We showed last week that a future resurrection is an event of the most absolute necessity, inasmuch as without it there is no future existence for the human race: a fact which entirely destroys at one blow the doctrine of the immortality of the soul. We now propose to notice the prominence given to this event in the sacred writings, and some of the plain declarations that it will surely take place.
1. The resurrection is the great event to which the sacred writers look forward as the object of their hope. In the far distant ages a day rose to their view in which the dead came forth from their graves, and stood before God; and before the coming of that day they did not expect eternal life.
So Job testifies: “I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that he will stand at the latter day upon the earth. And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God.” Job 19: 25, 26.
David entertained the same satisfactory hope. “As for me,” he says, “I shall be satisfied when I awake with thy likeness.” Ps. 17: 15.
Isaiah struck some thrilling notes on the same theme: “Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust; for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead.” Isa. 26: 19.
It was the hope of Paul, that eminent apostle, through all his sufferings and toils. For this he could sacrifice any temporal good, and take up any cross. He assures us that he considered his afflictions, his troubles on every side, his perplexities, persecutions, stripes, imprisonments, and perils, but light afflictions; yea, he could utterly lose sight of them; and then he tells us why he could do it: it was in view of “the glory which shall be revealed in us,” “knowing,” says he, “that He which raised up the Lord Jesus, shall raise us up also by Jesus, and shall present us with you.” 2 Cor. 4: 14.
The assurance that he should be raised up at the last day, and be presented with the rest of the saints, when the Lord shall present to his Father a church without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, Eph. 5: 27, sustained him under all his burdens. The resurrection was the staff of his hope. Again he says that he could count all things loss, if by any means he might attain to a resurrection (exanastasis) out from among the dead. Phil. 3: 8–11.
We refer to one more passage which expresses as clearly as language can do it, the apostle’s hope. 2 Cor. 1: 8, 9: “For we would not, brethren, have you ignorant of our trouble which came to us in Asia, that we were pressed out of measure, above strength, insomuch that we despaired even of life. But we had the sentence of death in ourselves, that we should not trust in ourselves, but in God which raiseth the dead.” Paul here gives us to understand that he could not trust in himself because he was mortal. He must therefore put his trust in God; and he tells us why he does this: not because God had promised him any happiness as a disembodied soul; but because he was able and willing to raise him from the dead. Paul “kept back nothing that was profitable,” and did not shun “to declare all the counsel of God,” yet he never once endeavored to console himself or his brethren by any allusion to a disembodied state of existence, but passed over this as if it were not at all to be taken into the account, and fixed all his hope on the resurrection. Why this, if going to Heaven or hell at death, be a gospel doctrine?
2. The resurrection is the time to which prophets and apostles looked forward as the day of their reward. Should any one carefully search the Bible to ascertain the time which it designates as the time of reward to the righteous and punishment to the wicked, he would find it to be not at death but at the resurrection. Our Saviour clearly sets forth this fact in Luke 14: 13, 14: “But when thou makest a feast, call the poor, the maimed, the lame, blind; and thou shalt be blessed; for they cannot recompense thee; for thou shalt be recompensed,” not at death, but, “at the resurrection of the just.”
Mark also the language by which the Lord would restrain that voice of weeping which was heard in Ramah. When Herod sent forth and slew all the children in Bethlehem from two years old and under, in hopes thereby to put to death the infant Saviour, then was fulfilled, says Matthew, what was spoken by the prophet, “In Ramah there was a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they were not.” But what said the Lord to Rachel? See the original prophecy, Jer. 31: 15–17: “Thus saith the Lord, Refrain thy voice from weeping, and thine eyes from tears; for thy work shall be rewarded, saith the Lord; and they shall come again from the land of the enemy. And there is hope in thine end, saith the Lord, that thy children shall come again to their own border.” Not thus would the mourning Rachels of the 19th century be comforted by the professed shepherds of the flock of Christ. They would tell them, Refrain thy voice from weeping; for thy sons are now in their cherubs chanting their joyful anthems in their Heavenly Father’s home. But the Lord points the mourners in Ramah forward to the resurrection for their hope; and though till that time their children “were not,” or were out of existence, in the land of death, the great enemy of our race, yet, says the Lord, they shall come again from the land of the enemy, they shall return again to their own border, and thy work shall be rewarded; and he bids them refrain their voices from weeping, their eyes from tears, and their hearts from sorrow, in view of that glorious event.
