Seventh-day Adventist Missionary Society · Oakland, Cal. · Oct 25, 1883
General Articles.
By Mrs. E. G. White
Luther Returns to Wittenberg.
BY MRS E. G. WHITE.
On the third of March, 1522, ten months after his capture and imprisonment, Luther bade adieu to the Wartburg, and through the gloomy forests pursued his journey toward Wittenberg.
He was under the ban of the empire. Enemies were at liberty to take his life; friends were forbidden to aid or even shelter him. The Imperial Government, urged on by the determined zeal of Duke George of Saxony, were adopting the most stringent measures against his adherents. So great were the dangers threatening the Reformer's safety, that notwithstanding the urgent demand for his return to Wittenberg, the elector Frederick wrote entreating him to remain in his secure retreat. But Luther saw that the work of the gospel was imperiled, and, regardless of his own safety, he determined to return to the conflict.
Upon arriving at the town of Borne, he wrote to the elector, explaining his course in leaving the Wartburg.
"I have sufficiently shown my deference to your highness," he said, "in withdrawing from the public gaze for a whole year. Satan knows that it was not from cowardice that I did so. I would have entered Worms, though there had been as many devils in the town as there were tiles upon its roofs. Now Duke George, whom your highness mentioned as if to scare me, is much less to be dreaded than a single devil. If what is passing at Wittenberg were occurring at Leipsic [the usual residence of Duke George], I would instantly mount my horse, and repair thither, even though—your highness will, I trust, pardon the expression—it should rain Duke Georges for nine days together, and every one should be nine times as fierce as he! What can he be thinking of in attacking me? Does he suppose that Christ my Lord is a man of straw? May God avert from him the awful judgment that hangs over him!
"Be it known to your highness that I am repairing to Wittenberg under a protection more powerful than that of an elector. I have no thought of soliciting the aid of your highness; and am so far from desiring your protection, that it is rather my purpose to protect your highness.
If I knew that your highness could, or would, take up my defense, I would not come to Wittenberg. No secular sword can advance this cause; God must do all, without the aid or co-operation of man. He who has most faith, is the most availing defense; but, as it seems to me, your highness is as yet very weak in faith.
"But since your highness desires to know what to do, I will humbly answer: Your electoral highness has already done too much, and should do nothing whatever. God neither wants nor will he endure, that you or I should take thought or part in the matter. Let your highness follow this advice.
"In regard to myself, your highness must remember your duty as elector, and allow the instructions of his imperial majesty to be carried into effect in your towns and districts, offering no impediment to any one who would seize or kill me; for none may contend against the powers that be, save only He who has ordained them.
"Let your highness accordingly leave the gates open, and respect safe-conducts, if my enemies in person, or by their envoys, should come to search for me in your highness' States. Everything may take its course without trouble or prejudice to your highness.
"I write this in haste, that you may not feel aggrieved by my coming. My business is with another kind of person from Duke George, one who knows me, and whom I know well."
It was not to war against the decrees of earthly rulers, but to thwart the plans and resist the power of the prince of darkness, that Luther returned to Wittenberg. In the name of the Lord he went forth once more to battle for the truth. With great caution and humility, yet with decision and firmness, he entered upon his work, maintaining that the word of God must be the test of all doctrines and all actions. "By the word," said he, "we must refute and expel what has gained a place and influence by violence. I would not resort to force against the superstitious, nor even the unbelievers. Whosoever believeth, let him draw nigh, and he that believeth not, let him stand afar off. Let there be no compulsion. I have been laboring for liberty of conscience. Liberty is the very essence of faith."
The Reformer had no desire to meet the deluded men whose fanaticism had been productive of so great evil. He knew them to be men of hasty and violent temper, who while claiming to be especially illuminated from Heaven would not endure the slightest contradiction, or even the kindest admonition. Arrogating to themselves supreme authority, they required every one, without a question, to acknowledge their claims. Two of these prophets, Stubner and Cellarius, demanded an interview with Luther, which he deemed it best to grant. He determined to expose the pretensions of these impostors, and, if possible, rescue the souls that had been deceived by them.
