The Advent Review, and Sabbath Herald, vol. 3
June 10, 1852
RH VOL. III. - ROCHESTER, N.Y. - NO. 3
James White
THE ADVENT REVIEW,
AND SABBATH HERALD
“Here is the Patience of the Saints; Here are they that keep the Commandments of God and the Faith of Jesus.”
VOL. III. - ROCHESTER, N.Y. THURSDAY, JUNE 10, 1852. - NO. 3.
JOSEPH BATES, J. N. ANDREWS, and JOSEPH BAKER Publishing Committee.
PUBLISHED SEMI-MONTHLY,
at No. 124 Mount Hope Avenue, Rochester.
Terms - GRATIS. It is expected that all the friends of the cause will aid in its publication, as the Lord hath prospered them.
All communications, orders, and remittances, should be addressed to JAMES WHITE, Editor of the Review and Herald, Rochester, N.Y. (post-paid.) ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.1
THE SABBATH
BY ANNIE R. SMITH
COME peaceful Day! Divinely blest!
Sweetly thy glories would we sing -
Memorial of that Sacred Rest
Of Creation’s Mighty King.
This hallowed time to man was given -
A foretaste of the bliss of heaven.
ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.2
Ye saints awake, with joyful lay,
Behold its rising light, divine;
To God your grateful homage pay,
Its radiant beams around us shine.
Welcome the day he calls his own,
And fervent worship at his throne.
ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.3
Hark! Through the shining courts above,
What rapturous praises echo now!
Around that Holy Law of Love,
Seraphs in adoration bow.
Let earth, responsive to the strain,
Exalt alone Jehovah’s name.
ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.4
All hail! Thou bright Immortal Day!
When at His Temple all adore
His scepter’s universal sway -
Observed in glory evermore;
When Zion shall in triumph reign,
And Eden bloom on earth again.
ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.5
THE SABBATH LETTERS TO O. R. L. CROZIER. - NO. III
DEAR SIR:- The remarks with which you open your third article, do not seem to be much to the point. Very few of those who do not love the fourth commandment will object to reading whatever may be written to show that the commandments are abolished; and if it be such a fearful heresy “to do and teach” the fourth, with all the other commandments, that those who are thus engaged will “fall from grace,” (rather, have already fallen,) those of your readers who thus believe will rejoice to find some one zealous to put down such a delusion, and to shut that floodgate of error that the observance of the fourth commandment is so likely to open. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.6
I say this from your point of view. But should it prove after all that it is a dangerous and fearful course to break the commandments, and to publicly teach men so, when our Lord did not come to destroy, but to fulfill them, and testifies that he had kept them, and utters a solemn warning against the act of breaking them and teaching men so, then an apology is indeed needed, not a slight excuse, but reasons of the strongest kind. The following retrospective paragraph exhibits your opinion of your own articles in an amusing light: ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.7
“We have followed the Review through the Old Testament, and, as we think the reader will admit, it has been routed in every position it has taken, and every position of ours it has attacked has been defended by plain Scripture and fair argument.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.8
Such being your statement of the subject, it may not be out of place to revert briefly to the manner in which you have accomplished this triumphant refutation. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.9
What gives your remarks a ludicrous aspect is the fact that though you have carefully kept my arguments out of sight of your readers in your reply thus far, you now request them to decide whether you have not perfectly routed the Review in every position it has taken. If you have been as careful to keep my arguments out of your own sight as you have to keep them out of the sight of your readers, you may perhaps suppose, as honestly as some of them, that nothing remains of my position, and that in every point it has been routed. But we will briefly recur to the argument as it stands thus far, and let that speak for itself: ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.10
1. My position on the first question is, that the seventh day became the holy Sabbath, or sanctified Rest-day of the Creator, at the close of the first week of time, when he rested from his work of creation on that day and hallowed it. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.11
2. Your position on the same question is, that the seventh day became the holy Sabbath, or sanctified Rest-day of the Lord, in the wilderness of Sin, though you are not able to point to any act that made it such, save the statement of Moses on the sixth day, “Tomorrow is the rest of the Holy Sabbath unto the Lord.” - To look at particulars: ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.12
1. You attempt to “rout” the position of the Review, that the seventh day became the Sabbath of the Lord when he rested upon it and hallowed it, because that Moses in recording that fact in Genesis 2 does not there use the word Sabbath. But Moses in giving us the words of the Decalogue, where the account of the week of Creation is rehearsed by Jehovah, expressly applies the term to the seventh day at that time. - Light a thing as it may be to rout the Review, it is a fearful position to deny the plain and unequivocal language of Almighty God. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.13
2. You object to the institution of the holy Sabbath at the time when Jehovah “consecrated” and “set apart to a holy use” the day of his rest, because that an express precept for its observance is not also recorded. But this objection bears with equal weight against nine of the ten commandments. As we find but one of the precepts of the Decalogue existing as a precept in the sacred record prior to the departure from Egypt, we may with propriety say that men in that period had the same right to indulge in idolatry and blasphemy, that they had to profane that day which Jehovah had consecrated, and set apart to a holy use. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.14
3. But as God’s act of sanctifying and hallowing his Rest-day means something, you undertake to explain it away by introducing Hebrews 4, which does not speak of any such act. Would it not be better to believe Exodus 20:8-11, which makes that event the foundation of Sabbatic observance? ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.15
4. But the Sabbath is not mentioned in the history of the patriarchs, which you say “makes the conclusion inevitable that it was not known during that period.” - Its institution is given before the patriarchs existed, [Genesis 2:1-3; Exodus 20:8-11,] and the fact that it is not afterward mentioned in the brief record of Moses in Genesis, is no evidence that it did not exist; and certainly it is not more remarkable than that it should not be mentioned from the days of Joshua to the days of David, a period of some hundred years in which it was enforced by the penalty of death. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.16
5. As you have not deigned to answer the scriptural testimony presented to show that you had misapplied Colossians 2, and as you state that I have nothing to offer on the point but assertions, the reader is requested for the sake of brevity, to turn to that part of my first letter to you that speaks on the point. Your professed candor can there be seen in the true light. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.17
6. Having exposed your perversion of my remarks on James 2, I pass it, and state briefly that James not only quotes a part of the ten commandments in giving his account of the royal law, but declares that he who violates one has become guilty of all. - Your position is, however, that the royal law means only the precept named in verse 8, and is not the same law that is acknowledged in verses 9-12. - And all this in the face of your own position that there is but one law! ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.18
7. In your report of the Bible class, you stated that the Testimony (not then in existence) was spoken of IN THE WILDERNESS OF SIN “even more familiarly than the Sabbath.” In reviewing you I pointed out the fact that Exodus 16 could not have been written until about forty years after the departure from Egypt, as it contains a record of events extending through that entire period. Verse 35. So that its mention of what finally became of the manna. [verse 34.] furnishes no proof whatever that the Testimony was even thought of in the wilderness of Sin. Instead of confessing that you have made a false statement, you try to evade the point by saying that I have not disproved the statement “that the Testimony is spoken of IN Exodus 16 even more familiarly than the Sabbath.” - This had not been the point between us, but it is a good illustration of your manner of defending your position “by plain scripture and fair argument.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.19
8. Your effort to explain away the voluntary act of preparation for the seventh day, on the part of the people, [Exodus 16,] by introducing two miracles, needs not to be stated again. Its folly is sufficiently “manifest.” Your attempt to prove from Exodus 16 that God made the seventh day his holy Rest-day in the wilderness of Sin having been exposed in detail, that I be not tedious, I will request the reader to refer to that part of my communication to you, as I have taken pains to state your argument as well as my refutation, a thing which you carefully avoid. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.20
9. In your remark on Exodus 20, you state that the time “when the Sabbath was instituted” is a “very plain matter.” In this I agree with you. Had it not been such, I am sure that J. B. Cook in his sermon, May 9th, against the observance of the holy Sabbath, would not have stated:- “I present you the original institution of the Sabbath. It is found in Genesis 2.” - I was much struck with the remark. Were you not also? ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.21
10. To be as brief as possible, I ask, Why, in your act of “routing” the Review, did you not explain away the direct evidence of Exodus 20:11, that God hallowed the Sabbath at Creation? ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.22
11. As space forbids an extended mention of all the points that you have “routed,” I ask you to look over the several inferences which you have presented from Deuteronomy 5, and from the rudiments of the world, the tradition of men and not after Christ, and at their exposure in the Review, and then answer me, Have you any thing here that you will point to as “plain scripture and fair argument?” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.23
12. In concluding our discussion on the first two questions as stated by yourself, I inquire, Is it not a scriptural, legitimate and unavoidable conclusion, that God sanctified the Sabbath at Creation “for the Man?” Genesis 2:1-3; Exodus 20:11; Mark 2:27. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.24
The third question, as stated by yourself, is, “Does the New Testament require us, as Christians, to keep the Sabbath?” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.25
You request that inasmuch as all are, or have been from education, prejudiced in favor of the Sabbath, that they will lay this aside, so that should they find that it will not endure the rigid ordeal of the Bible, and particularly of the New Testament, it can be cast away in the category of immortal-soulism, etc. (It happens, however, that this prejudice is in favor of that day which “the Popes sabbatized,” and is strongly against the day which was made the Sabbath by the Creator.) You think it “honorable and Christian” to cast away error for the truth, and very dishonorable to cling to an error through pride of opinion, when convinced that it is such. - Very good, I think just so. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 17.26
Now I will test you. Will you be “honorable and Christian” enough to confess that God sanctified his Sabbath at Creation for THE man, which is a “great truth plainly stated,” or will you through pride of opinion cling to your unwarrantable inferences which have been already exposed, and affirm that God made the Sabbath near Horeb for the Hebrews only? ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.1
We believe in the “one Law-giver, [Jehovah,] who is able to save and to destroy.” James 4:12. And that from him emanated the great “CONSTITUTION.” Exodus 20. But we do not believe that either the servant, or the Son, ever set aside or abolished the constitution of Jehovah. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.2
You make a statement of several points, which you think show conclusively that Christians are not under obligation to keep the fourth commandment. The first point presented by yourself is this: ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.3
“The New Testament does not command any to keep the Sabbath-day.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.4
