Review and Herald, Vol. 54, No. 4. (7/17/1879)

Review and Herald

Jul 17, 1879

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jul 17, 1879

THE RESURRECTION.

By C. W. Stone

BY C. W. STONE.

(Continued.)

THE NEW TESTAMENT ON THE RESURRECTION.

I do not say that the reader of these lines must die; he may not. The Saviour soon is coming, and many who read these lines will doubtless witness that grand scene. “Whosoever liveth and believeth in me,” says Christ, pointing forward to that time, “shall never die.” John 11:26. The faithful Christian living when the Lord shall come, will never die. But, reader, you may die, and be buried in the grave. You have friends who lie there now. You saw that dear face ere the coffin lid hid it from your view; you followed the bier in the solemn procession to that open grave in the cemetery; you saw the coffin lowered; you heard the dull sound as it touched the walls of earth or rested on its lowly bed, and you knew your dear one was there. Whatever may be your theology, your heart yearns for one who is lying dead in that grave. However much you may profess to think of your dear one as having gone to Heaven, your mind really rests on the form on whose coffin you now hear the “clods of the valley” falling as the sexton does his work, and you turn away, leaving your dead buried in the dust of the earth. Shall that dead one live again? That is the question that comes naturally from the aching heart. Shall I be permitted to clasp my darling one in my arms again? The dear Saviour has not left us without an abundant answer to this question that comes like a wail of anguish from millions of hearts bereft and bleeding. To him we will go, resolved to accept the kind of comfort which he who was touched with our sorrows gives us.

We have examined the testimony of Moses and the prophets, and we have found them unanimous in teaching that the dead shall live again, that they shall come from the grave at the resurrection. The first thing in the Saviour’s teachings to which we will refer is the fact that he indorses what Moses and the prophets have said in relation to the state of the dead, putting these words into the mouth of Abraham in the parable: “They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.” Luke 16:29. We shall expect to find no discord between their teachings and his.

At another time the Saviour appealed to the writings of Moses, to prove the resurrection. The occasion of this reference was this: “Certain of the Sadducees, which deny that there is any resurrection,” came to Jesus with a question, hoping to entrap him in his answer. He answered their question, and then, to prove the resurrection, he quoted Moses, whom they had introduced in their question. Said he, “Now that the dead are raised, even Moses showed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living.” Luke 20:37, 38. But does not that prove that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are not dead, but living? No; for the fact that God is the God of those good men proves that the dead shall rise,—so the Saviour says,—proves that they shall live again. Those men are dead; but with God, “who inhabiteth eternity,” with whom “a thousand years is as one day,” the time that they lie dead is as a little moment. He regards it as but a brief suspension of life; and as they are to live again, they may be said to live in the purpose of God even now; “for all live unto him.” Verse 38.

If, as some shallow reasoners at first suppose, these words of the Saviour prove that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were at that time really alive, then there is nothing in his answer to the Sadducees that would refute their position, or that would at all prove the resurrection of the dead, and the object of his answer would not be reached. But, on the contrary, his answer was so clear a proof of the resurrection that it put the Sadducees to silence. Matt. 22:34. God is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, because they are to live again. If they were never to live again, he would not be called their God, “for he is not the God of the dead”; but because they are to live again, God calls himself their God, even as though they were living now. A parallel to this is found in Rom. 4:16, 17: “To the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all (as it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations), before Him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things that be not as though they were.”

These words are addressed to Abraham in Gen. 17:5: “A father of many nations have I made thee.” But Abraham at that time had not had the child of promise. It is true his son Ishmael was then thirteen years old, but he was not counted in that promise, which was to be fulfilled through Isaac. But how could the Lord say, I have made thee a father of many nations, when as yet not a soul of them had been born? Answer: “God who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things that be not as though they were,” called Abraham a father of many nations “when as yet he had no child.” In the same way, “God who quickeneth the dead,” and who “is not the God of the dead, but of the living,” and who “calleth those things that are not as though they were,” when he has decreed that they shall be, calls himself the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, because they shall live again.

With this masterly argument Jesus silenced the Sadducees, proving from Moses, whom they heard read every Sabbath day, and whose disciples they claimed to be, that the dead are to be raised. So conclusive was this argument in favor of the resurrection that it drew an expression of approval from one of the scribes who stood by. Said he, “Master, thou hast well said.” Luke 20:39.

