Earlier text: SAVED BY FAMILIESStudents Protest Rationalism at Boston University
The Boston University School of Theology is an institution of the Methodist Episcopal Church. Early in December nine students of the school protested against the infidelity that was being taught to them. As stated by one of the students, the case was as follows:— Coming from the West to Boston University School of Theology a year ago, I was shocked to find the most rabid rationalism being taught as Old Testament exegesis, under cover of a leading Methodist school. Coming to Messianic prophecy, only half a truth was taught. Further on, Jesus Christ was no authority on Old Testament Scripture. The miraculous conception was set aside, and the atoning blood made nonessential. The president and the faculty sustained the professor who so taught; the president remarking that these were only “eight or nine out of an aggregate of one hundred and seventy-eight students.” The students appealed to the Board of Bishops; but these supported the president and the faculty, and advised the students to keep quiet on the subject. Then the nine students withdrew entirely from the school. It is good that they had enough faith to carry them so far; for there are hundreds of students who enter the “great” schools of to-day, who yield to those perverse influences, and are carried out to sea, to be utterly shipwrecked unless the saving gospel finds them anew. THE “RETURN OF THE JEWS.”
In our studies on the “Return of the Jews,” we found that the Scriptures, and the whole principle of the gospel, are directly against it. We found also that those who claim and advocate a return of the Jews as a people—a nation, to be re-established in the land of Palestine—are, by their claim, obliged to find another order of things from that of the true gospel as it is in Christ—another long period of time, indeed, an “age to come,” this “age” including the “millennium.” In the studies on the Millennium, we have found, by the straightforward story of the word of God, from the present day entirely through to the creation of the new earth and its everlasting occupation by the saved, that there is no possible place for any such long period of time, or “age, to come,” and, therefore, no possible place for any such return of the Jews as a people, a nation, to be re-established in the land of Palestine, as is claimed by those who advocate the return of the Jews. And even so saith the Scripture. How often in the New Testament there stands the expression, “There is no difference between the Jew and the Greek.” But what can be the force of any such expression when there is to be manifested such an enormous difference as is involved in this claim of the return of the Jews,—that they must be gathered from all the nations of other people, to that one particular place; and blessings, bounties, and favors be showered upon them, and not upon other people? It is true that the claim contemplates that these shall be made the means of conveying these things to other people; but this does not relieve the scheme from the charge that it does make a decided difference between the Jew and the Greek—the Jew and the Gentile. This, because the claim is that the Jews are to be gathered thus simply because they are Jews, without any reference whatever to character. It is true that God uses those who receive his blessing, his light, his truth, to convey all these to those who have them not; but all his blessing, all his light, and all his truth are equally open and free to all people alike to be received. And those who receive them are used to convey his blessings to others, not because they have been especially chosen from among all other people, without regard to character; but solely because of the character they have obtained in the accepting of these things from God, which were equally open to all. This is the gospel call and the gospel work, always and everywhere. But such is not in any sense the claim as to the return of the Jews. In that scheme a man is to be drawn to Jerusalem simply because he is a Jew, without reference to what his character is. Then, when these Jews have been gathered there, it seems that the claim is that the Lord is to manifest himself to them in such a stupendously impressive and open way that they simply can’t refuse to believe in him and to receive him as the Messiah. And, surely, that can be nothing else than the making of a boundless difference between the Jew and the Greek. For if the Jew is thus to be gathered there simply because he is a Jew, and without reference to character, and, after he gets there, the Lord is to be so astonishingly revealed to him that he simply can not refuse any longer to believe, would not the same plan be equally effective in bringing any other man, and, indeed, EVERY other man, to the same point? And to do it for one man, or for one set of men, and not for all alike, could not possibly be anything else than putting a difference between those and others. But there stands the Scripture forever: “God is no respecter of persons.” “There is no difference between the Jew and the Greek.” Therefore it is certain that every Jew must believe in and receive Christ, and what he has to give, precisely as every Gentile must believe in and receive him. “Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision [the Jews] by faith, and uncircumcision [the Gentiles] through faith,” it follows that for both alike the means of justification, of salvation, is faith—not faith for the Gentile, and sight for the Jew; but faith alone for both alike. For “there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.” “WHEREFORE then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions.” The Greek term