“AND all the days that Adam lived, were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died.” Gen. v, 5.
How very expressive this brief notice of the death of the first man. He lived almost one thousand years; he ceased to live longer. Death closed the scene. The man who sinned against God in eating of the tree of knowledge, now experienced the penalty of the law, and turned to dust. He had lost Paradise by sin. Now he suffers death as the penalty of transgression. It is certain, therefore, that death cannot restore man to Paradise, for it is the wages of sin. How appropriate is the brief statement of Moses concerning the death of Adam. How evident that he did not think the real Adam still alive.
THE OBITUARIES OF GEN. V.
This chapter gives a complete list of the ancestors of Noah. The record states in each case the number of years that the patriarchs lived, and each record closes with these expressive words, “AND HE DIED.” How little like modern obituaries does this simple record appear.
But there is one remarkable exception in this list of patriarchal biographies. One of these men did not die. Enoch walked with God, and was not, for God took him. Or, as Paul states it, “Enoch was translated, that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him.” Heb. xi, 5. One of these men was taken by God, and thus did not die; the others were not taken by God to be with him, and so it is said of each of them, “He died.” How different is all this from the present style of obituaries, which makes death the gate to endless joy, and dispenses with the resurrection of the dead, or the translation of the living, by exempting the real man from death, and ushering him in the moment of death into Paradise.
THE VOICE OF ABEL'S BLOOD.
When God made inquisition concerning the murder of Abel, he states the cause of this inquiry to be that Abel's blood cried to him from the ground. That is, the sight of that innocent blood reminded the just Judge of the earth that punishment for this crime was demanded. Abel was a martyr of that same kind brought to view in Rev. vi. Because these persons are represented as souls under the altar, crying to God for vengeance upon their persecutors, many persons suppose that they are alive, under an altar in Heaven, asking God to punish their enemies, who, by killing them, had ushered them into the presence of God, where there is fullness of joy. Now here is Abel, slain under the same circumstances with themselves. What was it that cried to God for vengeance upon Cain? was it his immortal soul in the bliss of Paradise that cried for Cain's punishment? By no means. It was the sight of his innocent blood that thus appealed to God for the infliction of justice. But had it been true that the real Abel was alive and standing in the presence of God, personally demanding the punishment of Cain, God would not have said the blood of Abel cries from the ground, but Abel himself, in my presence, declares your crime, and demands your punishment.
But in what a revolting light would this place Abel. Yet it is the very position that orthodoxy assigns to all the martyrs. How much more just the view that the martyrs beneath the altar were thus presented because their lives had been offered upon it, and that it was the sight of their blood thus offered that demanded vengeance from God, and not the personal wish, or prayer, of the martyrs. Stephen prayed, as he was dying from the murderous assault of his enemies, “Lord, lay not this sin to their charge.” Acts vii; 60. If he could say such things in the agonies of a violent death, it is indeed incredible that so soon as he was ushered into the bliss of Heaven, he began to pray for vengeance upon his murderers. It was the blood of Abel, and not Abel in person, that cried to God for vengeance.
THE LIFE IS IN THE BLOOD.
Such is the teaching of God to Noah (Gen. ix, 4), and such the language of the law of Moses. Lev. xvii, 11, 14. This is far from indicating that man has an immortal nature.149Nothing is more susceptible of putrefaction than the blood. It is the immediate sufferer from the bad habits of man. It is capable of being filled with deadly poison. Indeed, it has in itself the seeds of death.
When it is said that without the shedding of blood is no remission (Heb. ix, 22), it is with direct reference to the fact that the blood represents the life, and that sinners who have forfeited their lives to the law of God, cannot be pardoned without the laying down of a life that the law could accept.
