Review and Herald, Vol. 21, No. 1. (12/2/1862)

Review and Herald

Dec 2, 1862

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Dec 2, 1862

Perpetual Observance of the Sabbath.

By Uriah Smith

[We extract the following from an article in the American Theological Review, of April, 1862. It is an argument in favor of the institution of the Sabbath in Eden, and its primeval observance, in reply to Dr. Hessey, of England, who, in a recent publication, has taken opposite ground.—U. S.]

The Sabbatical value of the declarations made in Gen. ii, 2, 3—using the term Sabbatical merely as descriptive of a weekly day of hallowed rest—is not dependent upon the decision of the questions, whether or not the patriarchs kept a Sabbath, or whether the Mosaic cosmogony was in any form disclosed to mankind before Genesis was written. The passage has an intrinsic weight which is sometimes lost sight of in attending to subordinate questions. Experience shows that periodic seasons of rest and devotion are a human necessity. That certain periods are too long, and others too short, may also be determined by the light of nature. What is the best cycle, in the absence of conclusive natural proofs, may well be made matter of divine revelation. We claim that the passage before us affords perpetual light upon this subject; and since the light is that of the divine example and promise, it has not only illuminating, but directing, power. It reveals to men, as long as the present natural economy lasts, the path of duty and happiness. The fact of the divine rest upon the seventh day, whenever disclosed to mankind, and to whatsoever subordinate uses appropriated, must ever remain one of universal interest. It stands in the record of the creation, not of Palestine, but of the world; not of Jews, but of man. It speaks not of the rest of Jehovah, but of Elohim. It announces not merely the divine cessation from creating, but distinguishes a period, gives to it a distinctive character, and sets apart one day for special duties and the communication of special favors. Though such a cycle is beyond clear and certain discovery by man as the one best fitted to his complex nature and doubly related life, still experience is competent to affirm its wisdom and worth. As really, if not as obviously, do mankind need the Sabbath rest, as that of night. Its physical benefits, moreover, which candid men universally admit, are best secured when it is most sacredly kept in accordance with its higher ends. As piety is conducive to morality, so is the spiritual Sabbath to the physical. The better we become acquainted with human nature, the more significant are the words, "the Sabbath was made for man." We can accept the declaration in Genesis as meaning no less than that a weekly day of hallowed rest enters into the plan of creation. The idea of such a day is shadowed forth in divine acts, which, no matter when revealed, themselves are of universal interest and susceptible of universal application.

And what meaning can naturally be obtained from these words, "God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it," in the connection in which they stand, but this: that the divine example teaches men, all to whom it is revealed, that such a day is one on which it may be expected that Heaven's choicest favors will be bestowed, and grateful, holy worship will ascend in return? What less can be understood, than that it is a day incumbent upon man as a sanctified day? In what sense can God be said to bless the day, save that of blessing it to man? or to sanctify it, save that of setting it apart for hallowed and holy observances? Much of the religious instruction communicated to the old-world fathers (as Dr. Fairbairn has shown in a work characterized by sound learning and good judgment) was in all probability made known by divine acts. The time for full and formal legal institutes was not at the beginning. As we have already remarked, however, for our present purpose it is not necessary that we should be able to show, as matter of fact, the observance of a primeval Sabbath; or the possession by men, before the days of Moses, of the facts he published respecting the creation. All that we claim is, that a declaration like that before us, incorporated into the creation-narrative, and exhibiting the divine example, indicates to man the divine will—the lesson that, in the natural and moral economy which the Creator has established, there is a necessity created, and a provision made, for a Sabbath.

