Earlier text: Look to your ThoughtsThe Kingdom.—No. 5.
By John Harvey Waggoner
The strongest objections urged against these truths we will notice. The most plausible is presented in the following from a tract on the Age to Come, by J. Marsh. Quoting 1 Cor. 15: 23–28, he says:— “The particular points in these passages to which we would now call especial attention, are the commencement, close, and character, of the reign of Christ.
“1. His reign commences at his coming.
“2. It will continue until his enemies are subdued, or destroyed, the last of which is death.
“3. One grand object of that reign is to subdue or destroy his enemies.
“These points are clear and most conclusively proved by the evidence in the case. The number of years between the commencement and close of this reign, Paul does not tell, but John does. He gives us to understand that it will be a thousand years. Rev. 20.” Another advocate of that theory, J. M. Stephenson, says:— “His reign commences with ‘his coming,’ and the resurrection of ‘them that are his’ and terminates, as independent king, with the destruction of ‘the last enemy’—death. By Rev. 20: 5, 6, we learn that ‘the rest of the dead lived not again till the thousand years were finished;’ that then ‘the second death’ is to have ‘power over them,’ and they will be devoured ‘Verse 9. Then the Son, having reigned until he has put all enemies under his feet, ‘delivers up the kingdom to God even the Father,’ and becomes subject himself, that the Father ‘may be all in all.’” The plausibility of these declarations has carried many away with them, but it is easy to show their fallacy. As they lay so much stress upon their expositions of 1 Cor. 15: 22–28, we will quote the text for the benefit of the reader. “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order; Christ the first fruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming. Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule, and all authority, and power. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For he hath put all enemies under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted which did put all things under him. And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.” Of this important text we offer the following exposition:— 1. “The end” is an expression used in the New Testament to denote the termination of the day of salvation, or the time of Christ’s coming. In every instance, with only one exception, when it is used without a direct qualification, the context shows that it refers to the end of this age. In the exceptional instance, John 13: 1, the context clearly shows the sense of its use. If the reader wishes to test our assertion, he will please examine Matt. 10: 22; 24: 3, 6, 13, 14; 13: 39 (compare 24: 30, 31); 28: 20; 2 Cor. 1: 13, 14 (compare 1 Thess. 2: 19); Rev. 2: 26. The text in question is so clear in its reference as to leave no room for doubt. “Christ the first-fruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming. THEN COMETH THE END.” Here is brought to view the coming of Christ, but not one word about the 1000 years, nor any other subsequent period. We are not inclined to grant what is asserted—that it refers to the termination of the 1000 years, as that is the very point in dispute, and if it be true, they should prove it, and not rest it on their bare assertion. And this brings us to notice. 2. “The end” is not synchronous with the delivering up of the kingdom. The text reads, “Then cometh the end WHEN HE SHALL HAVE DELIVERED up the kingdom to God.” By this it appears that the kingdom will be delivered up before the end; and, of course, the end cannot refer to “the close of the reign,” as Mr. Marsh has it. Mr. Stephenson makes it the close of an “independent reign,” which is no better; for it may be the close in one sense as well as another, so far as the question of time is concerned. But it is not the close of the reign in any sense—they are separate events. And he makes the delivering up necessary “that the Father may be supreme.” But when we consider the relation the two thrones sustain to each other, and that Christ receives his own throne by the gift of the Father, the idea is truly absurd that Christ must deliver up to the Father the throne of David, that the Father may be supreme! as it implies that by the gift of the throne of David to Christ, the Father’s throne—the throne of all the universe—lost its supremacy. This idea of an “independent reign” is evidently thrown in to obviate a difficulty into which many have rushed by limiting the reign of Christ on his own throne. Thus, it does not look consistent to talk of “the close” of a reign of which the Scriptures say “there shall be no end.” But the difficulty is not, and cannot be, obviated. Both of these writers agree that he will reign till a certain work shall be accomplished, and that it will be accomplished in 1000 years subsequent to the advent. And as he reigns till a certain point and then delivers up the kingdom, if their view of the reign be correct it must also be correct to call it the end of the reign. But the prophet said, “Of the increase of his government and peace THERE SHALL BE NO END; upon the