All the writings of the Old Testament are fully indorsed by Paul and by Peter. Says Paul, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine.” 2 Tim. 3:16. He was speaking of the Holy Scriptures, which Timothy had known from a child. Verse 15. These were certainly the Old Testament Scriptures, for the New Testament was not in existence when Timothy was a child. And Peter says, “The prophecy came not in old time by the will of man; but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.” 2 Pet. 1:21. Then that which Job, David, Isaiah, and all the prophets have testified of the resurrection is not simply their own language; but it was dictated by the Holy Ghost, and written for our instruction. Therefore we might safely rest the question of the resurrection on the evidence presented from the Old Testament, for that evidence is indorsed by both Christ and the apostles. Nevertheless, we will follow the subject through the New Testament, for throughout the sacred volume the resurrection is kept prominently before the mind.

It is through Christ that the dead are raised. Were it not that he died for the sinner, there could be no life beyond this. It is by his power that the dead shall live again at the resurrection; it is his voice that shall call them from the grave. He has given several examples of his power to do this. At one time he met a funeral procession as he was entering the city of Nain. His tender heart of love and pity was touched as he saw that widowed mother following the bier of her dead son. “He had compassion on her, and said unto her, Weep not. And he came and touched the bier; and they that bare him stood still. And he said, Young man, I say unto thee, Arise. And he that was dead sat up, and began to speak. And he delivered him to his mother.” Luke 7:13–15. He raised from the dead the daughter of Jairus. He took the dead damsel by the hand, and said unto her, “Maid, arise.” Luke 8:54. And immediately she did arise, and all were greatly astonished.

But the most interesting case is the resurrection of Lazarus, recorded in the eleventh chapter of John. Mary and Martha had sent for Jesus to come, for Lazarus was sick. But he did not immediately go. After two days he said to his disciples, “Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep.” Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. Howbeit Jesus spake of his death; but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep. Then Jesus said unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead. The Saviour indicates the resemblance of death to sleep: “Lazarus sleepeth”; but it was the sleep of death. In sound sleep there is no thought, no knowledge of anything that may transpire. In that respect sleep is the representation of death. After sleep comes the awakening; after death comes the resurrection. Here again is a similarity, and the resemblance is so great in many points that death is often spoken of in the Bible as sleep, and the resurrection of the dead as awakening from sleep. The metaphor is very beautiful and strikingly appropriate.

When the Saviour arrived, Lazarus had been dead four days, and had begun to see corruption. Mary said to Jesus, “Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died.” “Jesus saith unto her, Thy brother shall rise again.” Martha, not taking the idea that Jesus meant that he should rise then, said, “I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day.” “I know.” How did she know? She had learned it either from the Old Testament or from the teachings of Jesus himself. When Martha had said this, Jesus next reminded her that it was he himself that should raise the dead at the last day. Said he, “I am the resurrection and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live.” And having assured her that it is through him that the resurrection shall take place, he next pointed out another truth; namely, that those who are found righteous, believing in Christ, who are living at the time of the resurrection,—those shall never die. “And whosoever liveth [at the time of the resurrection] and believeth in me shall never die.”

Then they went to the sepulcher. The same great heart that was moved with compassion when he met the widow of Nain following the coffin of her dead boy, was melted to tears of love and sympathy as he stood with those weeping sisters by the tomb in which their brother, the Lord’s friend, had lain but four days. “Jesus wept.” Truly it is an assuring thought, a comforting thought to the child of God when death approaches, that the same loving Jesus that wept at the tomb of Lazarus, holds the keys of the grave. Rev. 1:18.

Jesus ordered the stone removed, and then lifted up his eyes, and gave thanks to the Father. “And when he had thus spoken, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth.” He did not look up into the heavens and say, Immortal soul of Lazarus, come back; but he opened the tomb and cried, “Lazarus, come forth.” What was the result? “He that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with grave-clothes; and his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go.” Now where was Lazarus? In the tomb; for, “he that was dead came forth.” He came from the tomb. He that was dead came forth alive.

