The Advent Review, and Sabbath Herald, vol. 2

September 16, 1851

RH VOL. II. - SARATOGA SPRINGS, N.Y. - NO. 4

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. II. - SARATOGA SPRINGS, N.Y. SEPTEMBER 16, 1851. - NO. 4.

JOSEPH BATES, HIRAM EDSON, and J. N. ANDREWS, Publishing Committee.

PUBLISHED SEMI-MONTHLY.

Terms - GRATIS. It is expected that all the friends of the cause will aid in its publication, as the Lord hath prospered them. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 25.1

All communications, orders, and remittances, for the Review and Herald, should be addressed to JAMES WHITE, Saratoga Springs, N.Y. (post paid.)

“Fear not Little Flock.”

JWe

BY A. R. SMITH. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 25.2

Fear not little flock,
For Christ is our Rock;
The promise stands sure.
The kingdom He’ll give, to the same that endure. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 25.3

The armor gird on;
Till victory is won
Let us manfully fight.
The Millennial Morn, soon will end Time’s dark night. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 25.4

The Truth will prevail,
(Its beamings we hail)
And is mighty in power;
It will shield us from harm, in the dark trying hour. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 25.5

The Sabbath we love -
Sacred Law from above -
It was hallowed and bless’d,
A token, a seal, for our heavenly rest. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 25.6

Ye saints, one and all,
O heed the loud call;
With the last message given
The remnant are sealed, ‘tis their passport to Heaven. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 25.7

Tho’ the tempest loud rave,
And high swell the wave,
Let us never give o’er;
For the Ark will land safe, on fair Canaan’s shore. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 25.8

Then with rapture untold
Our eyes shall behold
Our glorious King.
On bright golden harps, the “New Song” we shall sing. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 25.9

They will that City view
His “commandments that do,“
With the angels of light
“To the tree and the fountain of life have a right.” ARSH September 16, 1851, page 25.10

Hallelujahs we’ll raise,
Our Redeemer to praise
With the pure and the blest,
In the Eden of Love be forever at rest.
“Call to Remembrance the Former Days.” ARSH September 16, 1851, page 25.11

The following article from A. Hale will be read with interest and profit. In the main we believe it to be correct. But the idea of the “door of mercy” being shut is unscriptural and untrue. The Bible mentions no such door. An expression alike unscriptural may be seen in the same number of the “Herald,” in the remarks of J. V. Himes, headed “An open door in Canada.” He says, “I am more convinced than ever since I came to this Province, that Jesus yet sits upon the mercy seat.” The mercy-seat was placed upon the ark containing the commandments of God, and was overshadowed by the cherubims of glory. Its place was within the vail, in the “holiest of all.” The high priest alone entered that place only once a year, and then to cleanse the Sanctuary; but certainly he never got up upon the mercy-seat. That would be a singular position indeed for the high priest. Jesus could enter the holiest of all to cleanse the Sanctuary, the “True Tabernacle,” only at the end of the 2300 days. But he never was, and never will be, on the mercy-seat. We freely admit that our Great High Priest has entered the Holiest, but to say that he “sits upon the mercy-seat,” is one step further than we can possibly go. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 25.12

It is also evident that to “suppose,” as A. Hale does in this article, “that the condition of things at the shutting of the door, would be very much as it was after the day of atonement among the ancient Jews,” is incorrect. The shutting of the door of the Holy Place, is preparatory to the antitypical tenth day atonement for the cleansing of the Sanctuary. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 25.13

But we recommend the article to all. It should be read carefully. It is well calculated to improve the faith and piety of those who are weak in faith. By this article it will be seen that the view we cherish, that the parable was designed to apply to the Advent movement, was advocated by one of the editors of the “Advent Herald,” in 1845. A large portion of the Advent brethren then held this view; but few, however, have been able to bear the cross, and endure the scoffs arising from this position. Let us “call to remembrance the former days.” ARSH September 16, 1851, page 25.14

BROTHER HALE’S ARTICLE

JWe

There are three questions in which every Adventist must feel the deepest interest at the present time. - 1. What is our position in the line of prophetic events, by which God has brought us down to the end? - 2. What is our position in reference to the termination of the prophetic periods which we have supposed to bring us also to the end? - 3. What are the duties which this position demands of us? and what are the particular trials to which it subjects us? 1. What is our position in the line of events? In reference to the bearing of the events brought to view in the history of nations, and the signs pointed out by the Saviour, upon our relation to the end, there is no difference of opinion among Adventists. It exists only in reference to the particulars, the details, in the events which all admit, who admit them at all, cluster around the end itself. Let us come directly to some of these particulars - to the question, Have we had the event denoted by the cry, in the parable of the virgins? On this question three several opinions would be found to exist. - 1. That which supposes the parable is not to be applied to the history of the people of God, in any of its particulars, but that it is only designed to exhibit the importance of a preparation to meet the Lord, as a general truth. 2. That which supposes the parable is to be applied in its particulars, but that the cry has not yet been made. 3. That which takes the ground that the parable is to be applied in its details, and that we have had the cry, if, indeed, we have not advanced to a farther point in its fulfillment. To me the choice is only between the first and the last of these views, viz: - That we are not to understand the parable in its details at all, or, that it is to be so understood, and that we have passed through its fulfillment, at least, to a point as late as that to which we are brought by the cry. And although I could find no very great difficulty in accounting for all that we have experienced, should I adopt the first of these two opinions, as the special application embraces all that can be designed by the general application, and so must be the most safe; and, further, as the special application, which generally prevails among us, is the result of events in our history which were entirely unlooked for till they came, and which all must admit are remarkably in accordance with the successive steps marked in the parable, I must act on the special application of it, till some decisive argument from the word of God, or time, if it must be so, shall make it appear that that cannot be the true application. Should that be the case, I trust I shall not then, any more than at the present time, reject the general truth supposed to be intended. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 25.15

That the discourse of the Saviour, including the 24th and 25th chapters of Matthew, carries us down from his day to the end, no one will deny. That it was his design to inform his church upon the manner of his coming, and upon the dangers to which they would be exposed about the time of his coming, is also placed beyond dispute. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 25.16

The parable of the virgins, which makes a part of that discourse, we understand as a distinct sketch of the Advent movement. It may help our memory and piety to repeat the illustration. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 25.17

Verse 1. “Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom.” Then - at the time when the faithful and the wise servants, having marked the signs which were to indicate that the Son of Man must be near, according to his word, are giving the meat in due season to the household; and the evil servant saith in his heart, My Lord delayeth his coming, and begins to smite his fellow servants, (the wise and faithful,) and to eat and drink with the drunken, - then the kingdom of heaven shall be likened unto the scene and the transactions, of which the Saviour speaks, in which ten virgins went forth to meet the bridegroom. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 25.18

Among those who took a part in this movement, as among the servants whose office it was to give meat to the household, and also among the “all nations,” (Matthew 24:9,) who were to hate the disciples of Christ, and to whom the gospel was to be preached before the end, and who are to be gathered before the Son of Man, when he shall sit upon the throne of his glory; so among those who fulfill this feature of the kingdom of heaven there are two classes:- ARSH September 16, 1851, page 25.19

Verse 2. “And five of them were wise,” careful, “and five were foolish,” careless. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 25.20

Verses 3 and 4. “They that were foolish,” careless, “took their lamps, and took no oil with them: but the wise,” careful, “took oil in their vessels with their lamps.” These lamps were evidently what we call torches, made by winding a bunch of flax or cotton upon the end of a stick, and saturating it with oil; and as this would soon burn out unless it were often supplied with oil, the oil in the vessel for that purpose, though a small matter in itself, was indispensably necessary. The omission indicated a want of hearty interest in the marriage arrangement. The lamp, or torch, as a symbol, doubtless denotes the Bible, as the oil does grace. Grace is to the word, what oil is to the lamp. The vessels may denote the means of grace which are adapted and designed to make the word give light. It is the highest folly - the most fatal carelessness, as to the great purposes for which the word of God is given to men, to think of deriving light from it, while we refuse, through pride, fear, or the love of human praise, to avail ourselves of those means of grace which are necessary to the understanding of its lessons, the observance of its requirements, and the attainment of its promises. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 25.21

It was the Bible alone which produced the Advent movement. Those who embraced the Advent doctrine were distinguished, from the first, by their strict regard for the Bible. This was exclusively peculiar to them. Every question was decided by that. No fair argument has ever been brought from that against their doctrine; and to this day the individual who is unfashionably familiar with his Bible, is sure to fall under the odium of their faith: and it was the supplying themselves with such means of grace - ministers - conference meetings - Bible classes - publications - religious associates, etc. etc., as harmonized with their supreme regard for the Bible, which served as the most severe test, upon the interest of the professed believers in the doctrine, in the great event of Christ’s coming. This also was their grand offence against “the churches.” And on the other hand it was the want of the oil in the vessels - proper means of grace - which has occasioned the declension of those who remained in “the churches,” a declension which the individuals and the churches themselves confess and begin to deplore. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 25.22

Verse 5. “While the bridegroom tarried they all slumbered and slept.” The wise slumbered, the foolish slept. Every one knows the difference between these two states, naturally; and between the states with which they correspond, spiritually, and every Adventist is familiar with the condition of things during the period to which it applies. “The bridegroom tarried.” - They must, then, of necessity have had a time appointed in which they expected him, for it would be nonsense to speak of a person tarrying who was not expected at any particular time. Its application to the case of the Adventists is too striking to need comment. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 25.23

Verse 6. “And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom cometh! go ye out to meet him.” If other parts of the parable had spoken of days or nights, it might be supposed at once that this “midnight” was a chronological mark; though it may be understood in that light, it is more likely to express the state of things when the cry is made - the security of midnight. Have we not had that cry? A query has arisen in some minds, whether we have had the true midnight cry, since it is found that “all” who were looking for the Lord were not particularly affected by the preaching of “the seventh month.” But it is well known that the universal terms, all, every, etc., are not always to be understood in the absolute sense; (see Matthew 3:5; John 3:26; 11:48; 1 Corinthians 10:33;) and even if the term “all” is to be so understood in this case, it is not true that “all those” who went forth in the beginning of the Advent movement, also arose from their slumbering and sleeping in the seventh month? Certain it is that the “cry” originated, humanly speaking, and did its chief work in that part of the great field which was first visited with the Advent doctrine in its more general form. And as that was the only section in which the interest had passed the crisis, which was followed by the slumbering and sleeping, so it was the only one which could be, or needed to be, affected by the cry. Those who had not had time to fall into that state, after receiving the Advent truth, could not be aroused from it. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 26.1

