Review and Herald, Vol. 34, No. 24. (12/7/1869)

Review and Herald

Dec 7, 1869

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Dec 7, 1869

OUR FAITH AND HOPE;

By James White

Or, Reasons Why We Believe as We Do.

NUMBER THREE—THE MILLENNIUM.

BY ELDER JAMES WHITE.

Last week we entered upon an examination of those texts usually quoted to prove that the world will be converted, and enjoy a period of peace and universal holiness in this mortal state, to show that they do not prove what they are said to prove, and then brought forward those portions of sacred Scripture which prove that no such state of things can exist prior to the second coming of Christ and the Judgment. This week we propose to conclude the subject.

9. Isa. lxv, 17–25: “For behold I create new heavens and a new earth; and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind. But be ye glad and rejoice forever in that which I create; for behold, I create Jerusalem a rejoicing, and her people a joy, And I will rejoice in Jerusalem, and joy in my people; and the voice of weeping shall be no more heard in her, nor the voice of crying. There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled his days; for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed. “And they shall build houses and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and eat the fruit of them. They shall not build, and another inhabit; they shall not plant, and another eat; for as the days of a tree are the days of my people, and mine elect shall long enjoy the work of their hands. They shall not labor in vain, nor bring forth for trouble; for they are the seed of the blessed of the Lord, and their offspring with them. “And it shall come to pass, that before they call, I will answer; and while they are yet speaking, I will hear. The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the bullock; and dust shall be the serpent’s meat. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, saith the Lord.” See also chap. xi, 6–9.

This prophecy is said to be a description of the condition of man during the temporal millennium. We, however, regard it as a prophetic description of the state of things after the restitution of the earth and man to their primeval glory. Then man was upright, and the earth and all that God had created upon it, as viewed by the Creator, were seen to be “very good.” Gen. i, 31.

The Scriptures do not teach the annihilation of all things by the fires of the great day, and a creation of all new things for the future state. But they do distinctly teach the restitution of all things. Thus saith the great Restorer, “Behold, I make all things new.” Rev. i, 5. Isaiah and the Revelation both speak of the new heavens and the new earth. But it is not merely of the influence of the gospel on the hearts of men that they speak. No; they both describe the tangible glories of the restitution.

One of two positions relative to the words of the prophet quoted above will be taken. He either gives a figurative description of a very happy condition of things in this mortal state, or he is portraying the literal glories of the restitution after the second advent and the resurrection of the just. To the figurative view we find serious objections:

(1) Our temporal millennium friends have, in their figurative new heavens and earth, figurative houses, figurative vineyards, of which they figuratively eat the figurative fruit thereof, and are obliged to suffer from figurative wolves, and figurative lions, figuratively feeding with figurative lambs and figurative bullocks, to say nothing of the presence of figurative serpents. But it is said that the gospel is to convert all these wolves and lions and serpents. Then we reply, that during the entire period of the millennium there will be nothing but lambs and doves, and the prophecy has no reference to the temporal millennium. It must apply to some other period.

(2) The apostle has so clearly identified the three worlds, namely, the one before the flood, the one that now is, and the new earth which is to come, as to entirely preclude the figurative view. He says: “For this they [religious scoffers] willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: but the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of Judgment and perdition of ungodly men.” “Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.” 2 Pet. iii, 5–7, 13.

The world that perished by the flood is the same as that which now is, and is reserved unto fire. This is to be changed by fire, and then will appear the new heavens and the new earth, according to the promise of God.

It is a remarkable fact that the promise of God, referred to by the apostle, is found only in the sixty-fifth chapter of Isaiah. Thus the apostle links the three worlds together. Are the first two worlds literal? so is the third. Is the new earth, mentioned by Isaiah, figurative? so are all three worlds figurative. To say that all three are literal, is to testify to the plain truth of God. To hold that they are all figurative, is to suppose that,

In the days of figurative Noah, the figurative heavens and earth, being overflowed by figurative water, perished figuratively. But the figurative heavens and earth which are now, are reserved unto figurative fire, against the figurative day of figurative Judgment and figurative perdition of figurative ungodly men. Nevertheless we, according to his figurative promise, look figuratively for figurative new heavens and new earth wherein dwelleth figurative righteousness.