that is here translated “added,” is the same word that, in Heb. 12:19, is translated “spoken,” in the clause referring to the voice of God speaking from Sinai, “which voice they that heard entreated that the word should not be spoken [or added] to them any more.” It is the same word that is used also in Deut. 5:22, where it is translated “added,” in the sentence, “These words the Lord spake unto all your assembly in the mount out of the midst of the fire, of the cloud, and of the thick darkness, with a great voice: and he added [or spake] no more.” In both Hebrews and Deuteronomy the word is used with direct reference to the giving of the law of God, the ten commandments. This passage in Galatians, therefore, would certainly seem to suggest that the law here referred to would be the same law. And this is further sustained by the expression later, in this verse, that the law referred to was ordained “in the hand of a mediator.” Now, since there is only “one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus,” it was certainly Christ’s hand in which this law was ordained. And Deut. 33:2, speaking of the same scene referred to in Deut. 5:22 and Heb. 12:20, says: “The Lord came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from mount Paran; and he came with ten thousands of saints: from his right hand went a fiery law for them.” Now the ten commandments were not only written by the hand of the Lord himself, but they were written on tables of stone, which “tables were the work of God,” as well as the writing, which was the writing of God. And these tables were given by the hand of the Lord, unto Moses. And even when Moses had broken these tables, and had been directed to make other tables, the Lord wrote again with his hand on these tables the same law that at first he had written on the tables that he himself had made. But this is not true of any other law. It is true that the ceremonial law—the law concerning sacrifices, offerings, the sanctuary, the whole Levitical system—was also given by the Lord to Moses; but it was not given by the hand of the Lord to Moses. It did not come forth from his hand, either in writing by his own hand, or upon tables made with his own hand. It was given to Moses by the Lord, and was written altogether by Moses, and not at all by the Lord. Some, taking the English word “added” in this clause in Gal. 3:19, and holding it in the restricted English sense of “added,” have supposed that it is here taught that whatever law is referred to was necessarily added to something as a part of that thing, and so have held that it was added to the covenant with Abraham. But such a view as that would plainly be a mistake, because, in Gal. 3:15, it is positively stated that “though it be but a man’s covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man . . . addeth thereto.” Thus it would be impossible for anything to be added to that covenant. The word translated “addeth,” in Gal. 3:15, is not the same in Greek as that translated “added” in Gal. 3:19, nor are the words akin. From the Greek word itself, in Gal. 3:19, and its use in connection with the law, in Heb. 12:20 and Deut. 5:22, as well as its further use in the Scriptures, it is plain that it is not necessarily implied that what is referred to should be literally added in the sense of a mathematical addition. One expression in which the Greek word is used is, “Seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.” Matt. 6:33. Here it is plain that the expression is equivalent to merely to “give”—“all these things shall be given unto you,” or “ye shall receive all these things.” Such is exactly its meaning in Mark 4:24, in which our translation is, “Unto you that hear shall more be given”—shall more be added. In Acts 12, 3 our translation reads, “He proceeded further to take Peter also.” This, translated as in Gal. 3:19, would be, “He added to take Peter.” Thus the word in Gal. 3:19 could, with equal propriety be translated, “Wherefore then the law? It was spoken because of transgressions,” or, “It was given because of transgressions.” One translation of the clause is, “It was set because of transgressions.” Another is, “It was introduced,” etc. True, to translate it, “It was added,” is just as good, provided it be understood that the word “added” conveys these senses, and is not to be restricted to its special meaning of a mathematical addition, as of adding “one cubit unto his stature.” The law, then, was given, was spoken, was added, because of transgressions. Will this statement that “it was added because of transgressions” hold in the case of the law of God, the ten commandments? With respect to that law as it is referred to throughout in the discussion in which the Galatian Christians were involved, that is, the law in its written form, the expression does certainly apply. This will not only be clearly seen, but it is positively stated, in a passage already several times quoted in these “Studies in Galatians;” and we here set it down again:— If man had kept the law of God, as given to Adam after his fall, preserved by Noah, and observed by Abraham, there would have been no necessity for the ordinance of circumcision. And if the descendants of Abraham had kept the covenant, of which circumcision was a sign, they would never have been seduced into idolatry, nor would it have been necessary for them to suffer a life of bondage in Egypt; they would have kept God’s law in mind, and there would have been no necessity for it to be proclaimed from Sinai, or engraved upon the tables of stone. And had the people practiced the principles of the ten commandments, there would have been no need of the additional directions given to Moses.—“Patriarchs and Prophets,” page 364.