The Hebrew word for Sabbath is not found in the texts we have been considering, neither is there any direct proof that it was ever on the lips of the patriarchs. As they may be said not to have known the name of Israel's covenant God, so may they be said not to have had the Sabbath. It does not follow that they had not the promises of Jehovah; nor that they had no stated times of worship; nor that, in some form, the substance of Moses' narrative of the creation, and of the Paradisaic state, may not have been in their possession. There is one fact which favors an affirmative decision of such points. We refer to the fact of the early knowledge possessed by the worshipers of the true God, and by nations with whom they may be supposed to have come in contact, of a septenary division of time. The manner in which this cycle is

referred to, indicates that it was in familiar use long before the days of Moses. There is even a slight suggestion of it in the narrative of the offerings of Cain and Abel. How far and how early it spread over the earth, is involved in deep obscurity. Some have asserted that it was in use with every nation of antiquity. Others, that it was restricted to the Jews, and to the families from whom they claimed descent. Each of these positions is probably equally wide of the truth. The present opinion which, according to Arago, [Popular Astronomy, Eng. Trans. vol. ii, p. 722] "has obtained the greatest number of adherents," is that, besides the Jews, it was in use only among the ancient Chinese, Arabians, Chaldeans, and Egyptians. The question arises, How is the origin of this cycle to be explained? Several attempts have been made without reference to the use of which we have knowledge through the Mosaic cosmogony. The most popular one, at present, is that which Dr. Hessey, we are surprised to see, affirms that he accepts "without hesitation." "The course of the moon," he remarks, "and especially the appearance of the new moon or νουμηνία, would suggest a division, roughly stated, of twenty-eight days. This, perhaps, would be the first and most prevalent division. It certainly was all but a universal one, for it is found even where weeks were unknown, and where they are still unknown—among the aborigines of the New World" [pp. 141, 142]. Having on the two preceding pages affirmed that "it is only in the East that anything like a septenary division is found to prevail," and that "it is not true that it (a septenary division) was ever general in the heathen world," our author, it will be noticed, proceeds to prove that the division of twenty-eight days was all but universal, because found where weeks were unknown! But letting this pass, what does the existence of the lunar division without the weekly, and that down to the present day, show, if not this, that the two are not necessarily, nor even easily, connected? This is evident upon other grounds. The present value of a synodic revolution is more than twenty-nine days and a half. The time between two new moons is not a number of days of which seven is a factor. The hebdomedal cycle is not a natural cycle, like that of years, or months, or days; it is artificial and arbitrary so far as our mere knowledge of natural laws carries us. "The object of the natural divisions," says the distinguished astronomer before referred to, "has been to indicate with convenience and precision the dates of events. ... The week indicates the regular succession of days of labor and rest." This is an established distinction, and we submit that it is much more philosophical to look for the origin of the week in the line of its idea, even if it constrains us to fall back upon divine revelation. It is evident that if, in any form, the fact recorded in Gen. ii, 2, 3, was communicated to mankind at the beginning, the hebdomedal cycle recognized in the subsequent narrative, and also the seemingly symbolical use of the number seven, are facts easily and fully explained.

Our author, however, urges, "if the septenary division is found out of Scripture, without the Sabbath, why may it not occur in Scripture without it?" Page 141. The possibility of this we concede. We are not anxious to show that the original idea of the week was always preserved. Once instituted, it might continue, although the world forgot the Creator, and lost all care for the hallowed rest. Dr. H. is at pains to convey the impression that the extension, among the nations, of the hebdomadal period, was not great. He does not seem to be aware that in so doing, he limits the likelihood of this cycle's having had the origin which he unhesitatingly accepts; nor that the fidelity with which the descendants of Shem adhered to this division, when other nations so easily lost it, favors the idea of its religious origin and associations. The more he succeeds in diminishing the evidence of its heathen use, the more closely does he link it with its scriptural explanation and character. That a day holy to the Lord should be lost by those who forgot God altogether, is no marvel. "A highly spiritual ordinance like the Sabbath," Mr. Gladstone has recently well remarked, "was one little likely to survive the rude shocks and necessities of earthly life; while it could not, like sacrifice, derive a sustaining force from appearing to confer upon the gods an absolute gift profitable to them, and likely to draw down their favor in return."