Stubner opened the conversation by showing how he proposed to restore the church and reform the world. Luther listened with great patience, and finally replied, "Of all you have been saying, there is nothing that I see to be based upon Scripture. It is a mere tissue of fiction." At these words Cellarius in a violent passion struck his fist upon the table, and exclaimed against Luther's speech as an insult offered to a man of God.
"Paul declared that the signs of an apostle were wrought among the Corinthians in signs and mighty deeds," said Luther. "Do you likewise prove your apostleship by miracles?"
"We will do so," answered the prophets.
"The God whom I serve will know how to bridle your gods," rejoined Luther. Stubner now fixed his eyes upon the Reformer, and said, in a solemn tone, "Martin Luther, hear me while I declare what is passing at this moment in your soul. You are beginning to see that my doctrine is true."
Luther was silent for a moment, and then said, "The Lord rebuke thee, Satan."
The prophets, losing all self-control, shouted in a rage, "The Spirit! the Spirit!" Luther answered, with cool contempt, "I slap your spirit on the mouth."
Hereupon the outcries of the prophets were redoubled; Cellarius, more violent than the others, stormed and raged until he foamed at the mouth. As the result of the interview, the false prophets left Wittenberg that very day.
The fanaticism was checked for a time; but a few years later, it broke out with greater violence and more terrible results. Said Luther, concerning the leaders in this movement: "To them the Holy Scriptures were but a dead letter, and they all began to cry, 'The Spirit! the Spirit!' But most assuredly I will not follow where their spirit leads them. May God in his mercy preserve me from a church in which there are none but saints. I wish to be in fellowship with the humble, the weak, the sick, who know and feel their sins, and sigh and cry continually to God from the bottom of their hearts to obtain comfort and deliverance."
Thomas Munzer, who was the most active of these fanatics, was a man of considerable ability, which, rightly directed, would have enabled him to do good; but he had not learned the very first lessons of Christianity; he had not a knowledge of his own heart, and greatly lacked true humility. Yet he imagined himself ordained of God to reform the world, forgetting, like many other enthusiasts, that the reform should begin with himself. Erroneous writings which he had read in his youth had given a wrong direction to his character and his life. Furthermore, he was ambitious of position and influence, and unwilling to be second, even to Luther. He charged the Reformers with establishing, by their adherence to the Bible alone, a species of popery, and with forming churches that were not pure and holy.
"Luther," said he, "has liberated men's consciences from the papal yoke; but he has left them in carnal liberty, and has not led them to depend on the Spirit, and look directly to God for light."
He considered himself as called of God to remedy this great evil, and held that manifestations of the Spirit were the means by which this was to be accomplished, and that he who had the Spirit possessed the true faith, though he might never have seen the written word. "The heathen and the Turks," said he, "are better prepared to receive the Spirit than many of those Christians who call us enthusiasts."
It is easier to tear down than to build up. It is far easier to trig the wheels of reform than to draw the chariot up the steep ascent. Men are still to be found who will accept just enough truth to pass as reformers, but who are too self-sufficient to be taught by those whom God is teaching. Such are always leading directly away from the point to which God is seeking to bring his people.
Munzer taught that all who would receive the Spirit must mortify the flesh, wear tattered clothing, neglect the body, be of a sad countenance, and, forsaking all their former associates, retire to desert places, and there entreat the favor of God. "Then," said he, "God will come and speak with us as formerly he spoke with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. If he were not to do so, he would not deserve our attention." Thus was this deluded man, like Lucifer himself, making terms for God, and refusing to acknowledge his authority unless he should comply with these terms.
Men naturally love the marvelous and whatever flatters their pride, and Munzer's ideas were received by a considerable part of the little flock over which he presided. He next denounced all order and ceremony in public worship, and470declared that to obey princes was to attempt to serve both God and Belial. Then marching at the head of his followers to a chapel which was the resort of pilgrims from all quarters, he demolished it. After this act of violence, being compelled to leave that region, he wandered from place to place in Germany, and even went as far as Switzerland, everywhere exciting a spirit of rebellion, and unfolding his plan for a general revolution.
