Seventh-day Adventist Missionary Society · Oakland, Cal. · Dec 21, 1882
Union With Christ.
By Mrs. E. G. White
BY MRS. E. G. WHITE.
“ABIDE in me and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine, no more can ye, except ye abide in me. I am the vine, ye are the branches. He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit; for without me ye can do nothing.”
There is a wide difference between a pretended union and a real connection with Christ by faith. A profession of religion places men in the church, but this does not prove that they have a vital connection with the living Vine. A rule is given by which the true disciple may be distinguished from those who claim to follow Christ, but have not faith in him. The one class are fruit-bearing; the other, fruitless. The one are often subjected to the pruning-knife of God, that they may bring forth more fruit; the other, as withered branches, are to be severed from the living Vine.
“I am the vine, ye are the branches.” Can we conceive of a more intimate relation to Christ than this? The fibers of the branch are almost identical with those of the vine. The communication of life, strength, and fruitfulness from the trunk to the branches is unobstructed and constant. The root sends its nourishment through the branch. Such is the true believer’s relation to Christ. He abides in Christ, and draws his nourishment from him.
This spiritual relation can be established only by the exercise of personal faith. This faith must express on our part supreme preference, perfect reliance, entire consecration. Our will must be wholly yielded to the divine will, our feelings, desires, interests, and honor, identified with the prosperity of Christ’s kingdom and the honor of his cause, we constantly receiving grace from him, and Christ accepting gratitude from us.
When this intimacy of connection and communion is formed, our sins are laid upon Christ, his righteousness is imputed to us. He was made sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. We have access to God through him; we are accepted in the Beloved. Whoever by word or deed injures a believer, thereby wounds Jesus. Whoever gives a cup of cold water to a disciple because he is a child of God, will be regarded by Christ as giving to himself.
It was when Christ was about to take leave of his disciples that he gave them the beautiful emblem of his relation to believers. He had been presenting before them the close union with himself by which they could maintain spiritual life when his visible presence was withdrawn. To impress it upon their minds, he gave them the vine as its most striking and appropriate symbol.
The Jews had always regarded the vine as the most noble of plants, and a type of all that was powerful, excellent, and fruitful. “The vine,” our Lord would seem to say, “which you prize so highly, is a symbol. I am the reality; I am the true vine. As a nation you prize the vine; as sinners you should prize me above all things earthly. The branch cannot live separated from the vine; no more can you live unless you are abiding in me.”
All the followers of Christ have as deep an interest in this lesson as had the disciples who listened to his words. In the apostasy, man alienated himself from God. The separation is wide and fearful; but Christ has made provision to again connect us with himself. The power of evil is so identified with human nature that no man can overcome, except by union with Christ. Through this union we receive moral and spiritual power. If we have the spirit of Christ, we shall bring forth the fruit of righteousness,—fruit that will honor and bless men, and glorify God.
The Father is the vine-dresser. He skillfully and mercifully prunes every fruit-bearing branch. Those who share Christ’s suffering and reproach now, will share his glory hereafter. He “will not be ashamed to call them brethren.” His angels minister to them. His second appearing will be as the Son of man, thus even in his glory identifying him with humanity. To those who have united themselves to him, he declares, “Though a mother may forget her child, yet will not I forget thee. I have graven thee upon the palms of my hands. Thou art continually before me.”
Oh, what amazing privileges are proffered us! Will we put forth most earnest efforts to form this alliance with Christ, through which alone these blessings are attained? Will we break off our sins by righteousness, and our iniquities by turning unto the Lord? Skepticism and infidelity are wide-spread. Christ asked the question, “When the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?” We must cherish a living, active faith. The permanence of our faith is the condition of our union.