But if Noah and Abraham had a Sabbath, it is objected, they, or some of the old-world fathers, would have been noticed as keeping it. We scarcely need remark how unsafe is such a process of reasoning. We may point, in illustration of its inconclusiveness, with the eminent scholar and statesman just quoted, to the designs upon the shield of Achilles, intended to represent the standing occasions of Hellenic life, yet giving no hint of religious observances. Or we may refer, with others, to the silence of the Scriptures respecting the rite of circumcision, from the time of the entrance of the Israelites into Canaan, down to the days of Jeremiah—a shorter period, indeed, yet all the more strong for our purpose, inasmuch as the records are so much more extensive and minute, thus increasing, by a double ratio, the probabilities of allusion. Indeed, the case may be put more strongly, if the statement is correct that no account of the observance of this rite occurs from the days of Joshua to those of John the Baptist. A yet more conclusive reply is, that there is no mention whatsoever in the ante-Mosaic history, of any stated occasions of religious worship. Dr. H. refers approvingly to Hooker's remark that "even nature has taught the heathen, first, that festival solemnities are a part of the exercises of religion; secondly, that praise, liberality, and rest, are as natural elements whereof solemnities consist." Does he suppose, from the silence of Scripture, that the patriarchs had not as clear a knowledge of religion as the heathen? Does he suppose there were no days of praise, liberality, and rest, until the Jews gathered manna in the wilderness, especially when, according to the common interpretation, we are taught that, as early as the days of Enos, there began to be the formal observance of social worship?

Further occasion for disconnecting the idea of a day of rest from that of the weekly cycle Dr. H. finds in the record of the giving of manna, in the sixteenth chapter of Exodus. Very different conclusions have been derived from this narrative by competent scholars, and these conflicting results may well suggest a less confident statement than our author gives. The facts in the case are undisputed; their significance is often determined by previously-adopted conclusions.

The facts upon which Hengstenberg, as quoted and endorsed by our author, relies in the attempt to derive from this chapter an account of the origination of a weekly day of religious rest, are: 1. The astonishment of the elders at the double portion of manna gathered on the sixth day; 2. The disobedience of some of the people to the command to rest on the day which they had been told was a Sabbath; 3. The absence of any reference by Moses to an existing Sabbatical ordinance. These considerations, it is claimed, leave "no doubt" that the Sabbath, not the Jewish Sabbath, but the sacred observance of the seventh day, was then first instituted. We will examine them in their order.

1. The perplexity of the elders. To render the argument from this fact conclusive, it must appear that no other explanation of the perplexity can be given, save that of entire ignorance of a sacred septenary institution. So far is this from being the truth, that the narrative itself supplies another explanation. Astonishment and perplexity, it should be noticed, are words a little highly colored for the simple statement. The rulers came and told Moses. They came in doubt. They came for information. This they might well need. Explicit command had been given that a prescribed amount of manna should be gathered, and any attempt to preserve it from day to day had been prohibited. "And it came to pass on the sixth day, they gathered twice as much bread, two omers for one man; and all the rulers of the congregation came and told Moses." We may suppose them to have come either to inquire if the people had done wrong, or to know what should be done with the surplus, or for both objects. The reply of Moses favors the supposition that they had some knowledge of the seventh-day rest: "This is that which the Lord hath said, To-morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord: take that which ye will bake," &c. There is no record of the communication to Moses of these words. It is possible the verse is to be divided differently from the manner in which it is punctuated by our translators. Moses then would say, "The fact you state has been divinely ordered. I was told there would be given a double portion on the sixth day. The import of this miracle I will explain, and the use to be made of the double portion of the manna." We prefer, however, the common interpretation. Moses, then, is to be understood to communicate, as by divine authority, the fact that the next day was to be kept as a Sabbath. This implies a previously unsettled life; either that, as Philo was of opinion, the Sabbath fell into desuetude in Egypt; or that it was observed there as well as circumstances allowed, but not with entire rest. But what decisive, or even probable, evidence is there that here is an account of the absolute institution of a day of worship? Not a word is said in explanation of the meaning of a Sabbath to the Lord. The term seems to have explained itself. New provisions, stricter regulations, were to be enforced. But there is no evidence that these were wholly strange words to the elders—"the rest of a holy Sabbath unto the Lord; eat that to-day; for to-day is a Sabbath unto the Lord; to-day ye shall not find it in the field. Six days ye shall gather it; but on the seventh day, which is a Sabbath, there shall be none."