The minds of men, already beginning to throw off the yoke of the papacy, were also becoming impatient under the restraint of civil authority. Munzer's revolutionary teachings, claiming divine sanction, led them to break away from all restraints and to give loose rein to their prejudices and passions. The most terrible scenes of sedition and strife followed, and the fields of Germany were drenched with blood.
The anguish which Luther had so long before experienced in his cell at Erfurth, now pressed with redoubled power upon his soul as he saw the results of fanaticism charged upon the Reformation. The princes constantly repeated, and many believed, that Luther's doctrine had been the cause of his rebellion. Although this charge was without the slightest foundation, it could but cause the Reformer great distress. That the work of Heaven should be thus degraded by being classed with the basest fanaticism, seemed more than he could endure. On the other hand, Munzer and all the leaders in the revolt hated Luther because he had not only opposed their doctrines and denied their claims to divine inspiration, but had pronounced them rebels against the civil authority. In retaliation they denounced him as a base pretender. He seemed to have brought upon himself the enmity of both princes and people.
The Romanists exulted, expecting to witness the speedy downfall of the Reformation, and they blamed Luther even for the errors which he had been most earnestly endeavoring to correct. The fanatical party, by falsely claiming to have been treated with great injustice, succeeded in gaining the sympathies of a large class of the people, and as is usually the case with those who take the wrong side, they came to be regarded as martyrs. Thus the ones who were exerting every energy to tear down the work of the Reformation were pitied and lauded as the victims of cruelty and oppression. All this was the work of Satan, prompted by the same spirit of rebellion which was first manifested in Heaven.
It was Satan's desire for the supremacy that caused discord among the angels. The mighty Lucifer, 'son of the morning,' claimed the right to honor and authority above the Son of God; and this not being accorded him, he determined to rebel against the government of Heaven. He therefore appealed to the angelic host, complaining of God's injustice, and declaring himself deeply wronged. His false representations won to his side one-third of all the heavenly angels; and so strong was their delusion that they would not be corrected; they clung to Lucifer, and were expelled from Heaven with him.
Since his fall Satan has continued the same work of rebellion and falsehood. He is constantly laboring to deceive the minds of men, and lead them to call sin righteousness, and righteousness sin. How successful has been his work! How often are censure and reproach cast upon God's faithful servants because they will stand fearlessly in defense of the truth! Men who are but agents of Satan are praised and flattered, and even looked upon as martyrs, while those who should be respected and sustained for their fidelity to God, are left to stand alone, under suspicion and distrust. Satan's warfare did not end when he was expelled from Heaven; it has been carried on from century to century, even to the present year of our Lord 1883.
The fanatical teachers gave themselves up to be governed by impressions, calling every thought of the mind the voice of God; consequently they went to great extremes. "Jesus," said they, "commanded his followers to be as little children; therefore they would dance through the streets, clap their hands, and even tumble one another in the sand. Some burned their Bibles, at the same time exclaiming, 'The letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life.' Ministers indulged in the most violent and unbecoming behavior in the desk, sometimes leaping from the pulpit into the congregation. Thus they gave practical illustration of their teaching, that all forms and order proceeded from Satan, and that it was their duty to break every yoke, and to act just as they felt."
Luther boldly protested against these extravagances, and declared to the world that the Reformation was wholly distinct from that disorderly element. These abuses, however, continued to be charged upon him by those who wished to stigmatize his work.
Fearlessly did Luther defend the truth from the attacks which came from every quarter. The word of God proved itself a weapon mighty indeed in every conflict. With that word he warred against the usurped authority of the pope, and the rationalistic philosophy of the schoolmen, while he stood firm as a rock against the fanaticism that sought to ally itself with the Reformation.
Each of these opposing elements was in its own way setting aside the sure word of prophecy, and exalting human wisdom as the source of religious truth and knowledge. Rationalism idolizes reason, and makes this the criterion for religion. Roman Catholicism claims for her sovereign pontiff an inspiration descended in unbroken line from the apostles, and unchangeable through all time, thus giving ample opportunity for every species of extravagance and corruption to be concealed under the sanctity of the apostolic commission. The inspiration claimed by Munzer and his associates proceeded from no higher source than the vagaries of the imagination, and its influence was subversive of all authority, human or divine. True Christianity receives the word of God as the great treasure-house of inspired truth, and the standard and test of all inspiration.