True, the sacred writers use figures and parables. But we feel bound by sacred obligations to believe that God in his word means just what he says, unless the connections show good reasons why a figure or parable is introduced. If God does not mean what he says in his word, who will tell us what he does mean? In that case the Bible ceases to be a revelation, and God should give us another book to teach what this one means. But the Bible is the very book in which he has plainly spoken, and revealed his truth to us.

With this view of the sacred Scriptures we see spread out before us the living realities of the new earth, in all their grandeur and glory, as when Adam was lord of Eden. Before the transgression, all was purity and peace, even among the beasts which God had created. And who can say that these, with natures such as the Creator first gave them, will not be in place in the earth restored from the fall, as well as in the earth before the fall?

But when the figurative interpretation of the Scriptures is adopted, the new heavens and the new earth of Isaiah and the Revelation, may be made to be almost anything fancy may suggest. Such liberties taken with the word of God, have led the skeptic to say that the Bible was like a fiddle, on which any tune can be played at pleasure.

Having examined the principal texts quoted to prove the conversion of the world, and a period of universal peace and holiness in this mortal state, and seen that they do not mean what they are said to mean, we will now call attention to some of the many direct proofs that no such state of things can exist prior to the second advent.

1. The prevalence of the little horn. “I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them, until the Ancient of Days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High, and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.” Dan. vii, 21, 22. “But the saints of the Most High shall take the kingdom, and possess the kingdom forever, even for ever and ever.” Verse 18. Here it will be seen that the little horn makes war with the saints until they take the kingdom, and when they once obtain the kingdom, they hold it forever, even for ever and ever. Where, then, is there room for that period of peace and triumph of the church called the temporal millennium?

2. The apostasy. “Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, that ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by

word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means; for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that he, as God, sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. Remember ye not, that when I was yet with you, I told you these things? And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. And then shall that wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming.” 2 Thess. ii, 1–8.

Paul is speaking of the day of the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. He is guarding the church at Thessalonica against deception in being led to expect the coming of the Lord too soon. He states to them what must first come before the coming of the Lord. Is it the temporal millennium? the triumphs of the world’s conversion? No; it is the sad apostasy, the falling away, and the manifestation of the man of sin, that will continue his blasphemy until, and be destroyed by, the coming of the Son of Man. Where, then, is room for one thousand years before the coming of the Lord, during which time all men will love and serve God?

3. The wicked continue with the righteous, as illustrated by the parable of the wheat and tares, until the end of the Christian age.

“Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of Heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field. But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also. So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares? He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest; and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them; but gather the wheat into my barn.” Matt. xiii, 24–30.

The friends of the modern doctrine of the world’s conversion find this parable directly in their way, and they have wearied themselves in laboring to explain it away. But as our divine Lord, by special request, gave an explanation of it, modesty suggests that we accept his explanation, and there let the matter rest.

“Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field. He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of Man; the field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; the enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire, so shall it be in the end of this world. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; and shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.” Verses 36–43.

We simply repeat, “The field is the world,” “The good seed are the children of the kingdom.” “The tares are the children of the wicked one.” “Let both grow together until the harvest.” “The harvest is the end of the world.” Why, then, talk of the world’s conversion?

4. The last days are described as perilous. If the glories of the millennium are to be manifested before the second advent, and the judgment of the great day, they will most certainly be realized in the last days. Read Paul’s description: “This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come; for men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, high-minded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.” 2 Tim. iii, 1–5. Are these the results of a converted world, amid the glories of the millennium?

5. The last days, or the days of the coming of the Son of Man, were to be like the days of Lot and of Noah. “And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of Man. They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all. Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; but the same day that Lot went out of Sodom, it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all: even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed.” Luke xvii, 26–31.

Then the wickedness of the wicked was such that God could bear with them no longer. And when their measure of iniquity was full, he visited them in wrath. There is a wonderful similarity between the days of Noah and Lot and ours. Then men were given up to the love of the things of this life, as they are at the present time. Then they were abandoned to lust and crime, fully illustrating the terrible records of our times. As God manifested his wrath then in fire and in flood, so now the vials of his wrath, unmingled with mercy, only wait for the interposing arm of mercy to be removed, when they will be poured out upon the ungodly.

