Your ShelfYour Projects

Review and Herald, Vol. 31, No. 13.

OBJECTS OF WORSHIP.

Review and Herald

Mar 10, 1868

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Mar 10, 1868

OBJECTS OF WORSHIP.

By ELD. R. J. LAWRENCE

BY ELD. R. J. LAWRENCE.
PROPOSITIONS: 1. All men are religiously inclined, or all men have an object upon which their chiefest affections are placed. 2. There always has been a false religion, and a true. 3. The true has been opposed by the false.
In proof of these propositions, I refer, first, to Gen. iv, 3-8: “And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord. And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock, and of the fat thereof. And the Lord had respect unto Abel, and to his offering; but unto Cain and to his offering, he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell. And the Lord said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen? If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door; and unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him. And Cain talked with Abel his brother. And it came to pass when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him.”
This shows how early men began to devise ways of their own in which to worship, aside from the commandments of the Lord, and how vexed and envious they feel toward the true worshipers when they see them accepted and blessed of the Lord, and themselves rejected. 1 Jno. iii, 12. “Not as Cain who was of that wicked one and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother’s righteous.” So the Lord banished Cain, and put a wide distance between him and his father’s house so that his wicked influence might not affect the younger members of the family, and their posterity. But when Cain’s posterity began to multiply, and spread out over the earth and came in contact with the posterity of Seth, it is said, Gen. vi, 2-3, “That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. And the Lord said, My Spirit shall not always strive with man; for that he also is flesh; yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.” Verse 5. “And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” Verse 8. “But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord.”
Men had so corrupted themselves that there was but one family that was found righteous, so that it is said in verse 13, that the earth was filled with violence through them. God determines to destroy them, and informs Noah, commanding him to prepare an ark for the saving of himself and house. And while Noah builds, they mock. They wag their heads, they point the finger of scorn, they ridicule. But God spared them not, but saved Noah, a preacher of righteousness. 2 Pet. ii, 5.
Moses, the meekest man that had ever lived, was opposed, first, by Pharaoh and the Egyptians; afterward, by Korah, Dathan, and Abiram; and then by almost all of the children of Israel. But, says one, you are not going to prove your position by the Bible are you? To be sure I am. Well, sir, I have not much confidence in the Bible, nor in the God of the Bible. Very well, we will bring up your god by-and-by, and compare him with our God.
David was opposed by Saul because he saw that the Lord was with David, and had forsaken him. Elijah was opposed by king Ahab, because he reproved him of sin; and the queen Jezebel sought his life because he slew the prophets of Baal. Daniel’s life was sought because he would not worship Baal; and he was cast into the lions’ den; but God sustained him. John the Baptist came preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins, to prepare the way of the Lord. But for reproving Herod for adultery, in having married his brother Philip’s wife, he lost his life.
So we see from the instances cited, that there has been a true and a false religion, and that the true has been opposed by the false.
But now Christ appears, not, as they had supposed, a temporal king to restore again to Israel that which had been taken from them by the Romans, but a person of humble parentage. He did not seek the society of the popular, the scribes and the Pharisees, nor of the lawyers and doctors; but he sought the society of the publicans and sinners. They marveled at this; but he says, “I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.” He teaches by parables, and performs miracles among them, by raising the dead, by healing the sick, and restoring the lame, the maimed, and the blind. He also cast out devils from them that were possessed. His fame continued to spread. The common people received him as the Messiah. The scribes and the Pharisees acknowledge that notable miracles are done by him; but if we let him alone, say they, all men will believe on him, and the Romans will come and take away our place and nation. They send out some of their disciples to catch him in his talk, and arraign him before the council; but they return, saying, Never man spake as this man. Is not this the Christ? And they answer, Have any of the rulers believed on him? His fame continues to spread. “Then went the Pharisees and took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk. And they sent out unto him their disciples, with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man; for thou regardest not the person of men. Tell us, therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Cæsar, or not? But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites? Show me the tribute-money. And they brought unto him a penny. And he saith unto them, Whose is this image, and superscription? They say unto him, Cæsar’s. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Cæsar, the things which are Cæsar’s; and unto God, the things that are God’s.” When they heard this, they retired confounded. When these first-class religionists were silenced by the superior wisdom of Christ, the Sadducees put their heads together, saying, He has tested the wisdom of the Pharisees, he has silenced them; come, now we will try our skill. He teaches that there are angels, spiritual beings, also that the dead are to be raised to life again. We don’t believe a word of it; and we have a question that will put this doctrine to the test. Hence they come, saying, “Master, Moses said, If a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother. Now, there were with us seven brethren; and the first, when he had married a wife, deceased; and having no issue, left his wife unto his brother. Likewise the second also, and the third, unto the seventh. And last of all the woman died also. Therefore, in the resurrection, whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her. Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God? There was their difficulty. They were ignorant of the Scriptures and the power of God. For says Jesus, “In the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in Heaven.” Now these infidel Sadducees discardedall the Scriptures but the five books of Moses; therefore the Saviour takes their endorsed authority to answer their question. “But as touching the resurrection of the dead,” he says, “have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.” Matt. xxii, 24-32. They held death to be an eternal sleep, therefore discarded the resurrection; but Christ shows from their own authority that God is not the God of the dead, that are never to live again, as they suppose, but he is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; therefore they will have a resurrection.
When they hear this, they also retire unable to meet his argument. “But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered [again] together. Then one of them which was a lawyer asked him a question.” Of course if they had a lawyer with them, they would make him their speaker, as he was used to criticisms and cross questionings; and if a lawyer asks the Saviour a question, it will be a law question. This lawyer said, “Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment; and the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” Who hung them there? God. These are his great constitution, out of which grow all moral obligations. The law of ten commandments hangs there, the prophecies hang there. Let us consider the ten commandments. 1. Thou shalt have no other gods before me. This forbids our placing our affections on any thing this side of God. The 2d forbids our making any image to worship. The 3d forbids our taking the name of God in our lips carelessly. The 4th requires that we should remember God’s rest-day, to keep it holy. The last six show the duty of man to his fellow man. By these we can see how desirable a community that would be, where all obeyed God, by keeping his commandments, and where all should do to others as they would that others should do to them.
Now we will bring up your god, and compare him with ours. “For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ. Whose end is destruction. Whose god is their belly [or appetite], and whose glory is in their shame. Who mind earthly things.” Phil. iii, 18, 19.
All men have an object upon which their chief affections are placed. It may be a seat in the White House. If so, all the energies of body and mind are directed to that object. They worship that god. So we might name every position from that of the chief executive, to the lowest office in the government; all have their aspirants, who bend their energies of both body and mind to attain them. Others have before the mind the arts. If they can succeed in some invention, and by it get a world-wide renown, they have gained that object. Or, if they can become adepts in the workmanship of those already invented, they will glory in their accomplishments. Others pursue the sciences. If they can excel in these, they have attained their highest ambition. Others look to their merchandise, others to their farms, their fine houses, or carriages, or horses, or cattle. Their energies are bent to secure these things. Their affections are placed on them. These are their gods. Such persons look upon the humble Christian as he bows before the Lord in humble prayer, with disdain, as occupying a foolish position. But they will lay off their daily wardrobe, and clothe themselves in mean apparel, and dive into the dirt, and crawl upon the ground, to worship their gods.
