Advent Review, and Sabbath Herald, vol. 26
July 4, 1865
RH, Vol. XXVI. Battle Creek, Mich., Third-Day, No. 5
James White
ADVENT REVIEW,
And Sabbath Herald.
VOL. XXVI. BATTLE CREEK, MICH., THIRD-DAY, JULY 4, 1865. No. 5.
“Here is the Patience of the Saints; Here are they that keep the Commandments of God and the Faith of Jesus.” ARSH July 4, 1865, page 33.1
The Advent Review & Sabbath Herald
is published weekly, by
The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association.
ELD. JAMES WHITE, PRESIDENT
TERMS.—Two Dollars a year in advance. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 33.2
Address Elder JAMES WHITE, Battle Creek, Michigan. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 33.3
“If Need Be.” 1 Peter 1:6
Three gracious words. Not all for naught
Is sorrow, grief and pain;
The heavy burdens that we bear
Will not be borne in vain.
Our heavenly Father knows our frame,
He knows how weak we are,
And every sigh and every tear
He seeth from afar.
ARSH July 4, 1865, page 33.4
If daily cares oppress our heart,
And earthly comforts flee;
Does aught disturb our peace of mind,
He knows it needs to be.
And when the “need be” has fulfilled
The end marked out by God,
And we are brought to trust him more,
He will remove the rod.
ARSH July 4, 1865, page 33.5
Oh, blessed thought, there’s not a drop
In all the cup of woe,
That is not measured by his hand,
And will not overflow.
Then may we ever trust his love,
And though severely tried,
Remember that it needs to be,
And in his strength abide.
[Am. Messenger].
ARSH July 4, 1865, page 33.6
NATURE AND DESTINY OF MAN
discussion between eld. n. v. hull, seventh-day baptist, and eld r. f. cottrell, seventh-day adventist
(Continued from Review Vol. xxv, No. 25.). ARSH July 4, 1865, page 33.7
Elder Hull’s Sixth Article
Eld. R. F. Cottrell: ARSH July 4, 1865, page 33.8
Dear Brother,—In resuming my reply to your article published in the Recorder of Jan. 26th, I commence by noticing your strictures on the term immortality. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 33.9
You say, “The Bible is silent concerning the immortality of the soul in its present state, or until it shall put on immortality at the resurrection of the just.” Dear brother, will you have the kindness to quote the passage which says, “The soul puts on immortality at the resurrection of the just.” Now mark what I say, and let all our readers mark it: There is neither word nor hint in the Bible, of the soul’s putting on immortality at the resurrection. You affect dismay at the misuse of the Bible by religious partizans; but of all the bold and unwarrantable statements made by men earnest to establish a point, I know of none exceeding this. Had you said the body puts on immortality at the resurrection of the just, it would have been well. But your theory required an addition to the simple Scripture statement, and for its sake you made the addition! ARSH July 4, 1865, page 33.10
All that I have attempted concerning the idea of the soul’s immortality, is to prove that the soul does not necessarily die with the body. You now say, should I prove this, still I have not proved the immortality of the wicked. I have not come to that yet. When we come to the question of the destiny of the wicked, we shall likely have something to say about the phrase “second death,” etc. But as to the existence of the soul after the death of the body, I maintain I have proved it by the saying of Jesus—a saying so positive and so exact, that to dispute it is to oppose! ARSH July 4, 1865, page 33.11
But you make strange concerning the existence of human spirits separate from their bodies, as if the “idea” was not contained in the Bible. But notice: 1. The Pharisees of Jesus’ time believed in the existence of spirits, Acts 23:8—“For the Sadducees say there is no resurrection, neither angel nor spirit; but the Pharisees acknowledge both.” 2. In this matter, Paul said he agreed with the Pharisees. 3. The disciples of Jesus believed in the existence of spirits. Mark 6:49—” But they seeing him walking on the sea thought it was a spirit, and cried out.” 4. Jesus believed in the existence of spirits. Luke 24:36—“A spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.” 5. Stephen believed his spirit would exist after the death of the body. Acts 7:59—“Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” And in this he followed he example of his Master, who, when dying, said, “Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit.”—Luke 23:46. Indeed, nobody, at least no sect, in Christ’s time, but the haughty infidel Sadducees, denied the separate existence of human spirits. Now, in the light of the above, said I not well, “The Bible especially the New Testament, would be without meaning, were we to remove this doctrine from it?” ARSH July 4, 1865, page 33.12
It is possible that Greenfield, in making Aphtharton, Romans 1:23, say that God is incorruptible, or undecaying, as to the essence of his nature, is right; but the difficulty I have with you is, that you quote Greenfield as sustaining you in your theory that the soul or spirit of man decays with the body because Aphtharton, when applied to decayable substances, means corruptible, perishable, etc., in a physical sense, whereas he holds no such doctrine; at any rate, if he does, I am not aware of it. And now, that our readers may not be misled, will you please quote Greenfield, or any other accepted lexicographer, where Aphtharton, when applied to the spirit of man, is made to mean corruptible, in a physical sense? I certainly know of no such use of the term. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 33.13
But light may be reflected upon this question, by taking the words corrupt and corrupted, and noticing a few instances where they occur in the Scriptures, from which the physical sense is excluded. Examination. 32:7—“And Jehovah said to Moses, Go, get thee down, for thy people, whom thou broughtest out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves.” 1 Corinthians 15:33—“Evil intercourse corrupteth good customs.” 2 Corinthians 11:3—“But I fear lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ Jesus.” 1 Timothy 6:5—“Idle employments of men of corrupt minds.” Also, 2 Timothy 3:8; Ephesians 4:29—“Let no corrupt words issue from your mouth.” But these instances are enough to show that these words are often used in the Bible, not in a physical, but in a moral sense. That mortality is affirmed of the bodies of men, whether good or bad, is true; that is, of men in the flesh. But mortality is not affirmed, either of the souls or bodies of men, in the future state. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 33.14
On what you say of the word destruction, I will only add to what I said in my former article, a quotation from Olshausen, whose learning you will hardly call in question. On 2 Thessalonians 1:9, he says: “Olethroo aioonios, everlasting destruction.... This is the only passage in Paul’s epistles in which everlasting damnation is openly declared.” I refer you hopefully to his entire note. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 33.15
I have a little more to say on your theory of definitions, or the application of words to spiritual subjects; and let this cover what you say on the word destroy. You seem wholly to overlook the fact, that all words, whether they relate to God, Heaven, or hell, or anything touching the future of man are in their primary significations earthly and physical—that all language seems awakened into being by, and is patterned after, “things visible.” And further, as in the beginning man knew but little, words were few and simple; but as men advanced in knowledge, words took on a deeper meaning; and, as necessity required, new words were coined. Such is the history of language, in the Bible as well as in the world of science and letters. Because, then, the words first used to describe God were simple and physical, adapted only to the childhood state of man, shall we refuse the light since shed upon that question, and still clothe him in the rags of that poverty-stricken state? Is he indeed a being possessed of the body and passions of a man? Your system rejects the doctrine that God is pure spirit! And so of your Heaven, the primary meaning of which is wholly physical; and all this comes from the unscholarly and absurd habit of attributing physical properties to spirit. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 33.16
Your illustration drawn from horse-flesh and horse-life may do very well for one occupying your stand point, but wholly fails when viewed from mine. 1 Your order in the creation of the horse is imaginary. No Such account is given in the Bible. 2. The horse is not made in the image of God, and here is the rub! In so far as the animal substance and life of both horse and man are concerned, I suppose them subject to about the same laws. But in neither of these does the image of God lie. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 33.17
Concerning your proposition, “that man is mortal,” I again say, that the Bible says that man’s body is mortal. This I believe. You say man’s spirit, or soul, is mortal This the Bible does not say. I believe the Bible but disbelieve you. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 33.18
I do not seek to evade the doctrine, that the “dead know not anything.” What I deny is, that the spirit dies with the body. If the Bible says that the spirit dies with the body, why can you not quote the passage in which it is found? That men in the grave do not “remember anything done under the sun,” I heartily believe, for that is what both reason and Scripture teach. That in certain instances the words life and spirit may have the same meaning, may be true, but not usually. I will give an instance or two, John 3:6—“That which is born of the spirit is spirit.” 1 Corinthians 2:11—“For what man knoweth the things of a man save the spirit of man that is in him?” It would be impossible to put the word life in the place of the word spirit, and make sense in these passages, as in many others. Consciousness is nowhere affirmed of life; It is the spirit that knows and wills. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 33.19
You say that Matthew 10:28, was written to assure the disciples that men could not deprive them of their future existence. But is that the plain teaching of that text? Is there any evidence that the disciples needed any such assurance as that? But upon the supposition that that is what the Saviour meant, how did he teach them this? Why, by telling them, that although men might kill the body, they could not kill the soul. So then the assurance Christ gives, that there is a hereafter for man, is that the soul does not die with the body. Well, then, let it be so! ARSH July 4, 1865, page 34.1
I close this article with a consideration of your argument upon “immortality an object of hope, and to be sought after.” Romans 2:7—“To those who by patient continuance in well-doing, seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life.” You may be surprised when I tell you, I consider this your strong text. In listening to conversations upon this subject, I have always noticed that this text was quoted with an air of triumph. I must then approach your citadel with care; And, 1st. If I understand you, you make immortality and eternal life one and the same thing. But this would be plainly tautological. You must then say, that glory and honor and immortality are one with eternal life. If so, then immortality and eternal life certainly are not equivalent. 2nd. No other writer than Paul exhorts us to seek after immortality, and he only in this text. 3rd. But the immortality promised to the saints, and spoken of in 1 Corinthians, is applied to the body in the resurrection state, and does not refer to the spirit. 4th. But this same writer, Philippians 3:11, speaks of striving to attain unto the resurrection of the dead; and in Acts 26:7, he calls the resurrection, the “hope” of Israel, because founded in a “promise” of God. 5th. But the resurrection per se takes effect upon the wicked as well as the just. But certainly Paul did not seek to attain unto the resurrection of the wicked. It follows, then, that he strove to attain that resurrection which is the portion of the just; the desirableness of which is found not simply in being raised, but in circumstances attending it. Such, then, I understand to be the immortality sought after; not existence, but a blessed, a happy existence. The existence comes without our seeking; but the blessed existence is to be sought after as a thing of hope. I am aware that you will say, that immortality means incorruption. But you will bear in mind the fact, that the primary sense of all language is physical and earthly. Even God, and, as I have said Heaven and hell, are thus described. But words take on other significations, being modified by their surroundings. Such is the universal law of language; When, then, I look at the word immortality, in the text under consideration, and take it in the light of its surroundings, I am satisfied that what Paul means is. “Seek for a blessed future, such as is the inheritance of the saints.” To interpret him as saying, “Seek for a future eternal existence,” is, I think, to fall far be low the mark. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 34.2
As ever yours, N. V. Hull.