The church of Rome, not perceiving the point that it is the life which the law is after in demanding blood, and, perhaps, withal, willing to pervert the truth in order to make gain of godliness, teaches that one drop of Christ's blood was sufficient to redeem the world; but he shed it all, so that the church could have the overplus to use in the sale of indulgences. Such is the perversity of man's fallen nature, that there are more persons, probably, to-day, who choose to buy indulgences out of the pope's treasury, than to accept a free pardon of all their sins from Jesus Christ. Perhaps this is not, after all, so strange when we consider that Christ only pardons on condition that men leave off to sin; but in the other case, it is money, and not genuine repentance that constitutes the condition of acceptance.
THE OBITUARIES OF ABRAHAM'S ANCESTORS.
The life of Noah closes with the very same form of expression that is used in the case of all his ancestors. “And all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years; and he died.” Gen. ix, 29. But from Noah's time to Terah, the father of Abraham, this form of expression is dropped. Eight generations intervene between Noah and Terah. The record of their lives is given in Gen. xi. The form of expression in the case of each is the same. Each man is said to live a certain number of years prior to the birth of his son. Then he is said to live a certain number of years after that event. Such is the form used by Moses in this most concise style of biography. And how expressive is this continued silence respecting man's translation to Paradise by the act of dying. The period of life is given, and every thing indicates that at the expiration of that period they ceased to live. Beyond all doubt this is the exact truth.
In the case of Terah, the father of Abraham, almost the same form of expression is used as in the record of Noah and his ancestors. Gen. xi, 32. “And the days of Terah were two hundred and five years; and Terah died in Haran.” How significant are these brief obituaries. These men lived so many years, and then died, i. e., ceased to live longer. One man did not die, because God took him. That is the whole story. All died but one. Call death what you will, it is a plain declaration of the Holy Spirit, that in death there is no remembrance of God. Ps. vi, 5. So it is certain that the righteous among these ancient patriarchs are not now praising God. Ps. cxv, 17. And such of them as died in sin are not now suffering punishment. They are silent in sheol, waiting for the decision of the Judgment. Job xxi, 29, 30; Ps. xxxi, 17; 2 Pet. ii, 9.
THE DEATH OF HARAN.
“And Haran died before his father Terah, in the land of his nativity, in Ur of the Chaldees.” Gen. xi, 28. In these days it is nothing unusual for children to die before their parents. In fact, a very large portion of all the children do thus die. But such was not the case in ancient times, when the lives of men were simpler, and their habits less destructive to health. Here is the first express mention of the death of an individual while his father yet lived, and even he did not die till mature life. The Holy Spirit places this on record in a manner to call our attention to it.
Lamech's case furnishes a partial exception among the antediluvian patriarchs, as he, at the age of seven hundred and seventy-seven, died five years before Methuselah. And Noah and Shem, as antediluvian patriarchs, outlive their immediate posterity after the flood. Noah did not outlive his son Shem, but did outlive Peleg, the fifth in descent from himself. Shem outlived his own son, and even lived till Abraham was one hundred and fifty. Peleg outlived his son Reu, and Nahor outlived Terah, but, in each case, this is the result of the great shortening of life to the entire race of man after the flood. The case of Haran seems to be properly the first instance of a man dying in the prime of life, of which we have any knowledge. But in these days, a vast proportion die in childhood; and of those that survive this period, by far the larger part die in what should be the midst of their days. It is not God's mysterious providence, but the unaccountable folly of mankind, that thus makes it true of so many, that they do not live out half their days.
THE SHORTENING OF HUMAN LIFE.
The abridgement of the period of human life presents some things worthy of notice. The first great abridgement was in the first generation after Noah. He lived nine hundred and fifty years. But Shem, who was born after Noah was five hundred years old, only lived six hundred years. Here the life of man was shortened over one-third. In the next generation the duration of life was cut down about one-third again, i. e., from six hundred years to about four hundred. Arphaxad lived four hundred and thirty-eight years. The next generation, as represented by Salah, lived four hundred and thirty-three years. The next, as represented by Eber, four hundred and sixty-four. Then it is cut down almost one-half. Peleg, the son of Eber, lived two hundred and thirty-nine years. His son, Reu, lived two hundred and thirty-nine years. Serug, his son, lived two hundred and thirty years. Terah lived only one hundred and forty-eight years. Then the next generation rallies and recovers the period of two hundred years. Terah, the son of Nahor, lived two hundred and five years. It is remarkable that none after him are recorded to have lived two hundred years. See this interesting record in Genesis xi.
