Review and Herald, Vol. 53, No. 17. (4/24/1879)

Review and Herald

Apr 24, 1879

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Apr 24, 1879

THE EARLY FATHERS.

By Dudley Marvin Canright

ELD. D. M. CANRIGHT.

We must now introduce a different class of witnesses,—the early fathers. We cannot place as much reliance on them as upon the apostolic fathers, as they began about this time to be more or less corrupted by heathen notions; yet many of them still held to the old landmarks for a long time.

JUSTIN MARTYR, A. D. 164.

Justin Martyr, about A. D. 164, comes first after the apostolic fathers. He was a heathen philosopher, and after his conversion to Christianity, he still retained some of his old heathen notions. He was a learned man, and wrote much. We will quote enough to show his faith upon this question.

1. He earnestly contended for the literal resurrection of the dead, and tried to meet all objections to it. “They who maintain the wrong opinion say that there is no resurrection of the flesh.” This doctrine he then refutes.

2. The doctrine of the second advent of Christ is prominent in all his writings.

3. He did not believe that the souls of men went to Heaven at death. He says: “If you have fallen in with some who are called Christians, but who do not admit this [the resurrection], and venture to blaspheme the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; who say there is no resurrection of the dead, and that their souls, when they die, are taken to Heaven, do not imagine that they are Christians.” Here we have it plainly stated that it was heresy in that age to teach that men's souls went to Heaven at death. Yet this is the very thing that the so-called orthodox denominations now generally teach, and the great mass of the common people among them never suspect but that this was always the faith of the church. But history shows it to be quite the contrary, as witness what Justin says above.

4. He refutes the heretical doctrine just then being introduced, that the soul alone is the man, and can act without the body. He says: “What is man but the reasonable animal, composed of body and soul? Is the soul, by itself, man? No; but the soul of man. Would the body be called man? No; but it is called the body of man. If, then, neither of these is by itself man, but that which is made up of the two together is called man, and God has called man to life and resurrection, he has called, not a part, but the whole, which is the soul and body.” Again: “How, then, did he raise the dead? Their souls or their bodies? Manifestly both.” Once more: “For as in the case of a yoke of oxen, if one or the other is loosed from the yoke neither of them can plow alone; so neither can soul or body alone effect anything if they be unyoked from their communion.” Can this be misunderstood?

5. He denies the immortality of the soul. Thus: “For he ordained that if he [Adam] kept this [God’s command], he should partake of immortal existence; but if he transgressed it, the contrary should be his lot. Man, having been thus made, and immediately looking toward transgression, naturally became subject to corruption.” Hear him state the subject: “Now that the soul partakes of life, since God wills it to live, thus, then, it will not even partake [of life] when God does not will it to live. For to live is not its attribute, as it is God’s; but as a man does not live always, and the soul is not forever conjoined with the body, since, whenever this harmony must be broken up, the soul leaves the body, and the man exists no longer; even so, whenever the soul must cease to exist, the spirit of life is removed from it, and there is no more soul, but it goes back to the place from whence it was taken.”

This is so clear that the most bigoted must yield the point and admit that Justin did not believe the soul could live separate from the body.

6. Justin teaches the utter extinction of the wicked. “Wherefore,” says he, “God delays causing the confusion and destruction of the whole world, by which the wicked angels, and demons, and men SHALL CEASE TO EXIST, because of the seed of the Christians, who know that they are the cause of preservation in nature.” The wicked will cease to exist. This is unequivocal, and cannot be misunderstood. He did not believe in eternal misery. Again: “Thus, some which have appeared worthy of God, never die; but others are punished so long as God wills them to exist and to be punished.”

