Review and Herald, Vol. 42, No. 2. (6/24/1873)

Review and Herald

Jun 24, 1873

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jun 24, 1873

PRACTICAL THOUGHTS.

By D. T. Bourdeau

BABES IN CHRIST.

Those who have been in the truth for years are in danger of forgetting what they once were, and where the truth found them, and of not making that allowance for young believers that they should. On the other hand, young believers are in danger of looking for perfection in old believers, and of halting and stumbling at their faults, instead of looking to the only perfect pattern, Christ Jesus. We should bear in mind that Christians all have a common enemy to contend with, and sins to overcome, and that the work of overcoming is a progressive work. We should remember that the Bible speaks of “babes” in Christ, as well as of men and women of full stature. We do not expect as much of babes as we do of grown persons. Their strength is feeble, and they require light food and much care. And, thank God, their knowledge and responsibility are not beyond their capacity to perform. If they knew as much as grown persons, a sense of their weakness would make them unhappy, and they would not be contented with little things. Their feebleness and dependence draw out our sympathies and feelings of tenderness; and we excuse in them things which would be inexcusable in older persons. Such should be our feelings toward young believers. We should exercise toward them that patience, tender love, and forbearance, that kind parents do toward their children. We should love them as Christ has loved us, and not suffer their errors and childish ways to separate us from them in our feelings, or move us to hatred toward them. Christ loved us when we were sinners. It was our sins and miseries that led him to pity us and die for us. So the infirmities of young believers should lead us to be the more anxious to pity and help them, but fallen human nature revolts at such duties. We are too much inclined to merely love those who love us. Selfishness

is at the bottom of this. Christ did not wait till we were all right before dying for us.

But while there is a period of spiritual infancy to every Christian which calls for care and tenderness, and which is characterized with limited knowledge and comparative freedom from heavy responsibilities, it is the will of God that we should emerge out from the feebleness of infancy into the vigor of youth and into the experience and firmness of manhood, that we may not constantly demand the care of others, but be where we can help others, and be nursing fathers and mothers in Israel. These are greatly needed at the present time. The cause is suffering greatly for want of such. The trouble is that men and women do not exercise in laboring for others. They are shut up to themselves. They shun responsibilities. They are babes, needing the care and attention of others, while they should be strong in God and in the truth, imparting strength and knowledge to others, and blessing them with their rich experience. As they do not labor for others, in weariness and anxiety, they cannot know the value of the soul from experience, and are not prepared to help those who have taken a stand on the truth under the labor of others.

Many of us are dwarfed in spiritual strength and experience, and retain childish ways, from which we should have been weaned years ago. It is a shame constantly to require to be humored and petted; to be carried by others while we should bear our own weight. God wants us to lean upon him, and test the value of religion and the power of his free grace by our own personal effort. Unless we do this, our lives shall be worse than useless; we shall not bear fruit to the glory of God. Our example of weakness and inefficiency will tend to weaken others, instead of strengthening them. Instead of gathering with Christ, we shall scatter abroad; and how shall we meet the perils of the last days?

God delights to see us behave ourselves like weaned children, to see us help ourselves and learn to help others. But when he would wean us we are in danger of murmuring. But he knows what is for our best good. It is with us in religion as with one learning to swim. We must launch out and leave the shore. God pushes us out, that we may learn the lesson of self-reliance. His eye is upon us, and he will not suffer us to perish. Let us submit to him and honor him by doing valiantly in his cause.

LACK OF WISDOM.

It is no part of that wisdom which comes from above, and which is peaceable, to take sides with brethren and sisters under trials, who are in the wrong, thinking to help them in so doing. In pursuing this course, many have ruined those whom they hoped to help. The only way to help those who are in the wrong, is to impress their minds with the fact that they are not right. But all are not qualified to perform this delicate duty. It is those who are spiritual and do not move from impulse and selfish motives, upon whom the Scriptures roll the burden of restoring the erring. Gal. 6: 1. Such are generally backward in engaging in this most difficult work, because they understand its importance, and the difficulties which it presents; while those who are the least qualified for this work generally think themselves competent for the task. In cases of trials, such individuals are the first to suggest what should be done, and they are not wanting for words on occasions when it is wisdom to be slow to speak. When such hastily meddle with a trial, its difficulties are increased, and very often the work of correcting these overanxious and talkative ones becomes a more difficult task than to settle the original trial. When two parties get tried with each other, both are generally more or less in the wrong, and both parties should be made to see their wrong, and the virtues of those with whom they are in trial. This course makes for peace. But to be partial, and array before one party the faults of the other party in the worst of light, widens the breach between brethren, ruins souls, and is put down in the records of Heaven as one of the most criminal acts that mortals can perform.

