Chapter xviii, 1-11, contains important testimony on this subject.

Paul at Corinth abode with Aquila and Priscilla, and worked with them at tent making. “And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.” Verse 4. How long did he remain at Corinth? “And he continued there a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them.” Verse 11. Here is apostolic example for seventy-eight successive Sabbaths. And it will be seen by verses 5-8, that the apostle occupied the synagogue a part of these Sabbaths, until the Jews opposed and blasphemed, then he went into the house of Justus, where he preached the remaining portion. Here, dear reader, is apostolic example in harmony with the divine precept, showing its application and force in the present dispensation.

The cross of Sabbath-keeping in the face of decided opposition, when its friends were few, was very great. Thousands became convinced that apostolic example was in harmony with the fourth precept of the decalogue; but the numbers who had the moral courage to act up to their convictions, were found to be comparatively few. And no sooner was a by-path opened around this cross by way of no-Sabbath, than multitudes eagerly pressed into it. Some of those who taught the Sabbath abolished labored to obliterate all distinction between typical institutions and moral principles, and to show that everything in the form of law recorded in the Old Testament was abolished. Others could not go so far, but took the position that the seventh-day Sabbath was of the same nature as the feast days of the typical system, and expired with them. These could not see any reason why the precepts of the decalogue, excepting the fourth, should be abolished. In their nature they are adapted to man, throughout all dispensations of his fallen condition. They exactly meet his wants. He cannot dispense with them. Why, then, should the crucifixion of the Saviour of sinners do them away? These could see how typical institutions, pointing to the death of Christ, could cease at the cross, but could not understand how moral precepts, applicable to the entire period of man’s fallen state, could be affected by the death of the Son of God.

The mistaken view that the Sabbath was typical, had long been held by the churches; hence this class could more easily receive the idea that when Paul says, “Let no man therefore judge you in meat or in drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath days, which are a shadow of things to come,” Col. ii, 16, 17, he includes the Sabbath of the Lord. The apostle here speaks of sabbath days, or sabbaths. Lev. xxiii, shows seven Jewish sabbaths, to be celebrated at their appointed times, “besides the Sabbaths of the Lord.” See verses 37 and 38. Here the distinction between the two kinds of sabbaths is seen. Paul refers to those which are classed with meat, drink, new moon, &c., and not to the Sabbath which the Lawgiver has wisely associated with nine moral precepts. The “Sabbath Manual,” by Justin Edwards, speaks with clearness and ability upon this point, and also in reference to the days spoken of in Rom. xiv:

“Under the Jewish dispensation were incorporated two kinds of laws. One was founded on obligations growing out of the nature of men, and their relations to God and one another; obligations binding before they were written, and which will continue to be binding upon all who shall know them, to the end of time. Such are the laws which were written by the finger of God on the tables of stone, and are called moral laws.

“The other kind, called ceremonial laws, related to various outward observances, which were not obligatory till they were commanded, and then were binding only on the Jews till the death of Christ.

“There were also two kinds of Sabbaths, or days of rest. One was a day of weekly rest; and the command to keep it holy was placed by the Lawgiver in the midst of the moral laws. It was called, by way of eminence, ‘The Sabbath.’ The command to keep the other sabbaths was placed by the Lawgiver among the ceremonial laws, because it was like them, as the command to keep the weekly Sabbath was like the laws with which it was associated. One class were fundamental, permanent, universal, moral laws; the other class were local, temporary, ceremonial laws. One had their origin in the nature and relations of man; the other in the peculiar circumstances in which, for a time, a peculiar people were placed. One would be binding in all ages, upon all who should know them; and the other would be binding only upon the Jews till the death of the Messiah.

“The Jews, at the coming of Christ, being in a state of great spiritual darkness and grievous apostasy from God, did not well understand the nature and objects of their laws. Often they overlooked the spirit, and were superstitiously devoted to the forms. Some, after they embraced the gospel, thought that the ceremonial as well as the moral laws were binding; others, more enlightened, thought that they were not. This led to contentions among them. Paul, in the fourteenth chapter of Romans, presented such considerations as were adapted to lead them, in this matter, to a right decision.

“‘One man,’ he says, ‘esteemeth one day above another. Another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it.’ Both mean to honor God, and he will accept them. But what day does he speak of? ‘The Sabbath’ of the fourth commandment, associated by God inseparably with the moral laws? Read the connection. What is it? Is it, one man believeth he must worship Jehovah; another, who is weak, worshipeth idols? One believeth that he must not commit murder, adultery or theft, and another thinks he may? Were those the laws about which they were contending, and with which were connected the days that he speaks of? No; about those laws there was no dispute.

“But ‘One believeth that he may eat all things,’ (which are nourishing, whether allowed in the ceremonial law, which regulateth such things, or not); ‘another, who is weak, eateth herbs. Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not, judge him that eateth, for God hath received him.’ Those were not the laws about which they were contending, and with regard to which the apostle was giving them instruction. It was not the moral, but the ceremonial laws; and the days spoken of were those which were connected, not with the former, but with the latter.

“So, in the second chapter of Colossians, ‘Let no man judge you in meat or in drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbaths.’ The sabbaths spoken of are not the Sabbath associated with, Thou shalt not commit murder, or adultery, or theft; but the sabbaths associated with meats and drinks, and new moons, which were indeed shadows of things to come. But to take what he said about those sabbaths which were associated by God with the ceremonial laws, and which the apostle himself, in this very discourse, associates with them, and apply it, as some have done, to ‘The Sabbath’ which God associated with moral laws, is wrong.” pp. 133, 136.

All types point forward to something connected with the work of redemption. They have no other design than this. Hence no type would ever have been introduced had not man fallen and needed a redemption. They all originate, therefore, this side of the fall. But the Sabbath was instituted before the fall, before man needed redemption, and before anything was, or could have been, reasonably given to foreshadow that work. All the types that were ever instituted had no meaning except as they recognized the work of Christ in redemption; but the seventh-day Sabbath was from creation a holy day, and all the facts to which the fourth commandment points would have been just as true as they are now if Christ had never died. While the types, among which were the typical sabbaths of the Jews, recognized man’s guilt, and signified God’s willingness to save, the seventh-day Sabbath would have occupied the same place it now occupies, and ever has occupied, even if man had never sinned. The typical sabbaths were shadows of things to come; the seventh-day Sabbath was and is a memorial of things past. The two classes of sabbaths point in opposite directions, and hence cannot be classed together. The one pointed forward to redemption; the other points back to creation. “For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day; wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.” The seventh-day Sabbath therefore is not a type, if reason and revelation may decide this question.

William Miller’s views respecting the perpetuity of the Sabbath, and its distinction from the sabbaths of the Jews, is also worthy of notice.

“I say, and I believe I am supported by the Bible, that the moral law was never given to the Jews as a people exclusively, but they were for a season the keepers of it in charge. And through them the law, oracles and testimony have been handed down to us. See Paul’s clear reasoning in Rom. ii, iii, iv, on that point. Then, says the objector, we are under the same obligation to keep the sabbaths of weeks, months and years that the Jews were. No, sir; you will observe that these were not included in the decalogue.... Only one kind of Sabbaths was given to Adam, and only one remains for us. See Hosea ii, 11. ‘I will cause all her mirth to cease, her feast days, her new moons, and her sabbaths, and all her solemn feasts.’ All the Jewish sabbaths did cease, when Christ nailed them to his cross. Col. ii, 14-17. ‘Blotting out the hand-writing of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; and having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it. Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days, which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.’ These were properly called Jewish sabbaths. Hosea says, ‘her sabbaths.’ But the Sabbath of which we are speaking, God calls ‘my Sabbath.’ Here is a clear distinction between the creation Sabbath and the ceremonial. The one is perpetual; the others were merely shadows of good things to come, and are limited in Christ.”--_Miller’s Life and Views_, pp. 161, 162.

Here let it be distinctly understood that those who hold that no change has taken place in the law of God, excepting in the fourth precept, have no right whatever to appeal to those texts usually quoted to prove the abolition of the entire code.

Those who took the extreme position that all ten of the commandments were abolished, relied with great confidence on what the apostle has said respecting the two ministrations. 2 Cor. iii. These seemed to overlook the fact that a law is one thing, and the ministration of that law quite another thing. Paul is here contrasting two ministrations of the same law. He is contrasting the ministration of the law of God under Moses, (which was a ministration of condemnation and death,) with the ministration of the same law under Christ (which is the ministration of the Spirit). It is the ministration of death that is done away, to give place to the more glorious ministration of God’s law, called the ministration of the Spirit. But we would inquire, Why should all ten of the commandments of God be slain at the cross, even if it were necessary to abolish the fourth? All agree that nine are good, yea, indispensable for the Christian dispensation. Was it an oversight in the Lawgiver in placing the Sabbath in the midst of nine moral precepts? And did he have to slay the whole ten in order to get rid of the Sabbath? But if all ten were abolished at the cross, how is it that nine are still binding? “Why,” says the objector, “nine of them were re-enacted by Christ for the gospel.” But here is a serious difficulty; the objector has nine of the commandments re-enacted during Christ’s ministry, before the ten were abolished at his death!

If it be said that the apostles re-enacted nine of the commandments for the gospel after their Lord ascended and the Holy Spirit was poured out upon them, we reply that according to this view there was a space between the abolition of the ten, at the cross, and the re-enactment of the nine; a space when there was no law, consequently no transgression, and men might blaspheme, murder, &c., and not commit sin! But if the objector takes the ground that the nine commandments were re-enacted at the cross at the time when he thinks the ten were abolished, then we shall understand him that Heaven aimed a blow that killed all ten of the commandments, and that the same blow, at the same moment, brought nine of them to life again! And all this to get rid of the Sabbath which Christ says was made for man.

By many it was assumed, 1. That Christ was the Christian’s lawgiver, and 2. That he has given in person and by his inspired apostles, a complete code of laws for the present dispensation. It was then asserted that as the law of the Sabbath was not repeated in the New Testament, the seventh-day Sabbath is not binding upon Christians. Deuteronomy xviii, 15-18, was offered as proof that Christ was our lawgiver, but it may be seen that the text teaches the reverse. “The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken.... And the Lord said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken. I will raise them up a prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.”

Peter, speaking of Christ, says: “For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you, of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you.” Acts iii, 22.

Christ, as a prophet, or teacher, was like Moses. We now inquire, Did Moses legislate? Did he make laws for the people? He did not. Moses received words from the mouth of God and spake them to the people. There is no record that he ever assumed the position of an independent lawgiver; while the inspired word furnishes facts quite the reverse. In the case of the man who gathered sticks on the Sabbath, (Num. xv, 32-36,) Moses did not presume to decide his case, but left that for the great Lawgiver. “And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done unto him. And the Lord said unto Moses, the man shall be surely put to death.” See also Num. xxvii, 5-7; Lev. xxiv, 11-14.

That Christ, as a prophet, or teacher, was like Moses, we have the united testimony of Moses, (Deut. xviii, 15,) the Lord, (verse 18,) and Peter, (Acts iii, 22,) therefore he was not an independent lawgiver. Says the eternal Father, when speaking of his Son, “He shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.” Jesus testifies of himself on this subject, and his testimony agrees with that of his Father. Mark well the following declarations of the Son of God:

“Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.” John vii, 16.

“Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.” Chap. viii, 28.

“For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.” Chap. xii, 49, 50.

“He that loveth me not, keepeth not my sayings; and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father’s which sent me.” Chap. xiv, 24.

By these testimonies from the Father and Son, we learn that it was not the work of our Lord Jesus Christ to legislate; but he received the doctrines which he taught, from the mouth of the Father, and spake them to the people. In this respect, as a prophet, or teacher, he was like Moses. In both cases the Father is the lawgiver.

The transfiguration is referred to as proof that Christ is the lawgiver in the gospel age. It is said that the presence of both Moses and Christ, (the teachers of both dispensations,) and Moses’ being placed upon the background by the voice from Heaven, saying, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased, hear him,” shows that Christ is the lawgiver of the present age, and that his teachings take the place of the law of God. But a very important personage is overlooked by those who take this position. It is the Father. He also appears at the mount of transfiguration. His voice is heard as the highest authority--“This is my beloved Son, hear him.” However much the glory of Christ excelled that of Moses, it did not eclipse the glory of the Author of the ten commandments. The great God spoke the ten precepts of his holy law in the hearing of all the people. He did not leave them with Moses to write and deliver to the people. Neither was it the work of the Son of God to deliver them, or any portion of them, the second time for the men of the present dispensation. Under circumstances of awful grandeur, the great Lawgiver spoke the ten commandments directly to the people, and wrote them in the tables of stone. Christ quotes several of them at different times to enforce the doctrines he taught. He treats them as the law of his Father, and affirms their immutability.

If it be said that the apostles in their writings have given a code of laws for the gospel age, we reply, that this view makes twelve lawgivers, whereas James says, “There is one lawgiver.”

See the commission to the eleven: “Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.” Matt. xxviii, 19, 20. Christ taught the apostles what he had received of the Father, and this they were to teach men to observe. Notice also the work of the Holy Spirit, and from whom it proceeds. “But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.” John xiv, 26. “And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you forever.” Verse 16. The Holy Spirit came from the Father, and one object for which it was sent, was to call to the disciples’ memory the words of divine truth which the Son had received of the Father, and had spoken to them.

It is God, the great Lawgiver, that speaks to his people in both dispensations: “God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son.” Heb. i, 1, 2.

A PAPER STARTED.

The subject of the Sabbath was growing clearer, and up to this time the foregoing positions were being presented to small congregations, by Bro. Bates and myself. Opposition was waxing stronger, and the battle was increasing. Burdened with a sense of duty to enter the field in defense of truth, in July, 1849, I issued the first number of a little sheet called _The Present Truth_, from which I give the following extract to show the spirit of that time:

“It is through the truth that souls are sanctified and made ready to enter the everlasting kingdom. Obedience to the truth will kill us to this world, that we may be made alive, by faith in Jesus. ‘Sanctify them through thy truth; thy word is truth.’ John xvii, 17. This was the prayer of Jesus. ‘I have no greater joy than to hear that my children walk in truth.’ 3 John, 4.

“Error darkens and fetters the mind, but the truth brings with it freedom, and gives light and life. True charity, or love, ‘rejoiceth in the truth.’ 1 Cor. xiii, 6. Thy law is truth.’ Ps. cxix, 142. David describing the day of slaughter, when the pestilence shall walk in darkness, and destruction waste at noonday, so that ‘a thousand shall fall at thy side and ten thousand at thy right hand,’ says: ‘He shall cover thee with his feathers, and under his wings shalt thou trust; his truth shall be thy shield and buckler.’ Ps. xci, 4.

“The storm is coming. War, famine and pestilence are already in the field of slaughter. Now is the time, the only time to seek a shelter in the truth of the living God. In Peter’s time there was present truth, or truth applicable to that present time. The church have ever had a present truth. The present truth now, is that which shows present duty, and the right position for us who are about to witness the time of trouble such as never was. Present truth must be oft repeated, even to those who are established in it. This was needful in the apostles’ day, and it certainly is no less important for us, who are living just before the close of time.

