Review and Herald, Vol. 43, No. 14. (3/17/1874)

Review and Herald

Mar 17, 1874

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Mar 17, 1874

FAITH AND WORKS.

By Dudley Marvin Canright

BY ELD. D. M. CANRIGHT.

TEXT: “Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.” James 2:24.

My text naturally leads me to speak of the relation between faith and works. This is an important subject—one which we believe is but poorly understood by many Christians. We often hear the old covenant spoken of as the covenant of works, while the new covenant is regarded as the covenant of faith. The idea seems to be that before the death of Christ men were justified by their good works and by a strict and exact obedience to God’s law; but since the death of Christ we are justified, not by the law, but by faith in Christ. An examination of the Scriptures will expose the fallacy of this position.

Before the fall, Adam was placed where simple obedience to God’s law, without faith in Christ as a Saviour, would have secured to him eternal life; for the Lord placed him in the garden in which was “every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food.” Gen. 2:8. “And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it; for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” Gen. 2:16, 17.

The tree of life was among those of which Adam could freely eat. See verse 9. As long as he could eat of this, he would not die. See Gen. 3:22. The day of his death would not come till he disobeyed God by taking of the forbidden fruit. Suppose, then, that Adam had not eaten of the forbidden fruit for one thousand years, then the day of his death would not have come for that one thousand years. And if he had never partaken of that forbidden fruit, the day of his death would never have come. Hence, by simple obedience he would have secured eternal life. He would have needed no Saviour. The Lord says that he gave man a law which, if he would do, he should even live in it. Eze. 20:11. So Paul says: “The doers of the law shall be justified.” Rom. 2:13. Certainly, if Adam had always kept the law of God, for what could the Lord have condemned him? Nothing. Hence, he would have been justified by works and not by faith.

But Adam sinned. He and Eve took the forbidden fruit. What law did they violate here? The principles of the moral law, the ten commandments. Look at the facts: That tree belonged to God. It was not theirs. They had no right to it. God forbade them to touch it. But Eve looked upon the tree till she greatly “desired” it. Gen. 3:6. That is, she coveted it, and thus broke the tenth commandment, “Thou shalt not covet.” Next she “took” of it, and thus broke the eighth commandment, “Thou shalt not steal.” In doing this, she obeyed Satan rather than God, and thus broke the first commandment, “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.”

Now they are sinners, and now they need a Saviour. But why does a sinner need a Saviour? Why can he not work out his own salvation? Or why cannot God forgive a sinner without Christ’s dying for him? Christ says, “So likewise ye, when ye shall have done all those things which are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants; we have done that which was our duty to do.” Luke 17:10.

It is a self-evident fact that it is the duty of an individual to do just right all his life, from his first day to his last. But suppose he should do wrong, commit various sins, the first half of his life. Now he concludes to reform. He leaves off all his sins, and does really do just right every way all the last half of his life. Now, will not the good deeds of the last half of his life atone for the sins of the first part of his life? No, indeed; for was it not his duty to do just right through all his life? Yes. Then, in doing just right the last half of his life, he is only doing that which was his duty to do during that time, provided he had not done wrong the first half of his life. Hence, no amount of right doing can atone for one wrong deed.

To illustrate: I trade with Mr. Jones a year, running in debt for all I get. New Year’s day, I decide not to get into debt any further, but to pay Mr. Jones for every article I get as I go along. I do so a year. I do not get into debt another cent. At the end of the year, Mr. Jones asks me to pay up what I owed him on the first year’s trade. Would he not be astonished if I should tell him that I did not owe him anything now because I had ceased to run in debt to him during the last year? Simply ceasing to contract further debts does not pay up past ones; so ceasing to sin does not remove past sins. In short, no amount of future obedience to a law can justify a past transgression of it.