6. Destruction, not conversion, awaits the world at the very time when men cherish the delusive hope of a good time coming. “When they shall say, Peace and safety, then sudden destruction cometh upon them.” 1 Thess. v, 2. At the very time when the Lord, by the prophet Joel, is saying, “Prepare war, wake up the mighty men, let all the men of war draw near; let them come up. Beat your ploughshares into swords, and your pruninghooks into spears: let the weak say, I am strong,” chap. iii, 9, 10, they are fulfilling the prophecy of Micah, which says, “And many nations [not the Lord] shall come and say, Come and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, . . . and they shall beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruninghooks, nation shall not lift up sword against nation; neither shall they learn war any more.” Chap. iv, 2, 3.

7. The way to destruction is broad, and many go in it; and the way to life is narrow, and but few find it. Matt. vii, 13, 14. This is true in every age till the close of human probation. Persecution and tribulation have ever been the sad portion of the true church, and Paul declares of all the future from his day to the end, “Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus, shall suffer persecution.” 2 Tim. iii, 12.

8. It is said of the blood-washed and saved of “all nations, and kindreds, and people and tongues,” “These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.” Rev. vii, 14, 15.

Dear reader, the double object of Satan in leading men to the false hope of the world’s conversion is to get their minds upon that when they should be looking for the second advent of Christ; and also to lead them to conclude that the body of popular professors who hold this doctrine are accepted of God to do the work of converting the world. Thus those who hold this false doctrine are in a terrible deception, thinking they are accepted of God, while they hold the standard of piety far below the Bible standard. Be not deceived. But few were saved in the days of Lot and Noah. “When the Son of Man cometh shall he find faith on the earth?” Luke xviii, 8. But few, comparatively, will be saved when the Lord comes. “Strive [agonize] to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able.” Luke xiii, 24. Those who only seek will assuredly fail. Those who strive will succeed. And who are these who only seek? Are they skeptics and worldly generally? No; these do not seek.

It is a painful fact that the many who seek, are professors of religion. And probably no class go so far in making up the many who simply seek, but fail, as those who cherish the delusive hope of the world’s conversion.

PRAYER.

CHRISTIAN, frequent the mercy-seat; Christian, be often there; What if each wayward, wandering thought, Each random breath, were prayer?

’Twould keep thy armor strong and bright, To meet the shafts of sin; ’Twould arm thee with a hidden might, To wage the war within.

’Twould make thy fig-tree’s withered leaves, All fresh, and green, and fair. Oh! thou mayst glean some precious sheaves For harvest-time, in prayer.

PLATO AND HIS DOCTRINE.

By Dudley Marvin Canright

The greatest name that appears in the history of the immortality of the soul, is that of PLATO. He was a Greek, born B. C. 428, and was one of the greatest philosophers of antiquity. “The influence of this sublime autocrat,” says Alger, “in the realms of intellect, has transcended calculation. However coldly his thoughts may have been regarded by his contemporary countrymen, they soon obtained cosmopolitan audience, and, surviving the ravages of time and ignorance, overleaping the bars of rival schools and sects, appreciated and diffused by the loftiest spirits of succeeding ages, closely blended with their own speculations by many Christian theologians, have held almost an unparalleled dominion over the minds of millions of men for more than fifty generations.” “Future Life,” p. 185.

His ideas concerning the immortality of the soul are now quoted with great satisfaction by believers in that doctrine. So much did he do for that doctrine that he often is called the father of it. Mr. Anthon expresses the sentiment which has led so many Christians to put Plato almost on a level with the Bible, when he says, “Whoever studies Plato is treading on holy ground. So heathens always felt it. So even Christians confessed!” “Classical Dict.,” Art. Plato. The reason why Plato is thus honored by Christians is revealed in the following statement of another author: “Plato is also celebrated as the first of the ancient philosophers who distinctly taught the doctrine of the immortality of the soul.” “Progressive Fourth Reader.” That it was not very plainly taught before, we have already seen. It needed the genius of a Plato to invent arguments to prove the soul immortal; and Christian theologians, in their defense of this doctrine, have only been able to take up and repeat his arguments. This fact Dr. Knapp honestly confesses: “In the varied web of proof [of the immortality of the soul] in our modern philosophical schools, the chief threads, and, as it were, the entire material, are of Grecian origin.” “The followers of Socrates, however, did the most for this doctrine, and especially Plato.” “Christian Theol.,” pp. 521, 522. Enfield says, “Even to the present day, Plato has many followers; his writings still give a tincture to the speculations and language of philosophy and theology.” “Hist. of Phil.,” p. 115. This is true; hence, we shall be interested to learn about Plato and his doctrine of the soul.