Eld. R. F. Cottrell’s Sixth Reply
Eld. N. V. Hull: ARSH July 4, 1865, page 34.3
Dear Brother,—Yours of Recorder, June 1, is received. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 34.4
You can scarcely express your astonishment at what you call my “bold and unwarrantable statement,” that the Bible is silent concerning the soul’s immortality in its present state, or until it shall put it on at the resurrection. You ask for a text that says the soul puts on immortality. You say, ‘Had you said the body puts on immortality at the resurrection of the just, it Would have been well. But your theory required an addition to the simple Scripture statement, and for its sake, you made the addition!” A grave charge indeed! Because the word soul is, not in the text referred to, I am charged with adding to the Scriptures. But if I had added body, another word that is not in the text, yon say, “It would have been well.” Why? Simply because your theory required that addition. The text is found in 1 Corinthians 15:53. It says, “This mortal must put on immortality.” Whatever of man is mortal will put on immortality. What is mortal? You say, the body. I admit it. But have you proved any part of man immortal? No. On the contrary, I have proved the entire man mortal, by plain Bible expressions. Man is a soul. When he received the breath of life he “became a living soul.” But the Scriptures call him, “mortal man.” Then the living soul is mortal. The Lord did not talk to the senseless matter of which man was composed, but to the living soul, when he said, “In the day thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die.” Hence, if the living soul transgressed—and that alone was capable of transgression—it was to die. What was the meaning of this threatening of death? It was simply this: that the living soul was to cease to live. It was defined by the sentence, “Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.” And that this penalty should not fail of execution, man was excluded from the tree of life, “lest he should eat and live forever.” The object of this was, that the living soul should not live forever. Now when Paul says, “this mortal,” he means all that is mortal belonging to man; and this certainly includes the living soul. Therefore, though the word soul is not in the text, yet it teaches that the soul puts on immortality at the resurrection of the just. It is the soul that shouts the victory over that personified power which had, for a season, apparently been the victor over it. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 34.5
You say, “All I have attempted concerning the idea of the soul’s immortality, is to prove that the soul does not necessarily die with the body!” Indeed! That is attempting very little. I presume you would have attempted more, had the proof been at hand. You wish me and our readers to believe the soul immortal, but, during a year’s discussion of the point, have not yet attempted to prove it! I think it time you yield the point, or attempt the proof. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 34.6
To prove the existence of human spirits separate from their bodies, you quote. Acts 23:8—“For the Sadducees say there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit; but the Pharisees confess both.” On these questions, Paul took ground with the Pharisees. So do we. We believe in the resurrection most faithfully, and think it of some value, too, as giving life to those that are dead. We believe, also, that all the angels of God are “ministering spirits,” and that there are such things as “spirits of devils,” which are capable, when permitted, of “working miracles.” These things we read; and believing them most fully, we are not Sadducees. But the text is still wanting that speaks of human spirits, as living, conscious beings, separate from their bodies. True, the disciples were frightened, because they thought they saw a spirit, and Jesus told them, “A spirit hath not flesh and bones as you see me have.” I believe the testimony. When those spirits from Heaven have appeared to men, they have appeared in the form of men; but they have not flesh and bones as men have. The dying Stephen prayed, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” This would be my prayer under like circumstances; and I should do so, believing, with Paul, “that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day.” Man’s spirit is not a being, but that endowment which man received by the inbreathing of the Almighty. It will be received again at the resurrection, and to the righteous, this gift will be eternal life. This doctrine of human spirits, living, conscious, and active, separate from their bodies, cannot be removed from the New Testament; for it is not there. All that is said of “disembodied spirits” is fabulous. The Bible reveals no such thing. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 34.7
You admit the possibility that Greenfield is right in his definitions of the Greek terms used in Romans 1:23, where God and man are contrasted as incorruptible and corruptible, immortal and mortal, imperishable and perishable I think he is Hence, the text describes man as “corruptible, perishable, liable to decay, mortal.” This covers the whole ground of man’s nature in this respect, unless you can find proof that some part of man is incorruptible, immortal, undying, imperishable. All proof of this kind is wanting. But seeing your weakness at this point, you attempt to, cover your retreat by the strange request that I should quote “Greenfield, or any other accepted lexicographer, where Aphtharton, [I presume you mean phtharton,] when applied to the spirit of man, is made to mean corruptible in a physical sense.” This paragraph of yours is very remarkable. The text speaks of the “incorruptible God” and “corruptible man.” The meaning is obvious, and not to be evaded. But you speak of “Aphtharton, [phtharton,] when applied to decayable substances,” just as if it is sometimes applied to undecayable substances. The fact is when phthartos is applied to a substance, it signifies that it is perishable. It is for you to give instances of its application to incorruptible things. The terms corruptible and incorruptible are defined in Scripture: “Not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth forever.” That which liveth and abideth forever is incorruptible. That which is corruptible, then, does not live and abide forever. This is the case with “corruptible man.” The instances you quote of the use of the words corrupt and corrupted, are rendered from other Greek terms, and not from phthartos. I do say that phthartos might not be used in a like figurative sense, but it is not in the New Testament. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 34.8
I accept of your lecture upon the philosophy of language and the diversified use of words, as a diversion from the point at issue. I do not dispute the various figurative senses of words. Consequently your instructions on this point, though good, are not necessary. Would it not be better to busy yourself in finding the Scripture language, literal or figurative, which proves that man, by nature, is immortal? This would be more acceptable to those of our readers who wish to ascertain the truth on this subject. Please come to the point. I will accept of figurative language in all cases where there is evidence that it is figurative. Any language to prove your position; but alas! it is all wanting. But I cannot allow you to make the most clearly literal expressions of Scripture (all of which are against you) figurative, merely because words are sometimes used in a figurative sense, and because the necessities of your theory demand it. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 34.9
I have no “theory that the spirit decays with the body;” and no “unscholarly and absurd habit of attributing physical properties to spirit.” Man was made of dust; and when the dust returns to the earth as it was, the spirit communicated by the “inbreathing of the Almighty,” which gives man life and understanding returns to God who gave it. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 34.10
No; God did not create the horse in his own image; but he created him and gave him, as well as man, the breath of life. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 34.11
Yes; “the Bible says man’s body is mortal It also says man is mortal.” There is no contradiction in the two expressions; one does not disprove the other. You always find the man where his body is. I have not said that “man’s spirit is mortal.” The spirit is not a separate entity or being. But we frequently read in the Hebrew Scriptures of “dead souls.” ARSH July 4, 1865, page 34.12
You say, “I do not seek to evade the doctrine, that the ‘dead know not anything.’ What I deny is, that the spirit dies with the body.” Until you prove that man has two distinct lives, one in the body and the other in the spirit, there is no demand for a text to prove that the spirit dies with the body. One death is sufficient to place a man in that state in which he knows nothing. Has the body, while living, knowledge? If so, living matter can think; and an immaterial soul to do the thinking is unnecessary. But if it is the soul alone that has knowledge in life, then it is the soul that knows nothing in death; for it is the same that knows while man is living, that knows nothing when he is dead. The text says, “The living know,” “But the dead know not.” Which horn will you have? According to your theory, there is no change in respect to man’s knowledge at death only that he knows more than he did before; for he now knows what death is, and how a dead man feels, a thing he never knew before in all his life. Now it seems to me this theory is a fable, or the text untrue I hold to the text, however “unscholarly” it may be. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 34.13
You claim that “the assurance Christ gives, that there is a hereafter to man, is that the soul does not die with the body.” I reply, the assurance he gives of a future life is the resurrection. He says, “And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one that seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day.” John 6:39, 40. From this text, we have for the assurance, that Christ’s people will not be lost in death, that he will raise them up again at the last day. “That I should lose nothing,” he says, “but raise it up. And the condition of everlasting life in the resurrection is faith in Christ. “Every one that seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life.” Will unbelievers have everlasting life, too? Thus it is proved that the resurrection is the assurance Christ gives of a future life. “Well, then, let it be so!” ARSH July 4, 1865, page 34.14