THE RICH AND THE POOR, MASTERS AND SERVANTS.

While the Bible enjoins upon the wealthy to regard and favor the poor, in their deal with them, it also enjoins faithfulness on the poor, in laboring for the wealthy. It commands them to do what they do “with good will,” “as to the Lord, and not to men.” “Not with eye-service, as men-pleasers.” Eph. 6: 5–8. The apostle adds: “And ye, masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in Heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him.” Verse 9. What a complete regulator are these words! Masters and servants would do well to reflect upon them. The servant who is unfaithful in his labor is as guilty of dishonesty as is the master who is close in his deal. Selfishness is the ruling sin of the age. Never were the wealthy more inclined to grind the face of the poor, and ne’er was it more difficult, on the other hand, to find faithful and reliable servants, who will interest themselves for their employers as they would for themselves. Faithful servants will seek to give their masters an equivalent in labor for the wages they receive, and to make the business in which they are engaged profitable to their masters, that they may be enabled to discharge their heavy responsibilities.

HOLD ON TO THE ERRING.

Although there is a point in laboring for the erring where exclusion must be resorted to for the good of the cause, yet it is safe to have it as a rule not to drop the erring too soon. When we think we have done all that we can to restore them, prayer and solemn reflection may bring to our mind some duty unperformed, some defects in our past labors, and some means whereby those in the wrong may be led to reform. Christ died for erring believers. He has presented the efficacy of his death to the Father, in their behalf. He has faithfully plead their cases before God. He has sent his Spirit and holy angels to convince them of sin and righteousness, and to lead them in the path of virtue. Much labor has been bestowed upon them by God’s children on earth. Angels rejoiced when they first repented and when their names were recorded in the Lamb’s book of life. Too much has been done for them for us easily to give them over as being past hope. Heaven would be clear of their blood if they were lost, but God would be more glorified in their restoration and salvation. May not their probation be lengthened in answer to our prayers and as the result of wisely directed effort? While we may be inclined to cut them down for not bearing fruit, and for cumbering the ground, it may be that the Lord says, “Let them alone this year also.” May we not, by manifesting love instead of hatred, patience and forbearance instead of impatience and rashness, meekness and a willingness to confess our sins instead of pride and stubbornness and a disposition to justify and build up self, lead them to repentance? How long the Lord has borne with us in our sins! We may have professed the truth much longer than they have, may have had greater light and more privileges than they have had, and yet may have often been indifferent and in a backslidden condition, and, notwithstanding all of this, we hope to be saved. Why not allow others the same privilege? With what measure we mete it shall be measured to us again. The merciful shall obtain mercy. But if we do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will God forgive us our trespasses. Says James to the last church, “Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him; let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.” James 5: 19, 20. What a strong inducement to wisely and patiently labor for the erring. Let us not drop them too soon.

D. T. BOURDEAU.

THE HOMELESS WAYFARER.

Foxes have their holes secure from danger, Where betimes they fly for rest; Man enjoys his safe and peaceful pillow, And the bird her quiet nest.

But the Son of man, born in a manger, Hath not where to lay his head— Counted as an outcast and a stranger, Spit upon and buffeted.

On the cross, he closed his weary eyelids— On the cross, he bowed his head— Only thus he rested from his labors, Dying in the sinner's stead.

King of glory, looking love and meekness, While the proud world scoffs and scorns, Hath thine aching head no softer pillow Than a cruel crown of thorns?

In thy Father's house are many mansions, Pleasant mansions, bright and fair— Yet thy patient feet still wander earthward, That thou mayest bring us there.