This corresponds exactly to the other expressions with reference to the entering of the law of God: “The law entered, that the offense might abound.” Rom. 5:20. “That sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.” Rom. 7:7, 13. “To bring transgressions to a head.”—Farrar’s translation of Gal. 2:19. “In order to bring about as transgressions the transgressions of it.”—Alford. This will be followed further next week. “YE ARE MY WITNESSES.”
By Uriah Smith
One of the most important functions that come within the experience of men is that of being witnesses. What vast results often hang upon the testimony of witnesses! How important that those who testify do so honestly and truthfully! He who bears false witness is set down by his fellow men as a criminal, a perjured villain. And this work of bearing witness is highly prized, even by the Lord himself. He sets apart his people to be witnesses for him. “Ye are my witnesses, saith the Lord.” Isa. 43:10. Trace the subject through the history the Lord gives of his people, and notice how often he links the prosperity of his work and the prosperity of his people with their witnessing for him and for his truth. Mark how highly, faithful and true witness for him is esteemed in his sight. So precious is it to him that he has even enlisted the unconscious elements of nature in the service. Thus Paul testifies, in Acts 14:17, “Nevertheless he left not himself without witness, in that he did good, and gave us rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness.” And in the first chapter of Romans he tells us how God, by the great works of creation, has borne witness to his eternal power and Godhead. And for what purpose are we his witnesses? — In Isa. 43:10 he declares it thus: “That ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.” Eternity is summed up in him, past and future; and we are to witness for him that there is no other ruler and redeemer for his people. This accords with the Lord’s own words: “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.”10 What is made known to us, to that we are to bear witness, by passing it along to others. However humble the position of a believer may be, however few or feeble his qualifications may be, however crowded his occupation, he has his own testimony to bear. No other one can bear it for him; he can not put off upon another, by proxy, word, or act, the part that has been assigned to him; and God has given to every one the work that he is to do. A called soldier of Jesus Christ can not procure, or offer, a substitute. Voluntary associations of workers, leagues, or unions, the ministry itself, or even the church in its organized capacity, can not do the work that belongs to the individual. The entire life is a period of witnessing. By act, or a failure to act; by speech or silence, we are forever testifying. Hour by hour, sometimes more loudly than by words, we are witnessing for or against the Master. To be firm for Christ when all the tide runs the other way; when the tide of opinion, business, pleasure, is against us; and to be called to suffer loss and oppression, and even to resist unto blood, striving against sin,—then to stand true, this tests all the integrity and courage there is in a man. But if the life of God is ever flowing into our hearts, we shall witness to its power, recommend the gospel constantly by our life, and cease witnessing openly, only when life itself comes to a close. Those who dare to be holy, dare to be singular, God will make his witnesses in all ages. Such know him inwardly, and stand for him outwardly. They fight a good fight, and endure hardness as good soldiers, and will stand before God accepted at last. If the eleven had stopped with merely being disciples, it would have been said that Christianity meant nothing more then, and means nothing more now, than simply discipleship. But they went on, and became radiant apostles, their lips full of persuasion, their lives running over with the demonstration of the gospel, and thus showed that Christianity meant apostleship as much as discipleship. It means purpose as much as power. It means making others Christians as much as becoming Christians ourselves. It means making Christ a living power in the mind and heart of others, as much as it means having Christ a living power in our own hearts. It means as much to-day as it meant eighteen hundred and sixty-seven years ago. It means bearing witness in the narrower circle of the home, in the wider field of the surrounding community, and finally going forth to the uttermost