It is something worthy of our notice how life was thus abridged by successive acts. Each considerable abatement is in every case final. What is lost thus is never recovered. How brief is human life now compared with the two hundred and five years of Terah. Yet it is long enough for us to make sure of immortality. Thank God for this brief and fleeting life.
WATCHING THE SACRIFICE.
When Abraham asked a token of the Lord that he should actually inherit the land, he was bidden to offer a certain sacrifice. He made the offering as directed, but no signs of God's acceptance appeared. What did Abraham do? Did he become weary of waiting on God? Did he say that he had done what he could, and that it availed nothing? That he was discouraged to find no response, and that he should never act in that manner again? Far from it. He had entered upon something worth all that it could cost, and that was sure to bring the wished for result, if he could only wait long enough.
The sacrifice needed watching. Abraham needed just exactly the task of doing that watching. He spent a whole day in doing it. For the vision in which God conversed with him, was in the night season, as shown by the fact that Abraham was taken forth abroad, i. e., out of doors, to see the stars. When the vision ended, we may safely conclude that Abraham immediately prepared and offered the sacrifice. But it was not till the going down of the sun that the desired token was granted. So the whole live long day Abraham watched his sacrifice and waited for the hand of God to appear. See this remarkable story in Gen. xv.
What a lesson for our admonition. God bids us to present ourselves, and all that we have, a living sacrifice to him. Perhaps we make the sacrifice. Whoever is soundly converted, must do this very thing in order that God may thus accept him. But how few, having made this surrender of self to God, do thenceforward watch the sacrifice to see that it is not removed from the altar. How few, alas, do not rob the altar with their own hands. Having once given all to God, they break their solemn vows, and take back, piece by piece, what they had solemnly devoted to God.
Consider Abraham watching his sacrifice through weary hours. There was a man faithful with God. But how few have the spirit that was in him. “If ye were Abraham’s children, ye would do the works of Abraham.” John viii, 39.
It is ours to make the unreserved surrender of all to God. It is his to reward our sacrifice. But it is for us to wait his time. The time our God appoints is best. The waiting is for our benefit, not for the Lord’s. We shall wait not one moment beyond what is strictly necessary. But who of us shall thus prove our fidelity? Who of us shall receive for our reward the things which God hath prepared for him that waiteth for him? Isa. xiv, 4.
The Worth of Time
To show us the worth of time, God, most liberal of all other things, is exceedingly frugal in dispensation of that; for he never gives us two moments together, nor grants us a second till he has withdrawn the first.
Thoughts About Conversion.
By Dudley Marvin Canright
My experience teaches me that many, very many, persons start out with a very wrong idea of what they must do to be converted to God. Frequently, when I speak to persons who are making some effort to become Christians, and ask them why they do not do this or that duty, why they do not pray, or confess Christ publicly, or be baptized, or something of the kind, they say, “I am not fit to do it.” Then what do they intend to do? Why, they expect to wait till, by their own efforts, they become good enough to perform these duties acceptably to God. They realize that they have been sinners in the past; that they have displeased God and done wickedly. They feel as though God would not hear such person’s pray; so they propose to wait before they call upon him, and reform their lives, and become as near like Christians as they can in other respects. When they have made themselves pretty good in their own eyes, then they expect to call upon God, and that he will then listen to them.
