Your ShelfYour Projects

Review and Herald, Vol. 77, No. 24.

CAIAPHAS

Review and Herald

Jun 12, 1900

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jun 12, 1900

CAIAPHAS

By Ellen G. White

MRS. E. G. WHITE.
With Caiaphas the Jewish high priesthood ended. The service had become base and corrupt. It had no longer any connection with God. Truth and righteousness were hateful in the eyes of the priests. They were tyrannical and deceptive, full of selfish, ambitious schemes. Such ministration could make nothing perfect; for it was itself utterly corrupt. The grace of God had naught to do with it.
Virtually Caiaphas was no high priest. He wore the priestly robes, but he had no vital connection with God. He was uncircumcised in heart. Proud and overbearing, he proved his unworthiness ever to have worn the garments of the high priest. He had no authority from heaven for occupying the position. He had not one ray of light from God to show him what the work of the priest was, or for what the office was instituted.
So perverted had the priesthood become that when Christ declared himself the Son of God, Caiaphas, in pretended horror, rent his robe, and accused the Holy One of Israel of blasphemy.
Many to-day who claim to be Christians are in danger of rending their garments, making an outward show of repentance, when their hearts are not softened nor subdued. This is why so many continue to make failures in the Christian life. An outward appearance of sorrow is shown for wrong, but their repentance is not that which needs not to be repented of. May God grant to his church true contrition for sin. Oh that we might feel the necessity of revealing true sorrow for wrong-doing!
The mock trial of Christ shows how base the priesthood had become. The priests hired men to testify under oath to falsehoods. But truth came to the help of Christ. Pilate declared, "I find in him no fault at all." Thus it was shown that the witness borne against the Saviour was false, that the witnesses had been hired by men who cherished in their hearts the basest elements of corruption. It was God's design that those who delivered Jesus to death should hear the testimony of his innocence. "I find no fault in him," Pilate declared. And Judas, throwing at the feet of the priests the money he had received for betraying Christ, cried out, "I have sinned, in that I have betrayed the innocent blood."
Previously to Christ's trial, when the Sanhedrin had been called together to lay plans for waylaying Christ and putting him to death, some of the members pleaded with the others to check their passion and hatred. They wished to save Christ from death. In reply Caiaphas said: "Ye know nothing at all, nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not."
These words were uttered by one who knew not their significance. He had lost the sense of the sacredness of the sacrifices and offerings. But his words meant more than he or those connected with him knew. By them he bore testimony that the time had come for the Aaronic priesthood to cease forever. He was condemning one who had been prefigured in every sacrifice made, but one whose death would end the need of types and shadows. Unknowingly he was declaring that Christ was about to fulfill that for which the system of sacrifices and offerings had been instituted.
"This," adds the evangelist, "spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation; and not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad."
Caiaphas was the one who was to be in office when type met antitype, when the true High Priest came into office. Each actor in history stands in his lot and place; for God's great work after his own plan will be carried out by men who have prepared themselves to fill positions for good or evil. In opposition to righteousness, men become instruments of unrighteousness. But they are not forced to take this course of action. They need not become instruments of unrighteousness, any more than Cain needed to. God said to him, "If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door." Cain would not hear the voice of God; and as a result, he became his brother's murderer.
Men of all characters, righteous and unrighteous, will stand in their several positions in God's plan. With the characters they have formed, they will act their part in the fulfillment of history. In a crisis, just at the right moment, they will stand in the places they have prepared themselves to fill. Believers and unbelievers will fall into line as witnesses to confirm truth that they themselves do not comprehend. All will co-operate in accomplishing the purposes of God, just as did Annas, Caiaphas, Pilate, and Herod. In putting Christ to death, the priests thought they were carrying out their own purposes, but unconsciously and unintentionally they were fulfilling the purpose of God. He "revealeth the deep and secret things: he knoweth what is in the darkness, and the light dwelleth with him."
Heaven and earth will pass away, but not one jot or tittle of the word of God will fail. It will endure forever. All men, whatever their position, whatever their religion, loyal or disloyal, wicked or righteous, are fitting themselves for a part in the closing scenes of this earth's history. The wicked will trample one another down as they act out their attributes and fulfill their plans, but they will carry out the purposes of God.
Christ, the foundation of the whole Jewish economy, stood before the Jewish rulers, to be condemned by his own nation. With his divinity clothed with humanity, he stood to be judged by the beings he had made. His garment of human flesh was to be torn from him. He could have flashed the light of his glory upon his enemies, but he bore patiently their humiliating abuse.
Our Redeemer humbled himself, fully identifying his interests with the interests of humanity. Look at him girding himself and washing the feet of the disciples. Mark how tenderly he performs his act of ministry, to give them a lesson in true service. He who was one with God, who thought it not robbery to be equal with God, humbled himself, and took upon him the form of a servant. Constantly he ministered to the needy, the sorrowful, the distressed. But in the hour of his need, who was tender and compassionate to him? During his trial, what friend had he who dared to say as much as the heathen judge said, "I find no fault in him"? Christ's divinity was so completely veiled that it was difficult for even his disciples to believe in him; and when he died on the cross, they felt that their hope had perished.
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made." "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, . . . full of grace and truth." "He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own, and his own received him not."
How different was the true High Priest from the false and corrupted Caiaphas. Christ stood before the false high priest, pure and undefiled, without a taint of sin.
Christ mourned for the transgression of every human being. He bore even the guiltiness of Caiaphas, knowing the hypocrisy that dwelt in his soul, while for pretense he rent his robe. Christ did not rend his robe, but his soul was rent. His garment of human flesh was rent as he hung on the cross, the sin-bearer of the race. By his suffering and death a new and living way was opened. There is no longer a wall of partition between Jew and Gentile. "By one offering he hath perfected forever them that are sanctified." This enabled him to proclaim on the cross, with a clear and triumphant voice, "It is finished." "Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us; nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with the blood of others; for then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself." "This man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right hand of God." Christ entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. "Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them." He has qualified himself to be not only man's representative, but his advocate, so that every soul, if he will, may say, I have a Friend at court, a High Priest who is touched with the feeling of my infirmities.