A VESPER HYMN.
By Helen M. Winslow
THOU canst help and only thou,
Hear me, Jesus, as I bow,
Asking thee to give me now
Thy peace divine.
Thou wilt send me what is best,
In that surety let me rest;
Nor wander from thy presence, lest
I slip and fall.
O dear Lord, forgive, I pray,
All of wrong I've done to day,
And keep me in thy blessed way
Forevermore.
Led by thee I'll onward press,
Till I don the heavenly dress,
And see thee in thy loveliness—
My Lord and King.
—Helen M. Winslow.
Appeal for the Sabbath.
By Editor
[The following is an extract from an "Address to the Baptists," being an appeal for the restoration of the Bible Sabbath, by the General Conference of the Seventh-day Baptists. It is an able document, and we gladly lay some portions of it before our readers. ED. SIGNS.]
WHEN we look over your large and influential denomination, we find that, in reference to the subject upon which we now address you, you are divided into about three classes. 1. Those who, acknowledging the perpetuity of the Sabbath law, enforce the observance of the Sabbath by the fourth commandment, but change the day of its celebration from the seventh to the first day of the week. 2. Those who see the impossibility of proving a change of the day, and therefore regard the commandment as abolished by the death of Christ. But, at the same time, they consider the first day of the week as an institution entirely new, to be regulated as to its observance wholly by the New Testament. 3. Those who consider neither the Old nor the New Testament to impose any obligation upon them to observe a day of rest, and advocate one merely on the ground of expediency.
1. To those of you who acknowledge the obligation of a Sabbath, but change the day of its celebration from the seventh to the first day of the week, we would say, that while from the law only you infer any obligation to sabbatize at all, yet make the particular time of sabbatizing to stand upon New-Testament authority, we do not see how you can relieve yourselves of the charge of departing from the great principle contended for by Baptists, viz., That whatever is commanded by an institution is to be learned from the law of the institution, and not from other sources. On this principle, you reject the logic of Pedobaptists, who, while they find the ordinance of baptism in the New Testament, go back to the law of circumcision to determine the subjects. You tell them, and very justly, too, that the law of the institution is the only rule of obedience. But do you not fall into the same error when the argument has respect to the Sabbath? We can see no more fitness in applying the law of the Sabbath to the first day of the week, than in applying the law of circumcision to the subjects of baptism. For the law of circumcision was not more expressly confined to the fleshly seed of Abraham, than was the law of the Sabbath to the seventh day of the week. The true principle is that every institution is to be explained and regulated by its own law. Therefore if the first day of the week is an institution binding upon us, the law to regulate its observance should be471looked for where we find the institution. Be pleased, brethren, to review this argument, and see if you are not treading on Pedobaptist ground.
In justification of this change of the day, we often hear you plead the example of Christ and his apostles. But where do we find anything to this effect in their example? Did the apostles sabbatize on the first day of the week? Did the churches which were organized by them do so? Observe, the question between you and us is not, Did they meet together and hold worship on that day? but, Did they sabbatize? that is, Did they REST FROM THEIR LABOR on the first day of the week? Did they observe it as a Sabbath? This is the true issue. We have often asked this question, but the only answer that we have received has been, that they assembled for worship. But this is not a candid way of meeting the point. It is in reality an answer to a very different question from the one we ask. Brethren, act out your own principles. Come up fairly to the question. When you ask a Pedobaptist, Did Christ baptize or authorize the baptism of little children? you expect him to make some other reply than, "He put his hands on them and prayed." When you ask, Did the apostles baptize unconscious babes? you are not well pleased with the reply, They baptized households. Your question was with regard to infant—the baptism of them. If, therefore, when we ask you, Did the apostles and primitive Christians sabbatize on the first day of the week? you merely reply as above, we do not see but you are guilty of the same sophistry; you are so ready to charge upon your Pedobaptist brethren. Your adroit evasion of the real question seems to place you much in the same predicament as were the Pharisees when Christ asked them whence was the baptism of John. It appears as if you reasoned with yourselves, and said, "If we shall say they did sabbatize on the first day of the week, the evidence will be called for, and we cannot find it; but if we shall say they did not, we fear the day will lose its sacredness in the eyes of the people." We do not by any means wish to charge you with a phariseal lack of principle, but we put it to your sober judgment, whether your position is not an awkward one. Brethren, reconsider this point, and see if you are not on Pedobaptist ground.