“For months I have felt burdened with the duty of writing and publishing the present truth for the scattered flock; but the way has not been opened for me to commence the work until now. I tremble at the word of the Lord, and the importance of this time. What is done to spread the truth must be done quickly. The four angels are holding the angry nations in check but a few days, until the saints are sealed; then the nations will rush, like the rushing of many waters. Then it will be too late to spread before precious souls the present, saving, living truths of the Holy Bible. My spirit is drawn out after the scattered remnant. May God help them to receive the truth, and be established in it.”

A few numbers of this little sheet had been published, which, with Bro. Bates’ publications, were a great help in the cause. Then the few that taught the truth traveled on foot, in second-class cars, or on steamboat decks, for want of means. The testimony they bore was pointed. God worked with them mightily; and the cheering news of conversions to the truth were coming in on every hand. Several brethren sold possessions, and handed out their means, to advance the cause. Young men and women could then give up their wages to help preachers from place to place, and to publish books for gratuitous distribution. All seemed to give cheerfully, and God abundantly blessed the cheerful giver. Ministers and people then felt for souls, and labored for them as though the coming of the day of God was an absorbing reality. But in those days of prosperity to the cause, there were trials; and these generally arose in consequence of a disposition to draw off from the great truths connected with the third message, to points of no vital importance. It was impossible to make some see that present truth really was _present_ truth, and not future truth, and that the word, as a lamp, shines brightest where we stand, and not so plainly on the path in the distance. Hence the order of events a thousand years in the future, or just before or after the coming of the Lord, was the all-absorbing theme with some.

THE REVIEW AND HERALD.

In 1850 I commenced publishing the _Review and Herald_ at Paris, Me. As friends were few and generally poor, we chose this country location to save expense. By this time several preachers had united in the proclamation of the present truth, and our hearts were often cheered by their success. But those were days of poverty, deprivation, toil and anguish of spirit. We labored ardently to bring some to a knowledge of the truth, divided our scanty purse with them, and at the same time were suffering for the comforts of life. With feeble health we traveled from town to town, and from State to State, preaching the word and holding conferences; and at the same time issuing the _Review_ once in two or three weeks.

About this time Bro. J. N. Andrews commenced his labors, which was no small reinforcement. Faithfully has this dear brother labored in the cause, which is now blessed with his clear expositions of Bible truth in our most important publications.

The first number of the second volume of the _Review_, was issued at Saratoga Springs, N. Y., August 5, 1851. Up to this time we had no permanent home, but had traveled as the way opened, then stopped to write and publish where brethren made us welcome. Our two little boys were from us, and six hundred miles from each other.

In March, 1852, the _Review_ was established at Rochester, N. Y. The friends of the cause raised seven or eight hundred dollars to purchase press and printing material with which to issue it. This was a new and important era in the progress of the cause. Here commenced Bro. Andrews’ letters to O. R. L. Crosier, which not only exposed the weakness of the no-Sabbath heresy, but the deceitful manner in which some handled the word of God. Success attended the cause east and west. Bro. Waggoner raised up witnesses for the truth in many places in Wisconsin. The labors of Brn. Cornell and Cranson were greatly blessed in Michigan. Bro. Bates was having his usual success in different States and the Canadas, through which he so rapidly passed, and other brethren in the State of New York, and in New England, were reporting success. I cannot better represent the state of things that followed, than by quoting from the _Review_, vol. xi, p. 77, which I give under the appropriate head of a

PURIFYING PROCESS.

“It is evident, however, that with the increase of numbers there was not a corresponding increase in consecration and in the graces of the Spirit. The truth was being more clearly brought out, and many were embracing it, and at the same time the standard of consecration, self-denial and sacrifice, was being lowered among us as a people. There was a great increase of numbers. The scripture evidences of our position were the themes of public lectures, and close, practical preaching was too much neglected, and most Sabbath-keepers became quite satisfied with the form without the power. Hypocrites crowded into the ranks. Men destitute of principle, and having a seared conscience, professed the Sabbath. And the spirit of the world prevailed in the body.

“Church discipline was urged through the _Review_, which was very disagreeable to some in the ranks who wished to have their own way, and hated reproof and instruction. They chose to be teachers, when they should have been learners. They went out to teach the truth without being sent of the Lord, or approbated by the church, and sowed the seeds of discontent, disunion and death wherever they went. Some of them were labored with and reproved. Others did not receive as much approbation and attention as they desired. And not a few were rebuked of the Lord for their unchristian, reckless course. This aroused their jealousy and anger, and finally they started a sheet of slander at Jackson, Mich., which met the feelings of all those who were ready to be inspired with jealousy and a feeling of hatred and revenge toward those who had reproved them for their wrongs, and they all poured forth their feelings of bitterness and wrath into this sheet.

“This was a cause of great grief to many dear brethren, and it appeared for the time that the precious cause was being injured. But this sheet was manifesting hearts and purifying the body. It was evident to all decent people that those who would go with such a sheet were not fit to go with the saints. We will mention some of the leading men in this faction, and their position when last heard from. W----n, rejected by his party for crime, and a town charge; B----o, their editor, fined $25 for presenting a pistol, and threatening to shoot a scholar in school; C----e, run out as a preacher, and fishing on the lakes; C----n, in a clothing store; L----s, a Spiritualist. R----l and H----s had denounced B----o and the publishers of their sheet as hypocrites, and were standing alone. It seems that as soon as these restless spirits went out from the body by themselves, they immediately went to biting and devouring one another, until not one of the eighteen messengers of which they once boasted as being with them, is now bearing a public testimony, and there is not one place of regular meeting, to our knowledge, among them east or west.

“The true friends of the cause have been led by these things to see the necessity of bearing a bold and independent testimony for the truth, and for the gifts of the Holy Spirit. And that gift which was so despised by the faction, never was prized by the body as now. The faction has crumbled and disappeared, and the body has risen in union and strength. And where one destitute of moral worth has left the ranks, four of real worth have joined the ranks of Sabbath-keepers. At the time of the disaffection, when the effort was to break down the _Review_, the church property at the Office was only $700; since, it has increased to $5,000. Then there were but about one thousand paying subscribers, now there are nearly two thousand, besides quite a free list.

“We mourn our lukewarm condition. We have nothing to boast of. But thanks be to God who has given the truth the victory thus far through our Lord Jesus Christ. The truth will triumph. Though those who now profess it be laid aside for their unfaithfulness, God can raise up a faithful army to fight his battles, and wear the victor’s crown. But those who have stood the storms of the past will not fall away now. Though many who have not the truth in them sufficient to move them cheerfully to action, may be shaken out, and left behind, yet the faithful ones who have toiled on, groaning, sighing and crying for salvation and deliverance, will go through to the city of God, and share the everlasting rest.”

TENT MEETINGS.

Tent operations, as an effective method of spreading the truth, were commenced among us in the summer of 1854. The first meeting of the kind was held in Battle Creek, Mich., June 10 and 11, of that year. These meetings called out large congregations, and gave greater publicity to our views, by means of the oral lectures, and of our publications, which had been greatly multiplied, and were eagerly called for. Since that time tent meetings have been held with great success in New England, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, Iowa, and Minnesota.

REMOVAL TO MICHIGAN.

The autumn of 1855 found me much reduced in strength, in consequence of incessant toil and care, editing, publishing, journeying and preaching. Very many gave me over to die of consumption. A change seemed necessary. Heavy debts were upon me, in consequence of printing large editions of our publications. In this state of things I called upon my brethren to take the cares and responsibilities of the Office from me, and advised them to remove it to some more favorable locality. The truth had been taking strong hold in Michigan, and the brethren in that State came nobly forward in that time of need, and took the responsibilities of the Office upon themselves. At a conference of the friends of the cause in Michigan and Indiana, held in Battle Creek, Mich., September 23, 1855, I offered the following resolutions, which were unanimously adopted:

“1. That the Advent Review Office still remain the property of the church.

“2. That the Advent Review Office be removed to Battle Creek, Mich.

“3. That a financial committee of three be chosen, whose duty it shall be to move the Office, and publish the _Advent Review_.

“4. That D. R. Palmer, of Jackson, Henry Lyon and Cyrenius Smith, of Battle Creek, be that Committee.”

A building was immediately erected, and steps taken for the removal of the Office.

A General Conference was held at Battle Creek, November 16, 1855, which sanctioned the doings of the conference of September 23, 1855, and elected Uriah Smith resident editor of the _Review_. The last paper published in Rochester, N. Y., was dated October 30, 1855, and its publication was resumed in Battle Creek, December 4, following. The expenses of the new building, and the removal of the Office, were promptly met, and soon the publishing department was in a prosperous condition.

POWER PRESS.

The business at the Office increased so rapidly that the hand press soon became entirely inadequate for the work. An appeal was again made to the friends of the cause, this time for means sufficient to purchase a power press. The brethren immediately responded. An Adams New Patent Power Press was purchased, and the _Review_ of July 30, 1857, was the first number printed upon it. A steam engine was soon obtained to run the press. The entire cost of press, engine, and fixtures, was twenty-five hundred dollars, which was soon met by the donations of the brethren.

PUBLISHING ASSOCIATION.

But the wants of the cause soon demanded an enlargement of capital, and more extended operations. To this end the Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association was incorporated in the city of Battle Creek, May 3, 1861, to which the _Review_ and all the publishing interests were made over by those who had heretofore had them in charge. This Association immediately erected a commodious publishing house, and has since that time been zealously engaged in carrying forward the objects of its formation. Its eighth annual report, May 14, 1868, showed the amount of property belonging to the Association, free from all incumbrance, to be $35,996.59.

ORGANIZATION.

The subject of church order had been from time to time set forth in the _Review_ since 1850, and the necessity of some simple form of organization had been quite fully discussed. The positions taken upon the subject of Babylon, the burden of the second message, had led many of our people to stand in great fear of organization, however simple. Babylon signifies confusion. God did not design to bring his people out of the confusion of Babylon into the greater confusion of no order nor discipline. This would only be making a bad matter worse. His object in bringing them out from the churches was to discipline and unite them for the last great battle of truth under the third message. It was not ambition to build up a denomination that suggested organization, but the sheer necessities of the case. For a time, the subject of organization waded heavily. But the importance of united action, and some simple form of organization by which we could legally hold our places of worship, and property necessary to efficiently conduct the publishing department, being earnestly plead by those who saw and felt the wants of the cause, our people generally soon overcame their fears, and united fully in the work. It has proved a success.

In our church organization, the General Conference, composed of delegates from the different State Conferences, is our highest authority. This Conference chooses annually, besides the usual officers, a committee of three who have the oversight of the work throughout the entire field.

Next to this are our several State Conferences, composed of the ministers and delegates from all the churches, in their respective States. These Conferences also have a committee of three to take the oversight of the work in their several States during the Conference year.

Next to these stand individual churches, associated together under the following simple covenant: “We, the undersigned, hereby associate ourselves together as a church, taking the name Seventh-day Adventists, covenanting to keep the commandments of God, and faith of Jesus.” The officers of the church are local elders, deacons, and clerk.

SYSTEMATIC BENEVOLENCE.

In the early stage of the cause, our people had no system upon which to act in the support of ministers. Those who were disposed to give anything, gave what they chose. For a time our ministers were quite well sustained, by a few liberal souls, while the majority excused themselves from doing anything. Ere long, it became evident that these liberal ones were becoming weary of this inequality, and they began to withhold their support. Hence, in the winter of 1858-9, some of our most efficient laborers were contemplating leaving the gospel-field to labor with their hands for the support of their families.

In this state of things, feeling that something must be done, I finally prepared an address on the subject of Systematic Benevolence, for the church in Battle Creek. This address was adopted, and published in the _Review_ of Feb. 3, 1859, as an appeal from that church to the churches and brethren in Michigan. This system is based on 1 Cor. xvi, 2: “Upon the first day of the week, let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come,” and, as now matured, suggests to all believers who are enjoying common prosperity, 1. That they give at the rate of two cents each week upon every one hundred dollars worth of property which they possess. 2. That they give a personal donation, each week, of from one to twenty-five cents, or more, according to their ability. The object of this second suggestion is to embrace those who have ability to earn, but have little or no property. The necessity and equality of the system are plead before all; yet all are left to assess their own property, and give, in the love and fear of God, according to their prosperity. Widows, the aged, and the infirm, who are in straitened circumstances, are excused. It is not a system of compulsion, but, as carried out among us, is Systematic Benevolence. While all are entreated to act their part in this work, with feelings of cheerful benevolence, none are compelled.

For a time this system received considerable opposition; but when fully explained, it was seen to be a perfect system of equality. The poor who had but a very few hundred dollars, were called upon by this system for so trifling a sum that they were the last to object to it; and the wealthy were certainly able to pay the small percentage from their abundance. This system is generally adopted by our people everywhere, and affords a liberal support to our ministers, leaving them free to devote themselves entirely to the work of the ministry.

GLANCE AT THE PAST.

As we look back upon the great Advent movement, with its joyful expectations and bitter disappointments, its prosperity and adversity, its triumphant victories and its trials, it appears just like the work of God in separating a people from the world, to purify, make white, and try, and thus make them ready for the coming of their Lord. Have Adventists been disappointed? So were the Israelites, in not immediately entering Canaan, and the disciples, as Jesus died upon the cross. Have the faith and patience of Adventists been tried? So were the faith and patience of the Israelites tried in their term of forty years’ wandering in the wilderness. And that of the disciples was severely tested in the unexpected death of their beloved Teacher. Have but comparatively few of the once happy expectants of the King of glory held fast their faith and hope? And have many cast away their confidence in this work and drawn back to perdition? Caleb and Joshua alone, of the six hundred thousand male adults that left Egypt, entered the goodly land. And what of the chosen twelve in the hour of our Lord’s apprehension? “Then all the disciples forsook him and fled.” Matt. xxvi, 56.

God has never been able to make anything very great or very good of man. It has been his plan to prove his people in every age, to test their faith and patience. This has been for the good of man and the glory of his name. It was necessary that such noble characters as Noah, Abraham, Job, and Daniel, should suffer the severest tests. And how unlike the work of God in all past time, had the many thousands of Adventists triumphantly entered the kingdom at the point of expectation, with hardly a single trial. “Blessed is the man that endureth temptation; for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life.” James i, 12. This is God’s plan. First the cross and the trial, then the crown of unfading glory. As I “call to remembrance the former days,” touching the Advent movement, and see its adaptation to the wants of the people, and God’s great plan of saving men, my soul says, “He hath done all things well.”