Though all hearts and homes were made for Jesus, Still they know no guest but sin; Though he stand and knock, no cheerful welcome Calls the blest Wayfarer in.

At my door, the wayworn wanderer knocketh, Wandering where fond friends are few— And he waiteth till his locks are dripping, Cold and wet with midnight dew.

I behold thee, O thou Man of Sorrows, Faint and footsore all for me, Let my humble and unworthy dwelling Rest and cheer and comfort thee.

Come, O come, thou meek and lowly Jesus, Dwell with me and be my guest! Come, and be my loving elder brother; Make thy home within my breast!

A Bridge That Goes All the Way Across

I HAD rather put my foot upon a bridge as narrow as Hungerford, which went all the way across, than on a bridge that was as wide as the world, if it did not go all the way across, the stream.

Receive Christ into Your Heart

RECEIVE Christ into your heart and he will receive you into his kingdom.

The Right Sort of Religion.

We want a religion that goes into the family and keeps the husband from being spiteful when dinner is late—keeps the wife from fretting when the husband tracks the newly washed floor with his muddy boots, and makes the husband mindful of the scraper and the door mat; keeps the mother patient when the baby is cross, and keeps the baby pleasant; amuses the children as well as instructs them; wins as well as governs; projects the honeymoon into the harvest moon; and makes the happy hours like the eastern fig-tree, bearing in its bosom at once the beauty of the tender blossom and the glory of the ripening fruit.

We want a religion that bears heavily, not merely on the “exceeding sinfulness of sin,” but on the exceeding rascality of lying and stealing; a religion that banishes small measures from the counters, small baskets from stalls, pebbles from the cotton-bags, clay from paper, sand from sugar, chicory from coffee, annatto from butter, beet juice from vinegar, alum from bread, strychnine from wine, water from milk cans, and buttons from the contribution box. The religion that is to save the world will not put all the big strawberries at the top and all the bad ones at the bottom. It will not offer more baskets of foreign wine than the vineyards ever produced bottles, and more barrels of Genesee flour than all the wheat fields of New York grow, and all her mills grind. It will not make one-half a pair of shoes of good leather and the other of poor leather, so that the first shall redound to the maker’s credit, and the second, to his cash.

It will not put Jouvin’s stamp on Jenkins’ kid gloves, nor make Paris bonnets in the back room of a Boston milliner’s shop, nor let a piece of velvet that professes to measure twelve yards come to an untimely end in the tenth, or a spool of sewing silk that vouches for twenty yards be nipped in the bud at fourteen and a half, nor the cotton thread spool break to the yard-stick fifty of the two hundred yards of promise that was given to the eye, nor yard wide cloth measure less than thirty-six inches from selvage to selvage, nor all wool delaines and all linen handkerchiefs be amalgamized with clandestine cotton, nor coats made of woolen rags pressed together be sold to the unsuspecting public for legal broadcloth. It does not put bricks at five dollars a thousand into chimneys it contracted to build of seven dollar materials, nor smuggle white pine floors that have paid for hard pine, nor leave yawning cracks in closets where boards ought to join, nor daub ceilings that ought to be smoothly plastered, nor make window blinds of slats that cannot stand the wind, and paint that cannot stand the sun, and fastenings that may be looked at, but are on no account to be touched. The religion that is to sanctify the world, pays its debts. It does not consider that forty cents returned for one hundred cents given is according to the gospel, though it may be according to law. It looks upon a man who has failed in trade and who continues to live in luxury, as a thief. It looks upon a man who promises to pay fifty dollars on demand with interest, and who neglects to pay it on demand with or without interest, as a liar.

The Gospel not Gloomy.