If we have not had the true cry, it is difficult to determine why the Saviour, in a discourse designed to guard his church against the dangers which they must be exposed to, at the period of his second advent, should not have warned us of such a false movement, as he must have seen it, if the movement of the seventh month be “a false alarm.” As he has given us no intimation of such a counterfeit movement among his people, I must believe we have had the cry denoted in the parable. I do not see how we could have one bearing more of the genuine marks than that. But further, if we have not had the cry, that parable cannot be a sketch of our history; it must belong to another people and another time. Those who are denoted by these virgins must have had a time fixed in which they expected the Saviour; as soon as that time passed, he must have tarried; and from that time, till the cry was raised, they all, i.e. a large portion of the body, must slumber and sleep. All this must be found in their history, or the parable cannot have a special application. But the time in which we expected the Saviour has passed, and the period since that should have been, with us as a body, an unbroken period of slumbering and sleeping, if we have not had the cry. Who, now, will presume to say that this has been the condition of the Adventists since the time passed in which they expected the Saviour? It might as well be denied that they have ever professed to expect him. Just as certainly, therefore, as the Adventists have had the state of comparative listlessness broken, into which they generally fell, after the passing of their time, we have had the cry; for “WHILE he tarried,” till that was made, they slumbered and slept. Is it not as evident that we have had the cry, as that the virgins have gone forth to meet the bridegroom, or that we have had the tarrying time? Would it not be as dangerous to expect the cry hereafter as to look into the future for any of the way-marks by which we have been guided in the past. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 26.2

Verses 7, 8, 9. “Then [when the cry was made,] all those virgins arose and trimmed their lamps; and the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil, for our lamps are gone out; but the wise answered, saying, Lest there be not enough for us and you, go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves.” The “not so” of our version, supplied by the translators, gives the answer of the wise virgins a harshness that does not belong to it. The reading here used is authorized by the best critics. (See Dr. Clarke.) They had proceeded so far, as companions, and the wise would have aided the foolish, if it could have been done with safety to themselves; while they pity them, they give them the only advice which can be of any service. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 26.3

All this was fulfilled in the seventh month. The cry aroused all those who were first affected by the proclamation of the Advent doctrine. The Advent meetings were thronged. Those who had “slept” because they had denied themselves the only proper means of grace, came, in the full character of the foolish virgins: The preaching under which they sat was unsatisfactory, and their other means of grace with their religious associates, had not only failed to aid them, but had been a positive hinderance. They must hear Advent preaching - join in their devotions - make them their associates. Confessing that all was darkness, they said almost in so many words, “Give us of your oil, for our lamps are gone out.” ARSH September 16, 1851, page 26.4

They were met by the Adventists in the full character of the wise virgins: “We cannot help you. Our destitution, our dependence, our necessities are so great, we are barely provided for, so as to hope in the mercy of God, ‘Go ye to them that sell, and buy for yourselves.’ In God only can you find help.” ARSH September 16, 1851, page 26.5

How is it that we can have forgotten these memorable traits in that scene! It seems as incredible as that the Israelites should have forgotten the awful splendors of Sinai, in view of which they trembled and durst not behold, so that before Moses descended, they had forgotten all the claims of the true God, and were dancing before the calf they had made. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 26.6

Verse 10. “And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came, and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut.” The same carelessness which disposed them to go forth without oil, at first, seems to have marked this last effort also. The advice could not have been a mockery; they did not follow it as they should have done. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 26.7

As this parable, viewed as an outline of our history, has been fulfilled, beyond dispute to my mind, down to a point as late as that to which we are brought by the cry, the only questions to which it can fairly give rise are these, - Has the bridegroom come? or, does the cry still present to us our duty: Go ye out to meet him? And so far as our prospects, as to the nearness of the advent, and our duties, are concerned, it would make but little difference which of these positions we take. In either case we should be required to take a position of constant expectation. In either case the end of our probationary state is involved, and our work in behalf of the world must be, in the main, performed. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 26.8

There is hardly room, indeed, since the parable has evidently been fulfilled down to the cry, for any other question than this - ARSH September 16, 1851, page 26.9

HAS THE BRIDEGROOM COME?

JWe

The decision of this question must depend upon what is to be understood by his coming to the marriage. If it means his visible coming in glory, he has not so come. If it means some other event, which is to precede his coming in glory, though intimately connected with it, the bridegroom may have come in the sense of the parable. But will it not be spiritualizing to understand the text to refer to anything but his coming as the King of Glory? We have taken it for granted that it does speak of this, and have read the text, in our minds, as if it read, “And while they went to buy, the Lord himself descended from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and the trump of God - the dead in Christ were raised, those who were his among the living were changed, and these all were caught up together to meet him in the clouds, to be forever with the Lord.” These are precisely the ideas we have attached to these words; but is there anything like them here? Certainly not. It will be seen, then, at once, as indeed the form of speech requires, that the parable is to be interpreted in the spiritual or figurative sense: and as no one supposes that Christ will be married, as human beings are married, the only point to be settled is, What is denoted by the coming of the bridegroom to the marriage? ARSH September 16, 1851, page 26.10

In the interpretation of the parable, thus far, we have visible as well as literal facts to prove its fulfillment, and have therefore spoken in more positive terms than we may use in what remains. Though the facts to which we shall refer are as literal as those in the past, as they cannot, in the nature of the case, be visible to us, we must speak with more caution in speaking of their accomplishment. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 26.11

That we may proceed intelligently, and for the particular benefit of those who may have forgotten them, I shall give an extract or two from Mr. Miller’s rules of interpretation, which are substantially those of every judicious interpreter of the word of God: - “Figures sometimes have two or more different significations;” - “To learn the true meaning of figures, trace your figurative word through your Bible, and where you find it explained, put it on your figure; if it makes good sense you need look no further; if not, look again.” - “Parables are used as comparisons to illustrate subjects, and must be explained in the same way as figures.” ARSH September 16, 1851, page 26.12

Let us proceed. As there is to be something in this movement in “the kingdom of heaven,” which is to be “likened” to the coming of the bridegroom “to the marriage” - what may be denoted by that part of the scene? There are but two events which the coming of the bridegroom to the marriage can be supposed to denote. - 1. The appearing of Christ to gather his Church to himself. - 2. His actual inauguration, or coronation, as the Lord of the whole earth. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 26.13

Now let us trace “the figure through the Bible.” And where shall we find the appearing of Christ to gather his people, exhibited by the figure of a bridegroom coming to a marriage, or, the act of uniting himself to them, at that time, exhibited by a marriage? The existence of such a case is unknown to me. I know that the relation between Christ and the Church is brought to view in connection with the relation of marriage; and the strongest case even of that kind is given by Paul, Ephesians 5:23-25. But there is not even a metaphor here, much less a parable or allegory. A literal and well known fact is referred to, to show what should characterize another literal and well known fact. He refers to the subjection of the Church to Christ, to show the proper subjection of wives to their husbands, and to his love to the Church, to show the love husbands should cherish for their wives; and not to the relation of marriage, to illustrate the relation of Christ to the Church. The figurative analogy between the two cases, as forms of speech, is entirely wanting. Besides, it refers to what then existed, in the Apostle’s day, and not to something to take place in the future. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 26.14

Again. It is assumed, that in the marriage of the Lamb, presented by the Revelator, the holy city, symbolized as the Lamb’s wife, is a symbol of the Church, or at any rate, must comprehend the Church. Shall we suppose the bride to be the city, and the city the church, and apply the figure in order to see the “good sense” it makes? To say nothing of the “sense” of making a figure of the explanation of a figure, we would ask, - If the bride - the city - is the church, who are the nations of them that walk in her light? - Revelation 21:24. If the city, the tabernacle of God, is the church, who are the “men” “his people,” with whom the tabernacle or church is to be? - Revelation 21. If the “wife” is the church, who are they that are called to the marriage supper of the Lamb, as guests? - Revelation 19. If the city is the church, who 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?” If Jerusalem which is above, the mother of us all, is the church, who are “the children?” and how could Isaiah say of her: “this is the heritage of the servants of the Lord?” Compare Galatians 4:26, 27, and Isaiah 54:1-17. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 26.15

If this is sufficient to show the “good sense” of this meaning of the “figurative word,” when we “put it on your figure,” shall we suppose the bride to comprehend both the city and the church, and see what “sense” it will make? We have only to apply the foregoing questions, varied to express this meaning, and we shall see that the consistency and harmony of the figure are equally destroyed. If the bride is brought to view in the figure, as both the city and the church, who are the other parties - “the children” - those of whom Christ says, “he shall be my son?” - “his people?” - those “who are called to the marriage supper?” etc. etc. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 26.16

And we know that the interpretation of figurative language, parables in particular, “all its parts must be perspicuous and pertinent.” - Horne. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 26.17

But we may add here, that the manner in which the parable closes does not appear to coincide with events which take place at the actual appearing of Christ, according to other portions. When he appears it is “to execute judgment.” The judiciary trial and decision having been previously made by “the Father,” “the Son” carries the decision into effect. And so in the case of the evil servant, at the coming of his Lord, he is cut asunder, and his portion is appointed with the hypocrites, where there are weeping and gnashing of teeth. The unprofitable servant, in the parable which follows that of the virgins, is treated in the same manner. But in this parable, after the bridegroom has come, and the door is shut, there is the common mark of a revival of religious interest. Prayer is heard: “Lord, Lord, open unto us.” If the coming of the bridegroom denotes the actual coming of Christ, and the shutting of the door the rejection of the wicked, to be left here to perish, is it possible, that after Christ has appeared, and the dead are raised, and the righteous caught up to meet the Lord, that such a state of things can exist? To me it seems impossible. It would seem to coincide much more naturally with the judiciary trial which precedes the execution, (the judgment which begins at the house of God,) than with the execution itself. It seems impossible to get to that point, by any figurative exhibition of the scene that agrees with this under consideration, without referring to the other parable of the marriage, to the fate of that one of “the guests” which had not on the “wedding garment.” “Then (when the King came in to see the guests) said the King to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” Matthew 22:11-13. That must coincide with the execution of judgment by Christ, as the office of the King does with the preliminary decision of the case. In this parable of the virgins no such execution of judgment is expressed. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 27.1

Again. Supposing that the appearing of Christ, as the Judge, is denoted by the coming of the bridegroom, and the execution of judgment, at least in the case of the righteous, is denoted by the shutting of the door, it is difficult to harmonize the words of Christ in Luke 12:35-38, which were certainly spoken in reference to his coming, if they were not a part of the same discourse that Matthew records in the 24th and 25th chapters. Compare Luke 12:39-46, and Matthew 24:43-51. In Luke, the point in the figurative representation of the truth, at which the saved actually meet the Lord, is at his “return from the wedding.” Now we know that the successive steps of the marriage scene are these. 1. The coming of the bridegroom to the marriage. 2. The marriage itself. 3. The return from the wedding. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 27.2

We would ask, then, is it natural, is it like him, i.e. if we suppose these several particulars were designed to be applied in the interpretation, to speak to us, by a reference to two different points in the same imagery of only one event? ARSH September 16, 1851, page 27.3

Once more. It seems to be impossible that the coming of the bridegroom to the marriage can denote the actual appearing of Christ as King and Judge, since it must be that the only act which can be denoted by the shutting of the door, and the consequent state of things must be realized, before his appearing as King and Judge. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 27.4