throne of David and upon his kingdom, to order it and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth, even forever.” Isa. 9: 7. And the angel said, “The Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David, and he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there shall be no end.” Luke 1: 32, 33. Paul, quoting the words of the psalmist, says, “Unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever.” To evade the force of this testimony it has been said that the term forever applies to limited duration. That it is sometimes so used, we admit, but not in these passages. All must admit that it is sometimes applied to unlimited duration, denoting eternity. And when it is used in a limited sense, there must be something in the connection to show in what sense it is used, otherwise it would be ambiguous or indefinite, and should not then be offered to prove anything. We are warranted in saying it is used in its fullest sense, or unlimited, when referring to that of which it is said, “there shall be no end.” If “the end” and “no end” are used to signify the same thing, the result must be only confusion. It seems very evident that the reign and kingdom which continues till a certain time and is then delivered up cannot be that one which does not pass away, is forever, and has no end. We next notice that, 3. The work of subduing his enemies is never, in the Scriptures, ascribed to Christ. Mr. Marsh’s third point is, “One grand object of his reign is to subdue or destroy his enemies.” And Mr. Stephenson says, “Then the Son, having reigned until he has put all enemies under his feet, delivers up the kingdom.” Yet, notwithstanding this opinion is advanced with such confidence (and upon it, indeed, the whole theory of the Age to Come rests), it is altogether unscriptural. In 1 Cor. 15: 23–28, as in Zech. 6: 12, 13, there are two persons brought to view, and the pronouns he and him refer to both, and so they must be referred, to preserve the sense of the text and to harmonize it with other scriptures. The view advocated by the teachers of the Age to Come, contradicts other passages and destroys the sense of this. To show the utter absurdity of the idea that Christ subdues his enemies and puts them under his feet in that or any other age, we here quote the text, leaving out the pronouns and inserting the name, according to that view. It will then read as follows:— “Christ the first-fruits: afterward they that are Christ’s at Christ’s coming. Then cometh the end, when Christ shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when Christ shall have put down all rule, and all authority, and power. For Christ must reign till Christ hath put all enemies under Christ’s feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For Christ hath put all things under Christ’s feet. But when Christ saith, All things are put under Christ, it is manifest that Christ is excepted which did put all things under Christ. And when all things shall be subdued unto Christ, then shall the Son [Christ] also himself be subject unto Christ that put all things under Christ, that God may be all in all.” This is worse—far worse, than nonsense; yet how will the “Age-to-Come” believer avoid accepting this as the substance of his faith? It is evident that Christ becomes subject to him that puts all things under him; and if he subdues his enemies and puts them under his own feet, as they declare, then it is equally evident that he becomes subject to himself! Against this fallacy we present the truth that, 4. The Father subdues the enemies of Christ, and puts them under his feet. Before bringing other scriptures to bear on this fact, we give another rendering of the text, supposing this declaration to be true:— “Christ the first-fruits: afterward they that are Christ’s at Christ’s coming. Then cometh the end, when Christ shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when the Father shall have put down all rule, and all authority, and power. For Christ must reign till the Father hath put all enemies under Christ’s feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For the Father hath put all things under Christ’s feet. But when the Father saith, All things are put under Christ, it is manifest that the Father is excepted which did put all things under Christ. And when all things shall be subdued unto Christ, then shall the Son [Christ] also himself be subject unto the Father that put all things under Christ, that God may be all in all.” With the beauty and truthfulness of this view all must be struck at a glance. The error of the other view is in referring the pronouns to Christ throughout, when it is evident that they refer to both Father and Son immediately after both are introduced in verse 24. Thus it is proved clearly that the Father puts his enemies under the feet of his Son, or crowns him King and Lord over the kings and lords of this world. And this act of the God of Heaven in investing his Son with kingly power over his enemies is, in the prophecy, entitled, setting up the kingdom. And this is the only act of the Father, brought to view in the Scriptures, which answers to that event. What Do your Children Read ?