A union with Christ by living faith is enduring; every other union must perish. Christ first chose us, paying an infinite price for our redemption; and the true believer chooses Christ as first and last, and best in everything. But this union costs us something. It is a relation of utter dependence, to be entered into by a proud being. All who form this union must feel their need of the atoning blood of Christ. They must have a change of heart. They must submit their own will to the will of God. There will be a struggle with outward and internal obstacles. There must be a painful work of detachment, as well as a work of attachment. Pride, selfishness, vanity, worldliness—sin in all its forms—must be overcome, if we would enter into a union with Christ. The reason why many find the Christian life so deplorably hard, why they are so fickle, so variable, is they try to attach themselves to Christ without first detaching themselves from these cherished idols.
After the union with Christ has been formed, it can be preserved only by earnest prayer and untiring effort. We must resist, we must deny, we must conquer self. Through the grace of Christ, by courage, by faith, by watchfulness, we may gain the victory.
Believers become one in Christ; but one branch cannot be sustained by another. The nourishment must be obtained through the vital connection with the vine. We must feel our utter dependence on Christ. We must live by faith on the Son of God. That is the meaning of the injunction, “Abide in me.” The life we live in the flesh is not to the will of men, not to please our Lord’s enemies, but to serve and honor Him who loved us, and gave himself for us. A mere assent to this union, while the affections are not detached from the world, its pleasures and its dissipations, only emboldens the heart in disobedience.
“Every one who is born of God doth not commit sin.” He feels that he is the purchase of the blood of Christ, and bound by the most solemn vows to glorify God. The love of sin and the love of self are subdued in him. He daily asks, “What shall I render unto the Lord for all his benefits toward me?” “Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?” The true Christian will never complain that the yoke of Christ is galling to him, or566that the service of Jesus as the true freedom. The law of God is his delight. Instead of seeking to bring down the divine commands, to accord with his deficiencies, he is constantly striving to rise to the level of their perfection.
God has made ample provision that we may stand perfect in his grace, wanting in nothing, waiting for the appearing of our Lord. Are you ready? Have you the wedding garment on? That garment will never cover deceit, impurity, corruption, or hypocrisy. The eye of God is upon you. It is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. We may conceal our sins from the eyes of men, but we can hide nothing from our Maker.
Such an experience must be ours if we would be prepared to stand in the day of God. Now, while probation lingers, while mercy’s voice is still heard, is the time for us to put away our sins. While moral darkness covers the earth like a funeral pall, the light of God’s standard-bearers must shine the more brightly, showing the contrast between Heaven’s light and Satan’s darkness.
To talk of religious things in a casual way, to pray for spiritual blessings without real soul-hunger, and living faith, avails little. The wondering crowd that pressed close about Christ, realized no vital power from the contact. But when the poor, suffering woman, in her great need, put forth her hand and touched the hem of Jesus’ garment, she felt the healing virtue. Hers was the touch of faith. Christ recognized that touch, and he determined there to give a lesson for all his followers, to the close of time. He knew that virtue had gone out of him, and turning about in the throng he said, “Who touched my clothes?” Surprised at such a question, his disciples answered, “Thou seest the multitude thronging thee, and sayest thou, who touched me?”
Jesus fixed his eyes upon her who had done this. She was filled with fear. Great joy was hers; but had she overstepped her duty? Knowing what was done in her, she came trembling and fell at his feet, and told him all the truth. Christ did not reproach her. He gently said, “Go in peace, and be whole of thy plague.”
Here was distinguished the casual contact from the touch of faith. Prayer and preaching, without the exercise of living faith in God, will be in vain. But the touch of faith opens to us the divine treasure-house of power and wisdom; and thus, through instruments of clay, God accomplishes the wonders of his grace.
This living faith is our great need to-day. We must know that Jesus is indeed ours; that his spirit is purifying and refining our hearts. If the followers of Christ had genuine faith, with meekness and love, what a work they might accomplish! What fruit would be seen to the glory of God!
THE LOVE OF GOD.
THERE'S a wideness in God's mercy
Like the wideness of the sea;
There's a kindness in his justice,
Which is more than liberty.
There is welcome for the sinner,
And more graces for the good;
There is mercy with the Saviour,
There is healing in his blood.
For the love of God is broader
Than the measures of man's mind;
And the heart of the Eternal
Is most wonderfully kind.