It is, indeed, most fatal to your theory, that we are taught to seek for immortality, and that eternal life is set before us as an object of hope. “To those who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honor, and immortality, eternal life.” Romans 2:7. There is a shade of difference between the terms, immortality, and eternal life; but when the apostle promises eternal life to those who seek for immorality, he doubtless intends to promise the very thing for which they seek. Aphtharsia, the word here rendered immortality, signifies incorruptibility, and by implication, immortality. And Greenfield refers us to 1 Corinthians 15:42, 53, 54, to illustrate its meaning. Now you will not dispute me on the meaning of the word in these texts. You will not dispute that when the apostle says, concerning the resurrection, “It is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption,” that he does not mean that his people are buried in moral corruption, and raised in moral incorruption, but that these decaying bodies will be made imperishable, and having life in that incorruptible, immortal state, they will have immortal, enduring, endless or eternal life as the result. Now this incorruptible and consequent eternal life, which is to be given at the resurrection of the just, is the very thing the apostle exhorts us to seek for, and assures us we may obtain, by patient continuance in well doing. Romans 2:7. This “first resurrection,” the resurrection of life,” over the subjects of which the “second death hath no power,” is the one to which the apostle so ardently desired to attain Philippians 3:11. It is a resurrection “out from among the dead,” i. e., the one in which none but the righteous have a part, all the wicked being left behind to slumber in the dust for a thousand years, and then come forth, not to the “resurrection of life”, but to the “resurrection of damnation;” not to incorruption, but to “utterly perish in their own corruption.” Revelation 20:4-6; John 5:29; Acts 24:15; Philippians 3:11; 1 Corinthians 15:54; 2 Peter 2:12. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 35.1
Your first objection to our view on this test is, that it makes it tautological. We can excuse the apostle for promising the very thing sought for, since he varies the terms to avoid tautology. You may qualify the terms by “blessed” or “happy,” a thing the apostle was capable of doing, had he thought it necessary, and still the test is not improved. There is no doubt that that life will be blessed; there will be “glory and honor,” as well as immortality there. Your second objection is that “no other writer than Paul exhorts us to seek after immortality.” Well, one testimony is sufficient if it is well corroborated. If the general tenor of the other scriptures contradicted this idea of Paul’s, as they do your view of Matthew 10:28, then we might rightly infer that he did not mean to be understood in a strictly literal sense. But Paul’s idea in this text is corroborated by the whole tenor of the scriptures on this subject. I cannot quote a tithe of the testimony in perfect harmony with this exhortation of the apostle, understanding him in the literal sense. I will merely refer you to our Saviour’s numerous exhortations to come to him that they might have life, to keep the commandments in order to “enter into life,” or have right to the tree of life, etc. All these, and a multitude of other texts, perfectly harmonize with Paul’s exhortation to seek for immortality. There is no necessity, then, unless created by a false theory of forcing this evidently literal language to mean something else. If there is a testimony that does not harmonize with this idea of seeking for immortality, please quote it. Ah! there is the difficulty. There are none. Your other objections I have already answered, and it is unnecessary to repeat. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 35.2
Olshausen I have not. I have no objection to what you quote from him. To be condemned to everlasting destruction is, certainly, everlasting damnation. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 35.3
And now, what progress can we report in this discussion on the nature of man? You have proved by unquestionable evidence that the body is mortal. I have proved by testimony equally clear and unquestionable, that the entire man is mortal—that the living soul is subject to death, and that death is not merely a loss of happiness, but a cessation of life—that it was decreed, in consequence of sin, that man should not live forever; and, consequently, it is only through faith in Christ that man can have eternal life. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 35.4
Have you found any testimony that any part of man is destined, by nature, or independent of redemption through Christ, to exist in conscious being eternally? Not a word of it; and nothing that points a single step that way, except your claim that Matthew 10:28 proves that the soul outlives the body. This I have admitted would be a fair inference from the peculiar phraseology of this single text, were it not contradicted by positive assertions on this point, and the whole tenor of Bible teaching. And I have proved by the text itself, taking your own stand-point, that the soul is mortal, because the Lord threatens to kill it in the same sense in which the body is killed; and you have been unable to present a single plausible objection to my argument. But should we admit all you claim on the text, it would only carry you one step beyond the death of the body, all further than this, is only what your philosophy says must be so. I am willing to submit our discussion of this text to the candid reader, who has carefully examined what has been said. Such reader will see that you have no Bible testimony for the natural immortality of any part of man. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 35.5
It is an idea too absurd to be entertained for a moment, that God created man with an immortal soul—a soul that must exist in happiness or woe to the endless ages of eternity; and that he has given him a revelation of his origin, present state, and future destiny, in which he has entirely omitted to inform him of this most important and thrilling fact if it be a fact. But it is a fact that all that we hear of the immortal, never dying soul, and deathless spirit comes from a source outside of the Bible. Ministers who believe the doctrine are not so remiss and careless as to keep it from then hearers; and I do not believe that the God of the Bible would have kept it back, were it the truth. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 35.6
In conclusion, I wish to advertise you, that when we get upon the other part of the question—the destiny of man—I shall not allow you to argue in a circle I shall not admit that certain texts upon future punishment prove the eternal conscious misery of the wicked, because the soul is immortal, and that the soul is immortal because it is never to be delivered from its Just condemnation and punishment. First prove the soul immortal, then you may claim that “eternal damnation” will result in eternal misery. But this you have not, and cannot do, simply because the testimony is not, the Bible plainly teaching the reverse. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 35.7
Yours, seeking for immortality, ARSH July 4, 1865, page 35.8
R. F. Cottrell.
Who Have Mercy, and Who Are Hardened
“For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion upon whom I will have compassion. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy.” “Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.” Romans 9:15, 16, 18. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 35.9
The Scriptures plainly show the character of the persons on whom the Lord will have mercy and compassion. “Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; and let him return unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon him, and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.” Isaiah 54:7. “He that covereth his sins shall not prosper; but whose confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy.” Proverbs 28:13. “Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” Matthew 11:28. “God is no respecter of persons; but in every nation, he that feareth him and worketh righteousness is accepted with him.” Acts 10:34, 35, if language can express anything, it leaves no possible doubt respecting the persons on whom the Lord will have mercy and compassion. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 35.10
The sixteenth verse in the passages shows that “willing” and “running” are not the causes of salvation, but the conditions on which it is received. A brief comparison will explain the subject. Suppose a man of wealth should prepare a table with plenty of wholesome food, and then give the information to a number of starving persons, who have not, and are not able to procure food, that if they will eat they may have as much as they need, for nothing. It is, therefore, certain that neither their willingness to eat, nor their eating, procures or pays for the provisions; yet both the willingness and the eating are necessary conditions, but the food is of the wealthy man who shows mercy. It is also evident that if those persons starve it is their own fault. So all the provisions of the gospel were made for the race before they came into the world, on conditions of faith and obedience, or of willing and running; and although both of these together cannot merit salvation, yet the want of either of them is sufficient to ruin the soul. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 35.11
In reference to the 18th verse, I have only to show whom God will harden; having before shown upon whom he will have mercy. According to the gospel by Paul, God will indirectly harden those who continue to rebel against him. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 35.12
The following passage illustrates the point: “Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and to four footed beasts and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves: who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshiped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed forever.” Romans 1:21, 25. From this passage it appears that God gave them up to uncleanness and vile affections, not because he had predestinated them to be wicked, but because of their own willful rebellion against him. Again the apostle asserts, “Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.” 2 Thessalonians 2:9-11. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 35.13
From this passage it is also evident that God sends men “strong delusions,” not because God hath predestinated them to wickedness, but because they receive not the truth in the love of it. Therefore although these errors and delusions of infidelity have ruined many, to them must be ascribed their destruction, as they brought these delusions entirely upon themselves, without any decree to that effect by their heavenly Father.—Herald of Gospel Liberty. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 35.14
Slander
The more prominent any person’s character is, the more likely he is to suffer in this way,—there being in the heart of every man, unless greatly subdued by grace, a pleasure in hearing anything which may sink others to his level, or lower them in the estimation of the world. We seem to ourselves elevated in proportion as others are depressed. Under such circumstances I derive consolation from the following reflections:— ARSH July 4, 1865, page 35.15
1. My enemy, whatever evil he says of me, does not reduce me so low as he would if he knew all concerning me that God knows. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 35.16
2. In drawing the balance, as between the debtor and creditor, I find that if I have been robbed of pence, there are pounds and talents placed to my account to which I have no just title. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 35.17
3. If man has his “day,” God will have his—Charles Simeon. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 35.18
The Review and Herald
“Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.”
BATTLE CREEK, MICH., THIRD-DAY, JULY 4, 1865.
URIAH SMITH, EDITOR.
The Lord’s Supper
is it to be celebrated weekly?