A bad book, magazine, or newspaper, is as dangerous to your child as a vicious companion, and will as surely corrupt his morals and lead him away from the paths of safety. Every parent should set this thought clearly before his mind, and ponder it well. Look to what your children read, and especially to the kind of papers that get into their hands, for there are now published scores of weekly papers, with attractive and sensuous illustrations, that are as hurtful to young and innocent souls as poison to a healthy body. Many of these papers have attained large circulations, and are sowing broadcast the seeds of vice and crime. Trenching on the very borders of indecency, they corrupt the morals, taint the imagination, and allure the weak and unguarded from the paths of innocence. The danger to young persons from this cause was never so great as at this time; and every father and mother should be on guard against an enemy that is sure to meet their child. Our mental companions—the thoughts and feelings that dwell with us when alone and influence our actions—these are what lift us up or drag us down. If your child has pure and good mental companions, he is safe; but if, through corrupt books and papers, evil thoughts and impure imaginings get into his mind, his danger is imminent. Look to it, then, that your children are kept as free as possible from this taint. Never bring into your house a paper or periodical that is not strictly pure, and watch carefully lest any such get into the hands of your growing-up boys.—Sel. Storms and the Mines of God’s Love
It was a storm that occasioned the discovery of the gold mines in India. Hath not a storm driven some to the discovery of the richer mines of God's love? Enter Through the Rent Veil
If God has rent the veil, it is the sinner’s obedience to enter. D. T. BOURDEAU
By Daniel T. Bourdeau
I organized a Bible-class and Sabbath-school at Wedron, and left fifteen keeping the Sabbath. I believe that many more will be added to their numbers if they are faithful, learn the lesson of self-reliance, and make experiments in testing the merits of present truth by individual effort in the performance of the various duties it enjoins. We have spent much of our time for the past two weeks in the neighborhood of Bro. Bernard, a French brother in Serena. His wife and one of his sisters have taken a firm stand on the truth, amid much opposition. God bless these dear souls. Our stay with them was pleasant. Truly the leaven of truth has been working in this neighborhood, and those who have almost despaired of seeing anything accomplished among the French have reason to take courage and labor on patiently. While we were in this neighborhood, Bro. Bernard’s renter, an Englishman, died of lung fever. I was with him much during his sickness. He had been to some of our meetings, and was under conviction. He thoroughly confessed his sins and found mercy. For days he enjoyed peace of mind and sweet communion with God. The special blessings we enjoyed while laboring for this man inspired in us a greater desire to do all that in us lies to save perishing men. I preached his funeral sermon yesterday. We are on our way to St. Anne, Kankakee County, Illinois. This will be our post-office address until further notice. It was with tender feelings and gratitude that we parted with the church at Serena, who have done all they could to make us comfortable and happy. May God’s blessing attend them as they perform the increased work that is rolled upon them by new openings to do good. Chicago, Ill., April 22, 1874. Atonement.—No. 14.
By Joseph Harvey Waggoner
In speaking of justification by faith, or of the exercise of grace through the blood of Christ for the remission of sins past, the apostle clearly divides between faith and works, and excludes works entirely. It is faith only—works not at all. But when he speaks of the future life of the justified, he speaks in a different manner. Then he teaches to “work out our own salvation with fear and trembling.” Phil. 2: 12. This is evangelical truth as well as the other; but it is an order which could not be given or obeyed relative to justification for past offenses, of which he is speaking in Rom. 3; for no one could work out a justification for a past offense. There is, then, this distinction to be regarded; the gospel is a remedy for sin; obedience is a preventive of sin. Now it cannot be that God regards future sin with any more favor than he does past sin. And if he does not, it would be reasonable to expect that his plan of salvation contemplated prevention as well as cure; and so we find it. Jesus saves from sin; puts away sin by the sacrifice of himself; says to the justified one, Go, sin no more; he is not a minister of sin, but of righteousness; therefore we shall not continue in sin that grace may abound. Both are in the gospel plan. Thus, man is under condemnation for sin; he also has a carnal mind, which is enmity against God, and not subject to the law of God; Rom. 8: 7; by position, a sinner—in disposition, sinful. It would not be sufficient to forgive past transgression and leave the sinful disposition, as we should again become involved in sin, and again come under condemnation. Nor would it be sufficient to remove the sinful disposition and leave the burden of past sin upon us, for that would condemn us in the judgment. Therefore Christ becomes a Saviour to us in both respects. He freely forgives our past sins, so that we stand free and justified; and he takes away the carnal mind, which is enmity against God, and not subject to his law, and makes us at peace with God—subject to his law; he writes it in our hearts so that we may delight in it. Then “the righteousness of the law” is “fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh,” the carnal mind, “but after the spirit.” Rom. 8: 4. The following remarks by Andrew Fuller are pointed, and worthy of careful consideration:—
