the seventh day sabbath a perpetual sign from the beginning, to the entering into the gates of the holy city according to the commandment. by joseph bates. "brethren, i write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the _beginning_. the old commandment is the word which ye have heard from the _beginning_." _john_ ii: . "in the _beginning_ god created the heaven and the earth." _gen._ i: . "and god blessed the seventh day, and rested from all his work." ii: . "blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life and enter in," &c. _rev._ xxii: . [second edition revised and enlarged] new bedford: press of benjamin lindsey [ii]preface to the little flock. "remember the sabbath day to keep it holy." "six days work may be done, but the seventh is the sabbath of the lord thy god: in it thou shalt not do any work." this commandment i conceive to be as binding now as it ever was, and will be to the entering into the "gates of the city." rev. xxii: . i understand that the seventh day sabbath is not the least one, among the all things that are to be restored before the second advent of jesus christ, seeing that the imperial and papal power of rome, since the days of the apostles, have changed the seventh day sabbath to the first day of the week! twenty days before god re-enacted and wrote the commandments with his finger on tables of stone, he required his people to keep the sabbath. exo. xvi: , . here he calls the sabbath "my commandments and my laws." now the savior has given his comments on the commandments. see matt. xxii: , .--"on these two (precepts) hang all the law and the prophets." then it would be impossible for the sabbath to be left out. a question was asked, what shall i do to inherit eternal life? says jesus, "if thou wilt enter into life keep the commandments"--xix. here he quotes five from the tables of stone. it is still clearer in luke x. , . "what is written in the law? how readest thou?" here he gives the savior's exposition in xxii. matt. as above. jesus says, "thou hast answered right, this do and live." see also matt. v: , , , , . paul comments thus. "the law is holy, and the commandments holy, just and good." "circumcission and uncircumcission is nothing but the keeping the commandments of god." "all the law is fulfilled in one word: thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." john says, "the old commandment is the word from the beginning."-- , .--gen. ii: . "he carries us from thence into the gates of the city." rev. xxii: . here he has particular reference to the sabbath. james calls it the perfect, royal law of liberty, which we are to be doers of, and be judged by. take out the fourth commandment and the law is imperfect, and we shall fail in one point. the uncompromising advocate for present truth, which feeds and nourishes the little flock in whatever country or place, is the restorer of all things; one man like john the baptist, cannot discharge this duty to every kindred, nation, tongue and people, and still remain in one place. the truth is what we want. fairhaven, august, . joseph bates. [iii]preface to second edition. to the little flock. my reasons for issuing a second edition of this book are, first, the increasing demand for them, from different quarters. second, it affords me an opportunity of spreading additional light from the word on this important subject of present truth. much more is said about it than any doctrine in the bible, beginning in genesis, and continuing down to the closing up of the last message which god ever gave to man, proving clearly that the doing of these commandments saves the soul; showing it more clearly than a strict adherence to the constitution of these united states proves the man a sound patriot. therefore in this sense they are strictly the constitution of the bible, the everlasting covenant between god and man, and can never be changed or altered while man is stamped with the image of god. why then has the church lost sight of them? or rather the covenant in them of the th day sabbath? see history d page, and dan. vii. . well then how does it come to be understood at this point of time? answer.--the angel gabriel told daniel that knowledge should increase in the time of the end. this of course included the scriptures, particularly since the proclamation of the everlasting gospel in rev. xiv: , . it is well known how this knowledge has increased since . these ten commandments being the foundation of the scriptures. (see matt. xxii.) god, in a peculiar manner, to instruct his honest, confiding children, shows them spiritually under the sounding of the seventh angel, the ark of his testament after the temple of god was opened in heaven. xi: . these are the ten commandments. here then i understand is where the spirit made an indelible impression to search the scriptures for the testimony of god. it was done, and published to the world by many, that the professed church had been walking in open violation of the fourth commandment since the days of the apostles.--every one that has read the history of this testimony of god in the ark, must see the mighty power that accompanied it through israel and philistine, one of the greatest wonders that ever existed [iv]in this world, a pattern only of what was seen in the opening of the temple in heaven. in the xiv: , john sees them obeying its dictates. in the xv ch. he describes the division as in the xiv ch. they were rejoicing over the victory of the beast, (got out of the churches,) standing on or by the sure word of prophecy, (some say immortality.) the th v. says, "for all nations shall come (in the future) and worship before thee." "after that i looked and behold the temple of the tabernacle of the testimony in heaven was open," th v. (that is after their songs of rejoicing.) the temple which contained the tabernacle, the ark of the testimony, or ten commandments was open. now this temple without doubt is the new jerusalem. who cannot see that this temple has been opened for some purpose, but not to be entered by man until the seven last plagues are fulfilled. here is a space of time in which the commandments will be fully kept. i