parts of the earth in obedience to the great commission. It is a part of Christianity to be apostolic. The anointing of the Holy Spirit sets every one in the apostolic line of true apostolic succession. The prophet, then, in Isaiah 43, appeals to the fulfillments of prophecy to show that the followers of the Lord, those who believe his word, are qualified to witness for him. In verses 14 and 16 reference is made to two great deliverances, one accomplished, and the other soon, in “that day,” to be accomplished, for the church. One was the deliverance from the bondage of Egypt, which had already taken place; and the other was the deliverance from Babylon, which was then future, but no less sure to be accomplished. The fulfillments of prophecy are sufficient evidence to which to appeal to show that Jehovah is the Mighty God and the preserver of his people. Heathen divinities have never done such a thing as to foretell events far in the future, and have them come to pass. All the claims of men are challenged to show where they have ever given a prophecy that has been fulfilled according to their word. We are witnesses of God concerning the accomplishment of all his word, which is a demonstration and pledge of what is to come. In Heb. 12:1 there is a timely exhortation and admonition to the church in the last days. It connects directly with chapter 10, the closing portion of which contains a warning to the people of God not to draw back when the Lord is soon to come. Chapter 11 is then thrown in parenthetically, giving a long list of the ancient heroes of faith, and the wonders wrought by God for them, and through them. Then comes the exhortation of the first verse of the twelfth chapter, in these words: “Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us.” The Revised Version transposes the word “also,” and makes a better reading, thus: “Therefore let us also, seeing we are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, lay aside every weight,” etc. The apostle does not design to say that those of whom he had been speaking were compassed about with a great cloud of witnesses, and we, as they were, are compassed about with witnesses, too; but the witnesses he refers to are the long line of worthies he had just been presenting, beginning with verse 4 of chapter 11; and he does not use the word “witness” in the common sense, of one who is looking upon some other person or thing, but uses a word that means one who has borne witness, or testimony, to some great truth or fact. All they whom he mentions are those who had had witness borne to them by God, in the approbation he bestowed upon them for their good fight of faith, and who had also themselves borne witness to the power of faith, and the faithfulness of God, in fulfilling his promises to his children. And seeing we have such a cloud of such witnesses, bearing such a testimony to these great truths, let us also lay aside every weight, as they certainly did, and run with patience the race set before us. The exhortation is here resumed, as already noticed, from the latter part of chapter 10, which, as we have seen, applies especially to the last days. This instruction is therefore especially for us. The Christian life, with its duties and sacrifices, is set before us under the similitude of a foot-race. The “weights,” such as balls or clogs attached to the feet of runners would be, are the incumbrances that would naturally hinder our progress,—the evil habits, self-indulging propensities, etc.—while “the sin which doth so easily beset us,” or, more literally, “stands all around us,” is the sin of unbelief, which the narrative of chapter 11 is designed to cure. Laying aside all these, we are to run with patience, that is, “endurance,” which is what the word implies. The word “looking,” in verse 2, is a very strong word. It contains two very distinct elements, only one of which is expressed in English. It means not only looking forward toward something, but also looking away from something else. Therefore what the apostle really says is this: Looking away from everything else, and looking wholly and exclusively forward to, or unto, Jesus; for he is the author and finisher, not only of our faith, but of faith as a whole. He is the originator and framer of that whole scheme of redemption upon which our faith takes hold; and he is the finisher of it, or the one who will bring it to its glorious consummation. And “the joy that was set before him” was the joy of bringing this grand arrangement to its triumphant issue—the joy of seeing souls who had exposed