and Protestants on this question, in the following forcible language:—
“I am going to propose a very plain and serious question, to which I would entreat all who profess to follow ‘the Bible, and the Bible only,’ to give their most earnest attention. It is this: Why do you not keep holy the Sabbath day?
“The command of Almighty God stands clearly written in the Bible in these words: ‘Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work; but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do any work.’ Ex. 20:8, 9. Such being God's command, then I ask again, Why do you not obey it? Why do you not keep holy the Sabbath day?
“You will answer me, perhaps, that you do keep holy the Sabbath day; for that you abstain from all worldly business, and diligently go to church, and say your prayers, and read your Bible at home, every Sunday of your lives.
“But Sunday is not the Sabbath day. Sunday is the first day of the week; the Sabbath day was the seventh day of the week. Almighty God did not give a commandment that men should keep holy one day in seven; but he named his own day, and said distinctly, ‘Thou shalt keep holy the seventh day;’ and he assigned a reason for choosing this day rather than any other—a reason which belongs only to the seventh day of the week, and cannot be applied to the rest. He says, ‘For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day; wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it.’
“Almighty God ordered that all men should rest from their labor on the seventh day, because he too had rested on that day; he did not rest on Sunday, but on Saturday. On Sunday, which is the first day of the week, he began the work of creation, he did not finish it; it was on Saturday that he ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it; because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.’ Gen. 2:2, 3. Nothing can be more plain and easy to be understood than all this; and there is nobody who attempts to deny it; it is acknowledged by everybody that the day which Almighty God appointed to be kept holy was Saturday, not Sunday. Why do you, then, keep holy the Sunday and not the Saturday?
“You tell me that Saturday was the Jewish Sabbath, but that the Christian Sabbath has been changed to Sunday. Changed! but by whom? Who has authority to change an express command of Almighty God? When God has spoken and said, Thou shalt keep holy the seventh day, who shall dare to say, Nay, thou mayest work, and do all manner of worldly business on the seventh day; but thou shalt keep holy the first day, in its stead? This is the most important question, which I know not how you can answer.
“You are a Protestant, and you profess to go by the Bible, and the Bible only; and yet in so important a matter as the observance of one day in seven as a holy day, you go against the plain letter of the Bible, and put another day in the place of that day which the Bible has commanded. The command to keep holy the seventh day is one of the ten commandments; you believe that the other nine are still binding; who gave you authority to tamper with the fourth? If you are consistent with your own principles, if you really follow the Bible, and the Bible only, you ought to be able to produce some portion of the New Testament in which this fourth commandment is expressly altered, or, at least, from which you may confidently infer that it was the will of God that Christians should make that change in its observance which you have made.
“The present generation of Protestants keep Sunday holy instead of Saturday, because they received it as a part of the Christian religion from the last generation, and that generation received it from the generation before, and so on, backward, from one generation to another, by a continual succession, until we come to the time of the (so-called) Reformation, when it so happened that those who conducted the change of religion in this country, left this particular portion of the Catholic faith and practice untouched.
“But, had it happened otherwise—had some one or other of the ‘Reformers’ taken it into his head to denounce the observance of Sunday as a popish corruption and superstition, and to insist upon that day was the day which God had appointed to be kept holy, and that he had never authorized the observance of any other—all Protestants would have been obliged, in obedience to their professed principle of following the Bible, and the Bible only, either to acknowledge this teaching as true, and to return to the observance of the ancient Sabbath, or else to deny that there is any Sabbath at all. And so, in like manner, any one at the present day who should set about, honestly and without prejudice, to draw up for himself a form of religious belief and practice out of the written word of God, must needs come to the same conclusion; he must either believe that the Sabbath is still binding upon men's consciences because of the Divine command, ‘Thou shalt keep holy the seventh day;’ or he must believe that no Sabbath at all is binding upon them, because of the apostolic injunction, ‘Let no man judge you in respect to a festival day, or of the sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is Christ's. Either one or the other of these conclusions he might honestly come to; but he would know nothing whatever of a Christian Sabbath, distinct from the ancient, celebrated on a different day, and observed in a different manner, simply because holy Scripture itself nowhere speaks of such a thing.