But we make his love too narrow
By false limits of our own,
And we magnify his strictness
With a zeal he will not own.
There is plentiful redemption
In the blood that has been shed;
There is joy for all the members
In the sorrows of the Head.
Pining souls! come nearer Jesus;
And, O come not doubting thus;
But with faith that trusts more bravely
His large tenderness for us.
If our love were but more simple,
We should take him by his word,
And our lives would be all sunshine
In the sweetness of our Lord. —Sel.
The Year-Day Theory, or Does a Day in Prophecy Mean a Year?
By Wm. Penniman
BY WM. PENNIMAN.
THIS is a subject of great importance to Adventists, and is therefore one which demands our serious attention. If this “theory,” as it is called, is wrong, it must follow that some of the leading doctrines of our faith are false.
Prof. Cowles, in his “Comments on Ezekiel and Daniel,” gives a dissertation on the “Theory that a Day in Prophecy Means a Year.” From the manner in which he has handled the “theory,” he must have concluded that it is less than the “baseless fabric of a vision,” and in his mighty efforts to demolish it, must have thought that he had left less than “a wreck behind,” as in conclusion he says: “These points may, I trust, suffice to show why this theory never ought to be, and never can be, true.” Pages 459–469 contain the dissertation. The proposition is that all reasonable presumption is against it. To substantiate the proposition, he says “the word lion means a lion, and the word bear, a bear. When a lion is seen in vision, we fall back upon the known qualities of the lion, and his known relations to other animals, to find the signification of the symbol.” Hence he concludes that the word year means a year, and the word day, a day, etc.
Does this reasoning prove anything? In his efforts to substantiate this proposition, he admits that we have symbolic lions and bears. He is compelled to admit this; but does it follow because the word lion means a lion, and the word bear, a bear, and the word serpent, a serpent, that we must always have an exact representation of what is symbolic? Was not the brazen serpent symbolic of Christ upon the cross, and was not the goat that was slain for the people symbolic of Christ’s death? Yet was Christ like a goat or a serpent? If, then, we may have symbolic serpents and goats, and objects including those without life, why may we not have symbols in time which may not have their literal counterpart, and why may not a day symbolize a year?
He further says: “When God chooses not to reveal the time, he manifestly forbears to give it; this is all-sufficient for that purpose.” Very true; this is right to the point. We think God does not wish to reveal the time to all unless they will conform to his will, and become wise. A man may be wise in human learning, may be profound in the sciences, or think that he is, and yet may say as the fool hath said in his heart, “There is no God.” Is such a man wise? and are such men and their followers the class of whom Daniel speaks when he says “the wise shall understand”? We think not. The truly wise are those who earnestly and prayerfully search the word of God, and conform their lives to its teachings. Then the wise are the class who understand, not all. Again we read: “At the time of the end shall be the vision.” This evidently means that at the time or near the end the vision will be understood, and that then more light will be given upon the great prophetic truths of God’s word. This is true of this age. There never has been a period when the subject of prophecy has attracted so much attention as it has within the past thirty years.
Again Mr. Cowles says: “Let us have patience to examine in sufficient detail the alleged evidence that a day in prophecy means a year.” He quotes Num. 14:33, 34: “Your children shall wander in the wilderness forty years. After the number of the days in which ye searched the land, even forty days, each day for a year, shall ye bear your iniquities, even forty years.” It is very plain that in this text the word days is symbolic of years, as the definition of the word symbol will prove. The word symbol, from the Greek sumbalon, is composed of sun, with, and ballo, to throw. The Greek sunballo, signifies to compare, hence the literal meaning of the word signifies to throw with, or to compare with. The number of days in which they searched the land are compared with the number of the years in which they should bear their iniquities. If this is not a comparison, then language has no meaning. If it is a comparison, the days must be symbolic. Hence to deny that days are used for symbols of years in this passage, is to deny the plain laws of language, as the symbol is here given, and its counterpart. It is not necessary that the counterpart of the symbol should be exactly like the symbol. Yet the learned Professor, to make a burlesque of the whole, comments as follows upon the passage: “Does this mean ye shall wander 360 times forty years, 14,400 years?” He has no right to say this inference may be drawn, when the text so well explains itself.