What may we suppose the shutting of the door to denote? Some of our brethren talk as if there were a literal door to be closed, for, say they, “If the door is shut there is no passing in or out.” It is singular, indeed, if we have become so very literal, that we cannot see anything beyond an admitted figure, but the figure itself. By this act is undoubtedly denoted the exclusion from all farther access to saving mercy, those who have rejected its offers during their time of probation. And none will deny that whenever the Bridegroom shall have come, that change in the condition of the great mass of the world will have taken place. That change must take place when Christ closes up his work as mediator for the world at large, in order to become King, not at that moment to possess his kingdom, the renewed earth, but to become king prior to its possession. Is there any evidence from the word of God to show that that change in his work is to take place any perceptible time before he appears in his glory - before his people are made immortal? ARSH September 16, 1851, page 27.5

It must be considered as settled beyond dispute that this change in his work and office takes place before he appears in his glory as king. 1. When Christ appears to save his people, he appears in his glory as King and Judge, Matthew 24:30, 31; 25:34. 2. The kingdom of the God of heaven, over which the Lord Jesus is to reign forever, is to be set up during the existence of the earthly kingdoms. - Daniel 2:44. One like the Son of man came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations and languages, should serve him. - Daniel 7:13, 14. “He returned, having received the kingdom.” - Luke 19:15. Then all his enemies are slain before him. As “the King of kings, and Lord of lords,” he makes war with, subdues and exterminates “the kings of the earth.” - Revelation 17:14; 19:11-21. 3. There must be a change in his office and work, in reference to the world at large, before, or at the time he becomes king; and in the very nature of the case, this change must precede the appearing of Christ as king, or the setting up of the kingdom; for he performs the work typified by the “daily ministering” of the priests, until his enemies are made his footstool, (Hebrews 10:11-13,) i.e. are given over to him as enemies doomed to death; and are no longer the subjects of his intercessions. And this change in his work and office must precede his appearing to gather his elect, for, 1. a part of his elect are under the dominion of death, one of the enemies to be destroyed, and he will not destroy that enemy till he has been put into his hands; and, 2. as he appears in his glory when he appears to gather his elect, he must have received that glory before he appears in it. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 27.6

Now, as it is almost impossible that this order of events should not also require order of time, it would seem that some time must elapse, how much we cannot tell, between the closing of Christ’s intercessions for the world, and his appearing to gather his elect. May not that time be marked by the Lord himself - the first point by the coming of the bridegroom, when the kingdom of heaven is likened unto the virgins who go in with him unto the marriage; the last point by his return from the wedding, when he shall receive them to the marriage supper? ARSH September 16, 1851, page 27.7

We admit that this does not of itself prove that the door is now shut, but as we must be very near the end, and that act must take place before Christ appears as king, what reason is there why it may not have taken place, which would not exist at any future time, before the actual appearing of Christ? So far as the condition of things around us bears upon the question, it goes to confirm it. Vs.11,12. “Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us. But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not.” The master of the house has risen up, the careless are too late. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 27.8

And what do we see and hear all around? Why, “the churches,” after having given a full rein to the scoffers, the fashionable and formal among them, in “fairs,” “tea parties,” etc. etc., are now willing to accommodate the more scrupulous - the class most affected by the Advent doctrine, but who were unwilling to confess it publicly, by taking oil in their vessels with their lamps - (foolish virgins,) and we hear of their calls to prayer, and special efforts to “get up a revival.” “Lord, Lord, open unto us.” But what is the result? By their own testimony, it does not appear that there is a single case which would have been considered, ten years ago, hardly a noticeable case of religious interest. Whether those cases which are reported, are worthy of being considered conversions to Christ, is more than doubtful. Would not the preaching of the most obvious truths in the gospel “stop these revivals?” If such revivals are to be received as genuine, it is time for the adventists to return to the churches, and not only make their confession, but renounce their hope. It may be shown from a large number of facts, that the last special cases of spiritual interest among the professed churches were the result, directly or indirectly, of the Advent doctrine; that where the doctrine has been avowedly opposed, and its believers silenced, spiritual death has followed, our enemies being judges. And we do not know of a single case of noticeable religious interest but where the doctrine is received, or at least not opposed; and these cases are so limited in their extent and number, that they can form no objection to the supposition that the door is shut, but rather go to confirm it. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 27.9

However, as our brethren seem determined that if our position is correct, nothing more is to be done, therefore we hold that there is nothing more to be done, we may be pardoned in saying a word upon that point. Now we can see how that all our brethren can do, may be done, in perfect harmony with our views. The question, here, is not, whether there is anything to be done, but, what is to be done? ARSH September 16, 1851, page 27.10

We believe there will be enough to do till mortality is swallowed up of life, especially since there must be, among such a diversity of opinions, “brethren who do err from the truth.” But we can no more resume our old plans of spreading the Advent doctrine, than we can labor for “the conversion of the world.” ARSH September 16, 1851, page 27.11

We will try to make this plain. We suppose the condition of things, at the shutting of the door, would be very much as it was after the day of atonement among the ancient Jews. Let us visit old Jerusalem as it was in the days of the prophets. It is the tenth day of the seventh month - the day of atonement. The preparation to partake in the benefit of its services are plainly made known, it is “a day for a man to afflict his soul,” and if a jubilee year, to “break every yoke and let the oppressed go free,” or he is “cursed,” and liable to be “cut off from among the people.” The appointed sacrifices are prepared, and the son of Aaron appears in his priestly robes. The court of the temple, and every avenue which leads to it, are crowded with the multitude of worshipers. Here are the devout and holy Isaiahs, and Jeremiahs and Daniels, ready to take the position which secures the blessing. Here are backsliders who see their wanderings and are stricken at heart with a sense of their sins, - they too are ready to take the required position. Here also are the penitents who are awakened to a sense of their condition, and these are ready to take the required position. All these, being ready at the time, may receive the blessing. To the case of infants, idiots, and others whose circumstances relieve them from the responsibilities of the truth, God adapts the provisions of his mercy by a special arrangement. By the careless, the worldly, and those who worship merely because others do - the largest class by far, no benefit is realized. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 27.12

Now if the transactions of this day are the last to be enjoyed, for this largest class there would be no further hope. So, too, if the devout, and the returning backslider, and the penitent turn away from their righteousness, knowingly and willingly, there is no further hope for them. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 27.13

All now depends upon their holding fast, and going forward. Just so must it be, we suppose, when Christ finishes the work of atonement. But is there nothing more to do in such a state of things? God forbid. There is everything which the danger they are in of “falling away,” - of “drawing back unto perdition” - can enjoin; everything which the desire for the salvation of a brother can prompt; everything which the holding fast the profession of our faith, in the way of laboring to enter into that rest, may demand. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 27.14

But can any impenitent sinners be converted if the door is shut. Of course they cannot, though changes that men would call conversions may take place. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 27.15

As it is a fundamental principle in the economy of heaven, that “it is accepted according to what a man hath,” we know that at the closing of the door of mercy, all who fear God and work righteousness, according to the light they have, must be embraced by the arms of his mercy; though as the measure of light they might then have, would be different, the apparent form of their character must differ. And there may be changes in the form of their character, which we might call conversions, though it would imply no change in their inward character before God. That such may be found, for whom we should labor, there can be no doubt; and in fact, it is with such a class only, few indeed is their number, that our labors are in any way successful. The few that makes up this class, would, therefore, form the limits of our labors, excepting that we exhort one another. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 27.16

If then it is so very doubtful whether the union of Christ with his church, at his second coming, is ever spoken of by the figure of a marriage, is it any more certain that the marriage refers to the reception of the throne and kingdom? And if so, what are the reasons for supposing that Christ has closed up his work, to become king, and that the door is shut? ARSH September 16, 1851, page 28.1

Let it be understood that we do not doubt that Christ is to be united to his church, but that that is the act denoted by the figure; nor do we doubt that Christ is to come literally and personally. And the act which we suppose the coming of the bridegroom to the marriage to denote, is as literal an act as the personal coming - just as the first step in descending a flight of steps, is as literal as the last step. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 28.2

THE REVIEW AND HERALD

JWe

“Sanctify them through thy truth; thy word is truth.”
SARATOGA SPRINGS, TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 1851.

Discourse with Brother Carver. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 28.3

Brother Carver writes that the recent remarks in the “Review and Herald,” relative to “the two laws,” are not satisfactory to his mind, and that he would like to speak in reply. If we mistake not, however, the arguments of brother C. are directed to prove that the law is all abolished, instead of answering the Scriptural arguments adduced to support the view that there is a plain distinction between “the law of a carnal commandment,” Hebrews 7:16, and that law, of which the same apostle affirms, “we know that the law is spiritual,” Romans 7:14; or between “the hand-writing of ordinances,” “which was contrary to us,” and which was nailed to the cross, Colossians 2:14, and “the royal law,” which James affirms that it is a sin to transgress, James 2:8-12; or between that law of which “there was made of necessity a change,” Hebrews 7:12, and that law of which Christ says, “till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled,” Matthew 5:18; or between that law which was “a shadow of good things to come,” Hebrews 10:1, which was only “imposed until the time of reformation,” Hebrews 9:10, and that law to which John referred, when he said that “Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law; for SIN IS THE TRANSGRESSION OF THE LAW,” 1 John 3:4; or between “the yoke of bondage,” from which we have been made free by Christ, Galatians 5:1, and that “law of liberty” by which we “shall be judged,” James 2:8-12; or between that law which Christ “abolished in his flesh,” Ephesians 2:15, and that law which he asserts that he did “not come to destroy,” Matthew 5:17; or between that law which he “took out of the way” at his death, Colossians 2:14, and that law which he came to “magnify” and “make honorable,” Isaiah 13:21; or between that law which Paul calls “good,” Romans 7:12, which Ezekiel testifies was such as men should walk by, and live in, Ezekiel 20:11-13, which Nehemiah characterizes as “right judgments,” “true laws,” and “good statutes,” Nehemiah 9:13, and those laws which Ezekiel 20:25, declares were “statutes that were not good, and judgments whereby they should not live;” or between that law, of which Paul says there was “verily a disannulling” “for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof,” Hebrews 7:18, and that law respecting which he inquires, “Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid; YEA WE ESTABLISH THE LAW,” Romans 3:31; or between that law of retaliation, “an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth,” which Christ declares should not be binding, Matthew 5:38, 39, and that law, respecting which he affirms, that whosoever should “break one” of its “least commandments, and teach men so,” should be of “no esteem in the reign of heaven,” Matthew 5:19 (Campbell’s Translation;) or between the law of Moses, which the apostles called a yoke of bondage, which neither they nor their “fathers were able to bear” Acts 15:5, 10, and the law of God, which Paul delighted in and served with his mind, Romans 7:22-25 and to which nothing but the carnal mind is opposed, Romans 8:7; or between that law which is the middle wall of partition between Jews and Gentiles, Ephesians 2:14, and that law, the work of which even the Gentiles are said to have written in their hearts, Romans 2:12-15; or between “the law of commandments contained in ordinances,” which was abolished by Christ, Ephesians 2:15, and “the commandments of God,” which it is “the whole duty of man” to keep, Ecclesiastes 12:13, which are brought to view by the third angel, Revelation 14:12, which the remnant of the seed of the woman were keeping when seen by John, Revelation 12:17, and which will ensure to those who observe them, access to the tree of life. Revelation 22:14. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 28.4

