Earlier text: WHEN WILL THE NATIONS BE DASHED IN PIECES?A RARE VIEW OF THE 2300 DAYS.
By Editor
OPINION OF A MILLENNIALIST.
THE last view of the 2300 days we have ever been called to consider, lately came under our observation in a tract entitled, "Pius Ninth, the last of the Popes." Commenting upon Matt. xxiv, 34, the writer says: "Verily, I say unto you, this generation shall not pass away until all these things be fulfilled." Christ is here prophesying as to the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus, and calls it the abomination which maketh desolate, spoken of by Daniel the prophet. This certainly gives us the time from which to commence the period of 2300 years. Titus destroyed the temple in the year 70 of the Christian era, within the lifetime of the generation to whom our Saviour foretold this terrible event. Therefore the 2300 years shall not have elapsed until the year 2370, which is 516 years from this present time. At that time the Jewish temple will be rebuilt, and all their former glory return to them again. They will never thereafter wander from the ways of God. He will receive them again into favor, and taking from them their hearts of stone, will give them hearts of flesh, and they shall believe." We do not present this view for the sake of entering into any particular reply, or because we think it worthy of any, but to show our readers to what monstrous conclusions mind may be led which is not guided by the light of present truth. It is one of the concomitants of that theory which supposes that the Jews according to the flesh, are entitled to peculiar privileges above all people, and that there are glorious prophecies yet to be fulfilled in them, in their restoration to their native land, and to more than their former glory. And whenever the advocates of future Jewish national blessedness wish to set a time for their marvelous predictions to be fulfilled, we recommend to them the theory under consideration; as it is the best we know of on the subject, and it so well corresponds, as far as both reason and scripture are concerned, to their belief on other portions of this question. But to return: the destruction of Jerusalem, in the words of the writer, "certainly gives us the time from which to commence the period of the 2300 years." We rarely meet with a declaration concerning scripture subjects, which compares with this in bearing upon its very face so little regard to the event concerning which it is spoken; so little regard to the context; so little regard to the prophecies which must harmonize with it; and so little regard to all laws of harmony and reason. "This certainly gives us the time from which to commence the period of the 2300 years!" How do we know? How are we ever to know when the 2300 years commence? What event is to mark their commencement? Now we must know when this period commences and ends, or it follows that the Holy Spirit has cumbered the sacred page with a revelation which is useless and absurd; namely, that at the end of the 2300 days a certain event is to take place, but no mortal is to know when the period commences! Dan. viii, 14, is the only mention we have of the 2300 days; but that text is silent as midnight about their commencement, or the events that mark it; hence Daniel says at the end of the chapter, that he was astonished at the vision, and none understood it. We must therefore look further for an explanation. The time mentioned in chap. viii, alone remained unexplained; hence when an explanation is given, it will be on time. We accordingly find in chap. ix, 20-25, when Gabriel comes to Daniel again, to give him "skill and understanding," and tells him to "consider the vision," (the same vision of course which before he understood not, Dan. viii, 27.) he commences upon the very point, and the only point, before left unexplained. Another period is now introduced to our notice. "Seventy weeks," says the angel, "are determined," otherwise rendered "cut off," upon thy people, &c. Events to mark the commencement of this period are plainly described in verse 25. "Seventy weeks are cut off." Cut off from what? From the connection of the two visions of chaps. viii and ix, and from Gabriel's own explanation, we learn that this is spoken of the 2300 days. Seventy weeks, or 490 days, are cut off from the 2300 days; hence the two periods must commence together. But the seventy weeks commence from the "going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem;" [Dan. ix, 25.] therefore the 2300 days must commence there also. This is the only reasonable and scriptural explanation of this important period. It is the only one on which the honest student of prophecy can conscientiously base his faith; for the moment we endeavor to separate the two periods of the seventy weeks and the 2300 days, we destroy them both. We then become most as bad as some others, who believe that these days must extend to the coming of the Lord, and as the Lord has not yet come, they cannot commence with the seventy weeks; since commencing them at that date, (457 B. C.) they expired in 1844; and hence that they do not know where they do commence, and