Again, he takes up Eze. 4:4–6: “Lie thou also upon thy left side, and lay the iniquity of the house of Israel upon it; according to the number of the days thou shalt lie upon it thou shalt bear the iniquity of the house of Judah forty days. I have appointed thee each day for a year.” In his explanation of this passage, he admits that the act of lying on the side was symbolic. Wonderful admission! It is strange that he should admit this, and yet could not see that the day was symbolic, especially when the language is so plain. “I have appointed thee each day for a year.” He enumerates several other texts in which a prophecy embracing time is mentioned; reduces the time, if in years, to days, then the days to years again, making enormous sums, so as to make the “theory” as ridiculous as possible. The learned Doctor says “the Lord through Noah predicted the flood (Gen. 6:3) after 120 years,” and wants to know if it turned out to be 43,200 years, or only 120. This, and all similar prophecies where the years are specifically mentioned, are not proper examples of prophetic time as Adventists and as all candid commentators and Bible students understand it. Where the time is plainly given in years, we do not reduce them to days, and then the days to years. But when we have positive proof that “times,” “days,” “weeks,” and “months,” do mean years (as will be shown by the fulfillment of prophecies before the subject is completed), we take them as years; but never when years are given in so many words do we reduce them to days. Therefore those who think this inference follows, grossly misrepresent our views. Let this class bear in mind that scoffing is not wit, nor ridicule, argument. Lastly, he undertakes to demolish this “air-castle theory” of a day for a year by his own translation of Dan. 9:24–27. The following is the rendering:—
“Seventy sevens (of years) are determined in reference to thy people, and thy holy city to shut up sin, to seal transgression, to cover iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophet, and to anoint the holy of holies. Know, and understand, that from the going forth of a decree for restoring and building Jerusalem unto Messiah the Prince are seven sevens (of years) and sixty-two sevens (of years), the streets shall be restored and built again; it is decided and shall be though distress of times. And after sixty-two sevens (of years) Messiah shall be cut off, and there shall be nothing more to him. Then the people of a prince that shall come, shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; its end shall be with that sweeping flood; even unto the end of the war desolations are determined. One seven (of years) shall make the covenant effective to many. The middle of the seven shall make sacrifice and offerings cease; then down upon the summit of the abomination comes the desolator, even till a complete destruction determined shall be poured upon the desolate.”
The careful reader on comparing the two renderings, the one just quoted with King James’, will see but little difference in the sense, unless it is in the “shutting up of sin” (would that it had always remained “shut up”), and the idea that after Messiah is cut off “there shall be nothing more to him.” We have quoted the entire rendering of these texts to show how careful he is throughout the entire translation to avoid the use of the word week. The little word week is very significant, as it includes seven days; and as they are also prophetic days, and mean years, it must be strong proof that a day in prophetic time means a year. He admits that the period is 490 years. Now what can be done to get rid of the word week? Nothing can be done but to give a new translation, to go “point blank” against King James, and many others. If the word week is not in the original, why did the translators insert it, and why did they not put it in italics? Prof. Cowles does not say that the text will not admit of the common rendering, but that he proposes to give one, etc. But, after all, it is hard to tell how much better the Doctor’s rendering makes the case, as the “sevens of years” can have no possible reference to anything else but weeks of years; and, again, what can be meant by the middle of the seven, but the termination of the three and one-half years of prophetic time, or the middle of the week of seven years in which “Messiah was cut off”?