Now let us weigh this assertion, and judge respecting its real character. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.5
1. The fourth commandment was given by God the Father, at the same time and under the same circumstances that the precept “Thou shalt have no other gods before me” was given. Hence until its abolition is proved, it abides in force as the commandment of the Father, and needs re-enactment no more than do the precepts, Thou shalt have no other gods before me; Thou shalt not bow down to graven images; Thou shalt not blaspheme, etc. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.6
2. But while our Lord does not quote the words of either of the first four commandments, (our duty to God,) but repeats verbatim only the last six, (our duty to our neighbor,) he does in the most solemn manner teach the duty of keeping, not merely the ones quoted, but the whole of them. After saying that he had not come to destroy but to fulfill them, and that till heaven and earth pass one jot or one tittle should in no wise pass till all be fulfilled, he adds: “Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do, and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” Matthew 5:19. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.7
3. When Jesus was asked the way to enter eternal life, he answered, “If thou wilt enter into life keep the commandments,” referring directly to the ten. There is no way that you can get the fourth excepted, unless you take the ground that when Christ proceeded to call the young man’s attention to the commandments in which he was specially deficient, (his duty to his fellow man,) those which he did not name were not binding; but this would leave out the whole of the first four, (our duty to God.) Matthew 19:16-22. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.8
4. But lest you should say that Jesus gave this direction respecting the entrance into life eternal, before the commandments of the Father were abolished, I ask you to hear this same Alpha and Omega, in the year 96, lay down the condition of entering into life. Mark, it is Jesus that speaks the words of Revelation 22:13-16, and he speaks not of his own commandments, but of “his,” the Father’s: “Blessed are they that do HIS commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.9
5. The validity of the fourth commandment is recognized this side of the crucifixion. The women that followed our Lord to the tomb returned and “rested the Sabbath-day” (not in an ignorant, presumptuous or superstitious manner, but) “according to the commandment,” which says, “Remember the Sabbath-day to keep it holy.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.10
6. The institution of the holy Sabbath in Eden, having been clearly established, I here remind you of a statement in your second article, that the endless perpetuity of the Sabbath, necessarily grows out of its institution before the fall of man. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.11
7. As the fourth commandment is, according to the statement of your Bible class report, one of the ten precepts that composed “the constitution” of the great Jehovah, it ABIDES until that constitution is abolished, and another established in its stead. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.12
8. In conclusion, I ask, How much stronger are the last six commandments which Jesus quoted, than are the first four which he did not directly quote, inasmuch as (according to your view) they have since that all been abolished together? ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.13
From these facts, and many others which will be noticed hereafter, we conclude that the fourth precept of God’s great CONSTITUTION stands on the same foundation with the other nine; and that they all abide until the Infinite Jehovah abolishes his constitution and forms another in its stead. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.14
The second statement on which you rely as proof that the fourth commandment is abolished, is this: ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.15
“It [the New Testament] does not name Sabbath-breaking as a sin.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.16
Your attention is invited while the amount of proof contained in this statement is weighed. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.17
1. That the sin of Sabbath-breaking is not named in the catalogues of sins in the New Testament, is only inferential proof that it is no sin to violate the fourth commandment and to “teach men so.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.18
2. The New Testament does not present these catalogues of sins as complete lists; for some omit to name many grievous sins, and all omit to name some that are very heinous. Witness the sins of slave-holding and of Polygamy, both of which were common in the days of our Lord and his apostles, and certainly very out-breaking. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.19
3. But mark! There is a standard somewhere by which these acts are shown to be sins. God has erected such a standard; and the New Testament points us to it, as nothing else than that holy law which you are trying to prove abolished. Hear the beloved disciple; “SIN is the TRANSGRESSION of the LAW.” 1 John 3:4. Now hear Paul tell how sin is made manifest: “BY THE LAW IS THE KNOWLEDGE OF SIN.” Romans 7:20. Hear him again: “I HAD NOT KNOWN SIN BUT BY THE LAW.” Romans 7:7, 13. This is the only standard by which sin is shown. It is the embodiment of God’s own principles of holiness, and it is therefore perfect. It is enough that the apostles have told us what the standard is by which sin is shown; we take this standard, and tell any man who breaks either the first, second, fourth, or eighth commandment he is a sinner, and “the wages of sin is death.” Romans 6:23. Your third statement reads as follows: ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.20
“What it [the New Testament] says on the subject, goes to show that the Sabbath was abrogated with the law of Moses.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.21
This statement lays the subject open for discussion. You affirm; I deny. - You commence by objecting to, and finding fault with the remarks of the Review on the question as stated by yourself. You think that they are uncandid and were made to forestall fair investigation by changing the point at issue. In this you are entirely mistaken. They were made to call attention to the fact that until the abolition of the ten commandments is proved, we are not under obligation to show the re-enactment of a single precept. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.22
We have never claimed that the New Testament enacts the fourth commandment a second time. We deny that it was the design of the New Testament to re-enact the holy, just, spiritual and perfect law of God; but on the contrary, that law having shown the whole world to be condemned and guilty before God, the New Testament comes in to present a hope of pardon, without dishonoring God or making void his law. And that the New Testament in offering pardon to fallen, guilty man, does it for the very reason that the law of God condemns the whole world, and shows all mankind guilty before God, and exposed to his wrath. Romans 3. Instead of assuming that whatever is not re-enacted in the New Testament, is not binding, you are requested to prove the abolition of the commandments of God, or else to render obedience to them. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.23
I can assure you, that having the utmost confidence in the perpetuity and immutability of God’s constitution in general, and of each of its ten articles in particular, I have no occasion to resort to “silly expedients” “to obscure the light” of truth. I thank God that I was enabled to expose “the silly expedients” to which you resorted in your Bible class report, to prove that Christ and his apostles broke the Sabbath. A few of these will be noticed in their place. You speak of the Review as follows: ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.24
“Its nice discriminations about the law of God and the law of Moses are all fancied; as though God and Moses had separate interests in the Bible!” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.25
Had you done me the justice to use the terms that were used by me, and then have shown that they meant one and the same thing, you would not have struck like one beating the air. My expressions were scriptural: “The hand-writing of ordinances” is abolished; “the royal law” remaineth. You are requested to prove that these are but one law, or else to take back your assertion. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.26
It is very true that circumcision was called an everlasting covenant between God and the posterity of Abraham; and the like expressions are used with reference to other ceremonies. But it was not made for man at Creation as was the Sabbath; it was not one of the holy, just and spiritual laws which Jehovah spake from heaven, and which composed his constitution. Consequently there is no propriety in classing circumcision with the Sabbath of Jehovah. The sign of circumcision was given to Abraham, as a seal of the righteousness of his faith, when he was yet uncircumcised, that he might be the father of those that should believe even though they should not be circumcised. - Thus this rite itself showed that the time would come when it would not be required. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.27
You assert that “the language of the New Testament abolishing the Sabbath is more abundant and explicit than that abolishing circumcision.” - Let us contrast the statement of the New Testament respecting circumcision, with one of the most prominent texts urged by no-Sabbath teachers against the fourth commandment. Paul speaks of circumcision as follows: “If ye be circumcised Christ shall profit you nothing.” Galatians 5:2. This testimony is very “explicit.” Now we will look at Romans 14:5, which you think refers to the observance of Jehovah’s Sabbath. It reads thus: “One man esteemeth one day above another; another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.” - Now admitting that Paul in Romans 14 is classing the abolition of the fourth article of God’s constitution, with the abolition of those carnal ordinances which stood only in meats and drinks and divers washings, (a thing in the highest degree unreasonable and absurd,) I ask, Can you not perceive a vast difference between the expression, “Christ shall profit you nothing,” and the direction, “Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind?” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.28
In order to avoid the absurdity of teaching that God abolished his law and then re-enacted it, you say that God abolished that which was written on the tables of stone, “but that did not necessarily involve the abolition of every precept in it that had existed before the period referred to.” The idea that the ten commandments could be abolished, and yet a part of the ten still remain in force, seems to be somewhat original with you. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.29
Let us look at the idea a moment. Prior to the account of the departure from Egypt, we find but one of the precepts of the Decalogue recorded in the scripture, as a direct commandment. Genesis 9:5, 6. But the existence of all those holy principles from Creation to Sinai you will not deny, the Sabbath precept excepted, as it is indispensably necessary to have them exist in this dispensation, some how or other. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.30
Now if nine of the ten commandments could survive the abolition of the Decalogue, Why cannot the Sabbath, which was instituted at Creation, survive that abolition also? And if the abolition of the Decalogue (a thing that never yet was proved) leaves a part of the ten commandments still in force, the fourth commandment may be one of them. And if God could abolish the ten commandments and yet nine of them remain unabolished, Why cannot ten? ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.31
When any evidence is presented to prove that God has abolished a part of his constitution, and modified a portion of the remainder, it shall be duly considered. If the subject of keeping the commandments of God and the duties of refraining from idolatry, blasphemy, murder, theft, false witness etc., was the theme of Paul’s discourse in Romans 14; Colossians 2, there would be some propriety in concluding that God’s Rest-day, which stands associated with these commandments, was there referred to. As his subject is the use of meats, drinks etc., it is an unwarrantable inference that his language refers to the Sabbath made for man, as it manifestly refers to the sabbaths, feasts and new moons of the hand-writing of ordinances. You continue: ARSH June 10, 1852, page 18.32