But to descend in the scale of worshipers, and the gods of worship, go with me across the way. There stands upon the shelf the decanter, sparkling with liquid fire, and around it more than a score of worshipers, some well dressed, others in tatters and rags. One says, “I have drank liquor for twenty years, and I never saw that it hurt me. I have chewed tobacco for so many years, and I never saw that it hurt me.” I think that if it has not hurt him, perhaps it has his poor old, tattered coat, or his poor wife and children at home.
The god tobacco has become one of the most exalted gods of the age. It is worshiped by men of every caste, the high, the low, the rich, the poor, the free, the bond, the male and the female. This god, though thousands of human victims are offered annually upon his altars, has a daily-increasing crowd of devotees. Let us look this thing in the face. Let us suppose a case. Here is a minister that has an appointment to preach. He is strongly addicted to the use of tobacco. Take it from him twenty-four hours beforehand, and what sort of a sermon would he preach? The church appoints a prayer-meeting, and the members are tobacco users. Take it away from them twenty-four hours beforehand, and what sort of a prayer-meeting do you suppose they would have? The lawyer has a case in law to plead. Take away his tobacco, and what sort of a plea would he make? The judge is upon the bench. Take away his tobacco, and what condition would he be in to administer justice? The physician is called to the bedside of the sick. Take away his tobacco, and what condition would he be in to deal out medicine to his patients.
Now the consent on all hands is, that they could do nothing. They would be in no condition whatever to engage in the duties above mentioned. Then what is the propelling, soul-inspiring spirit upon which they depend? It is the spirit of tobacco. Then tobacco is their god. What then? Tobacco preaches; tobacco prays; tobacco pleads law; tobacco executes justice; tobacco deals out medicine; and we have a tobacco administration, civil and religious. Therefore, dear friends, it is no wonder that justice has run riot, and equity has fallen in the streets, when we see the God of Heaven, the Creator of all things, rejected, and his law, the ten commandments, which is a perfect rule of right, set aside, and the faith of Jesus, which is the only remedy for sin, set aside, and in their stead all these gods of earth, of science, of literature, of merchandise, of agriculture, of alcohol, of tobacco, &c., brought in. It is no wonder that the ignorant are condemned, and the guilty go free. Now let us contrast with these, a community of real Christians, who worship the only living and true God, by keeping his commandments, and the faith of his Son Jesus Christ, who love God with all their heart, and their neighbors as themselves. What union! what peace! what a desirable place to live in! All looking upon others as better than themselves, and upon the things of others as better than their own. There is no lying, no cheating, no stealing, no murder; but all is peace. On the other hand, in a community of the worshipers of the various other gods, selfishness prevails, each exalts his own god, all is confusion. They riot, they kill, they steal, they lie, they cheat, they get drunk, they wallow in the filth of their tobacco. What a contrast! Yet this last is the state of things as they exist at the present time.
The question may be asked, Is there no remedy? or is this state of things to continue? We answer, There is a remedy provided, but man will not accept of it; therefore they continue in their sins. 2 Tim. iii, 1-5, 13. “This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come; for men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, truce-breakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, high-minded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof; from such turn away.” “But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.” 1 Tim. iv, 1, 2. “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their conscience seared with a hot iron.” 1 Thess. v, 1-3. “But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you; for yourselves know perfectly, that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night; for when they shall say, Peace and safety, then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child, and they shall not escape.” Matt. xxiv, 37-39. “But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be; for as in the days that were before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and knew not until the flood came, and took them all away. So shall also the coming of the Son of man be.”
But, say you, if the condition of the world is to grow worse and worse, until Christ comes, and they are not to know any thing about it, until he comes, what better off are the people of God than the wicked. 1 Thess. v, 4-5. “But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day. We are not of the night, nor of darkness.” Chap. iv, 16-18. “For the Lord himself shall descend from Heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with 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. Wherefore comfort one another with these words.”