The one law God gave in person, and wrote with his own finger, in the tables of stone. Exodus 24:12. The other was given through Moses, and written by his hand in a book 2 Chronicles 34:14. The one is a moral law which grows out of the nature of the relation which man sustains to God, and to his fellow man, the principles of which have been in force since man has had an existence. The other is a law of shadows which pointed men forward to redemption through Jesus Christ, and ceased when the great atonement for the sins of the world was made. Colossians 2:17. The one law pertained only to Israel; to the other, all mankind were amenable. By the one, the whole world was condemned and shown to be guilty before God. Romans 3:19. By the other was given a typical atonement, which pointed forward to him who should die for the sins of the world. The one having reached its antitype is abolished; but the other stands, if possible, on a firmer basis than ever. Romans 3:31. For the immutability of its character is shown in that the Son of God must lay down his life, before guilty man could be rescued from its just sentence. Though the law was not written before God himself engraved it with his own finger on the tables of stone, yet it is certain that each principle embodied in the Decalogue, did exist in the very beginning. For at the time when “God made man upright,” there was not one of these principles which he could violate. He could not have other gods, he could not have graven images, he could not take the name of God in vain, he could not trample under foot the day which God then sanctified, (Genesis 2:2, 3; Exodus 20:8-11; Mark 2:27,) he could not dishonor his parents, or kill, or commit adultery, or steal, or bear false witness, or covet. For these first principles, grow out of the very nature of things, and so long as man remained a holy being, he could never violate one of them. That he had this law implanted in his being, may be proved from the fact that natural men still retain something of the work of the law written in their hearts. Romans 2:12-15. But prior to the fall of man, the typical or ceremonial law could have no existence. It was the transgression of the law of his Maker that laid the foundation for the typical law. As soon as sin entered into the world, the typical law, pointing sinful man forward to the great atonement, began to be developed. Witness the sacrifices of Cain, Abel, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and in short, witness the gradual development of that law which was a “shadow of good things to come.” ARSH September 16, 1851, page 28.5

From the summit of Sinai, God gave his holy law to Israel, in ten precepts, “and he added no more.” Then he proceeded, (with an occasional repetition of the precepts or principles of the Decalogue.) to give them through Moses, “the hand-writing of ordinances,” which should point them forward to the great Sacrifice that should be offered for the sins of the world. When that sacrifice was offered, the shadow ceased, having reached the body by which it was cast. But there was a real law by which men were condemned, that made it necessary that Christ should die in their stead. Romans 3:19. The death of Christ was not for the purpose of abolishing this law, but to make an atonement for the transgressors, so that they could be pardoned. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 28.6

H. E. Carver. Bro. White, As you have been so kind as to send me a number of the “Review and Herald,” and have invited a review of the arguments contained in your answer to Bro. J. B. Cook’s reply to Bro. E. D. Cook, I take the privilege to comply with the invitation, and to give the view of the matter, as presented to my mind. Your first quotation is Romans 2:13, “For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.” Now it is not my purpose to array Paul against Paul, nor to explain what I do not claim to understand clearly, but by reading on to verse 19 of chapter 3, I read as follows: “Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law, there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets. Even the righteousness of God, which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all, and upon all those that believe; for there is no difference.” ARSH September 16, 1851, page 28.7

Answer. We hold no views of Romans 2:13, which make any discrepancy with Romans 3:19. Had men continued “doers of the law,” they would have remained in a state of justification, and never have fallen under its fearful condemnation, as we learn from Romans 3:19, that all men have. Since man has fallen, however, the law of Moses, with all its sacrifices and offerings, can never afford him justification before God, because those sacrifices can never take away sins. Acts 13:38, 39; Hebrews 10:1-4. Those who have the law written in their hearts by the Spirit of God, and who through grace fulfill “the precept of the law,” are the only ones who can now be called “the doers of the law.” We are justified by faith alone; but faith, if it exists, must “work by love;” and the love of God consists in keeping his commandments. 1 John 5:3. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 28.8

The doctrine stated by Paul in this chapter, is worthy of careful study, and lasting remembrance. The great truth that the law of God condemns the whole world, is here unequivocally stated. The reason is also given in distinct terms: “All have sinned and come short of the glory of God.” Verse 23. And such is the justice of this condemnation, that “every mouth” is “stopped.” What is now brought to view as the hope of lost men? Is it that God will take back his law, and receive those into his favor who are now condemned before him? Sooner would heaven and earth pass “than one tittle of the law” of God. How then may men be justified before God, who now are condemned and guilty in his sight? The apostle answers; “Being justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness, for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; to declare I say at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus.” Verses 24-26. That God, instead of abolishing his law, should give his own Son to die in the place of those who have broken it, and should offer pardon to such only as should avail themselves of this propitiation, is proof of the strongest character possible, that that law is immutable. Those only who avail themselves of his propitiation are “delivered from wrath;” the claims of the law remain good on all beside; for they are left to answer the demands of the broken law. The great idea held out in the New Testament, is that of pardon through faith in the blood of Jesus; but if his death abolished the law, the consequences are precisely the same whether men avail themselves of pardon or not. If they are pardoned it is well; if they are not, there is no law which condemns them. The fact that we are so urgently entreated to seek pardon through the blood of Jesus, shows that we may expect the fearful sentence of the law to be executed upon us if we do not avail ourselves of it. Paul has settled the question, however, as brother C. might have seen, “by reading on to verse” 31, “Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea WE ESTABLISH THE LAW.” Whether brother C. will abide by the doctrine of this chapter, or will attempt “to array Paul against Paul,” we shall see hereafter. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 28.9

H.E.C. Galatians 3:11. But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident; for the just shall live by faith. And the law is not of faith, but, the man that doeth them shall live in them. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law. In the twenty-first verse of this chapter, Paul argues, that if there had been a law given WHICH COULD HAVE GIVEN LIFE, verily righteousness should have been by the law; but in consideration that faith in Christ is requisite to salvation, it is evident that no such law was ever given - not even the ten commandments. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 28.10

Answer. You have abundantly proved the doctrine that the law condemns the whole world, and that none can be justified in the sight of God, except through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. He has “redeemed us from the curse of the law.” But how? By abolishing it? No! verily. By offering up himself in our stead. 1 Peter 2:24. He took the curse upon himself. Galatians 3:13. He did not “destroy the law;” he submitted himself to its penalty. But how many are delivered from the curse of the law? Is it all the world? or is it such only as make a personal application of the atonement to themselves? If the former view be correct, then the doctrine of Universalism is true, for the atonement avails equally for those who do not, as for those who do, accept it. If, however, it is those only who believe on the Son of God who are redeemed from the curse of the law, then the world is left under it, and remains in the fearful state described in Romans 3:19; and will have to answer, not only for breaking the law, but also for treading under foot the Son of God, who died to redeem them. The reason why the law could not give life, was not because the law was not “holy,” “spiritual,” and “perfect,” but because men had broken it; and it could only condemn them, and show their guilt before God. Hence the apostle says that “by the law is the knowledge of sin.” There is seen, therefore, the absolute necessity of the death of Jesus Christ. When, therefore, the New Testament holds out pardon through him, it is because the law condemns us, and we are exposed to its just sentence. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 28.11

H.E.C. Our Lord did not deny that the young man had kept the commandments from his youth up, and yet applied a test to his character, that is not named in that law. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 28.12

Answer. If the young man had actually kept the commandments, he would most certainly have entered into life. Matthew 19:16, 17; Revelation 22:14. The test applied to him by Jesus, was calculated to undeceive him, with regard to himself; for had he, a RICH MAN, loved his “neighbor as himself” he would have sold cheerfully, and GIVEN TO THE POOR.” ARSH September 16, 1851, page 28.13

H.E.C. By reading Galatians 3:19, we find that the apostle was speaking of the law given four hundred years after the promises made to Abraham and his seed. (Christ.) That law was the law of ten commandments, given by God from Sinai, and it was added (to the promises,) because of transgressions TILL the seed (Christ) should come. Verse 25. “But after that faith is come we are no longer under a schoolmaster,” (the law.) ARSH September 16, 1851, page 29.1

Answer. There is but one sense in which it could be said that the law of God “was added to the promises.” The covenant made with Abraham secured to him and to his seed the promised inheritance, and recognized one ground of justification, which is indeed the only one, viz: “the righteousness of faith.” The covenant which God afterward made with his natural seed, added another condition of justification, viz: “the righteousness of perfect obedience.” Exodus 19; 20; Jeremiah 11:4, 5; Galatians 3:12. This being perfectly just, and yet such a covenant as fallen, guilty man has never yet complied with, it is evident that if the inheritance is to be obtained by this condition only, then are the promises to Abraham made void and of none effect. The law is not “against the promises,” but it is certain that we cannot hope for the inheritance through a law which already condemns the world. “The Scripture (by means of the law) hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ, might be given to them that believe.” But when the promised seed came, one was found who could render acceptable obedience to all the claims of the holy law. He kept his Father’s commandments, and then gave up himself to die, because we had broken them. Then he could give us a covenant founded upon better promises, even the New Testament in his blood. Luke 22:20. He offers to us the merits of his death, as the foundation of our hope of pardon; he grants us the renewing of the Holy Spirit, and places THE LAW OF GOD IN OUR HEARTS. Romans 5:6, 8, 9; Hebrews 8:10. The seed “to whom the promises were made,” did not “come to destroy the law;” on the contrary he enforced it, by saying that “Whosoever therefore shall violate, or teach others to violate, were it the least of the commandments, shall be in no esteem in the reign of heaven; but whosoever shall practice and teach them, shall be highly esteemed in the reign of heaven.” Matthew 5:19, Campbell’s Translation. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 29.2

