Review and Herald, Vol. 21, No. 18. (3/31/1863)

Review and Herald

Mar 31, 1863

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Mar 31, 1863

Thoughts on Immortality:

By G. W. A.

Being a Selection of Brief Testimonies on Man's Present Condition, the Intermediate State, Future Punishment, &c., from the Pens of Reputable Authors.

BISHOP WHATELY'S VIEW OF ETERNAL MISERY.

This celebrated divine, Archbishop of Dublin, in speaking of 1 Cor. xv, 25, thus candidly bears witness: "We are told by Paul that Christ must reign till he hath put all things under his feet; and that the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. And this does not seem consistent with the continuance forever of a number of wicked beings alive, and hating Christ, and odious in his sight." Well may we say in the words of one of old, "How forcible are right words."

NO "THUS SAITH THE LORD" FOR IT.

However strongly theologians inveigh against the reform view of natural immortality, there are some who make surprising concessions toward this truth. Thus BISHOP TILLOTSON in his Sermons, printed in 1774, vol. 2, admits the whole question. Said he, "The immortality of the soul is rather supposed, or taken for granted, than expressly revealed in the Bible." And DR. BAGNALL, in the Methodist Quarterly Review for Apr. 1852, while writing in favor of natural immortality, acknowledges, "In the Bible, we think, there is no passage which can be strictly said to declare that all human souls are immortal." We heartily co-incide with the above declarations, and conjecture that perhaps this lack of inspiration is made up in the teachings of theology and modern Spiritualism.

TORMENTED DAY AND NIGHT FOR EVER AND EVER.

MR. DAUBUZ, one of the oldest commentators on the Apocalypse, and who states very strongly the common view of the lost, finds no proof of that doctrine in this scripture. While commenting on Rev. xiv, 11, he says: "So then, the smoke ascending up for ever and ever, is not to signify a continual burning; but by a metonymy of the efficient for the effect, to signify that it is burnt for ever, and NEVER TO BE RESTORED." What person who believes in the complete destruction of the wicked, could have given a better exposition of the text!

LUTHER ON THE INTERMEDIATE STATE.

This zealous reformer and expounder, while treating on the text, "There is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave whither thou goest," says: "Another proof that the dead are insensible. Solomon thinks therefore that the dead are altogether asleep, and think of nothing. They lie, not reckoning days or years, but, when awakened, will seem to themselves to have slept scarcely a moment." Bayle's Hist. and Crit. Dic. Luther's views on this question exposed him to much odium and calumny from his enemies. Sir Thomas Moore, a Catholic, in his dispute with Tyndale, thus kicked at him: "What shall he care how long he live in sin, that believeth Luther, that he shall after this life feel neither good nor evil, in body nor soul, until the day of doom?"

BEECHER'S VIEW OF ETERNAL MISERY.

DR. EDWARD BEECHER, in speaking of the present theory of punishment, in the Conflict of Ages, pp. 225, 306, says: "It involves God, his whole administration, and his eternal kingdom in the deepest dishonor that the mind of man or angel can conceive. The human mind cannot be held back from abhorring such a theory, except by the most unnatural violence to its divinely inspired convictions of right." So have many others reasoned as well as Dr. Beecher. No wonder that even the little child, when told by its mother of an ever-burning hell, said, "I wish I had never been born!" But, thank Heaven that so revolting a sentiment is altogether human and anti-scriptural.

BELIEF IN ETERNAL MISERY TENDS TO INFIDELITY.

Of the truth of this statement the case of the EARL OF SHAFTESBURY furnishes a remarkable instance. This personage was a noted skeptic and unbeliever. "There is a tradition," says Dr. Kippis, "that among other difficulties which occurred to him in regard to the truth of the Christian Revelation, he was startled at the idea of its containing the doctrine of the eternity of hell torments; that he consulted some eminent churchmen whether the New Testament positively asserted that doctrine; and that upon being assured that it did, he declared himself incapable of assenting to a system of religion which maintained a tenet so repugnant to all his views of the great government of the Universe."—Biog. Britan., London, 1789. Thousands of thinking men whose biographies will remain a secret till the great day, have been driven into the same oblivious state of mind as Lord Shaftesbury,—and by the same doctrine, too.