therefore they must wait till the Lord comes to find their termination, and then count back to find their commencement!! How brilliant these prophecies must be to such minds! and how much strength and comfort they must derive from perusing them in God's book of revelation! The course of such does not furnish an illustration of that cheering declaration that "the path of the just is as the shining light, that shineth more and more unto the perfect day;" for theirs has been growing darker and darker, and bids fair to end in eternal night! Brethren, our only safety is in clinging to the sure word; in standing firm in that position which harmonizes with the declarations of prophecy, establishes the past, and sheds light on the present and future; a position, which, though many have apostatized from, they cannot refute. If the 2300 days do not commence with the 70 weeks, no man knows, or can know, when they commence; and we may as well set them aside at once; for they become a mere cipher in the prophetic chain for which no place can be assigned. Now did not the writer above quoted know that the 2300 days must date from a commandment to restore and build Jerusalem? and did he think any such command went forth in the year 70? and does he think that Titus fulfilled the command to restore and build Jerusalem, when he destroyed the city, and razed it to the ground? Or how shall we account for this singular position? We can only do it by taking into consideration its intent, which is very evident. The writer appears to have made up his mind to have the Jews return at all events, and being settled upon this, he forgot to take into consideration what the Bible had to say upon the subject: very much like others at the present time, who have got their eye fixed on an ignis fatuus in the future, and have forgotten present truth, and present duty. He seems to have had a faint recollection that there was a prophetic period of 2300 days somewhere mentioned in the Bible, and doubtless thinking it give an air of sanctity to his disposition of imaginary events, he claps it in with the most reckless disregard for all truth or propriety. We will notice one more point before dismissing this subject. At the end of this period of 2300 days the Sanctuary is to be cleansed. Now what is the Sanctuary? and what is its cleansing? These are questions which have a vital connection with this prophetic period; and whoever would attempt to show when it terminates, must of course show that an event will then take place which the Bible recognizes as the cleansing of the Sanctuary. Unless he does this, he omits the most important portion of his subject and entitles his views to no notice or credence. But this writer says, "At that time the Jewish temple will be rebuilt, and all their former glory return to them again!" Is this then the cleansing of the Sanctuary?! Surely it would be hard to conjecture whether he had ever read the book of Hebrews, or ever raised his thoughts from earth to heaven. But then, that glorious land of Palestine, that "inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away," (everything but reserved in heaven! 1 Pet. i, 4.) must be the Sanctuary of course! and the restoration of the Jews there, and the rebuilding of the temple, &c., must be its cleansing! Of course it must! In contrast with these absurdities, let us look for a moment at the true position; a position sufficiently in harmony with itself and with the word of God, to command itself to every man's conscience; a position which is in harmony with all our past experience, and the more it is contemplated the more it will lead us to lift up our hearts in gratitude to God for the way in which he has led us, and the work he is doing for us. The 2300 days (years) commence with the 70 weeks, in the 7th of Artaxerxes, king of Persia, B. C. 457; for then the decree went forth for the restoration and building of Jerusalem. Ez. vii. That this is the true date is sufficiently attested by the fact that it is the only one which will harmonize with all those prophecies given in Dan. ix, concerning the Messiah. The days therefore ended in A. D., 1844. At that time Christ our great High Priest, the minister of the heavenly Sanctuary, entered from the Holy into the Most Holy, of the true Tabernacle above, there to commence his last act of ministration, which is the cleansing of the Sanctuary, according to the teaching of Leviticus and Hebrews. Consequently the last work for man's salvation is now being accomplished. Most of our readers are well acquainted with the plain Bible testimony for these truths; and those who are not, will find it set forth in our publication. Brethren, it will be well for us if we keep our eye fixed on present truth, and strive to know present duty, and remember the interest we have in the heavenly Sanctuary, the closing ministration of which is now going on, and prepare ourselves for that final sentence which is soon to go forth, "He that is unjust, let him be unjust still; and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still; and he that is holy, let him be holy still." Rev. xxii, 11. THE "AGE TO COME."