THE VICTORS UPON THE SEA OF GLASS.

By Vesta N. Cudworth

AIR.—“Pat Malloy.”
The pious Wesley said, “Snatch from the Devil his best tunes, and press them into God’s service.”
The dreadful moment hastens, when God’s avenging arm, Will judge the men that hate his law, and offered mercy scorn; That dare to worship Antichrist, and bear his mark, alas! They cannot be victorious, upon the sea of glass.
A little remnant humble, will never yield, nor bow, They hate “Catholicism,” and they love God’s holy law; Most gladly will they suffer, but they will gain at last A crown among the victors, upon the sea of glass.
Forecasting shadows warn us of the nearness of the day, “The time of Jacob’s trouble,” but it soon will pass away; Then let the storm clouds gather, we need not fear the blast, We’re going to stand as victors, upon the sea of glass.
The Hebrew children were not harmed, while walking through the fire, The furnace held the Son of God, this shall our hearts inspire; Thus in God’s name we’ll trust, and nail our colors to the mast, Or die, to be a victor upon the sea of glass.
VESTA N. CUDWORTH.
Springfield, Mass.

DISCUSSION WITH ELD. JOHNSON,

By Dudley Marvin Canright

Universalist Minister, at New Portland, Me.
Our meetings at this place closed with a discussion. From the beginning of our meetings here, we have met with the most bitter and determined opposition. The Methodists and Baptists united both in public and private in their efforts against the truth. Being afraid to meet us themselves, they were very anxious to get some one who was able to do it. It so happened that one Eld. Johnson, a Universalist minister, who had formerly lived here, and preached here much, and one whom they regarded as being the ablest man in all this section—it so happened that he came to the place. He was immediately solicited to discuss with us, as he had numerous friends in the place. He attended our meeting at evening, and, as we thought, greatly misused the privilege we gave of making a few remarks. The Methodist minister heartily supported him in what he said, though as contrary to Methodism as to Adventism. As his friends appeared very confident that he could easily put down the truth, we offered to discuss with him. This he was not inclined to do at first; but his friends pressed him so hard that he at length sent us this proposition, “Is there an element in man that never dies?” We saw that the Methodists and Baptists could be united with the Universalists on this question against us; so we objected, and offered this question: “Will all men live eternally?” After some hesitation the Elder accepted it, saying, that it covered the same ground. But we thought that there was quite a difference in proving that one man would live eternally, and that all men would. We were to have five sessions of two hours each, each one speaking half an hour alternately. The discussion was held in the Baptists’ house. At the time appointed it was jammed full. In his first speech Eld. Johnson went into a long harangue about nature and nature’s laws, &c., without ever touching the Bible argument. I could not see that it touched the question at all, hence I said so, and made no reply to it. This gave me the lead, so I laid down the following positions, and brought scriptures to prove them.
(1.) Man is made of the dust. Gen. ii, 7. (2.) Man is mortal. Job iv, 17; Rom. ii, 7. (3.) Death reduces man back to dust again. Gen. iii, 19; Job xxxiv, 15. (4.) Eternal life to be had only through Christ. John v, 26; vi, 39, 40. (5.) No one will have eternal life except those who obtain it by faith through Christ. John iii, 36; 1 John v, 11, 12; iii, 15. (6.) All men do not have faith in Christ in this life, as many die infidels, atheists, &c. Hence my opponent must now show how this class can get eternal life.
In his second speech, Eld. Johnson used a mill to illustrate the nature of man. The mill represented the body and the stream the soul. Destroying the mill does not destroy the stream; so destroying the body would not destroy the soul. I accepted the illustration as a good one. The mill is complete. Every wheel is in its place. Every band is in order. Thewheat in the hopper, but no flour is ground. Now turn on the water and the mill starts, and the flour is ground out. So with a man’s body. All the parts are in order, the brain, the lungs, the heart, &c.; but no thoughts are produced. Now add the breath and the machine begins to move, the brain begins to act, and thoughts are produced. Cut off the breath and the machine stops, just as the mill does when the water is cut off. But he insisted that destroying the mill did not destroy the stream, so destroying the body did not destroy the soul. I replied that when he could show me a stream grinding flour without a mill, then I could believe that the soul could produce thoughts without a body. This he did not answer.
He then brought forward Acts xxiv, 15; 1 Cor. xv, and Luke xxii, 36, to prove that all will be raised, both the just and the unjust, and that all who are raised from the dead can die no more. This was very plausible indeed. To this I replied by showing that there was a first and second resurrection, one thousand years apart, and that the scriptures which he quoted as applying to all only applied to the righteous. I made a very strong argument on this and fortified it so strongly with proof that he did not dare to touch the argument during the whole discussion. This position he was not prepared to meet. It took from him the main proofs upon which he had manifestly depended.
He said that this world did not satisfy man’s desires, his soul reaches out for eternal life. Has God placed desires in our natures which cannot be gratified? The leaf reaches out for moisture and air, and the root for nourishment in the soil, and they find what they desire within their reach. I answered that God had provided eternal life for all, and that they could have it by seeking it through Christ. If roots seek for moisture in dry ashes they will not find it, so if men seek for eternal life in the wrong way they will not find it.