“The Review says: Please notice, he passes over Matthew 5:17-19, where our Lord in his first sermon speaks out in distinct terms on the real point at issue.’ Where in that sermon does our Lord ‘speak out in distinct terms on the’ Sabbath? for that is the only ‘point at issue.’ The Sabbath is not once named nor alluded to in that whole sermon: Yet the Review finds it there ‘in distinct terms!!’ Just so it finds it in the ‘royal law.’ James 2:8. Dear reader, dare you trust such an expositor of the word of God? That cause must be desperate that needs such support, and fearful, fearful will be his account who lends it.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.1
Your attention is called to the subject while I briefly notice the above: ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.2
1. In my review of your Bible class report, I called attention to the fact that the abolition or the perpetuity of the commandments of God, was the real question in the New Testament; and that it was not whether the New Testament re-enacted the fourth commandment or not. Consequently, I remarked with reference to your first argument in the New Testament as follows: “Please notice, he passes over Matthew 5:17-19 where our Lord in his first sermon speaks out in distinct terms on the real point at issue, and begins with the accusation of Sabbath-breaking, presented by the Pharisees, and refuted by Jesus Christ.” - Our Lord in the text cited, does speak in distinct terms respecting the perpetuity and immutability of the commandments of God; consequently your effort to ridicule the Review because the fourth commandment is not cited in particular, evinces a serious lack of sound argument. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.3
2. James, in giving his account of the royal law in chap 2:8-12, introduces two of the original ten commandments, with a statement that he who should keep the whole law and yet fail in one precept, has become guilty of all. The way you get rid of this testimony respecting the commandments of God, is, I think, rather novel. You limit the royal law to the precept named in verse 8, and exclude the law and commandments named in verses 9-12. And while your unfortunate position compels you thus to wrest and mangle the word of truth, you elsewhere ridicule me for believing that the hand-writing of ordinances is distinct from the royal law. I cannot refrain from smiling, as I read your pathetic warning to your dear readers, to put them on their guard against what I may write. But I have sufficient respect for them to believe that it will not throw dust enough in their eyes to prevent them from seeing your real dilemma. As you and I shall be judged by this law in the day of God, [verse 12,] we shall then be convinced whether it is a light thing to violate one of its precepts or not. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.4
In exposing your effort to prove from Matthew 12, that Christ justified the violation of the fourth commandment, I used the following language: ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.5
“In order to aid the mind of the reader, and also to make C. speak out plain, we offer him one of three positions: ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.6
1. Christ excused his disciples by referring to others who had done wrong. (A poor excuse truly.) ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.7
2. Or the law had always been relaxed, changed, superseded, or abolished. (Then it was not relaxed by Christ.) ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.8
3. Or the acts of the priests, the act of David, and the acts of the disciples, were not, under the circumstances in which they were placed, contrary to the law of God. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.9
The first two positions being too absurd to need refutation, all must agree upon the third. Now look at the facts in the case. What said the law of God respecting the Sabbath? ‘Six days shalt thou labor, and do all THY work; but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work.’ Were the priests in their act of offering up sacrifices upon the Sabbath, at work for themselves, or for God: Not for themselves, but to obey God. Numbers 28:9, 10. They were not doing what could be called ‘thy work.’ But had they been engaged in slaughtering animals for their own use on that day, would they have been guiltless then? Verily not. Look at the case of David. 1 Samuel 21. - He was fleeing for his life from Saul, the king of Israel. ‘He had need’ and as an act of mercy ‘for there was no bread there but the shew-bread,’ the priest gave him of it to eat. This, as an act of mercy, was according to the law. ‘The WEIGHTIER matters of the law’ were ‘judgment, MERCY and faith.’ Matthew 23:23. Under other circumstances, though not expressly forbidden, it would have been wrong. Christ appealed to these circumstances to show that the disciples in satisfying their hunger from the heads of wheat, were guiltless. Was there any chance ‘to answer him again?’ I trow not. But how ‘unreasonable’ it is for C. to insinuate from this chapter that any amount of labor would have been ‘guiltless’ on the part of the disciples. If David and the priests would, under other circumstances, have been blameless in acting as they did, then might C. offer this chapter as proof, not merely that the law was slacked up in the days of Jesus, but that it always had been! Is it not ‘hard for thee to kick against the pricks?’ ‘Mercy and not sacrifice’ was not a new doctrine. Hosea 6:6. It was one of the weightier matters of the law. Matthew 23:23.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.10
As a matter of curiosity to the reader I present your reply. Whether you have defended your position by “plain scripture and fair argument,” or have dealt only in common-place assertion the reader will determine: ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.11
“Matthew 12:1-8 does not present the only instance of apostolic disregard for the Sabbath: this is in keeping with the uniform treatment that institution received at the hands of Christ and his apostles whenever it came up for special notice. They always, when speaking of its authority, treat it as a superannuated institution. In its day, it could no more be disregarded with impunity than circumcision, or any other ordinance of that period: but its age was expiring and a better one was dawning, distinguished by institutions broader in their scope and more obviously merciful in their genius. Our Saviour seems some times to have almost sought opportunity, if not to violate, at least to expose and correct the Pharisees’ superstitious veneration of the Sabbath.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.12
Perhaps one or two remarks on the above may be in place. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.13
1. According to yourself, Christ and his apostles, when speaking of the fourth article of God’s constitution, treat it as a “superannuated” thing. We may conclude then, (if the reader can pardon what looks so much like blasphemy,) that the government of the Infinite Jehovah was, in the days of our Lord’s ministry, in an unsettled state as his constitution was being abolished, and a broader and more merciful one about to be formed. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.14
2. Once the fourth precept of the great constitution was of as much importance as circumcision and other ordinances; but its age was expiring and institutions BROADER and more merciful than the Sabbath which “was made FOR the man” at Creation, were to take its place. Is not the utterance of such sentiments as these, presumptuous trifling with the word of God? ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.15
3. Our Lord’s exposure of the superstition of the Pharisees, is what you grasp as proof that he “almost sought opportunity” to show his disregard for the fourth commandment. John 15:10. To break the commandments, and to teach men so, is fearful business, and needs some better apology than such assertions and inferences as these. - Your next remarks are as follows: ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.16
“If the Son of man was Lord of the Sabbath to ‘cherish, protect and defend it,’ as the Review says, why did not he and his apostles defend and enforce it? They speak of marriage, and enforce respect to the mutual duties and obligations of husband and wife; and not a word is said by which it could be inferred that they had become less stringent than formerly. - But the reverse is true of the Sabbath.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.17
The following are the remarks of the Review to which you refer: ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.18
“The Son of man is the Lord of the Sabbath, even as the husband is the lord of his wife. See Mark 2:27, 28; 1 Corinthians 11:9; 1 Peter 3:6; Genesis 18:12. - Not to abrogate, abolish, - put away, or destroy, but to cherish, protect, and defend. He is the Lord of his people - he is our Lord Jesus Christ. Not to abolish - not to abrogate - not to destroy us - but to lay down his own life for us, and to ‘come again,’ and take us to himself. Romans 14:9; John 14:1-3. - ‘God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.’ - Matthew 22:32. Jesus Christ is not the Lord of dead types and shadows, but of ‘the lively oracles!’ - Amen. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.19
In taking leave of Matthew 12, we ask, Whether an act shown by our Lord Jesus Christ to be in accordance with that WEIGHTIER matter of the law, MERCY. and therefore no violation of the law, will justify C. in open, willful violation of the fourth commandment? If he be ‘weighed in the balances’ of Matthew 12, his own chosen scales, will he not be ‘found wanting?’” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.20
To the above a few remarks should, perhaps, be added. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.21
1. It was written in answer to the objection so often urged, that if our Lord was the Lord of the Sabbath, he certainly put it away and chose another, or else he abrogated and destroyed it. The facts cited above show that the term implies the reverse of all all this. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.22
2. But our Lord did the same thing to the institution of the Sabbath, that he did to that of marriage. To correct the light esteem in which the Pharisees held the latter, he calls their attention to its original institution at Creation, and thence shows its real object and sacred character. Matthew 19:3-8. To correct the superstitious austerities with which they had loaded the holy Sabbath, he points them to its original institution also, at Creation, in an answer that alike shuts the mouths of those who would cumber the Sabbath of Jehovah with superstitious observances, and of those on the other hand, who teach that it is one of the things AGAINST us and CONTRARY to us, which he took out of the way. Colossians 2. “The Sabbath,” says he, “was made FOR the man and not the man for the Sabbath: therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath.” Mark 2:27, 28. Satan has cared little whether men have added to, or made void the law of God. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.23
3. Christ lays down the keeping of the commandments of God as the condition of entering eternal life. The fourth and the seventh are alike included. Matthew 19. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.24
As you have made no effort to redeem the “expedients” to which you resorted in your Bible class report, to prove that Christ and his disciples violated the fourth article of God’s constitution, I will, for the sake of brevity, pass over the rest of them, and request you to recur to the Review in which these expedients are exposed. Your concluding remarks on the Gospels are as follows: ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.25
“We have never ‘charged Christ and his disciples with the sin of Sabbath-breaking.’ The Pharisees did that to them, as the Review does to us: but it cannot quote the example of Christ or any of his disciples in making such a charge. As the time had come for the abrogation of the Sabbath, it was no more a sin to disregard it than to disregard circumcision and sacrifices: and as they were sometimes observed without sanctioning their perpetuity, so of the Sabbath. What is said in reference to the perpetuity or abrogation of either must decide that point.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.26
Before quoting the language of the Review to which the above refers a few remarks may be in place: ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.27
1. You have attempted to prove that the disciples violated the fourth commandment, and that Christ justified them as its violators; and that the sin of Sabbath-breaking did not rest upon them, because it was no sin to violate the fourth commandment, though that commandment was not abolished till his death. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.28
2. But the charge of breaking the fourth commandment, was made by the Pharisees against our Lord falsely: for I ask you as a candid man to answer the question, which of them convinced him of sin, (the transgression of the law,) or what one of their number was able to show that he had not kept his Father’s commandments? John 8:46; 15:10. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 19.29