By Editor
"Blow ye the trumpet in Zion, and sound an alarm in my holy mountain: let all the inhabitants of the land tremble; for the day of the Lord cometh; for it is nigh at hand." This is the message which Inspiration enjoins upon us; but for sounding this alarm the Advent people have been called by the careless of the world, and by temporal millennialists, Alarmists, or those who were exciting in the minds of the people needless fears of coming evil. But the time has come that a certain portion of professed Adventists themselves may call us such, if the theory which they have of late years drifted into, be correct. For if it be true that the day of the Lord is not "a day of darkness and of gloominess, a day of clouds and thick darkness;" [Joel ii, 2;] if it be true that the seven last plagues in which is filled up the wrath of God will not waste the inhabitants of earth with destruction; [Rev. xv, 16;] if it be true that the Man of Sin will not be consumed with the Spirit of the Lord's mouth, nor destroyed by the brightness of his coming; [2 Thess. ii, 8;] if it be true that there will be space yet left the sinner for repentance after the changeless fiat shall have gone forth, He which is filthy, let him be filthy still; [Rev. xxii, 11;] if all this, we say, be true, where is the cause for fear and trembling? There is none; and he who would raise an alarm among the people in view of the day of the Lord, is wasting his strength in a useless mission. This is the teaching and the spirit of the doctrine called "Age to Come;" and if it be true, the scoffer and the infidel, and the careless professor, may for the present rest contented, as far as the day of the Lord is concerned, and the living Christian even may lay aside his armor and cease to run, for they can all say together, "Soul, thou hast no need to fear. The destruction from the Almighty will not come nigh thee; and even after the Lord has come, there will be time enough to repent: eat, drink and be merry." Such we say is the spirit of the Age to Come; and it is against this that we would lift up our voice like a trumpet: against this opiate to living religion we would cry aloud and spare not. Though I believed the Lord was coming in a few years, but yet was persuaded that it was to the land of Palestine only, attended with a moderate degree of glory, there to commence a gradual work of bringing the nations to his rule, no man could say but that I would be wise and prudent to wait and see if the event took place; and when I learned that it had, I would be acting understandingly, then to seek repentance, and become a subject of that kingdom; then I should not have to walk by faith wholly as Christians are now required to do, and which to some seems very difficult. But the Prophet bids us sound an alarm. Why? Because the day of the Lord cometh! There is perhaps no point on which the Scriptures speak out more plainly than on the great destruction, and awful scenes attendant upon the coming of the Lord, and the utter hopelessness of all those who then are unprepared to meet him in his glory. Then let us not deceive ourselves with a vain hope, and imagine that there will be probation when all cases are forever decided. If we miss the mark once we miss it forever. If we lose eternal life once, we lose it forever. It is not as though, if we failed the first time, we could try again. Hence the importance of this subject. Hence the importance of being on the sure side now, and having safe views of the events of the future. Hence we would not be slow to denounce an error which has a tendency so fatal. It is with error as such that we have to do, and not with its advocates. We would not indulge in any severity or harshness against any individual, but when we see an error advanced which we can but197regard as pernicious to the salvation of souls, and by which some are liable to be deceived and lost forever, we feel no disposition to pass by it lightly. We again call the attention of the brethren to the arguments which have appeared on this subject in the Review, among which we will mention, "The Second Advent; its manner and objects considered," "The Word," "Letters to H. V. Reed," and "When will the Nations be dashed in pieces?" Let none pass by this article on account of its length. Truth is worth studying for; and we must have a correct theory, in order to have a consistent hope. One brother has suggested that we do not give both sides of this question; but it must be that he fails to distinguish between an objection and its refutation. When a writer presents the scripture evidence for a certain theory, and then takes up all the objections by which the other side is supported, and utterly demolishes them, what more can consistency require? They misapprehend the question entirely who think, because we do not present some long-winded effort from those who hold opposite views, that we are therefore presenting only one side of the question. The Review has not yet rejected any article on the "Age to Come." Remarks on the Sabbath and the First Day of the Week.
