Signs of the Times, Vol. 9, No. 13. (3/29/1883)

Signs of the Times

Mar 29, 1883

Seventh-day Adventist Missionary Society · Oakland, California · Mar 29, 1883

General Articles.

By Editor

Harmony Between the Old and New Testaments.

BY THE EDITOR.

1. THEY have the same author. There cannot be that contrast, not to say conflict, between the two Testaments which some affect to see. It is a great mistake to ascribe the authorship of the Old Testament to the Father, and that of the New Testament to the Son. In all the dispensations, purposes, and revelations of Heaven to and toward man, the Father and Son have been, and are, perfectly united; and in all these the Father has revealed himself only through the Son. The highest evidence of divine authority that God ever offers in his word is that he made all things; and yet he made them by the Son. Heb. 1:1-3. Creation reveals to us the Son as certainly as it does the Father.

Not only in creation, but in the revelation of the Old Testament we behold the Son as clearly as we do the Father. He talked with the patriarchs. He was the angel of God's presence in whom he put his name, who led Israel out of Egypt, who communed with Moses, and ordered and arranged the first covenant with Israel. He went with Joshua, as "captain of the Lord's host," to bring the Lord's people into the land of Canaan. He inspired the prophets of old to speak concerning himself, as Peter says the Spirit of Christ testified in the prophets.

And in like manner in the work of salvation, in all the New Testament, do we behold the Father and the Son. They who shut the Son out of the Old Testament and the Father out of the New, represent God as a stern, inexorable, and almost cruel governor, and, in contrast, they represent Christ as loving, kind, and merciful. They find a relief to their feelings in the thought that, as a no-law minister in Indiana said, "their allegiance is transferred from God to Christ." This is nothing less than a monstrous perversion of the gospel. In the New Testament we are told that "God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son;" "the gift of God is eternal life, through Jesus Christ;" "God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself;" "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us;" in short, that "God is love;" and the richest blessing mankind can enjoy is to have "the love of God shed abroad in our heart."

2. They have the same object. Ever since the fall of man, since the first promise that the seed of the woman should bruise the head of the serpent, we can see the same ideas and purposes running through all the revelations of God to man. By sin, God's government was reproached, the earth was cursed, and man lost his dominion and his life. The offering of Abel, and all the offerings of the patriarchal and Levitical ages, looked forward to the same gospel truth, that the Son of God would put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

3. The Levitical system was preparatory to the gospel age. It was introductory, looking in the same direction. We should suppose from the teachings of some that they were in antagonism; but that is not the case. And so, also, the prophets spake by inspiration of the Spirit of Christ. They not only foretold the glories of the work of grace through Christ, but they looked for it, and longed for it.

4. The gospel is built upon the law of the Old Testament. The gospel is remedial—a system of pardon. It was a necessity because sin was in the world. And as sin is the transgression of the law, the gospel is a recognition of law, not merely a recognition of its existence, but a recognition of its claims, and of the justice of its claims. For, as Andrew Fuller forcibly and correctly remarked, "If the law which has been transgressed were unjust, instead of an atonement being required for the breach of it, it ought to have been repealed, and the lawgiver have taken upon himself the disgrace of having enacted it."

5. The perpetuity of the law is essential to the existence of the gospel. This may be shown in many respects, but we will content ourselves with a further quotation from Andrew Fuller, the celebrated Baptist author, on the atonement. He says:—

"Every instance of punishment among men is a sort of atonement to the justice of the country, the design of which is to restore the authority of good government, which transgression has impaired. But if the law itself is bad, or the penalty too severe, every sacrifice made to it must be an instance of cruelty. And should a prince of the blood royal, in compassion to the offenders, offer to suffer in their stead, for the purpose of atonement, whatever love it might discover on his part, it were still greater cruelty to accept the offer, even though he might survive his sufferings. The public voice would be, There is no need of any atonement; it will do no honor, but dishonor, to the legislature; and to call the liberation of the convicts an act of grace, is to add insult to injury. The law ought to have been enacted, and now it is enacted, ought immediately to be repealed. It is easy to see from hence, that in proportion as the law is depreciated, the gospel is undermined, and both grace and atonement rendered void." On the other hand, all can see that if the law were holy, and just, and good, and the rebellion against it wrong; if the authority, the claims, and the penalties of the law were worthy of the highest regard, then an atonement to the law does honor to the government which enacted the law, and to the principles of justice and right. Truly, as the prophet wrote, the Son of God, in his obedience and death, has magnified the law

and made it honorable; and, as the apostle said, we do not make void the law through faith, but we establish the law.