The idea that the law is our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ, that we may be justified by faith, is often urged as proof that the law is abolished. How is the law our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ? We answer, it shows our guilt and just condemnation, and that we are lost without a Saviour. Hear the apostle Paul, who was converted since the time when it is said the law was abolished. “I HAD NOT KNOWN SIN BUT BY THE LAW.” Romans 7:7. “BY THE LAW IS THE KNOWLEDGE OF SIN.” Romans 3:20. Read a full account of Paul’s experience in this school, also, his deliverance from the carnal mind, which “is not subject to the law of God.” Romans 7:7-25; 8:1-7. The instruction of the law is absolutely necessary, for without it, we can never know our guilt in the sight of God. It shows our just condemnation, its penalty hangs over our heads; we find ourselves lost, and fly to Jesus Christ. What does he do to save us from the curse of the law? Does he abolish the law that he may save its transgressor? He assures us that he did “not come to destroy” it; and we know that the law being “holy, just and good,” cannot be taken back, without destroying the government of him who gave it. Does the Saviour modify its character and lessen its demands? Far from it. He testifies that “one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled.” Matthew 5:18; Luke 16:17; James 2:10. And he shows that those who in heart commit any act of iniquity, are transgressors of the law. Matthew 5:22, 27, 28; 1 John 3:15. If the Saviour did not abolish or relax the law, how can those who have fled to him “for refuge,” hope for salvation? What does he do, to save the transgressors from the sentence of the law? He gives up himself to die in their stead. He lays down his own “life a ransom for many.” Matthew 20:28. “God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in him, should not perish, but have everlasting life.” John 3:16. Man, though justly condemned, can now be pardoned without dishonoring God, or making void his law. God can be just, and yet the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. Romans 3:25, 26. Had the law been abolished at the death of Christ, it could not have been a schoolmaster many years afterward to bring the Galatians to Christ. Paul testifies that he “HAD NOT KNOWN LUST, EXCEPT THE LAW HAD SAID THOU SHALT NOT COVET.” But an abolished law could never have convinced him of sin as a transgressor. James 2:8, 9; Romans 4:15. We cannot know sin “but by the law,” but if the law was abolished by the death of Christ, the world has never known its sinful state, or realized its need of a Saviour. We may state on the highest authority, that the law brings us to faith, for justification and that faith does not make void the law, but establishes it. Galatians 3:23; Romans 3:31. The fact that the law is our schoolmaster to show us the claims of God, and our own just condemnation, is direct evidence that it has not been abolished; hence though we have been pardoned through the death of Jesus, and thus rescued from its righteous sentence, we can never violate its precepts, without being convinced by it as transgressors. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 29.3

H.E.C. This brings us to another point in your argument. You state, and truly too, that God spake the ten commandments to Israel with an audible voice, and with his own finger wrote them on the tables of stone. “These words the Lord spake unto all your assembly, in the mount out of the midst of the fire, of the cloud, and of the thick darkness, with a great voice; and he added no more and he wrote them on two tables of stone.” Deuteronomy 5:22. 2. The ten commandments are called “a law.” “And the Lord said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount, and be there: and I will give thee tables of stone, and a law.” Exodus 24:12. 3. This law of commandments God calls “his covenant.” “And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments, and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.” Deuteronomy 4:13. Now turn with me to the New Testament, and let us see in what estimation the apostle Paul held that “law” or “covenant.” Galatians 4:21. “Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is written, that Abraham had two sons; the one by a bond-maid the other by a free woman. But he who was of the bond-woman was born after the flesh; but he of the free woman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem, which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.” Verse 30. “What saith the Scripture? Cast out the bond-woman and her son: for the son of the bond-woman shall not be heir with the son of the free woman. So then, brethren, (said Paul) we are not children of the bond-woman, but of the free. Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.” (The old Sinaic covenant.) ARSH September 16, 1851, page 29.4

Answer. The remarks to which brother C. takes exceptions were directed to show the distinction between “the law of God” and “the hand-writing of ordinances.” We think there is no propriety in applying the remarks of Paul respecting the law which contained the account of Abraham’s family, to the ten commandments which contain no reference to that family. But we will notice the remarks of Paul respecting “the two covenants.” By the first covenant, God took the whole nation of Israel, or “the children of the flesh,” to be his people. Exodus 19. And he chose Jerusalem as the place of his name. 2 Chronicles 6:6. These in the allegory, are represented by Ishmael and Agar. Galatians 4:25. When God entered into covenant with Israel, he gave them his holy law in person, and also gave them through Moses the law of carnal ordinances, with its “meats and drinks and divers washings.” He gave them also a typical atonement, and a typical priesthood, in the tabernacle which was the pattern of the true. The law of God condemned them as transgressors; the law of Moses with all its sacrifices, could not take away their sins because it could offer no real atonement. Hebrews 10:11. Because they broke the covenant thus made with them, the Lord promised by the prophet Jeremiah, that he would make a new covenant founded upon better promises. He now takes believers only, “the children of promise,” and he chooses Jerusalem which is above. Hebrews 12:22. These, in the allegory, are represented by Isaac and Sarah. Galatians 4:26, 28. IN THE HEARTS OF THIS PEOPLE HE PUTS HIS LAW, AND IN THEIR MINDS HE WRITES IT. Hebrews 10:16. He gives them a real atonement, and “a great high priest” to minister for them before God in “the true tabernacle” Hebrews 1:3; 4:14; 8:2. He makes them free, not from the law of God, but from the transgression of the law - sin, and from the yoke of bondage - the law of carnal ordinances. 1 John 3:4, 5; Acts 15:5, 10; Galatians 5:1, 2. The bondage of the Jewish church did not consist in that God had given them his law, but because they were its transgressors - the servants of sin. John 8:33-36. The freedom of the children of “Jerusalem which is above,” does not consist in that the law has been abolished, but in that they have been made free from sin. Romans 6:22. But “the yoke of bondage,” according to the view of brother C., is the ten commandments. The liberty then, in which we are to stand fast, is that liberty which a removal of their restraint would give. “Blessed liberty!” exclaims the idolater, the blasphemer, the murderer, the adulterer, the thief, the false witness and the covetous. But, perhaps, brother C. will reply, that it is the Sabbath, which was “the yoke of bondage,” and the freedom in which we are to stand fast is a freedom to break the fourth commandment only. We would then ask brother C. if “THE SABBATH WAS MADE FOR MAN,” how it has become “a yoke of bondage?” If it be what the prophet requires us to call it, viz: “a delight, the holy of the Lord, honorable,” how can it be such a delight to trample it down or a liberty, in which we are to stand fast, to break it? Isaiah 58:13, 14. Would you not be satisfied with the law of God as it is, if you had not some degree of the carnal mind? Romans 8:7. Had you really desired to “see in what light the apostle Paul held that law,” (the ten commandments,) would you not have quoted some of those texts in which he refers to it? Romans 7:7, 12, 14, 22, 25. “I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.” “Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, just and good.” “For we know that the law is spiritual.” “For I delight in the law of God, after the inward man.” Romans 8:7. “Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.” Romans 3:31. “Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.” ARSH September 16, 1851, page 29.5

H.E.C. I now wish to call your attention to Paul’s letter to the Hebrews. I have not space to quote largely, nor to comment freely, even were it necessary. But I consider the “word” here spoken, too plain to need comment. Hebrews 7:11, 12. If, therefore, perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should arise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? Surely there would be none; for as we have already seen, if there had been a LAW given which COULD have given life, then righteousness, here called perfection, would have been by that law. Galatians 3:21. And that too under the Levitical priesthood. But this idea Paul repudiates, and declares, verse 12, that “that the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.” Verse 19. “For the law made nothing perfect, but (it was) the bringing in of a better hope, by the which we draw nigh unto God.” Verse 22. “By so much [the oath of God] was Jesus made the surety of A BETTER COVENANT.” Chapter 8:6. “But now hath he (our high priest) obtained A MORE EXCELLENT MINISTRY by how much also he is the mediator of A BETTER COVENANT, which was established upon better promises.” (compare with Galatians 3:15-18) “For if that first covenant (Sinaic) had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second, (Sionic.) For finding fault with them he saith, Behold the days come saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah.” Chapter 12:18, reads thus: “For ye are not come unto the mount that might be touched, and that burned with fire, nor unto blackness, and darkness, and tempest, and the sound of a trumpet, and the voice of words; which voice they that heard entreated that the word should not be spoken to them any more. But YE ARE COME unto mount Zion, and to Jesus the mediator of the NEW COVENANT, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.” ARSH September 16, 1851, page 29.6

Answer. It is by confounding that law which was magnified, made honorable, established, which is holy, just, perfect, spiritual, good, royal, with that law which was abolished, taken out of the way, nailed to the cross, changed, disannulled on account of its weakness and unprofitableness, that brother Carver raises his argument from Hebrews 7. The apostle, in this chapter, speaks of that law which pertained to the Levitical priesthood, its sacrifices and offerings, and not to “that law” which had no mention of priesthood in it. Exodus 20. The idea that even the ten commandments could not give life, is no argument against their perpetuity. The reason why they could not give life, was because man had transgressed them, and fallen under their fearful condemnation. Romans 3:19. This made a real atonement necessary, instead of the typical one connected with those priests. When the apostle speaks of a change of the law necessarily following a change of the priesthood, we understand him to refer to that law which regulated the Levitical priesthood in every particular, and not to that law which had no mention of priesthood in it. The one is a law of which there was “verily a disannulling, for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof;” the other is a law which is not made void by faith, but established by it, and written in the heart by the Spirit of God. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 29.7

We come now to Hebrews 8. The promises on which the two covenants were based, are here noticed. The first covenant required entire obedience to the law of God, (Jeremiah 11:4, 5; 7:22, 23; Exodus 19:3-9; 20.) but did not contain those clear and gracious promises of pardon through Jesus Christ, that were needed by fallen, guilty man. Hence it was not faultless, though the law of God on which it was based as its conditions, is pronounced by both Testaments, perfect, holy, just and good. Psalm 19; 119; Romans 7:12, 14. The first covenant “waxed old” because its conditions were not kept: hence the new covenant, based on better promises, was introduced. This covenant offers to us the great atonement, from whence we may receive pardon for our transgressions of the law of God, reveals to us the fountain of grace from whence we may receive strength to render obedience, and places the law of God in our hearts. Romans 5:8-11, 20, 21; Jeremiah 31:33; Hebrews 10:16. The transition from the old covenant to the new, is marked by the death of the Testator. Hebrews 9:15-17; 1 Corinthians 11:25; Galatians 3:19. But if the law of God was abolished at that time, then it was not in existence to place in the hearts of his people! We see nothing in Hebrews 12, to show that the law of God is abolished. It shows, indeed, that we have a real atonement “the blood of sprinkling,” instead of that typical atonement that “could never take away sins.” And that we have a great high priest, holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens, the mediator of the new covenant, through whom we can come into the presence of God. But it does not show that the law of God has been destroyed. What though the first covenant failed, because the law of God was broken? The apostle shows that the new covenant contains promises that meet the exigencies of the case. The first covenant seems to grow out of relations which man sustained to God before the fall. The new covenant grows out of the relations which man has sustained to God since the fall. The one sets before him his duty, and treats with him as though he were able to perform it; the other recognizes his fallen condition, and offers him strength to perform the duties set before him. The whole matter shows God’s regard for his law. He does not leave man until he have performed that concerning which he spake to him - till he have placed man where he may fulfill the righteousness of the law. Romans 8:1-7. The glories of that city of God enshroud one thing, that you seem to overlook; “THE ARK OF HIS TESTAMENT” is there. Revelation 11:19. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 29.8

H.E.C. Deuteronomy 18:15-19. “The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a prophet from the midst of thee, like unto me; unto him shall ye hearken. According to all that thou desirest of the Lord thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of the Lord my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not. And the Lord said unto me, they have well spoken that which they have spoken. I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.” This is in substance the same alluded to by Paul, when speaking of the two covenants, and it proves that the law given by the voice of God upon Sinai, was to be superseded by a new law that should be communicated by a prophet sent of God. The apostle Peter in the temple at Jerusalem applies this prophecy to Jesus, and the first Advent. So does Paul. Hebrews 1:1, 2; 12:25. See also John 1:1-18, particularly verses 17, 18. “For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.” Jesus himself testifies to the same truth. John 17:8. “For I have given unto them the WORDS WHICH THOU GAVEST ME AND THEY HAVE RECEIVED THEM.” ARSH September 16, 1851, page 30.1