On another occasion the Saviour healed a man of an infirmity of thirty-eight years. He said that he did it through power which the Father had given him. And he proceeded to show that he would yet do greater works. Said he, “For the Father loveth the Son, and showeth him all things that himself doeth; and he will show him greater works than these, that ye may marvel. For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will. . . . Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God; and they that hear, shall live.” John 5:20–25. “And now is.” This statement he verified when, as we have seen, his voice called to life the widow’s son, Jairus’ daughter, and Lazarus of Bethany. But this was but a small exhibition of his power, a brief example of what is to come; and so the Saviour continued, “Marvel not at this; for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.” Verses 28, 29.

Now, reader, pause. Consider this question candidly: When do “they that have done good” enter upon that life that is to be their reward, that is purchased for them by the Son of God? Is it at death? This text plainly says it is not, but that it is at the resurrection; and that at that time the real, intellectual, thinking, responsible man that did good, the man that hears, is to be made to hear, and to come forth out of the grave. How could the doctrine of the resurrection be more plainly expressed? If you wished to state in unequivocal terms the fact that men go into the grave, and lie there dead and utterly dependent upon the resurrection for the future life, pray tell me what words in the English vocabulary you would select, that would convey the idea with more force

and certainty than do the words of Jesus in John 5:28, 29.

“They that have done good [shall come forth] unto the resurrection of life.” And this life is eternal life; for Jesus speaks of these two classes in Matt. 25:32, and says that at his coming “he shall separate them one from another as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats; and he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left”; and of the former he says they shall enter “into life eternal.” Verse 46. What is this life eternal? “The gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” Rom. 6:23. When is this reward,—this “gift of God,”—to be given? “For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then shall he reward every man according to his works.” Matt. 16:27. To whom is it given? “To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, [God will render] eternal life.” Rom. 2:5–7. These texts do most clearly show that the time when the righteous are to receive the gift of eternal life, which was purchased for them by the blood of Christ, and which God will bestow upon them who have done good, is at the resurrection, and not before. Men do not, therefore, receive their reward and enter upon eternal life at death.

These same texts do just as clearly show that the wicked are raised from the dead, to receive the wages of their sinful lives; for the wages of sin is death. Rom. 6:23. Jesus says, “They that have done evil [shall come forth] unto the resurrection of damnation.” They are raised from the dead, to be punished; and the Saviour speaks their doom in these words: “Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels.” Matt. 25:41. The prophet Daniel says the same thing. “Many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.” The wicked shall awake from their sleep in the dust of the earth to shame and contempt. Job says of the wicked, “They shall be brought forth to the day of wrath.”

(To be continued.)

COMING GLORY.

By Eliza H. Morton

“Eye hath not seen; ear hath not heard.”

The fairest landscapes eye hath seen, The greenest dells and hills, The freshest meadows, mossiest rocks, The clearest brooks and rills, Are only shadows, dim and faint, Of what this earth will be When curse is lifted in the morn Of glad eternity.

The grandest music ear hath heard, The deepest organ-peal, The softest lay by singer sung, The chords we hear and feel, Are only echoes of the song The angels sing above, Faint preludes of the grand “new song,” Whose notes are endless love.

The loftiest thoughts conceived by mind, The sweetest dreams by night, The deepest longings of the soul, The loveliest visions bright, Are only far-off glimmering gleams Of glory yet to dawn, When life springs up from “mother earth” In resurrection morn.

No eye hath seen, no ear hath heard That shining angel band; No mind conceived, no tongue described The beauties of that land: But soon our eyes will see the King, And tears be wiped away; Our ears will catch the anthem grand, And night be lost in day.

O songs that never, never cease! O sunlight ever fair! O city paved with glittering gold! O freedom from all care! The thought-worn brow will wear a crown, The saints be ever blest, Life’s waters cool the burning brain, The weary feet find rest.

ELIZA H. MORTON.

Allen’s Corner, Me.

HOW TO WIN BACK THE ERRING.