DEATH MEANS DEATH.

DR. WATTS, the church's poet, in his Ruin and Recovery of Mankind q. 11, § 3, deposes the following candid testimony on the penalty pronounced upon Adam. Said he, "There is not one place of Scripture that occurs to me, where the word death, as it was first threatened in the law of innocency, necessarily signifies a miserable immortality of the soul, either to Adam the actual sinner, or to his posterity." There is more truth than poetry in this paragraph of Watts, for the statement is exactly in harmony with Scripture.

ADAM NOT NATURALLY IMMORTAL.

BISHOP JEREMY TAYLOR, the famous author and scholar of the seventeenth century, thus beautifully states our position: "Whatsoever had a beginning can also have an ending, and it shall die, unless it be daily watered from the streams flowing from the fountain of life, and refreshed with the dews of heaven, and the wells of God; and therefore God had prepared a tree in Paradise to have supported Adam in his artificial immortality. Immortality was not in his nature, but in the hands and parts, in the favor and superadditions of God."—Future Life p. 311.

To this we may add the remark of RICHARD WATSON, whose "Institutes" are the Methodist standard of theology. He says: "That the soul is naturally immortal is contradicted by Scripture, which makes our immortality dependent on the will of God."—Inst. ii, 83.

WHAT NATURE DID ADAM HAVE?

THEOPHILUS of Antioch argues the proposition thus: "Some one will ask, Was Adam by nature mortal? By no means. Immortal? Not thus, either. What then?—nothing at all! I answer, neither mortal nor immortal; for if the Creator had made him the first immortal, he would have made him a god. If mortal, then God would appear as the author of death. He made him, then, capable of becoming either; so that by keeping the command of God he might attain immortality as his reward, and become a god [or glorified being]. But if he should turn to mortal things, and disobey God, he would be himself the author of his own death. For God made man free, and with power of self-control."—Future Life p. 309.

With this agrees the view of BALSAMON, a medieval annotator, who comments as follows: "God made man neither mortal nor immortal; but midway between greatness and humility; and having made him master of himself, and with power of free-will, he left him to choose either virtue or vice, and to receive either immortality or mortality."—Id., p. 311.

Says a Christian Bishop of the fifth century (NEMESIUS), in descanting on the nature of the soul: "Originally man was made evidently neither mortal nor immortal, but on the confines of either nature."—Id., p. 310.

PLAIN BUT TRUE.

A recent reviewer of a work on unconditional immortality, utters the following severe, though truthful, sentence: "The doctrine of the natural immortality of

the soul, is the foundation on which the harlot Mother sits, and, as she is the mother of harlots, all her daughters have drank deeply of her spiritual fornication. The whole Protestant world is tinctured with this subtle heresy; and in vain do they oppose the Mass, Purgatory, and Invocation of Saints, whose very existence depends upon the popular dogma of immortality, while they maintain, uphold, and defend this foundation."—Anthropos, p. 69. He might also have added, Spiritualism. For all that sublime jerking, howling, barking, reeling, staggering, rapping, and twitching of half-crazy mediums, the rattling, clattering, thumping, knocking, and tipping of household furniture, the peeping and muttering of officious spirits, is founded on this mighty corner-stone of Protestant belief and religious education.

CRITICISM FROM CLARKE.

DR. ADAM CLARKE, the well-known commentator and critic thus disposes of the passage, Matt. xvi, 26, "What is a man profited if he shall gain the whole world and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?" He says, "On what authority many have translated the word psyche in the 25th verse LIFE and in this verse SOUL, I know not; but I am certain it means life in both places." Dr. Clarke was a strenuous believer in the soul's immortality, with all its adjuncts, as consciousness in death, eternal misery, etc., therefore we like his honest comments in the present instance the better. His remarks will also apply with equal force to Matt. x, 28, 39, which is an exact parallel to the present case.

DID MR. WESLEY BELIEVE THE COMMON VIEW?