THE gospel gloomy! It is an anthem from the harps of Heaven, the music of the river of life, washing its shores on high and pouring in cascades upon the earth. Not so cheerful was the song of the morning stars, nor the shout of the sons of God so joyful. Gushing from the fountains of eternal harmony, it was first heard on earth in a low tone of solemn gladness uttered in Eden by the Lord God himself. This gave the key note of the gospel song. Patriarchs caught it up and taught it to the generations following. It breathed from the harp of the psalmist, and rang like a clarion from tower and mountain-top as prophets proclaimed the year of jubilee. Fresh notes from Heaven have enriched the harmony, as the Lord of Hosts and his angels have revealed promises, and called on the suffering children of Zion to be joyful in their King. From bondage and exile, from dens and caves, from bloody fields and fiery stakes and peaceful death-beds, have they answered, in voices which cheered the disconsolate and made oppressors shake upon their thrones, while sun and moon, and all the stars of light, stormy winds fulfilling his word, the roaring sea and the fullness thereof, mountains and hills, fruitful fields and all the trees of the wood, have rejoiced before the Lord, and the coming of his anointed, for the redemption of his people and the glory of his holy name.—Dr. Hodge.

DISCUSSION ON THE SABBATH QUESTION

BETWEEN ELD. J. H. WAGGONER, S. D. ADVENTIST, AND ELD. PETER VOGEL, DISCIPLE.

FOURTH PROPOSITION.

“Do the Scriptures teach that the first day of the week is to be sacredly observed by Christians?”

ELD. VOGEL affirms; ELD. WAGGONER denies.

ELD. VOGEL’S THIRD AFFIRMATIVE.

c. The third style of reckoning time, namely, from midnight to midnight, is used by John in his gospel, the last written book in the New Testament, unless Revelation be later. Here, we have scriptural authority as to the last usage among Christians. Mark 15:25, informs us that, according to the notation which begins the day with the morning, Jesus was crucified at the third hour—our nine o’clock in the morning. But John, who evidently begins the day at midnight, says that at the sixth hour he was on trial. John 19:14. This is also the only reckoning, as we shall hereafter see, which accounts for all the scriptural statements bearing on the length of time that Jesus was in the grave. “The Egyptians, the Assyrians, and others,” says Kitto, “adopted this reckoning.” It was also used by the Romans, and hence was the prevailing method when Christianity was cradled and nurtured. Not only was this style used in Ephesus, where John wrote his gospel, but also in the Roman town of Troas, about one hundred and thirty miles to the north, of which Acts 20:7, speaks.

Thus do we not only justify the present usage of beginning our days at midnight, but this also decides that that breaking of bread (verse 11) which took place after midnight (verse 7), was not the breaking of bread for which the disciples assembled, but was such an ordinary eating of food as is mentioned in Acts 27:35, in the use of similar terms. Conybeare well says, “St. Paul now took some refreshment after the protracted labor of the evening.” He translates verse 11, “When he had eaten,” and adds, “This is distinguished in the Greek from the breaking of bread.” Hence, the breaking of bread for which they assembled—the partaking of the Lord’s supper—was attended to before Paul began his long speech. Indeed, the change of pronouns—“We having assembled to break bread, Paul was discoursing with them”—indicates a withdrawal of Paul’s companions after the communion, and before the discourse. And this serves to strengthen the preceding conclusion as to the point whence the day is reckoned. At least, the reckoning which begins the day with sunset is not to be thought of; for that applied only to Jewish sacred seasons. The time of its abolition was, moreover, so far in the past, that it had fallen into desuetude, especially among Gentile Christians.

From the fact that Paul and his companions “tarried seven days” at Troas, before this gathering to break bread took place, it appears that in this Gentile city the Christians did not observe the Sabbath, as was still the custom in Jewish countries; reports of which troubled converts from among the Jews. Acts 21:19–25.

We have here, beyond all controversy, one first-day given to the Lord, in the communion and the ministry of the word, and I raise the question whether we may affirm more from these premises. It seems to me that we can, and I will here set down a few reasons.

a. Eminent Bible scholars of various denominations have been compelled, chiefly by this passage, to decide against their practice, and that of their people, in favor of weekly communion. (See quotations in my first affirmative.) Now, whatever force this passage has in this direction, it has with equal clearness in favor of the weekly observance of the first day. The two are inseparable.