“An atonement has respect to justice, and justice to the law or rule which man has violated. If this be worthy of being traduced by a servant of Christ it was worthy of the same treatment from his Lord and Master; and then, instead of being honored by his life and death, it ought to have been annulled, both in respect of him and of us. The doctrine of the cross, according to this view of things, was so far from being a display of the divine glory that it must have been a most shocking exhibition of injustice. “If the doctrine of the atonement leads us to entertain degrading notions of the law of God, or to plead an exemption from its preceptive authority, we may be sure it is not the Scripture doctrine of reconciliation. Atonement has respect to justice, and justice to the law, or the revealed will of the Sovereign, which has been violated; and the very design of the atonement is to repair the honor of the law. If the law which has been transgressed were unjust, instead of an atonement being required for the breach of it, it ought to have been repealed, and the Lawgiver have taken upon himself the disgrace of having enacted it. Every instance of punishment among men is a sort of atonement to the justice of the country, the design of which is to restore the authority of good government, which transgression has impaired. But if the law itself is bad, or the penalty too severe, every sacrifice made to it must be an instance of cruelty. And should a prince of the blood royal, in compassion to the offenders, offer to suffer in their stead, for the purpose of atonement, whatever love it might discover on his part, it were still greater cruelty to accept the offer, even though he might survive his sufferings. The public voice would be, There is no need of any atonement; it will do no honor, but dishonor, to the legislature; and to call the liberation of the convicts an act of grace, is to add insult to injury. The law ought not to have been enacted, and now it is enacted, ought immediately to be repealed. It is easy to see from hence, that in proportion as the law is depreciated, the gospel is undermined, and both grace and atonement rendered void. It is the law as abused, or as turned into a way of life, in opposition to the gospel, for which it was never given to a fallen creature, that the sacred Scriptures depreciate it; and not as the revealed will of God, the immutable standard of right and wrong. In this view the apostles delighted in it; and if we are Christians we shall delight in it too; and shall not object to be under it as a rule of duty, for no man objects to be governed by laws which he loves.”—Atonement of Christ, from the works of Andrew Fuller, pub. by Am. Tract Society, pp. 124, 160, 161. They who object to this as tending to salvation by works, cannot have looked deeply into the divine word. If Jesus takes away the sinful disposition, renews us or gives us a new heart, and brings us in subjection to the law of God, all our obedience to that law is by virtue of that change of heart effected by him; therefore, while he grants to us all the virtue of his blood for the remission of past sin, he is entitled to all the glory of our obedience in the future. So it is all of grace, and we have nothing of which to boast in any respect, nor anything to claim on our own account, for all that we do is by strength imparted by him. Here we have a system which is all grace, and no license to sin; a gospel worthy of Heaven—imparting mercy freely, and maintaining law and justice strictly. Here we see that without him we can do nothing, though we shall work out our own salvation with fear and trembling, “it is God that worketh in us to will and to do of his good pleasure.” We are justified by faith, yet so that we must add to our faith virtue; patiently continue in well doing; keep the commandments of God; fulfil the righteousness of the law, &c. Some have been troubled to harmonize Paul with James on justification; but their difficulty grows out of a disregard of the distinction here noticed. Paul, in Rom. 3, is treating on justification by faith for past offences only; while James is speaking of the obedience of faith. “By faith, Abraham obeyed.” Paul also speaks of faith which works by love. Gal. 5: 6. But neither Paul nor James says that works will procure the remission of past offences, or that faith will save without works. There is no difference in this respect in their teachings. “Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid; yea, we establish the law.” Rom. 3: 31. And as we do not make void the law through faith, so we do not supersede faith by obedience to the law; for that is through faith. The blood of Christ is our only refuge; his death opens to us the way of life.