A correspondent makes inquiry on this point. Having read works on present truth, somewhat, he so far endorses then teaching, as to acknowledge that the New Testament furnishes no evidence in favor of the first day of the week as a day of religious rest and worship. But he seems to think that day is pointed out as the one upon which the communion should be celebrated, and refers to Acts 20:7. And having belonged to a class of professed Christians who hold that view, he inquires what the text does mean, and where there is direction for the time of celebrating the Lord’s supper, if not there. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.1
Acts 20:7, reads, “And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread,” etc. Assuming that the words, “to break bread,” here refer to the Lord’s supper, we take the position distinctly that the New Testament gives us no stated period for its observance. If it was confined to any particular day of the week, that day would undoubtedly have been chosen upon which it was instituted. But this is commonly supposed to have been Thursday. Certainly it was not the first day of the week. And if Acts 20:7, is an instance of its celebration on that day, it is sufficient proof that no particular day is designated for that ordinance. And this view is further confirmed by Acts 2:46, which declares that at one time the church in Jerusalem broke bread daily. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.2
But the expression, “to break bread,” certainly does not always refer to the Lord’s supper. When the two disciples returned from Emmaus they told the eleven and others, at Jerusalem, that the Lord had risen, and that he was known of them in “breaking of bread.” Luke 24:35. What was this occasion of breaking of bread? It was as verses 29 and 30 in form us, when they had reached Emmaus as the day was far spent, and constrained the Saviour to stop with them, and had taken their seat to partake of the ordinary and closing meal of the day. This was called breaking of bread, but this was not the Lord’s supper. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.3
Come back now to Acts 20, and read verse 11. After Paul had been down and healed the young man who fell from the window, we read, “When, there fore, he had broken bread and eaten, and talked a long while, even till break of day, so he departed.” Here the breaking of bread did not take place till after midnight. When it did take place, Luke describes it by the term eating. When he had “broken bread, and eaten.” Is such language as this ever applied to the Lord’s supper? We do not come to the Lord’s table to eat. Paul sternly rebukes any such irregularity, in 1 Corinthians 11. “What?” says he, “have ye not houses to eat and to drink in?” And again, “If any man hunger let him eat at home, that ye come not together unto condemnation.” ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.4
It would seem then that Acts 20 does not refer to the Lord’s supper at all. Dr. Bloomfield in the notes to his Greek Testament, admits that verse 11, does not refer to it, and gives this as the general opinion of commentators this side of Grotius, a. d. 1600. And the only method he proposes of finding the Eucharist in that chapter, is to suppose that it was celebrated at the commencement of the meeting. But the record does not state this; nor is there any necessity or any place for such a supposition. The first thing Paul did was to preach. Next he healed the young man after midnight. Then he broke bread and ate, and then continued with the disciples, probably in social inter course (for the word rendered talked, in verse 11, is different from the word preached in verse 7), until break of day, and so departed. If this view is correct, Sunday-keepers need never again refer to Acts 20, for all the fact they have to work upon in that chapter is the Lord’s supper; and that is not there. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.5
But allowing verse 7 to refer to the Lord’s supper, does not the language denote its regular weekly recurrence? We answer, No. Some try to make this appear by laying great stress upon the word when. “Upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread.” And they have argued that this expression denoted a regular meeting, just as we would say, “And on the fourth of July when we celebrate our national independence,” denoting that it is a regular yearly occurrence. But there would have been no opportunity for this play upon the word when, had not the translators here taken a singular liberty with the original. There is no word in the original that corresponds to the word, when. The Greek reads simply and literally like this: “And on the first day of the Week, the disciples being assembled to break bread Paul preached,” etc. Whiting and Sawyer so translate it. It is a simple announcement of what then took place, without any intimation that it had ever taken place before, or ever would take place again. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.6
Another proof that the New Testament does not fix the time of celebrating the Lord’s supper, is found in Paul’s language in 1 Corinthians 11:26: “For as often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord’s death till he come.” What language could intimate more clearly that this institution was left, as to the frequency of its occurrence, to be regulated by the church. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.7
Might is Ever on the side of Right
Not in the “corrupted currents of this world.” Here, power is often on the side of the oppressor. The strong nation will trample upon the rights of the weak. And so it is with individuals. It is well illustrated by a little poem which I read many years ago upon the doctrine that Might makes Right. I quote from memory. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.8
“A sparrow perched upon a bough,
Spied a poor beetle creep below,
And picked him up. “O spare me spare!”
The insect prayed, but vain his prayer.
“Wretch” cries the murderer, “hold thy tongue,
For thou art weak, and I am strong.”
ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.9
A hawk behind him, and in haste,
Sharpens his beak for a repast,
And pounces plump upon him. “Oh!”
Exclaims the sparrow, “Let me go!”
“Wretch” cries the murderer, “hold thy tongue,
For thou art weak, and I am strong.”
ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.10
The hawk was munching up his prey,
When a stout eagle steered that way,
And seized upon him. “Sure, comrade,
You’ll spare my life; we’re both of a trade.”
“Wretch!” cries the murderer, “hold thy tongue,
For thou art weak, and I am strong.”
ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.11
A sportsman saw the eagle fly,
And shot, and brought him from the sky.
The dying bird could only groan,
“Tyrant! what mischief have I done?”
“Wretch!” cries the murderer, “hold thy tongue,
For thou art weak and I am strong.”
ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.12
“Tis thus that man to man behaves;
Witness the planter and his slaves!
‘Tis thus that State oppresses State;
And civil freedom meets its fate.
The weaker States must hold their tongue,
For England, France & Co. are strong.”
ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.13
But though in this world, power is on the side of the oppressor, and he justifies himself in doing wrong because he has the power to do so; yet Almighty Power is on the side of right, and sooner or later will vindicate it. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.14
This truth, was entirely left out of the account by those who predicted that the North could never conquer the South and put down the rebellion. They did not recognize the fact that there is an overruling Power that disposes national events, as well as others; and that this Power, ever on the side of right—ever on the side of the oppressed, and against the oppressor—would eventually strike terror into the hearts of traitors, and speak in vindication of the right. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.15
But individual crimes do not meet their full retribution in this world. Nevertheless the day of reckoning is sure to come. Right will be vindicated and wrong punished, and there is no possibility of escape, for the power to accomplish it is on the side of the Justice that Wills it. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.16
In this world the true Christian finds himself with a very small minority. Still he need not be discouraged; for taking into consideration the aggregate of the universe, he finds an overwhelming majority on his side. And though he may suffer for awhile, yet the time will surely come when he will be vindicated and rewarded; for eternal Might stands pledged to vindicate and reward the right. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.17
R. F. Cottrell.
Report from Bro. Loughborough
Bro. Smith: Since my last report I have attended several excellent meetings in Illinois and Wisconsin. The first, at Clyde, Ill., held from June 3rd to the 6th. This meeting was in the field of my labors during the winter of 1857. It was one of interest to me, as it called up a pleasing reminiscence of past scenes. I was glad to witness in the congregation several who embraced the truth in 1857, and to find them still pressing on. Many who were children then, have since embraced the truth. Several good brethren and sisters who then met with us are now, sleeping in Jesus. Others have moved to other localities. I had the privilege of speaking five times, with good freedom, to this church in their commodious house of worship, and to full and attentive congregations. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.18
Among others, while here, I saw those who opposed the truth when I was trying in past times to call the attention of the people to God’s commandments. An Elder Y—was of the number, who had in his hasty zeal to establish Sunday-keeping, told us that the disciples of Christ took up collections every Sunday! As he could find but one text, 1 Corinthians 16:2, to favor the idea of a collection on that day, he told us that the word “fellowship” in the New Testament meant a collection or contribution. We of course claimed the right to substitute his definition of the word fellowship for the word itself. So the brethren gave to Paul and Barnabas the right hand of a collection, or, perhaps, gave them a contribution-box. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.19
While these men, who used their wily schemes to overthrow God’s law, have in their lives demonstrated the insufficiency of such a theory to hold men, the plain truth of God’s law has steadily risen, and the numbers have greatly increased there of those who will honor God by obeying him. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.20
Our interesting meetings at Monroe and Hundred Mile Grove, Wis., have already been reported by Bro. White. The brethren and sisters expressed gratitude for the encouragement they found in these meetings. For myself I felt that faith, hope, and courage, were increased while listening to the truth, especially to the themes of healthy and holy living, introduced by Bro. and Sr. White. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.21
We are now on our way to Princeville, Ill., stopping for the night, waiting for the cars, at La Salle. From the appearance of the majority of the houses, and one third of the people, in the business part of the town one is not favorably impressed with the place. About every fourth door is a dram shop, Swarming with customers. Abundance of idleness seems to be here, which will account for the dilapidated condition of the town, to some extent. I presume there are noble exceptions here as we observe a better class of buildings, and a couple of tidy Protestant churches, on the higher ground of the city. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.22
We are strikingly reminded here of the degeneracy in the morals of the people of this age. Drunkenness profanity, and incivility, are on the increase. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.23
This last expression reminds me of a circumstance that occurred as Bro. Ingraham and myself were passing from Monroe to the Hundred Mile Grove meeting. A stranger to us, who it appeared knew Bro. I., came up behind us and commenced conversation about weather, crops, etc. Finally he said to Bro. Ingraham: ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.24
“Is Mr. living at Monroe?” ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.25
“Yes.” ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.26
“How is he getting along?” ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.27
“Finely. He gets two dollars a day for his work, and is trying to do well.” ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.28
“Is he a good member of your church?” ARSH July 4, 1865, page 36.29
“Yes. We have never seen any thing out of the way in him.” ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.1
“Well,” said the stranger, “I hope he will go to h----ll, and everybody with him that has confidence in him.” ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.2
The man, and the one he was speaking of, were both strangers to me, but had we been ever so well acquainted, and he a savage of the forest, such an uncivil attack in the streets, or elsewhere, is without excuse. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.3
J. N. Loughborough.
Letter from Bro. Bourdeau
Bro. White: I still deem it a privilege to contribute a few lines for the Review, and would say to the brethren and sisters that my mind is generally clear and cheerful; that I am enjoying rest, and am doing as well as could be expected. I do not expect to get well at once. In fact, I do not desire to recover in a moment. If I were to receive the blessing of health suddenly, I fear I should not duly appreciate it, and have sufficient experience to retain it, and make a good use of it. I do not want this great blessing to squander it away foolishly, but to spend it to the glory of God. And I want this blessing on the principle of reform. I do expect to recover gradually as a result of earnest and persevering efforts, and in answer to the prayers of those who have an interest in my welfare. I still request you to remember me in your prayers. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.4
Before Bro. and Sr. White suggested to have me come to this place for my health, my future prospects looked uncertain. I did not know but that my earthly career was about to close, and that I must soon be in the grave. But I am happy to now say that the future is brightening up before me, and that my courage is increasing daily. I believe that I shall still live and praise the Lord and declare his goodness, which will be a blessed privilege to me. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.5
I think I realize in a measure the goodness of the Lord, which has followed me all the days of my existence, and especially since I have become connected with the commandment-keepers. I enjoy the Spirit of the Lord at times, and have been blessed while praying for the messengers. Truly I feed in a rich pasture and, as it were, by the side of still waters. The Lord is kind and merciful and cares for me. He gives his children rest even in this life. Christ at times seems very precious to me. I delight to contemplate his great love and condescension, and to feast upon the riches of his grace. May I be very grateful, humble and faithful for temporal and spiritual blessings; and may these blessings ever lead me nearer the Lord land his people. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.6
D. T. Bouedeau.
Dansville, N. Y., June 25th, 1865.