2. The disobedience of the people. This does not prove that the institution was a new one. Sabbath-breaking, we must believe, is not yet extinct, any more than the Sabbath. Notice, also, that some disobeyed the explicit command, "Let no man leave of it till the morning."

3. The silence of Moses respecting any existing ordinance. The fact may be pointed either way. It is at least offset, for our author's use, by Moses' equally striking silence respecting the nature of the remarkable day he is said here to institute. The most probable explanation of both phenomena—the silence respecting a previously-existing sacred day, and respecting the import of the words, the rest of a holy Sabbath—is, that the chapter gives us an account of the revival of a day which had somewhat lost its proper position, and which was to be invested with new guarantees, and enhanced importance. If we are still referred to the statement, "See, for that the Lord hath given you the Sabbath," the reply is easy. This is not said to the elders, but to the people, through Moses, after the sin of those who transgressed. It refers to the preceding narrative, and follows its interpretation. That the words intrinsically and necessarily signify no more than the revival, or new and more impressive inculcation, of a custom previously known is clear from Neh. ix, 13, 14: "Thou camest down also upon mount Sinai, and madest known unto them thy holy Sabbath." Yet the day, in the theory of those who quote this and kindred passages, in proof of its exclusive Jewish origin, had been previously made known.

The chief difficulties, however, to which Sabbatarian tenets have given rise, it is of some consequence to observe, have sprung from misconceptions of the Sabbath as a religious day. The Sabbath of the fourth commandment has been too much regarded as only a part of a system of Sabbaths, and in its connection with the civil and ceremonial law. It has also been interpreted in the light of Rabbinical and Pharisaic traditions, rather than that of holy Scripture. It should never be forgotten that our Saviour's example is a commentary on the Sabbath of the decalogue.

Sufficient allowance has doubtless not always been made for the physical necessities of men in the use of such a day. Much has been said, also, contrary to Christian charity and to Christian liberty. Excesses inevitably lead to reactions. Yet the greatest danger lies at present in a sundering of gospel from law, of the new covenant from the old, of Christianity from principles of righteousness which are the pillars of religion. It cannot be too often insisted, that Christian liberty is freedom in law, and has its fruit in holiness, and that restriction is still a schoolmaster indispensable in the spiritual training of the race.

Sabbath Days.

By Vaughan

EMBLEMS of heavenly rest—fair buds of bliss, In heavenly flowers unfolding week by week; The next world's gladness, imaged forth in this— Days of whose worth the Christian heart can speak.

Eternity in Time—the steps by which We climb to future ages—lamps that light Man through his darker days, and thought enrich, Yielding redemption for the week's dull flight.

A milky-way marked out through skies else drear, By radiant suns that warn as well as shine; A clue which he who follows knows no fear, Though briars and thorns around his pathway twine.

Days fixed by God for intercourse with dust, To raise our thoughts and purify our powers; Periods appointed to renew our trust— A gleam of glory after six days' showers.

Foretastes of heaven and earth—pledges of joy, Surpassing fancy's flight and fiction's story— The preludes of a feast that cannot cloy, And the bright out-courts of immortal glory. [Vaughan.

God's Message to the Nation.

By Dr. Swain

“Let my people go.” Ex. ix, 1.

A YEAR ago God gave this message to our nation. We have driven our war-chariots over it up to the rebel Capital. To-day he takes up this trampled message and traces it in lightning on the skies. The events of the fatal week are “a strategic retreat,” say our generals. “We must have 300,000 more men,” says the President. “Give us new men and measures,” say the politicians. “Let my people go,” saith the Lord.

It is because we have not listened to this word that our armies are not in Richmond to-day—that our young men lie heaped in slaughter, while tens of thousands

are borne in bleeding agony to our cities to die, or if they live, to spend crippled and helpless lives.