Answer. That the Lord Jesus Christ was that Prophet who was to be RAISED UP IN THE PLACE OF MOSES, we believe as fully as yourself. We also believe that his sayings have taken the place of the law of Moses. But that law which God gave in person, was entirely distinct from the law of Moses. Exodus 20. We know of no proof that that law was “superseded,” or destroyed by the sayings of Jesus Christ. The atonement made by him for our transgressions of that law, is the only foundation of our hope. Never have we rested the hope of heaven, on the idea that Christ abolished a part of the commandments, and that we might be saved, even though we “break” them, and “teach men so.” ARSH September 16, 1851, page 30.2

H.E.C. Jesus promised that the Holy Ghost should teach the disciples all things, and bring all things to their remembrance, whatsoever he had said unto them; and he prayed for those who should believe on him through their word. Now I ask in conclusion, why it is that nothing plain and positive has been said by our Lord or his apostles concerning the Sabbath. He has spoken plainly, and positively, on other points of duty, and yet nothing stronger than inference, as I conceive, can be gleaned from the teachings of Christ or the apostles. On the other hand, we find the Saviour and his disciples traveling through the corn on that day, and plucking the corn, which was certainly opposed to the letter of the law. And when the Pharisees demanded that he should rebuke his disciples, he not only refused to do so, but asserted his superiority over the Sabbath, and consequently over the law of which the Sabbath is a part. And I am not aware of one instance where the apostles enjoined the observance of it as a duty, although opportunities were not wanting, where they might properly have introduced the subject. See the directions of the apostles and elders and brethren, to the brethren which are in Antioch, and Syria, and Calica. Acts 15:23, 29. Here was a good opportunity to inculcate the doctrine, but we read nothing of the kind. Why this silence on a subject which you regard so highly? I pause for a reply. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 30.3

Cincinnati, (O.,) Aug. 18, 1851. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 30.4

Answer. So then, brother Carver, you make Jesus guilty of breaking the fourth commandment! And then justify him on the ground of superiority to the law. The Pharisees, indeed, charged him with breaking the Sabbath, but he justified himself and his disciples on the ground that those acts with which they found fault, were acts of mercy, and consequently lawful, [i.e. according to the law.] Will you stand with the Pharisees, or with the Son of God? Jesus Christ is the Lord of the Sabbath, even as the husband is the lord of the wife; not to destroy, to put away, or to take another, but to cherish, protect, defend. Mark 2:27, 28; 1 Corinthians 11:9; 1 Peter 3:6. Jesus was “MADE UNDER THE LAW,” and he testifies respecting himself that he had kept his Father’s commandments. Galatians 4:4; John 15:10. Who but the Pharisees dare affirm that he did not? The apostle John testifies that “Sin is the transgression of the law, and in him is no sin.” 1 John 3:4, 5. In him therefore was no transgression of the law. Had he, himself, been a sinner, how much would his sacrifice avail for a sinful world1 1 Peter 3:18. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 30.5

It is true that the fourth commandment is not repeated in the New Testament; it is also true, that the first, the second, and the third, are not. But who from this consideration dares to break them? The apostles did not assemble at Jerusalem, at the time referred to, to determine whether the commandments of God were binding, but to determine whether “it was needful to circumcise them, (the Gentiles) and to command them to keep the law of Moses.” Acts 15:5, 6. Hence, in the letter written by them, they treat upon the question respecting which they had assembled - not upon the duty of keeping the commandments. Though neither of the first four commandments are quoted in the New Testament, the testimony of our Lord, and his apostles, was so decisive with regard to them all that we read of no dispute on the subject. Matthew 5:17-19. “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily, I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 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.” Romans 3:31. “Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.” James 2:8-10. “If ye fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself, ye do well: But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors. For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.” 1 John 3:4. “Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law; for sin is the transgression of the law.” 1 John 5:3. “For this is the love of God that we keep his commandments; and his commandments are not grievous.” J.N.A. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 30.6

[We give the following excellent remarks upon “The Seventh Month” from the “Voice of Truth,” copied into the “Advent Herald,” of Jan. 8th, 1845, which shows the “original,” and at that time, the unanimous faith of the Advent body. Brethren, “call to remembrance the former days, in which, after you were illuminated, you endured a great fight of afflictions.”] ARSH September 16, 1851, page 30.7

THE SEVENTH MONTH

JWe

We have now reached a point in our investigations where a very important question arises. If the scriptures do not warrant the expectation of the appearing of Christ on the tenth day of the seventh month, more than on any other day, then it is asked, in what light are we to view the recent proclamation of his coming on that day? Was it all the work of man? or did God guide and bless the work? ARSH September 16, 1851, page 30.8

1. Supposing the “tenth day” had been preached abstractly, it would have been powerless; it would have produced no more effect this, than on any previous year. There were other evidences which did, and we still believe do define the year of Christ’s coming. These evidences we then thought, and still believe, justified us in strongly looking for the coming of the Lord at the commencement of the present Jewish civil year, which answered to our October. And had the tenth day been left out of the question, we believe the virgins would have been waked up to some extent at least, to the work of trimming their lamps, by the proclamation of the approach of the first day of the Jewish civil year, the point of time in which we had good reason to expect the termination of the prophetic numbers. Hence the foundation on which the recent cry was based, has not been in the least impaired by the mistake detected in the tenth day. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 30.9

2. Judging a tree by its fruits, or a fountain by its stream, we cannot doubt that God was in the late movement among us. We admit there were some extravagances and wrongs, as might be expected, in a high state of religious excitement. Yet the general fruits are what give character to the cause that produces them. The fruits have been deep searchings of heart, full consecration of self and all to God, turning from sin, following the Lord in baptism, and a willing submission to all of his commandments and ordinances. A parallel cannot be found in the history of the church, since the days of primitive christianity. In short, if the nature of any cause can be determined by its fruits, we think we may safely decide that this work was of God. - With our present light we cannot honestly decide otherwise. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 30.10

3. Admitting as we must, that the coming of Christ is at the door, then the parable of the ten virgins has a most striking fulfillment in the late movement among us. If the cry at midnight, was to be made in probationary time, then we have not a doubt that it has been made in the proclamation of the coming of Christ in the seventh month. And that it was to be made in probationary time, appears evident from the fact, that after being made, the virgins arise, trim their lamps; some call for oil - they are told what to do - they go to buy; and after all this, the Bridegroom comes. From these considerations we are constrained to look upon this work, though disappointed and mistaken in a certain point, as having the hand of God in it. Just such a work as the parable of the ten virgins, and other portions of scripture warrant us in looking for immediately before the coming of the Lord. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 30.11

In answer to the question how can this be the work of God, and yet be attended with so many disappointments? we simply answer, Moses expected an early deliverance of his people, but was disappointed, and cried out under his disappointment, “Wherefore hast thou so evil entreated this people? Why is it that thou hast sent me? for since I came to Pharaoh to speak in thy name, he hath done evil to this people; neither hast thou delivered thy people at all.” Exodus 5:22, 23. God however, did subsequently justify his own ways in their deliverance. And we doubt not he will deliver his people now when he has sufficiently tested their faith and love for him. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 30.12

Jonah was told to predict the day of Ninevah’s destruction; yet God spared the city. He also told Abraham to sacrifice his son; yet he commanded him to stay his hand from obeying his command. And will any one say the work of the Lord was not in these cases of disappointment and seeming contradiction? They will not, if they are believers in the bible. Then why say that God cannot be in a cause now that has been attended with some mistakes and disappointment on the part of his imperfect children? On this principle you may sap the foundation of every good cause. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 30.13

The conclusion of the whole matter is, ARSH September 16, 1851, page 30.14

1. That though we have been disappointed and mistaken in the application of some scriptures, we are not disheartened, nor discouraged; from the consoling consideration that we have good evidence, that God has been with us. And though he has suffered us to meet with these trials, he has guided us by his hand, humbled us at his feet, caused us to search his word with more prayerful attention; and will, when sufficiently tried, work out our eternal deliverance. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 30.15

2. That notwithstanding, to the church and the world, we have met with a complete defeat; yet we think we know, from the very best of evidence, that our victory will soon be won. And their perfect security is a strong evidence in our favor. Now that day could come upon them as a snare - when they least expected it. Till now, it could not have so come on them; for very many who were not ready, were looking for it. Nothing but a little delay has in the least impaired a single evidence on which our precious faith and hope rest. And shall we give all up because of a few moments delay? No, never! We will exercise patience, that after we have done the will of God we may receive the promise. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 30.16

3. That we have now passed all the prophetical land-marks, from the first down to the very last, before the actual coming of Christ in the clouds of heaven. The only time we now have in which to look for this glorious event, is daily, nay hourly. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 30.17

4. That our chief work now is, to “comfort one another,” “hold fast the profession of our faith,” not “draw back unto perdition,” “let no man take our crown,” have our loins girded, our lamps burning, and we constantly watching and ready to meet the Lord at his coming. It now appears that we can do but little more for the church and the world. “None of those men which were bidden shall taste of my supper.” - [Advent Herald.] ARSH September 16, 1851, page 30.18

We have erased a large number of names from our list, of those we have not heard from. But if we have struck off the names of any who should have the paper, we hope to be informed of it, and we will send it to them immediately. Those who send for the paper, should state whether they wish the back numbers, and how many. We invite all the brethren and sisters to act as agents for the Review and Herald, to obtain subscribers, and collect means to defray the expenses of publishing. The Lord will reward them when our labor is done. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 30.19

We again call the attention of the brethren to the following wise suggestion of Bro. Rhodes - “Would it not be well for some one in each band to write, and send in the names of such as wish the paper, and stop such papers as are not wanted?” ARSH September 16, 1851, page 30.20

LETTERS

JWe

[From Bro. Chamberlain.]