By Ellen G. White

If you are grieved because your neighbors or friends are doing wrong to their own hurt, if they are overtaken in fault, follow the Bible rule. “Tell him his fault between thee and him alone.” As you go to the one you suppose to be in error, see that you speak in a meek and lowly spirit; for the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God. The erring can in no other way be restored than in the spirit of meekness, and gentleness, and tender love. Be careful in your manner. Avoid anything in look or gesture, word or tone of voice, that savors of pride, or self-sufficiency. Guard yourself against a word or look that would exalt self, or present your goodness and righteousness in contrast with their failings. Beware of the most distant approach to disdain, overbearing, or contempt. With care avoid every appearance of anger; and though you use plainness of speech, yet let there be no reproach, no railing accusation, no token of warmth, but that of earnest love. Above all let there be no shadow of hate or ill-will, no bitterness, nor sourness of expression. Nothing but kindness and gentleness can flow from a heart of love. Yet all these precious fruits need not hinder your speaking in the most serious, solemn manner, as though angels were directing their eyes upon you, and you were acting in reference to the coming Judgment. Bear in mind that the success of reproof depends greatly upon the spirit in which it is given. Do not neglect earnest prayer that you may possess a lowly mind, and that angels of God may work upon the hearts you are trying to reach, before you, and so soften them by heavenly impressions, that your efforts may avail. If any good is accomplished, take no credit to yourself. God alone should be exalted. God alone hath done it all.

You may have excused yourself for speaking evil of your brother or sister or neighbor to others before going to them, and taking the steps God has absolutely commanded. Perhaps you say, “I did not speak to any one until I was so burdened that I could not refrain.” What burdened you? Was it a plain neglect of your own duty, a thus saith the Lord? You were under the guilt of sin because you did not go tell him his fault between thee and him alone. If you did not do this, if you disobeyed God, how should you be otherwise than burdened, unless your heart was hardened, while you were trampling the command of God under foot, and hating your brother or neighbor in your heart? And what way have you found to unburden yourself? God reproves you for a sin of omission, not telling your brother or sister their fault, and you excuse and comfort yourself under his censure by a sin of commission, by telling your brother’s faults to another person! Is this the right way to purchase ease, by committing sin?

All your efforts to save the erring may be unavailing. They may repay you evil for good. They may be enraged rather than convinced. What if they hear to no good purpose, and pursue the evil course they have begun. This will frequently occur. Sometimes the mildest and tenderest reproof will have no good effect. In that case, the blessing you wanted another to receive by pursuing a course of righteousness, ceasing to do evil, and learning to do well, will return into your own bosom. If the erring persist in sin, treat them kindly and leave them with your Heavenly Father. You have delivered your soul. Their sin no longer rests upon you. You are not now partaker of their sins. But if they perish, their blood is upon their own heads. E. G. WHITE.

THE SABBATH AT THE NORTH POLE.

By A. Smith

As an objection to the seventh-day Sabbath, among other arguments, it is asserted that in the polar regions darkness and light alternately prevail for months at a time, making it impossible to mark, by solar phenomena, the beginning or ending of the Sabbath, or any other day limited by Bible time; and, therefore, that the Sabbath cannot be properly kept anywhere.

Admitting the premises to be correct, which we think we can disprove, the conclusion is greatly overdrawn, and indirectly impeaches the wisdom and justice of the Creator, who commanded that the Sabbath so limited should be kept holy. But it is not surprising that those who trample under foot the Sabbath of the Bible, and exalt in its stead a day devoted to the worship of a heathen god, should blasphemously charge the Lord with folly. Charity interposes, in extenuation, the plea that it is generally done ignorantly.

But to the point in question. In latitudes where the sun is vertical at his meridian, day and night are always about equal in length; but as we ascend to higher latitudes in the northern hemisphere, after the vernal equinox, an increase in the length of the day is observable, the periods of sunset and sunrise gradually approaching each other, until, at the north pole, they meet, where the sun appears to move in a perfect circle around the horizon, remaining visible thereafter until the autumnal equinox.

Now we will suppose that a Yankee farmer, with an enterprising spirit characteristic of his class, has appropriated for himself and family a tract of land, for a farm, (!) at the north pole. Having definitely located the place of the pole, he builds his house directly over it, in such a way that the center of his sitting-room, where his family most frequently assemble for social intercourse, and where, as in all Christian families, they would be most likely to be found after the toils of the week, waiting for the approach of the much-loved Sabbath, exactly coincides with the place of the pole. Now the whole question upon which the integrity of the Bible Sabbath hangs is limited to that one family, and to that little room; (!) for it must be admitted that from whatever side of the pole an observation is made, whether near to or remote from it, while the sun remained continually above the horizon, sunset would always occur when that luminary reached his lowest point of descent in the heavens, at the meridian directly on the opposite side of the pole from the point of observation.