In the second volume of his published Sermons, while discoursing upon the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, this good man penned the following paragraph, though perhaps much to the mortification of his present followers. Said he: "It is, indeed, very generally supposed that the souls of good men, as soon as they are discharged from the body, go directly to heaven; but this opinion has not the least foundation in the Oracles of God." MR. WESLEY did, indeed, believe in a conscious state somewhere outside of heaven; but what it is, or where it was, is beyond our ken. We however remark that his "ante-chamber of heaven" is altogether anti-scriptural, and submit the whole in the language of PRES. MAHAN: "Admissions in favor of the truth from the ranks of its opposers, constitute the highest kind of evidence."

MAN IS ALL SOUL—MILTON'S VIEW.

There are some who have much reverence for great names. Such will be pleased with the following criticism from JOHN MILTON, author of "Paradise Lost," so well known in the poetic world. Milton did not believe in the two-fold nature of man, as his "Treatise on Christian Doctrine," vol. 1, pp. 250, 251, shows: "Man is a living being, intrinsically and properly one and individual, not compound and separable, not, according to the common opinion, made up and framed of two distinct and different natures, as of body and soul, but the whole man is soul, and the soul man; that is to say, a body or substance, individual, animated, sensitive, and rational." Let those who believe in the duplex-entity of human beings, ponder well what the distinguished bard has said.

DWIGHT'S TESTIMONY.

DR. DWIGHT, the well-known theological writer, makes the following statement concerning everlasting misery: "There are, I know," said he, "persons who speak of future punishment with an air of cool, self-complacency, as being in their view, easy of investigation and free from embarrassment. I am inclined, perhaps uncharitably, to give them little credit for candor, clearness of intellect, or soundness of character; and greatly doubt whether it has been investigated by them."—Dwight vol. 4, p. 457. How few there are, if they would candidly examine the matter, but would be of the same mind with Dr. Dwight.

TO CEASE TO BE IS A PUNISHMENT.

We are sometimes met with the hasty assertion, that to be destroyed, consumed, burned up, &c., is no punishment. With this sentiment we join issue, mainly in the language of others, and those of opposite sentiments. It seems there are some who do regard the extinction of being as an "infinite punishment."

Says MR. EDWARDS in reply to Chauncey (Works i, 80), "Endless annihilation is an endless or infinite punishment."

MR. BAXTER, author of many works published by the Am. Tract Society, in his Unreasonableness of Infidelity, says: "Would you not be contented to suffer a terrible degree of misery everlastingly, rather than die? Whatsoever men may say, it is certain they would."

JURIEU, called the "Goliath of Protestants," inquires, "When a criminal is condemned to death, is not that an eternal punishment? Does the judge order him to be resuscitated in the course of a year?"

DR. GORDON, Hall's Memoirs, p. 95, testifies: "So dreadful do I think of annihilation" said a dying man, "that I would rather live in pain, than not to live at all."

ST. AUGUSTINE uses the following strong language: "If any one shall say, 'I would rather not be, than be in misery,' I should reply, 'you say what is false.'"—De Lib. Arb., 1, 3, c. 6.

And MR. DAUBUZ, in speaking of those who believed in a deprivation of future existence, says with emphasis, "The remedy is worse than the disease."—Com. on Rev. xx, 12.

To us the thought of a candidate for immortality losing heaven, is deplorable beyond expression. That one who might flame with seraphs, should be condemned to eternal deprivation of being, is a penalty from which most hearts shrink back in horror and consternation.

TO THE READER.—I have many more extracts in my possession similar in character to the foregoing, and should occasion offer, shall at some future time present them to the readers of the Review.

G. W. A.

All Things New.

By S. Elmer

O WONDROUS change! No finite mind This mighty truth can ever scan, Or comprehend infinity: 'Tis far beyond the reach of man.

Yet while we tread life's thorny vale, As here the effects of sin we view, Still let these thoughts our spirits cheer, That all will soon be formed anew.

From Afric's waste of burning sands, To Greenland's cold and icy zone, O'er Alpine hills so far away, Where vegetation ne'er hath grown,

The frightful chasm, the dark abyss, The rugged cliff, the lonely glen, Each spot however much defaced, Where'er the withering curse hath been,

The avalanche, the burning mount, The marshy ground, the putrid sea— O'er the whole earth, both far and near, A glorious paradise shall be.