The Bible student will please compare Cowles’ with King James’, and see which is the plainest and best. Leave out of the new rendering the parenthetical clause “of years,” and how will the common reader understand it? If Gabriel did not design to explain the vision in prophetic time, why did he not explain it specifically in years? But has the learned commentator shown from what the seventy weeks are cut off? He says in his paraphrase of this translation that they are “cut off from course of future time,” consequently it must follow that they are cut off from all future time. Here he finds himself in another dilemma. Not able to explain the “cut-off” theory, he is compelled to resort to paraphrase, and to “paraphrase is to translate with latitude.” Truly he has given it a wide latitude when he says the seventy weeks are cut off from all time. What is the sense unfolded in this explanation? It will not do to admit that the seventy weeks are cut off from the 2300 days, for that would favor the “day for a year theory;” this would prove that the seventy weeks, or 490 prophetic days or years, were cut off from the 2300 prophetic days or years. As a part of chapter nine is a continuation of the explanation of the same vision spoken of in chapter eight, it is very evident that Gabriel had reference to the 2300 days when he said (chap. 9:24) seventy weeks are cut off from thy people. “Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot? And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.” As Gabriel is giving a further explanation in chapter nine of the same vision of chapter eight, how easy and natural the exposition that the seventy weeks were cut off from the 2300 days.
Prof. Cowles says, in Dissertation 2, p. 470, that there is not the least hint in chapter nine which implies an allusion to chapter eight. It seems as though a school-boy might easily see the connection of these chapters. It is no wonder the Professor does not admit the connection, as if he did it would be fatal to his position that the “seventy weeks are cut off from all time.” As a matter of course, this learned objector denies the starting-point of the 2300 days, and inquires: “What has the decree of Artaxerxes to do with the beginning of that vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, and the giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?” These things, it is true, have nothing to do with the decree of Artaxerxes, more than to show the starting-point of the 2300 days, which makes the decree, or the date of it, a very important item in the matter, as only by knowing the starting-point can it be known when the days will end, and the sanctuary be cleansed. The Professor’s answer to his question is that the decree of Artaxerxes has absolutely nothing to do with the matter; he declares it only a fancy, a mere dream of Mr. Miller, that he might as well have proved his starting-point at the creation, or at the flood.
But does this objector fix the starting-point of the 2300 days? No; he cannot unless he fixes it according to the explanation of the angel. He has not attempted to fix the date but passes over it in silence. His silence on this subject is enough to convince the careful reader of his comments that he is tame on this point. Since he accuses Adventists of knowing nothing about the starting-point, why did he not fix the date? It was very necessary that Daniel should know the starting-point of the 2300 days in order to fully understand the vision, and to know when the time should end. Why should the angel again appear to him to explain more, if he fully understood the vision given fifteen years before? The angel who appeared to him at this time said, “I am now come to give thee skill and understanding. This language, especially the word “now,” implies that he had come to give him further information on the same subject, and to make plain what had not been previously explained. Time was, or seems to have been, the most difficult point in the prophet’s mind to understand, therefore Gabriel dwells particularly upon this point. The time was not explained in the previous interview, but an interpretation of the symbols was given, including the ram, the he-goat, and the little horn. At this time the angel begins just where he left off (and it is natural and reasonable that he should, just as though only one hour had elapsed since his last appearance), and goes on with a further explanation as follows (inferring that Daniel had not forgotten the 2300 days and their closing event):—
“Seventy weeks are determined [cut off] upon thy people and upon thy holy city to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy and to anoint the Most Holy. Know therefore and understand that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks and three score and two weeks, the street shall be built again, and the wall even in troublous times. And after three score and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself; and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week, and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.”
Is there no “hint or allusion” to chapter 8, in this chapter? and can any careful student of prophecy read this and not see the allusion? Is not the same little-horn power spoken of in the 26th verse of this chapter, which is so plainly described in the eighth? But the point to prove is the allusion to time. The entire explanation is quoted in this chapter to show that time is not left out of the explanation. Angels do not use unnecessary language in communicating knowledge, hence Gabriel did not say in so many words seventy weeks are cut off from the twenty-three hundred days, as that part of the vision was already in the prophet’s mind, and there was no other period from which they could be cut off.
Speedy Retribution.