b. It seems, as Conybeare says, that Paul “lingered at Troas after his companions.” This conclusion is, no doubt, reached from the expression, “And we went before” (proelthontes, to go in advance, or first), as Paul’s companions (proelthontes) had preceded him in their journey to Troas. Verse 5. The precise point when they left is, by the change of pronouns, indicated to have been immediately after communion, and before preaching: “We having come together to break bread, Paul discoursed to them.” (Bible Union.) It was Paul that was “about to depart on the morrow,” while his companions went in advance, by ship. The bearing this has on the question before us is obvious. The ship was expected to weigh anchor on Sunday, yet the communion service is postponed to that day! Though Paul and his companions were with the brethren at Troas a whole week, and no doubt “labored from house to house,” yet the Lord’s supper was not attended to on any previous day, not even on the Sabbath, but is reserved for Sunday. Evidently, this was the day for its observance. Aware, however, that the ship would sail about the time of meeting, Paul had “appointed” or planned that his companions should go with it, and that he, in order to gain a few hours for his brethren, and to give them opportunity to attend preaching on that day, would, “on the morrow,” go to the trouble of footing it across to Assos, while the ship is rounding Cape Lectum, or doing business at the next landing. These facts can have but one meaning, namely, that the first day of the week is the Lord’s day—the day on which the Lord’s supper is to be partaken of. And if such is the nature of the first day, it is of every first day.

I can, however, easily picture to myself the avidity with which my brother will seize upon the fact that Paul’s companions traveled on this day, to turn it against me. Let him, however, remember that we are not now talking about the Sabbath, hence no fanciful interpretation of the rules regulating it will apply here. The journey was necessary, and the ship not under their control. Whether they were able or unable to endure the fatiguing march across the country, or were needed to guard the baggage upon the ship’s arrival at Assos, it is not necessary to conjecture; they could as quietly and profitably enjoy a sacred feast on shipboard as in the upper room at Troas. Paul and Luke arrived at Troas on Monday, having there been the preceding Sabbath and Sunday on their way from Europe to Asia. Verse 6. If, therefore, the traveling of Paul’s companions argues against the first day, his own traveling argues much more against the Sabbath. Having once failed to make railroad connections, I was compelled to finish the last twenty miles of my journey afoot, and on the Lord’s day, on a hot September morning, in order to fill an appointment of long standing; in this, I felt that I was doing acceptable service to the Lord. On the supposition that I am right in the day, dare the even my legalistic brother say that I did wrong?

We have, then, in several acts of worship, and in many churches, indeed, in every church, both of Europe and of Asia, whose history is given in such detail as to name the time of observing these acts, invariably the first day given to the Lord; and this, not once, simply, but “every first day of the week.” Beyond all controversy, therefore, this is “the Lord’s day.”

V. The first day of the week is peculiarly appropriate, and the fittest of the seven to be the Christian’s sacred day.

The Lord’s day being a new institution, we naturally expect a new reason to underlie it. Being a positive institution, the Lord could make any day his that he saw fit to choose. But positive institutions, as a rule, are commemorative, and fall more appropriately on memorable days, if there be any, and if, in the nature of the case, they can be permanently located. The entire 23d chapter of Leviticus is proof of this statement. Baptism, though commemorative (see Rom. 6), is of such a nature as to find a fit place at the burying of “the old man,” and the resurrection into a new life. The Lord’s supper is a symbol, not of dying, but of death: the bread and the wine are a part, as were the body and the blood of Jesus, from the time the Roman spear had entered his side till the moment of the resurrection on the first day. While, then, any point between these two events is, in itself, suitable for the location of this commemorative institution, yet the first day is the more appropriate, having the additional advantage of being the more notable. There is no day of the week, in this dispensation, about which so many memorable facts cluster as about the first day. Indeed, it is remarkable how barren of such events are the other six. Let the reader pause to call them up, interrogating them one by one, and he will be astonished at the meagerness of the result. But turn to the first day, and behold what we have! What stimulus to holy thought!

