Publishing Committee · Battle Creek, Mich. · Mar 31, 1859
MEETINGS IN OHIO.
By M. E. Cornell
THE last four weeks I have been giving lectures in three different places in the town of Hanover, Licking Co. The first week my time was occupied in a school-house and a Disciple meeting-house, with very attentive congregations. But when the Disciple preacher, Eld. Walker, came, he found there was much interest manifested in the lectures on the prophecies, and perhaps seeing his craft was in danger, (he was preaching for a salary) took it upon himself to preach a discourse against the Sabbath and unconscious state of man in death. The effort was evidently to raise prejudice against me, as I had not yet introduced either subject. Having permission to speak, I remarked that I could not subscribe to a portion of the sermon, but that it was a rule with me never to controvert the views of another in their own meeting, but I would exhort to take the Bible, and by investigation "prove all things and hold fast that which is good."
Eld. W. then said that if I replied to his discourse he should answer it, and proposed to meet me in public discussion. I did not at the time accept it; but after some consideration and prayer, and hearing that the report was going out that I was afraid to defend those points, I accepted, and the engagement was made for two days, six hours each day. The common arguments were used, such as Paul's desiring to depart, the rich man and Lazarus, the law abolished, and apostolic example for first day. The victory was an easy one, although the greater portion of Eld. W.'s members, and personal friends made themselves believe (or pretended to believe) that he gained a great victory, but the disinterested or unprejudiced said his failure was complete. Even some of the Methodists that held the same views, acknowledged that he entirely failed to prove his points. One man said he came prejudiced in Eld. W.'s favor, and expected that he would triumphantly overthrow every argument that could be raised in favor of the Seventh day Sabbath, or the unconscious state of man in death, but he must confess that nothing but a few inferences were brought against the many and positive scriptures we had quoted. The discussion has caused many to thoroughly investigate those points, and the "Bible Student's Assistant" has been in good demand.
At the close of the discussion I requested the privilege of the house to finish my course of lectures, but Eld. W. was fearful, and advised the church not to grant it. I then referred to an article in their paper complaining most bitterly of the Methodists and others in Marietta, Ohio, for using the "lock-out argument" against Alexander Campbell. This appeared to take them back some and they finally decided to consider the matter at their next meeting; at which they agreed to open their house upon the condition that they should have half the time to reply. This I regarded as only a proposal for continued discussion, which they well knew I would reject, as the people wished the lectures.
They dare not leave the people with the Bible in hand to quietly hear and thus decide for themselves; but they must have a minister present to dispute and thus prevent rather than aid a free, candid investigation. I judge thus because they consider Eld. W. one of their most candid men, and he could not get along in the discussion without raising the cry of "Millerism," and quoting a report that most of the Gilboa church had given up our views and gone back. To this I replied that it must be for want of better arguments and to raise prejudice that Eld. W. had mentioned the report about the church at Gilboa; besides I knew the report to be utterly false, having just heard directly from there. This caused some squirming and it was soon apparent that the report originated with one of their own members who was chairman of the board of moderators. He arose and stated that he read it in the Advent Review, and he would produce the paper and prove the report correct. I then replied that if he could find such an idea in the Review concerning the church at Gilboa, I should have a confession to make. The paper was brought (Vol. xiii, No. 11.) and the letter of Bro. Wm. S. Foote of Pendleton, Ohio was read before the audience. The claim was that the letter stated that a few came out and a few had gone back; a "few" minus a "few" left nothing. We replied that there was no demand for confession, as the letter had reference mostly to Pendleton which was eight miles from Gilboa.
I was invited to finish my lectures in the Protestant Methodist chapel at Brushy Fork, where I continued without molestation until some of their members were about deciding to keep the Sabbath, and a general interest was awakened when they requested me not to preach any more on the Sabbath question, to which I replied that I must do my whole duty. But it became more and more evident every day, that two or three of the would-be rulers of the Synagogue were anxious to have the lectures close; so they announced that there could be no more evening meetings, as the oil was out. A gentleman then offered to furnish oil till the lectures were through. The next excuse was that my preaching had made one man crazy, and I could have the house no longer; so they gave out that there would be no meeting in the evening, and sent me word not to come. I however went, and having permission, occupied the school house near by, which was well filled notwithstanding the unfavorable report. I spoke from Acts xix, 23, "And the same time there arose no small stir about that way," and referred to the charges brought by the wicked against those who stood in defense of the Law of God in ancient time. Elijah had troubled Israel, 1 Kings xviii, 17. Paul and Silas exceedingly troubled the city and taught unlawful customs, &c. Acts xvi, 20, 21. They had turned the world upside down, &c. Acts xvii, 6.