“Now mind, in all this, you would greatly misunder-
A CUTTING REPROOF
stand me if you supposed I was quarreling with you for acting in this manner on a true and right principle—in other words, a Catholic principle, viz., the acceptance, without hesitation, of that which has been handed down to you by an unbroken tradition. I would not tear from you a single one of those shreds and fragments of divine truth which you have retained. God forbid! They are the most precious things you possess, and by God's blessing may serve as clues to bring you out of that labyrinth of error in which you find yourself involved, far more by the fault of your forefathers, three centuries ago, than by your own. What I do quarrel with you for is, not your inconsistency in occasionally acting on a true principle, but your adoption, as a general rule, of a false one. You keep the Sunday, and not the Saturday; and you do so rightly, for this was the practice of all Christians when Protestantism began; but you have abandoned other Catholic observances, which were equally universal at that day, preferring the novelties introduced by the men who invented Protestantism to the unvarying tradition of above fifteen hundred years.
“We blame you, not for making Sunday your weekly holiday, instead of Saturday, but for rejecting tradition, which is the only safe and clear rule by which this observance can be justified. In outward act, we do the same as yourselves in this matter; we, too, no longer observe the ancient Sabbath, but Sunday in its stead; but then there is this important difference between us, that we do not pretend, as you do, to derive our authority for so doing from a book; but we derive it from a living teacher, and that teacher is the church. Moreover, we believe that not everything which God would have us to know and do is written in the Bible, but there is an unwritten word of God, which we are bound to believe and obey, just as we believe and obey the Bible itself, according to that saying of the apostle, 'Stand fast, and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word or by our epistle.' 2 Thess. 2:14. [Douay Bible.]
“We Catholics, then, have precisely the same authority for keeping Sunday holy, instead of Saturday, as we have for every other article of our creed, namely the authority of 'the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth;' 1 Tim. 3:15; whereas, you who are Protestants have really no authority for it whatever; for there is no authority for it in the Bible, and you will not allow there can be authority for it anywhere else. Both you and we do, in fact, follow tradition in this matter; but we follow it, believing it to be a part of God's word, and the church to be its divinely appointed guardian, and interpreter; you follow it, denouncing it all the time as a fallible and treacherous guide, which often 'makes the commandment of God of none effect.'”
A CUTTING REPROOF
In another Catholic work, called a “Treatise of Thirty Controversies,” we find the following cutting reproof:—
“The word of God commandeth the seventh day to be the Sabbath of our Lord, and to be kept holy; you [Protestants] without any precept of Scripture, change it to the first day of the week, only authorized by our traditions. Divers English Puritans oppose, against this point, that the observation of the first day is proved out of Scripture, where it is said, the first day of the week. Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:2; Rev. 1:10. Have they not spun a fair thread in quoting these places? If we should produce no better for purgatory, prayers for the dead, invocation of the saints, and the like, they might have good cause indeed to laugh us to scorn; for where is it written that these were Sabbath days in which those meetings were kept? Or where is it ordained that they should be always observed? Or, which is the sum of all, where is it decreed that the observation of the first day should abrogate or abolish the sanctifying of the seventh day, which God commanded everlastingly to be kept holy? Not one of those is expressed in the written word of God.”
And finally, W. Lockhart, B. A., of Oxford, in the Toronto (Cath.) Mirror, offered the following “challenge” to all the Protestants of Ireland; a challenge as well calculated for this latitude as that. He says:—
“I do, therefore, solemnly challenge the Protestants of Ireland to prove, by plain texts of Scripture, the questions concerning the obligation of the Christian Sabbath. 1. That Christians may work on Saturday, the old seventh day. 2. That they are bound to keep holy the first day, namely, Sunday. 3. That they are not bound to keep holy the seventh day also.”
This is what the papal power claims to have done respecting the fourth commandment. Catholics plainly acknowledge that there is no scriptural authority for the change they have made, but that it rests wholly upon the authority of the church; and they claim it as a token, or mark, of the authority of that church; the “very act of changing the Sabbath into Sunday” being set forth as proof of its power in this respect.
That many should suppose that Christ wrought this change is not strange; for they have been so taught. But this misapprehension should no longer exist; for, according to the prophecy, the only change ever to be made in the law of God was to be made by the little horn of Daniel 7, and the man of sin of 2 Thess. 2; and the only change that has been made in it is the change of the Sabbath. Now, if Christ made this change, he filled the office of the blasphemous power spoken of by both Daniel and Paul—a conclusion sufficiently hideous to drive any Christian from the view which leads thereto.