themselves to ruin and death, saved everlastingly in his glorious kingdom. For this prospective joy he endured the cross, even looking with indifference and disdain upon the suffering and disgrace of that ignominious death. But it is immediately added, “and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.” On this expression, Robert South, D. D. (1716), makes the following beautiful remarks:— In the whole narrative of our Saviour’s life, no passage is related of him as low or weak, but is immediately seconded by another, high and miraculous. No sooner was Christ humbled in a manger, but the contempt of the place was taken off in the glory of the attendance, in the ministration of angels; his fasting and temptation were attended with another service of angels; his baptism with a glorious recognition by a voice from heaven. When he seemed to be overpowered at his apprehension, he exerted his might by causing his armed adversaries to fall backward, and in healing Malchus’s ear with a touch. When he underwent the last infamy of crucifixion, then did the universal frame of nature give testimony to his divinity—the whole creation seemed to sympathize with his passion. And when, afterward, he seemed to be in the very dominion of death, he quickly confuted the dishonor of the grave by an astonishing resurrection, and proved the divinity of his person by an equally miraculous ascension. THE ROYAL SEED IS PLANTED IN BABYLON.
By William W. Prescott
In the book of Daniel, concerning which Jesus said: “Whoso readeth, let him understand,” we have in small compass a divinely written history of the world from the time of “Babylon, the glory of kingdoms,” to “the end of the days.” Here we have the key to the correct interpretation of all history. Here we have the principles of the kingdom of heaven plainly revealed in contrast with the principles inculcated by the “god of this world;” and all this upon the actual stage of human action, a living panorama. Here is traced in bold outline the controversy that has been waged during all these centuries in the effort of the “prince of this world” to set up a permanent kingdom on this earth, which would rival the kingdom of God. Here we see the outcome of this controversy, with such light upon the present as enables us to understand the nature of the events just before the setting up of God’s everlasting kingdom. It is because “this gospel of the kingdom” is so plainly preached in the book of Daniel that we invite attention to it at this time. “In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah came Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon unto Jerusalem, and besieged it. And the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand, with part of the vessels of the house of God: which he carried into the land of Shinar to the house of his god; and he brought the vessels into the treasure-house of his god.” In the opening sentences of the book the kingdom question is presented. Two earthly kings are warring with each other, and the Lord decides the issue of the conflict. And it will be seen that it is decided in a way to spread abroad in all the earth the knowledge of the kingdom of God, to preach the gospel of the kingdom. But how does it happen that Jehoiakim king of Judah is overcome by Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon? Why are the Lord’s people conquered by the heathen? The walls of Jericho falling at the shout of faith, and Israel turning “their backs before their enemies” at Ai, furnish the answer. “Israel hath sinned, and they have also transgressed my covenant which I commanded them.” Joshua 7:11. “Jehoiakim . . . did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord.” 2 Chron. 36:5. Furthermore, the Lord never intended that his people should have any king but himself. When the people demanded a king, God said of them, “They have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.” He it was who would have given them victory over all their enemies, and have made them “the head, and not the tail,” above and not beneath, “if that thou hearken unto the commandments of the Lord thy God.” But when they chose a visible king in the place of the “King eternal, immortal, invisible,” and he departed from the Lord, they lost the working of that “eternal power” through faith in which kingdoms are subdued (Heb. 11:33), and were carried captive by the heathen. It is also true that the Lord works through his people to preach the gospel of his kingdom throughout the world, and thus to restrain the kingdom of evil; but when they become