At the age of twenty, Plato became the disciple of Socrates. At the end of eight years, Socrates dying, he left Greece in search of wisdom. “He first visited that part of Italy called Magna Grecia, where a celebrated school of philosophy had been established by Pythagoras, and was instructed in all the mysteries of the Pythagorean system, the subtleties of which he afterwards too freely blended with the simple doctrine of Socrates.” “Enfield’s Hist. of Phil.,” p. 116. Thus at an early period we find Plato a disciple of the Pythagoreans and freely receiving their doctrines, the chief of which was the immortality of the soul. What Plato represents Socrates as saying about the immortality of the soul is only Plato’s own words and ideas put into the mouth of Socrates; hence, no proof that Socrates ever held or taught that doctrine. “It is remarkable,” says Leland, “that though there were several sects of philosophers which professed to derive their original from Socrates, scarce any of them taught the immortality of the soul as the doctrine of their schools, except Plato and his disciples.” “Necessity of Revelation,” Vol. II, p. 319.

That Plato went to Egypt and spent several years there learning of the priests, is so well known that I need offer but little proof of it. Says Enfield, “Thales, Pythagoras, Plato, and others, had derived their

knowledge from the Chaldean and Egyptian priests.” Again: “Plato visited Egypt in search of knowledge.” “Hist. of Phil.,” pp. 9, 36. Sozoman says, “Plato, the friend of Socrates, dwelt for a long time among the Egyptians in order to acquaint himself with their manners and customs.” “Eccl. Hist.,” p. 86. Hippolytus, thus states: “Pythagoras and Plato derived these tenets originally from the Egyptians, and introduced their novel opinions among the Greeks.” “The origin, then, from which Plato derived his theory in the Timaeus is the wisdom of the Egyptians.” “Refutation of Heresies,” chaps. xvi, xvii, pp. 215, 216. See also “Enfield,” p. 124. Then to the Pythagoreans first, and to the Egyptians next, was Plato indebted for his theories and doctrines.

Having learned the fountain from whence Plato drew his doctrines, we will now briefly examine his theory of the soul. We find him agreeing with his master, Pythagoras, 1. In the pre-existence of the soul. 2. That it was an emanation from God. 3. That it was immortal. 4. That it transmigrated through different bodies. And 5. That it would finally be absorbed into the Deity. We shall also find that he further improved and spiritualized this doctrine. 1. By making the soul purely spiritual and immaterial; and 2. By making the transmigration a moral doctrine instead of one of necessity.

Enfield thus describes Plato’s doctrine of God and matter: “Through the whole dialogue of the Timaeus, Plato supposes two eternal and independent causes of all things; one, that by which all things are made, which is God; the other, that from which all things are made, which is matter. He distinguishes between God, matter, and the universe, and supposes the Architect of the world to have formed it out of a mass of pre-existent matter.” “Hist. of Phil.,” p. 129. God did not create matter, but simply molds it, as we now see it. He taught that hateful doctrine that matter is the source and origin of all evil. Says a learned author, “It was also a doctrine of Plato that there is in matter a necessary, but blind and refractory force; and that hence arises a propensity in matter to disorder and deformity, which is the cause of all the imperfections which appear in the works of God, and the origin of evil. . . . This is the cause of the mixture of good and evil which is found in the material world.” “Hist. of Phil.,” p. 132. The effect of this doctrine was to degrade matter and exalt mind, or the soul. From Plato, as we will show, this doctrine was received into Christian theology and produced the ascetics and monks of the early centuries. Again, the above author continues: “Visible things were regarded by Plato as fleeting shades, and ideas as the only permanent substances. These he conceived to be the proper objects of science, to a mind raised by divine contemplation above the perpetually varying scenes of the material world.” “Hist. of Phil.,” p. 132. Here the same effect is seen to decry matter and exalt pure mind, spirit, or soul.