J. H. WAGGONER. I am not satisfied with what my life has been,
I am not satisfied with what it is to-day.
I know not that at last my soul shall enter in
E’en though the pearly gates to everlasting day. I am not satisfied, I have not given all
The golden hours, the brightest and the best to
Thee.
I have not lived for others, and, forgetting self
Remembered Him who fully gave his life for me. I am not satisfied. Sometimes I’ve weary grown
Long ere the purple shadows gathered in the
west;
Ere yet the golden sheaves were safely gathered
home,
Have calmly sat me down with folded hands
to rest. With folded hands—while other reapers gathered
sheaves
All golden—gathered them with weary, aching
feet.
Methinks I hear the Master say, “Well done,” to
these,
“Well done” in thrilling tones—so rapturous
and so sweet. I am so weak—so very weak, and so defiled,
My faith is wavering, I cannot always see
The hand that guides my footsteps—Father, save
thy child,
Thine erring child, who that dark hour looks up
to thee. And oh! the past forgive! and from this twilight
hour
Help me to give my heart, my life, my all to
thee.
Deny me what thou wilt of any earthly good,
But this petition, Father! grant, oh! grant it
me. Ottawa, Kansas, April 28, 1874
By Smith Sharp
AFTER our quarterly meeting, March 14 and 15, I commenced meetings in a schoolhouse near where I had been in the winter, also holding some meetings with the friends who had lately embraced the truth. Found them all holding on, and the interest still good to hear. Remained with them six weeks, holding meetings with them, and near there, as the way opened. As the result, twelve were baptized. Three more signed the covenant at Richland, and three united with the Big Springs church. Organized Systematic Benevolence amounting to over $85, which we confidently expect will be raised to considerably over $100 as soon as they get a little more experience in this message. Sold $7 or $8 worth of books. Obtained three subscribers for the Reformer. I left them rejoicing in the truth, confidently expecting to meet many of them at our camp-meeting at Lee Summit, May 28. Several others are keeping the Sabbath, and others design to go forward in the ordinance of baptism soon. SMITH SHARP. Ottawa, Kansas, April 28, 1874
J. N. LOUGHBOROUGH
By John Norton Loughborough
At the time of my last report, Feb. 11, I was attending my sick companion. She has now so far recovered her health that I am enabled to be in the field again. During our afflictions, the friends at Woodland were exceedingly kind to us, for which they have our sincere thanks. Sabbath and first-day, March 7 and 8, we had a very interesting council of the S. D. Adventist ministers upon this coast, with our State officers. At this council, Bro. and sister Van Horn decided to go immediately to Washington Territory with a new tent. From March 15 to April 5 I spent the time mostly at Napa and St. Helena, holding meetings, and attending the discussion and dedication at Napa. We were favored for two weeks at Napa with the presence and counsel of Bro. and sister White, for which we were truly thankful. They spoke several times with freedom and acceptance at Napa, and Bro. White gave the dedication discourse in the new church, April 4. April 11 and 12, in company with Bro. Canright, attended the quarterly meeting at Woodland. This was an excellent meeting, and Bro. Canright's discourses encouraged the flock, and also awakened an interest in many minds. I am now at Red Bluff to spend a few days with the interested ones here. Bro. Canright and Cornell go out into a new field with the tent next week. They will hold at least one tent-meeting together, while I follow up the interest, and attend to some matters in the newly-raised churches. Hannibal, Mo.
By L. R. LONG
By the solicitation of a few friends here, I came to this place. One expressed his determination to have a place with the people of God. Seven united in signing the covenant. Systematic Benevolence was pledged, amounting to about twenty dollars. They were encouraged to endeavor to rise with the message. L. R. LONG. April 20, 1874. I HAVE just closed a series of meetings at Elk Falls, Howard Co., Kansas, which continued five weeks. Nine commenced to keep all of God's commandments, and the same number were baptized. Thirteen joined the church. Several others, who intended to join, were prevented from attending the last meeting by a severe storm. Our meeting closed with the ordinances. It was a solemn, searching season. All appeared to take fresh courage in the great work of overcoming. J. H. COOK. French Meetings at St. Anne, Illinois.