If the apostles did not sabbatize on the first day of the week, then it follows, as a matter of course, that whatever notoriety or dignity belonged to that day, they did not regard it as a substitute for the Sabbath. Consequently, unless the Sabbath law was entirely abrogated by the death of Christ, the old Sabbath, as instituted in Paradise, and rehearsed from Sinai, continues yet binding, as the "Sabbath of the Lord thy God."
But more than this. Even if it could be proved that the apostles and primitive Christians did actually regard the first day of the week as a Sabbath, it would not follow that the old Sabbath is no longer in force, unless it could be proved that they considered the new as a SUBSTITUTE for the old; or, that so far as the particular day was concerned, it was of a CEREMONIAL character. But where do we find proof for either of these points? In the whole record of the transactions and teachings of the apostles, where do we find this idea of substitution? Nowhere. Where do we find evidence that, so far as the particular day was concerned, it was ceremonial, and therefore to cease at the death of Christ? Nowhere. The argument that proves the Sabbath law not to be ceremonial, proves the same of the day. Did the Sabbath law originate in Paradise, when man was innocent, and had no need of a Redeemer? So did the day. It was then sanctified and blessed. Does the Sabbath law take cognizance of the relation on which all the precepts of the moral law are founded, viz., the relation we sustain to God as creatures to Creator? So does the day. It is a memorial of this relation, and of the rest entered into by God after he, by his work, had established the relation. It appears, then, that neither the Sabbath law, nor the day it enjoins, was of a ceremonial character. If this reasoning is correct—and if it is not, we hope you will point it out—it would not follow that the old Sabbath is done away, because Christ and his apostles sabbatized on the first day of the week; but only that there were two Sabbaths, instead of one.
But could Christ or his apostles consistently alter the law of the Sabbath? In all his ministry, Christ acted under the appointment of the Father, and according to such restrictions as were contained in the law and the prophets. By those restrictions, no laws were to be set aside at his coming, except such as were peculiar to the Jewish economy; such as "meats, and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed until the time of reformation." Heb. 9:10. To set aside these, the law gave the Messiah an express grant. Heb 10:9. But the very moment he should attempt to go beyond the limits of that grant he would destroy all evidence of his being the Messiah promised and appointed. For it was by his exact conformity to the law that his claims were established. Hence, early in his ministry, he declared that he "came not to destroy the law or the prophets." Matt. 5:17. Most cheerfully do we recognize him as God over all, and blessed forever; yet we are well satisfied that, even in virtue of his divinity, he could not consistently set aside any laws except those which were a "shadow of things to come." Otherwise, we should have God denying himself—God contradicting himself! The New Testament records not a single instance of his claiming a right to do so. When he avowed himself Lord of the Sabbath, he only claimed to determine what was the proper method of keeping it—what were breaches of it, and what were not. The Sabbath was made for man, and consequently it was his prerogative to decide what acts and duties, answered to the nature and design of the institution. Therefore, the Son of man is Lord of the Sabbath.Mark 2:28
Humility in Church Life.
