be like Christ, and in due season we shall be with him.

Continue reading: THE FALL OF DEMAS