Yes "all things new!" no chilling winds, Or breath of pestilential air, No sickness, sorrow, pain, or death, Can ever reach a world so fair.

No pois'nous reptile there will be, No rav'nous beast the forest roam, Nothing shall harm, or aught destroy, In heaven, our everlasting home.

Earth's ransomed millions then will be Obedient to their sovereign King; From land to land, from sea to sea, His universal praises sing. S. ElMER. Ashfield, Mass.

Words of Warning.

ThE Alliance and Visitor truly remarks, "The events of centuries have been crowded into a year. The hand of God should be recognized in these remarkable events."

The Living Age has said, "Old things are about to pass away, and we know not what shall be the new. All faces gather blackness, and men's hearts fail them for fear of what is coming on the earth."

The Christian Luminary says, "Signs are seen in the heavens and on earth, which plainly teach us the fact that the coming of the Son of man draweth nigh." Another Journal has stated, "The world is now just about 6,000 years old; it is well to be ready for whatever event may occur."

The Christian Review has recorded as follows: "A silent, rapid, irresistible preparation has been making—what will it be? The battle of Armageddon? The Millennium? preceded by the coming of the Son of man in the clouds of heaven? Nothing in the prophecies withholds his coming, that I have seen, if I have read Peter and Daniel and John aright."

Rev. Charles Beecher, referring the present vast "Pneumatic or spiritual movement to the category of Rev. xvi, 14, says, 'They incur the almost certain stigma of false Christs which should precede his coming.'"

Prof. George Bush has said, "If we take the ground of good reason, we must believe that the present age is one expressly foretold in prophecy, and that it is just opening upon the crowning eonsummation of all prophetic declaration."

Dr. Edward Beecher writes, "The point of prophetic chronology at which the world has now arrived is the interval between the sounding of the sixth and seventh trumpets."

Archdeacon Brown, of England, has said, "That he was strongly impressed with the conviction that our lot had fallen under the solemn period emphatically designated by Daniel as 'the time of the end.'"

President Hitchcock, of Amherst, has stated, "In a very short time, far shorter than we imagine, all the scenes of futurity will be to us a thrilling reality!"

Daniel Eddy, of Lowell, has also said, "Time has grown old; six thousand years encircle its weary brow, and with inconceivable rapidity it rushes on to its eternal sepulchre. The great events connected with the winding up of all things are near, are but a step before us, even 'when the Son of man shall come in his glory, and every eye shall see him!'"

"O, all ye lukewarm churches, followers of the world and its fashions, how is it that ye do not discern the 'signs of the times,' nor take heed to the 'sure word of prophecy?' for, truly, you all 'shall see him!'"

"Vain worldling; heedless youth; profane swearer; sensual, groveling pleasure-seekers, you, also, 'shall see him!' Proud, haughty man of ambition or of wealth, covetous lovers of this world, heaping up treasures for the last days, you, too, 'shall see him!'"

"Vain and giddy triflers, followers of the fashions and frivolities of the day, you, also, 'shall see him!'"

"Ye who turn aside from Christ, from truth and duty, from mercy and humanity's calls, you, also, 'shall see him!'"

"Careless, worldly-minded professor, having a form of godliness, turning your back on Christ, and absorbed in earth's pursuits, take heed, for you also 'shall see him!' for all betoken, as in the days of Noah and Lot, —in striking fulfillment of prophecy, —the sad condition of a ruined world, and its hastening doom!"

"Yes, reader, you too 'shall see him!'—the living, and the righteous dead 'shall see him!'—the wise and foolish virgins 'shall see him!'—those who put far away the evil day 'shall see him!'—scribes, Pharisees, hypocrites 'shall see him!'—all perverters of God's word 'shall see him!' and 'all kindreds of the earth' 'shall wail because of him!'—for sudden destruction cometh upon them, and they shall not escape."——Voice of the Prophets.

Questions for every Evening.

1. HAVE I read a portion of God's word to-day? and if I have, has it been hurriedly, and without meditation; or reverently, and with a sincere appreciation of its preciousness?