Much more to the same end might be given from him, but it is not needed. Justin frequently says that the wicked shall suffer “everlasting punishment,” “eternal punishment,” “in eternal fire,” etc., yet he positively declares that they shall cease to exist. So here we have a good example of the limited use of those terms. They are often so used by all the Greeks. Dr. Kitto says that Justin Martyr “held that punishments, at least sensible ones, would sometime cease.” Prof. Bush says he held to the sleep of the soul. Hagenbach, in his “History of Doctrines,” says Justin believed the soul to be mortal, and to perish with the body; that immortality was a reward to be acquired. Ballou says he held to annihilation. Thus: “In another place, however, he states his opinion upon this last point more particularly, and represents that the wicked will be, eventually, annihilated.” Of the faith of this father, Dr. Edward Beecher says, “That Justin did hold and teach the final annihilation of the wicked, the most eminent scholars concede. In the number of such Mr. Hudson appeals to Grotius, Huet, Röpler, and Dupin, Doederlein, Münscher, Munter, Daniel, Hase, Stork, Kerns, Otto, Ritter, J. B. Smith, Bloomfield, Gieseler.”

Gieseler, the church historian, says, “Justin appears to regard it as possible that the souls of the ungodly will be at some time wholly annihilated.” Sec. 45.

Another historian says of him: “Justin did not believe in endless torments, but in the final annihilation of the wicked.”

Jeremy Taylor clearly shows that the doctrine that souls go to Heaven at death, was not known to the primitive church, but was introduced at a late day by the Catholics. “It is,” says he, “a plain recession from antiquity which was determined by the council of Florence (1439) ‘that the souls of the saints are received immediately into Heaven, and clearly behold God himself, three in one,’ as who pleases to try may see it dogmatically resolved to the contrary by Justin Martyr, by Irenæus, by Origen, by St. Chrysostom, Theodoret, Arethus Cæsariensis, Euthymius, who may answer for the Greek Church.” He also quotes a number of Latin authors, showing that they did not believe that souls went to Heaven at death.

Daillé, in his famous work on the “Right Use of the Fathers,” says: “That Heaven shall not be opened till the second coming of Christ and the day of Judgment, that during this time the souls of all men with a few exceptions, are shut up in the under world, was held by Justin Martyr, Irenæus, Tertullian, Augustine, Origen, Lactantius, Victorinus, Ambrose, Chrysostom, Theodoret, Œcumenius, Arethus, Prudentius, Theophylact, Bernard, and many others, as is confessed by all. This doctrine is literally held by the whole Greek Church at the present day. Nor did any of the Latins expressly deny any part of it, until the council of Florence, in the year of our Lord 1439.” So it is contrary both to the Bible and to the faith of the ancient church, that souls go immediately to Heaven at death.

TATIAN, A. D. 172, THE DISCIPLE OF JUSTIN MARTYR.

Tatian, who was the disciple of Justin, seems to have believed about the same as Justin concerning the soul. He plainly denies that it is immortal, thus: “The soul is not in itself immortal, O Greeks, but mortal. Yet it is possible for it not to die. If, indeed, it knows not the truth, it dies, and is dissolved with the body, but rises again at the last end of the world, with the body, receiving death by punishment in immortality. But, again, if it acquires the knowledge of God, it dies not, although for a time it be dissolved.” We must then set down Tatian as another believer in the mortality of man and the sleep of the dead.

“He denies,” says Dupin, “the immortality of souls; affirming that they die, and that they shall hereafter rise again with their respective bodies.” Dr. Adam Clarke says he believes “that the soul cannot be immortal without union with the Holy Spirit; but, partaking of the nature of flesh while living without God, dies with the body.”

Another historian speaking of the writings of Tatian, says: “He represents that such souls as have not the truth, or knowledge of God, die with the body, and with it rise to judgment at the end of the world, when they are to undergo ‘a death in immortality,’ by which he perhaps means annihilation. To the sinful demons he assigns the same final doom.”

There is a remarkable passage in this author’s writings showing what several scholars have suggested, viz., that many of the early fathers used the term “immortality of the soul” very loosely, only meaning by it that there will be a future life for man. Thus Tatian, reasoning with a Greek, says, You say “that the soul alone is endowed with immortality, but I say that the body also is endowed with it.” Does Tatian mean to say that the flesh is now immortal? Certainly not. He simply means that the flesh will be raised up, and live in the future, which the Greeks denied. In this sense we find the term “immortality of the soul” used among some of the early Christian fathers.