self-centered, and shut this light away from the heathen, then the Lord overrules this very failure that gives them into the hands of the heathen, as the means of accomplishing the work that they neglected to do in a time of prosperity. Thus the truth to be learned by each person is that “the kingdom of God is . . . righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost;” that “a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of thy kingdom;” that “the kingdom of God is within you.” And the truth to be learned about earthly kingdoms is that “the Most High ruleth in the123kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will.” It is only in the light of these principles that the experiences of individuals and of nations can be read aright. These are the themes of the book of Daniel. The sacred vessels were removed from the house of God, and were displayed in the heathen temple as the outward tokens of the superiority of the gods and the religion of Babylon over the God and the religion of the Jews. Alas, that “the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles” by those who profess, but do not have, faith in him “who is over all, God blessed forever.” But the truth will triumph, even though its day of victory is often delayed by the unfaithfulness of those who profess to believe it. “And the king spake unto Ashpenaz the master of his eunuchs, that he should bring certain of the children of Israel, and of the king’s seed, and of the princes; children in whom was no blemish, but well favored, and skillful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king’s palace, and whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans. And the king appointed them a daily provision of the king’s meat, and of the wine which he drank: so nourishing them three years, that at the end thereof they might stand before the king. Now among these were of the children of Judah, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah: unto whom the prince of the eunuchs gave names: for he gave unto Daniel the name of Belteshazzar; and to Hananiah, of Shadrach; and to Mishael, of Meshach; and to Azariah, of Abed-nego.” Some of the captives, who have the best physical appearance, and who give evidence of possessing intellectual ability already well developed, are selected for training, that “they might stand before the king.” They are “children,” “lads,” probably in their teens, just at that age when surroundings usually have the most powerful influence upon conduct, when those who are not controlled by a living principle within are swayed to and fro by the pressure of outward circumstances. With the evident purpose that these young captives should retain their good physical appearance, and that they should make rapid progress in “the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans,” the king provided for them what he regarded the best diet, just such food and wine as was found upon his own table. It was a royal bill of fare, “as supplied to his majesty the king,” but the king was the king of Babylon. The question of the kingdom is thus before these young men. Shall they follow the instruction of their real King, or that of the king of Babylon? Will the fact that they have been chosen for training that they may serve the king of Babylon lead them to excuse a departure from right principle, with the plea that they are captives and in Babylon, and that when in Babylon, they must do as the Babylonians do? Will it really make so much difference after all what they eat and drink, provided they hold fast to their creed, and are well prepared to defend it against the heathen? Thus does the mere formalist betray his trust, substituting argument for conduct, sound for substance. Thus do all those think who regard religion as merely a round of ceremonies, and God’s commandments as simply arbitrary requirements. To all such the kingdom is outward, visible, fleshly; and they are easily persuaded that one form is as good as another, and that God is “not so particular” about these matters, so long as we maintain a sort of ethereal atmosphere about us, which is sometimes mistaken for spirituality, and is boasted of as that liberty by which we keep the law in the spirit, and so are privileged to disregard it in the letter. Such is the modern idea of gospel liberty. In this way does convenience dictate to principle: obedience becomes a mere matter of circumstance, and the kingdom of heaven becomes the kingdom of Babylon. W. W. P. A Christian is a representative of Christ
ONE FRUIT OF SPIRITUALISM.
By A. J. B.