Spiritual Gifts. Vol. III
The feelings and impressions which I received on first reading Spiritual Gifts, Vol. iii, were strongly revived on lately reading it, and I feel that it would be a pleasing privilege to give expression to them in the Review. I doubt not others have received like impressions; or if they have not considered the matter in the same light, I presume they will respond to my feelings, on reading and reflecting. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.7
The idea has become somewhat prevalent, and is quite often expressed, that the morality of the Old Testament is defective, and its standard of godliness, of piety and devotion, far below that of the New Testament. And those who would not concede so much have yet often been perplexed (I know not what word better to use), at the aberrations of some of the best men of olden times, apparently unrebuked if not apparently approved of. This may arise in part from the brevity of the record, and partly from a want of sufficient carefulness of study of the corresponding facts. We take the life of Enoch: How rich in incidents exemplary and instructive, must have been those many years of unswerving integrity and faithful godliness. Yet his memoir is embraced in three short words: He “walked with God.” These would be too scanty for a modern epitaph, yet they form a Bible biography of a most important life. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.8
The case of Abraham taking Hagar as his wife; that of Rebecca’s artifice, and Jacob’s deception, with others of a kindred nature, have been stumbling blocks to many readers of the Old Testament. But when we read in the volume above referred to, of the family difficulties, the trials and cares of Abraham, the direct results of his indiscreet action; of the grief of Rebecca, and her separation from her son as the consequence of her error; of Jacob’s penitence, and his long continued wrestling with the angel, who continued to press his sin upon his notice, and thus brought him to the deepest humility, all occasion of stumbling is far removed; and the scene is so far changed that we behold at a single glance the straitness of the way, and the necessity of spirituality in worship in that age as well as in the present, to please God. We see in a clearer light the unchangeable character of God, and his ways to man are fully vindicated. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.9
So strongly was this impressed upon my mind in reading that book, that I can say with all cheerfulness, that if the gifts of God’s, Spirit vouchsafed to the church of this age had done this service only, I Should yet thank God that it has increased and strengthened my love for the Old Testament, and that I can read the Bible record of ancient times, especially the memoirs of ancient saints, in the light of the instruction of that volume, with greater interest and pleasure than ever before. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.10
J. H. Waggoner.
Health
But very few persons, in this degenerate age, realize the moral obligation that they are under to obey the laws of their being, whereby they may preserve and improve their health. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.11
In a moral point of view the mass regard it of but little consequence whether they have health or not. They will even sacrifice it, and by so doing, even life itself, rather than deny the carnal appetites. They view health from a selfish stand-point, not that they may glorify God in their bodies as well as their spirits, which are his, but that they may gratify their morbid appetites and desires. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.12
Said a person not long since in my hearing, something in effect like the following: “Were it not for my anxiety to excel in my business, and become a noted man in my profession, I would never live on healthy and unstimulating food; but would live as others do, though it might shorten my life ten or fifteen years.” ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.13
And this is by no means an isolated case. The world is full of people that never dream of its being a sin to be sick; not stopping to think that sickness is generally brought on by gross violation of the laws which God has implanted in our beings. God made with a capacity to enjoy and retain health, if he would only obey his laws. It was only by disobedience, that sickness, pain and death were ever brought into this world. And God has not only endowed man with this capacity to retain his health when in the possession of it, but has implanted in his organism a living or recuperative force, whereby in the majority of instances he may regain his health after he has injured it by a violation of the laws of his being, if he will but return to and continue in, the obedience of these laws. But as this requires some self-denial on his part, but few have the moral courage and fortitude to do it; for “the carnal mind is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.” I do not deny but that mankind desire health, and in fact are decidedly anxious to be in possession of it, provided they can have it in their own way; but as strange as it may seem they are not so anxious for it as to be willing to comply with the conditions whereby it may be secured. They prefer poor health with the indulgence and gratification of their perverted appetites and desires, to good health and a perfect obedience to the laws of their organism. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.14
Dr. H. S. Lay.
Dansville, N. Y.
True friends are the whole world to one another; and he that is a friend to himself is also a friend to mankind. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.15
Characteristics of Jacob’s Sons
Considering them in the order as spoken of by their father in Genesis 49, Reuben is first in the discourse, being the eldest; but having committed heinous sins, he lost his birthright, and the pre-eminence in Jacob’s family was conferred upon Judah. Instability was the sin, the besetting sin, of Reuben. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.16
Simeon and Levi were distinguished for their cruelty in taking unfair measures in obtaining revenge up on the family of Shechem, for violation of the common rules of chastity. Their sin brought its effects. Le vi had no landed inheritance in Palestine, and Simeon’s inheritance was small, and less valuable than the other tribes, and their cruelty called for the prophetic denunciation, “I will scatter them in Israel.” ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.17
Judah being of a noble disposition, had distinguished himself at times by his manly and generous behaviour, and his course of conduct had won the respect and esteem of his brethren. His blessing was priority and eminence among his brethren. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.18
The tribe of Zebulon being disposed to traffic, were located along the Mediterranean Sea, and the tribe of Issachar (which was honorably mentioned in connexion with Zebulon) were famed for their skill and industry in agriculture, and for their love for their country. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.19
Dan as a judge is mentioned; but his serpent-like and crafty policy, is strongly anathematized. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.20
Gad, meaning in Hebrew, prosperity, seems not to have brought upon himself denunciations for out breaking sins, and was early settled in his inheritance east of Jordan. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.21
Asher is honorably noticed in prophecy, was located along the coast, and was rich as to the productions of the soil, and the mineral wealth of his inheritance. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.22
Naphtali is honorably noticed for his natural talents of oratory, or elegance of speech, and reference is probably had to the future poets and public men who would spring from this tribe. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.23
Joseph’s blessing is surpassed only by the blessing pronounced upon Judah. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.24
Benjamin though a favorite son, and possessing good qualities, is spoken of as possessing a wolf-like ferocity of disposition. We see he was as a tribe nearly exterminated at one time, although much blessed afterward, when united with Judah. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.25
In the notice of these tribes in Revelation 7, Dan seems to have been purposely omitted, and the half tribe of Manasseh fills his place. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.26
Why this tribe of Dan is omitted, may perhaps be from the abhorrence held against his serpent-like character, a tendency to strike the innocent and unsuspecting by a back handed blow, silly, venomously, before the victim could discover the viper, or from behind, after he had passed, when it was too late to make defense. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.27
Of all other besetments to be overcome, this one seems most of all to be hated, and avoided, and overcome; as we may fairly infer from the silent omission of the name of the tribe of Dan, in the enumeration of the twelve divisions of the one hundred and forty-foury-thousand. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.28
Jos. Clarke.
Report from Bro. Byington
Bro. White: My last report was from the Oneida church. As it is not the season of the year suitable for evening meetings, I spent most of the following week in visiting families of the Oneida and Windsor churches, who live quite scattered. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.29
A son of G. W. Newman, of Windsor, was cured of a habit of getting up nights in his sleep, by adopting the two-meal system. Some time after, his difficulty returned by his eating supper two evenings, when they had hired help. He then said to his mother, that he did not wish to eat three meals a day any longer. The children are satisfied with two meals, though quite young. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.30
June 17 and 18, we had three meetings, and the ordinances with the churches of Windsor and Charlotte, at the Allen school-house. The house was well filled, both Sabbath and first-day We felt freedom especially in attending the ordinances. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 37.31
Sabbath 24th, and 25th, we had four meetings with the church in Bunkerhill. Some difficulties recently existing had been settled. The church were united. They have a good Sabbath-school. Our meetings were well attended, and I felt blest with this people. I have visited twenty-five families the two weeks past, for the purpose of advancing their spiritual interests. The apostle says, he taught them publicly, and from house to house. Acts 20:20. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 38.1
John Byington.
Jackson, Mich, June 28, 1865.
A Deceived Heart
There are many cunning flatterers in the world, but the most cunning is man’s own heart. A man’s own heart will flatter him even about his sins. A man is a grasping miser—his heart flatters him that he is only exercising proper business habits. A man on the other hand is extravagant, and spends the good gifts of God upon his own evil passions; then his heart tells him he is a liberal soul. The heart turns “sweet into bitter, and bitter into sweet.” “Well,” says he, “it is true I drink too much, but then, there’s never a time I refuse a guinea toward a charity. It is true,” says he, “I am not certainly, what I should be, in my moral character, but still, see how regularly I keep to my church or chapel. It is true,” says he, “I don’t now and then mind a trick or two in my trade, but I am always ready to help the poor.” And so he imagines that he blots out an evil trait in his character with a good one, and thus flatters his own heart. And see how self-contented and satisfied he is. The poor child of God is trying his own heart with the deepest possible anxiety; this man knows of no such thing. He is always fully assured that he is right. The true believer is sitting down and turning over his accounts day by day, to see whether he be on the road to Heaven; or whether he has mistaken his evidence and has been deceived. But this man, self-satisfied, bandages his own eyes and walks deliberately on, singing at every step, straight to his own destruction. I know of some such now.—C. H. Spurgeon. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 38.2
Practical Infidelity
“An infidel, brother? Your room-mate an infidel?” ARSH July 4, 1865, page 38.3
“Yes, there are many in the University. Why are you so terrified? Do you think my life is in danger!” ARSH July 4, 1865, page 38.4
“I fear your principles are.” ARSH July 4, 1865, page 38.5
Oh! as to that, they do try to bring me over to their views; but I am little moved by all they can say. My danger lies in another direction—from skeptical believers, rather than from unbelieving skeptics. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 38.6
“What do you mean?” ARSH July 4, 1865, page 38.7
Why this. So far as I have observed, there is only here and there one among professing Christians, who really takes the Bible for the word of God, practically believing all its declarations, not because they accord with his own worldly maxims and the dictates of common sense, but because “the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it;” and all who do thus believe are called fanatics by their less credulous brethren. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 38.8
Now here are father and mother, long standing professors of religion. Do they believe the whole Bible? Christ says: “A man’s life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth.” If father believes that, why does he deny himself all leisure for intellectual and spiritual culture “that he may buy and sell and get gain?” If mother believes it why her pride in her accumulated household stores, her goodly wardrobe, fashionable furniture, and what she calls “style of living?” ARSH July 4, 1865, page 38.9
Notice these commands. “Love your enemies.” “Forgive if ye have aught against any.” “Pray for them which despitefully use you.” You know of father’s chronic bitterness toward Mr. A. for some real or fancied injury. Mr. A. has more than once tried to effect a reconciliation, but father cannot for give. Does mother, think you, ever pray for that tattling Miss S., whose slanderous reports have so annoyed her? One would not think so, judging from her talk. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 38.10
“Then here is the promise. ‘Trust in the Lord and do good; so shalt thou dwell in the land and verily thou shalt be fed.’ If I should act faith’ in that, ant devote myself to a life of charitable endeavor, taking God for my paymaster, father would think me insane. And as with the promises, so with the threatenings. Those having their fulfillment in this life, and in accordance with observation and experience, are credited, such as this, for example: ‘He that will not plow shall beg in harvest;’ but for those awful passages which threaten eternal loss to the finally impenitent, can it be that father believes them? You remember when I first started for the University, months ago, father took me to the station. While waiting for the train he talked to me freely, expressing his solicitude for my future welfare, his hope that I might acquit myself with honor, take a prominent rank in my class, and finally attain to professional eminence. Did he really believe that it would not profit me to gain the whole world and lose my own soul? Did he believe that by a collision of trains, a heedless crossing of the track, or a careless step upon the platform, I might that very day be sent to the bar of doom and an eternity of woe? ARSH July 4, 1865, page 38.11
“And do you think father is not a Christian?’ ARSH July 4, 1865, page 38.12
“I did not say that. I do not presume to judge. I am only saying that my faith in the Bible is less endangered by the arguments of avowed skeptics, than by the practical infidelity of professed believers.”—Congregationalist. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 38.13
Tell it to Jesus
Bury your sorrow—
The world has its share;
Bury it deeply,
Hide it with care.