To illustrate again: Forty years ago, Mr. Smith killed a man in this town. Not being suspected of the crime, he continued to live in the town till now when he is arrested, convicted, and is about to be sentenced. He confesses that he killed the man, but pleads that he justly ought to be set free because he has never killed a man since then, but has carefully kept the law. How much weight would such a plea have? The judge would tell him that he had no right to violate the law, even once, to kill one man. The fact that he had kept the law ever since did not justify his violation of it that once. So the sinner, having violated God’s law even once, can never save himself by his good works, by obedience to the law. This Paul forcibly argues in Rom. 3. He first proves that “all have sinned,” then he draws this conclusion: “Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight; for by the law is the knowledge of sin.” Verse 20.

Hence, Adam having sinned, he could not justify himself by keeping the law after that. He could indeed, in his own person, pay the penalty of the law, which is death; but this would destroy him. God could not set aside the penalty of his holy law, nor let sin go unpunished; for this would give license to iniquity, and break down the authority of God and his government.

God valued his law, and could not set it aside. He pitied the poor sinner, and did not wish him to perish. There was only one more thing that could be done; viz., to let the penalty of his holy law be executed upon his own innocent Son, and thus open the way for the sinner to be forgiven. And this is just what was done. Hence, as soon as man sinned, God made the precious promise that the seed of the woman should bruise the serpent’s head. Gen. 3:15. This evidently refers to Christ, as is generally agreed. Indeed, it was the first announcement of the gospel to the fallen race.

From this time, the children of God began to offer sacrifices, by which to show their faith in the promised Deliverer. Thus we read in the next chapter, concerning Cain and Abel: “And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord. And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock, and of the fat thereof. And the Lord had respect unto Abel, and to his offering; but unto Cain, and to his offering, he had not respect.” Gen. 4:3–5. Cain had no faith in Christ; hence he simply brought to the Lord a thank-offering of the grains and fruits he had raised. The offering of these showed no faith in the promised Redeemer; therefore, God rejected them. But Abel brought a lamb and slew it in sacrifice to God. In the death of this lamb was typified the death of the Lamb of God. This showed Abel’s faith in the Redeemer to come. So Paul says he offered it by faith. Heb. 11:4.

Now, we ask the reader carefully to consider this question: Can any sinner be saved without faith in Christ? Certainly not. Was not Abel a sinner? Surely, he was. Can a sinner be saved by the law? No, indeed. This we have already seen is impossible. Then, could Abel, or Noah, or Moses, or any other man under the old dispensation, be justified or saved by the law? Of course not. Then how will they be saved? By faith in Jesus Christ, the same as men are saved now. Will there be two companies of redeemed saints in Heaven, one from the Mosaic dispensation, saved by the law; and another, from the Christian dispensation, saved by faith in Christ? This is so manifestly absurd that to state it is to refute it. No; all the redeemed host, from Abel down, will unite in giving the glory of their salvation to Jesus Christ.

Neither the sacrifices nor the law in the Old Testament ever took away one sin or justified a single soul. Says Paul, “For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.” “And for this cause He is the mediator of the New Testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.” Heb. 10:4; 9:15. Then all the virtue there was in those sacrifices was simply as types to point men’s faith to Christ. They shadowed forth the gospel. As we have seen, the first announcement of the gospel was made in the promise that the seed of the woman should bruise the serpent’s head. Gen. 3:15. The gospel was preached to Abraham, for so Paul says: “And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham.” Gal. 3:8. So then the gospel was not first preached by the apostles. Jesus says of Abraham, “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day; and he saw it, and was glad.” John 8:56.

By faith, Abraham looked forward to Jesus’ first advent, and rejoiced. Of his faith, Paul bears this testimony: “For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory, but not before God. For what saith the Scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.” Rom. 4:2, 3. So, then, Abraham was not justified by his good works, nor by the law, but by faith. But did he, therefore, disregard and break God’s law and commandments? No; for God says of him: “Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.” Gen. 26:5. If neither faith nor the gospel freed Abraham from keeping the law of God, why should these free us from keeping it?