But why should any one labor to prove that Christ changed the Sabbath? Whoever does this is performing a thankless task. The pope will not thank him; for, if it is proved that Christ wrought this change, then the pope is robbed of his badge of authority and power. And no truly enlightened Protestant will thank him; for, if he succeeds, he only shows that the papacy has not done the work which it was predicted that it should do
The Relics of Popery
and so that the prophecy has failed, and the Scriptures are unreliable. The matter had better stand as the prophecy has placed it; and the claim which the pope unwittingly puts forth had better be granted. When a person is charged with any work, and that person steps forth and confesses that he has done the work, that is usually considered sufficient to settle the matter. So, when the prophecy affirms that a certain power shall change the law of God, and that very power in due time arises, does the work foretold, and then openly claims that he has done it, what need have we of further evidence? The world should not forget that the great apostasy foretold by Paul has taken place; that the man of sin for long ages held almost a monopoly of Christian teaching in the world; that the mystery of iniquity has cast the darkness of its shadow and the errors of its doctrines over almost all christendom; and out of this era of error and darkness and corruption, the theology of our day has come. Would it then be anything strange if there were yet some relics of popery to be discarded ere the Reformation will be complete?
A. Campbell (Baptism, p. 15), speaking of the different Protestant sects, says :—
“All of them retain in their bosom, in their ecclesiastic organizations, worship, doctrines, and observances, various relics of popery. They are, at best, reformations of popery, and only reformations in part. The doctrines and traditions of men yet impair the power and progress of the gospel in their hands.”
Therefore, let the reader beware, lest he make the mistake of supposing he is following the Lord Jesus Christ, while he is only following his pretended vicegerent, the anti-christ of Rome.
It may be proper to add a word respecting the testimony of history on this question, and answer an objection that may arise in some minds.
1. The whole theological world are assiduously taught that the first day of the week has been called the Lord's day, and unanimously observed as the Sabbath by Christians ever since the days of Christ. This claim is not sustained by either the Bible or history.
Rev. 1 : 10, is the only scripture that is brought forward to prove that the term “Lord's day” had become the familiar title of the first day of the week in the days of the apostles. There are a number of objections to such an application of this text.
First. John does not say that it was the first day of the week which he here calls the Lord's day, nor does he make the least statement from which such a conclusion can be inferred.
Secondly. John wrote his gospel two years after his Revelation (see Thoughts on Revelation, p. 28); and in his gospel he twice speaks of the first day of the week, and calls it, not Lord's day, as he would have done if that had come to be the general name for that day when his Revelation was given, but simply “first day of the week.”
Thirdly. The seventh day of the week is in the most express manner called God's holy day. It is the one day of the seven which he has reserved to himself. And the Son of man, through whom the worlds were made, John 1 : 3; Heb. 1 : 2, and who was consequently associated with his Father in the institution of the Sabbath at the beginning, expressly styles himself the Lord of the seventh day. Mark 2 : 28. Hence we say that the Lord's day of Rev. 1 : 10, is the seventh day of the week, not the first.
No ecclesiastical writer previous to A. D. 194 gives the title of Lord's day to the first day of the week. The so-called epistle of Barnabas is spurious. The letter of Pliny to Trajan speaks of a stated day, but does not specify which day of the week it was. The epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians is itself a forgery; and the passage which is made to speak of Sunday as the Lord's day has been interpolated into that forgery. Justin Martyr, A. D. 140, does not use the term Lord's day, as is so often asserted. Clement of Alexandria, A. D. 194, uses the term ambiguously, perhaps referring to the first day of the week. Victor, bishop of Rome, A. D. 196, attempted to honor the day by an effort to have Easter uniformly celebrated on that day. Tertullian, A. D. 200, furnishes the first evidence of abstinence from labor on that day. In A. D. 321, Constantine made a law in behalf of the “venerable day of the sun,” which was the first Sunday law. But this was a pagan edict, Constantine not yet having become even nominally Christian. At his so-called conversion, two years later, in A. D. 323, this law for Sunday as a heathen festival, being unrepealed, was made use of by Sylvester, bishop of Rome, now reckoned in the line of popes, to enforce Sunday observance as a Christian institution.