It was necessary, in order that the first message should arouse the people and separate those who should receive it from the spirit of the world, that it should not only relate to the fearful realities of the Judgment, but also to the period when it might be expected. “Fear God, and give glory to him, for the hour of his Judgment is come.” The proclamation of the time was a part of God’s plan. This brought the coming of the Lord very near. This was right. This was necessary to move the people. And when the time passed, instead of calling the attention of believers to some period in the future to which they might look for the coming of the Lord, the Spirit of God sweetly and powerfully applied to their consecrated minds and hearts, such passages as, “Cast not away, therefore, your confidence, which hath great recompense of reward. For ye have need of patience, that, after ye have done the will of God, ye might receive the promise. For yet a little while, and He that shall come will come, and will not tarry.”

How long this little while would be, no one knew. It was not best that any one should know when it would terminate. And more, it was God’s plan that this should not be known; but that they should move along through the period of the patience of the saints, Rev. xiv, 12, up to the coming of the Lord, ever keeping that event just before them. Those who have taught the three messages the past twenty years, have all the way presented the coming of Christ at hand. This has been as God designed. And those who would murmur at God’s ministers for this, murmur against the providence of God.

It is painful to hear those who have their faces set toward Egypt, complain that the message was not properly preached to them. The coming of the Lord was presented too near. And that if they had understood the matter, they should have laid their plans for the future differently, and now their property might be double its present value. These murmur against the direct providence of God. The coming of the Lord was brought very near in 1844, to rid men of the love of this world, that they might share the love of the Father, and seek a preparation for the coming of his Son. They cannot have both. “If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.” 1 John ii, 15. And it was designed that the coming of Christ should be viewed near by believers, every step of the way from the disappointment in 1844 to the gates of the golden city, to keep them free from the love of this world.

An energetic Advent minister, on visiting the believers at Roxbury, Mass., being asked, “What is your message now, Bro. B.?” answered, “Come out of her my people.” Soon after the passing of the time he visited that people again, and in reply to the inquiry, “What is your message now, Bro. B.?” made the apt and appropriate reply, “_Stay_ out of her my people.” So Heaven designed that the coming of Christ should be brought very near to tear from men the love of this world, and that in their faith they should ever hold his coming just before them all the way till faith should be lost in the blazing glories of the coming of the Son of man. If we keep the coming of Jesus ever near, and live consistently with such a faith, keeping the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus, we may be saved. But remove the coming of the Lord to the distant future, become imbued with the love and spirit of this world, and remain in such a state, and perdition is certain. Let the painful history of the past relative to those who have said in their hearts, “My Lord delayeth his coming,” have apostatized and have been scattered to the world and to Satan, be a warning to all to be ever “looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God.”

When the warning voice of the first angel was first heard, it found the nominal churches asleep upon the subject of the second advent, dreaming of the world’s conversion. But the truth was clear, and in the hands of devoted men, was powerful. Every where the message was proclaimed it produced general conviction. The Scriptures were searched as never before; a great revolution in religious belief took place in a few short years; and at least fifty thousand in America alone, became decided believers. The prophetic times in connection with that message served their purpose, and terminated with that message. The first angel’s message was a time message. The second and third are not time messages. That aroused men in view of the fast approaching Judgment. These tell them what they must do to be saved. And it has been Satan’s grand object to institute numerous time movements among certain Adventists since 1844, to contravene this work of preparation. The passing of each time has weakened the faith of believers, and has caused unbelievers to look upon Adventists with increasing disgust. And confusion and irreligion have resulted from these spurious time movements everywhere they have reached.

The title page of this work calls attention to the great Advent movement as illustrated by the three angels of Rev. xiv. The truth and work of God in this movement, commencing with the labors of William Miller, and reaching to the close of probation, is illustrated by these three angels. The first was a time message, and related to the Judgment. The second described the condition of corrupted Christianity. The third is a solemn warning relative to what men may not do, and what they must do, in order to be saved at the coming of Christ. These angels illustrate the three great divisions of the genuine movement. They do not illustrate the numerous time movements which have appeared since 1844; therefore, to say the very least, these movements were not from Heaven.

Seventh-day Adventists hold fast the great Advent movement, hence have use for the messages. They explain them in their sermons, treat upon them in their books, and give them a place with the other prophetic symbols upon their charts. They cannot spare these links in the golden chain of truth, that connect the past with the present and future, and show a beautiful harmony in the great whole.

Timeists, and in fact all Adventists who do not acknowledge the special providence of God in the work of William Miller and his associates, in 1843 and 1844, have no use for the three angels’ messages. They do not introduce them into their sermons and printed expositions of prophecy, unless it be to oppose us. They find no place for them among the other prophetic symbols upon their charts. Indeed, they treat them with all that neglect that would be justifiable, were they a wicked interpolation by men who sought to corrupt the sacred Scriptures. And no reason can be given why these men should pursue their fanatical course in relation to definite time, and other fancies not symbolized by the three angels, and therefore no part of the great movement, and resist the truth of God for this time, unless it be that in consequence of not receiving and retaining the love of the truth of the fulfillment of prophecy in the Advent movement, God has given them over to strong delusions. I repeat it. The three messages symbolize the three parts of the genuine movement. That which has appeared not symbolized by the three angels, though it be branded “Adventism,” is spurious.

Again, the sanctuary was the heart of the typical system. It was the repository of the ark of God, in which ark his law was deposited. By this law the people had the knowledge of sin. It was also the place where they, in figure, found pardon for their sins through the offerings there made. This entire system, with its great center, the sanctuary, was but the shadow of the realities of the present system of salvation. The shadow was on earth; the reality is in Heaven. The facts are stated by the apostle in few words: “We have such an High Priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; a minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.” Heb. viii, 1, 2. The sanctuary of the new covenant, which is in Heaven, is the great heart of the plan of redemption. There Christ offers his blood for the sins of men. In the real tabernacle there are two holies, if there were two in the shadow. In the holiest is the ark of God, containing the ten precepts of his law, if they were in the holiest of the shadow. Here is a theme worthy the attention of all Christians. And it is one in which they should feel the deepest interest, as each has a case of eternal consequence pending there.

The work of cleansing this sanctuary, at the close of the 2300 days, is a subject which should materially interest all Adventists. It pertains to the confession, pardon, and blotting out of sins. A correct and intelligent faith sees the adorable Redeemer in the most holy of the true tabernacle, offering his blood before the mercy seat for the sins of those who have broken the law of God beneath it in the ark. True faith reaches within the second vail, where Jesus and the ark of God are seen. There, by the law we have the knowledge of sin, and through the blood of Jesus we may find pardon, and share eternal redemption. The subject of the cleansing of this sanctuary, then, is one of most thrilling interest, especially to all Adventists. It is the key to the great Advent movement, making all plain. Without it the movement is inexplicable.

Seventh-day Adventists dwell upon this subject with great delight. It opens to them the ark of God, in which is seen the ten precepts of his law. They keep them. It presents Jesus before the mercy-seat, ready to plead the cause of sinners, who in the spirit of penitence and confession, go to him for help. They love and seek to obey him, so that it is said of them, “Here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.” They treat upon the subject of the sanctuary in their sermons and books, and find a place for it among the symbols of prophecy upon their charts. Seventh-day Adventists cannot spare the subject of the sanctuary, as it is the great center around which all revealed truth relative to salvation clusters, and contributes more toward defining their present position, than any other.

But nominal Adventists treat the subject as one of no interest or importance to them. Having in their own hearts abolished the ten commandments, they have no use for the ark of God, and cast it aside as an antiquated and unfashionable piece of furniture. Their sermons, and their printed essays and expositions, do not refer to the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary, unless it be to oppose the views of Seventh-day Adventists, and ridicule them, and ignorantly and contemptuously talk of Heaven being dirty, and needing cleansing. And as in the case of the three angels, you do not find the sanctuary represented upon their prophetic charts.

But these we value above all earthly good, and make them prominent in all our religious teachings, because the truth of God for this time, or present truth, is in them. And for this reason those who “call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter,” cast this subject from them, as unworthy of their notice, unless it be to oppose, denounce and ridicule.

THE TONGUE OF SLANDER.

During the rise and progress of the third message, the tongue of slander has not been silent. Men will use the best arguments they have. When unable from the Bible to meet the positions of those who teach unpopular truth, some will resort to slander as the next best argument. The case is sometimes felt to be urgent and even desperate. Truth is mighty. The people will hear, and some will obey. These are frequently the best members of the various religious bodies. Efforts at argument from the Bible, in opposition, fail to silence the voice of truth, and in some cases turn the minds of many of the people to the truth. Something must be done. And it is painful to record, that in many cases professed ministers of Jesus Christ deal in smut and blacking, and stoop to invent and repeat the vilest slanders to prejudice the people against those who plead for the truth of God.

“There are hundreds of ministers in the United States who, if disturbed in their quiet possession of the ears of the people, by the proclamation of the unpopular truths of the third message in their vicinity, would take delight in repeating the old threadbare falsehoods concerning ascension robes, and the like, to cut off the influence of the servant of God.

“In almost every place where our ministers give discourses upon the second coming of Christ, and the necessary preparation for that event, they have to labor against the prejudices of the people, caused by reports of the inconsistencies of Adventists; one of which is, that at a point of expectation in the past, many of them did prepare robes of white linen, and put them on ready to ascend and meet their coming Lord.

“While all sane persons, who have any knowledge of what the holy Scriptures do teach of the necessary preparation to meet the Lord as he shall descend from Heaven, will agree that to prepare a literal white robe made of cloth as a fitting preparation for the transit from earth to Heaven, from mortality to immortality, must be an indication of downright insanity, none will see in such an act evidences of criminality.

“But I do not believe that anything of the kind ever occurred. I have been actively engaged in the proclamation of the doctrine of the second advent for more than twenty-five years, and have traveled and preached in Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, Iowa, and Canada, and have not met a person who has seen an Adventist thus attired, or one that was able to give better proofs that anything of the kind ever did occur than vague reports. I have never found the place where the thing occurred. It was always in the next town, county, or State.

“Again, reports in relation to this matter, and slanders of a similar nature, have a hundred times been denied in Second-Advent periodicals, and proofs have been called for of the truthfulness of these statements. No one has been able to produce the proofs. But still the tongue of slander takes delight in repeating the old threadbare falsehood. Elders Loughborough and Strong met it at Orange, Mich., in January, 1868, and Elder Cornell met the same at Johnstown, Mich., a few weeks later. In both cases the miserable untruth was declared from the pulpit by professed ministers of Jesus Christ.

“The people, generally, credit the statements of these ministers, and conclude that the story of ascension robes is true. Especially do those who are not favorable to Second-Advent views enjoy this sort of clerical slander. And the fact that our people are not always prepared to meet it, is the reason why I have felt called upon to notice the matter at this time.

“In 1847, while on our passage in a steamboat from Portland, Me., to Boston, Mass., Mrs. W. was speaking to those around her in the ladies’ cabin, of the fearful storm we encountered in a recent passage between these two cities. She spoke of the importance of being always prepared for the close of our probation, either at death, or at the coming of Christ. A lady near her replied:

“‘That is the way the Millerites talk. I mean to have a jolly good time before I become a long-faced Christian. The Millerites are the most deluded set on earth. On the day they were expecting Christ to come, companies in different places put on their ascension robes, and went into graveyards, and upon the tops of houses and high hills, and there remained, praying and singing till the time passed by.’

“Mrs. W. then inquired of the lady if she saw any of these persons thus attired. She answered:

“‘No, I did not see them myself, but a friend who saw them told me. And the fact is so well understood everywhere, that I believe it as much as though I saw it myself.’

“At this point another lady, feeling that the testimony of the first should not be questioned, stated:

“‘It is of no use to deny that the Millerites did put on ascension robes, for they did it in towns all around where I live.’

“Mrs. W. asked this lady if she saw them with their robes on. She replied:

“‘No, I did not see them, as they were not in my immediate neighborhood. But it was commonly reported, and generally believed, that they did make ascension robes and put them on.’

“By this time strong feelings were evidently controlling these two ladies, because Mrs. W. did not seem to credit what they said against the Millerites. And the first in the conversation stated with emotions of excitement and passion:

“‘I know it was so. I fully believe the testimony of those who have told me these things. I believe what my friends have told me about those fanatical Millerites, the same as though I saw it myself.’

“Mrs. W. then inquired of her for the names of some persons who had figured in this fanatical movement. She stated if the putting on of ascension robes was so very common, certainly she could give the names of some. To this she replied:

“‘Certainly I can give you names. There were the twin Harmon girls in Portland. My friends told me that they saw their robes, and saw them going out to the graveyard with them on. Since the time has passed, they have become infidels.’

“A school-mate of Mrs. W., who had never been an Adventist, was in that cabin, and had watched the conversation with mirthful interest. She had been acquainted with the Harmon girls during the entire period of their Second-Advent experience. She could no longer restrain her feelings, and broke out in a laughing mood, as she pointed to Mrs. W.:

“‘This is one of those twin Harmon girls. I have known them always, and know that this report of their making and wearing ascension robes is all a lie. I never was a Millerite, yet I do not believe that anything of the kind ever took place.’

“The storm that was fast arising in that cabin suddenly abated, and there followed a great calm. Mrs. W. then stated that all the stories about ascension robes were probably as destitute of truth as this one concerning the twin Harmon girls.

“Elder Josiah Litch, lately editor of the _Advent Herald_, Boston, in his history of the rise and progress of Adventism, makes the following statement:

“‘Those periods came and passed with no unusual occurrence. As soon as they had gone by, a flood of scoffing, reviling and persecution burst forth, not from the infidel world so much, but from the professed friends of the Saviour; the most idle and foolish stories of ascension robes, and going out into the graveyards to watch, going to the tops of the houses, &c., &c. These were repeated again and again, both from pulpit and press, until the public were, many of them, at least, almost persuaded to believe them true.

“‘How, or where they originated, except in willful falsehood, we cannot devise. Some of the reports of that character, we happen to know, originated with professed ministers of the gospel, who gave date and place, when there was not a word of truth in the whole story. Others must have originated in a similar way.’”

The foregoing, relative to the ascension robes, was given in the _Review and Herald_ for April 14, 1868. The article closed with the following paragraph:

“Fifty dollars reward is offered to any person who will present unquestionable proofs of the truthfulness of the statements, that believers in the second advent of Christ, on the day of expectation, did put on ascension robes. Those who can produce such proofs, are requested to forward them immediately to the writer, at Greenville, Montcalm County, Mich., and receive fifty dollars by return mail.”

Up to this date, July 13, 1868, no one has responded in the way of furnishing proofs that anything of the kind ever took place. Why this silence on the part of our friends, as well as our enemies, if there be the least semblance of truth in the statements upon this subject, gravely made by ministers in the desk as a part of the gospel they preach? If proofs exist, why can we not have them? The reader should regard these statements about ascension robes, which opposing clergymen have the credit of repeating, more than any other class, as malicious slanders, until he has reliable proofs that something of the kind occurred.