6. The New Testament indorses the Old as a means of instruction in righteousness. Says Paul, "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." 2 Tim. 3:16, 17. This is a most important testimony, and demands careful attention.

(a.) The word "Scripture" is here used as it is generally used in the New Testament, namely, as referring to the Old Testament exclusively. To this the Saviour referred when he said, "Search the Scriptures." Paul used this as his authority when he "reasoned out of the Scriptures." And this is rendered certain by Paul's words to Timothy in the verse preceding the ones quoted: "From a child thou hast known the Holy Scriptures." Timothy might have known the Old Testament from a child; but not the New, for the very good reason that the New Testament was not yet written when Timothy was a child. Hence all that Paul here says must apply to the Old Testament exclusively. If the Old Testament was for the Jews only, and of no profit in this dispensation, as some teach, then Paul surely knew it, and he would speak accordingly. And how does he speak of it?

(b.) He says of the Scriptures which Timothy knew from a child "that they were able to make him wise unto salvation." No one can say more than this of the New Testament. Were this our own language, and not that of Paul, we are sure that they who teach that "rightly dividing the word of truth" is to separate the Old Testament to the Jews and reject it as a rule of right and means of instruction for Christians, would accuse us of being fanatical and of teaching error. But the words of this apostle to the Gentiles are a standing rebuke to that system of error which discards the Old Testament from the Christian church.

(c.) Paul says of the Old Testament it is "profitable for doctrine." Hence on doctrine we are not shut up to the New Testament, and out of the Old, in this dispensation. We have as our book of doctrine all that God has spoken to the human race in all ages. They who accuse us of having a special hobby, or of being narrow and exclusive in our faith, are blind in regard to the instructions of the apostles on this subject, and they lose much of the blessedness and fullness of God's revelations to his people.

(d.) Paul says the Old Testament, which Timothy knew from a child, is profitable "for reproof and for correction." Here again we discover the error of those who make the New Testament their sole book of "discipline." And why not accept the reproofs given by the writers of the Old Testament? They spake by inspiration of God, even as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. And this is not the only place where Paul indorses them as authority. He says the Ephesians, who "were Gentiles by nature," they were "built upon the foundation of the prophets and apostles." Therefore they who teach that the churches from the Gentiles are to depend on the instructions of the apostles alone are plainly in error. They who accept both the Old and New Testaments as the rule of their faith have a broad foundation on which to build. And this is what Paul calls it: "The foundation of the prophets and apostles." They who reject the teachings of the apostles, have a defective and one-sided foundation. Their whole system needs to be corrected in the light of Paul's teaching.

(e.) The Old Testament is profitable "for instruction in righteousness." Says another apostle, "He that doeth righteousness is righteous." Hence, righteousness consists in right-doing. And thus is proved that the Old Testament is not merely profitable to us theoretically, or as to mere doctrinal points and prophetic declarations, but profitable as laying down rules of right action; as giving us divine instruction for regulating our lives, and forming our characters. This being true, how much is lost to many professors of religion by their neglecting the study of the Old Testament. The Holy Spirit dictated the words written by "holy men of old," and inspired the apostles to confirm them as a rule of life; and they who reject those words grieve the Holy Spirit of God, and are left to walk in darkness. This is the reason why they who reject the Old Testament are found so generally denying the power of the Spirit of God. Their religion becomes nominal and formal.