We will suppose that our Yankee, with characteristic shrewdness, being one of those easy-going, accommodating sort of Christians, has so arranged his fields with reference to a possible emergency, that he can have one on either side of the pole planted to the same kind of grain. His wheat is now ripe, and the white bear and reindeer are destroying it fearfully, and the Esquimaux are robbing his fine orchards of lemons and oranges. His work presses, and it is Friday afternoon, near the time which his good wife is so particular to observe as the beginning of the Sabbath. As the sun approaches that point in the heavens, our Yankee moves around his farm work with it, to another field, and labors on for several hours.

In the meantime his wife, though accustomed to retire to bed several hours earlier on other days, from the side of the pole in her room where she is most accustomed to sit, and which she has chosen as the place from which to make her observations, and note the periods of morning, noon, and night, and to which her husband has tacitly assented and conformed, waits the approach of the sun to the point in the heavens on the opposite side of the pole, and with a hymn of praise and a prayer of thanksgiving she hails the approach of the loved Sabbath, and then retires to rest.

About six o’clock in the morning, the husband comes in and wants to know if breakfast is ’most ready. “Have you been at work on the Sabbath?” says his wife. “How could I tell,” says her husband, “when the Sabbath began? The sun kept moving around in a circle.” “And now,” says his wife, “you call for your breakfast before it is night according to your practical reckoning. I feel concerned for your sanity, dear. You had better go to bed and sleep a few hours; it may be that your mind will be restored.” “Well,” says he, “if I can’t tell when the Sabbath begins, I can tell, without a mistake, when it is breakfast or dinner time.” “I think,” says his wife, “if you loved the Sabbath as much as you love your breakfast or dinner, you would have no trouble at all in determining the time of its beginning or close.” A. SMITH.

EXTRACTS AND COMMENTS.

By L. C. Rogers

THAT the true friends of religious liberty may see what are the aims of the National Association, I append the following extracts; they are from a sermon by Rev. J. Blanchard, President of Wheaton College, Illinois, published in the Christian Statesman, and copied into the Cynosure of March 13, 1879, from which I copy. Dr. Blanchard and the Christian Statesman are authority in these matters:—

First extract: “There is a National Association now seeking to insert in the United States Constitution such a simple confession of Christ and the Christian religion as that ‘ours is a Christian and not a heathen government.’ This movement for a religious amendment has sprung up within a few years to antagonize the efforts of infidels, blasphemers, spirit worshipers, atheists, pagans, weak Christians, priests, and politicians to obliterate the Sabbath, etc.”

It is designed, undoubtedly, to include Seventh-day Baptists somewhere in the above list, perhaps under the heading of “weak Christians.”

Second extract: “If the atheist curses the Sabbath and its Author, are we to be denied not only all right to restrain such evil practices, but denied also even the poor privilege of saying they are not Americans, and pointing to the Constitution to show that they are not?”

Thus it is claimed that the Sunday Sabbath is an “American” institution, the disregard of which the National Association and its abettors are to “restrain” by civil enactments.

Third extract: “The United States undertook to drop the superstitions of Europe, and retain its Christianity. In the words of the historian Bancroft, ‘the austere principle was announced that not even a ceremony should be tolerated unless it was enjoined by the word of God.’ Blindly, it is true, and somewhat stumblingly, they sought to drop coercion and retain recognition of Christ.”

The above acknowledged undertaking of our forefathers is now to be “antagonized” by the National Association. And let these would-be reformers see how far they have wandered from the austere principle of the founders of this government in establishing, by national law, the American Sunday; for what support has it from the “word of God?” It is the want of this support that drives them to seek the support of the civil law. Thus the nineteenth century, and right here in free America, is about to take up the weapons of persecution, which a preceding century was compelled to lay down. Protestantism is about to fight “weak Christians” with the abandoned weapons of Catholicism. This is what Dr. Blanchard and his coadjutors call the “relation of civil government to Christ.” Does pure religion and undefiled demand these extreme and anti-republican measures? Does the welfare of the State demand it, either as a recognition of God or his Sabbath? Mr. Blanchard says, “our Constitution is atheistic in its terms, though Christian in its substance.” Will it be any better off, I ask, when it has set up a paper god? Why forsake the “substance” for the shadow? But will not this champion of the American Sunday be obliged to eat his own words? for he says, “Truth is not sectarian. The ten commandments, the Lord’s prayer, the sermon on the mount, these are not sectarian.” Let him adopt, then, the Sabbath of the fourth commandment; for this he will have a “thus saith the Lord,” and have no longer need of the American Sunday, or of civil penalties to aid and abet it.—L. C. Rogers, in Sabbath Recorder, July 3, 1879.