The _Review and Herald_ for May 20, 1868, has the following from Eld. J. H. Waggoner, which fairly represents this matter of ascension robes:

“Bro. White’s remarks on the falsehoods circulated on the above subject, remind me of an incident that transpired some years since in Wisconsin. A Mr. H., an M. E. preacher, deriding the Adventists, said: ‘It is a fact that they prepared and put on ascension robes in 1844.’ At the close of his remarks I stated that I was very anxious to learn about the facts on that subject, and asked him to give particulars, as to where, by whom, &c. He said that it was not always convenient to give the evidence on matters which had transpired years in the past, and he could not then comply with the request. I turned to the congregation and said:

“‘He has said it is a fact. Now if he does not know it to be a fact, he has made a false statement. If he knows it to be a fact, he can procure the evidence of the fact. As he has an appointment here four weeks from to-day, I give notice that I will be here at that time to get his statement, as that will give him time to get the information. If it occurred _anywhere_, it will be easy to prove it in that locality. I hope the people will all be here to get the facts he may present.’

“Being thus pressed to make good his assertion, and having the expectation of the people raised on it, he saw the necessity of doing something, and promptly confessed that he knew nothing about it, but had heard such a report!

“The way the report ran was well illustrated by the following case: A Bro. T., who had lived and labored in Buffalo, and attended the Advent meetings there, was working in Erie in the fall of 1844. After the set day passed, the report spread in Erie that the Adventists in Buffalo put on ascension robes. He was so grieved over their folly, and troubled in his mind, that he determined to visit his friends in Buffalo and talk with them about it. Landing at Buffalo, he met an acquaintance, not an Adventist, who did not know where he came from. He asked if any of the Adventists in Buffalo had put on ascension robes. ‘No,’ said his friend, ‘but they all did in Erie!’ A smile by Bro. T. led to an explanation. And so it was everywhere. Everybody _knew_ it was so--the _place_ where it occurred could not be found.”

The part which the Spirit of God has led Mrs. W. to act in close connection with the cause of present truth, has called forth against her a spirit of persecution. The apostle says, “Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice.” Eph. iv, 31. But these have been employed against her by the professed followers of Jesus Christ, with the object to crush her testimony and destroy her influence. In this cruel work, with some the tongue of slander has been “set on fire of hell.”

The work of the Lord through her has been to encourage the weak, comfort the desponding, exalt the standard of morality and true piety, and reprove sin in all its forms? And why should not the dragon rage? Why may we not expect to see those who are imbued with the spirit of the father of lies, delighting themselves in the most slanderous falsehoods against one who may be engaged in such a work? Such has ever been the work of Satan in all past time, and ever will be, till he is bound. And he has ever found, and ever will find, willing tools to do his work in opposition to the work of God. And these are more frequently found among ministers than any other class. The following from Eld. M. E. Cornell, which occurred on his route from Battle Creek to Ionia, will illustrate the wicked course of some of those who love to be called “Reverend:”

“While on the cars, a circumstance occurred which shows the necessity of Bro. White’s article on Clerical Slander. A Presbyterian minister from Gratiot county was making special efforts to attract attention to himself by his endeavors to amuse the passengers. Among other things, he stated that Mrs. White had a vision at St. Louis, Gratiot Co., Mich., that she was to leave her husband and take another man; that a man might have as many wives as he chose. He then made some, not very refined, remarks and witticisms, which excited laughter in some, but disgust in the pure-minded. In the cars were several clergymen, and many intelligent ladies and gentlemen from several different States. Of course we could not let such a base slander pass, and a wrong impression go to so many different places; we therefore watched for a chance to correct the misstatement.

“An intelligent Jew soon entered into conversation with him, and turned the tables on him by relating an old slander against Martin Luther, that he had a child by his own daughter, &c. The minister was aroused. Said he, ‘It is a base slander, invented by his enemies. There is not a particle of proof of any such thing.’ He then came down upon the Jew with the most cutting reproof for making such a statement from hearsay evidence. Now our time had come. The measure he had meted to others had been immediately measured to him again.

“We then stated to the passengers that we had known Eld. White and his wife for sixteen years, and that the statement made by the clergyman was an unmitigated slander. First, Mrs. White never had a vision in Gratiot county; and second, she never had a vision, anywhere, of any such nature as had been stated. We then challenged him to stop at Owasso, with any of his friends as witnesses, and we would secure for him _one thousand dollars_, on the condition that he should make good his statement. We urged him to the task with such earnestness, that all in the car appeared to be convinced that he had uttered a slander. He was embarrassed, and said faintly, ‘I heard so!’

“An intelligent Infidel, from Dearborn, Mich., then rose up, and made some very pointed remarks on hearsay evidence and condemning a whole body of people, because of a story about some one of their number. ‘Shall I,’ said he, ‘call the Methodists a set of cut-throats, because several of their preachers are now in our penitentiary? Shall I condemn all ministers, because one in our town ran away with Bro. M.’s wife, last week?’ By this time, the tide was turned completely. Several of the passengers expressed themselves very freely to me, and were anxious to know more about it”--_Advent Review for April 28, 1868_.

I do not believe that all ministers who differ with us in faith and practice are alike guilty with this man. No decent man, in or out of the ministry, would take pleasure in uttering such vile slander before a car full of ladies and gentlemen, however much he might feel opposed to the religious sentiments of Seventh-day Adventists. I believe there are God-fearing ministers in all the churches who would no sooner bear false witness of a slanderous character against those who are devoting their lives to the cause of Christ, than they would have the same done to themselves. But while these may be few and far between, the experience of a quarter of a century in teaching unpopular truth has taught me that, where personal interest is concerned, there are but very few ministers who will not stoop to the repetition of the vilest slanders, to injure the influence of those who get the ears of the people, if they differ with them. But in reference to the statements of Eld. Cornell, I will say:

1. Mrs. W. never was at St. Louis, Gratiot County, Michigan.

2. She never had a vision in Gratiot County.

3. Her standard of morality ever has been the ten commandments.

4. Her views, her public and private labors, her books and oral teachings, have ever been in strict harmony with the law of God, the highest standard of morality on earth.

5. She has ever borne the most decided testimony against any departure from the principles guarded by the ten commandments.

6. She has borne a public testimony for twenty-five years, in the several States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, Iowa, and in Canada. She has, during this time, written books amounting to more than twenty-one hundred pages, besides many articles for several periodicals. And all who are acquainted with her teachings know that any statement that they are not in strict harmony with God’s standard of morality, is a slanderous untruth. Then let her enemies point to one impure sentence in all her writings, or prove that in her religious teachings she has uttered one unchaste word, or cease their slanderous persecution of a self-sacrificing Christian woman.

But I do not indulge the thought that whatever may be said to show the falsity of statements concerning ascension robes, and the views of Mrs. W., will silence the tongue of slander. No. These ministers know the influence they have with the public mind, and the advantages they have over us in this respect. Regardless of justice and truth, they will doubtless continue to do this scandalous work, wherever the glorious doctrine of the coming of Jesus shall be proclaimed. We can only expose their sin in this thing, and disabuse honest minds.

The dragon is wroth with those who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. The Devil will use any willing tool to slander and abuse the followers of Jesus Christ. Scoffers will scoff, and liars will lie, whether they bear the title of Reverend, or be patrons of brothels. And the higher the position, the greater the criminality. But for all these things will God bring them into Judgment. Those who fear God and keep his commandments, and suffer reproach for the sake of Christ and the truth, will have their reward. Those who employ the vile tongue of slander against them, in order to crush their influence and keep others from obeying the commandments that they may live, will perish in all their villainy. They, also, will have their reward. The True Witness has spoken relative to the present controversy and the final destiny of both classes of actors, as recorded by the prophet John.

_First Class._ “Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.” Rev. xxii, 14. These are doing right. Although they suffer for well doing, all the hate and slander that wicked men and demons can invent, their reward is the holy city and the tree of life.

_Second Class._ “For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.” Verse 15. These are commandment-breakers, and commandment-haters, and haters of those who keep the commandments of God. They are also noted for two things in particular, namely, loving and making lies. The application of these two items is so natural to these reports of ascension robes and the like, that no further comment is needed. They make lies, and love to publish them from the pulpit and the religious press. But, thank God, in the Judgment they are without. The happiness of those who love God and keep his commandments is then no more to be marred by their poisonous influence. Would God that they would repent of, and forsake, their wicked course, and live, and finally share the holy city and the tree of life. But as they will not do this work, that they may share that reward, their corrupting influence must be borne with Christian patience and fortitude while the controversy lasts.

PRESENT POSITION AND WORK.

1. Seventh-day Adventists have nothing to do with definite time, only to show that the prophetic periods served the design of the Author of prophecy in the first angel’s message, and that they terminated with the midnight cry in 1844. Having no definite time to which to look for the coming of the Lord, yet seeing from the signs of the times, and the fulfillment of prophecy, the great Advent movement thus far, that the event is at the door, they regard the present as emphatically the waiting, watching time. Their position since their disappointment in 1844 has been a trying one, requiring faith and patience to hold fast the Advent movement in the past, and to meet in a Christian spirit the opposition to the observance of the Sabbath of the Lord. Hence it is said of this time, and of this people, “Here is the patience of the saints; here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.” Should we become weary of watching and waiting for the return of our Lord from the wedding, impatiently cast away our confidence in the great Advent movement, cease to keep the Sabbath, draw back, fall away, and crucify the Lord God afresh, it might then be said of us, Here is the impatience of the saints, (?) here are they that break the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

2. We solemnly believe that it was the design of God that definite time should be proclaimed, and that the 2300 days reached to the Judgment, referred to in the words of the first angel, “Fear God and give glory to him, for the hour of his Judgment is come.” In the great Judgment of mankind there are two distinct parts; first, the investigative; second, the executive. The investigative Judgment takes place prior to the second advent, and the resurrection of the just, that it may be known who are worthy of the first resurrection. Those who have part in that resurrection are first ascertained to be “blessed and holy.” Rev. xx, 6. The executive Judgment, both in the reward of the righteous, and the punishment of the wicked, will be at the close of the great day of Judgment.

The grandeur of the sitting of the great court of Heaven in the investigative Judgment is described by the prophet thus: “I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool; his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him; thousand thousands ministered unto him and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him. The Judgment was set, and the books were opened. I saw in the night visions, and behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom.” Dan. vii, 9, 10, 13, 14.

The best authorities give the words “cast down” just the opposite meaning. They render them “set up,” or “established.” Thus, Adam Clarke says: “_The thrones were cast down_ might be translated _erected_; so the Vulgate, _positi sunt_, and so all the versions.” Dr. Hales, in his “Sacred Chronology,” Vol. ii, p. 505, renders Dan. vii, 9, thus: “I beheld till the thrones were erected, and the Ancient of days sat,” &c. The Douay Version reads, “were placed;” and so Bernard, and Boothroyd and Wintle in the Cottage Bible. Matthew Henry in his Exposition renders it “set up.” Of the original Hebrew word, Gesenius, in his Lexicon says, “_R’mah_, (1.) To cast, to throw, Dan. iii, 20, 21, 24; vi, 17. (2.) To set, to place, _e. g._, thrones. Dan vii, 9; comp. Rev. iv, 2.” The term used by the Septuagint is θρόνοι ἐτέθησαν, which literally rendered, according to Liddell and Scott, would be, “the thrones were set.” Other authorities might be given.

The Judgment scene here introduced opens with,

1st. The establishment of thrones and the sitting in Judgment of the great God, amid the brightness of that glory, feebly represented by fire and flame, accompanied by the millions of his attendants.

2d. The opening of the life-records of men, from which they are to be judged.

3d. The Son of man approaches the Ancient of days, attended by multitudes of angels, here represented by the clouds of heaven, to receive dominion, glory, and a kingdom. This does not represent the second appearing of Christ to this world, unless it can be shown that the Ancient of days is here.

3. Seventh-day Adventists believe in the perpetuity of spiritual gifts. They believe that the spirit of prophecy was designed to be with the people of God in all ages, and that dreams and visions are a medium through which God has spoken to his people in past time, and through which he will speak, till faith is lost in sight. “If there be a prophet among you, I, the Lord, will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream.” Num. xii, 6.

They find no prophecy in the Old Testament pointing to the opening of the Christian age as the time for spiritual gifts to be removed from the people of God, and no declaration in the New Testament that the church would not need them, and that therefore they were about to cease. No, nothing of this kind appears upon the sacred page. But we hear the prophet of God say, “And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions. And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my Spirit. And I will shew wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and the terrible day of the Lord come. And it shall come to pass that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be delivered; for in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the Lord hath said, and in the remnant whom the Lord shall call.” Joel ii, 28-32.

Notice, first, that the prophet points to the last days, as quoted by Peter. Acts ii, 16-20. There can be no days later than the last, a period in which these things will be removed from the church; and, second, that he also points to signs and wonders in the heavens, and in the earth, in the sun and in the moon, to appear in connection with the manifestation of the spirit of prophecy. Third, he mentions the deliverance of those who call on the name of the Lord. This naturally applies to the deliverance of God’s people who will cry to him day and night in the time of trouble. Luke xviii; Dan. xii. They will be delivered, according to the words of the prophet. And may not the “remnant” here mentioned be the same spoken of in Rev. xii, 17? “And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.”

The woman is a symbol of the church, and the remnant of the church represents the Christians of the last generation of men living just prior to the second advent. The dragon makes war on these for keeping the commandments of God, Sabbath and all, and having the testimony of Jesus Christ, which according to the inspired definition of chap. xix, 10, “is the spirit of prophecy.” Here, then, are the causes of the dragon’s warfare upon the remnant. They teach the observance of the ten commandments, and the revival of the gifts, and acknowledge the gift of prophecy among them. When the Devil got one foot upon the fourth commandment, and the other upon the gifts planted in the Christian church by Jesus Christ, then his satanic majesty was filled with revengeful delight. But when the remnant, whom God designs to fit for translation to Heaven without seeing death, “ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein,” then the dragon is wroth, and makes war on them.

The true spirit of the dragonic host, which is already being somewhat developed, is vividly described in Isa. xxx, 8-13, as being manifested just prior to the sudden destruction of those who hate the pure testimony, and love smooth and deceitful things.

“Now go, write it before them in a table, and note it in a book, that it may be for the time to come forever and ever [margin, ‘the latter day’]; that this is a rebellious people, lying children, children that will not hear the law of the Lord; which say to the seers, See not; and to the prophets, Prophesy not unto us right things, speak unto us smooth things, prophesy deceits; get you out of the way, turn aside out of the path, cause the Holy One of Israel to cease from before us. Wherefore thus saith the Holy One of Israel, Because ye despise this word, and trust in oppression and perverseness, and stay thereon: therefore this iniquity shall be to you as a breach ready to fall, swelling out in a high wall whose breaking cometh suddenly at an instant.”