(f.) Some would be willing to admit that Paul's indorsement of the Old-Testament Scriptures is correct in some degree; they would accept his words, yet under large limitations. But Paul's words allow of no limitations; he has been careful to put them out of the way of restrictions. After saying they "are able to make thee wise unto salvation," that they are profitable for doctrine, for discipline, for instruction in right-doing, he adds, "that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto ALL GOOD WORKS." However strongly people may doubt that all good works are embraced within the teachings of the Old-Testament Scriptures, there is no room to doubt that Paul says so. And his statement must be approved by all who examine the subject with any care and candor. A sufficient vindication of his words (if they need any) is found in the fact that the law of the Most High God is written in the Old Testament. Concerning this law Jehovah himself said if they would keep it they would be holy. Moses said it was their righteousness and their life to keep those commands. Deut. 6:25; 30:15-20. David said that law was perfect. Solomon said it contained the whole duty of man. The particular declarations of the New Testament in favor of the law, equally broad and emphatic, will be considered hereafter. It is a very evident truth that a law which can make men holy in obeying it, which is righteous, which is perfect, which contains the whole duty of man, must indeed embrace "all good works." But this is the nature of the law of God, and this law is written in the Old Testament. And so Paul's words stand vindicated, that we are "thoroughly furnished unto all good works" in the Old-Testament Scriptures. Had we no other evidence in the New Testament in favor of the perpetuity and perfection of the law of God, we should consider this text amply sufficient; but, having much more equally decisive, we have no hesitation in planting ourselves on this truth, and claiming in its behalf a "full assurance of faith."

(g.) The perfect harmony of the Old and New Testaments is further found in Paul's answer to the objection which may be raised against his strong indorsement of the Old-Testament Scriptures. Thus, the objector questions, If the Old Testament is able to make us wise unto salvation, and gives complete instruction in doctrine, discipline, and right-doing, even furnishing us the rules of all good works, what need have we of the New Testament? Is not the Old Testament therein affirmed to be complete and sufficient without the New? To open this subject more fully to the mind of the objector, we ask in return: If the law of the Lord was perfect, why make any further revelation through prophets and apostles? Is there a complement of moral perfection? or, if the commandments of God contained the whole duty of man, why add the New Testament to them? Does God require man to do more than his whole duty? The whole difficulty is in the mind of the objector, in that he sees no difference between moral obligation and a remedy for sin. It is a Bible truth that the whole duty of man was revealed in the Old Testament; and it is equally true that man did not do his duty. Having failed in his duty; having subjected himself to condemnation and to punishment, he finds himself utterly helpless, unable to extricate himself from the difficulty and the danger. As a rebellious creature he is subject to the righteous wrath of God, without any means of averting it. God looks down upon him in pity. But the government of God is a right government; his claims on man are just, and cannot in justice be yielded. He cannot in any respect release man from his whole duty without doing violence to his own justice and dishonoring his own government. But in his infinite wisdom he devised a plan, wrought out through his own dear Son, whereby "he may be just, and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus." Rom. 3:23-26. Had man done his whole duty, he would, of course, have been accepted on his obedience; but now, in addition to future obedience, he must receive "remission of sins" that are past by the forbearance of God. And more than this, his rebellion has so alienated him from God that he is incapable of restoring himself to those privileges and to that allegiance from which he has fallen. Both remission for the past, and obedience in the future, are secured through his surety. Thus "being justified by faith we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ." Rom. 5:1. Hence, now, when Paul vindicates the sufficiency of the Old Testament as a divine instructor on morals, he adds the means of restoration, as follows: "From a child thou hast known the Holy Scriptures which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus." Here we have a perfect union of the two Testaments—the Old, containing the law of Jehovah, defining the whole duty of man, and also pointing out his fall, his repeated failures to discharge his duty—the New, revealing the remedy for sin through God's only Son. Thus we have "repentance toward God" because of transgression, and "faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ," for remission of sin; past failures forgiven in "being justified by faith," and future obedience insured by our having "peace with God," the enmity or carnal mind, which is not subject to the law of God, being taken away. Long time has error, like a pall of darkness, hung over the Christian world in regard to this important point. Grievous wolves have foisted their heresies upon the church, since the "falling away" foretold by the spirit of prophecy. And no greater heresy has ever obtained than that which places the Son in antagonism to the Father; which makes void the law of the great God through faith in Jesus Christ; which makes God's will, as revealed in this dispensation, conflict with his will as revealed in past dispensations. "All his commandments are sure. They stand fast forever and ever, and are done in truth and uprightness." Ps. 111:7, 8.