These are the indubitable facts of history, authenticated by a reference to the original authorities in the History of the Sabbath, by J. N. Andrews, to which the reader is particularly referred :—
2. The objection. The papacy was not fully established till A. D. 538, more than two hundred years after Constantine's law. How, then, can Sunday be called an institution of popery, and the change be attributed to the little horn, according to the prophecy of Daniel, which is a symbol of the papal power?
Let it be remembered that Sunday, as a subject of prophecy, is Sunday as a Christian institution. The question, then, is, What power or influence established this observance in the Christian church? Not Constantine; for his legislation referred to it as a heathen festival; although he furnished a means which was shrewdly manipulated by Pope Sylvester in enforcing it among Christians. But it was brought in by the working of that influence which finally resulted in the establishment of the papacy. The papacy existed in embryo long before Constantine's time. The mystery of iniquity worked even in Paul's day, 2 Thess. 2 : 7, waiting only the removal of the Roman empire, as Gibbon and others reveal.
The root of the papacy was then introduced into the church; and it continued to grow into a tree whose branches have extended far beyond all other institutions. Sunday is the badge of Christ's pretended vicegerent; it is the character of the beast; it is the mark of pagan and papal combined; and it is what we are to expect.
To the thoughtful, who look into the future and see the end, the present state of religion is a heart interest. Religion has lost its power. They seem to be following the form of godliness, but deny the power thereof. They do not deny the name of Christ, but they deny the spirit and life of true religion. And the dread of the coming storm has driven many from the doctrines of Christ, and left them drifting in the dark and in the gloom of infidelity, without a star of hope or a line of truth. The great mass of the world are in the same condition. They are in the gross darkness, and the light of heaven shines not in their hearts. The gospel to them is a dead letter. The truth of God is not in them. The love of God is not in their hearts. The fear of God is not before their eyes. The hope of heaven is not in their souls. The joy of the Lord is not their strength. The peace of God is not in their hearts. The comfort of the Holy Ghost is not in their souls. The grace of God is not in their hearts. The truth of God is not in their souls. The love of God is not in their hearts. The fear of God is not before their eyes. The hope of heaven is not in their souls. The joy of the Lord is not their strength. The peace of God is not in their hearts. The comfort of the Holy Ghost is not in their souls. The grace of God is not in their hearts. The truth of God is not in their souls.
In fact, the religion of the present day is a religion of earth, and not of heaven. It is a religion of time, and not of eternity. It is a religion of sense, and not of faith. It is a religion of the world, and not of God. It is a religion of man, and not of Christ. It is a religion of the flesh, and not of the spirit. It is a religion of the devil, and not of God.
In fact, the religion of the present day is a religion of the earth, and not of heaven. It is a religion of time, and not of eternity. It is a religion of sense, and not of faith. It is a religion of the world, and not of God. It is a religion of man, and not of Christ. It is a religion of the flesh, and not of the spirit. It is a religion of the devil, and not of God. It is a religion of the earth, and not of heaven. It is a religion of time, and not of eternity. It is a religion of sense, and not of faith. It is a religion of the world, and not of God. It is a religion of man, and not of Christ. It is a religion of the flesh, and not of the spirit. It is a religion of the devil, and not of God. It is a religion of the earth, and not of heaven. It is a religion of time, and not of eternity. It is a religion of sense, and not of faith. It is a religion of the world, and not of God. It is a religion of man, and not of Christ. It is a religion of the flesh, and not of the spirit. It is a religion of the devil, and not of God. It is a religion of the earth, and not of heaven. It is a religion of time, and not of eternity. It is a religion of sense, and not of faith. It is a religion of the world, and not of God. It is a religion of man, and not of Christ. It is a religion of the flesh, and not of the spirit. It is a religion of the devil, and not of God.
Thus, it is evident that the present state of religion is a sad one. It is a state of darkness, and not of light. It is a state of error, and not of truth. It is a state of sin, and not of holiness. It is a state of death, and not of life. It is a state of the devil, and not of God.