Mark this: In “the latter day” men will not hear the law of the Lord, the commandments of God; and they will say to the seers, those who have the spirit of prophecy, See not. They will receive neither. They war against both. See also Mark xvi, 15-20; Matt. xxviii, 18-20; Eph. iv, 4-13; 1 Cor. xii, 1, 28; xiii, 8-12; i, 4-8; Rev. xix, 10; 1 Thess. v; Matt. vii, 15-20; Isa. viii, 19, 20; Jer. xiv, 14; xxiii, 16, 17; viii, 10, 11; v, 30, 31. For a full exposition of the subject of the perpetuity of spiritual gifts, as held by Seventh-day Adventists, see their works upon the subject.

But it is objected that since the volume of inspiration was completed, spiritual gifts have not been needed. Who knows this to be the case? The disciples of Jesus had the law and the prophets, yet needed the manifestations of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. We have both Testaments, and who knows that we do not also need the gifts of the Spirit of God?

The great design of the sacred Scriptures was to give man a perfect rule of faith and practice. God purposed that his people should follow this rule and by it develop characters perfect before him. Said Paul to Timothy, “Thou hast known the holy Scriptures which are able to make thee wise unto salvation.” There is no fault in the Scriptures that makes it necessary that the gifts of the Holy Spirit should be manifested. The necessities in the case exist in the imperfections of the people of God, in the fact that they do not follow their perfect rule.

We now see the gifts of the Spirit occupying their proper place. They are not manifested to give a rule of faith and practice. We already have a rule that is perfect in the Sacred Writings. But in consequence of the errors of God’s people, and their deviations in faith and practice from this perfect rule, God in mercy manifests the gifts to reprove their errors, and lead them to a correct understanding of the holy Scriptures. This is the position of the gifts. They were not designed to take the place of the Scriptures. And they are not given because the Scriptures are an imperfect rule of faith and practice. But in consequence of the errors of God’s professed people, in departing from the perfect rule, which he has given them, the gifts are manifested to correct the erring, and point them to the Bible as their lamp and guide.

God designed that his people should be one. This was the burden of the prayer of Jesus. John xvii. Hear him as he prays in agony, “That they all may be one, as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us, that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.” Paul exhorted the Corinthians in the name of Christ to be perfectly joined together in the same mind, and in the same judgment. Read 1 Cor. i, 10; Rom. xv, 5; Phil. ii, 1, 2; 1 Pet. iii, 8; v, 5. But do we see this unity in those who profess to take the Bible as their rule, and reject the gifts? We see divisions, and with many, confusion to the utmost. The fault, however, is not in the Bible. It is in those who fail to follow the teachings of the sacred Scriptures. And God in mercy and condescension infinite purposes to help them by the gifts. But many of them refuse to be helped in this way, because that in the Bible they have a perfect rule. If they obeyed the sacred Scriptures, and walked in unity, both among themselves, and with God, they would not need the gifts. But in their confusion, and their distance from Christ, while still rejecting the gifts, there is no help for them in God.

Again, I ask, Who knows that the gifts of the Holy Spirit have not been needed since the completion of the volume of inspiration? It is admitted that when completed it was a more perfect rule then when but a portion of it was given. But how does its completion take the place of the gifts? If they were given because of the imperfections of the people of God, their removal supposes perfection on the part of God’s people. Do we find perfection in the church since the days of Paul, to that degree as to need no special manifestations of the Spirit, reproving sin and correcting deviations from God’s perfect rule? The history of the church, setting forth her terrible apostasies and corruptions, her endless schisms, divisions and creeds, and her conflicting expositions of the plainest truths of the Bible, testifies too plainly of her imperfections. Her sad history and present wretchedness, show that necessity still remains, since the completion of the Book of God, for the manifestations of the gifts of the Spirit.

The gift of prophecy is by the apostle classed with the callings of the Christian church in Eph. iv, 11-13. He distinctly states their object: “And he gave some, apostles, and some, prophets, and some, evangelists, and some, pastors and teachers, for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ.” These were _all_ given at the same time, all for the same purpose, _all_ to cease at the same time. Do we recognize in the Christian church, evangelists, pastors, and teachers? Why not prophets? Does the church still need them? Why not the gift of prophecy? Will those continue till the church is perfected, ready to meet her descending Lord? So will the gift of prophecy.

Paul, in his letter to the Corinthians, has spoken very definitely upon this subject of spiritual gifts. In 1 Cor. xii, 1, he says: “Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.” He regarded this subject as one of the highest importance, and urges an understanding of it. In all he has said relative to it, he has not once intimated that the gifts were to cease before the perfect day of glory should come. But he does clearly point to the time when the gifts will cease. 1 Cor. xiii. 8-12: “Charity [ἀγαπη--love,] never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. For now we see through a glass darkly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then shall I know even as also I am known.”

The apostle here contrasts the mortal state with the immortal; the present imperfect, with that which will be perfect; the cloudy present while we walk by faith, with the open glory of the life to come. Here, we only know in part, prophesy in part; there, that which is in part, will be done away. Here, we see through a glass darkly; there, face to face. Here, we know in part; there, we shall know, even as we are known. Charity, or love, will never end. Here, it is the highest Christian grace; there, it will be the crowning glory of immortals for ever and for ever. In this sense love will never fail. But prophecies will fail, tongues will cease, and knowledge will vanish away. The light of Heaven through the dim medium of these, and the other gifts of the Holy Spirit, is represented as being only in part, to be superseded by the perfect day of glory when we may talk face to face with God, Christ, and angels, as our first parents talked with God in Eden before sin entered. But when? This is the vital question. When were the gifts to be done away? Let Paul answer: “But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.” “And let all the people say, Amen.”

4. God has had a truth in every age, by which he has tested the people of that age. This was true in the days of Noah, and at the first advent of Christ. It is especially true at the present time, as God is preparing to visit the wicked with judgments and the righteous with salvation. All revealed, practical, truth ever has been, and ever will be, a test of man’s fidelity to God. He will have to give an account to the Author of truth how he treats it. If he obeys, he may be saved; if he rejects it, and violates its claims upon him, he must be lost.

But the law of God, in an eminent sense, is a test to man. It is the highest authority in all earth and Heaven. If God’s law is not a test, there is no such thing as a test. Seventh-day Adventists solemnly believe that God is proving and testing the people by his holy law. In point of sacredness and importance, they regard the fourth commandment equal to either of the other nine, and the sin of violating it, when as well understood, equal to that of breaking either of them. They believe that the present time, in the providence of God, during the proclamation of the third angel’s message, is the period for the Sabbath reform, and that in the last message, the Sabbath of Jehovah is to be the special test in the law of God for the people. The great question to be decided before the wrath of God shall be poured out upon a guilty and ruined world is, Who will be loyal to the God of Heaven? Such, if washed from their sins by the blood of Christ, become heirs to the future inheritance, and receive a crown of unfading glory at the second appearing of Jesus. Says Christ, “If thou wilt enter into life keep the commandments.”

Seventh-day Adventists are charged with making the Sabbath a test. And some will have it that we denounce and reject all who do not believe as we do. It is true that we teach that God is testing the people by his law. But we deny the charge that we denounce and reject those who differ from us. Our course toward all men whom we can reach with our publications, our sermons and our entreaties, proves the charge false. We beseech all men, without respect to profession of religion, color, or rank in society, to turn from their sins, keep God’s commandments and live. And we manifest a zeal and earnestness in this matter somewhat in proportion to the importance of the testing message we bear. And because our testimony is pointed and earnest, condemning those who choose to pass along with the popular current, and violate the law of God, some are disturbed, and with feelings of retaliation, falsely charge us. It is not our work to test, condemn, and denounce, the people. It is not in our hearts to unnecessarily injure the feelings of any. But with our present convictions of truth and duty, we should do great violence to our own consciences, and sin against God, should we cease to declare to the people the purpose of God in testing the world by his law, just before the day of wrath.

And God has greatly blessed such testimony. As a people, Seventh-day Adventists were heard of, as it were, but yesterday. As a people, they do not claim to be more than a score of years old. And yet in point of numbers and efficiency they have a little strength. And why? Because, when they have borne a pointed and earnest testimony, God has been with them, and added to their numbers and strength.

But if the Sabbath is not a test, it is not worth our while to be to the trouble of teaching and observing it in the face of decided opposition. If we can be as good Christians while breaking the fourth commandment, as while keeping it, should we not at once seek to be in harmony with the rest of the Christian world? Why be so odd as to obey the commandment of God, if one can be as good a Christian while living in violation of it? And there are frequent inconveniences, and pecuniary sacrifices, to be suffered by those who are so particular concerning the observance of the fourth commandment. If the Sabbath is of so little importance as not to be a test of Christian fellowship and eternal salvation; if men who break the Sabbath should be embraced in our fellowship the same as if they observed it; and if they can reach Heaven as surely in violating the fourth commandment as in keeping it; why not abandon it at once, and cease to agitate the public mind with a question of no real importance which is so unpleasant and annoying.

Seventh-day Adventists believe that in the restoration of the Bible Sabbath, under the last message of mercy, God designs to make it a test to the people. Hence many of them labor with earnestness to teach it, and are ready to make any sacrifices in order to observe it, and do their duty in teaching it to others. Convince them that it is not a test, and they will not trouble the people nor themselves longer with it. But should they give the people to understand that they regard the Sabbath of so little importance as not to be a test, “the sword of the Spirit,” on that subject at least, would become in their hands as powerless as a straw. They could not then convict the people upon this subject. Indeed their position before the people, in earnestly calling their attention to a subject that is of so little importance as not to constitute a test of Christian character, and which would subject them to a heavy cross, much inconvenience, sacrifice, and reproach, would be but little less than solemn mockery. With our present view of the importance of the subject, we have a sufficient reason for earnestly urging the claims of the fourth commandment upon our fellow-men.

The remarks of Elder J. N. Andrews in reference to the Sabbatarians of England in the seventeenth century, have so direct a bearing upon this subject that I give the following from his History of the Sabbath, pp. 335, 336:

“The laws of England during that century were very oppressive to all dissenters from the established church, and bore exceedingly hard upon the Sabbath-keepers. Yet fine, imprisonment, and even capital punishment, would not have proved sufficient to suppress the Sabbath. It was in the house of its own friends that the Sabbath was wounded. In the seventeenth century eleven churches of Sabbatarians flourished in England, while many scattered Sabbath-keepers were to be found in various parts of that kingdom. Now but three of those churches are in existence. It was not the lack of able men among the Sabbath-keepers to defend the truth, nor the fierce assaults of their persecutors, that has thus reduced them to a handful. The fault is their own, not indeed for any disgraceful conduct on their part, but simply because they made the Sabbath of no practical importance, and lowered the standard of divine truth in this thing to the dust. The Sabbath-keeping ministers assumed the pastoral care of first-day churches, in some cases as their sole charge, in others they did this in connection with the oversight of Sabbatarian churches. The result need surprise no one; as both ministers and people said to all men, in thus acting, that the fourth commandment might be broken with impunity, the people took them at their word. Mr. Crosby, a first-day historian, sets this matter in a clear light:

“‘If the seventh day ought to be observed as the Christian Sabbath, then all congregations that observe the first day as such must be Sabbath-breakers.... I must leave those gentlemen on the contrary side to their own sentiments; and to vindicate the practice of becoming pastors to a people whom in their conscience they must believe to be breakers of the Sabbath.’”

The Seventh-day Baptists of America have done a good work in teaching the Sabbath. We should respect them, and regard them with peculiar interest for this. But had they been faithful to the sacred trust committed to them, their numbers and strength might have been a hundred-fold greater than they now are. They have had the reproach, the cross, and the inconvenience of the Sabbath, without that strength and force which teaching it as a test gives. For nearly two centuries, in their feebleness, they have been holding up the Sabbath, while, if they had been faithful in teaching it, in observing it, and urging it upon the consciences of the people, the Sabbath would have held them up, and been the strength of that people.

Seventh-day Adventists have nothing to boast of. God has often reproved and chastised us for unfaithfulness. And when we have returned to him, and humbly and faithfully battled for the truth, amid reproaches and persecutions, he has greatly blessed us. Nothing is so much to be dreaded as that calm which is the result of tempering unpopular, testing truth to the ears of the people so as not to offend. Rather let the reproach come, and the storm rage, if it be the result of speaking the truth of God in love.

As a people we have had our difficulties to surmount, our trials to bear, and our victories to gain. We are gathered from Methodists, Regular Baptists, Freewill Baptists, Seventh-day Baptists, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Episcopalians, Dutch Reform, Disciples, Christians, Lutherans, United Brethren, Catholics, Universalists, Worldlings, and Infidels. We are composed of native Americans, English, Welsh, Scotch, Irish, French, Germans, Norwegians, Danes, Swedes, Poles, and others. To bring together a body composed of such material, affected more or less by the religious sentiments and forms of the several denominations, with all their national peculiarities, has called for much patient, and persevering toil. And it is by the grace of God that we are what we are. And let his name be praised that in our darkest hours, when we have humbled ourselves, he has ever come to our aid.

From their past brief history Seventh-day Adventists may learn much as to their present work and future prospects. When in humility they have borne a decided testimony in the fear of God, their labors have been signally blessed. When they have been willing to bear the cross of present truth, and sacrifice time, convenience and means to advance the work, they have shared the approving smiles of Heaven. They have seen that nothing can keep the body in a healthy condition but the plain and pointed testimony. This will do the work of purification, either by purging their sins, or separating from them the unconsecrated and rebellious. Let the result be what it may, such testimony must be borne, or this people will fall as others have fallen. And terrible would be their fall, after having so clear light, and having had committed to them so sacred a trust as the last message of mercy to sinners.

From the past we may also learn what to expect in the future, in the line of persecution. Satan has been angry because this people have been seeking for the “old paths,” that they might walk therein. He has been especially disturbed as they have plead for the restoration of the Sabbath, and the gifts of the Holy Spirit. If the people be taught that God is testing them upon the Sabbath, and that they should listen to the testimony of Jesus, in the spirit of prophecy, which reproves their sins, and calls on them to consecrate themselves and what they possess to the Lord, we may depend upon it, the ire of the dragon will be stirred. This we have witnessed and suffered in proportion to our faithfulness in the work. When we have borne a pointed testimony, we have been the especial objects of the wrath of the dragon; but with it have also shared largely the blessing of God. When we have been unfaithful, the dragon has been comparatively quiet, but we have suffered leanness of soul. And thus we may expect it will be for time to come.

The position of suspense is not the most happy one. Those who wait for the return of the Lord in uncertainty as to the definite period of his second advent, are in danger of becoming restless. Hence the application of certain texts to this time, and to the people who are waiting for their Lord. “Ye have need of patience, that, after ye have done the will of God, ye might receive the promise.” Heb. x, 36. “Be ye also patient, stablish your hearts; for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.” James v, 8. “Here is the patience of the saints, here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.” Rev. xiv, 12.