THE LAND FAR AWAY.

By MARY M. BUCKLAND

There’s a land far away, a beautiful land, Where the sorrows of earth are unknown, Where the saints will be gathered, that pilgrim band, And Jesus will crown them his own. The King in his beauty there ever will reign, And nothing can harm or destroy; For nothing can enter that beautiful land That can for one moment annoy.

In that beautiful land no sorrow or pain Can ever one moment be known. And there never is seen the burial train, To bear our loved ones from our home, To lay them away where the white marble gleams, To show where the lone sleeper rests; For death and the grave will never be seen In that beautiful land of the blest.

Oh! who would not wish for a home in that land Where no shadow of night ever comes; Where the ransomed ones gather, that pilgrim band, And find with their Saviour a home? There none will be weary, no sickness or pain, And there sorrow never can come; In that beautiful land they ever will reign With the King in his beauty, at home.

Albion, N. Y.

A Letter to the Disciples of the Lord.

By Roswell F. Cottrell

BY ROSWELL F. COTTRELL.

DEAR BRETHREN: The subject on which I address you is truly important. It is a subject involving a part of our duty to God—a subject on which all lovers of the truth should be agreed. Either myself or you are in the habit, through ignorance, of sinning against our Creator every week we live. It was long held, that the seventh day of the week was the Sabbath from the creation of the world to the resurrection of Christ; after which the first day was the Sabbath to the end of the world. At length the advocates of this doctrine discovered that it could not be maintained from the Scriptures. What was to be done? To return to the Bible Sabbath, would be too humiliating; and all christendom would be against them. Could they abandon their favorite Sunday? By no means! Well, what was the result? A first-day Sabbath could not be found between the two lids of the Bible. What could be done to save this darling offspring of human invention? What did they do? They just dropped the name, Sabbath, and christened the pet Lord's Day, and now observe the same thing in the same way, abstaining from labor and doing the same things they formerly did on the so-called "Christian Sabbath," but the name is changed!

It puts me in mind of an anecdote I have heard. It was said of the Catholics, that in their proselyting among pagans, they found, in a certain place, a people who worshiped a goddess of the name of Minerva. The Catholics persuaded them to expunge the name Minerva, and inscribe that of the Virgin Mary. So they became good Catholics, worshiping the same image, but by another name! I need not make the application.

Brethren, I write not to condemn you, but it is the hope that you may be convinced of your error, and that God may be honored by your turning to the truth, which has stimulated me to this undertaking. Hear me, then, while I examine the Scriptures on this subject.

FOR WHOM WAS THE SABBATH MADE?

For the Jews, do you say? Stop a moment. Our blessed Saviour, who never spoke amiss, and who meant all that he said, declares that "the Sabbath was made for man." Mark 2:27. The word man in this passage is not qualified or restricted in any way; consequently it means mankind, or the human race. Now, brethren, be careful that you do not call the Sabbath the Jewish Sabbath, for Christ has told you better.

If the Sabbath was made for man, it must, of necessity, be made at a time sufficiently early, that the first man of the race might enjoy it. Accordingly Jehovah has informed us that he made the world in six days, and rested on the seventh, and that he blessed and sanctified it. Now do not cavil because there is no commandment on record before it was given on Sinai. Jehovah has told us when it was made, and Christ has told us for whom it was made. Brethren, the conclusion is irresistible to my mind, that the Sabbath was made for us, or, that the Lord, inadvertently, said more than he meant!