ARSH July 4, 1865, page 38.14
Think of it calmly,
When curtained at night;
Tell it to Jesus—
And all will be right.
ARSH July 4, 1865, page 38.15
Tell it to Jesus—
He knoweth your grief;
Tell it to Jesus—
He’ll send you relief.
ARSH July 4, 1865, page 38.16
Gather the sunlight
Aglow on your way;
Gather the moonlight,
Each soft silver ray.
ARSH July 4, 1865, page 38.17
Hearts grown aweary,
With heavier woe,
Droop mid the darkness;
Go comfort them—go.
ARSH July 4, 1865, page 38.18
Bury your sorrow,
Let others be blest,
Give them the sunshine,
Tell Jesus the rest.
ARSH July 4, 1865, page 38.19
Surgical Analysis of the Cause of the Assassin Booth’s Death
Booth’s wound and death were so peculiar that they deserve notice and attention. A post-mortem examination was made; but the result has not been published; yet sufficient is known to enable us to state what were the parts injured, his sufferings, and his painful horrid death. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 38.20
The ball from the cavalry revolver entered on the left side, back of the head and below it, and passed out on the right side. He fell a helpless mass, unable to move, exclaiming: “I am finished!’ He was carried out of the burning barn and laid upon the grass and survived the wound four hours. He requested several times to be turned or moved from side to side, on his stomach, and asked to see his hands. When raised he gazed upon the helpless dead members, exclaiming, “useless—useless,” and asked more than once of those about him “to kill him,” thus to end his pain and sufferings. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 38.21
From these statements from those who were about him, and witnessed the “fussy doctor” probe his wound, we knew that he had a wound of the spinal cord, about the second cerebral vertebra, which was doubtless fractured. Such a wound would produce complete paralysis of the arms, legs, and lower portion of the trunk, while respiration and action of the heart would continue, as the nerves which proceed to those organs pass off from the cranium, and not from the spinal cord. The mind was clear and undisturbed, save from the shock of the wound and pain; but the brain was uninjured. It was a living, active mind, with a dead, helpless body, with the most excruciating, agonizing pain that a human body can be subject to. We once saw an officer with a similar wound lower down in the spine; his sufferings were terrible, and he prayed and implored all about him to “kill him” and end his misery. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 38.22
In Booth’s case the nerves of organic life, respiration and circulation, were uninjured, and the only muscles over which he could exert any volition were those of the head and face. From the moment the ball struck him he was dead and helpless, with a mind clear in intense suffering, a living witness of his own just punishment for his atrocious deed. Was there not the avenging hand of God upon him from the moment he exclaimed, upon the stage of Ford’s theater, “I am avenged!’ In the leap upon the stage the fibula—the small bone of the leg was fractured. For ten days and nights the forests and swamps were his home, with pain, and dread, and anguish. When discovered, the barn was fired; before him a sea of flame ready to engulf him, beyond the grave a still greater sea of flame awaiting him; and at that instant he received his peculiar, his wonderful wound, which we have described. Could the end of such a life have been more appalling? Was there not in all, the hand of an overruling Providence. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 38.23
Study of the Prophets
a word in season
The rectification of one error is a great thing; the redemption of one forgotten truth from beneath the pile of human tradition is a still greater; and the successful appeal to men to rally around Christ the Saviour-King is the greatest of all. May this loftiest of honors wreathe the brow of every man who is holding out the Bible to poor wandering humanity, and crying, “Lo! it is the proclamation of God, that he intends setting up a glorious kingdom upon this long distracted and bleeding planet.” ARSH July 4, 1865, page 38.24
Happily, the number of such men, though still few, is rapidly on the increase. Great and long-forgotten truths are beginning to reappear. Thoughtful men have been for many years ill at ease. Results at efforts to evangelize the world have been sadly out of proportion to the efforts themselves. What does God intend to do with this world,—this great, beautiful and populous world, the scene of so many miseries, so many mighty acts, so many Divine miracles, and so many and such long-continued struggles between the powers of good and evil? Shall it be converted? If so, by what instrumentality, and when?—and that “when?” has come back from every idol-temple and lofty mountain in a long and sickly echo. And again the dreary “when?” has gone up to heaven from the prayer meeting, fallen doubtfully from the preacher’s lips, rolled heavily in the large missionary meeting, and passed around the globe like a desolate thing seeking a resting place, and finding none. Or, does God intend suddenly to destroy the works of his hands to set fire to the earth, and sweep it to destruction, just at the time when multitudes were beginning to hope that signs of better days were budding forth to gladden the eyes of the nations? Shall the earth—Adam’s earth, man’s earth. Christ’s earth—speedily be seen by startled angels flying in its orbit through the heavens, one vast globe of intensely heated fire, like the steamship in flames rushing madly through the hissing sea? Such awful questions as these have long engaged the thoughts of devout thinkers, but no satisfactory answer was obtained. Some few men, however, hinted that it might be well to open the books of prophecy, and to try to realize the import of the visions of holy seers. But the habits, prejudices, and theories of the churches and pastors were all against that. “Meddle not with prophecy. “It cannot be understood.” “Preach the gospel.” “Let prophecy alone.” Such were the precepts of our teachers. Well, but we may ask, What shall we read, if not prophecy? How much Bible will be left to us, if all its predictions be excluded? Does it honor the Holy Spirit to say that prophecy cannot be understood? Is it not far more likely that he intended us to be made acquainted with leading facts, by presenting them in appropriate language, than that he designed to speak so obscurely that in effect it should amount to entire silence? Surely he is the Revealer, not the Concealer. Hath not God revealed them to us by his Spirit, that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God? Does not Paul speak of the guilt of the people and rulers of Jerusalem, in not knowing the voice of the prophets which were read every Sabbath-day? Does not Peter say that we do well to take heed to the sure word of prophecy, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place? Does not John, in his preface to the Apocalypse, say, “Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things that are written therein, for the time is at hand?” Was it not by consulting the prophecy of Jeremiah that the captive Daniel understood that the years of the captivity in Babylon were nearly expired? Does not our blessed Jesus, the Prince of the prophets, give us signs, and command us to watch them, and attend to them, and lift up our heads when they appear? Are not the children of Issachar celebrated, as men, who had understanding of the times, to know what Israel ought to do? Is not the testimony of’ Jesus the spirit of prophecy? Is it not the design of prophecy to bear testimony to Him? How should we know that Jesus is the Christ but by comparing his life, doctrines, deeds, and sufferings with the prophecies that described them so long before? And as to preaching the Gospel, why, you cannot do that faithfully, nay, you cannot do it at all, if you resolve to have nothing to do with prophecy; for the Gospel is itself the fulfilment of one series of prophecies, and the utterance of another; the Gospel is the grandest prophecy in the world—a long, beautiful, and most sublime prediction, embracing Heaven and earth in its mighty circumference, and resting not until earth shall be like Heaven, and both shall be one in Christ. And if we meddle not with prophecy, assuredly it will meddle with us, and the result will not be much to the credit either of our discernment or our piety. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 39.1
But then it is objected that certain students of prophecy have made calculations of dates and periods which the event has falsified. Nothing more likely; and yet we see not much more harm in making calculations from prophecy, than in making them from the results of the missionary efforts of the last fifty years to ascertain how long it will be before the world shall be converted at the same rate, which a celebrated missionary did not long ago, and gave us as the result the astounding answer of a million of years! So far as the hopes of men are at present concerned, he might just as well have said “Never.” But we do not plead for calculations, but for facts. God will take care of “the times and seasons;” let us believe the facts, and go cheerfully to work just as he has bidden us, and all will shortly be well. The kingdom will come.—W. Leask, D. D. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 39.2
Remembering Christ
If any skeptic or any stranger to the Gospel were to look in upon a company of Christians at the Lord’s Table, and were to inquire, “What is the use of this service, and what does it mean? I never could see anything in it,”—we might answer him, by asking him, “Did you ever see anything in the miniature of a departed wife? Did you never find any beauty in the golden lock clipped from the temples of your dead boy? Are there no teachings, no reproofs, no blessed suggestions in the very sight of your mother’s Bible? If you cannot understand and feel such influences, you cannot appreciate one of the highest and holiest uses of the sacrament of the Holy Supper.” ARSH July 4, 1865, page 39.3
For among other benefits linked with this simple ordinance, one of the very chiefest is that it is a memorial of the suffering Saviour. It is a keepsake of the best of friends. Not only do true believers come to the sacramental table in order to remember Jesus, but because they remember Jesus. In many characters and offices, beautiful and glorious, does the Redeemer there appear. In two characters does he shine preeminent and incomparable. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 39.4
1. First, we remember Jesus at his table as a sufferer. All suffering touches us; but what sorrow is like unto Christ’s sorrow? When Stephen was slain, he was slain, for his religion; when Paul bled, he bled for his best Benefactor; when Hampden fell, he fell for his nation’s liberty; but when Jesus of Nazareth died, it was an incarnate Son of God dying to bring salvation to the most malignant of his foes. A world’s enmities he bore. The chastisement of a world’s iniqities was laid upon him. By his stripes is the worst of lepers healed. His blood cleanses even a persecuting Saul of Tarsus from his guilt. But if this general statement does not touch my heart, I can think of the atoning Lamb as my own personal deliver, bearing on his divine heart a distinct and individual thought of me in the hour of his bitter agonies. For the sins of the whole world he died; but this does not so move me as the recollection that for me, poor, guilty, wayward, ungodly me, he gave himself to the tormentors. What the broken law of God demanded of me, my Saviour bore. What I deserved to suffer, Jesus suffered for me. That wounded side was cleft, and those mangled hands were pierced, that I might go with clean hands and a forgiven heart into Heaven. Putting forth his grateful hand to the sacred emblems, the believer exclaims: ARSH July 4, 1865, page 39.5
“This body broken for my sake,
My bread from Heaven shall be;
This testamental cup I take,
And thus remember thee;
Remember thee and all thy pains,
And all thy love to me;
Yea, while I breathe, or pulse remains,
Will I remember thee.”