Tatian plainly teaches the sleep of the dead. Thus he says: “For just as, not existing before I was born, I knew not who I was, and only existed in the potentiality of fleshly matter, but being born after a former state of nothingness, I have obtained through my birth a certainty of my existence, in the same way, having been born, and through death existing no longer, and seen no longer, I shall exist again, just as before I was not, but was afterwards born.”

This language cannot be mistaken. He teaches that in death there is no more knowledge than there was before a man was born.

MARTYRS OF THE CHURCH OF LYONS, FRANCE, A. D. 177.

In the year A. D. 177, many of this church were cruelly martyred. Those who survived wrote an account of their sufferings, in which they say: “The bodies of the martyrs, after being abused in every possible manner, and thus exposed to the open air for six days, were at length burned and reduced to ashes by the wretches, and finally cast into the Rhone, that flows near at hand, that there might not be a vestige of them remaining on the land. These things they did as if they were able to overcome God, and destroy their resurrection, as they themselves gave out, that they might not have any hope of rising again, in the belief of which they have introduced a new and strange religion, and contemn the most dreadful punishments, and are prepared to meet death even with joy. Now we shall see whether they will rise again, and whether their God is able to help them, and rescue them out of our hands.”

This shows plainly that the only hope of those early martyrs was the resurrection, and their enemies thought that if they could destroy this hope, they would never have any future life.

ATHENAGORAS, A. D. 180.

Of this Christian father, Horne says, He “is the most polished and elegant author of Christian antiquity.” The following passages show that he held to the sleep of the dead: “And let no one think it strange that we call by the name of life a continuance of being which is interrupted by death and corruption. . . . I suppose some call sleep the brother of death, not as deriving their origin from the same ancestors and fathers, but because those who are dead, and those who sleep, are subject to similar states, as regards, at least, the stillness and absence of all sense of the present or the past, or, rather, of existence itself and their own life.” Hence, he naturally hangs all hope of a future life on the resurrection. Of man, he says: “The cause of his creation is a pledge of his continuance forever, and this continuance is a pledge of the resurrection, without which man could not continue.” Again: “But it is impossible for him to continue unless he rise again; for, if no resurrection were to take place, the nature of men, as men, would not continue.”

Athenagoras, then, still held the Bible doctrine of the sleep of the dead, and also taught, as Paul did, that if there is no resurrection, there can be no future life.

THE FIRST ADVENT.

Who has our report believed? Shiloh come is not received, Not received by his own; Promised branch from root of Jesse, David's offspring sent to bless you, Comes too lowly to be known.

Tell me, O you favored nation! What is your fond expectation— Some fair-spreading, lofty tree? Let not worldly pride confound you; ’Mong the lowly plants around you, Mark the lowest—that is he!

Like a tender plant that's growing Where no waters friendly flowing, No kind rains refresh the ground, Drooping, dying, you shall view him, See no charms to draw you to him; There no beauty shall be found.

Lo! Messiah unrespected! Man of griefs, despised, rejected! Wounds his form disfiguring: Marred his visage more than any; For he bears the sins of many, All our sorrows carrying.

No deceit his mouth had spoken, Blameless—he no law had broken, Yet was numbered with the worst; For, because the Lord would grieve him, You who saw it did believe him For his own offenses cursed.

But while him your thoughts accused, He for our offense was bruised; Yes, for us the victim bled, With his stripes our wounds are cured, By his pains our peace secured, Purchased with the blood he shed.

Love amazing, so to mind us! The Great Shepherd came to find us, Silly sheep all gone astray; Lost, undone by our transgressions, Worse than stripped of all possessions, Debtors without hope to pay!

Death our portion, slaves in spirit, He redeemed us by his merit To a glorious liberty; Dearly first his goodness bought us, Truth and love then sweetly taught us, Truth and love have made us free.