The gospel was also preached to the Israelites in their passage from Egypt to Canaan at the very time the law of God was proclaimed to them from Sinai. “But with whom was he grieved forty years? was it not with them that had sinned, whose carcasses fell in the wilderness? And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not? So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief. Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it. For unto us was the gospel preached, AS WELL AS UNTO THEM; but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.” Heb. 3:17–19; 4:1, 2. The gospel was, then, preached to the Hebrews in the time of Moses; but the most of them did not believe it, though some did.

But, says one, do you mean to say that the holy men of those times under the law believed in Jesus Christ as Christians do? That they ate and drank of him spiritually as his disciples now do? Certainly, only that we have greater light than they. Paul settles this point. “Moreover, brethren, I would not that you should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; and were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; and did all eat the same spiritual meat; and did all drink the same spiritual drink; for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them; and that Rock was Christ.” 1 Cor. 10:1–4.

Stephen says the church was there in the wilderness, and Christ was in the church. Acts 7:37, 38. So these men had the gospel preached to them, and they spiritually ate and drank of Christ, who was there present with them. Now it is a fact worthy of careful notice that at the very time they enjoyed all these gospel blessings, they also had the law of God, the ten commandments, delivered to them by God to be kept. If, then, the gospel and faith in Christ did not free them from the obligation to keep this law, why should they free us from keeping it?

But does not Paul say that since Christ came “the just shall live by faith”? Rom. 1:17. If we can now live by faith, why keep the law? And even stronger, Paul says, “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God; not by works, lest any man should boast.” Eph. 2:8, 9. Do not these declarations prove that no man can now be justified by good works, or by keeping the law? Yes; but have we not seen that since the fall of Adam no man could be saved by the law? Was Abel, or Abraham, or any other man, ever saved by the law? No; they were all saved by grace through faith, as I have abundantly shown. In Paul’s use of the phrase, “The just shall live by faith,” he simply quotes from the Old Testament, Hab. 2:4, where it was first written B.C. 626. This proves that it was just as true before the advent of Christ as it was after, that the just lived by faith. But did not those holy men keep the law of God while at the same time they were justified, not by the law, but by faith? Certainly. This shows that justification by faith and obedience to the law do go together and are in harmony.

What, then, is the difference between the old dispensation and the new? Simply this: Before the death of Christ, it was necessary that men should look forward by faith to that event for justification from their sins; hence, it was necessary to have sacrifices, types, and shadows, pointing them forward to his death. This is exactly what all those sacrifices were for, and

this was all the virtue there was in them. See Heb. 10:1–5; Col. 2:17. They never took away a single sin. Men of faith who offered them did not look to those sacrifices as anything, but through them they looked to Christ. Ps. 40:6–9.

But as soon as Christ had come and died, it became necessary to look no longer forward, but back to his death. Hence those sacrifices must of necessity cease. There must now be something to point our faith back to his death as an accomplished fact of the past. Therefore the Lord’s supper was instituted for this purpose. Says Paul, “For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord’s death till he come.” 1 Cor. 11:26. The broken bread and poured wine fitly commemorate Christ’s broken body and spilled blood. Baptism illustrates and commemorates the burial and resurrection of Jesus. Rom. 6.

So, since the death of our Lord, we have these ordinances pointing back to the cross instead of the old sacrifices pointing forward to it. This change was made necessary by his death. But this is all that was necessary. The moral law of God as the rule of conduct and faith in Christ for justification from past sins is in no way changed. And why should it be? No; but prophets, representing the old dispensation, and the apostles, representing the new, are both built upon the same foundation. So Paul declares: “And [ye] are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone.” Eph. 2:20. The great foundation, then, of the church of Jesus Christ was laid away back in the old dispensation and remains unchanged in the new.

The gospel means “the good news.” Good news of what? Of salvation. Salvation from what? From sin. But what is sin? Transgression of the law. 1 John 3:4. The gospel does not offer to save us from a transgression of the gospel, but from transgression of the law.