ARSH July 4, 1865, page 39.6
2. For Jesus the sufferer, is at the same time Jesus the lover of my soul. Not that I at the first loved him, but he, when I was all unlovely, loved me. This is the sublimest teaching of the sacramental hour, this its holiest, tenderest inspiration. On the emblems which Jesus offers me at his table—on the folds of the banner which he lifts above me—on every morsel of the bread, and on every drop in the flagons, his sacred hand writes, “Herein is love.” Free, unsought love was Christ’s, for he gave himself for us. Sovereign love was Christ’s, for it passed by fallen angels weltering in woe, and lighted upon fallen me, weltering in my guilt. Condescending love was Christ’s, for although he were quite as rich without me, yet he became poor that. I might be everlastingly rich with a celestial inheritance. Mighty was this love of Christ’s for it subdues the most obstinate opposition, and transforms the most malignant depravity of the sinner’s soul. It was a love stronger than death. It saw me ruined by the fall; yet loved me notwithstanding all! Bless the Saviour, O my soul! let all that is within me bless his holy name! Draw nigh to him now. Reach hither thy finger and behold his hands. Reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into his side; and cry out, “My Lord and my God!” Thou art my Shepherd; thou art my Husband; thou art my King. Woe be upon all spiritual love but the love of Christ! Shame be upon all glory but glorying in the cross of Christ; death be upon all life but upon the life for Christ! “As the bridegroom rejoiceth over the bride, so doth my soul rejoice over thee!” ARSH July 4, 1865, page 39.7
To remember Jesus thus at his table, and to rejoice in him, is comparatively easy for the believer, when the very air is loaded with the fragrance of his presence. With everything to remind us of Christ, it is not so hard to keep the heart upon him. But when we get out again into the pestilential atmosphere of an unfriendly world—when we come among the jinglings of the money-changers, and the wranglings of the seekers after gain, and the clamorings of the seekers after pleasure—when there is nothing around us that looks or acts or speaks like Christ, can we remember him then? Can we order our lives in remembrance of his law of purity? Do we carry Christ’s keep-sake with us into daily life? Do we labor for dying souls in remembrance of the way in which he toiled for poor humanity? Do we try to be patient under trial, and forgiving under provocation, remembering how he returned good for evil? Do we remember him when we divide up our gains,—seeing to it that Christ’s cause receives its full share of our gold and silver? Do we remember him in the person of his poor, his enslaved, or his injured ones? These are the practical questions for every Christian to answer, both when he approaches and after he leaves that sacred spot where the voice of his crucified Master says, “Do this in remembrance o me.”—Cuyler. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 39.8
Concessions of the Church to the World
There are practical concessions which are even more to be dreaded than any speculative laxities. It is one thing to decline asceticism, it is another thing to live in an almost unbroken round of business and pleasure, with only the fewest and most weary moments for prayer and benevolent effort, and the work of the kingdom. Of course amusements are needful for the young and the mature; but this necessity cannot be appealed to in excuse of the excitements, which are only varied as winter passes into summer and the tide of fashion rolls from the city to the country. It is a solemn truth, and not a piece of asceticism, that they who live in pleasure are dead whilst they live. The earnestness and aspirations of the sanctuary utterly fail, in a multitude of instances, of any realization in the daily lives of avowed Christians. It would very often be hard to say what it is, save a peculiar creed, or ritual, that distinguishes the multitude of believers in the Gospel from the Jew, or the Mohammedan, or the Hindoo; certainly it is not a higher tone of living, an elevation of aims and tastes, an enlargement of the spiritual and moral nature, a refinement of the soul that makes a careless and self-indulgent life impossible. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 39.9
For man or woman, for youth or maiden, the Christian life is a grand enterprise; it involves self-renunciation—sacrifices of which the cross is the perpetual symbol. Its ways more excellent are often steep, rough, and narrow. Only when preachers and people find this out, and draw a clear, sharp line between the exceeding righteousness of the true Church, and an easy-going worldliness, does the word of Jesus become the great reality of life, so precious as to need no external commendation. We make concessions, we gather the half-converted into a communion and fellowship which we would fain regard as the Church, we substitute entertainment for instruction, and those who would have given themselves, body, soul, and spirit, to a Gospel of heroism and patience, become jaded critics in chapels of ease. Large demands are often far more attractive than concessions. We must kindle a great fire, unless we would be for ever tending it. Christianity lives in the world, upon condition that it is missionary and aggressive, a proclamation of the kingdom of God in a life of love. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 39.10
Oberlin’s Rule of Giving
It appears that one of the rules established by Oberlin was, that every one of his people should every year place in the treasury one-tenth part of his net income; this rule he enforced by love. The money was applied to works of benevolence or charity, and to many improvements made in that wilderness country. Le Grand told me that for some years he would not comply with what he considered an arbitrary rule, though he highly valued Oberlin; but he thought he could be his own almoner of the Lord’s blessing on his temporal industry. The losses that he sustained year by year in his business induced him at the end of a few years, closely to examine into the matter, and he found that during that period they amounted to exactly ten percent on his income, which he should have put into the treasury, according to Oberlin’s rule. This discovery convinced him that Oberlin was right, and he has acted ever since on the prescribed plan; and now, instead of meeting with losses, his income has greatly increased, though he has not ceased from also being his own almoner of the blessing that God confers upon him.—Life of Stephen Gillett. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 39.11
Time is that portion of eternity allotted to human probation. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 39.12
Ponder well the paths of thy feet, so shalt thou walk surely, and thy ways shall be established. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 39.13
The Review and Herald
BATTLE CREEK, MICH., THIRD-DAY JULY 4, 1865.
Brn. E. G. Rust and H. C. Miller of Chicago, desire to state for the benefit of those visiting that place, that they are not now residing in the city, but at Woodlawn, 8 miles out, on the Hyde Park, R. R. Their P. O. address remains as usual. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.1
From the Mich. Tent
Bro. White: Three weeks have passed since we commenced meetings in this place, and the plain truths of God’s word are producing quite a favorable impression on the minds of many who have listened with attention and interest. A few have already decided to keep all the commandments of God. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.2
The weather for the last two weeks has been quite unfavorable for meetings. This brought discouragement upon us, and we began to fear that our effort here would be in vain. But the darkness is now breaking away. The Lord is carrying on his work in the minds and hearts of the people. Truth is triumphing over the prejudices of the people, and is sure to gain the victory. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.3
The following article we take from the “Tuscola County Pioneer,” published at this place, which expresses the sentiment of the people. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.4
The reference therein made to “Credentials” was probably called out by the assertions which the Presbyterian minister of this place made in public, that we were vagrant preachers, without credentials, and of doubtful characters. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.5
“religious meetings
“Elders Canright and Van Horn, Second Advents, have been holding meetings some over three weeks in this place, in their own house which they brought with them. The Bible is their lamp, that lights up their minds, and which enables them to present truths to the people, both new and old, in so plain a manner that the unlearned can but be instructed in the way of life. A deep interest is manifested in their meetings, from the fact that they open up the truths of the Bible so plain, that ‘the’ people can understand then duties to each other and to God; so that it is truly a feast to the mind of every one that goes to hear. It has been imputed that they are here without ‘Credentials.’ We wish that more at the present day would take their ‘credentials’, as the rule and guide of their lives. Their ‘credentials’ is the Holy Bible, which is sufficient for all.” ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.6
We are encouraged to continue our labors to advance the cause of truth, and feel willing to render all the praise and honor to the Lord, for the visible manifestations of his goodness to us. Pray for us. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.7
I. D. Van Horn,
D. M. Canright.
Vassar, Mich., June 27, 1865.
A Call for the Proof
Bro. White: Desiring to obtain all the light possible in reference to the various doctrines preached in the world, I propose to ask a few questions through the Review by your permission. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.8
1. Will some one tell me where to find the chapter and verse in the Bible which says that the first day of the week was ever called the (weekly) Sabbath; or that Christ or any of his followers ever observed it as such. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.9
2. The chapter and verse that calls anything but immersion, baptism. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.10
3. The chapter and verse that says that man has an immortal soul. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.11
4. The chapter and verse that says the wicked shall have immortality, or endless life in the future world, or endless punishment. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.12
5. The chapter and verse that says that all mankind shall be saved or redeemed. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.13
These are doctrines preached and taught by various men and denominations in the world; and not knowing where to find the evidence I must pronounce them all unscriptural until the evidence is produced. Give us the law and the testimony that we may receive the light. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.14
E. Lanphear.
Nile, N. Y., June 28th, 1865.