3. But in grasping the accusation of the Pharisees as good and valid, (provided that our Lord held himself amenable to his Father’s law,) and in over-looking his repeated declaration that what he did was lawful, (that is according to the law,) I ask, Do you not stand on the side of the Pharisees in their opposition to the Son of God? ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.1
4. Will you please listen to the words of the Apostle. “Sin is the transgression of the law.” 1 John 3. Then that is its definition. “By the law is the knowledge of sin.” Romans 3. Then that is the way that it is made known. “I had not known sin but by the law; for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.” Romans 7:7. This is the testimony of Paul, years after the law is said to have been abolished. And he quotes from the ten commandments. Now if you openly and willfully violate the first, second, third, fourth, or any of the commandments, Are you not a sinner, exposed to the penalty of the law - the wages of sin - which is the second death? Romans 6:23; Revelation 20:14, 15. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.2
5. If the law of God was not abolished until the death of our Lord, it was a sin to violate it before that time, as it was yet in force. But if it was abolished at the commencement of our Lord’s ministry, Was it also abolished at his death? In your second article you informed your readers that Sabbatic obligation terminated at the crucifixion; here you have it terminate at the commencement of Christ’s ministry. As it is difficult to occupy two contradictory positions, Will you please to select the most tenable one? If the “time had come for the abrogation of the Sabbath” at the commencement of our Lord’s ministry, Will you prove the point by plain Scripture and fair argument? ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.3
6. It is worthy of notice that your concluding remark states the question in the very form for which I contended. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.4
In conclusion I append the words of the Review to which you refer: ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.5
“We take leave of the position of C. relative to the Gospels, with these remarks: ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.6
1. Christ came to ‘magnify the law, and make it honorable,’ [Isaiah 42:21,] but he relaxed its obligation, even before God had abolished (?) it! ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.7
2. He ‘came to fulfill’ the law, yet justified the violation of its fourth precept!! ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.8
3. He did more against the law than its worst enemy could have done; for while it was yet in existence, (as all must admit,) he justified its violation, and then relaxed its claims so that it could not take hold on its transgressor. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.9
4. James says that whosoever ‘shall fail with respect to one precept hath become guilty of all.’ [Macknight.] Jesus himself failed with respect to the fourth commandment and became guilty of all!!! ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.10
5. ‘Sin is the transgression of the law.’ According to C., [note also John 9:24,] Jesus was a sinner. But according to the beloved disciple, ‘In him is no sin.’ 1 John 3:4, 5. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.11
But as it was a mistaken notion with the Pharisees in regarding the ‘mint, anise, and cumin’ of the law, as above its ‘weightier matter,’ ‘MERCY,’ that led them to make these charges against him who had kept his ‘Father’s commandments,’ and had ever done ‘those things that please him,’ we ask if C. may not be laboring under a similar mistake? - Whether or not that which C. has presented from the Gospels, will cause Jehovah to ‘have him excused’ from obeying the fourth commandment, is now submitted to the reader.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.12
In view of what has been said thus far from the New Testament, I submit to you the following question: Did our Lord keep the commandments and teach men so, or did he violate them and teach others so to do? ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.13
J. N. ANDREWS.
Rochester, N. Y., June 1852.
THE following we copy from the Advent Herald, taken from the “London Quarterly Journal of Prophecy.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.14
“During the six days man was to show how he could serve and glorify God in the common duties of life; on the Sabbath he was to show how God was to be served and glorified by acts of direct and unmingled worship. This is the principle of the great Sabbath-institute - a principle which runs through all ages - more so than ever in these last days, when men are either denying religion altogether, or endeavoring to eject it from every-day life, and confine it to a peculiar region of its own. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.15
This seventh day God ‘blest.’ He uttered his mind concerning it, calling it a day of blessing, and in so doing, communicated to it (as it were) the power to impart blessing, that is, he made it the day in which he would specially give blessing. This is, then, the primary meaning and object of the Sabbath. It is the day on which God specially blesses man. - But more than this. It is added, he ‘sanctified it.’ He marked it off from all other days, as the tabernacle was marked off from all the tents of Israel. He drew a fence around it, which was not to be broken through. He set it apart for himself, just as he set the six days apart for man. It was to be his day, not man’s, just as the altar was his altar, the laver his laver, not man’s. And when, or where, or how has God’s claim to a Sabbath been renounced? When has his setting apart been done away? Men speak and act as if this ‘blessing,’ this ‘sanctification’ of the day were a yoke not to be borne; as if the Sabbath were a curse, not a blessing; as if the Gospel had at length broken fetters forged in Eden by God for man! But no. The Sabbath was set up by God, and by him only can be taken down.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.16
Knowledge of the True God. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.17
It was said of Paul, by certain Epicureans, and Stoics, that he seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods. And when he found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD, and wished to declare him in an intelligent manner, the Apostle could do it with no greater clearness than by quoting the language of the fourth commandment, the only one that informs us who the living and true God, to be worshiped is, viz: the Lord of heaven and earth, that made the earth and all things therein. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.18
No one will deny that the Athenians were infidel in the extreme. Acts 17:16. The city was wholly given to idolatry, therefore Paul’s spirit was stirred within him, to present one of the greatest truths of God’s word, and thereby give them right conceptions of the Great Creator. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.19
So we see the conclusion is irresistible that the knowledge of the true God is found alone in the reason for keeping the Sabbath. Mark the language and compare it well. “For [because] in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day etc.” - Exodus 20:11. If the race of Adam had always observed this institution, would there ever have been an infidel in the universe? If not, Has God abolished the only institution that commemorates the Creation, and recognizes the living and true God, that should be worshiped! If this be answered in the affirmative, then God has abolished a knowledge of himself in the earth. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.20
E. R. SEAMAN.
Rochester, N. Y., June 10th, 1852.
THE REVIEW AND HERALD
“Sanctify them through thy truth; thy word is truth.”
ROCHESTER, THURSDAY, JUNE 10, 1852.
BABYLON.
“AND there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, etc.” Revelation 14:8. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.21
The subject of the Babylon of the Revelation, its fall, etc. being the link that connects the past with the present, the first angel of Rev.xiv with the third, it is of the greatest importance that the correct view of Babylon should be given. For if the testimony of the third angel be presented to those who investigate subjects, and who must see good reasons before they can believe, they will most certainly wish to first understand the testimony of the angels that precede it. Those who might embrace the third message without inquiring for the first and second, would not be likely to stand a very fierce storm of opposition against the truth. Hence, those who teach the third message should be able to clearly define the first and the second. Certainly, if the period has arrived for the followers of Christ to have their attention called to the third message, the former ones may be understood. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.22
It is not our design at this time to take up the two former messages, but only to notice briefly some points of importance relative to Babylon, which is the subject of the second, angel. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.23
“Babylon comes from Babel, and signifies ‘confusion or mixture.’” See Genesis 10:10; 11:9. In this respect, at least, it well applies to the many religious sects, so widely differing in their creeds, and each professing to be the true church of Christ. - We are aware that this application of Babylon will appear harsh and uncharitable to many. But let such compare the one, united church of Christ, as set forth in the New Testament, separated from the world, with the many sects of the present day with all their confusion of doctrines, and united with the world, and we think they will no longer object to this application. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.24
“God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.” 1 Corinthians 14:33. It was the plan of God, and his will, that his people should be one. For this, the Son of God prayed: “Sanctify them through thy truth; thy word is truth.” “Neither pray I for these alone; but for THEM ALSO WHICH SHALL BELIEVE ON ME THROUGH THEIR WORD; that they ALL MAY BE ONE, as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be ONE IN US, THAT THE WORLD MAY BELIEVE THAT THOU HAST SENT ME.” John 17:17, 20, 21. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.25
Here is the great reason why the church should be one; that the world might believe that God had sent his Son to save lost men. But as the reverse has been the case, the confusion of this great Babylon has filled the world with infidelity. - There is another point of great interest in this prayer of the Saviour, as follows: “I have given them thy word, and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.” Verse 14. Here the true church of Christ is seen “not of the world,” separated from it, consequently, hated by the world. This shows the worldly, popular churches of this day, which are united with the world, and loved by the world, not to be the real church of Christ. - We, therefore, conclude that the various sects, united to, and loved by, the world, in their divided and subdivided condition, with their confusion of creeds, have ever been worthy of the name of Babylon. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.26
As the husband is the head of the wife, so Christ is the only lawful head of the church. As the wife should look alone to her husband to be protected and cherished, so the church should lean on no other arm than that of her lawful Head, But the churches of this day have formed an unlawful connection with the world, have gone after other lovers, and they are worthy to be represented by the family of harlots, [Revelation 17:5,] the daughters of the old mother, the Roman Catholic church. And how these daughters resemble their mother! Some indeed are older than others, but as they grow in strength of years the resemblance is more striking. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.27
Heaven has provided ample means to secure the purity and unity of the church; but that means has been trampled underfoot by the wisdom of men. Said the Son of God, “If I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart I will send him unto you. And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth is come, he will guide you into all truth.” John 16:7-13. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.28
God’s revealed truth is a unit. It has not as many heads and horns as the symbolic beasts of Daniel and John, but is one. While error has a thousand crooked streams, truth flows onward in one strait, even channel. And the Holy Comforter is sent down to guide the followers of Jesus into all truth. - This was God’s plan. And if Christ’s professed followers had ever stood separate from the world as the Word requires, and had been humble, meek and lowly, like their Pattern, so that the Spirit of truth could abide with them, they would have been guided into the one channel of truth, consequently, been one. Then the prayer of Jesus would have been answered in his professed disciples, they would not have composed this great Babylon, and the world would not have been filled with infidelity by reason of their confusion of doctrines. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.29