MEN are sometimes taken at their word. God sometimes visits blasphemy and irreverence with speedy punishment, in order that it may be seen that judgment, although delayed, is sure. The following incident is given by a writer in a recent number of the Christian at Work:—
“There was a protracted religious meeting being held in the Methodist Episcopal church near me. Many remarkable conversions took place, and much good was done. As was not at all strange, the ‘revival’ was the subject of conversation in stores and shops, and wherever men congregated in the village. In the shoe shop, one day, several were standing about the store, and were talking of the ‘meeting’ and its successes.
“Presently a man who was at work volunteered to say: ‘It’s all humbug. I don’t believe anything of it. I don’t believe there’s any truth in religion, anyhow. While man lives make him as comfortable as you can; let him have all the enjoyment possible; but when he dies, that’s the end of him; we don’t know anything more about him—no more than about the beasts.’
“‘Then,’ said one of the company, ‘you might as well die with the beasts.’
“The answer came boldly, though it shocked those who heard it: ‘It makes no difference to me. I’d as leave die that way as any other.’
“The conversation was not pursued, though the skeptic (who was a comparative stranger in the place), had completely made known his religious sentiments. Mark the sequel.
“In less than two weeks he went with the team for a load of coal. During the day a violent snow-storm came on, and the snow gathered very fast. As night approached it was supposed that he would leave his load and come home. But darkness came; bed-time came; and then it was supposed that he had ‘put up’ along the road; and his family retired. Early in the morning the loaded wagon was seen near the house, and, on further investigation, the horses were found in the stable, but untied and yet harnessed. The man lay outside, in the cow-yard, yet alive, though he died before he left the yard, in his neighbor’s arms.
“I only relate the facts as they occurred. Let every one draw his own conclusions.”
American Aristocracy.
The following from the Christian Evangelist of Oct. 12, 1882, shows how rapidly the people of our nation are drifting into the aristocracy and customs of the countries of Europe:—
“ As time rolls on and wealth increases, our country witnesses some changes that are not for the better. It was once believed that in a republic there should be mantained a republican simplicity, and that the castes and trappings of aristocracy were unsuited to American soil. Of late years, however, an astonishing wave of luxury and snobbery has swept over this country. Any one can see this by looking over the ‘society’ columns of our newspapers, or by a visit to any resort of fashion. We are gravely informed that Mr. Blank has employed a French cook at so many thousand dollars a year; great palaces are built at immense cost, in some cases reaching millions of dollars; families often keep a score of domestic servants, many of them men who wear luxury in the style of an old-world aristocrat; or coats of arms are quartered upon the panels of the carriages, and no possible pains are spared to imitate the ways of the upper classes in Europe. The history of every great nation describes a period of rugged simplicity during which it developed its greatness, followed by the growth of wealth, the increase of luxury, effeminacy and corruption, and these have gradually worked its decay. There are too many signs that our own country is following in the beaten course.”
Do Noble Things Now
If you intend to do a mean thing, wait till to-morrow. If you are to do a noble thing, do it now.
The Danger of Condemnation
OFTEN, when we are the readiest to condemn, we are the nearest to sinning ourselves.
Education and Practical Life
By Christian Union
It is a common mistake to suppose that a fine education unfits for the common walks of life; it is certainly a great mistake. Any man can handle a hoe better for knowing something of mechanics; any girl can cook a breakfast better for knowing something of chemistry. You cannot educate one faculty without developing them all. Many a young girl without household training has after her marriage at once mastered the art of housekeeping; her college did not teach her to cook, but it taught her to think, and the cooking followed as a matter of course. Intellectual development is physical development; by refining and strengthening the nervous system it gives power of recuperation to the body. The war statistics show that delicately-bred college boys stood the hardships of camp and field and hospital far better than roughs, whether from the wild woods or the great cities.—Christian Union.
ADVENT HYMN.
By Rev. W. R. Huntington
Lord of the darkness and the day,
To thee thy waiting people pray;
Perplexed, assaulted, hard-beset,
Faithful we grasp thy promise yet.