Prophecy Fulfilling
Bro. White: I love the ways of the Lord, especially in the paths of present truth. It is cheering to contemplate the joys of an endless life, a world of light—a crown of glory that fadeth not away—an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled. Having lived under the effects of the curse in this world where sorrow and death reigns, we shall there in heavenly raptures draw the contrast, and exclaim, Heaven is cheap enough. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.15
Our meetings are free and interesting. We hear the voices of those who have recently started in the good cause with a full determination to go with the remnant people of God. Here are they that keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus. How clear ‘that this prophecy is now being fulfilled. The harvest is ripening, the end is near when Jesus will send his angels to gather his people home. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.16
Yours in hope of life. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.17
H. S. Gurney.
Memphis, Mich.
Sister E. S. Tenney writes from Grapeland, Minn.: May 28th I attended a meeting and heard sixteen speak of the goodness of God, and their determinations to keep the Sabbath, where eight months ago there was perhaps only one in thirty miles. Pray for us that we may be found having on the wedding garment when our Lord shall come. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.18
Business Department
Business Notes
We have a number of orders for bound copies of “How to Live,” which will be filled, as soon as we receive the books from the binder, which will probably be in a few days. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.19
RECEIPTS
For Review and Herald
Annexed to each receipt in the following list, is the Volume and Number of the Review & Herald to which the money receipted pays. If money for the paper is not in due time acknowledged, immediate notice of the omission should then be given. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.20
F Johnson 27-1, J Wormwood 27-1, F Linscott 27-1, A Hatch 27-1, P A Thomas 27-1, C Penoyer 27-1 J Hawks 27-18, E J Bulen 28-1, R Parker 28-1 A M Lambphere 28-1, O Clark 26-1, W E Caviness 27-1, E Lanphear 27-1, J W Raymond 27-1, H F Phelps 27-1, A D Rust 27-14, R Peck 27-1, S W Willey 27-1, J Howlet 27-1, H Patch 27-1, C B French 26-1, J Baily 28-1, R Peters 27-1, Mrs S McNall 27-1, W Munsell 27-1, J Button 27-1, each $1. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.21
C S Lynnell 28-3, W S Fairchild 28-1 A Wright 28-1, L Potter 28-1, N Clark 28-1 C B Ells 28-1, O Frizzle 27-1, D F Moore 28-1, H Wheeler 27-8, Mrs J Day 29-1 D Wilcox for J G Walston 28-1, A R Morse 28-1, Eli Sherman 28-1, P M Cross 28-5, T A Herrick 28-1, E P Cram 28-1, W G Kendall 28-1, P E Rinter 28-1, E Colby 28-1, J Claxton 29-1, M N Cross 27-17, I Renfrew 28-1, C F Saxby 27-14, Mrs N Dennison 28-1, each $2. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.22
W R Perry 27-1, H W Hammond 27-1, each 50c. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.23
J M Santee $3, 28-9, E Dickens $2,44, 28-1, E Kellogg $2,50, 28-11. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.24
Subscriptions at the Rate of $3,00 per year
W Lawton $3, 28-21. H J Rich $1,50, 27-1. N Claflin $3, 29-1. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.25
Review to Poor
A Warren $1,50. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.26
Boots Sent By Mail
W R Perry 23c. SC Perry 27c. E H Catlin 60c. S R Smith 10c. T J Gaskins $1. S M Abbott $1,10. H Sweet $1. Mrs M T Scott $1,91. M Foreacre 55c. O Hoffer 28c. S N Haskell 25c. P G Woolsey 50c. Mrs S McNall 50c. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.27
Cash Received on Account
D M Canright $9. J Matteson $15. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.28
For Shares in the Publishing Association
R M Johnson $5. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.29
For Bro. Bourdeau
L M Gates $10. John Byington $10. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.30
To Pay Expenses on Draft Publications
J F Colby $1. D Wilcox $1. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.31
PUBLICATIONS
The law requires the pre-payment of postage on Bound Books, four cents for the first four ounces, or fractional part thereof, and an additional four cents for the next four ounces, or fractional part thereof, and so on. On Pamphlets and Tracts, two cents for each four ounces, or fractional part thereof. Orders, to secure attention must be accompanied with the cash. Address Elder James White, Battle Creek, Michigan. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.32
| PRICE. | WEIGHT. | |
| cts. | oz. | |
| The Hymn Book, 464 pages, and 122 pieces of music, | 80 | 12 |
| “ ” “ with Sabbath Lute, | $1,25 | 12 |
| “ ” “ Calf Binding, | 1,00 | 12 |
| “ ” “ ” “ with Lute, | 1,50 | 12 |
| History of the Sabbath, Sacred and Secular, | 80 | 12 |
| “ ” “ in paper covers, | 50 | 10 |
| Dobney, on Future Punishment, | 75 | 16 |
| Spiritual Gifts, Vol. I, or the Great Controversy between Christ & his angels, and Satan & his angels, | 50 | 8 |
| Spiritual Gifts, Vol. II, Experience, Views & Incidents in connection with the Third Message, | 60 | 8 |
| Spiritual Gifts, Vols. I & II, bound in one book, | $1,00 | 12 |
| Spiritual Gifts, Vol. III , Facts of Faith, | 75 | 8 |
| Spiritual Gifts, Vol. IV, Facts of Faith & Testimonies to the Church, Nos. 1-10, | 75 | 8 |
| Sabbath Readings, a work of 400 pages of Moral & Religious Lessons for the Young, | 60 | 8 |
| The same in five Pamphlets, | 55 | 8 |
| “ ” twenty-five Tracts, | 50 | 8 |
| Appeal to the Youth. Bound, | 60 | 8 |
| “ ” “ Paper Covers | 30 | 2 |
| “ ” “ ” without Likeness, | 15 | 2 |
| The Bible from Heaven. | 30 | 5 |
| Both Sides. Review of Preble on Sabbath and Law, | 20 | 4 |
| Three Angels of Revelation 14, and the Two-horned Beast, | 15 | 4 |
| Hope of the Gospel, or Immortality the Gift of God, | 15 | 4 |
| Which? Mortal or Immortal? or an Inquiry into the Present Constitution & Future Condition of Man, | 15 | 4 |
| Modern Spiritualism: its Nature and Tendency, | 15 | 4 |
| The Kingdom of God: a Refutation of the Doctrine called, Age to Come, | 15 | 4 |
| Miraculous Powers, | 15 | 4 |
| Appeal to Mothers, | 15 | 2 |
| Review of Seymour. His Fifty Questions Answered, | 10 | 3 |
| Prophecy of Daniel —The Sanctuary and 2300 Days, | 10 | 3 |
| The Saints’ Inheritance in the New Earth, | 10 | 3 |
| Signs of the Times. The Coming of Christ at the Door, | 10 | 3 |
| Law of God. The Testimony of Both Testaments, | 10 | 3 |
| Vindication of the True Sabbath, by J. W. Morton, | 10 | 3 |
| Review of Springer on the Sabbath and Law of God, | 10 | 3 |
| Christian Baptism. Its Nature, Subjects, & Design, | 10 | 3 |
| Key to the Prophetic Chart, | 10 | 2 |
| The Sanctuary and 2300 Days of Daniel 8:14, | 10 | 2 |
| The Fate of the Transgressor, | 5 | 2 |
| Matthew 24. A Brief Exposition of the Chapter, | 5 | 2 |
| Mark of the Beast, and Seal of the Living God, | 5 | 1 |
| Sabbatic Institution and the Two Laws, | 5 | 1 |
| Assistant. The Bible Student’s Assistant, or a Compend of Scripture References, | 5 | 1 |
| Truth Found. A Short Argument for the Sabbath, with an Appendix, “The Sabbath not a Type,“ | 5 | 1 |
| An Appeal for the Restoration of the Bible Sabbath in an Address to the Baptists, | 5 | 1 |
| Review of Fillio. A Reply to a series of Discourses delivered by him in this City against the Sabbath, | 5 | 1 |
| Milton on the State of the Dead, | 5 | 1 |
| Brown’s Experience. Consecration—Second Advent, | 5 | 1 |
| Report of General Conference held in Battle Creek, June, 1859, Address on Systematic Benevolence, etc., | 5 | 1 |
| The Sabbath, in German, | 10 | 2 |
| “ ” Holland, | 5 | 1 |
| “ French, | 5 | 1 |
| On Daniel II & VII, in French, | 5 | 1 |
ONE-CENT TRACTS. The Seven Seals—The Two Laws—Reasons for Sunday-keeping Examined—Personality of God—Wesley on the Law—Judson on Dress—Appeal on Immortality. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.33
TWO-CENT TRACTS. Institution of the Sabbath—Sabbath by Elihu—Infidelity and Spiritualism—War and Sealing—Who Changed the Sabbath?—Preach the Word—Death and Burial—Much in Little—Truth. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.34
THREE-CENT TRACTS. Dobney on the Law—Milton on the State of the Dead—Scripture References—The Mark of the Reast and Seal of the Living God—Spiritual Gifts. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.35
CHARTS, Prophetic and Law of God, the size used by our Preachers Varnished, a set, with Key, $4,00 ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.36
A Set on Cloth, with Key, 3,00 ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.37
On Cloth, without Rollers, by mail, post-paid, 2,75 ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.38
Small Chart. A Pictorial Illustration of the Visions of Daniel and John 20 by 25 inches. Price 15 cents. On Rollers, post-paid, 75 cts. ARSH July 4, 1865, page 40.39