The gifts of the Holy Spirit were given to secure the purity and unity of the church; but many of these being rejected, as belonging to the apostles alone, the church has been left to form human creeds, and finite wisdom has led benighted souls in almost every direction excepting the channel of truth - Hear the great Apostle: ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.30
“And he gave some, apostles, and some, prophets, and some, evangelists, and pastors, and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come in the UNITY OF THE FAITH.” Ephesians 4:11-13. Is it said that the apostolic church came to this unity of the faith, and that these gifts have not since existed? To this we reply, that those who tear down the unpopular gifts, on this ground, tear down the ministry also, for Paul places them on the same ground, and shows them to be of equal duration. Hear Paul again: ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.31
“And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healing, helps, government, diversities of tongues,” 1 Corinthians 12:28. If God has set these gifts in the church, who has taken them away? If they have all been taken away, then those who profess to be called of God as “teachers” in the church, are engaged in a calling that ceased about 1800 years since. But, if it be said that a portion of the gifts were to cease at the death of the apostles, we ask, who is prepared to decide this matter, and tell which gifts were to cease? God, the one that set them in the church, has not told us, neither has Christ, or his apostles. Ah! This cutting and carving for the Almighty, has deranged the gracious gospel plan, grieved the Spirit of truth almost entirely away from the church, and she has been left to the guidance of finite wisdom, to wander a thousand directions from the fold of Christ, and unlawfully unite with the world, and form this great Babylon. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.32
It is vain to talk of union, permanent and scriptural, where there is confusion of views, and separate interests. How often have different denominations united in protracted efforts for the conversion of sinners; and all would go on well till the time came to bend the converts to the different man-made creeds; then what confusion has followed, and what wounds have been inflicted upon the cause of Christ. No wonder that men have doubted the reality of the Christian religion. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.33
Look at the so-called Union Conference of Advent believers, held at New York City a little more than one year since. — That union not being in sentiment, but for objects understood by those acquainted with the state of the Advent people, was short-lived. Some of the most prominent leaders in that Conference have since manifested extremely unkind feelings toward each other through the columns of the Harbinger and Watchman. We here give a few texts from the epistles of Paul which show the true, and only safe position for the church to occupy. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.34
“Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. - 1 Corinthians 1:10. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 20.35
“Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to be like-minded one toward another according to Christ Jesus: that ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God. - Romans 15:5, 6, ARSH June 10, 1852, page 21.1
“If there be therefore any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and mercies, fulfill ye my joy, that ye be like-minded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind. Philippians 2:1, 2. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 21.2
“Finally, brethren, farewell. Be perfect, be of good comfort, be of one mind, live in peace, and the God of love and peace shall be with you. Greet one another with an holy kiss.” 2 Corinthians 13:11, 12. See also, 1 Peter 3:8; Philippians 3:16. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 21.3
The Fall of Babylon ARSH June 10, 1852, page 21.4
Is evidently a moral fall, and not her final destruction. - This may be seen from the order of events given, that she first falls, second, “becomes the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird,” third, God’s people are called out of her, and fourth, then her plagues are poured upon her, and she is thrown down with violence, “like a great mill-stone cast into the sea,” and found no more. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 21.5
“And after these things I saw another angel come down from heaven, having great power, and the earth was lightened with his glory. And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying; Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird. For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies. And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.” Revelation 18:1-4. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 21.6
After Babylon falls, and then becomes the hold of every foul spirit, etc. God calls his people out of her, to escape her plagues, yet future. Now, if Babylon’s fall is her utter destruction, we ask how can she become a hold of foul spirits after she is destroyed? How will God’s people be called out of Babylon after she is thrown down, like a great mill-stone cast into the sea? And how are her plagues to be poured upon her after she is destroyed, and is “found no more at all?” - Will those who confound the fall of Babylon with her final destruction, please answer these questions? ARSH June 10, 1852, page 21.7
If the term Babylon be applied to the Roman Catholic church alone, then we inquire, When did she morally fall? The fact that she has always been corrupt, and about as low as she possibly could be, forbids the application of this moral change, or fall, to that corrupt church. Again, Babylon, signifying ‘confusion, or mixture,’ cannot be applied to the Roman church, she being a unit. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 21.8
If it be said that the city of Rome is this Babylon, and that her fall is the burning of that literal city, then we would ask, How can the city of Rome “become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird” after it is burned. And how is it possible for God’s people to be in Rome, (in order to be called out,) after that city is burned, and is thrown down with violence, like a great mill-stone cast into the sea by a mighty angel, and “found no more at all.” Will God’s people be in Rome after that city is no more? Again, the people of God are called out of Babylon to escape her plagues. Revelation 18:4. But will they flee out of Rome after it is burned, to escape plagues, of which her being burned is her last plague? “Her plagues shall come in one day, death, and mourning and famine; and she shall be utterly burned with fire.” Revelation 18:8. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 21.9
The true application of Babylon is free from all these inconsistencies. The prophecy when rightly applied, will fit like the glove to the hand, being made purposely for it. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 21.10
In our next we design to show, that the message of the second angel, “Babylon is fallen, is fallen, etc.” [Revelation 14:8,] is in the past, and has been fulfilled in connection with the Advent movement, also the nature of her fall, and that the message of Revelation 18:1-4, “Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, AND HAS BECOME [after her fall] the habitation of devils, and the hold of EVERY FOUL SPIRIT, etc.” is yet to be given, to call out the 144,000 from the great Babylon of apostate Christianity, preparatory to the coming of Christ. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 21.11
We are happy to publish the article from Bro. Cottrell, on another page, and hope our friends will do what they can to circulate the REVIEW AND HERALD among Sabbath-keepers not particularly interested in the advent doctrine. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 21.12
The Seventh-day Baptists, seeing the proclaimers of the advent bowing to an institution of Papacy, were not well prepared to receive the message. And is it not the purpose of God that those who have come to the knowledge of the Sabbath, should spread the light of the advent before this people, as the way may open before them? ARSH June 10, 1852, page 21.13
ARTICLE BY E. G. WHITE. “To the Brethren and Sisters”
[CD-ROM Editor’s Note: See EGW CD-ROM]
To Correspondents
BRO. B. B. BROWN - We sent you a Chart by the mail to Beloit, Wis., about the middle of April; also a letter. Were they received? Please write. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 21.14
BRO. DARIUS MYERS - We were happy to hear from you, dear brother. Have sent a very few small tracts; will send more if you wish. The Chart can be sent by Mail. Shall send it otherwise if possible. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 21.15
To Sabbath-keepers who have not heard The Third Angel’s Message. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 22.1
DEAR BRETHREN:- The Lord will soon come. - To those who look for him and love his righteous appearing, these few words are addressed. We, that have long observed the Sabbath of the Lord, have been looking forward with great desire to the time when this commandment of Jehovah, so long trodden down by the power that should “think to change times and laws,” should be restored. We have expected to see the Sabbath triumph. Perhaps we have expected too much from this sinful world. - The great mass even of professors of religion, will never yield obedience to this oracle of God. But after seeing the clear light upon it and rejecting it, their house will be left unto them desolate. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 22.2
But rejoice with me, brethren, the truth is even now triumphing with the honest. Those who love our Lord Jesus Christ, and are looking, and longing for his glorious appearing, and wish to be found of him in peace, without spot or wrinkle, are being led to see that they must keep all the commandments of God, that they may have right to the tree of life, and enter in through the gates into the City. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 22.3
You doubtless remember the cry that went through the world, that the Lord would come in 1843. This message was derided under the name of Millerism, but not by those who loved the Lord and believed his word. He promised, before he left the world, to come again; and none who love him and understand his word, will ever scoff at the idea of his coming. - Just such a proclamation as this, is symbolized by an angel having the everlasting gospel to preach to them that dwell on the earth, saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him, for the hour of his judgment is come. Revelation 14:6, 7. Brethren, inquire carefully whether this scripture was not then fulfilled. Perhaps you are ready to say that the proclamation was false, because the Lord did not come, and therefore cannot be the fulfillment. To this I answer, that the Author of the prophetic word is not answerable for the mistakes of fallible humanity. His children oft fulfill his word, when they do not understand all about what they are doing. Concerning what took place when Christ rode into Jerusalem, which was a fulfillment of prophecy, it is said:- ARSH June 10, 1852, page 22.4
“These things understood not his disciples at the first; but when Jesus was glorified, then remembered they that these things were written of him, and that they had done these things unto him.” John 12:16. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 22.5
So the people of God, in giving this judgment hour cry, in connection with the termination of the 2300 days of Daniel, for lack of knowledge, said, then the Lord will come. But the Prophet said, “Unto 2300 days, then shall the Sanctuary be cleansed.” And the Revelator saw two other messages follow the judgment hour cry, before he saw the Son of man on the white cloud. Revelation 14:14. The error in regard to the event to take place at the termination of the days, does not prove that the preaching of time did not fulfill the prophecy of Revelation 14:6, 7, any more than that of the disciples, in supposing that Jesus would at that time restore the kingdom to Israel, proved that they had nothing to do with the fulfillment of that prediction in Zechariah 9:9. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 22.6
It is not my intention to argue this question, but only to awaken in your minds the spirit of inquiry that you may examine the subject for yourselves. - The Holy Spirit, by the prophet Daniel, has given us definite time. Was it intended that we, in these last days, should “understand” this time, and be benefited by it, or is it impossible for us to understand it in this mortal state? If the last supposition is true, why was it given to us? And ought not Paul to have accepted this, when he said, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable”? ARSH June 10, 1852, page 22.7