He then quoted Isa. lxv, 22–24 to prove universal salvation. “Every knee shall bow,” &c., I showed by Rom. xiv, 10–12, Phil. ii, 10, 11, that this applied at the Judgment, when the wicked will confess, the same as criminals do when they are about to be hung. He quoted Eph. 1, 10, which I showed would be fulfilled after the wicked were destroyed. This ended our first session. Now the battle was fairly open. I expected that the next day the Elder would attack my positions with his biggest guns,—that he would bring forward his Greek and Hebrew, and criticise the text which I had used as proof; but I was greatly mistaken, for he made no such attempt. He did not attempt to disprove, or even to deny the two resurrections which virtually upset his whole theory. He attempted to gain the sympathy of the Orthodox by saying that he had rather burn eternally in hell fire than to be annihilated. In the discussion between the Sadducees and Christ, as recorded by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Luke says, “They that shall be accounted worthy, &c.” The other two do not use the term worthy; hence he took occasion to say that Matthew and Mark were more responsible than Luke, and hence their silence proved Luke’s statement incorrect! I replied that Luke was inspired by God to write the same as Matthew and Mark were, and hence, if Eld. Johnson’s position was correct, God was more responsible while writing through Matthew and Mark, than he was while writing through Luke!
He took the position that the resurrection takes place when a man dies,—that there is a germ, “a germ of an angel” as he expressed it, a spark of divinity, a part of God, in every man. When the body dies this angel germ leaves the body and goes to Heaven; this is the resurrection. He founded this argument mostly on 1 Cor. xv, 37. “Thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain.” I answered this that the germ then had to go into the grave and have a resurrection from that place. Hence if it was the soul, here was positive proof that the soul went into the grave. And again, in the resurrection the corruptible was to put on incorruption, and the mortal was to put on immortality. How could he reconcile this with his theory of the resurrection? How could the angel germ in man, the immortal part put on immortality? This he could not answer. These arguments he produced in his third speech. When I came to answer he began to interrupt me, to contradict, to deny that I quoted him right, to object to the position that I took, &c. He would not allow me to speak five minutes without interrupting me. He carried it to such a length that it became manifest to all that he was fully determined to break up the discussion. As the president was not prepared to meet such things in a minister he hardly knew what position to take, so that Eld. J. virtually confused and broke up the second session. However I was bound that the discussion should not end upon any consideration. This same man had once had a discussion with Eld. Grant, and took a similar course, and succeeded in breaking it up, and then boasted that Eld. Grant ran; so I was resolved that he should not do that here. As soon as I learned his course I only referred in general terms to what he had said, and gave him no chance to interrupt, so he had to get into the traces again.
In the third session he made another attempt at the same thing, but failed very signally, as the president decided against him, and called him to order. I quoted Malachi iv, as applying to the destruction of the wicked in the Judgment. He ridiculed this idea, and said that it applied in the days of Elijah, because in that chapter it says, “Behold I will send you Elijah the prophet.” But we showed that the prophecy was not written until 500 years after Elijah’s time. This appeared to be news to him, and he could not answer it. He attempted to quote Malachi iv, but misquoted it. I demanded that he should read it. Here it was amusing, indeed, to see him undertake to find the last chapter in the Old Testament. He spent several minutes while we all waited in profound silence for him, and at last he had to have it found for him. He said that God was the father of all men, and that a father would be cruel to treat his children as we said God would the wicked. By turning to John viii, 41–44 we found that the Pharisees put forth the same claim, namely, that God was their father; but Jesus denied it, saying, “Ye are of your father the Devil.” So of all wicked men.
Of course he tried to make a strong point on 1 Cor. xv, 22, “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” And in the same chapter those who are made alive have immortality, &c. This, Universalists consider their strong fort; but I took the position that it did not apply to the wicked at all. 1. The whole chapter is addressed to the “brethren.” 2. It refers to those who are asleep in Christ. 3. The term all is frequently used in a limited sense. 3 John xii; 2 Tim. iv, 16. 4. If the 22d verse applies to wicked men, it is the only one in the whole chapter that does. 5. The term all is here particularly limited by the verse, “Christ, the first fruits, afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming,” showing that there will be some who are not Christ’s, but this chapter refers to them only who are his.
Eld. Johnson said that God was in all men, that every man had a part of God in him. To this I answered that in wars and fighting, we have God arrayed against God, God fighting God, &c. This he did not attempt to answer. I asked if man could only be saved through Christ, how he would get Tom Paine into Heaven. He answered, easily enough, but did not prove it. To be asleep in Christ, 1 Thess. iv, 13, he said was rejoicing in the love of Christ. He quoted 1 Tim. ii, 4, “For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.” He dwelt largely on this, asking if the will of God would not be done? I showed, by different passages, that wicked men did not do the will of God. Men steal, commit murder, and do all manner of wickedness. Now is this the will of God? If so then he is responsible for it all. This was at the close of next to the last session.