THE THINGS I MISS.

By Thomas Wentworth Higginson

An easy thing, O Power Divine, To thank thee for these gifts of thine! For summer's sunshine, winter's snow, For hearts that kindle, thoughts that glow. But when shall I attain to this — To thank thee for the things I miss:
For all young Fancy's early gleams, The dreamed-of joys that still are dreams, Hopes unfulfilled, and pleasures known Through others' fortunes, not my own, And blessings seen that are not given, And never will be this side heaven?
Had I, too, shared the joys I see, Would there have been a heaven for me? Could I have felt thy presence near Had I possessed what I held dear? My deepest fortune, highest bliss, Have grown, perchance, from things I miss.
Sometimes there comes an hour of calm; Grief turns to blessing, pain to balm; A Power that works above my will Still leads me onward, upward still; And then my heart attains to this — To thank thee for the things I miss.
— Thomas Wentworth Higginson.

OUR WORDS.

By Mrs. G. P. Thompson

MRS. G. P. THOMPSON.
(Perrys Mills, N. Y.)
How many of us are aware of the power for good or evil contained in our words? In the blessed Book we read that a word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in pictures of silver. Imagine the beauty of it. Apples of gold set in a silver picture! How pleasing! How rich! And could anyone portray a more delicate work of art than one wrought in colors of gold and silver? Think, then, of the value of a good word.
In Prov. 15 : 23 we read that “a man hath joy by the answer of his mouth; and a word spoken in due season, how good is it!” What unpleasant memories have come to us sometimes when, perhaps in an unguarded moment, we have let slip from our lips an unkind answer or a cross word to a loved one. Then we had no joy. The answer of our mouth was not given in pleasantness, and it had the effect to sadden the heart of our friend, and so cause us grief, not only because we had wounded his spirit, but we had brought condemnation upon ourselves thereby. “For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.” Matt. 12 : 37. Then how necessary that we keep our mouths as with a bridle.
Again: we read, “If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man’s religion is vain.” James 1 : 26. Moreover, as he says in the third chapter, second verse, we have the mark of a perfect man. It becometh us who are striving to make the needful preparation to meet the Lord at his coming, and are seeking to attain unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, to take diligent heed to do all the commandments, if we would enter into life. Therefore let us come up “to the help of the Lord, to the help of the Lord against the mighty,” and watch and pray always that we enter not into temptation.