A PROBING question for the highest intelligence. In reading the history of the past, one cannot help but be impressed with the fact that the greatest minds have often been the most mistaken. What you may consider as the highest expression of human intellect, may, in this class of cases, be the very thing that leads you astray. The things that are termed the highest expressions of human intellect are often the most erroneous. The things that are imagined to be the highest expressions of human intellect are often the most foolish. The things that are thought to be the highest expressions of human intellect are often the most absurd. The things that are supposed to be the highest expressions of human intellect are often the most ridiculous. The things that are believed to be the highest expressions of human intellect are often the most nonsensical. The things that are held to be the highest expressions of human intellect are often the most irrational. The things that are deemed to be the highest expressions of human intellect are often the most illogical. The things that are considered to be the highest expressions of human intellect are often the most unsound. The things that are regarded as the highest expressions of human intellect are often the most unsatisfactory.
PRAYER is the soul's sincere desire, known to God, and to him alone. It is the language of the heart, and is understood by him who reads the heart. It is the breath of the soul, and is heard by him who listens to the voice of the soul. It is the cry of the soul, and is answered by him who hears the cry of the soul. It is the plea of the soul, and is granted by him who grants the plea of the soul. It is the petition of the soul, and is granted by him who grants the petition of the soul. It is the request of the soul, and is granted by him who grants the request of the soul. It is the desire of the soul, and is granted by him who grants the desire of the soul. It is the wish of the soul, and is granted by him who grants the wish of the soul. It is the hope of the soul, and is granted by him who grants the hope of the soul. It is the longing of the soul, and is granted by him who grants the longing of the soul. It is the aspiration of the soul, and is granted by him who grants the aspiration of the soul. It is the yearning of the soul, and is granted by him who grants the yearning of the soul. It is the craving of the soul, and is granted by him who grants the craving of the soul. It is the thirst of the soul, and is granted by him who grants the thirst of the soul. It is the hunger of the soul, and is granted by him who grants the hunger of the soul.
Sunday: Pagan and Papal
removal of the restraining influence of paganism, to reveal before the world the papacy in its full strength. The root of this monstrous system of evil runs back far into the centuries before its open development, like the tree which sends its tap-root far down into the earth beyond the sight of the observer. Through that root the Sunday has found its way into the professed church of Christ; and on that tree it appears as one of the most characteristic fruits. As an institution, Sunday is both pagan and papal; as a rival of the Sabbath of the Lord, it is wholly papal.
THE BIBLE AND THE PEOPLE.
By Prof. Swing
To the multitude, the Sacred Volume tells a straight-forward story. They see in it a picture of the human heart in all its sinfulness, and in all its divineness too. They see the dark destiny of sin and the bright destiny of virtue. One is called hell, the other heaven. They do not descend into particulars about the region of sorrow or the region of joy. They feel that the one is to be dreaded, the other loved. There, on the open page, lies the doctrine of repentance, far more impressive in Peter and in Magdalene than in any system of abstract doctrine. There lies the doctrine of faith in Christ, sweeter in the group around Jesus, in the apostles and martyrs, than in any confession of any church. There in the gospels lives and moves, and dies, and rises again, the Redeemer, in a charm and power to which the learning of commentators can add nothing.
In fact, one may perhaps be glad that there is an army of earth's inhabitants, old and young, white and black, hidden away in the obscurity which ignorance and poverty bring, to whom human wisdom in the form of "eternally begotten," and "eternally proceeding," and "limited atonement," and "inability," has never come, but to whose hearts the Bible tells its simple story as a mother talks to her confiding child. Much of modern theology is only great banks of cloud rolling up between the human family and the moral sun. As the damp vales of earth, and the bitter ocean, are always exhaling vapors that keep our sky clouded and that expose the beautiful earth to perpetual storm, so from the intellect, in its extravagant vanity, clouds arise that hide both Creator and Saviour from the upturned faces of mankind.
Upon Goat Island, in Niagara, upon a Sunday, years ago, I found, hidden away at the root of a tree, a servant from the hotel reading in his Testament about the crucifixion. He was an old, emancipated slave. Upon being questioned as to whether he loved that passage above all, he said he always cried over the idea, that, for even black men, a Christ should have died. I wondered whether any of the formulas of men about that death could ever entice from a slave's heart such tribute of weeping. Here an humble fugitive slave came to fulfill the image of Tennyson:
All subtle thought all curious fears,
Borne down by gladness so complete,
He bows, he bathes the Saviour's feet
With costly spikenard and with tears.