2. How have I prayed to-day. Has it been formally,

without realizing thoughts of God; without sensible nearness to God; or with affection, fervor, and confident dependence on Christ's mediation?

3. Have I been sensible of any holy motion of God's Spirit in my soul? or have I encouraged or discouraged his gracious visits?

4. Have I longed after my God, panted after his manifestations to my soul, and felt that in his favor and love alone I could be happy?

5. Have I studiously repressed evil thoughts and desired to be delivered from their intrusions; and have I made any successful assaults on my easily besetting sins?

6. Have I been guilty to-day of envy, jealousy, pride, evil speaking, or unkind feelings? Have I returned good for evil? Has sin overcome me, or have I overcome sin?

7. Have I realized my nearness to eternity, and encouraged myself to meditate on, and to seek preparation for, death, judgment, and the coming of my Lord?

8. Have I met crosses and disappointments, wrong, or slandering, with meekness and patience?

9. Have I been covetous? or have I resisted the tendency of my heart to avarice, by performing benevolent and charitable deeds? Have I given anything to the poor, or purposed to do good unto all men as I have opportunity?

10. Have my secular avocations absorbed too much of my time and attention to-day?

11. Have I lived to God's glory, or for my own selfish ends to-day?

12. Is it a matter of consciousness with me that religion is my chief concern, and the source of my greatest pleasure?

13. Have I been gentle and courteous toward my inferiors and dependents, kindly affectionate toward my equals, and respectful toward my superiors?

14. Have I spoken unadvisedly with my tongue, or rashly judged others?

15. Has the world been in any way benefited by my living to-day?

16. Have I had opportunities for doing anything for Jesus? and have they been embraced? Have I spoken well of him to any perishing sinner? Have I given away a religious tract, magazine, or book to any one, with prayer for the Spirit's blessing?

17. Have I prayed for the prosperity of the church and the conversion of sinners, and considered all I have as given me for the promotion of the Lord's kingdom among men?

18. Have I felt with increased intensity that I am a sinner, and that my only hope is in Christ?

19. Have I avoided all appearance of evil, and set a holy example before those with whom I have come in contact, fearing not men, but God.

20. In a word, have I made any advance in the divine life to-day? Ponder this, O my soul! as in the immediate presence of thy God.—Sel.

The Christian's Consolation.

THE professed disciple of Christ who desponds and trembles, when he hears his Master calling him to go on to perfection, may derive courage and support from looking at the promises of Christ and at their Author. Among the blessings promised you will find everything which any man can need to assist him in arriving at perfection. There are promises of light and direction to find the path which leads to it; promises of assistance to walk in that path; promises of strength to resist and overcome all opposition; promises of remedies to heal us when wounded, of cordials to invigorate us when faint, and of most glorious rewards to crown the end of our course. You will hear Jehovah saying, fear not for I am with thee; be not dismayed for I am thy God; I will strengthen thee, yea, I will help thee; yea, I will uphold thee with the right hand of my righteousness. Though thou art in thyself but a worm, thou shalt thresh the mountains and beat them small as the dust.

Look next at him who gives these promises. It is one who is almighty, and who therefore can fulfill them. It is one who cannot lie, and therefore will fulfill them.

It is one who possesses all power in heaven and on earth; one whose treasures of grace are unsearchable and inexhaustible; one in whom dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. With all this fullness, faith indissolubly unites us. Say, then, ye who despond and tremble when you contemplate the almost immeasurable distance between your own moral characters and that of Christ, what, except faith in these promises and their Author, is necessary, to support, encourage, and animate you in going on to perfection? If Christ himself is perfect; if faith makes you members of this perfect head; if it cause his fullness to flow into your souls,—then it is most evident that he can and will enable all, who exercise faith in him, to imitate his example, and finally to become perfect as he is perfect. —Payson's Thoughts.

Duty of loving God.

Every object which can be presented to us has a claim on our affections corresponding to its character. If any object be admirable, it possesses a natural and inherent claim to our admiration; if it be venerable it has a claim to our reverence; if it be terrible it demands our fear; if it be beautiful and amiable it claims and deserves our love.