The apostles represent the day of Christ’s coming and the resurrection as the time when the saints will receive their crowns of glory. Says Peter, “And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.” 1 Pet. 5: 4. And Paul says that there is laid up for him a crown of righteousness, and not for him only, but for all those also that love his appearing, and which shall be given him in that day [the day of Christ’s appearing]. These holy apostles were not expecting their crowns of reward sooner than this.
All this is utterly inconsistent with the idea of a conscious intermediate state, and rewards or punishments at death. But the word of God must stand, and the theories of men must bow to its authority.
In 1 Cor. 15: 32, Paul further tells us when he expected to reap advantage or reward for all the dangers he incurred here in behalf of the truth: “If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not? let us eat and drink; for to-morrow we die.” If without a resurrection he would receive no reward, it is evident that he expected his reward at that time but not before. His language here is moreover a reiteration of verse 18, that if there is no resurrection, they which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.
Our Lord testified that of all which the Father had given him he should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day. This language is also at once a positive declaration that the resurrection shall take place, and that without this event, all is lost. To the same effect is 1 Cor. 15: 52, 53, “The trumpet shall sound and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.” Here is a plain announcement that the resurrection will take place; that the change mentioned will be wrought at that time; and that this change must take place, or we cannot inherit the kingdom of God. Verse 50. Therefore without a resurrection, none who have fallen in death will ever behold the kingdom of God.
3. The resurrection is made the basis of many of the comforting promises of Scripture. 1 Thess. 4: 16, 17: “For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and the trump of God; and the dead in Christ shall rise first. Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.” We have already referred to this passage in this article on the Resurrection. We quote it again to show that God designed that from these promises we should comfort ourselves and one another in the keenest of all our afflictions, and the darkest of all our hours, the hour of bereavement. For the apostle immediately adds: “Wherefore comfort one another with these words.” Is it to such facts as these, the second coming of Christ and the resurrection of the dead, that the theology of our day appeals to alleviate the sorrow which the human heart will feel for the loss of departed loved ones? Here if anywhere, and on this subject if on any that the apostle has anywhere taken up, should come in the modern doctrine of uninterrupted consciousness in the intermediate state. But Paul was evidently against any such doctrine, and so denies it a place on the page of truth, but passes right over to the resurrection as the place where comfort is to be found for the mourners.
As the resurrection is inseparably connected with the second coming of Christ, the words of Christ in John 14: 1–3, are equally in point on this question. When he was about to leave his sorrowing disciples, he told them that he was going to prepare a place for them; he informed them moreover of his design that they should ultimately be with himself. But how was this to be accomplished? Was it through death, by which a deathless spirit would be released to soar away to meet its Saviour? No; but, says he, I will come again and receive you to myself, that where I am, there ye may be also. Should any say that this coming of the Saviour is at death, we reply, that the disciples of our Lord did not so understand it. See John 21: 22, 23. Jesus incidentally remarked concerning one of his followers, “If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me;” and the saying went immediately abroad among the disciples, on the strength of these words, that that disciple should not die.
The eminent and pious Joseph Alleine also testifies:
“But we shall lift up our heads because the day of our redemption draweth nigh. This is the day I look for, and wait for, and have laid up all my hopes in. If the Lord return not, I profess myself undone; my preaching is vain, and my suffering is vain. The thing, you see, is established, and every circumstance is determined. How sweet are the words that dropped from the precious lips of our departing Lord! What generous cordials hath he left us in his parting sermon and his last prayer! And yet of all the rest these are the sweetest: ‘I will come again and receive you unto myself’ that where I am there ye may be also. What need you any further witness?”
Dr. Clarke, in his general remarks on 1 Cor. 15, says:—
“The doctrine of the resurrection appears to have been thought of much more consequence among the primitive Christians than it is now. How is this? The apostles were continually insisting on it, and exciting the followers of God to diligence, obedience, and cheerfulness through it. And their successors in the present day seldom mention it. . . . There is not a doctrine in the gospel on which more stress is laid; and there is not a doctrine in the present system of preaching, which is treated with more neglect.”