In such a position, how natural the often-repeated inquiry, “How long before the Lord will come?” But no definite answer can be given to this inquiry. And it is best that this question cannot be definitely answered. Definite time has answered the purpose of God. It brought the Advent people to the waiting time, requiring great patience. Throughout this entire period of the patience of the saints, the only safe position is to keep the coming of Christ ever before us, and to regulate all our acts in full view of the terrible realities of the Judgment. To put off the coming of the Lord, and view that event in the distance, and enter into the spirit of the world, would be dangerous in the extreme. It is true that there are prophecies to be fulfilled, just prior to the coming of the Lord; but their fulfillment is of such a nature that it can be realized in a short time. Unbelief may suggest that as the time has continued longer than the waiting ones expected, it may still continue many years. But saving faith takes the safe position, and views the event at the door. This fact should ever be borne in mind, that while we have no means of showing that the Lord will come at an immediate definite point, no one can prove that he may not very soon come. And while it cannot be proved that the Lord will not very soon come, I call attention to the following facts which show that the second advent cannot be a distant event.

1. The three messages constitute a solemn warning to the world to prepare for the coming of Christ. The closing division of this great warning is a test to the world and ripens the harvest of the earth. Those who receive the warning and prepare for the coming of the Lord, are ripened by it for immortality. Those who reject it, are ripened for the day of slaughter.

2. The warning given by Noah, the manner his message was treated, and the wrath of God in a flood of water, illustrate the closing events of the present state of things. “As the days of Noah were, so also shall the coming of the Son of man be.” God did not call this preacher of righteousness to warn the next to the last generation before the flood, but the very last. The very generation which drank the waters of the flood, saw Noah build the ark, and heard his warning voice. How absurd the supposition that Noah built the ark, and gave his warning message in the time of next to the last generation, so that those who heard his message and saw his work, passed into the grave, and the ark went to decay, and their children came upon the stage of action to witness unwarned the terrors of the flood.

3. The last great warning was to be given to the last generation of men. The very ones who hear it, receive it, obey it, and are waiting for the Lord, will exclaim, as the Son of man shall return with his angels down the blazing vault of heaven, “Lo! this is our God, we have waited for him, and he will save us.” And the very men who reject the warning, and justly merit the wrath of God, will also witness the second advent in flaming fire with terror and anguish. This warning is not given to the next to the last generation, but to the very last. Then, as certain as the great warning, illustrated by the three messages of Rev. xiv, has been, and is being given in our day, just so certain the generation that has heard the warning will witness the day of wrath, and the revelation of the Son of God from Heaven. One of two things is certain; either Seventh-day Adventists are wrong in the application of the messages, or Christ is very soon coming. If they are correct in their application of the great warning, then the very men who hear it will witness its terrible realities.

“Verily I say unto you,” says Christ, “this generation shall not pass away, till all these things be fulfilled. Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.” Matt. xxiv, 34, 35. We do not believe that the word generation marks any definite number of years. The Lord designed to teach that the people who should live at the time of the fulfillment of the last sign mentioned, (falling stars of 1833,) and should hear the proclamation of the coming of Christ, based partly upon the fulfilled signs, should witness the scenes connected with his coming. God has raised up men to give the solemn warning to the world at the right time. The signs were fulfilled at the right time to give force to the warning. And the very generation of men that live after the three great signs are fulfilled, and who hear and reject the warning message, will drink the unmingled cup of the wrath of God. And those of this very generation who receive the message, suffer disappointment and endure the trials of the waiting position, will witness the coming of Christ, and exclaim, “Lo! this is our God, we have waited for him.”

Dear reader, if watchful and faithful to duty, we shall very soon enter the harbor of eternal rest. Keep a good look-out. Oh, be not deceived, and overcome by the world, the flesh, and the Devil. True faith forbids your looking into the future, and laying plans for the benefit of the next generation. It shuts you up to the present. But it is to be feared that those who are employing their physical and mental forces to accumulate wealth for their children, while they are neglecting their duty to the cause of present truth, and do not give themselves and families time to seek and serve God, are making a terrible mistake. They not only fail to help the cause, and fail to walk with God, and fail to exert the best influence in their own families, but their influence in professing so solemn and definite a position as that the present is the period for the third and last solemn warning, while in works they deny their faith, is decidedly against the cause.

The world exhibits madness in grasping for wealth. A spirit of insanity has taken hold of men upon the subject of worldly gain; and many who profess present truth are more or less imbued with it. With those who do not fear God and keep his commandments, and are not looking for the soon coming of his Son, this is what might be expected. But with Seventh-day Adventists there is no excuse. With them it is insanity and madness. Why should they accumulate wealth for their children? Should the Lord remain away a hundred years, wealth handed down to them would be their almost certain ruin. Look to the history of truly good and great men. Have they sprung up amid wealth? Or have they come from families trained in the school of poverty and want? Read the histories of the early lives of Martin Luther and Abraham Lincoln. Both were poor boys. But they both became great men, by facing want, grappling with poverty, and overcoming those obstacles ever lying in the path of want. Such a struggle in early life gave them experience, and was the safeguard of their purity. While the names of these good men are embalmed in the memory and affection of the people, those of hundreds, who received riches from their parents, have rotted, because money was in the way of their doing what they should have done, and being what they might have been. Setting aside the coming of the Lord, there is no more certain ruin to the children than for them to look to, and lean upon, their parents’ wealth.

But what can be said of the influence of those brethren who profess to believe that the last great warning to the world is being given, yet devote their entire energies to accumulating wealth for their children? What can be the influence upon their children? Is it not to lead them to love this world? to put off the coming of the Lord? to neglect the necessary preparation? Are they not taking a course directly to shut them out of the kingdom of Heaven? And is there any hope of the salvation of either parents or children while pursuing such an inconsistent course? Without the faith of the soon coming of the Lord, they are pursuing a course to secure their ruin. With this faith, while pursuing a course to deny it in work, they are making that ruin certain.

The short period of probation remaining should be improved in laying up treasure in Heaven, and seeking that preparation necessary to its enjoyment in the next life. Parents, I entreat of you, live out the precious Advent faith before your children. Lead them to Jesus, and, teach them by your faith and works to secure a preparation for his coming. Let your influence in favor of truth and holiness extend to all around, that it may be said to you, “Well done, good and faithful servant, enter thou into the joy of thy Lord.”

THE LAW AND THE GOSPEL.

“I and my Father are one.” John x, 30.

The Father and the Son were one in man’s creation, and in his redemption. Said the Father to the Son, “Let us make man in our image.” And the triumphant song of jubilee in which the redeemed take part, is unto “Him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb, forever and ever.”

Jesus prayed that his disciples might be one as he was one with his Father. This prayer did not contemplate one disciple with twelve heads, but twelve disciples, made one in object and effort in the cause of their Master. Neither are the Father and the Son parts of the “three-one God.” They are two distinct beings, yet one in the design and accomplishment of redemption. The redeemed, from the first who shares in the great redemption, to the last, all ascribe the honor, and glory, and praise, of their salvation, to both God and the Lamb.

But if it be true that the law of the Father and the gospel of the Son are opposed to each other, that one was to take the place of the other, then it follows that those saved in the former dispensation are saved by the Father and the law, while those of the present dispensation are saved by Christ and the gospel. And in this case, when the redeemed shall reach Heaven at last, and their redemption shall be sung, two songs will be heard, one ascribing praise to God and the law, the other singing the praises of Christ and the gospel.

This will not be. There will be harmony in that song of redemption. All the redeemed will sing the facts as they have existed during the period of man’s probation. All will ascribe the praise of their salvation to God and the Lamb. Adam, Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, and Moses, will join with the disciples of Jesus in singing of the redeeming power of the blood of the Son, while those who have lived since the crucifixion of Christ, saved by his blood, will join the patriarchs and prophets in the song of praise to the Father, the creator and lawgiver. Therefore the law and the gospel run parallel throughout the entire period of man’s probation. The gospel is not confined to some eighteen centuries. The dispensation of the gospel is not less than about six thousand years.

The word gospel signifies good news. The gospel of the Son of God is the good news of salvation through Christ. When man fell, angels wept. Heaven was bathed in tears. The Father and the Son took counsel, and Jesus offered to undertake the cause of fallen man. He offered to die that man might have life. The Father consented to give his only Beloved, and the good news ran through Heaven, and resounded on earth, that a way was opened for man’s redemption. In the first promise made to man that the seed of the woman should bruise the serpent’s head, was the gospel of Jesus Christ, as verily as in the song the angels sung over the plains of Bethlehem, to the shepherds as they watched their flocks by night, “Glory to God in the highest, peace on earth and good will to men.”

Immediately after the fall, hope of a future life hung upon Christ as verily as we can hang our hopes on Christ. And when the first sons of Adam brought their offerings to the Lord, Cain in his unbelief brought the first fruits of the ground, which were not acceptable. Abel brought a firstling of the flock, in faith of Christ, the great sacrifice for sin. God accepted his offering. Through the blood of that firstling, Abel saw the blood of Jesus Christ. He looked forward to Christ, and made his offering in the faith and hope of the gospel, and through it saw the great sacrifice for sin, as verily as we see the bleeding Lamb as we look back to Calvary, through the broken bread and the fruit of the vine. Through these emblems we see Christ crucified. Abel saw the same through the lamb which he offered. Do we hang our hopes in faith upon Christ? So did Abel. Are we Christians by virtue of living faith in Christ? So was Abel.

Abraham had the gospel of the Son of God. The apostle says that the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen, preached before the gospel unto Abraham. Gal. iii, 8.

Paul testifies of the Israelites in the wilderness, that they “were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; and did all eat the same spiritual meat; and did all drink the same spiritual drink; for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them; and that Rock was Christ.” 1 Cor. x, 2-4. The gospel was preached to the children of Israel in the wilderness. The apostle says, “Unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them; but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.” Heb. iv, 2.

Moses and the believing Jews had the faith and hope of the gospel. Through the blood of the sacrificial offerings, they saw Christ, and by faith embraced him. Their hopes of the future life were not in the law, but in Christ.

“The law,” says Paul, “having a shadow of good things to come.” The typical system is but the shadow. The good things, of which Christ as a sacrifice and mediator is the center, are the body that casts its shadow back into the Jewish age. The bleeding sacrifices of the legal system were but the shadow; Christ, bleeding on the cross, was the great reality. Every bleeding sacrifice offered by the Jews, understandingly and in faith, was as acceptable in the sight of Heaven as what Christians may do in showing their faith in the sufferings, death, and resurrection of Christ, in baptism and the Lord’s supper. The one was done in the faith and hope of redemption through the blood of the Son of God, as verily as the other may be. The gospel dispensation, which is the dispensation of the good news of redemption through Christ, has been six thousand years long.

The dispensation of the law of God is longer than that of the gospel. It commenced before the fall, or there could not have been in the justice of God any such thing as the fall. It existed as early as there were created intelligences subject to the government of the Creator. It covers all time, and extends to the future, running parallel with the eternity of God’s moral government. Angels fell, therefore were on probation. They, being on probation, were consequently amenable to law. In the absence of law, they could not be on probation, therefore, could not fall. The same may be said of Adam and Eve in Eden.

The ten commandments are adapted to fallen beings. As worded in the sacred Scriptures given to man in his fallen state, they were not adapted to the condition of holy angels, nor to man in his holy estate in Eden. But the two grand principles of God’s moral government did exist before the fall, in the form of law. These are given in the Old Testament, and are quoted by Christ in the New, as the two great commandments: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” Matt. xxii, 37-40. Compare Deut. vi, 5; Lev. xix, 18.

These two commandments require supreme love to the Creator, and love to fellow-creatures equal to that bestowed upon one’s self. Angels could do no more than these require. Adam could do no more. We can do no more. The two great commandments embrace all that is required by the ten precepts of the decalogue. They are the grand circle inside of which is the will of God to man. No precept, and no principle, of the Book of God, extends beyond this circle.

Soon after the fall, we see this circle in ten parts. The two principles of God’s moral government are seen in ten precepts, worded to meet man’s fallen condition. Love to God is taught in the first four commandments, and love to our fellow-man is taught in the last six. The prophets of the Lord, the Son of God, and the apostles of Jesus, have all spoken in harmony with the ten precepts of the law of Jehovah. The whole duty of man, says Solomon, is to fear God and keep his commandments.

The ten precepts of the decalogue, adapted to man’s fallen condition, were enforced as early as the circumstances demanded them. The first three were applicable to Adam, immediately after the fall. And although the Sabbath of the fourth precept was instituted at the close of the first week of time, before the fall, and we have evidence that Adam was directed to observe it as a memorial of creation, yet that portion of the precept adapted to the fallen state, relative to the man-servant, the maid-servant, and the stranger, could not exist till a later period when such relations existed. The fifth commandment could not be enforced, until applicable to Adam’s children. The sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth, were enforced as early as the parties existed to whom they could properly apply.

There is nothing in the moral condition of man in his fallen state, nor in the nature of the ten commandments themselves, to restrict them to any one dispensation more than another. Man’s moral wretchedness is the same, only more deplorable as he advances from the gates of Paradise toward the close of probation. And the law of God, adapted to his fallen state, is applicable and necessary throughout the entire period of his fallen condition, from Paradise lost to Paradise regained.

The reign of sin runs parallel with the reign of death, from Adam until sin and sinners shall cease to be. And parallel with these, stretching through all dispensations, there has been the knowledge of the principles of the ten commandments, consequently a knowledge of sin.

The means of this knowledge has been the law of God. “By the law,” says the apostle, “is the knowledge of sin.” Rom. iii, 20. “I had not known sin but by the law.” Chap. vii, 7. As proof that this knowledge did exist immediately after the fall, see Gen. iv, 7, 23, 24; vi, 5, 11, 12. Also, Noah was righteous before God. Chap. vii, 1. He was a preacher of righteousness. 2 Pet. ii, 5. By his preaching right-doing, reproving the sins of the people of his time, he condemned the world. Heb. xi, 7. The men of Sodom and Gomorrah were great sinners, excepting one man. Abraham interceded, saying, Wilt thou destroy the righteous with the wicked? Gen. xiii, 13; xviii, 20, 23, 25; xix, 7. The blessing of God came upon Abraham, because he obeyed his voice and kept his commandments. Gen. xxvi, 5. Those who refused obedience, experienced his wrath for their transgressions. The cities of the plain were condemned for their unlawful deeds. 2 Pet. ii, 6-8.

As an illustration of this subject, I will briefly notice the murder of righteous Abel. Cain killed his brother, and, as a sinner, received the mark of God’s displeasure. Sin, says the apostle, is the transgression of the law. 1 John iii, 4. Cain broke the sixth commandment; hence that precept existed in the time of Cain. Otherwise he did not sin; for where no law is, there is no transgression. Rom. iv, 15.