But God is perfectly, and also infinitely, lovely; nay, he is excellence and loveliness itself. If you doubt this, ask those who can tell you. Ask Christ who is in the bosom of the Father, and he will tell you that God is infinitely lovely. Ask the holy angels, who dwell in his immediate presence, and they will tell you that he is lovely beyond all that even angels' minds can conceive. Ask good men in all ages and they will lament that they cannot tell you how amiable and excellent Jehovah is. Ask every thing beautiful and amiable in the universe; and it will tell you that all its beauty is but a faint reflection of his. If this does not satisfy you, ask the spirits of disobedience; and they, though filled with malice and rage against him, will tell if you can constrain them to speak, that the Being they hate is lovely and that it constitutes the essence of their misery that they can find no blemish in his character. But if God be thus infinitely lovely we are under infinite obligations to love him; obligations from which he himself cannot release us but by altering his character and ceasing to be lovely.—Payson's Thoughts.

Genesis ii. 17.

THERE are in the Hebrew, as in all other languages peculiarities, upon some of which theories have been built which gradually grew up to doctrines. In fact, however, these peculiar expressions were not intended to teach anything else but that which the whole sentence or passage intended to convey to the mind of the reader. One of these peculiar expressions is the word “b’yom,” in the day; and another, in the same verse, is “moth-tamath,” thou shalt die.

Some theorists say that, as the Lord God said to Adam, In the day thou eatest thereof—that is, of the tree of knowledge—thou must die; and as we see that Adam did not die on that very day when he ate of the tree of knowledge, but still lived on many hundreds of years, and saw multitudes of his descendants; consequently, the threatened death must not mean the death of the body, but a spiritual death. We cannot understand what a “spiritual death” means; if the spirit of man dies, surely the whole man is dead, and returns to the ground from which he was framed. A man may be dead in trespasses and sin; that is, sin and transgression hold the sinner in their clutches, just so the grave holds the dead whom it has received; and, as the dead body can and shall only be released from the tomb by the voice of the world’s Redeemer, so the sinner cannot free himself from the iron grasp of sin and trespasses, except through the mercy of God in Jesus Christ, the Redeemer. What can “spiritual death” mean? We are informed by the wisest of men that, when man dieth, the spirit returns unto God who gave it, and the body returns unto the dust. Or does it mean that Adam was morally dead as soon as he transgressed the command of God? This, again is impossible. In the first place, God himself explained what he meant by the phrase: “Thou shalt die,” by saying (v. 19.) “In the sweat of thy brow thou shalt eat bread, until thou returnest unto the ground, for from it thou wast taken; for dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return.”

Secondly, the conduct of Adam after the fall does not prove that he was morally dead, because he felt ashamed; and, as long as any of Adam’s family can blush, that individual is not yet morally dead. The true meaning of the sentence: “In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt die,” is this: As soon as thou eatest of the fruit of that tree which I forbid thee, thou art guilty of death. Now, Adam, thou knowest the command, and the penalty for its transgression. Be on thy guard! Adam transgressed the command of God; his life was forfeited; but the Judge delayed the execution of the sentence more than nine hundred years.

A similar passage we find in 1 Kings ii, 27, when Solomon says to Shimei: “And it shall be, in the day that thou goest out—from Jerusalem—and crossest the streamlet Kedron, know that thou shalt die.” We know however, that Shimei left Jerusalem, and went to Achish, the king of Gath, from whom he recovered his fugitive slaves, and returned. Now this journey to and from Gath must have taken several days, so that Shimei did not actually die on that day, when he left Jerusalem, and crossed the Kedron; but as soon as he did that, he was under the sentence of death. In both cases Hebrew translators say: “As soon as thou eatest,” “As soon as thou goest out.”

The other peculiarity, viz., “Moth-tamath,” is so frequently employed that the cases might be enumerated by hundreds. Some modern translators say, “dying thou shalt die,” which, in our opinion, has no sense at all. What will these translators do with so many other subjects expressed in the same way? In Gen. ii, 16, they must translate, “eating thou shalt eat,” and in Exod. xxi, and xxii, where the words, “Moth-Yumath,” He shall be put to death, occur many times, how will they translate it—“killing he shall be killed?”