Again, if the Sabbath was made for man, it is, undoubtedly, of some use and benefit to him. How then can it be classed with the "handwriting of ordinances which was against us, which was contrary to us"? No requirement of Jehovah was ever against us, unless it was caused by sin. It was against us to see the innocent lamb bleed away his life, figuratively in our stead; it was contrary to our feelings of benevolence and justice. This was caused by sin. But before sin was, was the Sabbath.

THE TEN COMMANDMENTS.

When God gave the law at Sinai, he spoke ten precepts to all the people, "with a great voice; and he added no more; and he wrote them in two tables of stone," and delivered them to Moses. Deut. 5:22. This is pre-eminently and emphatically THE LAW OF GOD. This is the supreme law of right—a law founded in the nature of things, and naturally binding, with the exception, if you please, of the fourth commandment, on the whole human race. This law embodies every principle of right between man and man, and between man and his Maker, and yet it may be resolved again into two principles—love to God, and love to man—and on these two hang all the law and the prophets. This law, being the basis of every law of right, might be called the constitution by which God governs the world. And yet Christians of the nineteenth century impiously talk of God's revised constitution—comparing the ways of God to those of men! Christians, I say, for if God had no people in Babylon, he could not say, come out of her my people.

This is the law of which Christ spoke when he said, Matt. 5:17, "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy but to fulfill. Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall by no means pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." All what? All that the prophets had said. It was the prophecies which were to be fulfilled. I know of no way to fulfill a law, but to keep it inviolate; and to keep a law does not put an end to it.

It was this law of which Paul spoke, Anno Domini 60, when he said, "By the law is (not was) the knowledge of sin;" and "I had not known sin, but by the law; for I had not known unlawful desire, unless the law had said, Thou shalt not covet." Rom. 3:20 and 7:7.

It was this law of which James spoke, about the sixtieth year of the Christian era, when he said, "Whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty (not was guilty) in respect to all. For he who said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill." And it may be truly added, He who said do not kill, said also, Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. John referred to the same law when he said, A. D. 90, "Sin is (not was) the transgression of the law." If transgression of the law was sin, Anno Domini 90, what is it now?

The truth is, my dear brethren, Jehovah has always had one standard of morality and only one; and a violation of this standard of right, always was, and always will be, sin. What change then took place at the introduction of the new dispensation? Not a change of that law by the transgression of which all men are sinners; but a change in the outward acts by which we come to God for remission of sins. For example: From the days of Abel to the coming of the Lord, men were required to acknowledge their faith in the promised Messiah by the shedding of blood, which pointed forward to the sacrifice of Christ. Now we are required to show our faith in a crucified and risen Saviour, by being baptized into his death. Changes similar to this are all that Jehovah made; man has made the rest.

THE FIRST TABLE.

The first four of the ten commandments contain our duty to God alone—duties which naturally grow out of our relation to God, the universal Father.

1. "Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

2. "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image. Thou shalt not bow down to them, nor serve them." We are not, in deed, to admit the existence of another god.

3. "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain." We must not speak the name of Jehovah but with the utmost reverence.

4. "Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy." We must acknowledge, in deed, that God is the Maker of the world and all its inhabitants. "For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day; wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it." Here, then, at the creation, God erected a monument sacred to the memory of the Creator.

We talk of moral and positive precepts; but who, brethren, shall decide which of the above four has the most morality about it?

(To be Concluded.)

"If We Knew."

And so, through this weary world we go, Bearing a burden of needless woe, Carrying hearts that are heavy and slow Under their load of care; When, oh! if we only, only knew, That God is tender, and strong, and true, And that he loves us through and through, Our hearts would be lighter than air!

I do not know who wrote the lines. I saw them first on a card sent from one Christian heart to another. I heard them again from the lips of a busy woman—a wife, a mother, a housekeeper, a teacher of other women in the Bible class, a helper in every good work that comes pressing upon women in these earnest days. She was never idle; she was always somewhat overworked; she was often very weary, and yet she seemed to carry a heart that was lighter than air; and she certainly did carry one that was "at leisure from itself, to soothe and sympathize."