The foregoing positions relative to the law of God would meet with but little opposition were it not for the Sabbath of the fourth commandment. The proper observance of the Bible Sabbath is not only crossing, but with many inconvenient, and not favorable to the successful prosecution of their worldly plans. The fearful and unbelieving shun its claims, brand it as a Jewish institution, and frequently assert that it was unknown to men until the Sabbath law was proclaimed from Sinai. Sacred history, however, proves this statement to be false. It is true that Sabbath-keeping is not mentioned in the book of Genesis. But this does not prove that it did not exist during the long period covered by that brief record. The facts connected with the giving of the manna show that the Israelites understood the obligations of the Sabbath, that some of the people violated them, and were reproved by Jehovah, thirty days before they saw Mount Sinai. See Ex. xvi-xix.

I now come to the New Testament. The first four chapters of Matthew are devoted to a sketch of the genealogy of Christ, Joseph and Mary, the birth of Jesus, Herod slaying the children of Bethlehem, John the Baptist, the temptation of Christ, and his entering upon his public ministry. The fifth chapter opens with the first record of his public instructions. In that memorable sermon upon the mount, Christ warns his disciples against a terrible heresy that would soon press its way into the church.

The Jews boasted of God, of Abraham, and of the law, but despised and rejected Jesus. The great facts connected with his resurrection were soon to be so convincing that many would believe. And as the Jews were to reject and crucify the Son, while boasting in the law, Christians would run to the opposite and equally-fatal heresy of trampling upon the authority of the Father, and despising his law, while receiving Christ and glorying in the gospel. It has ever been Satan’s object to separate, in the faith of the church, the Father and the Son. With the Jews was the cry, The Father, Abraham, the law; but away with Jesus and his gospel. With Christians the cry was to arise, Christ, the cross, the gospel; but away with the law of the Father. To meet this heresy, ere long to arise in the Christian church, the Master, in his first-recorded sermon, spoke pointedly. Listen to his appeal to his disciples in the presence of the assembled multitudes:

“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever, therefore, shall break one of these least commandments, and teach men so, he shall be called least in the kingdom of Heaven; but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of Heaven.”

These words of warning from our Lord fully meet the case. They need no comment. The history of the church, showing how loosely, great and apparently good men have held the law of God, and the present, closing controversy respecting it, give them especial force.

Jesus did not come to legislate. In no case did he intimate that he would give a new law to take the place of that of his Father. Speaking of the Son, the Father says, “He shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.” Deut. xviii, 18. Jesus answered them and said, “My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.” John vii, 16. “I do nothing of myself, but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.” Chap. viii, 28. “The word which ye hear, is not mine, but the Father’s which sent me.” Chap. xiv, 24.

Let us consider the grave question of the great apostle to the Gentiles, relative to the law of God and the faith of Jesus: “Do we then make void the law through faith?” Rom. iii, 31. This question points directly to the true issue between us, and the men of this day who teach that the gospel of the Son makes void the law of the Father. Paul decides the question in these emphatic words: “God forbid: yea, we establish the law.”

The gospel is a necessity in consequence of law transgressed. Where there is no law, there is no transgression, no sin, no need of the blood of Christ, no need of the gospel. But the gospel teaches that Christ died for sinners, on account of their sins. Sin is the transgression of the law. He came, therefore, as the great sacrifice for those who transgress the law. The gospel holds him up as the bleeding sacrifice for the sins of those who transgress the law. This fact establishes the existence of the law of God. Remove the law, and we have no further need of Christ and his gospel.

In the gospel arrangement for the salvation of man, there are three parties concerned; the Lawgiver, the Advocate, and the sinner. The words of the apostle are to the point: “If any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.” 1 John ii, 1. Sin is the transgression of the law of the Father; hence the sinner offends the Father, is in trouble with the Father, and needs Jesus to plead his cause with the Father. But if the Father’s law has been abolished, and Christ sustains to the sinner the relation of lawgiver, who is his advocate? “Mother Mary,” or “father Joseph,” or some other one of the multitude of canonized saints will answer for the Papist; but what will the Protestant do in this case? If he urges that Christ, and not the Father, is the lawgiver, and that in the present dispensation, sin is the transgression of the law of Jesus Christ, then I press him to tell me who the sinner’s advocate is. And I ask him to harmonize his position with the words of the beloved John, “If any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.”

Paul addresses the elders of the church at Miletus, relative to the fundamental principles of the plan of salvation, thus: “I kept back nothing that was profitable unto you, but have showed you, and have taught you publicly, and from house to house, testifying both to the Jews and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.” Acts xx, 20, 21. The apostle has here set before the men of the present dispensation two distinct duties. First, the exercise of repentance toward God, for his law is binding upon them, and it is his law that they have transgressed. Second, the exercise of faith toward Christ as the great sacrifice for their sins, and their advocate with the Father. These are both indispensable. Paul presented both. He kept back nothing pertaining to the plan of salvation, that was profitable.

The closing words of the third angel point directly to a body of Christian commandment-keepers. “Here are they that keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.” Rev. xiv, 12. The Jew takes no stock in this text, because he sees in it the despised Jesus of Nazareth. Many professed Christians find it as objectionable as the Jew, for the reason that they find in it the equally-despised commandments of God. But said the adorable Jesus, “I and my Father are one.” So the law of the Father and the gospel of the Son pass through all dispensations of man’s fallen state, in perfect harmony. Oh! that both the blind Jew and the blind Christian might see this, and embracing the whole truth, instead of each a part, might keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus, and be saved.

But here let it be distinctly understood that there is no salvation in the law, that is, there is no redeeming quality in law. Redemption is through the blood of Christ. The sinner may cease to break the commandments of God, and strive with all his powers to keep them, but this will not atone for his sins, and redeem him from his present condition in consequence of past transgression. Notwithstanding all his efforts to keep the law of God, he must be lost without faith in the atoning blood of Jesus. And this was as true in the time of Adam, of Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and the Jews, as since Jesus died upon the cross. No man can be saved without Christ.

On the other hand, faith in Jesus Christ, while refusing obedience to the law of the Father, is presumption. An effort to obtain friendship with the Son, while living in rebellion against the Father, is Heaven-daring. No greater insult can be offered to either the Father or the Son. What! Separate the Father and the Son, by trampling on the authority of the one, and making a friend of the other? “I and my Father are one.” The Jew insults the Father, in his rejection of the Son; and the Christian flings in the face of Heaven equal insult, in all his acts of worship in which he vainly thinks to make Jesus his friend while, with light upon the subject, he breaks the commandments of God.

The oneness of the Father and the Son is seen at the transfiguration. That voice which is the highest authority in the universe, is there heard saying, “This is my beloved Son; hear him.” It is also seen in the closing benediction of the Son, in the last chapter of the Bible, which presents before those who are loyal, the glories of the reward in reserve for the obedient. “Blessed are they that do His commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.”

I briefly call attention to three grand events, which have taken place in connection with the sad history of fallen man, either one of which is sufficient to establish the perpetuity of the law of God.

First, the fall, with all its terrible consequences. If the law of God was of such a nature that it could, in any particular, be changed at any time, it would have been thus changed when there were but two fallen beings, Adam and Eve, just before leaving Eden. If the plan of God’s moral government could be changed, it would then have been changed, so as to set them free, and save the tide of human wretchedness and agony, which has followed. But, no; it could not be changed. The curse must fall on man, and upon the earth for man’s sake; and the blight and mildew of sin must follow everywhere, and hang upon creation like a pall of death. Why? Because God’s law that had been transgressed, could not be changed--could not be abolished. Every fading flower and falling leaf, since man left Eden, has proclaimed the law of God changeless. This has been the result of sin. It is the result of the terrible fall. And this has all come about because of the transgression of that law which is as changeless as the throne of Heaven. If that law could ever be changed in any particular, it would have been changed when there were but two fallen beings, in such a way as to free them from the sentence of death, and raise them from their degradation, and the race from continued sin, crime, and woe.

Think of the recent American war, with all its terrible agony. But this is only an item in the vast catalogue. For six thousand years, the tide has been swelling, and creation has been adding groan to groan. Oh! the sorrow, the wretchedness, the agony! Who can compute it? The fall, then, with all its accumulated wretchedness, proclaims God’s law changeless. I hasten to notice the next great event which proclaims this truth.

Second, the announcement of the ten commandments from Sinai with imposing display. It was not left for Moses to proclaim this law. It was not left for an angel to assemble the tribes of Israel, and utter these ten holy precepts in their hearing. It was not even left to the Son of God to do this. But the Father, the great Eternal, descends in awful grandeur, and proclaims these precepts in the hearing of all the people.

Do you say that that was the origin of the law of God? Do you say that God descended on Sinai, and there legislated? And do you say that he has since abolished that code, or changed it? When did he do this? Where did he do it? Has any prophet foretold that such an event should take place? And has any apostle recorded that such a work was ever done? Never.

The commonwealth of Michigan sends her legislators to Lansing to enact laws. These laws are published throughout the commonwealth. The people understand them. Some of these laws are repealed or changed. Is it done in secret, and the people permitted to know nothing about it? No. The same body that enacts laws, also changes, amends, or abolishes them, and the people are apprized of the fact. This is made as public as the enactment of the law. And has not the all-wise and merciful God manifested as much wisdom in managing affairs in which man has so great an interest, affairs which affect his eternal welfare? He came down upon Sinai, and proclaimed his law under such circumstances as to impress the people with its grandeur, dignity, and perpetuity. Who can suppose that he would abolish, or alter it, and say nothing about it?

Third, the Crucifixion establishes the law of God. If that law was of such a nature that it could be abolished, or any of its precepts changed, why not have this done, and set man free, instead of the Son of God laying aside his glory, taking our nature, living the sad life he lived here upon the earth, suffering in Gethsemane, and finally expiring upon the cross? Oh! why should the divine Son of God do all this to save man, if that law which held him as a sinner could be changed, so that he could be set free? But no; nothing could be done in that direction. Man had sinned, had fallen, and was shut up in the prison-house of sin. His sins were of such a nature that no sacrifice was adequate but the sacrifice of Him to whom the Father had said, “Let us make man.” The death of an angel was not sufficient. He only who engaged with the Father in the formation of man, constitutes a sufficient sacrifice to open the door of hope by which he might find pardon, and be saved. In the language of the hymn we sing, “Come, O my soul, to Calvary,” and there behold love and agony mingled in the death of the Son of God.

Behold him groaning in Gethsemane. His divine soul was in agony as the sins of man were rolled upon him. “My soul,” said he, “is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death.” The weight of man’s sin in transgressing God’s immutable law was such as to press from his pores as it were great drops of blood.

He then bears his cross to Calvary. The nails are driven into his hands and feet. The cross is erected. There the bleeding Lamb hangs six terrible hours. The death of the cross was most agonizing. But there was in his case the additional weight of the sins of the whole world. In his last expiring agonies he cries, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” and bows his head in death.

The sun, the brightest luminary of heaven, can no longer view the scene, and is vailed as with sackcloth. The vail of the temple, the noblest work of man, is rent in twain. Christ, the noblest being in the universe save One, is dying in agony. Creation feels the shock, and groaning and heaving, throws open the graves of many of the saints, who come out of their graves after his resurrection. This great event transpired because it was the only way by which sinners could be saved. The law must stand as firm as the throne of Heaven, although the earth shake, and the whole creation tremble, as the Son of God dies in agony.

The law of God was given to man as his saviour. He broke it. Could it then redeem him? It is not in the nature of law, either human or divine, to redeem the transgressor. Those who transgress the law of this commonwealth, must suffer the full penalty, unless the Governor shall pardon the transgressor. This is his only hope of escaping the full sentence of the law. It is said by those who do not fully understand our position, that we trust in the law, and the keeping of the Sabbath, for salvation. No, friends, you may observe all these precepts, to the best of your ability, conscientiously; but if you look no further than the law for salvation, you can never be saved. The hope of eternal salvation hangs upon Christ. Adam hung his hope there. Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, and the believing Jews, hung theirs there. We can do no more. The hope of the next life depends upon Jesus Christ. Faith in his blood can alone free us from our transgressions. And a life of obedience to the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus will be a sufficient passport through the golden gates of the city of God.

GOD’S MEMORIAL.

The Sabbath is a memorial of what the Creator did during the first week of time. He wrought six days. He rested on the seventh day. Here is the origin of the week. The weekly cycle is not derived from anything in nature. Months are suggested by the phases of the moon, years by the returning seasons; but the week can be traced only to the six days of creation, and the seventh of rest. The patriarchs reckoned time by weeks, and sevens of days. Gen. xxix, 27, 28; viii, 10, 12.

The Sabbath was instituted in Eden, at the close of the first week, by three acts on the part of the Creator. First, God rested on the seventh day. Second, he placed his blessing upon the day. Third, he sanctified the day of his rest. He rested on the seventh day, and in this set an example for man. He next blessed the day upon which he had rested. He then sanctified, or “set apart to a sacred use,” the day of his rest. He gave the first six days of the week to man, in which to obtain a livelihood, and reserved the seventh day to himself, to be used sacredly by man.

The great God was not wearied with the six days of creation. His rest upon the seventh day means simply that on that day he ceased to create. Nor did man in Eden need rest from toil, as since the fall. In fact, rest from labor is not a leading feature of the Sabbatic institution. The fourth commandment makes no reference to man’s physical wants of a day of rest. Neither does it speak of his spiritual necessities of a day of public worship.

It gives quite another reason for the Sabbath. Here it is: “For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day; wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it” Ex. xx, 11. This reason relates to what God did in the first week of time. He has given no other. It is as old as the world, and will continue to be the reason why man should revere Jehovah’s rest-day as long as the world shall continue. Man rests upon the day of the Sabbath in honor of the Creator. And wherever he may turn his eye, whether to the heavens, the earth, or the sea, there he beholds the Creator’s work. As he rests upon the seventh day, he sees in the countless varieties of nature the wisdom and power of him who created all in six days, and thus is led from nature up to nature’s God. The Sabbath now becomes the cord that binds created man to the infinite Creator. It is the golden chain that links earth to Heaven, and man to God. Had he always observed the Sabbath, there could not have been an idolater nor an atheist. The Sabbath, as a memorial of what the Creator did during the first week of time, is now seen in its dignity and importance. It is the memorial of the living God. Man is to rest on the day of the week on which the Creator ceased to create.

But those who belittle the grand Sabbatic institution to only serve man’s physical wants of a day of rest, and to provide for him a day of public worship, and see no higher design in it, are satisfied with a change of the day of the Sabbath. They think that a day on which the Creator did not rest, will do quite as well as the day on which he did rest. With this limited view of the subject, why may they not be content with the change? If a day of rest from toil, and a day for the public worship of God, are all the blessings secured to man by the Sabbath, the one-day-in-seven and no-day-in-particular theory looks quite plausible. For, certainly, man can rest his weary limbs, or weary brain, on one day of the week as well as on another. And if only a season of divine worship is to be secured, Sunday may answer for this purpose. In fact, one day in six might do as well for rest and worship as one day in seven, if rest and a day of public worship are the sum total of the reasons for the Sabbath. There is nothing in man’s physical or spiritual wants to mark the number seven.