THE THIRD COMMANDMENT.

By Wm. A. Westbrook

WM. A. WESTBROOK.
  • (Parkersburg, W. Va.)*
“Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.” The significance of this command is frequently limited to blasphemy, and the irreverent use of the names of the Deity, and the unhallowed use of the Sacred Scriptures. While all that is claimed as to blasphemy is in it, there is a far-reaching application that will, if recognized, cause every professor to ask himself, Am I a keeper of this specific command?
First, let us study what it is to “take a name,” then the rest follows easily. A child is adopted. The legal requirements are fully complied with, and the facts are duly registered. The adopted child then assumes “every right and privilege” of a “child of the body.” Its name is changed, and that of the adopting parent is assumed. The child now has a “new name.”
I was lost, a sinner, a child of wickedness; and as such was of the family of Satan. See Rom. 3:23; Eph. 2:2, 3, 11, 12; 1 John 3:10. Then comes the gospel adoption; God gives his Son for me (Gal. 2:20), and I am adopted into his family. Gal. 4:4–7; Rom. 8:14–17. And thus I take, by his love, all the rights and privileges of his only begotten Son; for my Heavenly Father loves me with the same love. John 17:23. Now I TAKE HIS NAME. Eph. 3:15; Acts 15:14.
Let us follow on. If an adopted child, regardless of the love of the foster parent, departs from the warmth of the home life; if, reckless as to consequences, he plunges into dissipation and iniquity, the whole effort to rescue the child has proved “vain,” and the taking of a “new name” by the child has proved to be all “in vain.” The heretofore honored name of the foster father is brought into reproach, and becomes a laughingstock to the world; and the father’s heart is made to mourn as he sees the child, with his own name, bringing the parent to shame.
My brother and sister, you and I have been adopted. We call ourselves “children of God,” and often raise our voices to sing, “I’m a child of the King.”
Let us stop and consider. Have we assumed his name in vain? When he took us from the family of Satan, and granted us his “new, best name,” did we realize that we were called to “MANIFEST HIS NAME” TO THE WORLD? John 17:6. Was this operation in vain? Did we “take his name” in vain?
Oh, that we might all realize how much it means to change names! Does our life show to whom we belong? “For the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.” The family name is at stake. Dare you bring it into disgrace? Isa. 48:10, 11. Do you realize that for the privilege of taking that name, you must forsake all, or else the taking will be in vain? Matt. 19:29; Luke 21:12; John 15:21; Rev. 2:3, 13; 3:8.
Again: as his children, we are “in” his name; and “in his name,” or as his own children, we can ask “in his name” (John 14:13), and receive. We can work “in his name.” Mark 9:41; 16:17.
Having found what it is to take his name, and what it is to take it in vain, let us study what his name is. Many deductions and attributes are designated as his name, even in Scripture. Yet he himself gives us the name, and in this centers our interest and our hope. In Ps. 83:18 he says that his name “alone is Jehovah,” and in Ex. 3:14 he says that “I AM” (which is the same word translated) is his “name forever.” “Jehovah,” the Eternal One, the “self-existent,” the “all-living,” the “author and force of all life,” in whom “we live, and move, and have our being,”—I AM is his name.
How strangely contrasted is man! “All flesh is grass,” “a flower of the field,” “a vapor,” a mere transient, to-day he is, and to-morrow he is not.
Why is this?—Made “in the image of God,” very good, with the right to the tree of life, man fell and became a prodigal. He went from the Father’s house. He even forsook his name, and became a child of disobedience, of the synagogue and family of Satan. Thus sin separated man from God; and thus, instead of having life, man has death; instead of possessing God, the I AM, he has Satan and death.
But the loving Father sees him “a long way off,” and in his love provides a way. We are adopted, and the Father’s name is given again. “Him that overcometh . . . I will write upon him my new name.” Rev. 3:12. When?—When we overcome. Thank his name, and praise his mercy! We can overcome now; and now receive a change of name. His name is in our foreheads. Then for death, write life. “He that hath the Son hath life.” Now, with Solomon, we sing, “Thy name is as ointment poured forth.” Oh, the joy to have the life of God placed in us!
Having his name, we have his life; we are his, and all things are ours. How careful then should we be not to rashly assume his name; not to take it in vain, but contrariwise, praising him that he has adopted us into his own family and given us his own name, go forward and bring glory to him by manifesting his name to those who are in darkness.