An angel was sent to inform the prophet Daniel, that seventy weeks were determined upon his people, and told him that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and build Jerusalem, unto the Messiah, should be 69 weeks. If Jesus was the Christ, these weeks were weeks of years. From the going forth of the decree, B. C. 457, to three years and a half after the crucifixion, (which was “in the midst of the week,”) is 70 weeks, or 490 days. - (years.) Ought not the Jews to be convinced from their own scriptures, that the Messiah has already been manifested? Most certainly. And yet they are looking to the future for their Messiah. Very well. If Jews ought to be convinced of this fact by time, surely Christians ought to know that the remainder of the 2300 days, from which the seventy weeks were “cut off,” are also ended. Take 490 from 2300, and we have 1810. To A. D. 34 add 1810, and we have A. D. 1844. “Then shall the Sanctuary be cleansed.” It is not a matter of small importance, thus anciently, and definitely foretold. Then it behoves us to inquire the meaning of cleansing the Sanctuary. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 22.8
I would like to say more on the subject of time, but the limits I have prescribed for myself forbid. I wish, however, to call your attention to the effect produced by preaching definite time. It awakened a spirit of inquiry in regard to bible truth. They took their lamps and went forth to meet the Bridegroom. And though the lamps of the foolish have gone out, for want of oil in their vessels, those of the wise shine more and more, and will continue to shine till we come to the perfect day. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 22.9
The judgment hour cry was opposed by the churches. They, who professed to love the Lord, began to disfellowship those who proclaimed him near. Meeting-houses were closed against this message. And they, who scarcely thought of a separation from the churches, were compelled as it were, to give the second angel’s message, viz: “Babylon is fallen, is fallen.” Revelation 14:8. I remember well of hearing that the churches in the Eastern States were being torn in pieces by the advent doctrine. And why were not the churches which kept the Sabbath equally effected with the rest? Because they stood upon a truth which was not held by those who were preaching the Advent. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 22.10
But those who loved the Lord, and wished to be found of him without spot and blameless, in searching the sure word, began to see that there was no authority in that word for a change of the day originally sanctified by God as the Rest-day. When honest people see this, they obey God rather than man. So they were led along down the track of prophecy to the third angel’s message. Revelation 14:9-12. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 22.11
“And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast, or his image, or receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God,” etc. “HERE is the patience of the saints; HERE are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 22.12
In this message is brought to view two classes. - One class worship the beast and receive his mark; the other keep the commandments, (not nine of them only,) and have the faith of Jesus. If you examine this subject, you will see clearly that the mark of the beast is that institution of the beast by which he attempts to set aside the commandment of the Most High, thinking himself able to “change times and laws.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 22.13
But I was about to tell you the result of preaching definite time. It has finally resulted in turning hundreds, and perhaps I might say thousands, to the Sabbath of the Lord. This you will say is good fruit. - Very well. Can a corrupt tree bear this good fruit? ARSH June 10, 1852, page 22.14
Now I know you will wish to examine the subjects here briefly hinted at. You will make known your wishes by addressing a letter to JAMES WHITE, editor of the ADVENT REVIEW AND SABBATH HERALD, Rochester, N. Y., “Terms - Gratis. It is expected that all the friends of the cause will aid in its publication, as the Lord hath prospered them.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 22.15
Listen to no cry of “fanaticism,” or, “shut door,” but send in your names for the paper. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 22.16
Yours for the truth,
ROSWELL F. COTTRELL.
Mill Grove, N. Y., May 25th, 1852.
“AND to them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.” Hebrews 9:23. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 22.17
“If, therefore, thou shalt not watch, I will come upon thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee.” Revelation 3:3. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 22.18
LETTERS
From Bro. Ingraham
DEAR BRO. WHITE: I have returned from my tour south, in connection with Bro. Baker, and will give you a brief account of the meetings we held in different places. I did not attend the conference at East Bethel, from the fact that the appointment did not reach me until it was too late, but was informed by the brethren that the Lord was present to help and bless his people. I met with Bro. Baker in Lebanon, N. H., and started with him for Unity, according to appointment. - Our meeting in this place was somewhat interesting. One came in for the first time to hear the truths relative to our position, and became much interested in the third angel’s message. From Unity we journeyed to Ashfield, Mass., and found a few brethren strong in the present truth, and hungry to hear the word of the Lord. The saints of the Lord in this place were strengthened, and our souls refreshed. - Others were convicted, and we were in hopes there would be an addition to the little company. We visited an adjoining town, (Hawley,) and held one meeting, and left them fully satisfied. Something remains to be done by some of God’s servants in that vicinity. On our way to Ware, we stopped with Bro. S. Everett over night; found them somewhat afflicted. His daughter, Bro. Higgins’ wife, had been sick for some time. God heard prayer in her behalf, and she was enabled to walk about the house when we left. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 22.19
Our meeting in Ware was one of trial, but in the midst of discordant notes, some were enabled to understand the voice of the good Shepherd, and came out in favor of the truth. A number of preachers came out to hear during our stay in this place. Is it not astonishing to find our Advent preachers taking the position of the no-Sabbath. They have been driven from the first-day by arguments deduced from God’s word, and to avoid the conclusion to which we have come, a refuge must be sought somewhere. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 22.20
If the lot of our Advent preachers should be among the Turks, undoubtedly they would contend for the observance of the sixth day of the week; but as this is not the case, and as they dread to take a public stand so singular and peculiar as the observance of the Lord’s day would place them in, the next subterfuge is the no-Sabbath ground. I am glad we have found the through train, and if we continue faithful, we’ll sing among the redeemed in the kingdom of God, beyond this world’s confusion. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 22.21
On our return from Massachusetts we visited the brethren in Atholl. We had an extra time there, some embraced the truth. God will raise up a good company in that place. We shall soon visit the brethren in Canada if the Lord permit. The appointment will be given through the REVIEW AND HERALD. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 22.22
Touching my own prosperity, I would say, I have made some advancement in the heavenly way of late. Never did the way look more narrow to me than now. Sometimes when I have a view of the way, my soul cries out, Let the saints go through; but as for me it is a doubtful case. But when I view the City just before us, and compare it with this world, where confusion is trampling on the heels of confusion, my soul cries out, By the grace of God I’ll conquer the world, the flesh and the devil, escape the plagues of the damned, and shout victory with all the saints in the City of our God. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 22.23
WM. S. INGRAHAM.
Woolcott, Vt., May 15th, 1852.
From Bro. Edson
DEAR BRO. WHITE: Our Conference in this place has just closed. The meeting has been one of much interest and profit to the dear saints in this place. The company of believers are united, and firmly settled in the present truth. The Word has had free course, and has run and been glorified. The blessing of heaven has rested upon the meeting. The sweet Spirit of the Lord has rested upon his people, and the melting power of his love has caused them to rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory, and to offer the sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving to God. An addition was made to the number of Sabbath-keepers. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 22.24
Some came with their minds prejudiced against this way which is every where spoken against, but felt their prejudice in a measure give way, and some confessed that God was with this people of a truth. The standard is planted here, and we are sure that the saints of God will rally around it. The Lord is at work in this region of country, bringing out, and making manifest his people. May the Lord speed the truth is my prayer. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 23.1
HIRAM EDSON.
Bangor, N. Y., May 31st, 1852.
From Bro. Holt
DEAR BRO. WHITE: The Conference in this place has closed. This meeting I believe was of divine appointment, and the blessing of God attended it. A goodly number came together in the spirit of meekness, union and love. There are more Sabbath-keepers in this region than I expected to find, and the number is increasing. Some at the meeting confessed their faith in the present truth for the first time, and their intention to obey it. The work of the Lord is moving forward gloriously; the truth has taken deep root in some hearts, and others are under deep conviction. The heart of the fathers are turned to their children, and the heart of the children to their fathers. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 23.2
The Conference was held at the house of Bro. Lewis Haskell. Bro. and Sister H., with their four daughters, are all in the truth. The Ark of the Lord rests in their house. The truth of God had free course, the Spirit was poured out freely, and the brethren were much blest and encouraged. Finally the truth bore away the victory, and the children of the Lord triumphed. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 23.3
Bro. and Sr. Penoyer have been afflicted by the death of their eldest daughter, aged seventeen years. She embraced the Sabbath last winter, after Bro. Rhodes had passed that way, and continued steadfast in the present truth until she fell asleep in Jesus a few days since. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 23.4
G. W. HOLT.
Norfolk, N. Y., May 29th, 1852. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 23.5
From Sister Dow
DEAR BRO. WHITE: In conversation with a friend not long since, upon the importance of keeping the commandments of God, it was remarked as follows: “The seventh-day folks are calculating to be saved by the law. I look to the gospel for salvation.” Now I would inquire, Can any one have a well grounded hope of salvation by the gospel, who does not yield willing obedience to the requirements of the gospel? And what are these requirements? Are they anything more or less than the “righteousness of the law fulfilled in those who walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit?” Those who delight in the law of the Lord have no other gods before them, consequently, they are ever ready to make “a covenant with him by sacrifice.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 23.6
Let us look at a few gospel requisitions, as expressed by the Saviour and his inspired apostles. Says Jesus, “Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth;” - “Sell that ye have and give alms;” “Be perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.” Says the chief Apostle, “Set your affections on things above, not on things on the earth;” “Be not conformed to this world;” “Let each esteem others better than themselves;” “Look not every man on his own things, but also on the things of others.” Hear also the disciple whom Jesus loved: “Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world;” “He that saith he abideth in him, ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 23.7
Now methinks the individual who can cheerfully comply with the above, will find nothing grievous in ARSH June 10, 1852, page 23.8
“The Law of Ten Commands
On holy Sinai given.”
ARSH June 10, 1852, page 23.9
O, how delightful to contemplate those commands, as a wall of salvation beside the narrow way, “strait as a rule can make it.” [Bunyan.] How safe to walk by such a rule, ever looking unto Jesus, without whom we can do nothing. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 23.10
“O, may my feet ne’er turn astray,
Nor rove nor seek another way.”
ELIZABETH DOW.
Newport, N. H., May 25th, 1852.