Now what is all this? Nothing but a struggle of the carnal mind, and the old man, to keep itself alive. It is an effort to dress one’s self up in his own righteousness, and then expect that God will forgive his few sins because he is pretty good in so many respects. Is this the way to seek God? Is this the way the Bible points out for sinners to be converted and cleansed from sins? Far from it. This is just the way to deceive one’s self and make damnation sure. This is the way to build up a cold, human self-righteousness, which has no Christ, no salvation, no true repentance. This is a sad and awful mistake to make; yet it is one that I fear is frequently made. Christ is the sinner’s only hope. No other way can be found to pardon, and to the favor of God.
The case stands like this: We have sinned, polluted ourselves with wicked deeds, and stained our characters with iniquity. In the sight of God we stand guilty, all polluted and condemned for those sins already committed. In the book of God these sins stand to our account. Now suppose we do stop sinning; suppose we do not commit any more wicked deeds; suppose we do reform our lives so as to pass for very good persons. Does this make us any more innocent in the sight of God? Are we any less sinners than we were before? Not in the least. All these same sins stand against us, and will stand there till the day of Judgment, unless cleansed away by the blood of Christ.
Now what shall we do in this case? The very first thing for the penitent sinner to do, is to go to God and humbly confess all his sins. Then look to Christ and ask pardon of all his sins for Jesus’ sake. He must not expect pardon simply because he has stopped sinning, because he has reformed his life, or because he feels very bad for his sins. He must not expect pardon for any of these things; but he must seek for it and expect it, wholly and only, because Jesus has died for him. There is a fountain opened for sin and uncleanness, the fountain of Christ’s precious blood. With this he must be cleansed from his sins. This is that which will bring the blessing of God. This salvation is without money and without price. It is free for all. Yet, strange to tell, the poor sinner does not like to accept it. He will do everything rather than to throw himself upon the mercy of God, and the love of Jesus. He wants to fix up something that he can do himself, so as in some manner to claim pardon for his sins, because of something that he has done. But this will never do. The carnal heart must die. Christ alone must be all in all; he alone must have the praise and glory of every sinner’s salvation. Hence the very first thing for every one to do is to call upon God for mercy, and believe in Jesus Christ for the remission of his sins.
D. M. Canright.
Sigourney, Iowa.
THE CLOSING MESSAGES.—NO. 12.
By Roswell F. Cottrell
THAT the kingdoms of the earth are not the Babylon of the book of Revelation, is evident from several considerations.
1. She is the great city that “reigneth over the kings of the earth.” The beast, upon which the woman was seated, represents the kingdoms of the divided empire of Rome. Surely, the woman is not identical with the beast upon which she rides. But let Babylon represent the apostate church, as she was from the sixth to the sixteenth century, controlling the kings of Europe, and, through them, shedding the blood of the martyrs of Jesus, and how strikingly true is the application of the figure!
2. Babylon commits fornication with the kings of the earth. “The kings of the earth have committed fornication with her.” Then she is distinct from those kings. But the professed church, nominally espoused to Christ, compromises the pure doctrines of the gospel, lowering the standard of the truth, and mixing Christian doctrines with heathenism, to secure the patronage of kings, to exalt herself as a queen, and to crush, by bloody persecution, all that refuse to go down with her in her apostasy, but remain loyal and true to Christ and the gospel—when applied to such a one, how true the representation. Otherwise, the figure has no aptness.
3. Add to the foregoing the fact that when the plagues come, which are emphatically the plagues of Babylon, “the kings of the earth, who have committed fornication and lived deliciously with her, shall bewail her, and lament for her, when they shall see the smoke of her burning, standing afar off for fear of her torment,” and the point is fully established that Babylon is distinct from the civil governments of the world.