LIFE'S MIRROR.

By Madeline S. Brigham

There are loyal hearts, there are spirits brave, There are souls that are pure and true; Then give to the world the best you have, And the best will come back to you.
Give love, and love to your life will flow, And strength in your utmost needs; Have faith, and a score of hearts will show Their faith in your work and deeds.
Give truth, and your gifts will be paid in kind, And a song a song will meet; And the smile which is sweet will surely find A smile that is just as sweet.
Give pity and sorrow to those who mourn, You will gather, in flowers again, The scattered seeds from your thought outborne, Though the sowing seemed in vain;
For life is the mirror of king and slave, 'Tis just what we are and do; Then give to the world the best you have, And the best will come back to you.
— Madeline S. Brigham.

Strength Proportionate to the Trial

“As thy days, so shall thy strength be.” The trial will not exceed the strength which shall be given us to bear it. Then let us take up our work just where we find it, believing that nothing can come but that strength will come proportionate to the trial.”

ROME IN THE BOOK OF DANIEL.

By Alonzo Trévier Jones

A. T. JONES.
(Concluded.)
I READ again the sentence just quoted, and the next one with it:—
If there be one lesson which history clearly teaches, it is this, that free nations can not govern subject provinces. If they are unable or unwilling to admit their dependencies to share their own constitution, the constitution itself will fall in pieces from mere incompetence for its duties.
That is the one lesson that history teaches. Free nations can not govern subject provinces, and themselves remain free. And wherever they are unable or unwilling to admit their dependencies to share their own constitution, the constitution itself will fall to pieces. Rome thought to preserve the constitution, by not extending it to the subject provinces. But in that very thing, Rome destroyed her constitution. The real damage done was not to the provinces, but to the home government that would not extend to her subject provinces the privileges which Rome had, which Rome enjoyed. Therefore this writer further says:—
For these reasons, the fall of the Roman Republic is exceptionally instructive to us. A constitutional government, the most enduring and the most powerful that ever existed, was put on its trial, and found wanting.
Again I read:—
With such vividness, with such transparent clearness, the age stands before us of Cato and Pompey, of Cicero and Julius Caesar: the more distinctly because it was an age in so many ways the counterpart of our own, the blossoming period of the old civilization, when the intellect was trained to the highest point which it could reach; and on the great subjects of human interest, on morals, and politics, on poetry and art, even on religion itself and the speculative problems of life, men thought as we think, doubted where we doubt, argued as we argue, aspired and struggled after the same objects.
It was an age of material progress and material civilization; an age of civil liberty and intellectual culture; an age of pamphlets and epigrams, of salons and of dinner parties, of senatorial majorities and electoral corruption. The highest offices of state were open in theory to the meanest citizen; they were confined, in fact, to those who had the longest purses, or the most ready use of the tongue on popular platforms. Distinctions of birth had been exchanged for distinctions of wealth. The struggles between plebeians for equality of privilege were over, and a new division had been formed between the party of property and a party who desired a change in the structure of society.
The rich were extravagant, for life had ceased to have the practical interest, except for its material pleasures; the occupation of the higher classes was to obtain money without labor, and to spend it in idle enjoyment. Patriotism survived on the lips, but patriotism meant the ascendancy of the party which would maintain the existing order of things, or would overthrow it for a more equal distribution of the good things which alone were valued. Religion, once the foundation of the laws and rule of personal conduct, had subsided into opinion. The educated, in their hearts, disbelieved it. Temples were still built with increasing splendor; the established forms were scrupulously observed. Public men spoke conventionally of Providence, that they might throw on their opponents the odium of impiety; but of genuine belief that life had any serious meaning, there was none remaining beyond the circle of the silent, patient, ignorant multitude. The whole spiritual atmosphere was saturated with cant,—cant moral, cant political, cant religious,—an affectation of high principle which had ceased to touch the conduct, and flowed on in an increasing volume of insincere and unreal speech.
Tendencies now in operation [twenty-one years ago, bear in mind] may a few generations hence land modern society in similar conclusions, unless other convictions revive meanwhile and get the mastery of them: of which possibility no more need be said than this, that unless there be such a revival in some shape or other, the forces, whatever they be, which control the forms in which human things adjust themselves, will make an end again, as they made an end before, of what are called free institutions. Popular forms of government are possible only when individual men can govern their own lives on moral principles, and when duty is of more importance than pleasure, and justice than material expediency.—“Cæsar: A Sketch,” by J. A. Froude, chap. 1.