One of the prerogatives of the Christian in these last days is to distinguish between “the works of the flesh” and “the fruit of the Spirit.” The good Book tells us that “the works of the flesh are manifest,” so that it will not be difficult to determine the character of such works. Pure Christianity always bears “the fruit of the Spirit,” and nothing else. All religions must therefore be measured by this religion of Christ, and be accepted or rejected according to their agreement or non-agreement therewith. One prominent religion of the day is Spiritualism. From its name, one might suppose its adherents to be spiritual, led of the true Spirit, and their works to be “the fruit of the Spirit.” Any supposition of this kind, however, is precluded by the following declarations of one of the most prominent Spiritualist women of to-day. After stating that, although she is a Spiritualist at heart, she does not call herself one, not wishing “to be associated with the charlatany and odious characters, many of whom profess the doctrine,” she anathematizes “this class of people who purport to be priestesses of the higher life, and yet whose characters are vile, and conduct worse.” She then sums up her opinion of one of the fruits of Spiritualism in the following plain words: “It seems as though when one professes this belief, he or she immediately seems inspired with the desire for somebody’s wife or husband.” Such are the words but recently spoken by Mrs. Mary A. Livermore, to a reporter of the Boston (Mass.) Post. The entire interview, as published by the reporter, is a description of how she became a Spiritualist. She was reared a Baptist, but when quite young became a Universalist. It appears that “for many years she has been investigating the probable future life, and has given Spiritualism a thorough testing.” It is also said that “the tenets of that belief have been impressed on her by many strange experiences,” such as the mediumistic twistings and movings of tables in a room, “spirit messages,” etc. However, “the most convincing proof of all,” she says, “was an actual talk I had with my husband, some months after his death. I went to a medium in ——, and in a short time I was talking with my husband. I was perfectly unknown to the medium, and the details of personal things my husband told me could not have been known to her. He also told me things about his present condition. He said he was there what an infant would be on earth.” Such pretended communications from the dead were predicted by the Spirit of Prophecy years ago, and must be expected to increase in numbers as we draw nearer the end. One of the mediums who visited her shortly after her husband’s death, is described by her as being “awfully vulgar,” and yet this same medium was, by her spiritualistic manifestations, one of the means of converting Mrs. Livermore to Spiritualism. Now the scripture says that “the dead know not anything;” and since “also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished” (Ecclesiastes 9), it is evident that these communications received by Mrs. Livermore were not at all from “the dead.” Neither were they from God; for his angels are never “awfully vulgar.” Such apparently genuine revelations are manifestly from Satan, the deceiver. But the great mistake made nowadays by many persons, as well as by Mrs. Livermore, consists in taking mere supernatural manifestations for divine manifestations. As has already been stated in these columns, miracles, in and of themselves, are no proof of divinity. Witness, for example, the wonderful workings of the sorcerers and magicians in Bible times, the present-day miracles of magnetic healers, hypnotists, the yoghis of India,—priests of Brahma,—etc. God’s miracles are performed only through those who do his will, who keep his law, the ten commandments. But from Mrs. Livermore’s own testimony it is clear that the keeping of God’s commandments is not one of the fruits of Spiritualism. On the contrary, to use her own words, its fruits are often tainted with adulterous desires, and that which is “awfully vulgar.” It is, therefore, no wonder that, in view of all this, she prefers not to call herself a Spiritualist. How sad it is for people to be ashamed of their avowed religion! Would it not be far better to believe in a religion which “maketh not ashamed”? Of the seventeen “works of the flesh” which Paul enumerates in Gal. 5:19-21, the very first mentioned is “adultery.” But Christianity, being in full accord with the commandments of God, makes the believer happy. The breaking of the commandments is that which makes ashamed. Therefore Paul, the great Christian, speaking of his religion, said: “I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ.” Rom. 1:16. Why was he “not ashamed” of Christianity?—Simply because “it is the power of God unto salvation;” it is the “power” which brings “salvation” from sin, which, being “the transgression of the law,” makes ashamed. So Christianity, being that which saves from “the works of the flesh,” from sin, can not in any sense be allied with Spiritualism, which, in the words of the Spiritualist, is such that “when one professes this belief, he or she immediately seems inspired with the desire for somebody’s wife or husband.” Again: a belief which so affects people that they become “inspired with the desire” to break the seventh commandment, will also inspire a person to break the other nine precepts of Jehovah; for it is written: “Whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.” James 2:10. Such inspiration, not being at all compatible with the inspiration to do the works of the Spirit of God, must therefore be that wisdom which “descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish.” On the other hand, of Christianity it may be said that when one professes this belief, he immediately seems inspired with the desire to “bring forth” the “fruit of the Spirit,” which is “love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance.” Gal. 5:22, 23. And the great and simple reason for all this is because “they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the passions and lusts,” margin. Let us be Christians, being “not ashamed of the gospel of Christ,” and bearing continually and only the Spirit’s fruit.