[The following we take from a tract, with the above title, published by John Butchart, Sen., of Canada, and kindly forwarded to us. The views on the Sabbath here advocated he embraced and began to disseminate among the people, according to his statement, before he learned that there was such a people as the Seventh-day Baptists, or Advent-Sabbath-keepers, in the States. As far as we know, he was influenced by nothing in arriving at these conclusions, but the plain teachings of the Word. We therefore cite him as an illustration of a plain truth which we have often repeated; namely, let a man divest himself of all prejudice and the influence of human teaching, and take the Bible alone for doctrine and duty, and he would never dream of a First-day Sabbath, from any of its teachings. The seventh day as the Sabbath of the Lord our God would be impressed upon him from Genesis to Revelation; nor would he arrive at any other conclusion so long as he searched the sacred Volume for the truth's sake, and followed the teachings of the Holy Spirit.—Ed. Review.] THE observance of the Sabbath is one of the ten precepts which are denominated by God as his laws, as may be learned from Ex. xvi, 28. "How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws;" and again, [Hosea viii, 12] "I have written to him the great things of my law, but they were counted as a strange thing." The Sabbath being established on the second day of Adam's existence, [Gen. ii, 3,] and he not having then sinned, is sufficient evidence that it is an institution required by Adam and all his posterity, even though he had not sinned; and the record of its commencement bears all the solemnity that so important an event required. It is true that the circumstances attending its announcement were not so imposing, nor associated with that glory and demonstrations of power which attended the delivery of the laws from mount Sinai; but it should be borne in mind that in the former case, God directly communicated his will to two perfect and holy beings; whereas in the latter, there was a medium between God and man, and there required a demonstration to command the attention of a vast multitude of fallen and degenerate creatures. These facts unquestionably prove that the seventh day was holy to the Lord, and was therefore the Lord's day. That the Sabbath has been changed from the seventh to the first day of the week is unquestionable; but such change cannot be binding but by the authority of God, and to prove that authority the record must be found wherein his sanction is given to it. For my own part I know of no such record. But let us examine for a little the grounds on which this is founded. The writings, sayings and doings of the apostle Paul are the authority upon which both those who have changed, and those who have abolished the Sabbath, have proceeded: let us investigate them as recorded in the Scriptures. Paul in six separate places preached on the Sabbath as may be learned from the following quotations: "But when they departed from Perga they came to Antioch in Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day and sat down. Acts xiii, 14. And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next Sabbath. Acts xiii, 42. And the next Sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God. Acts xiii, 44. And on the Sabbath we went out of the city by a river-side where prayer was wont to be made. Acts 13. They came to Thessalonica where was a synagogue of the Jews, and Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three Sabbath days reasoned with them out of the Scriptures. Acts xvii, 2. And he reasoned in the synagogue and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks. Verse 11. And he continued there a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them." As the foregoing sufficiently demonstrates that St. Paul, neither by word nor deed, made any change in the day on which the Sabbath was observed—whilst he strictly reverenced it—it ought to prove conclusive evidence on the question. But further to elucidate the subject, I will present one more evidence, which ought to satisfy any one who venerates the word of the Lord. Matt. xxiv, 20. "But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the Sabbath day." This proves beyond dispute, that not only did St. Paul observe the seventh day, but that Christ himself, in his predictions of the future, gave his sanction to its continued observance. Paradoxical as it may seem, it is frequently asserted that the Scriptures contain no command from God to Adam to observe the Sabbath, yet it is written that "God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it." What do our Lord and his apostles mean, by saying "it is written"—undoubtedly that a revelation from God is recorded, for it could neither be written nor communicated whilst it remained in the divine mind alone. And not only did Adam receive oral instructions from God to reverence the Sabbath, but we read that the divine Being sanctified it by his own example, as we read that "he rested the seventh day from all his work." Were it necessary to demonstrate that the instructions of the Most High to Adam were much more full and complete than the very abridged history which we possess of the creation and the earlier ages of the world, reference might be made to the character of the sacrifices of Cain and Abel. "The Lord had respect to Abel and to his offering, but to Cain and his offering he had not respect"—not being in accordance with the law. Again, when Noah came forth from the ark, and consecrated the post-deluvian world by an act of sacrifice, as recorded in Gen. viii, 20. "And Noah builded an ark unto the Lord, and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl and offered burnt offering on the altar"—had there been no fuller revelation than that referred to, how could Noah have discovered which were clean and which were unclean? But even in the giving of the law from mount Sinai, there is evidently reference to principles already laid down for the guidance of the people, when God himself