Here is a history that was written a good deal more than twenty-three years ago, written by one of the first historians of the world, Professor Mommsen, of Germany. At the place where I shall read, he writes of Rome after the time at which the prophecy mentions Rome as entering upon the scene, “to establish the vision.” This tells of the time when the republic had made her conquests, and when, as the book from which I have already quoted says, wealth flowed into the city “in rolling streams of gold,” so that riches was untold, boundless—individual wealth as well as governmental wealth. This writer discusses “The Government and the Governed,” and he says that those who were in power in the state—
not only usurped in substance the government, but also remodeled the constitution according to their own views. It was part of their policy, with a view to keep up the importance of the public magistrates, to add to the number of these as little as possible, and to keep it far below what was required by the extension of territory and the increase of business.
That is to say, The state had expanded; but they did not allow the government to expand with it, and the governmental machinery broke down.
Yet these who set aside the constitution did not definitely alter the constitution.
They changed not the letter, but merely the practice, of the existing constitution.
The constitution stood as it had, in the letter; but it was applied in a different way.
The earlier state law of Rome knew nothing of tributary subjects. The conquered communities were either sold into slavery, or merged in the Roman commonwealth, or admitted to an alliance which secured to them at least communal independence and freedom from taxation. But the Carthaginian possessions in Sicily, Sardinia, and Spain, as well as the kingdom of Hiero, had paid tithe and tribute to their former masters: if Rome was desirous of retaining these possessions at all, it was in the judgment of the shortsighted, the most judicious, and undoubtedly the most convenient, course to manage the new territories entirely in accordance with the rules heretofore observed. Accordingly the Romans simply retained the Carthagino-Hispanic provincial constitution [did not extend the Roman constitution to those provinces, but continued the provincial laws, under a Roman governorship], and organized in accordance with it those provinces also, such as Hither Spain, which they wrested from the barbarians. It was the shirt of Nessus which they inherited from the enemy.
The expression “the shirt of Nessus” is a mythological reference. In the myth a shirt of Hercules was secretly tinged with the blood of the dying Nessus, which, when Hercules again put it on, caused his ruin. And the thought of the historian is that when Rome would not extend her constitution, the privileges of her own government, to her provinces; but held them as subjects ruled by foreign laws, and taxed them besides, in that she took upon herself what corresponds in the myth to “the shirt of Nessus.” And as, in the myth that shirt ruined the one who wore it, so this colonial system ruined Rome.
Beyond doubt at first the Roman government intended, in imposing taxes on their subjects, not strictly to enrich themselves, but only to cover the cost of administration and defense; but they deviated from this course, when they made Macedonia and Illyria tributary without undertaking the government or the guardianship of the frontier there. The fact, however, that they still maintained moderation in the imposition of burdens was of little consequence as compared with the conversion of their sovereignty into a profitable privilege at all; the FALL WAS THE SAME, whether a single apple was taken or the TREE WAS PLUNDERED.
The fall of what?—He is writing of the fall of the Roman Republic, the fall of the Roman state, not the fall of the provinces. “The fall” of the republic “was the same, whether a single apple was taken or the tree was plundered.” He says that the Roman Republic fell when it levied taxes upon subject provinces, even though the money was spent in and on the provinces themselves; and that the fall of the republic was the same, whether it levied a tax of a cent or of millions. What followed?
Punishment followed, in the steps of wrong. [I am not putting in anything. I am simply reading.] The new provincial system necessitated the appointment of governors, whose position was absolutely incompatible not only with the welfare of the provinces, but with the Roman constitution.
Then what?
As the Roman community in the provinces took the place of the former rulers of the land, so the governor appeared there in the position of a king.
What then?
But it was not practicable for any length of time to be at once REPUBLICAN AND KING.
That was written forty-five years ago, concerning Rome two thousand years ago. I leave it to you to decide whether it concerns only Rome. I will read those sentences again:—