It has been held by some that the city of Rome was this Babylon, and that the literal destruction of that city by fire, would be the fall of Babylon. It is thought that the text: “The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth,” proves that the woman is the city of Rome, situated on her seven literal hills. But the seven heads are not literal mountains. In chap. xiii, we read that one of these heads received a deadly wound by a sword and was healed. This was not a literal mountain, but one of the forms of government of the Roman empire—the papal form received150a death-wound and was healed. That the heads are governments and not hills, is further evident from the crowns that were seen upon them; and, further still, from the fact that they are successive, only one of them existing at a time. Whiting literally translates the text, “The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sitteth, and they [the mountains] are seven kings.” The heads and the mountains then are two sets of symbols to represent the kings or civil governments over which the woman rules; even as the “woman” and that great “city” are two symbols of the ecclesiastical power “which reigneth over the kings of the earth.” Of these governments it is said, “Five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come.” Apply this to the city of Rome at the time indicated in the prophecy, and she was standing on a single hill, five had tumbled down, the sixth she then occupied, and the seventh was still to be thrown up by some future volcanic eruption.
Rome was the literal seat of that government which was symbolized as the beast. When the civil government of Rome was changed from its Pagan to its Papal form, it is said that “the dragon gave him his power, and his seat.” All know that the seat of this government was Rome; and that the civil power once exercised there by pagan emperors, was afterward wielded by the popes. The seat of the beast and the woman that sits upon the beast cannot be identical. Hence the woman is not the city of Rome.
But the people of God are called out of Babylon that they may escape her plagues. Are they chiefly in the city of Rome? But they are in Babylon after her fall is announced. Now, if Rome is Babylon, and her fall is the destruction of that city, then the people of God will be found in her, even after she shall be “utterly burned with fire.”
Thus the folly of every false view of the subject is readily seen, when we apply the various specifications given; but when we take the right view, every portion of the prophecy will sustain it. The prophecy is infallible in all its parts; and when we find an object to which every specification perfectly applies, we have arrived at an infallible conclusion.
R. F. COTTRELL.
VERMONT STATE CONFERENCE.
By A. C. Bourdeau; N. Orcutt
Seventh Annual Session.
PURSUANT to call of Committee, published in REVIEW, Sept. 14, 1869, the Vermont State Conference assembled at Enosburgh, Vt., Oct. 7, 1869, at 9 A. M. Owing to limited attendance on account of recent storm and freshet, adjourned until Friday, Oct. 8, at 9 A. M.
Meeting called to order by the President. Prayer by Bro. A. Stone.
Voted, That brethren present, in good standing in the churches to which they belong, be invited to participate in the deliberations of this Conference.
Report of the last session read and approved. Reports of churches called for and read.
Voted, That a committee of five on Nominations be appointed by the Chair; and H. Bingham, A. Stone, E. Kellogg, M. Gould, and D. Wilcox, were appointed.
Voted, That an Auditing Committee of six be appointed by the Chair. Brn. H. Bingham, W. I. Cross, D. Wilcox, E. Kellogg, M. Gould, and F. Gould, were appointed said committee.
After some time spent in discussing matters pertaining to the church at East Richford, adjourned until 2 P. M.
Assembled at the hour. Prayer by Bro. A. S. Hutchins.
The following preamble and resolutions, were presented and unanimously adopted.
Whereas, The church at East Richford, have, in opposition to the counsel and advice of Bro. A. C. Bourdeau, President of this Conference, and the judgment of the other members of the Executive Committee, commenced to erect a house of worship, more expensive than, in the judgment of the Committee, their wants require, or their pecuniary ability would warrant; therefore,
Resolved, That the counsel and advice thus given should have been honored and heeded, that the interests of the cause would thus have been advanced, and union and harmony in the body thereby promoted.
Resolved, That we will aid by our means in finishing the house, as the interests of the cause may seem to demand, and as the Executive Committee may advise, and that the church be allowed to retain one-half, or more, of their s. b. pledges for the present year, as the Executive Committee may direct.
The Nominating Committee presented the names of A. C. Bourdeau for President, N. Orcutt, Secretary, and W. I. Cross, Treasurer, which nominations were ratified by the Conference. A. C. Bourdeau, L. Bean, and N. Orcutt, were appointed Executive Committee.
Report of Secretary called for, read and accepted. Adjourned until Oct. 10, 8½ A. M.