It is because we have not obeyed this voice that our treasures have been poured out by hundreds of millions, and that foreign powers are tempted as never before to thrust themselves into our national affairs.

The duty was laid upon us at the beginning of the war, to open the house of bondage, because then we had the right and power. What the Constitution did not give us the power to do, treason gave us; God thus uses the wrath of man. With the power and the right came the responsibility and the duty. It is we now who are responsible for the continuance of slavery. There are no such perils of servile insurrection as are usually associated as inseparable from emancipation. More than 100,000 soldiers would, ere this, have enlisted in our cause—100,000 men more would have been efficient workmen in the Federal service.

By a striking coincidence, the very day that the columns of sickening defeat were read in Congress, and the President's call was sent forth for 300,000 men, Hunter's famous letter was read. How will the country respond, till they know how the President will respond to this letter? Will they send their sons, when they know that twice that number are ready to die in defense of their liberties and our own, and when our present policy says to the slave, You shall not help us, but you must stay and help the enemy who is slaying our sons? God has put the key of the house of bondage into our hands, and held them to the key, and kept us standing at the door for months, saying to us, “Let my people go.”

We refused to open the door, and refused to have it opened. Fremont, Phelps, Hunter, have been recalled, superseded, or their orders countermanded.

When the inmates of this house of bondage opened the door, we have thrust them back. God has treated us as he did Pharaoh. Halleck drove the contrabands from his lines, and after infinite labor to make the enemy's escape impossible, he had the satisfaction to find that Beauregard's army had gone, and left no footprints or tidings of their destination. If information had been welcomed from the slaves, the rebel army might have been captured or cut to pieces. But it had leisure to make its way to Richmond, and, two to one, the rebellion launched its forces upon us, and drove us back eighteen shameful miles in that terrible and fatal week. God has bound up our interests in the same bundle with those of his oppressed people. Shall we say, We will conquer the rebels, and bring them to terms by opening the house of bondage? But the experiment of waiting has already cost us too much. It may yet appear that we have hardened our hearts one day too long. Our army may be cut to pieces. France and England may be upon us. Let the word of God be obeyed before the hour of a death-bed repentance. If you will not in the name of God and justice, then in the name of our national life, smite slavery down, smite it speedily. If we do not stay it, it will stay us. Say to the President, Take the 300,000 men you call for. Yet give him 300,000 besides; but tell, entreat, him, “Let my people go.”

We thank God that the President is neither Pharaoh nor a king. He is only waiting for your voice. He would have opened the house of bondage long ago if you had said so.—Sermon by Dr. Swain, of Providence.

Foreign Intervention.

A CORRESPONDENT of the Boston Journal, under date of Nov. 8, writes;

"The feeling in Europe is described by Mr. Cameron as strongly savoring of intervention, and this feeling is strongly increased in consequence of the continued inactivity of the Federal arms. In England it is thought that no active intervention will take place until Parliament meets. The success or failure of the present campaign will probably decide the matter, and only decided victories on our side will dispel the idea, in his opinion. It is generally understood in England that a rebel naval attack on our Atlantic cities is in preparation. Three immense iron-clad steam rams, the most powerful ever constructed, are building in English ship-yards, and with these it is supposed that the rebels will attack our Northern cities. They have an especial desire to make a dash at New York, and even if the enterprise were but partially successful, the presence of rebel war-vessels in New York harbor, if only for an hour, would have a great effect abroad.

"There is a secession club in Liverpool numbering three hundred members, who provide funds to furnish vessels to run our blockade. No individual member of this society is allowed to know what any other member contributes.

"The sympathy in England for the rebels is daily increasing, and a delay in a Federal advance is interpreted as a tacit admission of our inability to cope with the enemy.

"Mr. Cameron thinks that the fortifications of New York should be at once attended to, and is surprised that the danger of an attack on our city is not more fully appreciated here."

State of Things in Europe.