The Fathers on the Sabbath Question.
By John Nevins Andrews
ONE of the principal means of blinding the people to the claims of the Sabbath of the fourth commandment is to present certain quotations purporting to be taken from those who had conversed with the apostles, or from those who had conversed with those who had seen them, and to show from these that the first day of the week was ordained by the apostles to be observed in the place of the ancient day of rest. The Sunday argument from the Scriptures is too feeble to stand alone, and never ventures out except with the testimony of the fathers of the early centuries, as a staff on which to lean for support. A set of quotations, purporting to come from the early writers of the Christian church, was long since prepared ready for use, and every first-day writer and speaker produces these in support of the change of the Sabbath, and in proof of the authority of the so-called Christian Sabbath.
It has therefore seemed to me important, inasmuch as this kind of testimony is so highly prized by first-day people, that the complete testimony of all the fathers for something more than three hundred years—which must be long enough to take in all those men who had conversed with those who had seen them etc., and several quotations more—should be given in full in their own words. I am persuaded that it will astonish many to see what dishonest use has been made of these writings.
The task has been one of much labor, and I have not known how to spare the time for it when so many other things demanded attention in the Sabbath History. But the work seemed to me to be imperatively demanded and I have now nearly accomplished it. Probably it would not be best to insert the whole of this matter in the new edition of the Sabbath History, as it is necessary to keep that work in as condensed a form as possible. I have therefore thought best, if the publishing committee approve, that this “Complete Testimony of the Fathers of the First Three Centuries concerning the Sabbath and First Day” should be published in a pamphlet of perhaps about one hundred pages. And after thus giving the testimony in full, with some remarks, the most important points can be given in a condensed form in the Sabbath History.
Modern church historians make very conflicting statements respecting the Sabbath and first-day in the centuries preceding Constantine. And there is no end to the modern first-day writers, who set forth the merits of the so-called Lord’s day from the authority of the fathers. These are thrust in the face of every person who observes the despised, down-trodden Sabbath of the great Creator. The History of the Sabbath is of course the proper work to give the truth on these points. And how shall it be done? Shall it array those historians who have borne testimony with greater or less clearness in behalf of the Sabbath against those others who have given to Sunday such unqualified support, and have treated the Sabbath with such contempt? This could be done; but this does not seem to me the proper method. It decides nothing, inasmuch as it simply arrays doctor against doctor, and makes the subject of the early history of the two days one of doubt and perplexity in many minds.
There seems to be, however, a wiser and better course, and one that cannot fail to give us the exact truth. Let us go back of these modern writers to the persons who lived in those first centuries, and find the exact words which every one of them has written (or which purport to have been written by them) on this subject. Then it matters little to us what the modern writers say, for we have the facts in full which they used in preparing their histories. This reason, also, has weighed with me in determining to give the full testimony of the fathers. I trust it will be found by no means dry, but of real interest to the common reader.
I have felt great anxiety to hasten forward, the whole work to completion. For this reason, I have desisted, for the time, from writing for our papers, that I might save my strength for this work. But after a little, I intend, if the Lord will, to write also for the papers. In the meantime, I ask an interest in the prayers of the people of God, that my work may be done to his acceptance. J. N. ANDREWS.
Lancaster, Mass., Nov. 15, 1872.
“A Very Pleasant Charge.”
By Roswell F. Cottrell
In recent travels it has been my lot to fall in company with several ministers, going to take their stations in new places. My attention was attracted to one of them by a remark he was making to a lady in the car, namely, “I think I have a very pleasant charge.” Imagine a rosy-cheeked, round-headed man in the prime of life, who has every appearance of being one who relishes good victuals, going to a new place to labor for the salvation of perishing souls, expressing his satisfaction at having a very pleasant charge. If one realizes the present state of the world and church, and feels the responsibility of a minister of Jesus Christ; if he feels the solemn charge of Paul to Timothy resting upon him, to “preach the word,” and in so doing reprove the popular sins of the church, as well as the unpopular sins of others, he will not congratulate himself very much with the anticipation of having a very pleasant charge.