Met pursuant to adjournment. Prayer by Bro. N. Orcutt. Reports of ministers and licentiates called for, and the following brethren responded: A. Stone, A. S. Hutchins, A. C. Bourdeau, and N. Orcutt.
The following preambles and resolutions were unanimously adopted by the Conference.
NEW ENGLAND CONFERENCE.
Whereas, It is suggested, and seems reasonable to believe, that it might be subservient to the interests and advancement of the cause of truth in the Eastern States and Canada, to concentrate our strength in the organization of a New England Conference, therefore,
Resolved, That should a meeting at any time be called to effect the organization of such a Conference, the several churches within the limits of this Conference shall represent themselves by delegate or letter to said meeting, and we will conform to the result of the deliberations of such meeting, respecting the disorganization of the Vermont State Conference, and any other arrangement which may by it be made.
NEW ENGLAND CAMP-MEETING.
Whereas, Our hearts were cheered and encouraged, by witnessing the interest manifested by the brethren and sisters in Vermont in attending the New England Camp-meeting, and by the privileges enjoyed with those of like faith during the meeting; therefore,
Resolved, That we would express our gratitude to God for the plain, pointed testimonies and rich lessons of instruction from the lips of his faithful servants, reminding us of the obligations resting upon us, of the dangers which threaten, as well as of the strong arm out-stretched to succor and save; and while, in this, we acknowledge the goodness of God, we will strive to improve and profit by the warnings, admonitions, and instructions received; and that we extend a cordial invitation to Bro. and Sr. White, to visit and favor us with their labors, as the way may open before them.
FOREIGN MISSIONS.
Resolved, That we would express our gratitude to our Heavenly Father, for the interest in the present truth awakened, through the instrumentality of Bro. A. C. Bourdeau, among the French in northern Vermont and Canada, and for the work already accomplished among them, and that we pledge our prayers and hearty co-operation in the work of Foreign Missions, and that we will aid by our means, as may be necessary, to carry forward this important branch of the great work in which we are engaged.
The resolutions which were adopted by the General Conference, May 18, 1869, relative to Spiritual Gifts, Health Reform, and California Mission, were unanimously adopted by this Conference.
Voted, That credentials be granted to Brn. A. Stone, A. S. Hutchins, A. C. Bourdeau, D. T. Bourdeau, and N. Orcutt.
Voted, That a license be granted to Bro. L. Bean.
Voted, That the matter of granting licenses to Brn. D. T. Evans and E. Kellogg, be referred to the Executive Committee.
Report of Auditing Committee presented and accepted.
Adjourned to call of Committee.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
Met at call of Committee.
Voted, That the commencement of the financial year, of this Conference, be changed from June 1 to January 1.
Voted, That the proceedings of this Conference be forwarded to the REVIEW AND HERALD for publication.
Adjourned sine die.
A. C. BOURDEAU, President.
N. ORCUTT, Secretary.
SMALL inconsistencies destroy the influence of good men.
IOWA STATE CONFERENCE.
By George I. Butler; A. A. Fairfield
The seventh annual session of this Conference was held in connection with the camp-meeting as per announcement in REVIEW. Sixth-day, Oct. 8, called to order by the President, Geo. I. Butler. Prayer by Eld. Canright. Ten churches responded to call for credentials of delegates.
Moved, That Eld. Canright be invited to take part in the deliberations of this Conference.
The churches at Brighton and State Center made application for membership. On motion they were admitted.
Moved, That C. N. Ford be admitted to act as delegate for the church at Iowa City.
Moved, That all brethren, of good standing, be invited to take part in the discussions of this Conference.
Moved, That a committee of three be appointed to nominate officers for the ensuing year.
Moved, That the Chair appoint said committee.
The following-named brethren were selected: D. M. Canright, Wm. P. Andrews, and Smith Sharp.
Moved, That a committee of three be appointed to draft resolutions.
Moved, That the Chair appoint.