To illustrate: A man, for murder, is condemned to death. But the governor sends him a pardon. That is good news to the murderer; for it offers him salvation from the penalty of the law which he had violated. If he accepts the pardon, he will be saved, not by the law, or by his good deeds, but by the pardon. Now, suppose that as soon as he was out of prison he should begin berating the law because it could not save him, at the same time highly extolling the pardon for saving him, and then declare that he should no longer regard the law, but make the pardon the rule of his life! How absurd! Yet his position would exactly illustrate that of those who reject the law because it does not save them, and then propose to make the gospel their law.

The gospel is not given to succeed the law, but to save men from their sins, the violations of the law. Hence faith in Christ and obedience to the commandments of God should always go together as they will in the remnant church as shown by Rev. 14:12. “Here are they that keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.” The object of faith is to lead men to work. Gal. 5:6. “Faith which works by love.” A faith which does not do this is dead. James 2:17. The rule and test of good works is the law of God, the ten commandments. Matt. 5:16–19; James 2:8–24.

Be it understood, then, that we are not seeking to be justified by the law, but by faith, as was Abraham, Rom. 4:1–4; and yet we keep God’s law as did Abraham the father of the faithful.

GOD CALLING YET.

By Sel.

“Unto you, O men, I call, and my voice is to the sons of men.”

God calling yet! and shall I never hearken, But still earth’s witcheries my spirit darken? This passing life, these passing joys all flying, And still my soul in dreamy slumber lying.

God calling yet! and I not yet arising— So long his boundless, faithful love despising— So falsely his unwearied love repaying? He beckons still, and still I am delaying!

God calling yet! loud at my door is knocking! And I my heart, my ear, still firmer locking! He yet is willing, ready to receive me, Is waiting now—but ah! he soon may leave me.

God calling yet! and I no answer giving! I dread his yoke, and am in bondage living. Too long I linger, but, not yet forsaken— He calls me still, O my poor heart, awaken!

Surrender all, all to his care confiding; Where but with him are rest and peace abiding? Unloose, unloose, break earthly bonds asunder, And let this spirit rise in soaring wonder.

God calling yet! I can no longer tarry, Nor to my God a heart divided carry; O vain and giddy world, your spells are broken! Sweeter than all, the voice of God has spoken! —Sel.

The Truth.—No. 2.

By R. F. Cottrell

In the fortieth Psalm is a prophecy of Christ which Paul applies to his first coming into the world. Heb. 10:5-9. In this is foretold how he would regard the law of God, which is the truth, and also the fact that he would preach it. “Then said I, Lo, I come; in the volume of the book it is written of me, I delight to do thy will, O my God; yea, thy law is within my heart. I have preached righteousness in the great congregation. . . . I have not concealed thy lovingkindness and thy truth from the great congregation.” Ps. 40:7-10.

Righteousness is right doing; and the commandments are righteousness as well as truth. Ps. 119:172. Now let us see how Christ fulfilled the prediction by preaching truth and righteousness in the great congregation in his sermon on the mount, in other words, how he testified of that law which was in his heart. Said he, “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven; but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of Heaven. For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of Heaven.” Matt. 5:17-20.

Our Lord said to Pilate, “For this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth.” And he did so by deeds as well as by words; for he could truly say, “I have kept my Father's commandments.” And we too may bear testimony in the same way. If we labor on “the six working days,” and rest on the seventh, the day on which the Creator rested, we say by our actions that God made the world in six days and rested on the seventh. And that is the truth. But if we rest on the first day and not on the seventh, are we not like the boy that told a lie with his finger by pointing the wrong road to the inquirer? The result of that lie was the death of the child which the surgeon might have saved had he not been delayed by being directed out of his way. And who knows how many souls will go to perdition by the false testimony concerning the day of God's rest, which he requires all men to celebrate?