Thus, doubt it not, the common people glean from the sacred page the very golden sheaves which the Lord let fall for man. They find them in all the wide field reaching from Abraham to St. John. Not the entire multitude will thus be found extracting honey from this great field of flowers. Man will never move in a solid phalanx toward any form of good. Many are called, but few are chosen. The downward path is always broad, the upward path narrow. Hence, when I speak of the blessings which the common people draw from the Bible I am not dreaming of an unbroken host poring over a divine book, but of many souls, many indeed, that in youth and in old age, in joy and in sorrow, in darkness and in light, are at times taking up the Bible, to trace in it the path of hope for time and eternity. Could you call all these together this day from all the corners of our land, and from the lonely ships on our seas, they would come in such a multitude, and so pressing the book to their hearts, that even were you an infidel you would bless God that so many souls were drawing so much happiness from the two Testaments. The hardest heart might weep for joy that so many had found infinite peace.—Prof. Swing.
Proper System of Reading.
By Blakey
A PROPER and judicious system of reading is of the highest importance. Two things are necessary in perusing the mental labors of others; namely, not to read too much, and to pay great attention to the nature of what you do read. Many persons peruse books for the express and avowed purpose of consuming time; and this class of readers forms by far the majority of what are termed the reading public; a habit more injurious in its influence on mind and character can hardly be imagined. Others, again, read with the laudable anxiety of being made wiser; and when this object is not attained, the disappointment may generally be attributed, either to the habit of reading too much, or of paying insufficient attention to what falls under their notice.—Blakey.
PRAYING TO THE POINT.
President Finney was well-known for clearness of ideas as well as plainness of speech; and his prayers were not altogether destitute of point and directness. On Sunday, after the choir at Oberlin had sung without distinctly pronouncing the words, he in his prayer alluded to the matter as follows: "O Lord, we have sung an anthem to thy praise. Thou knowest the words, but we do not. We do pray thee that those who thus led us may open their mouths that we may know what they say, that we may join in thy praise. May they not sing to be heard of men. May they not mock thee and offend thy people, or the house of God, by making a display of themselves."
Liberality and Good Works
LIBERALITY does not consist in good words, but in good works.
Thoughts—Words—Actions.
The sum total of human influence is comprised in these three words. In one of these three channels it must flow; for it has no other. Every sin that has ever been committed, has been done in some one or all of these three ways; and every good deed that has ever been performed, has been confined to the same channels. All that goes to make up character, takes its place under some one of these three heads; and when character is weighed at last, the estimate will be formed on these three points alone—the thoughts, the words, and the actions.
How important then do these channels of our being become! How important that they be carefully closed against the insidious ingress of the enemy, and sleeplessly guarded against all his attacks! In each of these ways we may go wrong, in each of them sin against God; while only by being right in all of them can we be accepted with him. And here we are never idle. In thought or word or act we are always busy; and in neither of these can we be neutral; we are therefore constantly moving on one side or the other. Think of this, and say, reader, if the importance can be estimated of knowing how to be, and then of being, on all these points without sin.
Let us then look at a few of the declarations, directions and warnings of the word of God touching these divisions of our conduct. Considering the importance of our outward actions, and the direct influence we thereby exert on those around us, we are not surprised to find throughout the blessed word so many exhortations to those deeds which are good, and so many warnings against those which are evil. By the Lord, we are told, actions are weighed. 1 Sam. 2:3. A law has been given us by which to regulate our lives in this respect, enforced by suitable rewards and penalties; outward manifestations of God's displeasure against sin, have been recorded for our admonition; and finally we are told that according to our deeds, whether good or bad, so shall be our sentence beyond this life.
Next to our acts, we exert an influence for good or evil by our words. What directions have we concerning these? By them we may accomplish good. "A word spoken in season," according to Solomon, "how good is it!" And words fitly spoken are like apples of gold in pictures of silver. Prov. 15:23; 25:11. Profane and vain words "will eat as doth a canker." 2 Tim. 2:17. The man that offends not in word is a perfect man. Jas. 3:2. The Psalmist prayed that the words of his mouth might be acceptable to the Lord. Ps. 19:14. The words of the tale-bearers are as wounds. Prov. 18:8. There is more hope of a fool, than of a man who is hasty in his words. Prov. 29:20. In coming before God our words should not be hasty and rash, but few. Eccl. 5:2. Lying lips are an abomination to the Lord. Prov. 12:22. We are to keep from speaking evil and guile. Ps. 34:13; Prov. 24:28. The tongue must be bridled. Jas. 1:26. And, finally, for every idle word we must give an account; and by our words we shall at last be justified or condemned. Matt. 12:36, 37.