They also said Paul was "mad" and called his manner of worship "heresy;" but none of these things moved him, for his house was on the rock (law of God and gospel of Jesus Christ) and no storm could affect it in the least.
After reading Acts xix, 26-29, I transposed it and read again to apply to the present circumstances, as follows:
"Moreover ye see and hear, that not alone at the Bounds school house, but also at the Stone meeting house, and now at Brushy Fork, and community, this man hath persuaded and turned away much people, saying that is no Sabbath which men have ordained. So that not only this our church is in danger of coming to nought, but also that Sunday the great goddess of Christendom should be despised, whom all Brushy Fork and the world worshipeth."
I then stated the true cause of the man's derangement which was the bitter opposition and persecution he received from his brethren and others because he had decided to keep the Sabbath. Some scoffed at him, others threatened to prosecute, &c., until his trial of mind was so great that for two or three hours he was bewildered. His own brother who was present at the time, believes the above to be the true cause. But the man that was most urgent for me to occupy their house, whose words at first were smooth as butter, but at the last were drawn swords, was the very one to start the report that "Cornell's preaching had set George Drum crazy." In less than 48 hours it went to adjoining towns and counties; but while the report was circulating, and even before ever it started, that confusion of mind was gone and Geo. Drum was in his right mind nearly as usual; and thus it appears that the reporter was more beside himself than the reported; for while the one was taking it upon himself to close the meeting house against the wishes of the majority of the members and to take up another's appointment without permission, the other was quietly minding his own business.
"Behold how great a matter a little fire kindleth," when the "unruly tongue fans the flame." But He that can cause the wrath of man to praise him, has overruled it all for good. Many of the members have no fellowship for the course pursued against me there, and do not hesitate to express the same146in public and private. Many have taken books and a lively investigation is going forward.
Brother and sister Iden who first heard the truth at Gilboa now rejoice that several of their friends and others have embraced the Present Truth, and rejoice with them in the same blessed hope. I enjoyed two social meetings with them, and was not a little encouraged by the cheering testimonies of those that seemed to feel as well as think. They have arranged for semi-weekly prayer meetings and I hope they may grow in the knowledge of the truth, and that when speaking, praying, or singing, they will not do it merely for the noise, but in spirit and truth, and in the spirit of Present Truth. We are to exhort one another so much the more as we see the day approaching; and to fulfill this we will talk about the approaching day and the events connected with it. To speak of being rewarded at death is not scriptural. Paul says 'If any man speak let him speak as the oracles of God.' O how good it is to hear the warm hearted and humble speak in the language of Canaan.
The battle here was a hard one. Most of the time there were muddy roads and dark nights. By much exposure, walking from one to three miles to and from meetings, thus taking frequent colds, the difficulty in my throat has been much increased, so that I have considerable pain at times. But the Lord has greatly blessed in time of need. When all was dark and doubtful the Lord heard from the top of Carmel. When I ascended there were signs of a great drought, but when I came down there was a sound of abundance of rain. The cause is the Lord's and he alone can prosper it. How true that whenever we feel that the race is not to the swift, that it is not by might or power, but by the Spirit, then doth the Lord work by us to his own glory. Praise the Lord for victory.
Let none of the brethren think that our interest in the cause is waning, because we have not reported as encouragingly as heretofore. Efforts have been made but the weather has been so unfavorable—so much rain and mud that but few could attend in country places in all the north part of this State. My labors the past winter, both of body and mind, have been more wearing than usual, still I see no cause of discouragement. The truth is taking a deeper hold, and the way is opening for a greater work, which may the Lord hasten in his time.
M. E. CORNELL.
WATCHMAN, WHAT OF THE NIGHT?
Watchman, set on Zion's tower,
Tell us of the night,—
Has the tempest spent its power,
And the storm its might?
Seest thou through the gathered haze,
Morning brightly waking,—
While before the rosy rays
Cloud and mist are breaking?
Weary christian—child of sorrow,
Brightly dawns the day—
Promise of a glorious morrow,
Beams the rising ray!