The following names were called: D. M. Canright, J. H. Morrison and J. T. Mitchell.
Moved, That a committee of six be selected to audit accounts.
Moved, That the Chair select.
The following brethren were named: D. M. Canright, Benn Auten, Russel Hart, A. A. Fairfield, N. Hoyt and S. Osborn.
On motion, adjourned to call of committee.
Evening after Sabbath, 6½ o'clock, met per call of committee. Prayer by J. N. Andrews.
Moved, That Eld. White and Andrews be invited to take part in this Conference.
Moved, That the church at Talleyrand be admitted to this Conference.
Moved, That the church at Sigourney be admitted to this Conference.
On motion, adjourned to 8 o'clock A. M., first-day.
Met per adjournment. Prayer by Eld. White.
Treasurer's report read and approved.
Moved, That the camp-meeting and Conference of the ensuing year be held, beginning the first Thursday in June, 1870.
Moved, That the Chair appoint a committee of six to select and prepare the ground for said meeting.151
On motion, adjourned to call of committee.
Second-day morning, met per call of committee. Prayer by J. N. Andrews. Nominating Committee reported in favor of present incumbents. On motion, they were re-elected.
Resolved, That this Conference hereby extend a hearty invitation to Bro. White to settle in Iowa, if he deem it consistent with duty.
Moved, That J. H. Morrison be granted license to publicly teach the doctrines of the Seventh-day Adventists.
On motion, the credentials of Geo. I. Butler were renewed.
Moved, That Geo. I. Butler be appointed a delegate to General Conference.
Chair appointed Camp-meeting Committee as follows: J. T. Mitchell, D. Andre, T. Hare, D. T. Shireman, H. Nicola and Russel Hart. On motion, Geo. I. Butler was added to said committee.
Resolved, That a subscription be raised to finish paying for tent, and to create a camp-meeting fund.
Moved, That $300 of Conference Funds be appropriated to General Conference Missionary Fund.
Moved, That 80 per cent of all the S. B. received by the churches be paid to State Conference.
On motion, adjourned to call of committee, which, from the frequency and length of meetings, was hindered till too late to get the delegates together; so business was left a little unfinished.
GEO. I. BUTLER, President.
A. A. FAIRFIELD, Secretary.
THE VERMONT CONFERENCE.
By A. C. Bourdeau
This yearly meeting, which was held with the Enosburg church, at Bordoville, Vt., had a smaller attendance of brethren and sisters from other churches than usual, on account of a very severe storm and freshet which had just occurred, and had washed away bridges, and rendered the roads impassable in many places. Yet it is with pleasure, and a good degree of satisfaction, that we look back to this meeting. The blessing of God attended in all the deliberations of the Conference. Freedom was enjoyed in speaking the word by the preachers; and the prayer and social meetings were profitable and interesting to nearly all who attended.
On Sabbath, at the close of the forenoon meeting, we repaired to a clear and beautiful stream of water, where I baptized an American brother in the usual manner, and three French persons, repeating the words, "Je te baptize au nom du Pere, et du Fils, et du Saint-Esprit." This was truly a refreshing season to all present.
After preaching in the afternoon, we had a cheering season while Bro. Nahum Orcutt was ordained to the gospel ministry, with, 1. Prayer by Eld. A. S. Hutchins and laying on of hands by the ministers present; 2. Ministerial charge by Eld. A. Stone, and 3. Giving the right hand of fellowship by the writer.
At the close of the last meeting, $91.80 were pledged for the Benevolent Association.
A. C. BOURDEAU.
Bordoville, Vt., Oct. 22, 1869.
A Letter and Reply.
DEAR BROTHER: I write you for information in regard to the Sabbath. Last fall we moved to Stanton, Montcalm Co., Mich., and while there, for the first time, we heard of the Seventh-day Adventists. I heard a few lectures from Eld. Matteson, and was convinced that Saturday is the true Sabbath. Owing to the health of my family we returned this spring to our old home in this State. The Sabbath is something very strange to the people of this region. We are called Jews, and are blamed for keeping the old Mosaic law.