ARSH June 10, 1852, page 23.11
From Sister Peckham
DEAR BRO. WHITE: I have been forcibly struck of late in witnessing the confidence some seem to have of entering the kingdom, while living in the violation of the fourth commandment. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 23.12
I called upon a sick woman a few days since, who has been afflicted with swellings in the head, extremely painful, so that for seven weeks past she said she had realized but one night’s natural sleep; and spoke of the wonderful manner in which God had sustained her. Said she had received grace just as she needed, and added, I have had the greatest evidence of my acceptance with God during my affliction that I have ever had; and quoted these words, “Before I was afflicted I went astray, but now keep I thy law.” - ARSH June 10, 1852, page 23.13
I carefully introduced the Sabbath, and referred to her sickness as the means, perhaps, that God designed to bring her where these things might reach her. Her bosom began to swell with emotion, and she broke out, saying, “Christ! Christ! He is all to me. He is every thing. Your Sabbaths, away with them. If you have not got the love of God in your soul what good can these things do.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 23.14
I replied, we may have the love of God in our souls, and feel that Christ is all to us, yet search for the truth, and try to find out our own errors, that we may put them away. (It seems to me that the love of Christ will constrain us to these things.) She broke out in a strain louder than before, saying, “If I have Jesus Christ formed within, the hope of glory, what do I want more? What more can I have?” Another aged and honorable lady who sat by, joined with her, saying the same words. Now, then, if one commandment is to be discarded, as not worthy of our notice, then others may be disposed of in the same way, and finally no commandment be binding on us. (Under grace as some would have it.) ARSH June 10, 1852, page 23.15
Another idea conveyed, is, that we cannot observe the Sabbath of the fourth commandment, and at the same time be in the possession of the love of God. - Now is it so, that obedience to God’s commandments takes the place of love, and therefore love is made void? I do not understand it so. The Beloved Disciple, John, did not thus comprehend love; for he testifies, saying, “This is the love of God that we keep his commandments.” Again, “He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.” And Jesus, himself, says, “If thou wilt enter into life keep the commandments.” The apostle James understood it, for he said, Faith without works is dead, being alone. “Show me thy faith without thy works, and I will show thee my faith by my works.” So say I. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 23.16
Now I understand works to be the product of faith and love. We first hear, then believe, next obey. - And what does the keeping of his commandments signify, but to live them out. Then we must necessarily act, which produces works. It is nevertheless, the fruit of faith and love, (for a person would not be apt to bring forth fruit so contrary to the carnal nature if he did not love God,) and can be called nothing more nor less than obedience. Then if we must do the things he requires, in order to prove to God that we love him, I know of no way to excuse myself when he says, The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God, in it thou shalt not do any work; but to rest “according to the commandment.” Neither dare I call the observance of the Sabbath “unnecessary works,” that has been or ought to be done away. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 23.17
I would ask how a person can, willingly or knowingly, reject even the least of God’s commandments, and maintain justification through Christ. Did Jesus die to justify us in sin, or to justify for past sins, when we should have thoroughly amended our ways and our doings? To me the latter seems more reasonable. Paul says “sin is the transgression of the law.” What law? It cannot be that law of rites and ceremonies which only pointed to Christ, of which he is the end for righteousness to every one that believeth, and which was nailed to his cross; but it must be that law which convinced Paul that he was a sinner, slew him, and led him to cry out, “O wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of this death!” It convinced him of sin and justly condemned him, and he pronounced it holy, just and good, (yet it could not take away past sins; but Paul found a man that could, that man Jesus, who was crucified for our offences, that satisfied the claims of that law which required the death of every transgressor.) - Then if sin is the transgression of that law, how can we be justified from our sins until we cease to violate any part of it? If we would comprehend the extent, the length and breadth of the claims of that law on us, we must go to the life and teachings of Jesus. He fulfilled it, that is lived it out, and by so doing, magnified it and made it honorable. It does not say that he did it “away,” but “made it honorable.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 23.18
I praise the Lord that he lets a little light shine into my poor heart in this time of satan’s triumph. - One more idea from the expression, “If I have Jesus Christ formed within, the hope of glory, what more can I have? While opposing some of his sayings, seems to me is flattering one’s self that as soon as God has forgiven their past sins, and they are made to rejoice in Christ Jesus, because of his mercy towards them, they are then perfect in wisdom and knowledge, and are prepared to carry out the designs of God without further search. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 23.19
Now it seems to me that then is the time that we should begin to search the scriptures diligently for truth, that we may obey and please him who hath called us to the fellowship of his Son, lest we be again brought into condemnation. Peter, no doubt, had Jesus Christ formed within, yet he was not perfect in knowledge or understanding. No doubt, however, but he was willing to be convinced of his errors, that he might repent of them. So must we be. I feel like trying every point, and every principle, and see if it is on a good foundation, that when the storm of the seven last plagues shall descend, to sweep away the refuge of lies and the hiding-places, my house may stand, being founded on the rock. O I do want to do his will, work for him, and have respect unto all his commandments, statutes and judgments. He is good and faithful in all his sayings. My soul is witness to it. His promises never fail. Whatever we ask we receive, because we keep his commandments, and he will withhold no good thing from them that walk uprightly. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 23.20
S. PECKHAM.
Volney, N. Y., May 7th, 1852.
From Bro. Hutchins
DEAR BRO. WHITE: Though not personally acquainted with you, yet I trust you will allow me a space in the columns of the Review and Herald, sufficient to declare some things that God has done for my soul within a few months past. For I fain would publish them from the burning equator to the icy poles! I have professed to be a follower of Christ for twelve years, and have had, within that time, some strong evidences that God, for Christ’s sake, had forgiven my sins; and from a sense of duty, I have been preaching most of the time for five years past with the F. W. Baptist denomination. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 23.21
Last July, I met for the first time with some of the dear brethren at Waterbury, who were firm believers in the third angel’s message. Up to that time I had not so much as heard whether there was any third angel’s message, having never formed much acquaintance with the Advent people or their views. - But one thing I did know, and had known it for years, that there was a famine for the bread of life in the land where I had traveled and lived. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 23.22
Notwithstanding the idea of keeping the seventh day as the Sabbath, at that time seemed quite unnecessary to me. Yet I could not resist the impression that God was with, and blessed this people in their meetings of worship, abundantly. I was soon led to examine closely the evidence offered and urged for the observance of the first, instead of the seventh day, as the Sabbath; and to compare them with the plain declarations of God’s holy word. And, as might be expected as a natural result, I was soon stoutly convicted in my heart, that “the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 23.23
Sometime in the month of August, I listened with much interest, to two lectures delivered on the subject of the third angel’s message, by Bro. Holt, at Irasburg. So clear, conclusive and overwhelming were his arguments in favor of the position he assumed upon this subject, and so thrilling his appeals to the congregation to get ready for the thick, hastening events of the future, that the determination settled deep into my heart to leave a fallen church, and all that was near and dear in this world, and connect myself with the church of the living God, with them to suffer, toil and be redeemed. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 23.24
But on returning to the church of which I was a member, the hour - yea, the dark hour of trial met me! Solemn thoughts in swift succession revolved in my mind, when I thought of leaving so many kind brethren and friends, and of coming out upon a subject where my name would be made a proverb by all my former acquaintance. Here, for want of greater moral courage and strength of faith in God, I stumbled and was in darkness during a long cold dreary winter, not however without often pleading with God in prayer for strength to discharge my duty. Though I confess at times, while attempting to call upon his name, I felt keenly the force of the wise man’s words, [Proverbs 28:9,] “He that turneth away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer shall be abomination.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.1
But after staying in Babylon till the last mullein stalk of food had been consumed, and there was nothing left for my soul but certain death by starvation, the final decision was made, and I am now among that happy company that “keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.” Yes, glory to God! My soul is happy! And my prospects, for heaven are most cheering and consoling. I had not the most distant idea that there was half the life, power and glory in the third angel’s message, till I knew it by happy experience. This message seems to have been sent out to gather up the children of God just when it was most needed - just where nothing else would or could have been used as a substitute. Seems, did I say? Yea, more, We know this to be a fact. - Like the “life-boat,” used where no other one can be, to rescue the drowning man whose vessel has been wrecked upon some dangerous coast, the message comes to us offering all honest souls, whether perishing upon the coast of Babylon, or sunken down in darkness, by reason of Christ’s not appearing in 1844, as they expected, a safe and speedy conveyance to the haven of endless bliss. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.2
I have been with the brethren in meetings at Waterbury, Morristown and Johnson, and in each of these places we have felt in all our meetings, that “The angel of the Lord encampeth round about them that fear him, and delivereth them.” The first, second and third message of Revelation 14:6-12 are clear to my mind, and my heart rejoices to be with you in this noble cause, my dear brethren, for I regard it as the work of God, and no argument brought from any source will be sufficiently strong to shake my faith on this point, unless it proves also that I have been wholly mistaken in all of my religious experience for twelve years past. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.3
A. S. HUTCHINS.
Johnson, Vt., May 31st, 1852.