The new provincial system necessitated the appointment of governors, whose position was absolutely incompatible not only with the welfare of the provinces, but with the Roman constitution. . . . As the Roman community in the provinces took the place of the former rulers of the land, so the governor appeared there in the position of a king. . . . But it was not practicable for any length of time to be at once republican and king. . . . Playing the part of governors demoralized the Roman ruling class with fearful rapidity. Haughtiness and arrogance toward the provincials were so natural in the circumstances as scarcely to form matter of reproach against the individual magistrate. But already it was a rare thing—and the rarer because the government adhered rigidly to the old principle of not paying public officials—that a governor returned with quite clean hands from his province; it was already remarked upon as something singular that Paullus, the conqueror of Pydna, did not take money.
What followed?—Haughtiness and arrogance were held by the governor toward these people who were counted “not capable of self-government.” These peoples had been formerly ruled by kings. The governor went there to govern them, and stood in the place of king, and governed them as king. And when he came back home to Italy, he carried home with him that same air and spirit of haughtiness and arrogance, and held toward the people of the home government the same attitude that he had held toward the people of the subject province. Those who had governed abroad as kings remained such in air and spirit when they came home. Thus the refusal to extend the constitution abroad ruined the government at home. That is wherein “punishment followed in the steps of wrong,” and wherein the “demoralization of the Roman ruling class” followed “with fearful rapidity.” I read right on:—
The governors ruled virtually as sovereign; and the most important of the institutions serving for the latter purpose, the census of the empire, was extended to Sicily alone, not to any of the provinces subsequently acquired. This emancipation of the supreme administrative officials from the central authority was more than hazardous. The Roman governor, placed at the head of the armies of the state, and in possession of considerable financial resources; subject to but a lax judicial control, and practically independent of the supreme administration; and impelled by a sort of necessity to separate the interests of himself and of the people whom he governed from those of the Roman community, and to treat them as conflicting, far more resembled a Persian satrap than one of the commissioners of the Roman senate at the time of the Samnite wars. The man, moreover, who had just conducted a legalized military tyranny abroad, could with difficulty find his way back to the common civic level, which distinguished between those who commanded and those who obeyed, but not between masters and slaves. Even the government felt that their two fundamental principles—equality within the aristocracy, and the subordination of thepower of the magistrates to the senatorial college—began in this instance to give way in their hands.
The aversion of the government to the acquisition of new provinces and to the whole provincial system; the institution of the provincial quaestorships, which were intended to take at least the financial power out of the hands of the governors; and the abolition of the arrangement—in itself so judicious—for lengthening the tenure of such offices, very clearly evince the anxiety felt by the more farseeing of the Roman statesmen as to the fruits of the seed thus sown. But diagnosis is not cure. The internal government of the nobility continued to follow the direction once given to it, and the decay of the administration and of the financial system—the precursor of future revolutions and usurpations—steadily pursued its course, if not unnoticed, yet unchecked.
They themselves recognized what was going on; but the tide was too strong: they could not stem it. They had taken the step, and they could not turn back. They believed that destiny was upon them; and so they went on, one step after another in that direction, until—you know—the world knows—the prophecy has recorded it—there came the greatest civil despotism, then the greatest despotism of any kind,—a religious despotism,—and then the greatest ruin that ever was wrought in governmental affairs, in this world—the ruin of the Roman Empire.
Now, I ask again, Why was so much said of Rome in the book of Daniel?—“To be a light in the time of the end;” for prophecy is as “a light that shineth in a dark place,” “whereunto ye do well that ye take heed.” If it had been written only for the time of Rome, and had applied only to that time, it would have been a light for the people then. But it was not written especially for that time: it was not sealed up until that time: it was sealed up to this time, “the time of the end.” Then, as certainly as prophecy is a light that shines in the darkness of this world, so certainly that prophecy concerning Rome, written so fully, and then closed up and sealed “to the time of the end,” is a light whereunto we, in this time, do well that we take heed. And upon what can it possibly be a light, except the things which in this time are like those of that time? That then was an essential element in the making of the beast; this now that is so like it is an essential element in the making of the image of the beast.
All this relates to the time in which we live, and to the place where we live. Darkness covers the earth, and gross darkness the people; but thank the Lord for the light of prophecy. Oh, let us study it as never before, and walk in the light of it, that we may be “children of light, and children of the day.”