To all the scattered saints in Christ Jesus I send greeting - ARSH September 16, 1851, page 31.1

God is at the present time most manifestly gathering his people into the unity of the faith, and to a more perfect understanding of his revealed will to man, and this is to be brought about under the sounding of the third angel’s message. Revelation 14:9-12. Never did the holy scriptures shine with that light and beauty as they do now, and more especially the book of Revelation is unfolding its glorious light as never since Jesus sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John, on the Isle of Patmos; saying, blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein, for the time is at hand. Write the things which shall be hereafter. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 31.2

God in his providence brought out a people from their spiritual bondage, and led them step by step through the first and then the second angel’s messages, and now is giving them the third and last message to fit them to pass through the “time of trouble such as never was.” Oh, my dear brothers and sisters, my whole soul cries out, Praise the Lord for his wonderful goodness to the children of men. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 31.3

I want to tell you a little of what I have seen of late in Connecticut. I have for weeks thought much of the scattered flock of God in this state; and last first-day morning I started east in company with Bro. Belden, to try to fulfill Jeremiah 16:16, last part, and I think God has been glorified in our tour through Windham, Tolland and Hartford counties. We labored hard for six days, searching for the “hidden jewels,” and I can say to the praise of God, that in almost every town we found one or more that had an “ear to hear.” God did grant unto us much of the power of the truth. Never did I feel its weight and importance as now. I have felt in some instances as did Isaiah when he said, “cry aloud and spare not,” etc. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 31.4

I see the gross darkness that prevails among the professed Advent people. But thanks be to God, the third angel’s message, that is sounding louder and louder, will bring to light every honest jewel, and they will be polished up for the “second casket.” Truth is mighty to the pulling down of the strong holds of Satan. Nothing, I think, that has gone before, has had half that effect to arouse the Israel of God, as will soon be felt by the third angel’s message. This follows the two that have preceded it in our experience. How simple, natural and plain. All that are truly honest at heart must see and understand the third angel, who declares with a loud voice, “If any man worship the beast and his image,” etc. How important to understand this message. This message will wax louder and louder until the 144,000 are sealed with the seal of the living God. Amen. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 31.5

My Brothers and Sisters, we are just about entering upon the “time of trouble such as never was.” And seeing these tremendous scenes are just before us, “what manner of persons ought we to be in all holy conversation and godliness,” looking and praying for the “latter rain” to fall upon us, to ripen us for the garner of the Lord. I exhort you, as did Paul, “Therefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord. Prove all things, hold fast that which is good. Abstain from all appearance of evil, and the very God of peace sanctify you wholly, and I pray God your whole spirit, and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 31.6

From your unworthy brother, expecting to come up through great tribulation,
E.L.H. CHAMBERLAIN.
Middletown, Sept. 1st, 1851.

[From Bro. Bingham.]

BRO. WHITE: Through the medium of the “Review and Herald,” permit me, an unworthy yet trusting friend of truth to give a few words of my experience for the encouragement of such as are of doubting mind. God has promised his Son, a seed to serve him; therefore his Spirit will do its office work upon such as will heed it, and thereby their minds will be opened to the instruction of the blessed word which is able to make us wise unto Eternal Life. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 31.7

In 1832, I became very sensibly alarmed for my eternal welfare. I saw that without holiness I was forever lost. After a few days of awful distress, I found peace in believing, and felt the sanctifying influence of grace, and a free and full pardon of all past sin, and was freely justified, and lived for days and weeks, growing in grace, and in the knowledge of the word of life. After a few months the sects began to strive for the mastery, and in a few weeks we (the numerous converts,) were divided up into flocks or parties for a reward to the priests, who had labored to convert and secure us. It happened to be my lot to be drawn into the Methodist net, and immediately I was elected a leader, and officiated a few months, when, as I studied, I found the word and their rulers did not agree, and I withdrew; not without discovering that my mind had greatly fallen. And I was indeed lean and barren, under the trial I had passed through. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 31.8

Again, I committed my way to the Lord in tears and sorrow, and found that peace I had lost, and lived alone for some time. At length I found a people who, like myself, did not believe our blessed Saviour was the Eternal God. I found them to be humble and devoted, and had little sectarian influence. With them I walked and worshiped, until the Spirit moved the cry to prepare us for the coming judgment. My mind was stirred; I felt that God was in the move. I obtained a lecturer and gave the note of alarm. Hundreds professed to believe and sought to obey; but alas for the weakness of human nature, and our distrust for grace, many have fallen and Peter-like denied their Lord. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 31.9

When this cry came, our little church unanimously, and with joy, received the glad tidings. But when the second angel sounded - “Come out of her my People” - many began to look for their creed, and turned to look it up, and left us and walked no more with us. But O, when I call to mind the thrilling and soul-stirring cry “Behold the bridegroom cometh,” my mind leaps for joy, and I feel carried back to that happy hour, in the fall of ’44, when I walked out upon my farms for the last time, often I had warned, and with tears and many prayers entreated my friends. I bade them adue, and felt that I was called to die while yet alive. But we were destined to another and still more severe trial, to fit us for the yet future kingdom. The time passed, and I truly felt like keeping the dying sacrifice good; but in a few weeks, at a conference at Waterbury, their was a mighty effort made to stir up the little band to go to work and again sound the first angel’s message. There I wept, and cried to God for help, by his grace, that I might not fall, while my mind thus recoiled. I felt to say, I cannot go, I cannot feel to work again the work I have finished. But at last my mind rested upon the idea that we might be blessed in gleaning after the harvest, and I began to unite with those who thus felt and labored, and often engaged in recounting the evidences of our hope. I have often been cheered while passing through these years of darkness and doubt, when I could, with humbleness, bow and reverently dedicate my wandering powers of mind to him who knew my sincerity and desire for redemption. But God will not leave his humble, trusting children to perish by the way, if they are willing to be led by the Word and Spirit. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 31.10

Something near a year since my mind became considerably stirred as I heard from one and another that the Advent people were getting up another excitement. On examination I found that there was yet another angel, the third, of warning and mercy to sound, and stir God’s humble children to an examination of their position, and a preparation for the coming judgment. As I read I was moved, and more and more convinced of my conformity to the requirements of the image beast. I distinctly saw the broken law, and rejected Sabbath, in a most striking sense. It was too much. I fell under it, and in Jesus’ name besought my Father to again forgive my folly, sin and ignorance, and in November I called my family around the alter of prayer one blessed Sabbath morning, with a heavy heart, and told them my convictions, and asked them to unite with me in observing God’s Royal Law. My men (being Adventists) acknowledged it but just, but struck against me, as did my companion and children. I bowed the knee under the most trying circumstances I have ever seen, since I had a being, and with the hardest spirit upon me. But, blessed be God, as I bowed my blessed Saviour met me by his Spirit. I was filled even to rejoicing, and praise and thanksgiving. But oh, the family’s sympathy; my reputation was gone, and I had become a dupe, deluded by the Devil, and my influence was gone. They wept over me, they rebuked, they chided; but my trust was in God, and I prayed for sustaining grace and light upon the blessed Word. And although entirely alone for months, praise God, I have been sustained while examining the Word, and daily have I received light upon the different points connected with the closing message. The Heavenly Sanctuary, oh how beautiful! But as the light is before the world, bright shining as the sun, I close, exhorting my dear brethren to be of good cheer, committing their ways to the Lord, and in faithful labor in the truth. Although entirely alone but a few months since, God has now given me more in number to strengthen my hand, and encourage my mind, than Noah had in his Ark. And yet, blessed be his holy name, his arm is not shortened, nor is his ear shut that he cannot hear. I now have three ministering brethren to go with me, praise the Lord, and yet I expect more. Truth is mighty, and I expect will yet strike the ear of all the benighted, sleeping Advent believers in the north of our state, and many of them will heed the cry, restore the breach of the fourth command, and exhibit the patience and faith of the gospel, and so observe the Royal Law, that by faith in Jesus, they will be numbered to make the 144,000 that will be fitted for translation when our blessed Saviour shall appear. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 31.11

This is the faith and prayer of your unworthy, yet confiding brother,
HIRAM BINGHAM.
Morristown, (Vt.,) Sept., 1851.

EXTRACTS OF LETTERS

JWe

Bro. D. Daniels, of Chicopee Falls, (Mass.), writes Aug. 30th, 1851: “With my eyes full of tears of joy, I attempt to write you a few lines this morning, to give my thanks to you and Bro. Rhodes, and to all the dear saints who have felt interested for me, in sending me the “Review and Herald,” and those that have prayed for me. O, this seems like heaven. I do believe that this is the Philadelphia church, glory to God. Can it be that there should be any one in this world that would care for me enough to try to hunt me up, and to try to save me. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 31.12

“I received the paper Thursday after dark, but did not read much until this morning. I can almost say as Philip said to Nathaniel, ‘I have found him of whom Moses and the Prophets have written.’ I must believe that this message is from God. It seems some like ’43. There seems something worthy to be called love in the pages of the ‘Review and Herald.’ How different from the other papers. They have believed me to be in error, but never have come to me in love to try to save me as the Bible requires them to do. But on the contrary, have tried to put me down by telling many things that were not true, and finally cast me out without knowing the truth. So they have hated me, and cast me out for the truth’s sake. Praise the Lord, O my soul, that I am counted worthy to suffer shame for his name. But I feel this morning that God has raised me up, and shown me a people more worthy of my attention. To them I am joined in spirit forever.” ARSH September 16, 1851, page 31.13

Sister A.R. Smith writes from 67 Warren Place, Boston, Aug. 27, 1851: “It is with much reluctance that I send you these verses, [see first page,] on a subject which a few weeks since was so foreign to my thoughts. Being as it were a child in this glorious cause, I feel unworthy and unable to approach a subject of such moment, but as I’ve written for the world, and wish to make a full sacrifice, I am induced to send. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 31.14

“I feel willing to do and be anything for God. I want to be unreservedly given to his work, that I might be the humble instrument in his hands of doing some good. I rejoice in the glorious light in which, by His infinite mercy I’ve been led. But I still feel that I’ve much to overcome; and I desire an interest in your prayers that I may be kept by the power of God, through faith unto salvation. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 31.15

“I will give you a short account of our meeting last Sabbath. It was well attended. Some were in who have not embraced the last message, especially one from Brooklyn, N.Y. who was to speak the next (first) day at Cochituate Hall. His arguments presented in opposition to our views, entirely vanished before the clear light of truth, and only tended to strengthen us, and inspire with fresh courage and zeal in defence of our position. And although no lecturer was present, yet each one was ready to bear his testimony, and the Lord was indeed with us by his Spirit and power. The beauty and harmony of the scriptures was clearly dispensed, and the ‘word’ had free course and was glorified. It was truly a refreshing season to each one of the dear children. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 31.16

“Our brother confessed that the Spirit was with us, and as an honest seeker after truth, will further examine the evidences of our faith. We hope and trust good will be the result.” ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.1

Bro. H.S. Case writes from Jackson, (Mich.), Aug. 24th, ’51: “I wish to say to you, and also to the friends scattered abroad, that I feel grateful to God for his blessing and protection of late while traveling over the field of my former labor, in the state of New York. To find some of those who started for the kingdom in ’43 and ’44, strong in the present truth, was not a little pleasing to me, after an absence of six years, and passing through so many sore trials and discouragements. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.2

“I never witnessed such sweet, heavenly meetings or conferences as were enjoyed at Camden and Milton. Truly, the Spirit of God was manifested, and the work was intelligible, and I know that the Lord met with us while the saints worshiped before him. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.3

“After I left you at Milton, I went to manlius, Bath, Martin’s Hill, Elmira, Owego, Pitcher Springs, Belisle, Liverpool and Lorain. In all these places I found some that love the present truth.” ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.4

THE SABBATH QUESTION

JWe

BRO. HIMES: - I was forcibly struck while reading several tracts with which I met while on my passage from New York to Hartford, with the apparent disingenuousness of the writer. One argument on which he seemed to lay great stress in support of the seventh-day Sabbath, was this, - that Sabbath means rest, - that the seventh day is called a Sabbath in the New Testament, - the first day is not so called, but is always designated the first day of the week. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.5