The words were nothing new; a child might have fashioned their simple rhyme; yet they sang on and on through a day of burden and care, till the soul took courage and felt as if some fresh breeze had blown across it from the green pastures where the weary rest. And I began to question if really the burden of woe was not often a needless one. It is, surely, when we have brought it upon ourselves, by our sin or our mistakes. If the proper use of our own God-given powers would have averted the misery, then it was needless indeed. But not necessarily useless because needless; for, if it serves as a teacher and helps us to avoid similar failures in the future, the work of the "needless woe" is done.

But there is another sense in which we drag a burden of needless woe; i. e., when the woe would not be woe but for the sorrowful eyes through which we behold it. We see through a cloud; we darken our vision by our own shadows; we shut our eyes to the sun, and take a mournful comfort in pitying ourselves. If we subtract from our burdens those we bring upon ourselves, and which need never be burdens the second time, and those which are not trials at all, if met bravely, and turned around so that the sunlight smiles upon them, the sum of our human miseries will be greatly decreased. With both these classes of ills we have the power to battle, and the promise of God's help in the unequal fight. But there remain the sorrows tangible and real—the burdens never brought by our own hands; the woes that cannot be transformed by any hopeful fancy into blessings. Under these—the real arrows that rankle in our souls, the real weights under which we stagger—it is that the heart beats heavy and slow. And it is to meet these that we want the sure knowledge that "God is tender and strong and true."

All this he is. We "know" it vaguely; but experimentally, we do not know that his tenderness will soothe every wound, and that the sorer the hurt, the softer the touch of the Healer. We believe in his strength; but, if we trust ourselves to it, we cling to our burdens while we lean, and do not know how to cast our care on him. If he would take us, would he not surely take everything that troubles us? In giving himself to us he freely gives us of all that he has. In giving ourselves, why do we withhold what is ours? He makes us his children, and Christ shares with us his joy, his peace, his home; that "where he is, we may be also." He gives us freely of his riches of grace, and puts his everlasting arms under us, and we hug our trials to our hearts instead of laying them into his open hand. "If we only, only knew" how tender, strong, and faithful he is! and we can know at once by testing and trusting his love and strength and truth. No one ever tried them and found them wanting. They are enough to steady the soul in storms, to keep the heart from breaking in sorrow; nay more, to turn its sorrow into joy. To be sure that he loves us "through and through," that is, from the heights of our folly to the depths of our shame, from one end to the other of our weakness and sin, from our cradle on through every experience to the grave; aye, and through the dark valley into the land of many mansions—to know this, and to be glad in it, is a part of the Christian's heritage, the birthright of every child of God.—Methodist.

The Power of One Good Boy.

"WHEN I took the school," said a gentleman, speaking of a certain school he once taught, "I soon saw there was one good boy in it. I saw it in his face. I saw it by many unmistakable marks. If I stepped out and came suddenly back, that boy was always studying just as if I had been there, while a general buzz, and the roguish looks of the rest showed there was mischief in the wind. I learned he was a religious boy and a member of the church. Come what would, he would be for the right."

"There were two other boys who wanted to behave well, but were sometimes led astray; these two began to look up to Alfred, and, I saw were much strengthened by his example. Alfred was as lovely in disposition as firm in principle. These three boys began now to create a sort of public opinion on the side of good order and the master. One boy and then another gradually sided with them. The foolish pranks of idle and wicked boys began to lose their popularity. They did not win the laugh which they used to. A general obedience and attention to study prevailed. At last the public opinion of the school was fairly revolutionized; from being a school of ill-name, it became one of the best-behaved schools anywhere about, and it was that boy Alfred who had the largest share in making the change. Only four or five boys held out, and these were finally expelled. Yes," said the teacher, "it is in the power of one right-minded, right-hearted boy to do that. He stuck to his principles like a man, and they stuck to him, and made a strong and splendid fellow of him."

SHUT IN.

By Susan Coolidge

"And the Lord shut him in." (Gen. 7:16.)

Was it the Lord who shut me in Between these walls of pain? Who drew between me and the sun The darkening curtains, one by one, Cold storm and bitter rain, Hiding all happy things and fair, The flying birds, the blowing air, And bidding me to lie, All sick of heart, and faint and blind, Waiting his will to loose or bind, To give or to deny?