1. Jesus rose from the dead on the first day of the week.

This is an admitted fact on the part of Eld. Waggoner and his brethren, but denied by Seventh-day Baptists. I will, therefore, pause a little to gather Scripture facts in support of my statement. And for this the reader will have the more patience, when I assure him that these facts will bear on several points hereafter to be made.

a. The paschal lamb was by the law required to be slain on the fourteenth day of the first month, between the two evenings—3 P. M. and sunset. Ex. 12:6, margin. But as “born under the law” (Gal. 4:4), and “a minister of the circumcision” (Rom. 15:8), Jesus “learned obedience” (Heb. 5:9), “knew no sin” (2 Cor. 5:21), was “without sin” (Heb. 4:15; 1 Pet. 2:22; 1 John 3:5), and “fulfilled all righteousness” (Matt. 3:15); he, therefore, slew the paschal lamb at its appointed season. See also Matt. 26:17–21; Mark 14:12–18; Luke 22:7–14; and compare Ex. 12:18.

b. On the fifteenth day, which was the first passover after the two evenings had passed, was the first paschal sabbath. Num. 28:16–18. And so, also, testifies Smith, Bib. Dict., Art. Pass.: “The lambs were selected, on the fourteenth they were slain, and the blood sprinkled, and in the following evening, after the fifteenth day of the month had commenced, the first paschal meal was eaten. At midnight, the first-born of the Egyptians were smitten.” Again: “As the sun was setting, the lambs were slain, and the fat and blood given to the priests (2 Chron. 35:5, 6). The lamb was then roasted whole, and eaten with unleavened bread and bitter herbs; no portion of it was to be left until the morning. The same night, after the fifteenth of Nisan had commenced, the fat was burned by the priests, and the blood sprinkled on the altar (2 Chron. 30:16; 35:11). On the fifteenth, the night being passed, there was a holy convocation, and during that day no work might be done, except the preparation of necessary food (Ex. 12:16).” So, in substance, Kitto also.

It was on this day, the fifteenth, a yearly sabbath, that Jesus was crucified. The same unscrupulousness which had once led the Jews to send officers to arrest Jesus on “the great day of the feast,” of tabernacles (John 7:32–45), and afterward, to seize Peter during the passover (Acts 12:3, 4), led them, in disregard of the day, to crucify Jesus on the first yearly sabbath. Against the conclusion to which the foregoing facts undeniably lead, namely, that the passover had actually begun, John 18:28, weighs nothing, since (1) the word, passover, may there denote the feast in general, as in Luke 22:1, or (2) the same perverseness which could crucify the innocent One, could just as readily postpone the keeping of the passover beyond the legal time, or (3) the priests may have been afraid of becoming defiled, because it would render them unfit to attend to the sacrifices which were to be offered on the fifteenth. Num. 28:17–24.

c. Jesus was crucified on “the preparation” day before the Sabbath. Luke 23:54. As this preparation day was itself a (yearly) sabbath, and the second yearly sabbath is wholly out of question, the Sabbath which followed was one of the weekly Sabbaths, and Jesus was crucified and buried on Friday. And this helps us to understand the somewhat indefinite expression of John 19:14—“It was the preparation of the passover;” it is to be understood of the preparation for the weekly Sabbath which fell in the passover week. Before the yearly sabbaths, no particular preparation was needed, for necessary food might be prepared on those days (Ex. 12:16). But this Sabbath “was a high day” (John 19:31), since it not only fell within the passover week, but also because from it the following Pentecost was dated, as we shall hereafter see.

d. On the first day of the week, the grave was found empty, and Jesus had risen. Mark 16:1–6; Luke 24:1–7. His resurrection could not have taken place on Saturday; for, in that case, it would be impossible to make out “three days,” even by counting the beginning and ending fraction of a day as a whole, no matter at what point we begin to reckon the day. Nor is there any passage of Scripture which teaches his resurrection on the Sabbath. The only one relied on by the advocates of this theory is Matt. 28:1–6: “In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulcher.” And the angel said, Jesus “is not here; he is risen.” Should we adopt this version, and understand, with Lange, in the quotation already made from him on this point, that the more accurate Jewish division of the Sabbath is here referred to, we have the women leaving their homes at the dawning of the day, and arriving at the sepulcher, as Mark says, “at the rising of the sun,” or, more strictly, “the sun having risen.” Or, if we adopt the more unusual rendering of Dr. Geo. Campbell and others, “After the Sabbath,” &c., this difficulty vanishes equally well. Campbell says, “Opse, before a genitive, often means ‘after.’” There is, however, a more excellent way. Let the word, “opse,” have its more usual meaning, “late,” or “in the end of,” and render sabbaton, in each of its occurrences, by the same word in English (and no man can give a substantial reason why this should not be done); then we have the version of Rotherham, and of many others—“And late in the week, when it was on the point of dawning into the first [day] of the week, &c.” The Jews, for whom Matthew wrote his gospel, knew well that, though the Sabbath ended at sundown, the week, according to their own reckoning, did not end till sunrise the next day. It follows, from the foregoing, that Mark 16:9 is punctuated correctly in the common version: “Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene.”