At the commencement of the last session he came in evidently much excited. He opened by saying that I had taken away his Bible, his God, his Saviour, his all. Then he talked largely about the will of God being done, and tried very hard to produce a great sensation. Said he did not suppose that he was discussing with an infidel, atheist, &c. He said that man could not alter the will of God, taking this illustration: “A father makes his last will and testament; in that he wills to his children his property, so and so, then he dies. Now their conduct after his death will not alter the will in the least; whether they are good or bad.” In closing his speech he said that I had said “The will of God is not done,” and said he should not allow me to read a word from the Bible till I had cleared it up. Hence, the moment that I began to reply, he objected, would not allow me even to read the text over which the controversy had arisen, would not allow me to make any explanation, would not allow that I had qualified the term by anything I had said before or after it. I had said the will of God was not done, and now I must clear it up without any explanation or I could go no farther. I must not even open the Bible to read one word from it. Here he thought he had me where I could go no farther, because according to parliamentary rules, if the president decided in my favor he could appeal to the house, and we should have to abide by their decision, however unreasonable it might be. I was a stranger here. The doctrine I advocated was new to the people, and unpopular, and their prejudices were against it. Mr. Johnson was right at home in the heart of his people, where he had lived and preached for years. His friends were there for miles around. He very naturally supposed that a vote could only go in his favor. Thus he opposed, and disputed, and did everything in his power to break up the discussion for nearly an hour. It was evident that he considered himself defeated, or the argument, and took this course to get out of it. However, at length a vote, on this question was put to this effect: Shall Eld. Canright be allowed to proceed with his argument? When the votes were counted, what was our surprise to find that we had 49 majority! This seemed to come like a thunderbolt upon him. He had not expected it. This cured him of objecting any more, and I was allowed to give my last two speeches without interruption. We considered this vote a victory gained right in the midst of his friends.
With regard to the will of God being done, I answered it with his own illustration. A father makes a will, in which he tells that John shall have the farm, provided he takes care of his mother, faithfully, till she dies. James shall have a thousand dollars on condition that he spends $200 of it in getting an education. So the father wills to each one of his children a certain amount of property, but puts in conditions upon which they are to have it. If they do not comply with these conditions a different disposal will be made of the property. Now, although the father is dead and buried and the will unalterable, yet the conduct of those children determines wholly whether they shall have the property which he willed to them or not. Now it is manifestly the will or the desire of that father that those children should do as he says, and that each of them should have the property as he mentioned. If they fail to do as he desired, they would fail to do their father’s will. In this sense his will would not be done. They would fail to do their father’s will. But would not his will be executed? Oh! yes, the property would be disposed of in some other way as he had willed. Now for the application. God has made known his will to man. The last will and testament to man is contained in the New Testament, sealed with the blood and death of his Son. Heb. ix, 15–24. Testament means will. Hence, when we are reading from the Testament we are reading the last will of God to man. There is more than one clause to this will. Universalists seem to think that there is only one clause in the will of God, and that is contained in 1 Tim. ii, 4, “God will have all men to be saved.” Yes, this is the will of God. This is what he desires; but are there no conditions in his will upon which men are to be saved? I read another clause from this will of God, found in Mark xvi, 15, 16. “Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned.” Again, I read in another clause found in Rom. ii, 6–9. “God will render to every man according to his deeds; to them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory, and honor, and immortality, eternal life. But unto them that are contentious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish upon every soul of man that doeth evil.” Here we find some conditions stated in the will of God on which men are to be saved or lost. These conditions Universalists totally ignore.
In his last speech, Eld. Johnson presented a good illustration of what he had tried to ridicule so often, namely, that man was nothing but body and mind. He was manifestly much excited, and wished to make a great impression, but did not know how. I employed my last speech in showing that the wicked would suffer an everlasting or eternal punishment. Matt. xxv, 46. That the punishment of the wicked was to last as long as the life of the righteous, that one was right the opposite of the other,—one was eternal life, the other eternal death. The original word rendered punishment, signifies, to be cut off; hence, while the righteous go into eternal life, the wicked are eternally cut off from life. The English word punishment, signifies, pain or loss. The righteous will gain eternal life, the wicked will lose it. This was confirmed by 2 Thess. i, 7. “Punished with everlasting destruction.” Mark iii, 39. “In danger of eternal damnation.” Matt. xii, 30, 31. “Hath never forgiveness, neither in this world nor in the world to come.” Mark ix, 40, 43. A hell “where the worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.” I never saw the force of this passage so clearly before. I thank God that the Bible reads just as it does. Thus our discussion closed. I firmly believe that God helped us during this discussion, and that it will result in good to the cause of truth. I feel well satisfied with it. It has already raised us up numerous friends where we had none before. The Methodists and Baptists who were so anxious for the discussion, hoping that we would be put down, received no aid nor comfort from it. Eld. J.’s efforts were almost entirely to prove Universalism, and ours to prove the Advent doctrine. As we foresaw, the question led to this. This pleased us much. I am more than ever impressed with the fact that the best and only consistent way for us to discuss with opposers of the truth, is for one to speak one evening, and the other the next. Then if men are disposed to be mean and tricky, they can take no advantage. We could not expect that many would decide to obey the truth in the midst of so much opposition, and discussion.
We go to New Vineyard, five miles from here, to commence a course of lectures, and shall in the mean time help them here all we can.
D. M. CANRIGHT. New Portland, Me.
Continue reading: JEREMIAH XXXI, 18–40