Is it the Lord that shuts me in? Then I can bear to wait! No place so dark, no place so poor, So strong and fast, no prisoning door, Though walled by grievous fate, But out of it goes fair and broad An unseen pathway, straight to God, By which I mount to Thee When the same Love that shut the door Shall lift the heavy bar once more And set the prisoner free.

—Susan Coolidge.

Always to Pray.

By Spurgeon

Keep the altar of private prayer burning. This is the very life of all piety. The sanctuary and family altar borrow their fires here; therefore, let this burn well. Secret devotion is the very essence, evidence, and barometer of vital and experimental religion.

Burn here the fat of your sacrifices. Let your closet seasons be regular, frequent and undisturbed. Effectual prayer availeth much. Have you nothing to pray for? Let us suggest the church, the ministry, your own soul, your children, your neighbors, your relatives, your country, and the cause of God throughout the world. Let us examine ourselves on this important matter. Do we engage with lukewarmness in private devotion? Is the fire of devotion burning dimly in our hearts? Do the chariot wheels drag heavily? If so, let us be alarmed at this sign of decay.

Let us go with weeping and ask for the spirit of grace and of supplications. Let us set apart special seasons for extraordinary prayer. For if this fire should be smothered beneath the ashes of worldly conformity, it will dim the fire on the family altar, and lessen our influence in the church and in the world.

The text will apply also to the altar of the heart. This is a golden altar indeed. God loves to see the hearts of his people glowing towards himself.

Let us give to God our hearts all blazing with love, and seek his grace, that the fire may never be quenched; for it will not burn, if the Lord does not keep it burning; many foes will attempt to extinguish it; but if the unseen hand behind the wall pour thereon the sacred oil, it will blaze higher. Let us use texts of Scripture as fuel for our heart's fire; they are live coals; let us attend sermons, prayer-meetings; but, above all, let us be much alone with Jesus. Let us never forget the divine command: “Pray without ceasing. In everything give thanks.”—Spurgeon.

Speaking Boldly.

By Isaac Taylor

WE are come to no gentle mood in the world's history. This is not the hour of leisure and soft persuasion. Whoever does not speak expressly and boldly, had better not speak at all. The adherents of the gospel must either forfeit all chance of hearing, or act with a corresponding energy and promptitude. Whatever overloads, encumbers, defaces our faith, should be thrown aside. Whoever is loaded with the stuff of the world, whether interests or prejudices, will be chased from the field, or fall there ingloriously.

"Thou therefore endure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus Christ. No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen to be a soldier. And if a man also strive for masteries, yet is he not crowned, except he strive lawfully. . . . Consider what I say; and the Lord give thee understanding in all things." 2 Tim. 2: 3, 4, 6.—Isaac Taylor.

Sunflowers Turn East Before Sunrise

As every one knows, the sunflower turns its face toward the sun during the day, following the course of that luminary from east to west. But when does it turn back to face the rising sun? Probably most persons who have thought of the matter at all have supposed that it continued facing the west until morning, and then, as the sun came up, feeling the influence of its rays, turned again to the east. But a correspondent of Nature reports that when in Colorado, in 1881, he observed on the borders of a large irrigating ditch at sunset an abundant growth of the wild Helianthus annuus, with their broad faces all turned to the west; returning that way less than an hour later, and immediately after daylight was gone, he found, to his surprise, that much the greater part of the flowers had already turned their faces full to the east, in anticipation, as it were, of the sun's rising. In that short time they had retraced the semicircle which they had occupied the whole day in traversing under the influence of the sun. Unfortunately he has had no opportunity since to verify this interesting observation.—N. Y. Examiner.

St. John on His Defeat

At a recent meeting in New York, Ex-Governor St. John, of Kansas, said in regard to his defeat at the last election that he would rather be instrumental in raising one poor wretch from the gutter than climb over human wrecks to the highest office in the gift of the people.

Continue reading: Expecting the Saviour,