Rest thee now, with troubles worn,
Broken, bowed with grief;
Rest thee, for this cloudless morn
Brings thee sweet relief.
Glorious Sun! Of light the fountain!
Soon he'll rise on thee,
See his radiance floods the mountain
Bidding darkness flee!
Weep no longer, weary one,
Dry the falling tear,
All thy toil, thy work is done,
And thy rest is near.
Ne'er again shall tempest lower,
Or the whirlwind harm,
Thou no more shall feel the power
Of the raging storm:—
Dwelling in the brilliant light
Of that glorious Sun!
Bathing in the splendor bright
Of th' eternal throne!—Sel.
Analogy between the Moral and Physical Laws of the Universe.
THE laws that govern physical nature are analogous to those which the gospel introduces into the spiritual world. The earth is held to the sun by the power of attraction, and performs regularly its circuit around the central, sustaining luminary, maintaining at the same time, its equal relations with its sister planets. But the moral system upon the earth is a chaos of derangement. The attraction of affection which holds the soul to God, has been broken, and the soul of man actuated by selfishness, revolving upon its own center—only jars in its course with its fellow spirits—and crosses their orbits; and the whole system of the spiritual world upon earth revolves in disorder, the orbs wandering and rolling away from the center of moral life and power, which alone could hold them in harmonious and happy motion. Into the midst of this chaos of disordered spirits, God, the sun of the spiritual world, come down. He shed light upon the moral darkness, and coming near like the approaches of a mighty magnet, the attraction of his mercy, as manifested in Christ crucified, became so powerful that many spirits, rolling away into darkness and destruction, felt the efficacy, and were drawn back and caused to move again in their regular orbits, around the 'Light' and 'Life' and 'Love' of the spiritual system.
If free agency could be predicated of the bodies of the solar system, the great law that governs their movements might be expressed thus:—Thou shalt attract the sun with all thy might, and thy sister planets as thyself. The same expression gives the great law of the spiritual world. Thou shalt love the Lord with all thy soul and thy neighbor as thyself.
Now if a planet had broken away from its orbit, it would have a tendency to fly off forever, and it never could be restored unless the sun, the great center of attraction could, in some way, follow it in its wanderings, and thus by increased power of his attraction, as he approaches nearer the fallen planet, attract it to himself, and then draw it back to its original orbit. So with the human spirit; its affections were alienated from God, the center of spiritual attraction and they could never have been restored, unless God had approached, and by the increased power of his mercy, as manifested in the selfdenial, sufferings and death of Christ, united man again to himself, by the power of affection, that he might draw him up from his misery and sin, to revolve around him in harmony and love forever.
If this earth had by some means broken away from the sun, there would be no way possible of recovering it again to its place in the system, but that which has been mentioned—that the sun should leave its central position, and approach the wandering orb and thus by the increased power of his attraction, draw back the earth to its original position. But the sun could not thus leave the center of the system, without drawing all the other planets from their orbits, by the movement to recover the lost one. The relations of the system would be broken up, and the whole solar economy be sacrificed, if the universal and equal law of gravitation were infringed by the sun's changing his relations in the system.
Further, the established laws of the physical universe would render it impossible that any other planet should be the instrument of recovering the earth to the sun. If another planet should approach the earth while thus wandering, the increased power of attraction would cause the two globes to revolve around each other; or if the approaching planet was of greater magnitude, the earth would revolve as a satellite around it. But this would not be to restore the earth to its place in the system, nor to its movement around the sun, but to fix it in a wrong position and wrong movement, and thus alienate it forever from the central source of light and heat. It follows, therefore, that in accordance with the established laws of the solar system, the earth could never be recovered, but would fly off forever, or be broken into asteroids. There could be no way possible for the recovery of earth, unless God should adopt an expedient unknown to the physical laws of the universe.
(This, all who believe that God is Almighty, and Himself the author of those laws will allow he might do).