e. Jesus, then, was in the grave a part of Friday, all of Saturday, and a part of Sunday. He said that he would be in the heart of the earth “three days and three nights.” Matt. 12:40. If we reckon the day from sunset, and count the beginning and ending fraction as if a whole, we can make out three days, but only two nights; though this reckoning is not permissible, since it belongs only to sacred days; if, on the other hand, we reckon from sunrise, adding the night to the preceding day, we still have but two nights. The night must be broken into fractions, before we can count “three nights.” This brings us again to the Christian reckoning, which begins the day at midnight. From before sundown to Friday midnight, counting fractions, we have one day and one night; from thence to Saturday midnight, another day and two halves or one whole night; thence till sunup Sunday, another day and night.

That it is Bible custom to reckon the beginning and the ending fractions of a series as if they were whole numbers, is so well known, and so generally admitted, that proof seems unnecessary. I will only ask that doubters, if there be any, begin at such passages as 1 Kings 15:25–28, and try to harmonize the reigns of the kings of Judah and Israel.

By way of preparing for objections on another score, I call attention to the fact that Jesus said he would rise “in three days” (John 2:19). “After three days” (Mark 8:31; Matt. 27:63), and “on the third day” (Matt. 16:21; 17:23; 20:19; Mark 10:34; Luke 9:22). It must be frankly confessed that, according to our idiom, this is an irreconcilable contradiction. But the difficulty vanishes when we remember that the Jews in all ages habitually used the cardinal numbers inaccurately, and the ordinals accurately. Let us look at a few examples. Joseph imprisoned his brethren “three days,” and yet released them on the third day (Gen. 42:17–20). By this, by the way, also serves to show that a fraction is counted as a whole. Rehoboam said, “Depart ye for three days, then come again.” “So all the people came to Rehoboam the third day as he had appointed.” 1 Kings 12:5, 12. The Pharisees and priests asked for a guard, alleging that Jesus had said, “After three days I will rise again.” “Command therefore that the sepulcher be made sure till the third day.” Matt. 27:62–64. Matthew reports Jesus as having said, “the third day” (16:21), and Mark, in a parallel passage, says, “after three days” (8:31). “Cornelius said [to Peter, Acts 10:30], Four days ago I was fasting until this hour;” but according to our count it was only three days. In Esther 4:16; 5:1, we have a passage parallel to Matt. 12:40: “Fast ye for me, and neither eat nor drink three days, night and day;” yet “on the third day” she went before the king.

f. The first day is memorable by reason of Christ’s appearances to his disciples on that day, after his resurrection. and yet it is difficult to say whether this was on Thursday or Friday. But for some reason the Holy Spirit has seen fit to carefully date the appearances on the first day.

(1.) On this day, Jesus appeared to proclaim his resurrection (a) to Mary Magdalene, Mark 16:9–11; (b) to the other women, Matt. 28:8–10; (c) to Peter, Luke 24:34; 1 Cor. 15:5; (d) two others of the disciples, Mark 16:12, 13; and (e) to the apostles generally, Mark 16:14–18; Luke 24:36–49; John 20:19–23. To the sad hearts who mournfully said, “We trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel,” this was equal to the reception of a new life; they were “begotten again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead!” But all this meant no more to them than it means to us. Most memorable day!

(2.) “And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them; then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.” John 20:26. “After eight days,” is the inaccurate use of the cardinals, which we have examined above, denoting the eighth day, as, “after three days” denotes the third.