THE political aspect of Europe is far from being encouraging. Revolutionary war-clouds look more and more threatening. All are preparing for a terrible storm, but each government seems unwilling to begin the bloody scene. It is now the hour of "preparation." All the men of war appear to be awake, and girding on their armor for the bloody conflict. The following is from The Catholic, of Nov. 15, 1862:

"The elements of disunion which are at work in Europe cannot much longer be directed or controlled. A general war seems imminent, in which England will not be on the side of France. This may stay the progress of the revolution, but we fear its day of success must come. To use the words of an attentive observer, 'Europe is honey-combed with secret societies.' These are an element whose influence escapes all calculation, and renders nugatory all speculations based on ordinary grounds of policy. God alone can give peace and quiet to perturbed society."—Crisis.

A Smoking Minister.

Yes, a smoking minister. On last Monday evening by previous engagement we called upon a clergyman, the pastor of one of the largest and most influential churches in the city of —. He dwells in a splendid parsonage, and has a splendid salary; no doubt preaches splendid sermons, and prays long and splendid prayers. But what was our reception? Cold, of course. How could it be otherwise? for in one hand was his segar, and the other hand, oh, how slow it was to come forth to greet us. With a slow unwelcome tone he bade us be seated. His manner was so frigid that a blind man could almost see the icicles upon his heart. We were seated, and what then? Why, his Havanna was again re-lighted, and this divine once more seated in his free and easy chair, commenced puffing, puffing, puffing. But what was he doing?

Puffing, puffing, puffing away his self-respect. Puffing away his religion. Puffing all the love from his heart. He was preaching a sermon; a sermon, I fear, that will not soon be forgotten. Even the youngest of our company, a little mute girl, could understand such preaching as that. Could you have seen those poor deaf and dumb children as they left that splendid mansion, and beheld the disgust depicted upon their countenances; could you have understood their gestures, you would have said that was a sermon indeed. "Puffing, puffing, puffing," said the poor little mute girl by her silent gestures, "puffing, puffing, filthy, filthy, clean not; holy man not; God loves smoke not; bad man loves black deaf and dumb not; deaf and dumb loves puffing man not." All the language in our possession was not sufficient to convince that poor little mute child that that man was a minister of God. To speak of him as a holy man was disgusting to her. If I called him a good man, she would shake her head violently, "No, no, he was not good; tobacco was not good; puffing was not good; the tobacco was bad; the smoke was bad; the man was bad."

Oh! what were our feelings when this poor little mute continued repeating by her gestures bad, bad, bad. Here was a professed ambassador of the meek and lowly Jesus; that pure and holy Jesus; that God of infinite love, here in the presence of this little mute, he stood condemned. In her little unsophisticated mind tobacco was filthy, and every man that would defile his lips with it was filthy. Any man that would puff, puff that filthy smoke into her face was not only filthy, but wicked.

Could I reverse all the thoughts of her mind, and try to teach her that this was a holy man of God? Could I tell her that Jesus loved that nauseous weed? that he would roll the filthy tobacco quid under his tongue? that he would puff that stenching perfume from a filthy segar? Or could I insist that Jesus, the type of holiness and purity, would sanction the use of this filthy weed? To do this would be only to condemn myself, for I knew that this poor little mute child knew what every one must know, that tobacco was filthy, and that no one could by any means use it without making himself filthy. Oh! when, when shall we have the gospel preached by pure lips, from clean hearts, when tobacco-smoking and tobacco-chewing ministers shall not be heard of in all this land?

But what was the reply of this clergyman when we wished to plead the cause of the blind, of the deaf, of the dumb, and the unfortunate, in his church? Turning to these poor little dark-faced ones he said, "We would not allow our lectures or meetings to be disturbed by such as those."

The question instantly arose in our minds, How could Jesus permit himself to be so much disturbed as to stop in the street and open the eyes of a poor blind man? Or how could he utter such words concerning little children? "Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not; for of such is the kingdom of heaven." The query arises whether there were any of these that were blind, or dumb, or black, of whom this great Teacher was speaking? Did he mean to say, Suffer all little children to come unto me except the black ones? Would he have taken his filthy segar and sat down in the presence of poor little deaf, mute, and blind children, and after puffing, puffing, puffing that filthy, noxious tobacco smoke into their faces, would he have thus indignantly turned them away with the reply, "We will not have our meeting disturbed by such as those?" May it not be possible that these poor, black, blind, and mute children may yet rise up in judgment to the condemnation of some who now thus spurn them from their presence and drive them from the house of God?