THE LESS AGITATED THE BETTER.
Another young-looking minister, with a cigar in his mouth, at the railroad station, on my mentioning the present movement for a religious amendment of the Constitution, so as to place the enforcement of Sunday observance on the basis of constitutional law, and alluding to the increasing interest in the question of the particular day to be observed in obedience to the fourth commandment, replied that he thought that the less agitation there was in regard to the particular day, the better.189
It is natural enough for conscious error to shrink from investigation; but truth demands investigation; the more agitation the better—the more it is scoured by friction, the brighter it shines.
R. F. COTTRELL.
Sinners Converted.
By Dudley Marvin Canright
It is often urged against our work that it does not convert sinners, but simply takes members from other churches. This would be a serious objection, if it were only true. But nothing can be more false, as all our ministers and brethren can testify. So far as my experience has gone, a good share of those who embrace the truth are either infidels, unprofessors, or backsliders. True, a great many church members embrace these truths, and indeed they frequently need converting about as much as worldlings do. This they confess themselves, and very generally they have about as far to go in reforming as the others do. But there is power in this truth to reach the hardest heart, as I have frequently seen demonstrated.
Within a short time past, at this place, we have seen persons that have passed the middle-age of life without ever being affected by the popular preaching of the day. We have seen these men heartily embrace the truth, give their hearts to the Lord, and commence to lead holy lives. Nor has it been excitement, or an appeal to the sympathies, that has wrought this change in them; but simply truth, attended by the Spirit of God. For this, we will rejoice and thank God, whether men like it or not.
Our land is as full of Pharisees and hypocritical professors as was ever Jerusalem in the days of Christ. There are men and women, who, simply because they belong to the church, feel called upon to denounce, deride, and oppose the present truth, because, as they say, it divides the church, and takes their best members from them. Very frequently these persons are proud as Lucifer, vain, fond of show, and give good reason for us to believe that they have simply joined the church for popularity. Their religion has made no difference in their dress, as they wear as much jewelry, as many flowers, feathers, gewgaws, &c., as ever. It has not subdued their pride; for they are as haughty as before. It has not changed their lives, as they grind the face of the poor, oppress the widow, take exorbitant rates of interest, and in every way show themselves entirely destitute of the Spirit of Christ. These are the ones who denounce those who preach and obey the truth, simply because they feel no need of it themselves. Instead of sparing or modifying our preaching for such hypocrites, it is simply an indication that we ought to cry the louder, and lay it on the harder. If we do not, there is no hope of their being aroused.
D. M. CANRIGHT.
Hutchinson, Minn., Nov. 12, 1872.
I Would thou Wert Cold or Hot.
By A. M. LINDSLEY
All! these are the words of Jesus! Words of deep import! And they have their application now, and to us. “So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew thee out of my mouth.” Here is the end of those who make profession of the present truth, but do not come up to the standard in living it out. They have not the love of it deep down in the heart. Such are holding the truth in unrighteousness. Paul writes, “For the wrath of God is revealed from Heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness.” Rom. 1:18. For such to profess the truth, is admitting in words their obligations both to God and man, yet practically denying the same.
It is plain that a living faith in the messages will produce corresponding works. A faith or profession which comes short of this will only avail to our condemnation in the end. It is possible to live out these solemn truths. It is possible to obey God perfectly, else he would not have commanded it. By unbelief, we count the blood of the covenant an unholy thing. It is not possible to have the favor of God and be saved in his kingdom, unless we put forth efforts commensurate with the greatness of the work, and continue them till they shall be crowned with success.