says, "Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy." Remember what? That I blessed and sanctified the seventh day when I instituted it, therefore keep it holy—for what God does is perfect and durable as himself. Having showed the grounds that exist for believing that the appointment of the Sabbath on the seventh day was positive and irrevocable, I will next take up the arguments generally adduced in favor of a change to the first day of the week. First. Acts xx, 7. "And upon the first day of the week when the disciples came together to break bread Paul preached unto them." From this sentence of Scripture the inference is attempted to be drawn that Paul concurred in and acted upon a change in the Sabbath; but to support this supposition it is necessary to show that Paul did not preach nor break bread on any day but the first day of the week, or that at least he abstained from so doing on the seventh day; whereas the scripture informs us that it was Paul's "manner" to preach or reason every Sabbath. It also appears that it was the custom of the church at Troas to break bread on the first day of the week, so that Paul's preaching unto them was not necessarily connected with the breaking of bread. Nor is the celebration of the Lord's supper confined to any day of the week—"And they continued daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart." Acts ii, 46. It is believed by some that the breaking of bread from house to house by the first Christians was not eating the Lord's supper; but whatever it was at Jerusalem, it was the same at Troas, for the same distinction is made in both places between breaking of bread and eating a common meal. The un-tenableness of the argument in favor of a change from the acts of St. Paul, at Troas, is at once shown by the foregoing quotation; for the same principle would support the doctrine of every day as a Sabbath, from the proceedings of the first converts to Christianity. But the object of the historian in mentioning St. Paul's service on the first day of the week, was not to convey the idea that he regarded it as the Sabbath, but for the purpose of mentioning the miracle which the Apostle performed on that occasion by the recovery of Eutychus, as may be plainly seen by reading the context. Another inference in favor of a change in the day is drawn from St. Paul's writings to the Corinthian church, where he says, "Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come," 1 Cor. xvi, 2. The idea that the laying up of money for a special purpose out of the week's profits, should mark the Sabbath, is rather too far-fetched to require any argument in refutation; but in juxta-position we may remind the reader that the same Apostle, "reasoned in the synagogue [at Corinth] every Sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks;" "and he continued there a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them." But, say objectors, when Paul left the synagogue he ever after preached upon the first day of the week, and by that signified that the Sabbath was changed; yet the Scriptures are altogether silent on this subject. Moreover, when Paul preached in the synagogue he gave the Jews and the Greeks to understand that he believed the seventh day to be the Sabbath. And what would Justus and Crispus and all his house, with the believing Greeks, think of Paul's practicing such dissimulation as preaching a different doctrine from that he had preached in the synagogue. How heavily would his own anathema have fallen upon himself; [Gal. i, 8, 9] and would not such conduct be very inconsistent when contrasted with his reproving Peter before them all for using dissimulation. Gal. ii, 14. But St. Paul was not a dissembler. The Holy Ghost falling on the apostles on the first day of the week is made use of as another argument in favor of an alteration of the Sabbath. Granting that it was likely that God would permit such change under the new and vastly more important dispensation; or supposing that the epoch of the gospel dispensation being ushered in by a change so important on the death and resurrection of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ; to establish it as an act of the Divine Being, or giving the change such an impress as would authorize his creatures not to "remember the seventh day to keep it holy"—or the expunging of any portion of the decalogue and the retention of the remainder—it is absolutely requisite that authority should be shown, or the period so definitely so distinctly marked that his creatures could have no doubt on the subject. For instance, had the death of our Saviour produced the change, or his resurrection have sanctioned it; the period must have been definitely marked by the acts of the apostles themselves, have been part of their teaching to the Jewish converts, and the reason for it have been pointed out as distinctly as in the case of the change in the Levitical law. Until this is done it is clearly a violation of God's commands not to "keep holy the Sabbath day;" and yet St. Paul scrupulously kept the seventh day thirty years after the first promulgation of the gospel, there was no command ever given to the contrary, and the alteration is a device of man and not the act of God! Mr. O. Scott, Wesleyan Methodist, says; "The plainest principles of the gospel have slumbered for ages. "The Church is as deeply infected with a desire for worldly gain, as the world. At least there is no perceptible difference. Professors of religion are emphatically worldly minded. "The Church are making a god of this world. "Most of the denominations of the present day might be called Churches of the world, with more propriety than Churches of Christ. "The Churches are so far gone from primitive Christianity that they need a fresh regeneration—a new kind of religion. "They have gone over to the world and have opposed what the world opposed. "The world will never be converted by such a religion. "Christians pray for the union of the Churches, but fight against it. "The fact cannot be disguised that the ways of Zion mourn." An Appeal to the Impenitent.