Glory be to God who gave us— Freely gave—his Son to save us! Glory to the Son who came! Honor, blessing, adoration, Ever from the whole creation, Be to God and to the Lamb! —Selected.

DEVOURED HIMSELF.

By C. W. Stone

Yesterday Eld. Evans, pastor of the M. E. church, preached at South Troy upon the Sabbath question. I reviewed his discourse in the evening before a full house. None of the positions taken were new, yet it may be of interest to notice some of them here.

He stated that the change of the Sabbath from the seventh day to the first day of the week did not abrogate the law. In another connection, speaking of Col. 2: 16, he claimed that the “sabbath days” of that text refer to the seventh-day Sabbath; that the Greek word sabbaton, here rendered “sabbath days,” always refers in the New Testament to the seventh day.

It is true that whenever the seventh day of the week, or the Sabbath, is spoken of in the New Testament, this is the Greek word used; but the same word refers to the ceremonial annual sabbaths of the Jews. Greenfield’s Lexicon thus defines the word: “Sabbaton, cessation from labor, rest; the Sabbath, i. e., the Jewish Sabbath, the seventh day of the week, both in the singular and plural. Matt. 12: 2, 5, 8. . . . Plural, all the sabbaths, or times of sacred rest, Col. 2: 16.”

Thus we have the authority of the learned Greenfield for applying the word to other sabbaths and seasons of sacred rest, and he cites this text as an example. The sabbaths here named are those annual sabbaths connected with meats and drinks, and pointing forward to Christ.

But let us notice how Eld. Evans’s positions devour one another. Paul, in Col. 2: 14–17, speaks of a law that was abrogated: “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances, . . . took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.” And he adds, “Let no man therefore [for that reason] judge you in meat or in drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days, which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ.” That is to say, Because that law is abrogated, blotted out, let no man judge you in respect of those sabbath days which are a shadow of things to come. Then it is very plain that those sabbath days are ones that were formerly observed by virtue of that law which is now nailed to the cross, abrogated; for the abrogation of that law is the reason assigned by Paul why those days need no longer be observed. But Eld. Evans says that changing the Sabbath from the seventh day to the first day of the week does not abrogate the law. That is, it is not because of the abrogation of the law that we are excused from keeping the seventh day; and that by the law he had direct reference to the decalogue is shown by his next words: “The obligation of the fourth commandment is met by keeping the first day.” Now if the fourth commandment is not abrogated, then the “sabbath days” of Col. 2: 16, commanded by a law which is abrogated, have no reference to the “Sabbath of the Lord thy God,” commanded by the fourth precept of the decalogue. Thus Eld. Evans, by his own words, debars himself from any right to apply anything in Col. 2: 16 to the Sabbath of Ex. 20: 8–11.

Eld. E. referred to the law forbidding the building of fires on the Sabbath day, and said that in the northern regions under such a law men would never keep but one Sabbath, the idea being that they would freeze to death. In another connection he said that the seventh-day Sabbath was suited to the old dispensation. Putting these two thoughts near each other, we are led to inquire how it was that such a Sabbath under such a law could be suited to the old dispensation. Were the northern regions warm in those days? Were men more capable of enduring cold? Or did they deserve freezing? But Eld. E. says that the Sabbath was suited to that dispensation. Then he very well knows that the command respecting fires was only a local one, applicable only in the warm region where the Jews then were. They had no need of fires except to do work, and this was forbidden on the Sabbath.

In speaking of the difference between the two Sabbaths, Eld. Evans said, that “in this new Sabbath [Sunday] the law allows fires to be built, or at least there is no law against it.” Indeed! That is a very safe statement. It is quite certain that there is no law in the Bible to prevent our building all the fires we please on Sunday.