Dimly our homesick eyes descry
The signs that fleck earth's sunset sky;
But, while we strive to read aright,
The evening deepens into night.
Come, Prince of Life! Come, even so
As thou from Olivet didst go;
Make good the word, for honor's sake,
The twain in white apparel spake.
With cleansing fire our work to try,
Discerner of the heart, draw nigh!
Swing east, swing west thy winnowing fan,
Till judgment thoroughly search out man.
So melts at last the twilight gray;
So broadens luminous the day
When, stern to punish, swift to bless,
A King shall reign in righteousness.
—Rev. W. R. Huntington.
“Her Spirit Came Again.”
By W. N. Glenn
BY W. N. GLENN.
A CERTAIN ruler named Jairus, once called upon Jesus to come and heal his sick daughter. But when the great Healer arrived at the house the maiden was dead, and a demonstrative scene of mourning was presented. However, as stated in Luke 8: 54, 55, Jesus “took her by the hand and called, saying Maid, arise; and her spirit came again, and she arose straightway.”
This text has been cited as positive proof that the spirit of man is an independent entity, which leaves the body at death, and, maintaining conscious existence, goes somewhere else to dwell; and which, in this instance, returned at the call of the Master.
I do not presume to discuss the nature of the spirit of man, in all its varied phases; we have books and tracts which treat that subject to the satisfaction of any one who will read them with unbiased desire for truth. But to answer a friend (and others of like mind), who evidently deems this a clincher for the doctrine of inherent immortality, I will merely refer to two other instances mentioned in the Bible.
After Samson had ended his terrible conflict with the Philistines, in which he slew a thousand with the jaw-bone of an ass, he “was sore athirst,” and called upon God in his distress. “But God clave a hollow place that was in the jaw, and there came water thereout; and when he had drunk, his spirit came again, and he revived.” Judges 15: 19.
The Amelekites had smitten Ziklag and burned it, and David, with four hundred men, was pursuing them. “And they found an Egyptian in the field and brought him to David, and gave him bread and he did eat; and they made him drink water, and they gave him a piece of a cake of figs, and two clusters of raisins; and when he had eaten, his spirit came to him again.” 1 Sam. 30: 11, 12.
Here are two instances of men’s spirits going and coming again, without the intervention of death. To come again, these spirits must have departed in some sense, and yet these men had not died nor lost their reason. Do these instances show that man has within him two conscious entities? or that the popular idea of the spirit is unscriptural?
“Thy Will Be Done.”
By Eld. R. F. Cottrell
BY ELD. R. F. COTTRELL.
SELFISHNESS and self-will are very nearly related to each other; each sin is of the same family. Selfishness covets that which is not its own, and leads to theft and murder and almost every variety of crime. Self-will seeks to have its own way, and its natural fruit is injustice and hatred. It exalts itself and will not yield; and if it cannot rule, it will seek to ruin.
Christ came from heaven to earth to save men from their sins. He set an example for us to follow. He laid aside his glory, and took the form of a servant. He was with his disciples as one that served. He came not to do his own will, but the will of Him that sent him; and in his deepest trial and sorest temptation, when his soul was exceedingly sorrowful, even unto death, he could say, “Thy will be done;” not as I will, but as thou wilt.
The great lesson for the disciples of Christ to learn is to follow him. “Learn of me,” he says, “for I am meek and lowly of heart.”
He gave himself for us. We owe our all to him, and we should willingly give him all. He was a servant to us, and we should cheerfully serve him. And to serve him is to serve those for whom he died. He bids us work in his vineyard. He yielded his will, and drank the bitter cup. It is those who renounce and subdue self-will that will have a part in his inheritance. When we say, I will, and I will not, we do not follow Christ, nor exemplify his meekness and gentleness. The apostle Paul followed Christ. Said he, “I Paul myself beseech you by the meekness and gentleness of Christ.” “I beseech Euodias, and beseech Syntyche, that they be of the same mind in the Lord.” When we have the same spirit, we shall be able to follow such advice. Let all be of this mind.