In this case, the translation of our common version is much better than the modern. It says: Thou shalt surely die; but they might have spared the word surely, and the expression would have remained strong enough because it was the Creator of the universe who spoke it.—Israelite Indeed.

How Can Creatures Glorify God?

If it be asked how creatures so feeble and ungrateful as we are can glorify God, I answer, by conducting in such a manner as naturally tends to make him appear glorious, amiable and excellent in the view of his creatures. A son, for instance, honors his parents, when he evidently loves, reverences, confides in, and obeys them; because such conduct tends to make those who know him think favorably of his parents. A subject honors his sovereign when he cheerfully submits to his authority, and appears to be contented and happy in his government, because this tends to give others a favorable opinion of his sovereign. So men honor and glorify God, when they show by their conduct that they consider him the most perfect and best of beings and love, reverence and confide in him as such; for these things naturally tend to excite a high estimation of God, in the minds of their fellow creatures.—Payson's Thoughts.

Where are the Stars?

I WAS walking out one evening, just after sunset, with a child a few years old by my side, who asked me, "Where are the stars? I don't see any." I said to her, "Wait till it is a little darker, and then you will see them." We continued our walk, she clinging fast to my hand. The shades of evening deepened; one by one the stars appeared, and soon, in the darkness of the night the whole sky was covered with their light and beauty.

As we walked on, I fell a musing, and when we returned, the musing still went on as I repeated to my heart, "Wait till it is a little darker, and the light will come." Often have we heard that "Man's extremity is God's opportunity;" that "when he has humbled us he will exalt us;" that "he will cause light to rise out of obscurity;" and that "the darkest time is just before day." And many a poor, weary, troubled soul has found in his own experience, that from the verge of despair the blessedness of hope has sprung. When all other help had failed him, God had been his help and Saviour. But we are very slow to get the comfort of these promises and proverbs in advance. After the stars have come out bright, and the sky is radiant with glory, we admire it, and wonder at our want of faith before. Like the child who did not know where the stars were when she could not see them, we do not know where light, and peace, and joy are to come from when we are in trouble. Well, we must wait till it is a little darker. We have not had trial enough yet. We must fret and worry about the future; we must see the country, and our business, and our property going to ruin; we must be perplexed and distressed on every side, and cast down, and nearly destroyed; perhaps we must actually suffer by hunger, and nakedness, and the sword; but when it is a little darker the stars will appear. The day star will arise on our hearts. The Lord will provide. Our food and raiment will come. Zion will arise and shine. And the days of our mourning will be ended.—San Francisco Pacific.

The Scoffer Silenced.

An infidel from Louisiana saw, in a steam-boat on the Mississippi, a minister whom he heard deliver a discourse on infidelity. Gathering his associates to the table, he began to tell hard things about religion and religious people, the Bible and its ministers. The minister said nothing.

At length the infidel came up, and suddenly slapping him on the shoulder, said,—

"Old fellow, what do you think of these things?"

"Do you see that beautiful landscape?"

"Yes."

"If you were to send out a dove he would pass over it, see and delight in all that is beautiful and lovely; but if you were to send out a buzzard, he would see nothing to fix his attention, unless he could find some rotten carcass, loathsome to all other animals; on it he would light and gloat with exquisite pleasure."

"Do you mean to compare me to a buzzard?"

"I made no allusion to you."

The disciple of Tom Paine walked off in confusion, and was called Buzzard the rest of the passage.—Sel.

Extremes.

One of the great misfortunes of Christianity has been the extreme positions taken, with corresponding course of action carried out, by many of its most ardent, and, in many respects, very worthy supporters. The great reformation, led on by the German reformers, suffered greatly from extremes. Among the reformers there were characters which would now shine upon the pages of history with even greater lustre than that of Martin Luther, were it not for the sad record of extremes into which they ran, which marred the glorious work of reform.