Those who will read Paul's testimony in Rom. 2:17-22, will find him in harmony with the other scriptures concerning the law of truth. He says to those who “are instructed out of the law,” that they have “the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law.” What law? That law that forbids theft and adultery. “Thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal? Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery?” The apostle teaches obedience to this law of truth as a condition of receiving eternal life. Says he, “To them who by patient continuance in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life. But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath.” Since “all unrighteousness is sin” (1 John 5:17), and “sin is the transgression of the law” (chap. 3:4), it follows that to “obey unrighteousness” is to transgress the law, and that “well-doing,” or obedience to the truth, is obedience to the law. The apostle teaches in harmony with his Master, who said, “If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.”

Peter is another witness to the truth. Says he, “Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth.” 1 Pet. 1:22. It may be objected that he speaks of obeying the gospel. Admitted; but the first precept of the gospel is to repent of sin, which is the transgression of the law; and no repentance is genuine but that which turns from transgression to obedience.

If the witnesses already cited are orthodox, so also is the apostle John. Listen to his testimony: “And hereby we do know that we know Him, if we keep his commandments. He that saith, I know Him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.” This is plain testimony; but all can bear it who consider that it comes from the disciple whom Jesus loved, and who leaned upon his breast at the last supper. The testimony concerning the truth is harmonious throughout. R. F. Cottrell.

Sins of Presumption.

By D. T. Bourdeau

It is a dangerous thing to presume on the goodness of God in transgressing even the least of his commandments; for it is in sinning presumptuously that men harden their hearts; and there are limits beyond which the Spirit of God will cease to strive with men. The Spirit of God is not like a lackey, that we can send and call at our bidding. If we grieve it beyond measure, it will leave us forever. It will leave us to hardness of heart, no more to reprove us of sin, or to win us in the paths of virtue. And how solemn is the thought that millions in the past have closed their probation in their lifetime by presuming to venture on the forbidden grounds of sin; and such will be the case with the masses of the last generation; for the Scriptures plainly teach that the days immediately preceding the coming of Christ will be like the days that were before the flood.

To view sin in the right light, we must bear in mind that what men call slight transgressions are committed against the authority of the great and holy God, and that those who sin presumptuously are guilty of rebellion against the Almighty, upon whom they depend for life and mercy and all the blessings they enjoy. What sinful and shameful ingratitude those are guilty of who repay God for his great goodness by venturing to disregard even the least of his just and sacred claims upon them. But it is too natural for the carnal heart to frame excuses to justify presumptuous sins.

One excuse is that those who venture to transgress the commandments of God may be saved; for it is said that they “shall be called least” in the kingdom of Heaven. Matt. 5:17-19. To which we reply that the least known sin unconfessed and unrepented of will exclude us from the kingdom of Heaven. Although God may have mercy on some who have ignorantly transgressed certain portions of his law, and who have had a disposition to thoroughly repent upon discovering their sins, yet there are no Bible grounds for expecting salvation while deliberately persisting in the transgression of God’s law. To claim that we can be saved while knowingly and willfully transgressing God’s commandments, would be to virtually teach the salvation of all mankind and even of fallen angels. For if some can be saved in rebellion against God’s law, others can. Some claim that Matt. 5:19, should be rendered thus: “Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be of no esteem in the reign of Heaven”; that is, he shall have no part there; for those who are accounted worthy of a place in the kingdom of Heaven shall be highly esteemed. To say that the Saviour in this text teaches that the willful violators of the commandments can be saved, would be to represent him as telling the Jews: Think not that I am come to destroy the law or lessen its binding force on men. For till heaven and earth pass, not one jot or one tittle shall pass from the law. Therefore men may violate that law and yet be saved in the kingdom of Heaven.