By Editor
THE following is an extract from a sermon by Rev. C. H. Spurgeon, on "Humbling Ourselves before God." His text was 1 Peter 5:6. The importance and responsibilities of church relations are too little considered and far too lightly esteemed, and we publish with pleasure anything which forcibly sets forth the duty of humility in church life:—
Observe that Peter has been speaking to the elders, and telling them how they should behave themselves in the flock over which they are set as overseers. Then he speaks to the younger members, and he says, "Submit yourselves unto the elder." He says to all church members, "All of you be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility;" and it is in the same context that he writes, "Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God." I am, as a member of a church, not to seek honor to myself, but I am to walk humbly. I am not to make it in any respect the object of my Christian life to be esteemed among my fellow-Christians so as to have influence over them, and to take the lead among them. I am to have far humbler motives than that. I am to think very little of myself, and to think so much of others that I admire all that I see of God's grace in them, and am glad to learn from them as well as to help them in their progress to Heaven. Each one of us should think little of himself and highly of his brethren. I cannot say that all of us as Christians are clothed with humility as we should be. I am afraid that, from the preacher down to the most obscure member, we may, every one of us, listen with awe to the injunction, "Humble yourselves under the mighty hand of God," and confess that we fall short of this command. Yet I may honestly add that in this church I have seen more submissiveness, and deference to others, and less of ambitious self-esteem than anywhere else in the world. I have spoken nothing less than bare justice when I have said this. Let all the world know that as a pastor I can in this point praise the people of my charge beyond any that I have ever heard of. I am not apt to judge too favorably; I speak as I have seen, and this is my honest testimony. We owe our union and prosperity under God to the readiness of most of the brethren to do anything and everything for Christ, without considering ourselves.
Now, true humility in our church relationship will show itself in our being willing to undertake the very lowest offices for Christ. Some cannot do little things; they must be ordained to great offices, or they will sulk in indolence. Genuine humility makes a man think it a great honor to be a door-keeper in the house of God, or to be allowed to speak a word to a little child about Jesus, or even to wash the saints' feet. I am sure, brethren, that those who are not willing to fulfill the lesser offices will never be used by Christ to mind the greater duties. Humility is a qualification for greatness. Do you know how to be little? You are learning to be great. Can you submit? You are learning to rule. My symbolic sketch of a perfected Christian would be a king keeping the door, or a prince feeding lambs, or, better still, the Master washing his disciples' feet.
The next point of humility is, that we are conscious of our own incompetence to do anything aright. He who can do all things without Christ will end in doing nothing. The man who can preach without divine aid cannot preach at all. The woman who can teach a Bible-class cannot teach a Bible-class. Human ability without the grace of God is only puffed-up inability. Those of you who, apart from supernatural help, feel quite sufficient for any kind of holy service, are miserably deluded. Self-sufficiency is inefficiency. The fullness of self is a double emptiness. He that has no sense of his weakness has a weakness in his sense. I believe, brethren and sisters, that any man whom God uses for a great purpose will be so emptied out that he will wonder that ever God uses him in the least degree; and he will be ready to hide his head, and long to get out of public notice, because he will feel himself to be utterly unworthy of the favor which God manifests towards him. I do not believe that God ever fills a cup which was not empty; or that he ever fills a man's mouth with his word while that man has his mouth full of his own words. Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God. If you desire that the Holy Spirit should bless you, be purged from your own spirit. The way to rise into God is to sink in your own self; as our Lord Jesus descended into the depths, that he might rise above all things and fill all things, so we, in our imitation of him, must descend to the uttermost that we may rise to the highest.
Brethren, we want humility, all of us, in our church life, in the sense of never being rough, haughty, arrogant, hard, domineering, lordly; or, on the other hand, factious, unruly, quarrelsome, and unreasonable. We should endeavor to think very carefully of those who are poorest, for fear we should hurt their feelings; and very noticeably of those who are obscure; lest we should seem to despise them. It is ours never to take offense, and to be most cautious never to cause it, even by inadvertence. He that is set as a leader in the church of God, let him be the person that is most ready to hear blame, and least ready to give offense; let him say, "You may think what you please of me, but I shall lay myself out to do you good, and to be your servant for Christ's sake." The lower you can stoop the greater is your honor.
"Free Thought."
By W. N. Glenn
Opposers of the word of God have much to say about free thought, and are fond of arrogating to themselves the appellation of "free-thinkers." They would fain convey the idea that the scope of Christianity is entirely too narrow for the development of the human mind, and that Christians are consequently circumscribed in their opinions and privileges of investigation. Notwithstanding the boldness with which this idea is thrust upon the world, we are firmly convinced that the opposite is the truth.
We challenge any "free-thinker" to point to one item of knowledge, one clearly demonstrated fact, that is contrary to the knowledge we receive from God's treasure-book, or that Christians are not permitted to believe. We hold that the believer in God and his word has a much wider field for the exercise of thought, and has access to a more fruitful source of reliable information—such as will lead to practical results for good here and hereafter—than any other class of people.