One fact is worthy of special attention; viz., that Plato places his doctrine of the human soul at the head of his philosophy. Thus testifies Enfield: “Plato refers to the head of the philosophy of nature, his doctrine concerning the human soul: a doctrine which he treats obscurely on the ground of his assumed hypothesis concerning spiritual emanations from the divine nature. He appears to have taught that the soul of man is derived by emanation from God; but that this emanation was not immediate, but through the intervention of the soul of the world, which was itself debased by some material admixture, and, consequently, that the human soul, receding further from the first intelligence, is inferior in perfection to the soul of the world. . . . The relation which the human soul in its original constitution, bears to matter, Plato appears to have considered as the source of moral evil. Since the soul of the world, by partaking of matter, has within itself the seeds of evil, he inferred that this must be the case still more with respect to the soul of man. . . . “To account for the origin and present state of human souls, Plato supposes that when God formed the universe, he separated from the soul of the world inferior souls, equal in number to the stars, and assigned to each its proper celestial abode; but that those souls (by what means, or for what reason, does not appear) were sent down to the earth into human bodies, as into a sepulcher or prison. He ascribes to this cause the depravity and misery to which human nature is liable; and maintains that it is only by disengaging itself from all animal passions, and rising above sensible objects to the contemplation of the world of intelligence, that the soul of man can be prepared to return to its original habitation.” “Hist. of Phil.,” p. 134.

Thus we see that Plato held that the soul was a spiritual emanation from God; that the source of all evil is in matter; that the body is a prison for the soul; that by contemplation the soul may return to God; &c. “Lastly, Plato teaches, in express terms, the doctrine of the immortality of the rational soul; but he rests the proof of this doctrine upon the more fanciful parts of his system.” “Hist. of Phil.,” p. 135. “Raising man above his condition and nature, he unites him to certain imaginary divine principles, leads him through various orders of emanations, and forms of intelligence, to the Supreme Being, and represents these fictions of fancy as the first principles of wisdom.” “Hist. of Phil.,” p. 126. The learned Mr. Anthon thus relates Plato’s arguments for the soul’s immortality as found in the Phaidon. Be it remembered that in this dialogue Socrates is only used as a mouth-piece for Plato to express his own ideas with. “Socrates,” writes Anthon, “undertakes to prove the immortality of the soul by its spirituality; and we have here the first traces of a demonstration which modern philosophy, under the guidance of revelation [?] has carried on to so successful a result. The doctrine which Plato here puts into the mouth of Socrates is not entirely pure; it is amalgamated with the Pythagorean hypothesis of the metempsychosis, and with all sorts of fables borrowed from the Greek mythology.” “Classical Dict.” Art. Plato. Here we have Plato proving the immortality of the soul by its spirituality. This was the first trace of that idea which modern Christian philosophy has carried on. This shows the origin of that doctrine. Plato was its legitimate father.

Plato taught that the transmigrations which any soul has to undergo are for its sins. When it is freed from sin it will be freed from transmigrating, will no longer be connected with a natural body, but will return to God and be re-absorbed into his being. If a soul has sinned much and is very vile, it will be born into the body of a degraded animal, as a pig or a dog. If it has been pretty good, it will occupy the body of a better animal, as a horse or a man, &c. Warburton and Knapp say this was a refinement of Plato’s upon the original doctrine of transmigration. “Divine Legation,” Vol. II, pp. 160, 161. “Knapp’s Chris. Theol.,” sect. 150, p. 523. This was the only hell that Plato really believed in. The vulgar notions of hell, hades, tartarus, and the torments there, he rejected as fables, though he often speaks of them in accommodation to the popular notion. So say Leland and others. “Necessity of Revelation,” Part 3, chap. 4, p. 315.

Plato held that the soul was a part of God. Thus writes Bishop Warburton: “Plato, without any softening, frequently calls the soul, God, and a part of God.” “Divine Legation,” Vol. II, p. 220. This is one of his strong proofs of the soul’s immortality. As a part of God, it will be re-absorbed into him either at death or as soon as sufficiently purified by transmigration. Hence, an eternal personal existence of any soul, either righteous or wicked, was out of the question. Plato did not, and could not, believe in eternal misery. This I have proved before. And his doctrine of the immortality of the soul was far from being that which now goes by that name. With Plato, the soul was immortal only as a part of God into whom it would finally be re-absorbed and lose all personal existence.