Another excuse that is offered to justify presumptuous departures from God’s word is, that preachers of the gospel can build on Christ, wood, hay, and stubble, or erroneous doctrines, and yet be saved. 1 Cor. 3:10. But we deny that what is built on Christ represents doctrines. In introducing the subject, Paul says, “Ye are God’s husbandry, ye are God’s building,” verse 9; and in concluding the subject, he says, “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God? If any man defile [or destroy, margin] the temple of God, him shall God destroy.” Verse 17. Wood, hay, and stubble, represent bad material that is added to the church under the labor of ministers. This material shall be burned up in the day of wrath, and those who have added it to the church shall sustain a loss, i. e., shall not have a full reward. 2 John 8. And even if the ministers have been faithful, before they are saved they shall experience that sorrow with reference to their unfaithful adherents which may be well represented by passing through fire; and much more will those experience sorrow and anguish whose work is burned up at last because of their unfaithfulness. In this case, destruction awaits the preacher as well as his adherents. Paul’s exhortation to Timothy, and through Timothy to every minister of the gospel, is, “Hold fast the form of sound words;” 2 Tim. 1:14; and Jude “gave all diligence” to exhort the church to “earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.” Jude 3. D. T. BOURDEAU.

Dress in Church.

It was noticed that when the Queen of England, a few weeks ago, attended at a Presbyterian church in Scotland, she was dressed without jewelry, or any of the symbols of fashion. The Evangelist, referring to this, says:—

“This example of the highest lady in the realm might be imitated, not only in Great Britain, but in this country; for nowhere, we are ashamed to say, is the bad taste of ostentation in dress more conspicuous than here. It seems as if, with many, the Sabbath were the grand occasion for display, and the church the place for self-exhibition. In no other country have we seen so much show and tinselry in the churches as in some of our cities.”

Religion without the Cross.

By A. S. Hutchins

THOUGH the cross is the sign of ignominy and sufferings, yet it is the badge and glory of the true Christian. In this age of great and widespread religious declension, there are many who profess the Christian religion who have but a slight knowledge of the cross.

To have a name to live, to profess separation from the world, to have chosen the narrow way to life, and yet shun the cross-bearing, self-denying duties of the Christian, and be borne along on the tide of public opinion and applause, as the bubble is borne on the surface of the water, will never secure the approval of Him who died upon the cross, nor give access to the city of God.

Says the apostle, “And I, brethren, if I yet preach circumcision, why do I yet suffer persecution? Then is the offense of the cross ceased.”

From thousands of pulpits at the present time, a gospel is heralded so highly popular and well-pleasing to the unregenerate, that one might almost think “the offense of the cross ceased.” Cross-bearing, self-denial, and suffering with the Man of Calvary, are neither proclaimed nor experienced. The crucified Lamb is not kept before the mind. The cross of Christ is not there. The separation from the world which the religion of the Bible demands is not recognized.

Says Jesus, “He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.” Matt. 10:37, 38.

And again, “Whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.” One who well knew what it was to “suffer persecution for the cross of Christ,” leaves on record the following testimony:—

“But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.”

The cross implies a crucifixion, and crucifixion implies a death, death to the world, but life, eternal life through Jesus Christ. Let us not be ashamed of the old paths in which men walked who were inspired of the Holy Spirit, nor think we can here walk around the cross and finally wear the crown with the ransomed of the Lord. Let us rather be able to say from the heart;

“Jesus, I my cross have taken, All to leave and follow thee.”

A. S. HUTCHINS.

Singing All Together.

By Rev. Dr. Talmage

MANY contend that the singing of the church should be done by delegation. Now imagine a few of Heaven’s choice spirits deputed to do the singing for the upper temple. There they are gathered in one place! One! two! three! four! Yes, just a heavenly quartette! With subdued and almost inaudible sweetness it will begin. Hark! they have begun! No! they have not! Yes, they have! Thrones and principalities be silent! Hush, David! though thou art the sweet singer of Israel! St. Paul, be still, although thou hast received the crown of rejoicing. Richard Baxter, hold! this is the saints’ everlasting rest. Capital music! But such propriety cannot long be kept. “Hallelujah!” cries a soul from under the altar. “Praise the Lord,” sings a martyr from among the trees of life. “Thanks be unto God who giveth us the victory!” cry a thousand redeemed voices. A myriad spirits catch up the song of Moses and the Lamb, and the hundred and forty and four thousand break forth into rejoicing. See how the palms wave. Look how the thrones quake.