Hot, in the text, implies great earnestness and zeal; a thorough heart-work; in fact, a loving God with all the heart, might, mind, and strength, and our neighbor as ourselves. Every power and capacity of our being must be entirely enlisted to overcome. How reasonable, if God is our kind Heavenly Father, Creator, and Preserver, that we should love him and be obedient to him. Jesus wants our love. He first loved us. Oh! how he loves! “Behold I stand at the door and knock.” Shall we open to him? We must. By the help of God, we will. Not sometime in the future, but now. Now is the day of salvation. Oh! for a taste of his love, then should we not rest satisfied at the halves. Oh! that we might realize our privilege in living at a time when the religion of Jesus Christ may cost us something. Away with faintness, and stumbling, and weakness, and unbelief, and hardness of heart, and all the list of hindrances to the pure life of God in the soul. Eternal life is worth something. It cost Jesus a life of toil and suffering, and a death of terrible agony—six thousand years of merciful providences on the part of both the Father and the Son, to bring about the salvation of a world. Oh! why should we cling to our rags and filthiness, our poverty and wretchedness, our blindness and nakedness? May God help us to make the exchange for the true riches, that we may, by-and-by, be exalted to a seat at his right hand, where the good and pure of all ages shall congregate; to a home with Jesus and angels; where God himself shall wipe away the last remains of sorrow. A. M. LINDSLEY.
Novel-Reading.
By Dudley Marvin Canright
TOO MUCH can scarcely be said against this pernicious and growing habit. Our young people should be everywhere and constantly warned against it. The inducements to engage in it are constantly held out before them. Let us not slack our hands in this matter. A taste once formed for it is exceedingly hard to break. They can just as well form the habit of reading good histories as this trash; and it will be just as enticing to them when they have once formed a taste for it. Young man or woman, do you read novels? I beseech you to think what you are doing. Take advice from others. The following is from the Phrenological Journal, October, 1872:—
“But, seriously, are we going to allow stories to take the place of other literature? Shall we sit and see our friends reading trashy novels without warning them of their ruinous effects? We have already too much day-dreaming and too little real life. Sometimes it seems as though we had forgotten that life was real, but regard it only as a dream, and stories rapidly increase dream-life.
“In speaking of novel-reading, a writer says, ‘It is a culpable habit; it consumes much valuable time; it is also a waste of money. The inveterate novel-reader, like the drunkard, lays out his money for that which is neither food, clothing, nor shelter.’
“The novel-reader’s course is very similar to that of the drunkard. They commence by an ‘occasional’ story, which they read to rest them from business, or to pass away the time while traveling. At first they read nothing but stories which are written for the purpose of exposing national or individual follies. Next they read to learn human nature; then, as their appetite increases, they read without any excuse only to satisfy a longing desire for romance. Finally, business, friends, and many opportunities of doing good, are neglected for the sake of a story. The realities of life are irksome to them. They complain about labor, and are constantly wishing Adam had never sinned and compelled man to ‘earn his bread by the sweat of his brow.’ They wish they had been born rich, or that ‘their ship would come in;’ in fact, they are desirous of anything that will release them from toil and give them leisure.
“Now, have we not right here a work to do? Is it not our duty to help clear the land of this curse? Let us awake, and be as ready to defend the right as others are the wrong. Let us not sit watching the tide of events, vainly regretting that wrong is on the increase, but stand ready to protect the right. ‘Let us not be weary in well-doing, but faithful unto the end.’” D. M. CANRIGHT.
A Good Criterion on the True Standing of a Church.
By D. T. Bourdeau
An excellent test of the spiritual prosperity of a church is punctuality on the part of its members in keeping up their religious meetings, and exhorting one another, and so much the more as they see the day of the Lord approaching. Heb. 10 : 25. This is evidence of Christian union, brotherly love, and love for God and his cause; of real faith in the immediate coming of Christ, and in the need of unusual earnestness in the use of all the means of grace to obtain a special preparation to meet it. But where, under ordinary circumstances, the meetings of a church are poorly attended, it is a sure sign of deficiency in these graces, and good evidence that the interests of this world are eclipsing those of the world to come.
And one good way for a preacher to ascertain whether a church keep up their meetings or not, is to meet with them when he is not expected. The absent ones may excuse themselves by saying that they were weary and unwell, or that the weather was unpropitious, while the preacher, perhaps in feeble health, had to travel days in storms and over bad roads, to attend the meeting. And very often, those who excuse themselves on the ground of ill-health, are found busily and earnestly engaged in their worldly employments, as soon as the Sabbath is over. With many, the trouble is that their minds and energies are so taken up with things of this world that when the Sabbath comes they have no strength or taste left for the service of God; and they think that they are excusable if they take up the sacred hours of the Sabbath in recuperating their wasted energies. This is robbing God of his due. The Sabbath is not merely an animal rest. It is a rest from our own work, to be employed in the nobler work of our Creator.