We will now briefly notice the history and influence of Plato’s teachings and followers. After finishing his travels, Plato returned to Greece, where he established a philosophical school, in which he taught his theory of the human soul, &c. It was largely attended, and became very famous and influential. Contemporary with Plato and his school, there were several other schools of philosophy, as the Stoics, &c.; but as none of them taught the immortality of the soul we are not now interested in them. It was through Plato and his disciples that this doctrine came into the church; hence, we are interested in their history. Enfield says, “The school of Plato long continued famous, but passed through several changes, on account of which it was successively distinguished into the Old, the Middle, and the New Academy. The Old Academy consisted of those followers of Plato who taught the doctrines of their master without mixture or corruption.” “Hist. of Phil.,” p. 137. The Old Academy continued till about three hundred years before Christ.

Then, under the teaching of ARCESILAUS, it passed into the Middle Academy. It differed from the Old in asserting that “everything is uncertain to human understanding, and, consequently, that all confident assertions are unreasonable.” “Hist. of Phil.,” pp. 142, 143. This school tended strongly to scepticism. It continued less than one hundred years, and met with much opposition. The New Academy succeeded it. CARNEADES, born B. C. 214, was its first teacher. It came back nearer to the doctrine of Plato. It allowed that a strong probability of truth might be attained by sufficient evidence. This school continued about one hundred years. “The last preceptor of the Platonic school in Greece was Antiochus of Ascalon. . . . He resigned the Academic chair B. C. 80. After his time the professors of the Academic philosophy were dispersed by the tumults of war, and the school itself was transferred to Rome.” “Hist. of Phil.,” p. 146. Platonism, having found its way to Rome, soon made its way into the Roman Church, as may be easily shown.

D. M. CANRIGHT. Monroe, Iowa.

WHAT IS PRAYER?

When listening to some long, tedious prayers, we have thought, if all was omitted except what was really prayer, it would be sufficiently short to be listened to with interest. It seems as though some thought if they did not make a long prayer the people would think it was because they lacked ability. Prayer is defined as “the act of asking a favor, and particularly with earnestness.” If one should go to ask a favor of one who was greatly his superior, it would be quite out of place for him to begin to give an account of passing events, and various other things not connected directly with the petition. The request should be presented in as few words as possible, in a simple manner, with becoming reverence and respect toward the one of whom the favor is expected. Those points should be especially observed in prayer to our Creator, if we would be heard with pleasure by those who may listen. The prayers recorded in the Bible are very short, when compared with most of the public prayers of the present day. Instead of its being a pleasure, it is often tedious, to unite with those who pray on public occasions. One would think they were praying like the Pharisees, to be heard of men. They appear to seek all possible ways to express the same thing; and go on to tell the Lord about things, of which, no doubt he is better informed than any one else. Many prayers are offered that hardly contain a single petition. It was a beautiful talk about various things, but the prayer was wanting. If all but the prayer was omitted, we think but very few would be over three minutes in length, thus corresponding with those recorded in the Scriptures.

It has often been observed that in revivals, prayers are usually short and fervent; but when a church is in a cold state, then we may expect long, cold and formal prayers, which afford no satisfaction to any one. It is only a kind of religious drudgery, which is performed like a school-boy's task. Such prayers, of course, do not avail much. When we live near to Jesus, prayer is a delight, and is to the Christian spiritually as is the breath of life physically. He cannot live without it.

It is to be feared there is a lack of prayer, private, social, and public, among those who are professedly looking for the coming of Jesus. In proportion as prayer is neglected, we grow weak and faint in the cause of the Lord. Those who have been the most noted for their success in winning sinners to Christ, have been equally noted for spending much time in secret prayer. We do not see how any one can think of living a Christian life without at least having a special place for morning and evening prayer, where he can be alone in communion with the Lord. When one gets so far from the Saviour as to neglect secret prayer, he may be sure he is in a dying condition.

Let us all watch and pray more, and we shall be more useful in the vineyard of the Lord, and better prepared to meet Jesus at his coming. Short prayers in public, and long ones in the closet.

Continue reading: THE ORDER OF EVENTS IN THE JUDGMENT