The original design of the Sabbath was for a perpetual memorial of the Creator. Yet it secures the seventh day of the week to man in his fallen condition, not only as a day of rest, but a day for public worship, in which to draw nigh to God and share his pardoning love. But these blessings, of comparative importance, can be obtained on either of the other six days of the week, and do not constitute the grand reason for the Sabbatic institution. That reason given in the law of the Sabbath is, in its importance, as much above the simple idea of repose from weary toil, and a day for public worship, as the heavens are higher than the earth. With this agree the words of the prophet: “If thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day, and call the Sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, honorable, and shalt honor him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words, then shalt thou delight thyself in the Lord.” Isa. lviii, 13, 14.

Here the great object of the Sabbath is set forth. It is to honor God. Man is required to turn away his feet from the Sabbath, and refrain from seeking his own ways, words, and pleasure, on that day, not because he needs a day of rest, but because by so doing he can honor the great God. Those who keep the Sabbath with this object in view, will call it a delight, the holy of the Lord, and honorable.

The fourth commandment points back to what God did during the first week of time. The creation and rest occupied the first week. Immediately following, Jehovah sanctified and blessed the day on which he had rested. In this way the seventh day became the holy Sabbath of the Lord for Adam and his posterity. It was ever to be observed by the race as the memorial of the living God.

Those who locate the institution of the Sabbath at Sinai, urge that no mention is made of Sabbath-keeping in the brief record of the book of Genesis, as proof that the Sabbath was made for the Jews alone. As evidence of the unsoundness of this position, please notice the following facts:

1. The sacred record nowhere intimates that the Sabbath was instituted at Sinai, while it distinctly locates its institution at creation.

2. The Sabbath being made for man, Mark ii, 27, as a memorial of creation, there are no reasons why the Jews alone should enjoy its blessings. All men have need of it as much as they.

3. The facts connected with the giving of the manna show that the Israelites understood the obligations of the Sabbath, that some of the people violated these sacred obligations, and were reproved by Jehovah, thirty days before they saw Mount Sinai. See Ex. xvi-xix. They came to the wilderness of Sin, where the manna was first given, on the fifteenth day of their second month. On the sixth day they gathered a double portion of the manna, sufficient for that day and for the Sabbath which followed. Moses said to the people, “This is that which the Lord hath said, To-morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord.” On the seventh day, Moses said, “Eat that to-day; for to-day is a Sabbath unto the Lord. To-day ye shall not find it in the field. Six days ye shall gather it; but on the seventh day, which is the Sabbath, in it there shall be none. And it came to pass, that there went out some of the people on the seventh day for to gather, and they found none. And the Lord said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws? See, for that the Lord hath given you the Sabbath.”

Here we see that the Sabbath was understood, and its violation was rebuked by Jehovah. But the Israelites had not yet seen Sinai. Indeed they did not come to the mount from which the ten commandments were proclaimed, until thirty days from the time the manna was first given. See chap. xix. Here is a nail driven in a sure place, and ministers and men should cease to assert that the Sabbath was first given at Sinai, till they have searched the sacred narrative with greater care.

The original plan of the Sabbath contemplated its perpetual observance as long as God, the creator, and created man should exist. It does not point forward to redemption. It was instituted before provisions were made for redemption. It looks back to creation. It was made for man before the fall; but, in consequence of the fall, it is of tenfold more importance to him throughout the entire period of his fallen condition. And it will exist during man’s future life upon the new earth in all its original significance and glory. We have seen the Sabbath based upon the great facts of the creation in six days, Jehovah’s rest upon the seventh day, and his sanctifying and blessing the day of his rest. As long as these continue to be facts, so long will the Sabbath continue. Redemption does not propose the creation of a new world as the inheritance of the redeemed. “Behold I make all things new,” says the Redeemer. This world, redeemed from the curse and all its results, will be the eternal possession of the righteous. And notwithstanding the work of redemption, the great facts connected with the creation week will ever be vividly impressed upon the immortal minds of the redeemed. Thus saith the prophet: “For as the new heavens and the new earth which I will make shall remain before me, saith the Lord, so shall your seed and your name remain. And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one Sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the Lord.” Isa. lxvi, 22, 23. There is no point of time in the past when all flesh have come to worship before the God of Heaven on the Sabbath; and this can never be while the wheat and tares, the children of the kingdom and the children of the wicked one, grow together; and these will not be separated until the harvest, which is the end of the world. This unity in reference to the memorial of the great God will be seen only in the immortal state, when from one Sabbath to another, and from one new moon to another, all flesh shall come to worship before the Lord. “What! the moon in Heaven?” No, not in such a Heaven as that of which the poet sings,

“Beyond the bounds of time and space, Look forward to that heavenly place, The saints’ secure abode.”

Beyond space there would be no room for the moon, nor for the sun; neither would there be room for the resurrected saints, possessing bodies like their Lord’s resurrected, glorious body; and beyond the bounds of time, there would be no need of the sun and the moon which are God’s great time-keepers. We are not looking for a general smash-up in the universe, and then the creation of all new things, for immortal saints beyond the bounds of time and space. It is this planet that has revolted. And the Redeemer, who is coming to bring it back into allegiance to the government of God, says, “Behold I make all things new.” The revolt did not affect the sun, moon, and the other planets. Redemption will not affect these heavenly bodies. When the Restorer shall have established the immortal saints in the new earth, it will continue its revolutions, and the sun and moon will measure off days, and months, and years, as long as eternal ages shall roll. The redeemed will have right to the tree of life, which Adam lost through disobedience. That tree yields twelve manner of fruits each month. And why may not the words of the prophet in reference to all flesh appearing before the Lord from one new moon to another, be fulfilled when the entire family of the redeemed shall come each month to partake of the new fruit of the tree of life?

But to return to God’s memorial: The position taken in these pages presents the one-day-in-seven-and-no-day-in-particular, or one-seventh-part-of-time, theory, in its true light. If the Sabbath was made for man, for the simple reason that he needed rest from physical toil, and a day of worship, one day may answer as well as another. But if it be a memorial of Jehovah’s rest, the seventh, and no other day of the week, is the day of the Sabbath. Sabbatarians are charged with being great sticklers for the day. And so they are. Sabbath signifies rest. Man is required by the fourth commandment to celebrate the rest-day of the Lord, or the day on which the Lord rested. God rested on the seventh day. He hallowed the seventh day. Hence, the seventh day, and no other, is the day of the Sabbath. Change the day of the Sabbath, and you cease to celebrate the rest of the Lord. If God rested on one day in seven and no day in particular, man may do the same; but if God rested on the seventh day of the first week, acceptable Sabbath-keeping is the celebration of the seventh day of each succeeding week.

The passover was a memorial of an event that occurred on the fourteenth day of the first Jewish month. The celebration of the day of the passover became a statute in Israel from Moses to Christ. Remove this observance to a day on which the event commemorated did not take place, and the celebration would lose its significance. It would cease to be the passover.

The American people celebrate their national independence on the fourth day of July. And why? Because July 4, 1776, patriotic men signed the Declaration of Independence. The men of this nation are great sticklers for the day; and well they may be. Should they change our national celebration from the day on which the Declaration of Independence was signed, to a day on which it was not signed, it would lose its significance. It would cease to be a celebration of our independence. Let the people of this country celebrate their independence on the twenty-fifth day of December, and let the Declaration of Independence be read from every orator’s stand on that day, as is customary on the fourth of July, and the American people would be regarded as a nation of fools.

And what Jew ever thought of observing one three-hundred-and-sixty-fifth part of time, or one day in three hundred and sixty-five and no day in particular, and calling that the passover? And we might as well talk of celebrating our national independence on one day in three hundred and sixty-five and no day in particular, as to talk of celebrating the rest-day of Jehovah upon one day in seven and no day in particular. The veriest American idiot that can recollect of ever hearing about George Washington or the Declaration of Independence, might well laugh at the folly of changing the day of our national celebration. Verily, as our Lord has said, the men of this world are wiser in their generation than the children of light. It is only in matters of religion that people seem to be satisfied with that which, in regard to any other subject, would be considered consummate folly.

And do these men who use the one-day-in-seven-and-no-day-in-particular theory, advocate a change of the Sabbath from the rest-day of the Father, to the resurrection-day of the Son? Then I inquire of them, Who ever thought of celebrating the resurrection of Christ on one day in seven and no day in particular? If they say that this can be done, then I inquire again, Where is the change of the day of the Sabbath? Was it a change from one day in seven and no day in particular of the former dispensation, to one day in seven and no day in particular of the present dispensation? This would be “confusion worse confounded.”

And to those who assert that redemption, as a greater work, is to be celebrated on the first day of the week, as creation was anciently to be celebrated on the seventh day of the week, I would say, We only have your word for that. Please notice these facts:

1. The Bible is silent relative to redemption’s being greater than creation. Who knows that it is?

2. The Bible is silent as to the observance of a day to commemorate redemption. Who knows that a day should be kept for that purpose?

3. We have in the Lord’s supper, and baptism, memorials of the two great events in the history of the Redeemer’s work for man. These are appropriate.

4. There is no fitness in keeping a day of weekly repose to commemorate the agonies of the crucifixion of Christ, or the activities of the morning of his resurrection.

5. But if a day of the week should be kept, to celebrate man’s redemption, which should it be? the day on which he shed his blood for our sins? the day on which he rose for our justification? or the day on which he ascended to the Father, to intercede for sinners? The day of the crucifixion, when the greatest event for man’s redemption occurred, has the first claim. The apostle does not say that we have redemption through the resurrection; but he does say, “We have redemption through his blood.” Eph. i, 7. Now if a day should be kept to celebrate redemption, should it not be the day on which he shed his blood? Redemption is not completed; but in the Lord’s supper and baptism are two memorials of the greatest events that have occurred in connection with this work for man. Neither of these are weekly memorials. Baptism may be received by the believer on any day of the week; and it is said of the emblems of the broken body and shed blood of the Son of God, without reference to any particular day, “As often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord’s death till he come.” 1 Cor. xi, 26. These memorials point back to the death, burial, and resurrection, of Jesus Christ. God’s great memorial points back to the day of his rest. And why not let all these remain, answering the purpose for which they were instituted? Why should the work of creation be lost sight of in the work of redemption? Why not celebrate both here? Both are equally remembered hereafter. It is said of the redeemed:

“And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof; for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation.” Rev. v, 9. The same also “cast their crowns before the throne, saying, Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory, and honor, and power; for thou hast _created_ all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.” Rev. iv, 10, 11. Here the redeemed are represented as ascribing praise to both the Creator and the Redeemer. And again, every created intelligence in the universe, in joyful sympathy with man in view of his redemption, is represented in chap. v, 13, as ascribing “blessing, and honor, and glory, and power, unto Him that sitteth upon the throne [the Creator], and unto the Lamb [the Redeemer], forever and ever.”

We here see that the redeemed, with all the enrapturing facts of redemption completed before them, do not lose sight of the creation. The Creator shares their adoration equally with the Redeemer. How, then, must Adam have felt, when, in the garden of Eden, he first awoke to all the glories of this creation which the redeemed so joyfully remember! Fresh from the hand of his Creator, he springs to life in all the vigor of perfect manhood. With an intellect capable of appreciating the glories of Eden, and comprehending the grandeur and dignity of his position, and with a heart unsullied by sin, how must he have turned in gratitude and adoration toward the mighty Maker of himself and all these glories! If the redeemed could cast their crowns before Jehovah in reverent worship, in view of a creation accomplished over six thousand years before their song of praise was uttered, how must every fiber of Adam’s being have thrilled with emotions of thanksgiving and adoration to the beneficent Author of his creation, as he stood there in Eden, enraptured with the strange delight of a new existence! And how could he best express the emotions of his heart? Would it not be by celebrating, amid all the surrounding glories of his Eden home, a day of rest in honor of his God? Say not that Adam had no occasion for the Sabbath in Eden. It was the very means by which he would rise into communion with his Maker, and offer the service of a grateful heart to him from whom he had just received the gift of life and all its blessings.

And if the Sabbath was thus appropriate, thus necessary, in Eden, what shall we say of it since the fall? With sin came man’s estrangement from God, and his proneness to forget his Maker, and wander away from him. How much more needful the Sabbath, then, that he might not entirely break away from the moorings which held him to the heavenly world. The flood of sin and crime has rolled broader and deeper with each succeeding year; and the further we come from Paradise, the weaker and more prone to sin do we find the race, and hence more in need of God’s great memorial.

Did Adam, while yet unfallen in Eden, surrounded with all its heavenly influences, and in free and open converse with his Maker, need the Sabbath? How much more, when, with the gates of Paradise forever closed against him, he could no longer speak face to face with his Creator, but must henceforth grapple with the sinful promptings of his own heart, and grope his way amid the moral darkness that began to settle upon the world when the glorious light of Eden was obscured by sin! And if needed then by Adam, how much more still by Abel, whose eyes had never looked upon the beautiful garden, and who had never personally experienced the nearness to Heaven which Adam there enjoyed! And it was still more essential to the spiritual wants of the race in the days of Enoch and the more degenerate age of Noah, when the influence of Eden, like the last rays of twilight from the setting sun, were fading from the hearts of men. Abraham needed it still more to save him from the idolatry of his father’s house; and Moses and the Jewish nation, yet more, to keep them from the open apostasy of the heathen nations around them. But more than to Abraham, to Moses, or to the Jews, was the holy Sabbath a necessity to the church in the gospel dispensation, when the Man of Sin was to arise, and oppose, and exalt himself above all that is called God; when there should be a tendency to multiply feasts and festivals, uncalled for by the Scriptures, in honor of Christ, and to rank the Sabbath of Jehovah with Jewish ceremonies, and sweep it away with them.

And now we have come down nearly six thousand years from the gates of Paradise. Through all this time, has sin reigned, and iniquity abounded, and the hearts of men grown less and less susceptible of divine impressions, and in the same proportion more prone to forget the Creator. And can we dispense with the Sabbath now? True, the dawn of Eden restored, is visibly approaching; but the world is farther from God than ever before. Infidelity and atheism run riot, and seemingly the race would fain banish all thoughts and love of God from mind and heart. More than ever, then, is the Sabbath now needed, to save men from utter apostasy. With all the original reasons for the institution, the accumulated necessities of six thousand years of sin, now call upon us to throw all possible safeguards around this sacred institution. If ever a memorial of the great God and a golden link to bind man to Heaven, was needed, it is needed now. And the necessity of this institution will even yet increase through the few remaining days of peril. Can we dispense with it? Never. More and more sacredly should we cherish it, while with earnest hearts we breathe the prayer,

“Let earth, O Lord, again be thine, As ere with vengeance cursed; And let the holy Sabbath shine As glorious as at first.”

* * * * *

Transcriber’s Notes:

Punctuation has been made consistent.

Variations in spelling and hyphenation were retained as they appear in the original publication, except that obvious typographical errors have been corrected.

The following change was made:

p. 339: “the” inserted (to the next)