J. N. Andrews, Seventh-day Sabbatarian, in his “History of the Sabbath,” says, “After six days,” instead of being the sixth day, was about eight days after Matt. 17:1; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28.” But Luke’s “about eight days” is too indefinite to form an exception to the rule established. Webster says that about signifies “not far from,” and the sixth day is certainly “not far from” the eighth. Luke did not mean to be accurate. Mr. Andrews says, again, “Those who were to come before God from Sabbath to Sabbath to minister in his temple, were said to come ‘after seven days.’ 1 Chron. 9:25; 2 Kings 11:5.” This is no exception; if after seven days denotes on the seventh, then after eight days signifies on the eighth. Moreover, the Hebrew of 1 Chron. 9:25, is peculiar; it literally reads, “for or against the seven of days.” Where we have after, in the common version, the Hebrew has lamed, for or against; in the Greek, kata, on; in the Douay version, upon; and Luther, the genitive, i. e., on;—thus making it different from John 20:26, where the Greek has meta. There is, then, no getting away from the fact that the only visits of Jesus to his disciples, which the Holy Spirit saw fit to date carefully, were those taking place on Sunday.

Doing One’s Best.

The habit of doing to the best of one’s ability the duty of the hour is invaluable. The world is full of work half done, of enterprises imperfectly accomplished, of deeds that lack one or two elements only to make them great. And this is so because there are so many people who simply try to meet the present contingency. They have no high ideal of doing things well for the sole sake of doing them well, no wings to their souls which raise them into that upper air where motive gives nobility to action. Those who do rise to the conception of an ideal life too often procrastinate the hour when they shall begin to live as well as they know how, and still the days pass on, and their conceptions take no form. Thus life goes by, and mediocrity slumbers in an unknown grave.

The interior life of every man and every woman who rises above the common level is distinguished by this love of excellence for its own sake, this quenchless aspiration to do better and better until their performance reaches the unattainable ideal.

There is not a boy nor a girl in the remote cabins of the far West, or on the lonely prairies, that may not follow in the footsteps of these mighty ones who have laid

“—their just hands on that golden key That opens the palace of Eternity.”

Let the boy begin by doing well his morning chores, neglecting nothing, slighting nothing, omitting nothing. Not many months since we went through the stables of the best stock-raiser in this country. How clean were the calf-pens, and the pigs looked like household pets! Not a corn-stalk was in the wrong place; not a dust of ashes on the furnace where the food was cooked; every rake and brush and shovel hung on its nail. “How do you manage to keep things so clean?” we asked. “Oh,” was the reply, “I’ve discharged many a man because he wouldn’t do things well!” This stock-raiser will have everything, little and big, done in the very best manner, and just here is the secret of his success. When the boy has done his chores well, if he goes to school, let him get his arithmetic lesson thoroughly, not doing the sums this way or that because it “brings the answer,” but because the right way of doing the sum is right, and every other method is wrong. If he has a composition to write, let him take the utmost pains to make it the best expression possible of his ability, in language, grammar, and penmanship. He might as well be playing ball, or twirling his thumbs, so far as any intellectual improvement is concerned, as merely “scratching off a composition,” to save a bad mark or escape reproof.

And the girl, she can walk in the footsteps of Alice Cary, of Margaret Fuller, of Elizabeth Barrett Browning, by washing the dishes well and wiping them till they shine, by making the loaf snowy, and light, and sweet, by giving her kitchen an air of neatness and cleanliness, of order and system, without which the costliest parlor is cheerless and dreary. If she has in her own mind a clear conception of perfection in housekeeping, it will appear in everything she touches, and adorn the rooms over which she presides more than costly tapestries or rosewood furniture. And for the lessons at school, what we said to the boy applies with equal emphasis to her.

If we knew that this day, this month, this year, would close our work here, how solicitous would we be to make each separate portion perfect in quality and in performance! If we knew what single act of our lives would mark a turning point in our destinies, how careful would we be to make that act complete in every excellent quality! As we cannot know these things, how fitting it is that at every step of our progress we covet earnestly the best gifts, and let each separate day as it passes witness a perfect record.

Continue reading: Trust Children