But behind this backwardness in attending religious meetings are other great lacks. The study of God’s word and private devotions must have been neglected. There must be a great separation from God, a lack of communion with God, and a destitution of the blessings of his Spirit which always lead to a performance of duty, not to long to meet in the assemblies of God’s saints to worship God, build up his precious cause, and enjoy sweet communion with God and his people.
Cherished idols and a guilty conscience may keep some from attending meetings. How can such meet Christ and holy angels at his coming? Others may be kept away from meetings by alienation of feelings toward brethren. To such I would say, How can you expect to worship together in Heaven if you cannot worship together here? Oh! press together, and love one another as Christ has loved you. Do not deceive yourselves with the lazy thought that God will be as well pleased with you if you remain at home, while he tells you to not forsake the assembling of yourselves together. Supposing that all should remain at home as you are inclined to do, what would become of public worship and all the benefits resulting therefrom? But if it is lawful for you to excuse yourselves, it is also for others.
God knows that we need to meet oftener now, and exhort one another more, than ever before. These golden opportunities will not last long. May we cheerfully improve upon them. If heavenly employments are repugnant to us here, what shall we do among the inhabitants of the celestial abodes?
D. T. BOURDEAU.
The Word of God.
By R. F. Cottrell
There is a vast difference between the word of God and the word of men. The word of God should be revered, and honored by implicit obedience. When God speaks, there is no danger of thinking too highly of what he says, or of being too particular in heeding it. We may well tremble at the word of the Lord. “The lion hath roared, who will not fear? The Lord hath spoken, who can but prophesy?” Amos 3:8.
The word of God should be received as the Thessalonians received it. “For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.” 1 Thess. 2:13. The present truth, the third angel’s message, is the word of the Lord to this generation, as much as the gospel preached by Paul was to that. If God has sent a message, as he promised, and as he is now fulfilling it, it is the word of God to us, and not the word of men.
Some receive it as the word of God. Such make faithful soldiers. They are found every time at their post. They can be relied upon in the time of conflict. They are not hesitating, fluctuating, halting between two opinions. They are firm and steadfast, because they have received the truth as inspired and sent of God. To them it is the word of God. They believe that God lives and is fulfilling his word—that the message comes by divine inspiration. And when God instructs and warns, they think it of importance to heed his word; feeling assured that every word is for their benefit.
There is another class who profess to receive the truth; but they treat it as the word of men. The evidence is too clear for them to reject it entirely; therefore they receive it in part. They dare not reject it entirely; but they discriminate and judge for themselves how much it is necessary for them to heed. For example: They admit the principles of that branch of the work of God pertaining to health reform. But they judge for themselves what constitutes the reform—what is healthful for them as individuals to use—and so deciding, they continue the use of those things which are decidedly proscribed. With self-complacency, and often with pride of their opinions and their skepticism, they walk right over the word of the Lord, and make it of none effect.
God does not instruct us in regard to wholesome and unwholesome articles of diet, and then leave us to judge for ourselves what is wholesome. Such instructions would be of no use. For one would say, “Tobacco perfectly agrees with me;” another, “Tea agrees with me.” Now this is false. These things are against the health of every one that uses them. And so of every one of the articles proscribed. To walk in the light of health reform is to make progress in the abandonment of every one of these articles till they are all abandoned, not to be indulged in occasionally.
Which of the two ways is the best in which to receive the word of God? All must answer, “As the word of God and not the word of men.” Those that receive it so are stronger in the truth in one year—rather from the very beginning—than the other class are in ten, fifteen, or twenty years. I have witnessed it. I testify of what I have seen and know. A sifting time is yet before us. Who will heed the word of God and be found on the side of the Lord? Let all heed it.
R. F. COTTRELL.
Another Objection Against the Immediate Coming of Christ.