That expedient must not destroy the great laws of system, upon which the safety of all its parts depend, but an augmented force of attraction must be thrown upon the earth from the sun itself, which would be sufficient to check the force of its departing momentum, and gradually draw it back to its place. If a portion of the magnetic power of the sun could be thrown into the earth, adhesion would take place between it and the earth, and then after the cord was fastened if that body of attractive matter could ascend again to the body of the sun, the earth would receive the returning impulse, and a new and peculiar influence would be created to draw it back to its allegiance to the sun. If, as has been said, the power came from any other body but the sun itself, or attracted toward any other body the earth would lose its place in the system forever. So in the moral world: God's relations to the moral universe must be sustained. The infinite justice and holiness of the Divine law must not be compromised. The end to be gained is, to draw man, as a revolted sinner, back to God, while the integrity of God's moral government is maintained. Now affection is the attraction of the moral universe. And in accordance with the foregoing deduction, to reclaim alienated man to God would be impossible, unless there should be a manifestation of the Godhead in the world, to attract to himself man's estranged affection and then after the affinity was fastened by faith, by his ascending again to the bosom of the Deity, mankind would be gradually drawn back to allegiance to Jehovah.—Plan of Salvation.
AN APPEAL to Men of Reason and Common Sense.
1. Is it reasonable to suppose that God created man an immortal being, and yet never once in his holy Word informed us of the fact?
2. Is it reasonable to suppose that if man naturally possessed immortality, God's word would recommend us to seek for it, as it does in Rom. ii, 7?
3. Is it reasonable to suppose, that if men were naturally immortal, God's word would so plainly assure us that "God—ONLY hath immortality?"
4. Is it not far more reasonable to believe that immortality is the GIFT of God through Jesus Christ our Lord? Rom. vi, 23.
5. Is it reasonable to suppose that words, when found in the Bible, must have a meaning attached to them, which no man in his senses would ever think of attaching to them in any other book? For instance, the words Life and Death, when found in the Bible, must (as theologians tell us,) mean happiness and misery; but, if found in any other book in the world, would simply mean, "Existence" and "Cessation of Existence."
6. Is it reasonable to suppose that, in all the vast multitude of passages in which Christ promised Life, Eternal Life, to his followers, he did not literally mean what he said? This he could not, if all men have immortal life by nature. In that case the wicked will live through eternity, as well as the righteous.
7. Is it reasonable to suppose, in all the vast multitude of passages in which Death is threatened as the punishment of the sinner, that loss of happiness is all that is meant? An unhappy man is as truly alive as the most happy being in existence; and if he be immortal by nature, will continue alive through all eternity. In no plain, common sense language can any immortal being be said to suffer Death.
8. Is it reasonable to suppose that infinite wisdom would invariably use language which was only calculated to mislead mankind? or which none but Doctors of Divinity could unravel? Would God speak in riddles to men, in the great matters which concern their salvation?
9. Is it not more reasonable, and more in accordance with the wisdom and love of God, to suppose that he would give his creatures such a revelation, as plain, common-sense people could easily understand? He has done so:—if men would but use their reason in reading the Bible, as they would do in reading any other book.
10. Is it reasonable to believe, that men go to heaven or hell immediately at death; and then, hundreds or thousands of years afterward are taken out to be judged, and to see which they deserve to be sent to? Should we deem it right to send a man to the State's prison for ten years, and then bring him out for trial, to see if he deserved such a punishment? And "shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?"
11. Is it reasonable that such prominence should be given in scripture to the doctrine of the resurrection from the dead, if that event only means a "re-union" of a lump of clay, with the conscious thinking and real man—the soul: and which is said by theologians, to be as capable of happiness or misery without the body as with it?
12. Is it reasonable to talk about a "death that never dies," when there is not a word in scripture to sanction such a contradictory phrase? Would it not be equally reasonable to speak of the reward of the righteous as a "life that never lives?" Is there not as much common sense in the one as in the other?
13. Is it reasonable to be so constantly, both in sermons and prayers, talking about "immortal souls," "never dying souls," "deathless spirits," and such like expressions, when there is not, from Genesis to Revelation, one single passage to warrant the use of such language?
14. Is it reasonable to say, that "eternal death," and "eternal torment, are synonymous expressions," (as theologians tell us,)—for how then can it be said in Rev. xxi, 4, "There shall be no more death?"
15. Is it reasonable to believe that a hell of fiery torment, and ceaseless misery is to exist forever,147when God says, [Rev. xxi, 5.] “Behold I make all things new?”
16. Is it reasonable to believe in the eternal torment of the wicked, when more than two hundred passages of scripture plainly affirm that they shall “die,” be “consumed,” “devoured,” “destroyed,” “burnt up,” “be as though they had not been,” &c.