Three Unchangeables: Covenant, God, and Heaven

By Matthew Henry

We have, amid all changes, three unchangeables,—an unchangeable covenant, an unchangeable God, and an unchangeable Heaven; and while these three remain “the same yesterday, to-day, and forever,” welcome to the will of our Heavenly Father in all events that may happen to us. Come what will, nothing can come amiss.—Matthew Henry.

STRIVE LAWFULLY.

By G. W. Pond

“AND if a man also strive for masteries, yet is he not crowned except he strive lawfully.” 2 Tim. 2:5.

All who would prove successful in the Christian warfare, and be rewarded in the life to come with a crown of never-fading glory, must strive for the mastery over all the lusts of the flesh, and gain a complete victory over the temptations by which they are surrounded. But to strive in a hap-hazard manner will not do; we are required to strive according to law.

We sometimes hear it said of a professed Christian that “he does hold some very erroneous opinions, and his practices are in accordance with them; but yet he seems sincere and earnest.” This will not do. Misdirected zeal will never save a man. He must strive lawfully; he must keep all the commandments of God, and comply with all the ordinances of the gospel of Christ. We should be very careful to know what the law is, so that we may strive lawfully. We shall not be excusable for remaining in ignorance, for we are required to “search the Scriptures,” where we shall find the law by which to strive. “To the law and to the testimony; if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.” We must obey the whole law; for “whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.” We must strive according to the letter of the law; and not, as some profess to do, keep the law in the spirit, and yet transgress every day of our lives. If we strive for the crown in that manner, we shall never obtain it, though we have all faith, and strive with all zeal.

Dear reader, are you striving to be an overcomer? do you want to stand in your lot with Daniel at the last day? do you want an inheritance with the saints of God in the new and beautiful earth? Strive continually, and strive lawfully; otherwise no man can be crowned. And what language can describe the wretched condition of him who has endured enough of the strife, and denied himself of so much of the pleasures of this present life, as to be persecuted, buffeted, and tormented for his faith, and yet fails because in some particular he had not striven lawfully? See to it that you strive lawfully, and so receive the reward. G. W. POND.

THE SUNDAY LAW OF TEXAS.

By R. M. Kilgore

To the Editor of the Herald.

In answer to many inquiries whether it is not a violation of the law of the land for one to keep the seventh day and work on Sunday, the first day of the week, I wish to append the statute of Texas on the subject. I copy from the Revised Statutes of the State of Texas which took effect yesterday, May 28, 1879, in which is embraced the following:—

“Penal code, title 7, chapter 2, article 183: Any person who shall hereafter labor, or compel, force or oblige his or her employes, workmen or apprentices, to labor on Sunday, shall be fined not less than $10 nor more than $50.”

“Article 184. The preceding article shall not apply to household duties, works of necessity or charity; . . . nor to any person who conscientiously believes that the seventh or any other day of the week ought to be observed as the Sabbath, and who actually refrains from business and labor on that day for secular reasons.”—R. M. Kilgore, in Denison Daily Herald, May 29, 1879.

WASH UP.

By J. H. Cook

T. De Witt Talmage says a great many good things. From his lecture on the “Night Side of City Life,” I quote the following:—

“The first thing that a bad man does when he is converted is to thoroughly wash himself.”

Again, “When on the Sabbath I see a man uncleanly in his dress, my suspicions in regard to his moral character are aroused, and they are always well founded.”

“God is ever the same; and it is evidently as displeasing now as anciently for his people to appear before him with their everyday clothes on, without their being washed up clean. When he summoned the nation of the Jews to appear before him at the base of Sinai, he said, ‘And let them wash their clothes.’”

After God has so plainly spoken in his word upon this subject, is it any wonder that a neglect to comply with his requirements should be regarded as an indication of the real character of the individual? Brethren, when we go to meeting on the Sabbath, let us expect to meet God there; and let us have our clothes as well as our persons in a cleanly condition, and our consciences void of offense toward God and man. Then may we expect God will meet with us. J. H. Cook.

NO DIFFERENCE.