By D. E. Elmer
[Bro. Smith:—I send you the following letter written to a friend. If you think it worthy of a place in the columns of the Review, you can publish it.
D. E. Elmer.] Dear Friend:—Feeling impressed with a sense of the time in which we live; the near approach of that day in which the "righteous Judge" shall descend "in flaming fire," attended with a retinue of "holy angels," to awake the sleeping saints, to change the righteous living, and to destroy "with the brightness of his coming" the ungodly, who will then vainly call for the rocks and mountains to fall upon them and hide them from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb; feeling impressed with a sense of the awful doom which awaits the finally impenitent, who while here despise proffered pardon, reject offered mercy, and regardless of the claims of a merciful Creator and a merciful Redeemer upon them for obedience, persist in a course of high-handed rebellion, of sin and folly; feeling impressed with the importance of a speedy preparation to meet a coming King, and that soon the doom of the ungodly will be fixed unalterably, I wish you to "suffer the word of exhortation." What of all earthly things is of sufficient importance to occupy our thoughts, to engage our attention? Honor? Wealth? Learning? These are all uncertain. "Honor holds a fluctuating seat." The honor of this world is opposed to God and his truth. How can ye believe which receive honor one of another, and seek not the honor that cometh from God only. It shuts out from the mind the glorious truths of divine revelation. The mind occupied in this way is unfit for the Divine teachings and guidance. "Riches profit not in the day of wrath." How vain to trust in riches. "He that trusteth in riches shall fall." And how uncertain! they "make themselves wings and fly away." All learning is but a mere maze of folly, if separated from Him who has said, "Learn of me;" if independent of him "in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge." The objects of time and sense are vain, transient, delusory, unsatisfying. How seldom do we experience fully our anticipations, how seldom do we realize fully anticipated happiness. 'Tis not in man to find in earth that which can fully satisfy the longings of the soul: he was created for a higher purpose, a nobler end. There is that which can satisfy the hungry soul; there is that which can impart joy and peace to the heart; there is that which can buoy up the spirits amid trials, afflictions and disappointments; there is that which can afford true happiness when friends forsake and earthly prospects fail: 'tis found in the religion of Jesus; 'tis found in pardoning grace. Jesus has paid the price of our redemption. He died that we might live. He spilt his precious blood for you and me. What condescension! What wondrous love! A being of immaculate purity and holiness leaves the realms of glory, the joys of paradise, "becomes of no reputation," takes upon himself "the form of a servant," dies an ignominious death, upon the cross, all, all for rebel man! "O for one note that rocks and hills
Their lasting silence break,
And all harmonious human tongues,
Their Saviour's praises speak!" Salvation is free for all. "Ho every one that thirsteth come ye to the waters." The invitation is to all. O that any should despise the offer of pardon and finally perish; that any should spurn the calls of mercy and sink down to utter woe! Will you not heed the invitation and accept of offered mercy? Jesus now calls you! and must he call in vain? Shall that lovely voice meet with cold indifference? Will you requite with ingratitude what the Saviour has done for you? Will you persist in a course of disobedience and thus dishonor Him who died for you? Why longer live with "no hope and without God in the world?" Can you bear, for a few days of seeming pleasure, of vain glory here to lose the joy of the eternal world? to lose an interest in that eternal felicity which is promised to all the faithful; to be shut out from the realms of glory; to be cast off with the ungodly; and to suffer the pain of the second death? Our days here are but few at most. Life is but short. And what are the pleasures of this life compared to endless joys: for all herein is vanity. "Vain are all terrestrial pleasures;
Mixed with dross the purest gold;
Seek we then for heavenly treasures,—