BRO. J. R. TOWLE writes from Woodbury, Vt., May 30th, 1852: “I hardly know how to express myself in regard to the present truth, which has brought salvation to my poor sinking heart. The third angel’s message found me in the waste, howling wilderness, bewildered and faint. I was sick of the church, [Babylon,] and left it about four years since, and fell in with the Laodiceans, and there I came very near starving to death. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.4
While looking for help from the Most High, one of God’s messengers, Bro. Ingraham, came along, and by the help of the chart, showed me the position of our High Priest, and the holy commandments, especially the fourth, “Remember the Sabbath-day to keep it holy.” The Lord gave me light, and strength, and power to overcome the past, and take hold of the present truth. It is clear as noon-day to me. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.5
I rejoice that God’s commandments shine out from his holy Temple, into the minds of honest seekers after truth. There is great light in this truth. It has come, in just the right time - just in time to save my companion and myself from gloomy darkness and despair. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.6
How clear the messages of the first and second angels look now! Before the third came, there were scales on my eyes relative to the first two. But now I see clearly how and why Bro. Miller began to reckon from B. C. 677. Now I see the 2,300 days, and why they should end when they did, in 1844. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.7
I am strong in the belief that time is very short. I feel that I cannot rest, but must cry aloud and spare not, till the Lord shall send forth judgment unto victory, and all the precious ‘jewels’ are brought into the ‘second casket.’ May the Lord speed the message till the 144,000 are sealed. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.8
I want to be humble, meek and mild, more like my Blessed Master; for the people are getting angry with God’s truth, because the word of God cuts like a sharp, two-edged sword. - The third angel’s message hews close, but, thank God, it is none too close. It is just what is wanted. Sinners in Zion are afraid. Fearfulness has surprised the hypocrite. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.9
There is such a fullness in this truth that it has completely eclipsed my mind from my former course of proclaiming the gospel, for more than fifteen years past; that is, I see the sword is not muffled now to me. Naked truth shines out of God’s word plainer than ever it did before. The Bible is its own expositor. Thank the Lord for his good Spirit that leadeth into all truth. There are several in town keeping the Sabbath with me. We hold our meetings every Sabbath when we are not absent. There is such a halo from the Lord thrown around the holy day, as I never before saw.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.10
THE REVIEW AND HERALD
ROCHESTER, THURSDAY, JUNE 10, 1852.
Justified by the Law. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.11
THOSE who proclaimed the time of the Lord’s coming were met with one text, which was considered a perfect refutation of the Advent theory. Those who opposed the Advent faith, from the drunkard in the street up to the learned divine in his pulpit, were very ready to quote the words of our Lord, “No man knoweth the day and hour.” And it was often said, “Why, these Advent men profess to know more than Christ, for he said that he knew not the day and the hour;” as though the Son of God would be ignorant of his own advent, until he should find himself on the earth the second time!! ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.12
But such opposition against the advent was not as sinful in the sight of Heaven, as that now existing against the observance of the fourth commandment. We wish to refer to one text that is often quoted to prove that it is wrong and dangerous to keep the Sabbath. It is this: “Whosoever of you are justified by the law ye are fallen from grace.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.13
This text may with propriety be quoted as applying to the blind Jew who rejects Jesus, but not to the Christian who keeps the commandments of God, and hopes for justification alone through Jesus Christ. And why should this text be quoted as applying to the case of the Advent brethren who keep the Sabbath? Admitting that Paul, in the word law, refers to the ten commandments, does the text then forbid one from keeping the Sabbath, and show Sabbath-keeping to be a sin? Certainly not. For Paul does not say, whosoever of you keep the Sabbath, or the commandments of God, are fallen from grace; but “whosoever of you are justified by the law.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.14
On this point the brethren who teach and observe the Sabbath are grossly misrepresented by those who teach the abolition of the fourth commandment. We have never heard the idea advanced by any one of them, that they hoped for justification by keeping the law of God. And those who represent Sabbath-keepers as going away from Jesus, the only source of justification, and rejecting his atoning blood, and seeking justification by the law, do it either ignorantly or wickedly. - We will not be silent on this point. God’s truth and the real faith of his down-trodden people, must be vindicated. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.15
Now if the word law, in the text referred to, embraces the ten commandments, it embraces them all, and Paul places all ten on a level. Take away the Sabbath, and nine tenths of God’s law remains, and if it is wrong and dangerous to keep the Sabbath, it is equally so to keep the other nine! ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.16
The man that refrains from murder, or theft, cannot expect justification on the ground that he has not imbued his hands in the blood of his neighbor, or stolen his goods; neither do Sabbath-keepers expect justification for keeping the fourth commandment. One may observe the letter of all ten of them, and, if he is not justified by faith in Jesus Christ, never have right to the tree of life. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.17
The gospel arrangement is plain. God’s law convicts of sin, and shows the sinner exposed to the wrath of God, and leads him to Christ, where justification for past offences can be found alone through faith in his blood. The law of God has no power to pardon past offences, its attribute being justice, therefore the convicted transgressor must flee to Jesus. “For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh, that the PRECEPT OF THE LAW MIGHT BE FULFILLED BY US who walk not according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit.” Romans 8:3. Whiting’s Trans. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.18
But what a heresy is that doctrine, that one may be justified through the blood of Jesus, while living in violation of the law of God, or any portion of it. When we present the fourth commandment, many object, on the ground that there is a fullness in Christ. “Away with your Sabbath,” say they, “Jesus is my Saviour;” as though God’s holy law was made void through faith, Says Paul, “God forbid.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.19
On this ground the blasphemer, to whom we might present the claims of the third commandment, might say, “Away with your old commandments, there is a fullness in Jesus;” and on he goes, blaspheming God’s holy name, and boasting of his faith in Christ. The horse-thief also, to whom we might urge the claims of the eighth commandment, might object on the same ground, and as he rides away upon his stolen horse, publish the fullness of the Saviour’s love. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.20
But it may be said that blasphemy and theft are forbidden in the New Testament. Very well. Let it here be understood that we are reasoning from the ground of the opponent that Paul refers to the ten commandments in Galatians 5, and that Sabbath-keepers are fallen from grace. Dear reader, “Let no man deceive you.” ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.21
THE PAPER
THE Brethren will see, from the small sum receipted in this number, and the note relative to means in No.2, that their help is much needed at this time to carry forward the paper. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.22
An effort has been made to obtain a Printing Office, to be controlled by those who observe the Sabbath of the Lord our God, and we are happy to say that the plan works well. But let it be borne in mind, that in order for the Paper to be issued from the New Press, means must be provided to purchase paper, ink, etc., pay the foreman, pay rent, and supply the wants of a large family. Let all those who can, and who esteem it a pleasure to help sustain the Paper, help now, however small the sum, that the work may move on free from embarrassment. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.23
JOSEPH BATES.
Rochester, June 10th, 1852.
Appointments. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.24
THERE will be a Conference of the Brethren at Fredonia N. Y., and vicinity, to commence June 19th, at 6 o’clock P. M., and hold over Sabbath and First-day. It is expected that the Meeting will be held at the house of Bro. J. Hamilton, or where he may appoint. The Advent Brethren in the place, and region round about, are respectfully invited to attend. If the Lord permit I shall attend this Meeting. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.25
JOSEPH BATES.
THERE will be a Conference of the Brethren in Jackson, Mich., and vicinity, to commence June 25th, at 2 o’clock P. M., and continue over Sabbath and First-day. The Advent Brethren in the place, and region round about, are cordially invited to attend. I expect (by divine permission) to attend this Meeting. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.26
I shall be happy to attend to the wants of any of our Advent Brethren in the West who may wish to have Conferences of the like character in their vicinity during the Summer months. My Post Office address until July 1st, will be Jackson, Mich. If the Brethren wish their Conferences published in the REVIEW AND HERALD they will please signify it to me. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.27
JOSEPH BATES.
We will meet with the Brn. in Conference at Wheeler, N. Y., June 19th and 20th, where Bro. Raymond may appoint. - Brn. in the vicinity are invited to attend. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.28
We will also meet in Conference at Catlin, N. Y., where Bro. Truesdell may appoint, June 26th and 27th. Bro. T. wishes us to say that the Brn. in Bath and Elmyra, and the region around about, are cordially invited to attend. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.29
JAMES WHITE.
Bro. Joseph Bates was with us at our meeting, held Sabbath and First-day, May 29th and 30th. His visit and labors here have proved a comfort and blessing to us all. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.30
He now intends visiting Reach, C. W., where he will hold meetings June 11th, 12th and 13th, ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.31
Let all see that the money they send to us is receipted. If it is not, you will please inform us immediately. Letters should be directed as stated on the first page. If not, they may not be received. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.32
Publications. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.33
| THE REVIEW AND HERALD,* | Vol. I, bound in paper covers. |
| “ ” “ | Vol. II, ” “ ” |
EXTRA COPIES* of Nos.6,8,11,12 and 14 of Vol. II.
THE ADVENT REVIEW, containing thrilling testimonies relative to the past Advent movement. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.34
THE BIBLE SABBATH, or a careful selection from the publications of the American Sabbath Tract Society, including the History of the Sabbath. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.35
PERPETUITY of the LAW of GOD. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.36
THE SEVENTH-DAY SABBATH. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.37
THE PARABLE, Matthew 25:1-12. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.38
Brief Exposition of the Angels of Revelation 14. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.39
The entire cost of Printing Materials is $600, of which $432 are receipted in this and the previous numbers. It is necessary that the sum of $168 should be sent in immediately, as it will be due about the middle of June, and must be paid. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.40
For Printing Materials. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.41
| H. A. Churchill | $50 00 | An unknown Friend | 2 00 |
| Jesse Thompson | 50 00 | Jesse Barrows | 5 00 |
| A. R. Morse | 10 00 | Enoch Coleby | 5 00 |
| Sarah Chase | 5 00 | Larnard Titus | 5 00 |
| Lorenzo Lowrey | 4 00 |
Letters received since May 27th. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.42
H. S. Gurney, J. Thompson, A. S. Stevens, S. R. C. Denison, R. S. Whitcomb, M. M. Truesdell, H. A. Churchill, G. W. Holt, R. R. Coggshall 2, H. Lothrop, O. Raymond, A. M. Curtis, O. Nichols, L. Kellogg, M. L. Bauder, E. L. H. Chamberlain, C. Andrews, E. Dow, W. S. Ingraham, J. R. Towle. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.43
Receipts. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.44
S. Mix, S. Haskel, J. Fitch, M. Leach, A. Andrews, each $1. H. B. Steadman, J. B. Sweet, A. H. Hilliard, H. Chase, each $2. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.45
O. Raymond $3; D. Myers $5. ARSH June 10, 1852, page 24.46