“It looks incompatible with the great God,” said Eld. E., “that a particular day, and no other, should be observed, when it is impossible.” He proceeded to show that it is not possible, because while people in our part of the world are beginning the Sabbath, others are at work, for the world is round! In almost the next moment he quoted Ps. 118: 24, and called it a prophecy of the new first-day Sabbath, and said that the disciples began its observance at the cross.

The query arises, Why should the great God, after seeing that it is “impossible” to keep “a particular day, and no other,” on a round world, having demonstrated it for four thousand years with the seventh day,—why should he command men to undertake a like “impossible” thing with the first day? Does it not look rather “incompatible”?

It looks “incompatible” with a Bible student, with integrity, and with a sound theory, that a doctrine should be defended by arguments so contradictory. Opponents of the truth will take the easiest way to calm their hearers, even to contradicting their own positions. Truth will run in parallel lines. Error crosses itself at every turn.

C. W. STONE.

South Troy, Vt., April 6.

BURIAL AND RESURRECTION OF POMPEII.

At last Vesuvius, which had so long threatened the gay city, burst its fire sluices, and broke asunder its lava crypts, and in one mighty river of molten rock, poured its cataracts down the steep sides, and overwhelmed Pompeii in a solid shroud of lava and ashes twenty feet deep.

The inhabitants had no time to gather up and carry off their valuables; the shopman left his goods in the scales where he was weighing them for customers; the baker, his bread in the oven and on the shelves; the doctor, his instruments in the surgery; the bather, his garments at the baths; and many an atrium was strewn with articles of the household abandoned in flight. Jewels, trinkets, rings, and all kinds of gold and silver works, were buried there, with wine-bottles just uncorked, and tables spread with viands only half eaten.

For eighteen hundred years the black pall of lava lay upon the corpse of the city. Then it was uncovered by our moderns, and behold we were carried back to the days of the Caesars! Annihilated were those eighteen hundred years! We lived in the year 79 of Christ.—Selected.

“ABIDE IN ME.”

By Mrs. C. Lawton

“If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you.”

What is it to abide in Christ? It certainly is not merely to profess to be a Christian, or even to attend to all the outward forms of religion. We may be decided believers in present truth, and do much to help forward the cause; we may make great sacrifices, and suffer persecution and reproach, and not fully abide in Christ.

John says, “If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love, even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in his love.” You may say, “Do we not keep the commandments?” We certainly profess to; but do we keep them all? If we break one of the least commands, we have broken the law. In reply to the lawyer, Jesus gave this epitome of the law: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy

heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” We must keep these commandments before we can say that we fully abide in Christ.

Is it not to be lamented that we do not put forth a greater effort to obtain this glorious freedom in Christ which he has so freely purchased for us with his own precious blood? We shall be accountable to God for our influence, which would be tenfold greater were we free from sin and unbelief. “Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not.” 1 John 3: 6. “He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.” We shall not knowingly or wilfully sin against God when our hearts are filled with the love of God, and all that is opposed to love and purity is overcome. Then we shall partake of the divine nature, and be brought into very near union with Christ. Oh, what a desirable position! our wills wholly subdued, and in sweet union with Christ. We can then sing with the poet:— “Give joy or grief, Give ease or pain, Take life or friends away, But let me find them all again In that eternal day.”

We have no choice only that we may glorify God in life or death. We are as a little child, that has no fear while enfolded in the loving arms of its parents. Dear brother, dear sister, shall we not seek rest in Christ? How few live in the enjoyment of this inestimable blessing! Yet we can thus live a Christian life much more easily, and there is as much difference between the life and influence of such a Christian and the life and influence of one who is not thus living as there is between twilight and the sun at noonday.

Enoch walked with God three hundred years, and was translated; but before his translation he had the testimony that he pleased God. And we may also have this testimony. Those who have enjoyed the love of God, the Spirit witnessing with their spirits that they are children of God, can never rest satisfied without it; and no one is fully qualified for usefulness without full consecration to God. How soon would the loud cry go forth, and the work of the third angel be closed up, if the whole church of Seventh-day Adventists were wholly consecrated to God! What a mighty influence would go out in every direction! Cannot the church do much to help forward, or to retard, the coming of Christ?