Luther at times was bold, rash, and even impetuous. But God placed Melancthon by his side, an opposite character, to hold him from extremes. Was Melancthon extremely timid and cautious? Luther was just the man to inspire him with boldness and faith. Thus the two great reformers, with the blessing of God, held each other from unfortunate extremes.

And just now we are thinking of Peter and John, the one naturally bold and rash, the other so mild so even and sweet in temper as to be worthy of the compliment of "beloved disciple." Jesus called them both, and when grace had done its work on both, early Christianity needed both, hence we see these especial yoke-fellows in the gospel. The sweet influence of John upon Peter was doubtless better than that of any other Apostle could be, and, doubtless the influence of the boldness and zeal of Peter was just what John needed. Had John become disgusted with Peter's zeal, and found a fellow-laborer of the same cast of mind as his own, they could have enjoyed all the blessings of affinity of spirits so much talked of in these times, but the gospel in their hands might have suffered for want of the very element possessed by his brother Peter. Had Peter cast off John, and taken a fellow-laborer like himself, they might for a time have been happy and delighted with each other's zeal. Peter might have thanked God for a congenial spirit in his colleague, and talked like a spiritualistic philosopher of the glories of "affinity," and they two might have run on in their zeal, and on, and on, and unless checked by some Jerusalem council of apostles and elders, run the cause of Christianity where they labored, into the ground.

Extremes are not prevented by persons of the same cast of mind associating together, but, rather, encouraged. Two ministers of different turn of mind laboring together, by the grace of God, may save each other from extremes. Alone they may both run to extremes. And here is the grand argument for church organization and discipline. If every brother and sister be left to constitute an independent church, how many of peculiar turn of mind are certain to run to ruin. In any body of believers may be found more or less ill-balanced heads and peculiar temperaments. But bring them into one body, and let that be tempered according to the word, and you have a well-balanced and well-tempered church. The strength of their union, and their prosperity will depend upon their obedience to such inspired injunctions as we read in 1 Pet. v, 5, "Likewise ye younger submit yourselves unto the elder. Yea, all of you be subject one to another."

As a people, everywhere we exist, we might now be strong had our people looked upon organization with candor when first introduced. In the East we are weak for want of organization. The battle must first be fought there before the cause can rise. Already rebellion is kindling, and as an effort is made to set things in order, you will see every element of confusion and rebellion on the stir. Persons who are nothing to build up in order, in connection with the cause, will delight in tearing down what you may build. Like bridge-burners, while you are building one, if you do not prevent them, they will burn ten bridges. Brn. Hammond and Macomber write to us of one James T. Sweet, of R. I., who is hurting the cause with his extremes. But what can be done with his case in the absence of organization? The Review may be burdened with a statement of his wrongs, which may cause those under his influence to sympathize with him more strongly.

We have outgrown these things in Michigan. When men come to our churches professing to be Seventh-day-Adventist preachers, our brethren simply call for their papers, and that ends the matter without controversy. We regard it of no use to circulate books in R. I., or in any way to teach the truth there, or anywhere else, until order be first restored among believers. As a people we have labored energetically. Self-sacrifice and liberality have marked our history. The message we have borne to the world has been so well defined from God's word that it has had a powerful influence where it has been proclaimed. Yet extremes, which must exist in the absence of order, have eaten up and destroyed a large proportion of the fruits of our energetic labors.

Time never can show the bad results of the spirit of anti-organization among us. It kindled and raged like fire at the first suggestion of organization. It prostrated the cause everywhere, and when the scale turned in favor of organization, there was hardly a congregation among us, from Maine to Minnesota, but what had become so distracted and discouraged that they needed the labors of some faithful preacher a month before they were prepared for organization. But right in here came another extreme nearly as injurious as the first, namely, the rapid organization of churches, when but a portion could be gathered, often leaving the majority outside. So, "one extreme follows another." If it be inquired, "What should have been done?" we reply, The first work was to patiently labor and do away the influence of anti-organization, and bring up our Sabbath-keeping brethren, who have suffered reproach for the truth with us, to a state of harmony, then gather them into church fellowship. If this cannot be done, organization in most cases should be deferred, in hope of a better state of things. May God save us from extremes.

Continue reading: Lessons for Bible Students