17. Is it reasonable to believe that the righteous, in their glorified state, can be indifferent to, and unaffected by, the endless sufferings of countless millions of their fellow beings; among whom would probably be found parents, children, husbands, wives, &c.?—Is it possible that they will be destitute or deprived of qualities which are considered most lovely and Godlike in this life; viz., piety, sympathy, compassion, commiseration for others' woes, &c.? Will insensibility to the woes of the wretched ever become a virtue? Will that which is a vice in this life become a grace in the glorious future life? Is the standard of virtue thus variable, that what is vicious here, is to be gracious hereafter?
18. Is it reasonable to believe that a God of infinite rectitude will punish with eternal torment, the heathen who have never heard of Christ, and who therefore could not reject him? Is it possible that God can cast into one indiscriminate mass of fiery torment, the least wicked among the heathen, together with the most guilty in this Christian land? for such must be the case if their souls are immortal, and if their torment is to be eternal. There can be no degrees in that which is infinite. Is it not far more reasonable to believe the Apostle's words literally, “For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law?” Rom. ii, 12.
19. Is it reasonable to believe that God is such a vindictive being, that his justice cannot be satisfied with the death of the offender? but that he must be constantly pouring floods of fiery wrath upon the wretched being, through the ever-rolling cycles of eternity?
I might multiply questions of this kind, but I forbear.
Men of reason and common sense, give your serious attention to these points. Read your Bibles again. Read carefully—read prayerfully. See if these things be true or not. Dare to think for yourselves. If other men should attempt to dictate a political creed for you, would you not indignantly spurn their interference? Do the same in religious matters. Dare to be independent. Do not trust to commentaries. Do not build your faith on “bodies of divinity.” Do not surrender your right of private judgment to any class of men. Go at once to the fountain head of truth. “The words of the Lord are tried words.” “The law of the Lord is perfect.” This cannot be said of the writings or opinions of any man, or number of men, however wise or holy they may be. To err is human. God and his truth alone are infallible. Show yourselves true Protestants, and cast away the “traditions of men.” You have the Bible. The wisest and holiest of the “fathers” had no more. Your ministers have nothing else to guide them—at least they ought not. “The Bible, and the Bible alone, is the book for Protestants.” Go then to your Bibles, and see if the God-dishonoring doctrines to which I have directed your attention, are found there or not. Excuse me if I tell you, that, however full of these doctrines human books and human sermons may be, God's Bible does not contain them.
Rather believe that man is mortal and condemned to die, but Christ is “come that men may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly.” John x, 10.
“The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” Rom. vi, 23.
“He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life; and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.” John iii, 36.
“And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any pluck them out of my hand.” John x, 28.
“He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.” 1 John v, 12.
“Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in their graves shall hear his voice and come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.” John v, 28, 29.
“And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.” Acts xxiv, 15.
“The Lord knoweth how—to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished.” 1 Pet. ii, 9.
“And they were judged every man according to their work. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire—this is the second death.” Rev. xx, 13, 14.
THOUGHTS FOR THINKERS.
1. Is the soul a part of God, or a part of man?
2. If it is a part of God, can it sin?
3. If it is a part of man, is it not mortal, and subject to death?
4. Is there an intimation in the Bible that God put (what is technically called) an immortal soul into the first man, at his creation?
5. As Adam was made of the “dust,” is it not said that this man of dust “became a living soul,” and not an “immortal soul?”
6. If the soul is an immortal or spiritual thing, must it not die a spiritual death? seeing that the Scriptures say, “The soul that sinneth it shall die.”
7. As nothing can die except what is mortal, if the soul dies a spiritual death, must it not be spiritually mortal?
8. If the soul is a spiritual thing, and immortal, it must have spiritual immortality; how then can it die a spiritual death?
9. If literal death destroys a literal thing, must not spiritual death destroy a spiritual thing?
10. How could David say, “God will redeem my soul from the power of the grave,” if the grave has no dominion over the soul?
11. If the soul is the conscious and responsible part, how is it that, by repentance, it escapes to paradise at death, and leaves the innocent body to suffer the penalty?
12. If the righteous go to glory at death, did not the serpent speak the truth? Gen. iii, 4.
13. If God spake the truth, does not that (which he calls the soul) return to dust?
14. But if that (which man calls the soul) does not surely die, did not the serpent speak the truth?
THE DAY OF WRATH HASTETH.