By John Hackett

Those who advocate the observance of the seventh day as the Sabbath, are often met with the remark that it makes no difference which day is kept, if only one-seventh part of time is observed. In fact, this seems to be the most common excuse offered by those who try to evade the claims of the law of God upon them. It is used very generally by that largest of Protestant denominations, the Methodists, while at the same time they indorse Dr. Aker’s chronology, the whole object of which is to prove that Sunday is or was the original seventh day.

If it makes no difference which day is observed, why take so much trouble to find which is the particular seventh day? It looks very much as though they think it does make a difference; and since they can find no authority in the Bible for the course they are taking, and since it would cost them great inconvenience to turn their course, therefore they seek to excuse themselves with the contradictory pleas of “no difference,” and “Sunday the original seventh day, and the one commanded to be kept, by the fourth commandment.”

The commandment plainly says that “the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God;” and believing as they do in the perpetuity of that law, and its obligation in the Christian age, in order to be consistent they must show that they are observing it, which they try to do, by saying that the Jews kept the sixth day, while they keep the Sabbath according to the commandment by observing the Sunday, which they claim, and we also believe, to be the day of Christ’s resurrection, and which the Bible calls the first day of the week—the day after the Sabbath was past. In Luke 23:56 it is said that the disciples “rested the Sabbath day according to the commandment;” and if, as some claim, they kept the next day too, did they do it according to the commandment, which only requires one day in seven, or the seventh day?

Again, if the first day, or Sunday, is the original seventh day, then the Jews were deceived. The reason assigned to them why the seventh day was holy, and to be observed by them as the Sabbath, was that God had created the heavens and the earth in six days, and had rested the seventh day; wherefore the Lord blessed the seventh day and hallowed it. It was given as a memorial of creation, and for no other reason did the people in the old dispensation observe it. Moreover the Lord pointed out the particular day to be kept, by over eight thousand miracles, during the space of forty years, in the giving of the manna. Did the Lord deceive the people when he said that on the seventh day there should be no manna, because that day was the Sabbath of the Lord? Did Christ keep the sixth or the seventh day while on earth? and did he recognize the sixth day as the Sabbath when he said, “The Son of man is Lord of the Sabbath”? Mark 2:28.

But it should be enough for us to know that the Lord has never intimated that it makes no difference to him whether we obey him or not. I would like to ask how God could have worded the commandment so as to make it more definite and particular? I apprehend that the difficulty all comes from the names given to the days at that time; viz., first, second, third, etc. If they had had the names they now have, and God had said that Saturday was the Sabbath, there would be no difficulty in the minds of any; and yet it would then be no more definite than it now is. The term “fourth day” was at that time just as intelligible and as definitely understood as Wednesday is with us. What right has man to say it makes no difference whether we obey God strictly or not? Has a subject the right to thus carelessly set aside the laws of his sovereign to suit his own convenience? God has been very jealous of his law and his Sabbath, and has sent severe judgments upon his people because they put no difference between the holy and profane, and have hid their eyes from his Sabbath. Ezek. 22:26.

Christ has declared that “till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled.” “Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven.” Matt. 5:19. Again, “Pray ye that your flight [from Jerusalem] be not in the winter, neither on the Sabbath day.” Matt. 24:20. Why pray that their flight be not on the Sabbath day, if there was not a particular day which was the Sabbath, and for which God had a special regard?

But perhaps our Christian friends who think the law of God so easily stretched to suit their convenience, find their license in Rom. 14:5: “One man esteemeth one day above another; another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.” Or perhaps they will confidently quote Col. 2:16: “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days.”

If the day spoken of in the former text, and the sabbath days mentioned in the latter, had reference to the Sabbath of the Lord enjoined in the fourth commandment, then here would be a strong point. But let it be borne in mind that these words are spoken in connection with meats and drinks, holy days and new moons, which Paul says “are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.” Col. 2:17. Now if it can be proved that the Sabbath was of that shadowy, typical nature, then when the substance came the shadow ceased, and we now have no Sabbath. But the Sabbath was instituted before the fall, therefore was not typical. It was placed upon a definite day, for a specific reason, and placed in the midst of God’s immutable law; and never until the unchangeable God changes his law, will we be at liberty to change in our observance of it. JOHN HACKETT.

Continue reading: A Novel Sermon on Baptism at Lebanon, Kentucky