I was taught in Michigan that the Sabbath was changed by the Roman Apostasy, and that this change was wrought during the dark ages. I was told yesterday that the apostles made the change. I would like to have some testimony from history relative to this change of the Sabbath so that I can answer those who question my reasons for differing from others. We are alone in this faith, but we intend to keep the Sabbath. I want to take your paper as soon as I can.
I desire also to learn how soon after the dark ages the seventh-day began to be observed by Christians. I am told that a city set upon a hill cannot be hid; and that if it had been God's will that men should keep the seventh-day, there would have been people keeping it ever since Christ, beside the Jews.
WM. JAMES.
Kosciusko Co., Ind.
ANSWER. We are glad to learn that you have decision of heart to obey God in the observance of the fourth commandment. One thing is very certain, with the open Bible in your hand, you can show that God appointed the seventh day to a holy use in memory of his own rest from the work of creation, and that he has never revoked this appointment, and never changed it to the first day of the week. The observance of the rest-day of the Lord is enforced by one of the ten commandments. That precept survived the crucifixion of Christ, and was obeyed under very remarkable circumstances the day after that event. Luke xxiii, 56. The Bible contains not one hint of the change of the Sabbath, except indeed by the little horn. Dan. vii, 25. It never speaks of Sunday as a day of abstinence from labor. It never calls it by the name of Sabbath, or by any sacred title whatsoever. Nothing can be more certain, therefore, than that the original Sabbath has never been changed by divine authority, and that, if we make the Bible our guide, it is clearly our duty to keep the Sabbath of the Lord, ordained at the beginning of our world's existence.
Until the new edition of the History of the Sabbath is published, which will be at the earliest time possible, we refer you for information concerning the change of the Sabbath, to the little work recently published, entitled, “Sermons on the Sabbath and Law,” which we send you with this number of the paper. The change of the Sabbath was effected by many successive acts, all directed with the one object of putting down the Sabbath, and of establishing the first day of the week in its stead.
We think it can be clearly shown that God has not left himself without witnesses to bear testimony to his Sabbath, and in the midst of the general darkness to faithfully observe the day which he hallowed in Eden.
Forgiveness.
By I. SANBORN
“For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your Heavenly Father will also forgive you. But, if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.” Matt. vi, 14, 15. How wonderful is this language of the Saviour, and how appropriate to the condition of those who believe that the Judgment will soon close; who are also praying that the Lord may forgive them all their sins. Many of their sins they have never yet seen; yet they expect forgiveness while they hold malice and hardness in their hearts against their brother or sister; and yet they hope to be forgiven. Vain hope. They can see the mote in their brother’s eye, but cannot see the beam in their own eye.
What a contrast! A mote is something quite small, as dust. A beam is something large—a splinter large enough to destroy the power of sight till it is removed. What an idea that this brother or sister, with a sin represented by the Saviour by the term “beam,” in the eye, should think of seeing the little mote in the brother’s eye. But Jesus says, Take the beam out of thine own eye, then thou canst see clearly to take the mote out of thy brother’s eye. This was well illustrated in the case of the woman that was brought to the Saviour, condemned for breaking the seventh commandment. Jesus said, Let him that is without sin cast the first stone at her; and they all went out one by one; and he said, Hath no man condemned thee? She said, No man, Lord; and he said, Neither do I condemn thee; go and sin no more.
Suppose my brother has sinned. Does he not need my help to overcome? But how can I help him, when I need the very same kind of help myself that he needs? May the Lord help us all to remember that until we are without sin, that is, until we walk after the Spirit entirely, and not after the flesh at all, we are not in a condition to be of any help to our erring brothers and sisters. May all who read these few lines prayerfully consider the importance of getting the beam out of their own eyes before they try to get the mote out of their brother’s eye. I. SANBORN.