Note the contrast between the Author of the Christian's wisdom and privileges, and the authors of infidel theories. One is the Creator of all things, with whom is all wisdom, while his would-be rivals are but creatures of a day, confessedly liable to error, and almost daily showing the weak places in each other's theories. The contrast between the intellect of a Solomon and that of the lowest order of animal life is but a span compared with the superiority of the living God over the teachers of skepticism, who have so far been unable to tell their pupils whether they have sprung into existence by chance or have developed from the monkey. The right to choose between such theories as these, and the right to deny the God of the Bible, is about the sum of their freedom of thought. Verily, "the wisdom of man is foolishness before God."
That class of mind which allows itself to be limited to a few negative theories, entirely void of present satisfaction or assurance for the future, offering nothing in lieu of that which they would destroy, has little ground for the boast of free thought. We should rather call it the absence of thought, for it requires no mental energy to deny anything. All that anyone has to do to be recognized as a "free-thinker" is to deny the Bible; and his rank in the class is reckoned by the volubility of his railings against the wisdom and power of God and his plan of salvation.
Who is the real free-thinker? He whose thought conforms to the "law of liberty," beginning at the A B C of wisdom, "the fear of the Lord." Ps. 111 : 10. His Tutor has an unfailing fountain of knowledge, which is promised to his disciples without stint. "If any of you lack wisdom let him ask of God." Jas. 1 : 5. The believer's range of privileged and profitable contemplation reaches back to the creation, and forward to eternity. In all this realm he may move with all diligence, without the shackles of skepticism, or the contracted walks of the unproved and unprofitable theories of those who would deprive us of the inspired text-book. "The truth shall make you free." We believe in free thought, and we also believe that true Christians are the only free-thinkers in the world.
W. N. GLENN.
"Judaizing Teachers."
By Epsilon
It would be well for those who use as a sneer the phrase "Judaizing teachers" to consider whether Judaizing teachers, or Romanizing teachers would be the more acceptable to God. To which were committed the oracles of God? To the Jews, or to the Romans? Paul says, to the Jews were committed the oracles of God. Rom. 3:2.
If we should go to church, and hear the preacher say that he had read the book of Revelation many times, and that the people of this age were, by the Spirit of prophecy, warned against Judaism, would not every Bible reader in the house be shocked by such a statement?
Does the Spirit of prophecy warn us against Judaism, or Romanism? We are warned against that mystic Babylon who corrupted the whole earth with her fornications.
We find that the great masses of people of all nations will receive the popular mark of the beast and persecute those who receive the seal of the living God.
The great Prophet says that the true disciples shall be hated by all nations for his name's sake. Matt. 24:9.
Those churches that are popular in the nations, as many of the Protestant churches now are, cannot be included among those that shall be hated by all nations.
"Marvel not my brethren, if the world hate you." 1 John 3:13.
"If ye were of the world, the world would love his own; but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." John 15:19 and onward.
In the face of these scriptures, and in the face of the Spirit of prophecy, Protestant churches boast of their popularity.
The Jews received the promises and the covenants. All Gentiles that are saved must be grafted into the Jewish stock. Rom. 11. I hope to pass through one of the twelve gates which have the names of the twelve tribes of Israel. Rev. 21:12. EPSILON.
OCTOBER.
By William C. Bryant
Ay, thou art welcome, Heaven's delicious breath,
When woods begin to wear the crimson leaf,
And suns grow meek, and the meek suns grow brief,
And the year smiles as it draws near its death.
Wind of the sunny South, oh! still delay
In the gay woods and in the golden air,
Like to a good old age released from care,
Journeying in long serenity, away.
In such a bright, late quiet, would that I
Might wear out life like thee, 'mid bowers and brooks,
And, dearer yet, the sunshine of kind looks,
And music of kind voices ever nigh,
And, when my last sand twinkled in the glass,
Pass silently from men, as thou dost pass.
—William C. Bryant.
God’s Goodness in Our Need
The greater your wants, the greater God's goodness in supplying them; the greater your enemies, the greater the display of God's power in subduing them; and the greater your unworthiness, the greater his grace in saving you.