Rev. xvi, 13–15. ‑And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet. For they are the spirits of devils working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth, and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty. Behold I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked and they see his shame.‑
The manifestation of the unclean spirits named in the text is just before Christ comes ‑as a thief,‑ and preparatory to the battle of the great day of God Almighty; therefore they are a sign of the swift approach of that dreadful day. We do not understand by the phrase, ‑three unclean spirits,‑ that they are only three in number, as some have argued; but they were to be manifested from these three divisions: the dragon, beast and false prophet. The unclean spirit that Christ cast out of the man from among the tombs, [Mark v, 1–13,] said, ‑My name is legion; for we are many.‑
The spirits named in the text have power to work miracles. This we have shown is now being fulfilled in the history of Spirit Manifestations. They ‑go forth unto the kings [or kingdoms] of the earth, and of the whole world.‑ How true in the history of Spiritualism!
The unclean spirits are now entering the three great bodies named in the text; but under the sixth vial, and just prior to Christ's coming as a thief, they will be seen going ‑out of the mouth‑ of these three leading powers. See J. H. Waggoner's late work on Modern Spiritualism, pp. 61, 62.
Never Jest with Scripture
By Palgrave
Never Jest with Scripture.—It is of great importance that we should resist the temptation, frequently so strong, of annexing a familiar, facetious, or irreverent idea to a Scriptural expression, a Scripture text or a Scripture name. Nor should we hold ourselves guiltless, though we may have been misled by mere negligence, or want of reflection. Every person of good taste will avoid reading a parody, or a travestie of a beautiful poem, because the recollection of the degraded likeness will always obtrude itself upon our memories when we wish to derive pleasure from the contemplation of the elegance of the original.—But how much more urgent is the duty by which we are bound to keep the pages of the Bible clear of any impression tending to diminish the blessings of habitual respect and reverence towards our Maker's law.—Palgrave.
An Incident in the life of Eld. I. N. Walter.
In august 1828, he, in company with a number of other ministers, attended a camp meeting near Sunsbury, Ohio, at which an incident occurred showing his address and tact in meeting emergencies, as well as his reliance upon Divine aid and the superiority of the moral power over the animal or physical. The meeting had progressed, with some, good indications, up to Saturday evening. There were, however, occasional slight interruptions, from those called, in common parlance, rowdies. They finally resolved that on that evening they would break up the meeting; accordingly they came into the "camp-ground" and up to the stand in a solid phalanx, and commenced throwing clubs and other missiles into the congregation and at the ministers in the pulpit. Several of the congregation and one or two of the ministers were struck and slightly injured. Eld. Joseph Thomas, known as the "White Pilgrim," was preaching, but so violent was the attack, that it was thought best to close the meeting, for that night at least. This left the ground in the hands of the rabble; and they immediately commenced their mock religious services, by singing and speaking. After having given vent to their coarse blasphemy, in mock worship and ribaldry for some time, one of their number proposed prayers. This was readily assented to; and a voice said: "Let us pray," and in an instant the words of solemn earnestness came full and distinct upon their ears.—They could not be mistaken; that was not the voice of mockery. The stillness of the grave seemed to settle down upon the crowd, that a moment before were mocking heaven, as the sentences of holy, fervent prayer came from the suppliant. Deeper and more pathetic the voice and words became, until they arose clear and full upon the breath of night, and ascended towards heaven. All were wrapped in the earnest, melodious voice of the pleader, as it increased in volume, until the encampment and the ancient woods around were filled with its force. No other words were spoken. The voice, the prayer, the earnest pleadings, the holy sentiments, gushing from a warm soul of Christ-like love, all, poured out before the God of eternity, were resistless. The moral and spiritual force of one man under God, triumphed over the physical, the mere brute force, of the many. The victory was complete. The mob quietly dispersed, and interrupted the worship of the people no more during that meeting. The man who did this was Eld. Walter, then only twenty-three years of age. He had left the stand with the other ministers, when the attack was made by the mob, and had, unobserved—as the rabble had extinguished nearly all the lights—made his way into the very midst, waiting only an opportunity to prove the superiority of mental and spiritual force over the physical and wicked; and one soon offered; he seized it with a firm heart, fully believing it must subdue and conquer in the end.”—Memoir, page 69.