THE HOUR OF GOD’S JUDGMENT IS COME.

By Luther J. Burgess

LUTHER J. BURGESS.
(Chicago, Ill.)
We all know that the twenty-three hundred years of Daniel 8:14 ended in the year 1844, and since that time it could no longer be said, The judgment will come; but he who preaches the gospel in truth must say, The hour of God’s judgment is come. In other words, the books are now open, and all cases, both of the dead and of the living, are to be decided for eternity before Christ can close his work in the sanctuary, and return to the earth to bring the promised deliverance and reward to his servants.
The Lord has kindly sent us this message, not that we should be left to wonder when the judgment will begin with the living, or when our case will appear, but that we may “come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.”
God is not an arbitrary ruler or judge, but in all his dealings with man he invites man to co-operate with God in his work, as it is written, “Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.” And thus in the matter of the judgment, the Lord has sent a message to his people, in order that they may know of the work that is being done, and that they may come and present their cases before the throne, and have them decided at once for eternity.
The first angel’s message is not given for the dead, but that the living may recognize their great privilege to come and present their cases for judgment after having made preparation.
There are but three steps necessary to prepare us to come before the judgment seat with perfect confidence, and with the assurance that the verdict will be satisfactory:—
First, acknowledge the claims of God’s law. “So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.” James 2:12.
Secondly, recognize our own unrighteousness. “But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags.” Isa. 64: 6.
Thirdly, accept of the perfect righteousness of Christ. “And this is his name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.” Jer. 23: 6.
After having taken these steps by faith, we are ready to pray the prayer, “Save me, O God, by thy name, and judge me by thy strength.” Ps. 54: 1. And the verdict will come back at once, “There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” Rom. 8: 1.
“Who shall lay anything to the charge of God’s elect? It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.”
When we have received this message by faith, we can go on our way rejoicing, with our “faces lighted up and shining with holy consecration;” for we shall realize that we have “passed from death unto life.”
The Lord is waiting for us to receive this precious truth in all its fullness, which will be followed immediately by the showers of the latter rain.

The Fabric of Life

“THE fabric of life is a homespun web, Each weaver fashions his own; The warp and the woof are of God’s own giving, But the ‘filling in’ of the daily living Is the weaver’s choice alone. Then choose bright threads for the homespun web, As the shuttle is daily thrown.”

The Mind Enlarged by Bible Study

“MEN are changed in accordance with what they contemplate. If commonplace thoughts and affairs take up the attention, the man will be commonplace. If he is too negligent to obtain anything but a superficial understanding of God’s truth, he will not receive the rich blessings that God would be pleased to bestow upon him. It is a law of the mind, that it will narrow or expand to the dimensions of the things with which it becomes familiar. The mental powers will surely become contracted, and will lose their ability to grasp the deep meanings of the word of God, unless they are put vigorously and persistently to the task of searching for truth. The mind will enlarge, if it is employed in tracing out the relation of the subjects of the Bible, comparing scripture with scripture, and spiritual things with spiritual. Go below the surface; the richest treasures of thought are waiting for the skillful and diligent student.”

WHAT LACK I, YET?

By Anne H. Woodruff

I have kept the commandments, and said my prayers, Before the world I am pure and clean, In the temple I worship, and no one dares To hint of a hunger or want unseen; But I feel a longing—a vague unrest— For something better than I have known; I knock at thy heart, Good Master, in quest Of something to satisfy my own.
The young man sorrowful went his way, The test was stronger than he could bear, And with all his wealth he was poor that day; For his soul was starving within him there. Oh, we struggle and pray, and yearning sigh For the peace of God in our hearts; and yet We cling to some secret idol, and cry, “Master, Good Master, what lack I yet?”
—Anne H. Woodruff, in Good Housekeeping.
Continue reading: BE THOU PREPARED