By D. T. Bourdeau
THIS objection runs as follows: The opinion has quite generally prevailed among the ancients and moderns that our earth would continue in its present state for the period of 6000 years, at the close of which, the seventh millennium would be ushered in, and our Saviour would come the second time. Now, as there were, according to Usher’s chronology, only 4004 years from creation to Christ, see margin of Gen. 1, and as we have only reached the year of our Lord 1872, we cannot consistently look for Christ for about 124 years.
In reply to this objection we would say that it is also our opinion, as based on Old Testament types, especially that of the jubilee, that our earth will continue in its present state during a period of 6000 years, and that the seventh thousand years will be a period of rest to our earth; and could we determine the age of our world to a year, we could tell the very year of our Saviour’s return to earth. But, as God would have it, we cannot tell the precise age of our world. There must be in the best of chronologies a variation of at least a few years; so that we are left in a waiting, watching position, having seen the signs by which we are to know that Christ is near, even at the doors, and that we have even reached the last generation of men, and are yet being called to live by faith, not knowing the day nor the hour of Christ’s second coming.
Although we have a good degree of confidence in Usher’s Chronology, as found in the margin of our Bibles, yet this remarkable chronology stands corrected by Paul on the period of the Judges, at least. Usher makes this period—i. e., from the death of Joshua to the coronation of Saul—margin of Joshua 22, and 1 Sam. 10—about 331 years; whereas, Paul says, “He [God] gave unto them judges about the space of four hundred and fifty years.” Acts 13 : 20. This makes a difference of 119 years, which, added to 4004 years, would make 4123 years, fixing the creation of our world B. C. 4123. To which add 1872, and our earth has stood about 5995 years. We are on the verge of the seventh millennium; and the Lord for whom we have waited will soon descend the blazing vault of heaven, in the glory of the Father, and with all the holy angels, to raise the sleeping saints and change the righteous living. Hail glorious day!
D. T. BOURDEAU.
How The Different Protestant Denominations Arose.
By D. T. Bourdeau
WHILE some of these denominations evidently sprang from selfish contentions on points of little or no importance, others arose in defense of important truths, and to engage in the noble work of reform. Among the latter, the Lutheran, Baptist, and Methodist churches have occupied conspicuous places. These and other churches started well, and battled nobly for truth. But overlooking the fact that truth is progressive in its development, and that God has reserved a burden of reform for every age, they have erred in retarding progress and binding the consciences of their members through their creeds, disciplines, or articles of faith. For instance, in “The Doctrines and Discipline of the Methodist Episcopal Church, chapter 1, section 1, we have the following on the ‘Origin of the Methodist Episcopal Church:’”
“The preachers and members of our society in general, being convinced that there was a great deficiency of vital religion in the church of England in America,” etc. This starts off well, and furnishes a real necessity for reform. But on page 20 of the same work, we read on “Article of Religion”:
“5. The General Conference shall have full powers to make rules and regulations for our church, under the following limitations and restrictions, viz:—
“1. The General Conference shall not revoke, alter, or change, our articles of religion, nor establish any new standards or rules of doctrine contrary to our present existing and established standards of doctrine.”
With this restriction before our Methodist brethren how can they keep pace with the light of God’s word, which was to shine more and more unto the perfect day? How can they receive the additional truths of the time of the end, when knowledge was to be increased? Dan. 12. How can they engage in the work of reform on the platform of the “commandments of God and the faith of Jesus,” Rev. 14:12, which is sufficiently broad to embrace all the true reforms of the past, and close up the work of reform, that a people may be prepared for the second coming of Christ? As their articles of religion clash with this platform, and are like the laws of the Medes and Persians, which cannot be changed, we see no other way for them to do this, than to step out of the pale of the church, as the primitive Methodists stepped out of the church of England, that they may feel free to follow the dictates of their own consciences. And so with members of other denominations. For though they do not all have similar restrictions in written disciplines, yet they generally claim that they have the whole truth, and treat those who differ with them accordingly. It would please God better for all the churches to lay aside party feelings, and advance unitedly on the platform for these times; but if they, as bodies, will not do this, but will oppose those who do, those who step out of the pale of the church, that they may obey the truth, honor the God of truth who bids them go forward; and the blame of the division rests on those who will not advance in the light.