Shall we who profess to love the appearing of our blessed Lord and Saviour longer delay his coming by our tardiness, our lukewarm spirit? Shall we not rather press into the light by making a full surrender to God? If we are thorough in the surrender we make, it is our privilege and duty to believe that God accepts the sacrifice; and he will send light, love, joy, and peace into our hearts. Then we shall feel like rallying around the standard of truth. We shall have a desire to do all we can to hasten the work. Our prayers, fervent and effectual, will go out after those who are strangers to the truth.

Dear brethren and sisters, “abide in Christ,” and let his word abide in you; then you may ask whatsoever you will, and it shall be done unto you. MRS. C. LAWTON.

BURIED GIANTS.

“Many a man would do good, if he had not a superabundance of means of doing it; many a spiritual giant is buried under mountains of gold.” Such is the suggestive sentence we came across recently, and how true!

Thus some are buried under the very excess of religious privileges. Sermons, so many and so good; prayer-meetings, so frequent and interesting; books, so abundant and attractive; Christian communion, so sweet and constant,—all may, and often do minister to self-indulgence and spiritual sloth. Enjoyment takes the place of enterprise. Means of grace are made an end. A surfeit of these good things, without exercise, makes a dyspeptic, and hence a feeble Christian. The giant is so overloaded with armor that his strength becomes weakness.

Others are buried under the very wealth of opportunities. There are so many ways of doing good that they see not which to choose; there are so many openings for influence that their very multiplicity is an embarrassment; there are so many calls for laborers that they know not which to heed. And so in the endeavor to do everything they accomplish nothing, or they stand still while the daily train of opportunities rushes past, never to return, instead of seizing the living present and doing with their might what their hands find to do; buried under a mountain of opportunities.

Others are buried under a load of refinement and social conventionalism. They have a “position in society” to maintain. The family has fashionable connections. It may not be quite “genteel” to visit the squalid abodes of poverty, to confront vice in its haunts, to be found engaged in personal activities for the salvation of men. Once in a while they will compromise with conscience by a check to some popular charity, and do their work by proxy. Rank and wealth thus become the withes wherewith these giants are bound. The very elements of influence, providentially conferred to enhance their power for good, are perverted into the occasion for non-action, if not wrong action. “A living dog”—an obscure but active Christian—“is better than a dead lion”—a gifted but lifeless disciple.

Others are buried under mountains of gold. The instances are not rare of liberal, active Christians growing covetous and indolent in the measure in which they are prospered in worldly affairs. The very process of accumulation, without proportionate charities, induces selfishness; time becomes money, they cannot afford personal activity in the cause of Christ. Wealth brings luxury, and luxury breeds ease; both engross time and heart. The Dives of business becomes a Lazarus in charity. The giant dwindles into a pygmy.

It may seem an anomaly, but the truth, we apprehend, is this—that as in the inspired record, both of the Old Testament and the New, the spiritual heroes of the world were not those whose gifts and opportunities made them such, so in all ages the men of achievement have been for the most part men who, like the Captain of salvation, have been made perfect in suffering. They are men who have been trained in the school of want and difficulty, men who have hewed their way through innumerable obstacles, men who have seized the crown by valiantly wielding the sword and bearing the cross.

Surely the men of renown, like Moses and Abraham and Elijah, and the Luthers and Howards and Wesleys of more modern times, had no hothouse training, no surfeiting of religious privileges. Our men of benevolence are not those who have a windfall of a fortune in the way of bequest, but who have steadily and by hard toil wrought business success. “He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much.” It is the fidelity with the one pound that gains the ten pounds.—Christian Weekly.

“SEEING THE BLOOD.”

By Lucy Wade Herrick

[Founded on a legend very affectingly told by Mr. Moody, the Evangelist.]