Live the Life of Jesus—All else is Nothing.

Such were the dying words of the excellent and devoted Jean Louis Rostan, the companion and fellow-laborer of the faithful Felix Neff. When asked by the friend who stood by his bedside, a witness of the triumph of his closing hours, "Have you any personal counsel or advice to give me?" he replied, "Live the life of Jesus: all else is nothing."

Memorable words! How deeply should they be impressed on the memory and heart of every one of us! The life of Jesus! How much is comprehended in those four short words! Humility, self-denial, benevolence, earnestness, constant converse with heaven, entire consecration to God, unwearied effort to do good to men—all these rise to our view as we think of the life of Jesus!

But to live his life, we must come to him with full faith in him as the only and all-sufficient Saviour; giving up all that we have and are to him and his service; asking, as the one great question, "Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?" confessing his name, obeying his laws, cherishing his spirit, imitating his example, laboring for the extension of his kingdom, aiming in all things at the advancement of his cause and the promotion of his glory. Like the apostle to the Gentiles, we must be able to say, "The life which I now live in the flesh, I live by the faith of the Son of God." "For me to live is Christ."

Such a life indeed is the only one worth living. It is the only life that can satisfy the sober judgment, or meet the demands of conscience, or fulfill the requirements of God; the only life that has peace and self-approbation in its progress, and joy in its end; the only life that is worthy of a rational being; the only life that will bear the test of the final judgment, and prepare for endless blessedness in heaven.

"All else is nothing."

Live for fame, and even if you gain its plaudits, they are not sure for a moment. The "Hosanna" of to-day may be the "crucify him" of to-morrow.

Live for pleasure, and though it may gratify for a season, you will find it like poisoned food, satisfying a present hunger, but leaving death behind.

Live for wealth, and in the very aim you will "fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and harmful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition," and be in danger of "erring from the faith, and piercing yourself through with many sorrows." And even if you are successful, and gain the riches you desire, you can hold them but a little while, and cannot bear them with you to eternity; and if misimproved, "your gold and silver will be cankered, and the rust of them will be a swift witness against you, to eat your flesh as it were fire."

Live for the world in any form, and what shall it profit you though you gain it all, if you lose your soul?

Live, then, the life of Jesus, for all else is nothing.

The Value of Religion.

FRIENDS are highly appreciated. Wealth, if rightly used, serves an admirable purpose. Both make us easily and pleasantly situated. But friends may forsake us in the hour of adversity, or not be able to render needed assistance. Property may be suddenly destroyed. Friends, having smoothed the pillow, or cooled the fevered brow, cannot calm a troubled breast, or heal a broken heart. Wealth may secure us a soft bed, purchase the soothing antidote, obtain kind and skillful nurses, erect a splendid tomb, and draw a large concourse to the grave; but it cannot buy the healing balm for the soul, secure the attendance of heavenly watchers, or obtain a title to a mansion on high.

Where these are most clearly seen to fail, there religion comes to our relief. In adversity it is a sure support, in the sick chamber a desirable companion, in life a guide and protector, at death a source of great joy. Earthly things last only through time. They are like the flower opening with the rising sun, closing with the day, and falling from its stem in the night.

Religion springs and buds in life, opens its fragrant leaves at death, and leaves its fruit in perfection through eternity. It gives us a righteous claim to the lawful things of earth, makes the heart peaceful in the duties of the world, quiets the rising passions, and gives us permanent homes in heaven—mansions in the city of God. Nothing is equal to it. It is more precious than gold. It is the "pearl of great price"—a boon given from on high to be lived on earth and enjoyed in heaven.

Continue reading: Thoughts on the Revelation