Life Is What We Make It
LIFE is what we make it. Let us call back images of joy and gladness, rather than those of grief and care. The latter may sometimes be our guests to sup and dine, but let them never be permitted to lodge with us.
Love, the Greatest Ornament
Love is the greatest ornament a believer can wear.
THOUGHTS FOR THE THOUGHTLESS.
WE often see articles and pamphlets headed, "Thoughts for Thinkers;" but it has occurred to us that those who do not think stand most in need of help in this direction. For the benefit of such we offer the following considerations :
1. Is it not strange that the Sabbath was instituted at creation [see Gen. ii, 2, 3,] if it was not designed to come into use till the days of Moses, twenty-five hundred years afterwards?
2. If the Sabbath is a type—type of the saints' future rest, the redeemed state—is it not strange that it was instituted in the garden of Eden, before man by his fall stood in need of redemption; thus to become to him a dismal token of the melancholy experience that awaited him?
3. If the Sabbath was instituted in the wilderness, after the Israelites came out of Egypt, as is claimed on Ex. xvi, how is it that we find there no reasons on which the institution is based, nothing by which we know how the day became the Sabbath, no enactment for its observance, and none of its general requirements and characteristics pointed out?
4. If the Sabbath was first made known at Sinai, as some claim on Neh. ix, 14, how is it that we find it enforced upon the Israelites at least fifteen days previous to that time? See Ex. xvi.
5. If the Sabbath was designed as a memorial of the deliverance of the Israelites from Egypt, is it not strange that they were not informed of that fact till forty years after that deliverance? See Deut. v. And why do people go to this rehearsal of the law by Moses, to learn the design of the institution of the Sabbath, to the neglect of the original promulgation of the law by the voice of God from the summit of Sinai, forty years previous? See marginal chronology of Ex. xx, and Deut. v.
6. If the Sabbath was a memorial of the deliverance of Israel from Egypt, where was the need of the Passover and Feast of unleavened bread?
7. If we may conclude from Deut. v, 15, that men might break the Sabbath previous to the exode, may we not on the same ground conclude from chap. xxiv, 17, 18, that previous to that time, men might pervert the judgment of the stranger and the fatherless, and take a widow's raiment to pledge, &c?
8. Are not the ways of God equal? and will he not have a uniform standard of right, by which to judge the world from the commencement to the close of its probationary state?
9. Can we find this standard anywhere embodied except in the ten commandments as spoken by the voice of God, and written with his own finger upon the tables of stone—an honor and distinction accorded to this law alone above all others?
10. As God is not a changeable being, can this standard be varied, so that what was required in one age of the world for the development of moral character, is not in another?
11. If the ten commandments were to be abolished at the death of Christ, three and a half years after the commencement of his public ministry, is it not strange that in his very first discourse he should enforce these commandments upon all people for all coming time? See Matt. v.
12. If the moral law is not exclusively referred to in Matt. v, 17, is it not strange that our Lord in his whole discourse, touches upon no commandment which is not of a moral nature, making no reference to laws which were simply of a ceremonial or local character.
13. If the Saviour broke the Sabbath during his public ministry, as some contend, and taught men so, did he not become a sinner by transgressing the law, which by universal consent remained in full force till the crucifixion. See 1 John iii, 4.
14. If the Sabbath was abolished at the cross, how could Luke, writing twenty-eight years after the resurrection of Christ, say that the disciples rested a day after his crucifixion, according to the command-ment? See Luke xxiii, 56.
15. If there is no Sabbath in this dispensation, how is it that we find the writers of the New Testament speaking of it as a permanent institution, many years this side of the cross, where, in this case, it must have ceased to exist? See Acts of the Apostles throughout.
16. If the first day of the week is the Sabbath of this dispensation, how happens it that we have the seventh day of the week mentioned as the Sabbath 59 times in the New Testament, and the first day of the week only eight times, not as the Sabbath, but always in distinction as the first day of the week; and how can it be explained that we never find it spoken of as a holy or sacred day, and that we have no recorded instance of the disciples' meeting together for worship in the day-time of that day, but on the other hand evidence that it was used for secular pur-poses? See Acts xx, 7, 11; 1 Cor. xvi, 1.
It may be of profit to some who seem not to have thought much upon these points, or who, if they have thought, do not appear to have reasoned correctly, to ponder these queries, and give to the Lord of the Sabbath an answer, guided by the promptings of a good conscience and the light of revelation.