“Father, I cannot sleep; the prophet's words Ring in my ears; they fill my heart with fear; For am I not the first-born, and the one On whom the destroying angel's shaft would fall Were not the token on the lintel found? Thrice have I named the patriarchs, and once The creatures great and small that Noah drove Before him in the ark; but all in vain. I cannot sleep, O father, art thou sure The blood is sprinkled as God gave command?”

“Peace, peace, my child; just as the evening fell The fairest lamb of all the flock was slain, And roasted then with purifying fire; With bitter herbs, and bread devoid of leaven, In haste we ate the Lord's appointed feast. Nor were the means of saving thee forgot; Scarce was the yearling slain ere I gave word For sprinkling of the blood upon the door; Sleep, then, my first-born, God's avenging one Will see the signal, and pass over thee.”

Thus on that dark night which God had chosen For passing throughout all fair Egypt's land, To smite on every side the loved first-born, Sparing not e'en the flirtings of the flock, A Hebrew father soothed his restless child; Restless himself, as now with girded loins, Sandals upon his feet, and staff in hand, We waited for that solemn midnight hour When God's almighty arm should break the chain That bound his people to proud Pharaoh's throne. The bread unbaked was in the kneading trough, The scattered flocks were gathered in the fold, And all, betokened plans for hasty flight. There was a thrilling silence in the air; A quiet joy burned in the Rabbi's breast, Joy that was not unmingled with regret At leaving thus his birthplace, though it was A house of bondage, for the promised land.

The night wore on,

And yet again the pleading voice was heard: “Father, sleep will not come; before my eyes I see the angel pass, and at our door Pause sadly, as though he wept to enter, Yet dared not hasten unavenging by. O father, if the blood has been removed, Or if the herd boy heeded not thy voice, Then never shall my weary eyes behold The land of Canaan with its waving fields.”

“Rest, little one, faithful our Jared is. Not only on the side-posts of the door Should be the stain, but on the one above; So if some hungry dog should from its place One token lick, the others would remain. Sleep, my sweet child, for thou hast need of rest; The journey will be rough for little feet.”

The anxious voice was silent; for in that home Obedience reigned supreme, though not as yet The law had sounded forth from Sinai's top; With patience dutiful she sought to woo Soft slumber to her long unclosed eyes; Sleep came at last, but with it dreams of fright, Wherein she tossed, and moaned, and oft cried out.

The midnight hour drew nigh; unbroken still The darkness' solemn hush; the child awoke With a loud cry, “Father, I thought I heard The cock's shrill crow to greet approaching morn. My heart is sick with a sick'ning dread Of danger near. Oh! take me to the door, And let me see the red blood sprinkled there.”

Lighting a torch, the father gently took His first-born in his arms, and bore her forth— Started and paled to see no paschal sign, No warning that their door should be passed by! With trembling hand he snatched the hyssop then, Himself applied the blood in eager haste. A long sigh of relief escaped the child; Almost before he placed her on the couch Sweet sleep had fallen on her heavy lids, Nor when that “great cry” rose did she awake. That agonizing wail of man and beast Reached not her ears, with drowsy slumber sealed, And at the dawn they bore her, sleeping still, Away from Egypt's darkness and despair.

* * * * * * * *

Christ, our blest Passover, is slain for us; The “blood of sprinkling” for us is shed; Have we the atoning sacrifice applied, Made sure our entrance to the promised land? —Lucy Wade Herrick, in Christian Weekly.

NO CROSS, NO CROWN.

By Chas. L. Boyd

Bearing the cross of Christ has come practically to be a mere name. Every age has its peculiar crosses. I have heard of a young disciple who on starting for the Celestial City thought the cross laid upon him heavier than that borne by any of his fellow-pilgrims. “Any cross but this I would willingly bear,” was the sentiment of his soul. He was permitted to lay aside his own cross, and to choose from a large collection of crosses. But alas! each was unendurable, and with a heart weary with disappointment he again received the cross assigned by the divine Master.