Thus definite and precise is the word of God in reference to our acts and words; and thus constantly are we to guard against the everpresent danger of sinning therein. But what of our thoughts, those unexpressed and invisible messengers that hold council in our own bosoms? May they become tainted with sin? Yes; even here sin may enter; and here too we must erect our works to bar it out. In what way may we sin here? By harboring unprofitable thoughts. "The thought of foolishness," says the wisest of men, "is sin." Prov. 24:9. We are not to let over anxious thoughts for the future disturb us. Matt. 6:25. Simon sinned in thinking that the Holy Ghost might be purchased with money; and Peter said to him, Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee. Acts 8:22. Vain thoughts are to be hated. Ps. 119:113. The unrighteous must forsake his thoughts, as well as his wicked ways. Isa. 55:7. The Psalmist prayed that not only the words of his mouth, but also the meditation of his heart might be acceptable in the sight of his Lord.
But might not wicked thoughts and temptations arise, it will be asked, and yet not be sin? Assuredly; but they are not sin simply because we do not harbor them. The state of the converted person is well defined by the apostle, as that in which every thought is brought into captivity to the obedience of Christ. 2 Cor. 10:5. And when every
Thoughts, Words, and Actions
By Uriah Smith
thought is thus brought into obedience to Christ; and the tongue bridled that we offend not in word, and our actions regulated by the law of God, the whole sphere of man's volition is spanned.
Let us extend a little the prayer of the Psalmist, and have the thoughts of our hearts, the words of our mouths and all our acts acceptable in the sight of the Lord, our strength and our Redeemer. U. S.
The Order of Events in the Judgment.
NUMBER EIGHTEEN.
WHEN our Lord says to those at his right hand, "Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world," he takes his saints into the presence of his Father, compare John 13:36; 14:1-3; 1 Thess. 4:14-17; Rev. 19:1-9, to the paradise of God, once here upon earth, Gen. 2:8, 9; 3:22-24, now in the third heaven, 2 Cor. 12:2-4, within the heavenly Jerusalem itself. Compare Rev. 2:7; 22:2, 14. Here they sit down with him at his table and eat the marriage supper. Rev. 19:1-9. These things being accomplished, the work of judgment is committed to the saints, a work so vast that we may well conceive the long period which lies between the two resurrections, to be requisite for its accomplishment. Rev. 20:4-6. The sitting of the saints in judgment upon the wicked, must begin after they have heard the words of Christ approving them in his Father's name, and before the sentence, "Depart ye cursed," is pronounced by the Saviour upon those who shall be thus judged. This judgment by the saints is thus presented in the Scriptures :—
Dan. 7:21, 22: "I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them; until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom."
1 Cor. 4:5: "Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts; and then shall every man have praise of God."
1 Cor. 6:1-3: "Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more, things that pertain to this life?"
Rev. 20:4-6: "And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them; and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshiped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection; on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years."
According to the first of these texts, the saints of the Most High are to have the judgment work committed to them. But before this is placed in their hands, they are themselves to be judged by God the Father. And this very act of determining who are worthy to be saved, really determines that all the others are unworthy of eternal life. The judgment work of the saints cannot therefore, relate to the salvation or damnation of those who are judged by them, but solely to the determination of the measure of their guilt. The second of these texts, in forbidding the work of judgment "before the time," plainly implies that when that time does come, then this work is to be done by those who are at present forbidden to do it. And the time is fixed when this prohibition expires. For it is thus limited: "Until the Lord come." That they will not err in the judgment which they will then perform, is guaranteed in the further statement that the Lord shall bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and make manifest the counsels of the heart. And this will no doubt be accomplished by placing in their hands the books of record which contain an accurate statement of the deeds of those to be judged by them. Barnes, in his notes on this text, makes this remark: "'And then shall every man have praise of God.' The word here rendered praise denotes in this place reward, or that which is due to him; the just sentence which ought to be pronounced on his