Treasures never waxing old." The treasures of heaven are not subject to change. Time but adds to their glory. The joys of that heavenly world are ever new. There happiness is real. There, "Sickness and sorrow, pain and death,
Are felt and feared no more." O who would not desire a home in heaven? Who would not willingly forego the honors and pleasures of this vain and inconstant world, for a home in that better land. From the "sure word of prophecy whereunto we do well to take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn;" from the past and present fulfillment of events therein predicted; from the present state of the religious, moral, and political world, exactly corresponding with their sad condition as represented in that sure word, just prior to the Second Advent, we are assured that that fearful day of wrath, that "day of darkness and of gloominess," that "day of clouds and of thick darkness," when "the slain of the Lord shall be from one end of the earth even to the other end of the earth," when the Lord shall pour out his indignation "upon the ungodly; when he shall execute wrath upon the rebellious," is nigh at hand. What means this general awakening of the nations? this spirit of war which is now so prevalent throughout the world? the waking up of "the mighty men," the vast preparation for "war," the gathering of the "nations," are not these precursors of that day? "Solemn voices now are calling,
Ask you what these voices are?
Raging winds and waves appalling,—
All presage the final war." While the nations of the Old world have been in a state of commotion, while they have been engaged in bloody contests, our nation has seemed to partake of the same spirit. The elements of war have long been at work, and now seem destined like the pent-up elements of the fiery volcanoe soon to burst forth with sudden and irresistible fury. Each nation seems to be preparing to act its part in the last great conflict. "The Lord hath a controversy with the nations; he will plead with all flesh; he will give them that are wicked to the sword saith the Lord." Jer. xxv, 31. "My determination is to gather the nations, that I may assemble the kingdoms, to pour upon them mine indignation, even all my fierce anger: for all the earth shall be devoured with the fire of my jealousy." Zeph. iii, 8. "And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come." Rev. xi, 18. Who can fail to see in the present movement among the nations the fulfillment of prophecy? Frisbie’s Lectures and Interest
By J. B. Frisbie
BRO. SMITH:—I have lectured forty-four times since I left home. I closed my lectures in Portland, since I wrote last to you. Some at that meeting were deeply interested, and have commenced to keep the Sabbath, as I understand; but I do not know how many. One Methodist woman told one who was interested that if she had the power, she would have all these Advent folks put to death. Well, says the other, now I believe the doctrine more than ever; for that is the dragon spirit. I understand she is now keeping the Sabbath. I went from Portland to Green Bush, about 30 miles, to Bro. Richmond's. I lectured in three different places some two weeks. Some gave good attention to the word preached. A goodly number appeared199to be convicted that we have the truth. I believe the Lord has children there who will obey him by keeping his Sabbath. I closed lectures in a neighborhood north from Bro. R.'s, where they had never heard anything before on the subject. There were large congregations and good interest manifested. What the result will be, I cannot tell. If I should do like the Methodists in their excitements, put down all that come to the anxious seats as converts, as I learn some do; we might report many. But six months might not find them. Truly “many are called, but few are chosen.” No one can know of the trials of a messenger, except those who go to proclaim the Third Angel’s Message, and feel its wearing cares and responsibilities. To think and know that God has entrusted souls to their care, for which they must give account. It gives me bad feelings when I find any one discouraged or bewildered by the enemy. How many cunning and artful snares are set to entrap the feet of the honest and unsuspecting to turn them out of the way. If God had not a great care for his children I should be clear discouraged. But best of all we can know that God is for us, and who can be against us. The Lord be praised, who knows our hearts. Glory be to his name! Your brother in Christ, J. B. Frisbie.