By Daniel T. Bourdeau
I REACHED this place last Wednesday night. I had determined to rest at least one week from the wear connected with my closing labors at Serena and Wedron; but the people were so anxious to know what the stranger had to say that, with the aid of Mr. Marshall, a kind friend with whom we are stopping, I at once secured the use of a hall at the rate of $5 a week. I gave my first lecture to about thirty last Saturday night. Sunday morning I spoke in English while the different French churches were holding their regular services. At the close of my sermon, two trustees of the first French Presbyterian church in the place urged me to occupy their meeting-house in the evening. At 2 P. M. there were about one hundred out to hear me on the symbols of Dan. 2. At the close of the meeting, one of the elders of the Presbyterian church arose, and said I might preach in their meeting-house as long as I desired. I accepted the offer, and spoke to upwards of two hundred last night on the symbols of Dan. 7. This is a French village of about five hundred inhabitants. It has five French churches. Two are Presbyterian, one is Roman Catholic, one Episcopalian, and one Baptist. The Baptists have a respectable meeting-house, but they have been greatly reduced in numbers by the emigration of several of their members to Kansas. Their preacher, one of my old acquaintances, has, from a want of support, been compelled to devote a part of his energies to the mercantile business. He will shortly return from a tour East. The Presbyterian church was started by M. Chiniquy, formerly a Catholic priest, who twenty-five and thirty years ago was the well-known champion of the Roman Catholics in opposing the progress of the French Baptists in Canada East. He came West about twenty years ago, soon left the Roman Catholics, and turned quite a large number to the Bible, so far as he had received it. He has started a high school, and will soon return from a voyage to Europe, Asia, and Africa. Pray that we may be enabled to revive the interest, and unite them on the great theme of the coming of Christ and the necessary preparation to meet him. St. Anne, Kankakee Co., Illinois, April 27, 1874. Walking With God in All Things
By Cecil
I must walk with God, in some way or other, whatever be my character or profession. I must acquire the holy habit of connecting everything that I possess in my house and affairs with God. If sickness or health visit my family, my eyes must see and my heart must acknowledge the hand of God therein. Whether our affairs move on smoothly or ruggedly, God must be acknowledged in them. —Cecil. A BROTHER writes from Elk Point, Dakota Territory:— “I was persuaded last summer by an Adventist sister to read the REVIEW, a few numbers of which she gave me, and also several tracts. I found them stored with such sound scriptural doctrine and based upon such plain and substantial arguments that, after a careful study of the Scriptures on the subjects during the past winter, I have concluded to accept the truth, or, as some of my neighbors call it, the ‘strange doctrine.’ There is no church or class of Adventists in this country—none who keep the Sabbath of the Lord but the sister above referred to and her family. But I pray you to send us a minister as soon as possible. I think good success would attend an effort here.” Another brother writes from Sangerville:— “I wish to acknowledge, by the liberality of some unknown friend, the receipt of your valuable and highly-prized paper. I look for its weekly visits with anxiety, and with pleasure devour its whole contents, and then send them abroad on their silent mission of light and love. And, although I have never practiced the one great truth it promulgates, yet I can see no good reason why I should not. It requires some nerve to divest ourselves of all our preconceived opinions and step out alone in a new direction; but I trust the grace of God is sufficient for me, and that I shall come off conqueror and more, through Him who first loved me.” Another writes from W. Wardsboro, Vt.:— “I was very much interested in an article in the REVIEW a few weeks ago on the Sabbath question, and would indorse what is there written; for I owe my light on the Sabbath, and, under God, my conversion, to its principles, and the observance of it to its teachings and the prayers of an esteemed disciple of Christ who felt its importance. It contains the very information that is needed to lead the honest in heart to an observance of the fourth commandment.”