“Stop that loud singing. All out of taste. Stop.”

But they will not cease. You might as well attempt to drown the thunder of the skies, or beat back the roar of the seas; for verily I believe that every saint in Heaven has resolved to do his own singing.—Rev. Dr. Talmage.

Forgive Others Many Things, Yourself Nothing

FORGIVE others many things; yourself, nothing.

Thoughts on Great Minds and Golgotha

WHEREVER a great mind utters its thoughts, there is Golgotha.—Heine.

HE who talks, sows; he who listens, reaps.

Borrowing of the Egyptians.

W. H. POOLE, in “Guide to Holiness,” gives the following, as an illustration of Exodus 3: 21, 22; 12: 35, 36.

1. The word “borrow,” which is shaal in Hebrew, means “to ask,” “request,” “demand,” “require,” and is not used to signify the act of loaning a thing. In the Greek text it reads, “She shall ask,” and in the Latin it reads, “She shall demand.”

The same word, shaal, is used in Deut. 10: 12, in regard to the requirements of God: “What doth the Lord thy God require [shaal] of thee.” Also in Joshua 15: 18, where Caleb’s daughter was moved to ask (shaal) of her father a field. It is also found in Judges 5: 23, where Sisera asked a drink of water. It also occurs in 1 Sam. 30: 22, when speaking of property that David recovered from those who had violently removed it. In none of these passages could that word be understood to mean “borrow,” as we understand that word.

2. The Egyptians had been enriched by the labor of the Israelites, and God, who judges rightly, now constrains them to refund a part of that which was justly due to them as wages.

3. The Lord inclined the Egyptians to remunerate them willingly. “The Lord gave the people favor in the sight of the Egyptians.”

4. The Egyptians felt it to be a forlorn hope, and esteemed it a good bargain to repay them; to settle up with them in full, in order to secure their departure.

It is recorded that an Egyptian prince came to Alexander the Great, soon after the conquest of Syria, and said to the conqueror, “Our nation has heard that you are so benevolent that you pay all the just debts of your poor subjects, and of those whom you have conquered. I am sent to inquire.” Alexander replied that he did pay all lawful claims. Then said the prince, “The Jews, a long time ago, borrowed jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, and costly plate, and never returned them. I demand, in behalf of my nation, both principal and interest.” Alexander inquired as to the evidence supporting his claim. The prince referred him to the Jewish Scriptures, and to Egyptian records. Alexander asked three days to examine the evidence, and called in his secretary and treasurer, a learned Jew, named Mordecai. The secretary assured the parties that he was quite willing to entertain the case, but that the Egyptian prince must promise three things:—

1. To take the Jewish Scriptures and the Egyptian records as the only evidence for or against his claim.

2. To answer whether Egyptian law allowed servants a just and equitable compensation for services rendered, and how much?

3. To pay the balance, if due on the other side.

To this the prince agreed. Mordecai then produced Gen. 46: 6, where Jacob took their cattle and their goods, with their wealth and their families. They were there 215 years, and gave their labor and their service, and received no return of lands or cities, save only their bread. Egypt owed its existence, its laws, its policy, and its opulence, to Joseph, and yet they did not so much as furnish him with a grave. He then requested the prince to value the property taken down to Egypt; the flocks and the herds; to count up the wages; to calculate the interest; to double the sum for the time they did double work; to value the materials for the time that Pharaoh refused to furnish them; to find the total amount due the Jews, and from that sum deduct the small amount they received on their departure; then tell the balance. In this way, at very low wages, he brought the young prince immensely in debt. He also reminded Alexander that the prince did not understand the language of the Jews; that they did not borrow the gold and silver plate and jewels, but that they demanded it as a small installment of the amount long since due as wages.

The young prince made his best bow, and retired.

Continue reading: Increase of Skepticism