The truth is, - the Sabbatarians either do or ought to know it, - the evangelists never in the language in which the gospels are found, (the Greek.) called the first day of the week anything else but Sabbath. For the information of those who are shaken in their minds on this subject, I will transcribe the Greek text in Italics, containing the words rendered by our translators first day of the week, and also the word rendered by them Sabbath, meaning the seventh day. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.6

Matthew 28:1 - English translation: “In the end of the Sabbath, as it begins to dawn toward the first day of the week.” Greek - Opse de sabbatoon, te epiphooskuse eis miam sabbatoon. There the identical word in the same case, genitive plural, rendered Sabbath when referring to the seventh day, is rendered first day of the week in the very next clause of the verse. A literal rendering would be, if we adopt the principle of our translators of Anglicising instead of translating the word, - “And in the end of Sabbaths, as it began to dawn toward one of Sabbath.” ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.7

Does not this indicate that one series of Sabbaths there ended, so far as obligation to observe it was concerned, and a new series was introduced? At any rate, the first is as positively called Sabbath as the seventh day. And all four of the evangelists designate it by the same word. Mark 16:2 - Kai lian prooitees mias sabbatoon - “And very early the one of Sabbaths,” etc. Luke 24:1 - Te de mia toon sabatoon - “And in the one of the Sabbaths,” etc. John 20:1 - Te de mia toon sabbatoon - “And in the one of the Sabbaths,” etc. Thus the four evangelists do agree in calling the first by the same name they do the seventh day of the week, and that word as certainly signifies rest in the one case as in the other. Let no one, therefore, hereafter contend that the writers of the New Testament never call the first day Sabbath, or rest, for no New Testament writer has called it anything else except John, (Revelation 1:10,) where it is called the “Lord’s day.” ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.8

J. LITCH.
Philadelphia, July 16th, 1851.

REMARKS: - Lest any should gather from the above that the word Sabbath is represented by the phrase “first day of the week” we add that Sabbath is simply translated week in those texts - other words indicating the day of the week. The word Sabbath is originally a Hebrew word, and signifies rest; but occurring at regular intervals by a metonymy it became significant of the periods separated by these rests. So that we have the seventh day of the rest, and the first day of the rest, week, or Sabbath. - ED. [Advent Herald. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.9

REPLY. 1. The observers of the ancient Sabbath of Jehovah, are charged with disingenuousness [want of fairness,] in stating that the word Sabbath is never applied to the first day of the week. The word Sabbath, indeed, signifies rest, and it is applied to the seventh day, because God rested on that day. No other day can be called “the Sabbath of the Lord,” until he shall have rested on such day. The New Testament, as it now stands, contains no hint that anything of a sabbatic character, pertains to the first day of the week. But (to speak in plain language) it is wrongly translated, “and Sabbatarians do or ought to know it.” Well we are glad that you cannot sustain your charge by an appeal to the common version. Candor will oblige you to admit that fact. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.10

2. You sustain the charge thus, if we are able to understand you. The Greek words translated “first day of the week,” are not rightly translated, but should be rendered “one of Sabbath,” or “the one of Sabbaths.” Yet you affirm that “the one of Sabbaths” is the identical first day of the week. How do you know it? If it ought not to be translated the first day of the week, how dare you say that that is the real meaning of the text. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.11

3. After repeating the text, as you consider rightly translated, you ask, “Does not this indicate that one series of Sabbaths there ended, so far as obligation to observe it was concerned, and a new series was introduced?” We can only answer, you have given and ingenious guess. Will you also tell us who instituted this new series of Sabbaths? On what day of the week are they to be celebrated? What law enforces their observance? As the Scripture is silent with regard to such matters, as now translated, can you not give an amended version? ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.12

4. Perhaps you may reply, that as “the one of the Sabbaths” succeeded to “the end of Sabbaths,” it must have been the first day of the week. To say the least this is a question of doubt. For the phrase “the end of Sabbaths,” is certainly not very definite. But there is nothing whatever to show that Acts 20:7, and 1 Corinthians 16:2, have any reference to the first day of the week, if your new translation changes them to “one of the Sabbaths.” ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.13

5. But you have pointed out one exception in Revelation 1:10. The first day is there called “Lord’s day.” Who told you so, Bro. Litch? Are you not in this also “wise above what is written?” “The Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath.” But in what text of Scripture do you read that he has “put away” his holy day, [Isaiah 58:13,] and chosen another? Have you not made an unwarrantable addition to the Book of Revelation. See chap 22:18. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.14

6. The Editor of the “Herald,” however, exposes the fallacy of the whole matter. His “remarks” show that the word Sabbath is used in a secondary sense meaning the whole week, other words determine the day of the week. The first of the week, therefore, has no claims to the character of Sabbath, and in this respect is like the thousand and one “cunningly devised fables,” that men prefer in the place of the commandments of God. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.15

J.N.A.

CONFERENCES

JWe

CONFERENCE IN VERMONT

There will be a General Conference of the brethren in New England and Canada East, at Sutton, Vt., to commence Friday, Sept. 26th, at 9 o’clock A.M., and hold three days or more. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.16

Those coming from abroad will please inquire for A.R. MORSE or HARVEY CHILDS, who will be ready to entertain them. Brn. Holt, White and Andrews may be expected to attend this conference. The traveling brethren, one and all, are invited to attend. In behalf of the brethren. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.17

As it may be expected that the meeting at Sutton will be a large one, we would suggest the propriety of those living within one or two days’ ride taking bed-clothes with them. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.18

CONFERENCE AT BATH, N.Y

There will be a Conference at Bath, Steuben Co., N.Y. to commence Friday, Sept. 26th, at 6 o’clock P.M., and hold over the Sabbath and First-day. The scattered brethren are invited to attend. It may be expected that Brn. S.W. Rhodes and Joseph Bates will attend this meeting. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.19

Providence permitting they will also hold a Conference at Bingham or Ulysses, Potter Co., Penn., to commence Friday, Oct. 3rd, at 6 o’clock P.M., to hold over the Sabbath and First-day. The brethren there will please fix upon the place to hold the meeting, and address a line to Bro. Rhodes at Bath, N.Y. in season to be received by him before the conference there. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.20

If the brethren in Allegany Co., or any part of this State, desire Conferences, now is a good time. They can make their wishes known to Bro. S.W. Rhodes, who will be at Lincklain, (N.Y.), Sept. 19th, and at Bath, Steuben Co., the 26th. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.21

CONFERENCE IN CONNECTICUT

There will be a General Conference, “if the Lord will,” at Berlin, Ct., at the house of Bro. Joseph North, two miles east of the Depot, to commence on Friday, Oct. 3rd, and hold over the Sabbath and First-day. We desire to see a general gathering of the Advent brethren from all parts of the State. “He that hath an ear let him hear.” We also hope to see some from other States. And we do earnestly pray that God will send us some of his faithful messengers to break unto us the bread of life, giving to the household meat in due season. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.22

Those who come by the Cars, will stop at the Berlin Depot, where they will find a carriage on the arrival of the 12 M. and 3 P.M. trains, on Friday the 3rd of October. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.23

In behalf of the brethren,
E.L.H. CHAMBERLAIN.
Middletown, Sept. 8th, 1851.

CONFERENCE IN ILLINOIS

There will be a Conference at Cold Spring Prairie, McHenry Co., Ill., to commence Oct. 3rd. Brn. Case and Bowles expect to attend. The scattered brethren are invited to come to this meeting. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.24

In behalf of the brethren, H.S. CASE. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.25

The Conference at West Milton will be held at the house of Bro. Horace Cushman. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.26

Oswego Conference

It will be proper, and no doubt interesting to the scattered brethren, for us to give a brief statement of this meeting. The number of believers in the present truth at this meeting, was about one hundred. Brn. Holt and Rhodes were present, and bore the true testimony with much freedom. Here we met with Brn. Pool, E.D. Cook, Stocking, Alden, and many others for the first time, and we felt that our hearts were united in the truth, and in the love of Christ. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.27

The brethren came together in the spirit of the gospel, and perfect harmony and union existed quite through the meeting. It was frequently remarked during the meeting that this was like Second Advent meetings in 1843 and 1844. The brethren were greatly comforted, and strengthened in the truth. Some who had not heard all the reasons of our faith presented, became fully convinced, and now feel resolved to take their stand fully with those who keep the commandments of God. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.28

The principal subjects presented, were the 2300 days, the Sanctuary, the commandments and law of God in the New Testament, gospel order in the church of Christ, and the “good works” that God’s “peculiar people” should, and will be “zealous” of. The subject of the seven-years time was not mentioned. In fact, we know of no one in this State, or in the west, who teaches it. Some may suppose from our remarks in No.2, that the seven-years time is held by quite a large portion of the brethren; but it is not so. The view has been mostly confined to the state of Vermont, and we learn by Bro. Holt that most of the brethren there have given it up. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.29

But we will return to the conference. First-day, in the forenoon, Bro. Holt spoke on the commandments and law of God in the New Testament, in a very clear, spirited, and convincing manner. The truth seemed to take deep root in the hearts of all the brethren present. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.30

The brethren at Oswego are well united and strong in the truth. They have made strong efforts to help advance the precious cause, and are much blest in so doing. Though poor, they do much for the cause. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.31

Bro. Lillis is in union with the church there, having confessed his error referred to in No.2. He and his companion and children are seeking to walk blameless before God. We had a very pleasant visit with them, and the other dear brethren in Oswego. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.32

The Pamphlet, ‘Experience and Views,’ of 64 pages, will be ready in a few days. The edition will cost about $100, of which $38,40 has been sent in. Those only who are interested in it are invited to see that the amount is furnished. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.33

Letters received since August 28th

JWe

A.R. Smith 2, H.S. Case, L. Kellogg, A.E. Randall, A. Woodruff, S.W. Rhodes 2, A.S. Coburn, D. Daniels, E.L.H. Chamberlain 3, A.R. Morse, R. Moran, H.S. Gurney, O. Hewett, F.M. Shimper, Otis Nichols. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.34

Receipts

JWe

Saul Strong, $30; L. Titus, Geo. Morse, A. Armon, C. Wetherbee, Alfred Chase, H. Lothrop, A. Hazeltine, O. Bartlett, Wm. Dolley, L. Woodworth, Joseph Jackson, M. Steembarg, Sarah Griggs, H. Roode, Joseph Hanson, S. Swan, C.P. Finch, T. Finch, E.A. Pool, B.C. Bancroft, a Friend, J.B. Sweet, $1 each; O. Hewett, C. Swan, 50 cents each; Wm. Lassel, Mrs. D. Strout, 25 cents each; T. Bailey, 60 cents. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.35

For the Pamphlet entitled ‘Experience and Views.’ ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.36

C.S. Hurlbut, $2; Harriet Cole, C.P. Finch, $1 each; Jane M. Lowrey, $1,40. ARSH September 16, 1851, page 32.37