The name of Christ has ceased to be a reproach. The cross is painted by the artist, and framed as an ornament. Made of gold, it is worn by the gay, pleasure-seeking youth. The cross is carved upon the monument of the nominal Christian, and raised above the temples of an apostate church. But is this the cross which separates us from the world?—No; for the world is bearing it with us. Is there, then, no cross for us to bear?—Yes; and, strange as it may seem, even here, in our own enlightened land, which makes the highest boast of Christianity of any nation on earth, in which every town has its church-spires towering heavenward as evidence of our loyalty to God, the heaviest cross which can be presented to rich or poor is the keeping of the commandments of God.

This is the cross for the present generation. Dear reader, do you wish for some more pleasant test of loyalty, some lighter cross to bear? Is the Sabbath to you a “delight”? or have the scoffs and scorns of the world and of a sleeping church caused you to blush with shame? The time has been when to acknowledge faith in the resurrection of Christ (who was reported as stolen from the grave by the designing disciples) by being buried in the likeness of his death, was as heavy a cross as it now is to keep God’s Sabbath.

The privilege of drinking the bitter cup of suffering, and, if faithful, of sitting with Christ in his kingdom, was offered to James and John. The certainty of the cross, and the possibility of the crown was held out before the great apostle to the Gentiles. Our blessed Pattern bore the cross, and drank the bitter cup to the dregs.

I said, “This is the cross for us to bear;” I would rather say, “The privilege which is offered to us.”

With too much of truth the poet says,—

“Some with Jesus are delighted When he speaks of joys to come, Thinking that for them is plighted, After death, a happy home; But the cross—when he declares it— ‘None but he who takes, and bears it, Can my true disciple be.’ Few—how few!—to this agree.”

CHAS. L. BOYD.

FAMILY SABBATH-SCHOOLS.

By W. E. Dawson

No phase of the work for the advancement of present truth is more noticeable than the recent waking up of our people to the importance of the Sabbath-school work. Organization and system—the same forces which have proved so efficient in other departments of the cause—are being brought to bear, and are taking the place of independent action and confusion. The Sabbath-school interest has received an unusual degree of attention in the REVIEW and its Supplements, and now demands a weekly edition of the Instructor. The requisite talent has been enlisted to supply our children with hymns of praise free from popular fable, and with Bible Lessons suited to every age and condition of mind.

In short, a general effort is being made to put new life and interest into the work.

Of course, those living in communities where regular Sabbath meetings are maintained are the first to feel the impulse of this forward movement. But why can there not be such a movement “all along the line”? Certainly we who are denied the privilege of joining with our brethren in the worship of God on his holy day, have as great need for a good understanding of his word as have others more fortunately situated.

There is always a great temptation to misspend the Sabbath. This temptation is, no doubt, strongest with us who are compelled to spend our Sabbaths alone.

What a barrier would be erected against the intruding cares, anxieties, and idle thoughts which steal our Sabbaths away from us, if we would only resolutely set apart a portion of the day to the study of God's word.

Most of us, no doubt, spend some portion of the Sabbath in studying the Bible; but we need to learn the value of a systematic course of study, and an appointed time for it.

In short, we all need the Sabbath-school, and where we cannot unite with others in this capacity, there should be such a school in every Sabbath-keeping family.

No Christian feels at liberty to neglect the worship of God merely because he is not surrounded by sympathizing worshipers. No one who prizes the word of God can afford to neglect its systematic study, even though he may be entirely alone in prosecuting that study.

True, where but few of us meet together, we cannot in all cases have a complete Sabbath-school organization; but we can have all the essential features of the best Sabbath-school in the land. We can have the same helps to Bible study, and the same careful preparation of the lesson. We can have a regular hour for recitation, and no tardiness of others will disturb the promptness of our exercises. And, finally, we can ask and receive the blessing of God on our humble efforts to obtain a better understanding of his word.

This idea of family schools for the study of God's word is not a new one. It is as old as the days of Moses. Please read Deut. 11 : 19–21. W. E. DAWSON.

Continue reading: SHALL WE SURRENDER THE BIBLE?