do not say that this view of the ark in rev. is positive, but i think the inference is strong. i cannot see what else it refers to. on pages , , i have added about lines in further explanation of coll. ii: , . on th page, i have also added about as much more to illustrate and distinguish the sabbath feasts of the jewish nation. on the nineteenth page i have given about forty lines on the d cor. iii, which i think must settle these points fully. the last fourteen pages are principally devoted to the covenants and what they are intended for. the two covenants made with man in this state of mortality, is first by god delivered to moses. the second or new, by jesus christ and his disciples. paul in speaking of them to the gal. iv: , says these are the two covenants. all the others belong to the saints after the second advent. if any of the brethren feel it a duty to help pay for the paper and printing of this edition the way is open, otherwise it will be done by a few individuals here, as was the first edition. this work is sent forth gratuitously, with a fervent prayer that these present precious truths may be set home on the soul preparatory to the coming judgment. since issuing the first edition in august last, we have publicly called on all the advent lecturers and believers to show us if we were wrong on the lord's sabbath. once more we now challenge the christian world to show us if they can from the bible, where we have taken a wrong view of the seventh day sabbath. fairhaven, jan. . j. b. [ ]the sabbath first question is, when was the sabbath instituted? those who are in the habit of reading the scriptures just as they find them, and of understanding them according to the established rules of interpretation, will never be at a loss to understand so plain a passage as the following: "and god blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it; because that in it he had rested from all his work which god created and made." gen. ii: . moses, when referring to it, says to the children of israel. "this is that which the lord hath _said_, to-morrow is the rest of _the_ holy sabbath unto the lord." exod. xvi: . then we understand that god established the seventh day sabbath in paradise, on the very day when he rested from all his work, and not one week, nor one year, nor two thousand five hundred and fourteen years afterwards, as some would have it. is it not plain that the sabbath was instituted to commemorate the stupendous work of creation, and designed by god to be celebrated by his worshipers as a weekly sabbath, in the same manner as the israelites were commanded to celebrate the passover, from the very night of their deliverance till the resurrection of jesus from the dead; or as we, as a nation, annually celebrate our national independence: or as type answers to antetype, so we believe this must run down, to the "keeping of the sabbath to the people of god" in the immortal state. it is argued by some, that because no mention is made of the sabbath from its institution in paradise till the falling of the manna in the wilderness, mentioned in exo. xvi: , that it was therefore _here_ instituted for the jews, but [ ]we think there is bible argument sufficient to sustain the reply of jesus to the pharisees, "that the sabbath was made for man and not man for the sabbath." if it was made for any one exclusively it must have been for adam the father of us all, two thousand years before abraham who is claimed as the father of the jews was born. john says, the old commandment was from the beginning-- ; ii: . there is pretty strong inference that the antideluvians measured time by weeks from the account given by noah, when the waters of the deluge began to subside. he "sent out a dove which soon returned." at the end of _seven_ days he sent her out again; and at the end of _seven_ days more, he sent her out a third time. now why this preference for the number _seven_? why not five or ten days, or any other number? can it be supposed that his fixing on upon _seven_ was accidential? how much more natural to conclude that it was in obedience to the authority of god, as expressed in the d chap. of gen. a similar division of time is incidentally mentioned in gen. xxix; "fulfil her _week_ and we will give thee this also; and jacob did so and fulfilled her _week_." now the word _week_ is every where used in scripture as we use it; it never means more nor less than _seven_ days (except as symbols of years) and one of them was in all other cases the sabbath. but now suppose there had been an entire silence on the subject of the sabbath for this twenty-five hundred years, would that be sufficient evidence that there was none. if so, we have the same evidence that there was no sabbath from the reign of joshua till the reign of david, four hundred and six years, as no mention is made of it in the history of that period. but who can be persuaded that samuel and the pious judges of israel did not regard the sabbath. what does god say of abraham? that he "obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my _commandments_, my _statutes_ and my _laws_." (see what he calls them in exo. xvi: , .) this, of course, includes the whole. then abraham reverenced god's sabbath. once more, there is no mention of the circumcision from the days of joshua till the days of jeremiah, a period of more than eight hundred years. will it be believed that samuel and david, and all those pious worthies with the whole jewish nation, neglected that essential seal of the covenant for eight hundred years? it cannot be admitted for a moment. how [ ]then can any one suppose from the alleged silence of the sacred history that adam, enoch, noah and abraham, kept no sabbath because the fact was not stated? if we turn to jer. ix: , , we find that they had not neglected this right of circumcision, only they had not circumcised their hearts; so that the proof is clear, that silence respecting the keeping any positive command of god, is no evidence that it is not in full force. again, if the sabbath was not instituted in paradise, why did moses mention it in connection with the creation of the world? why not reserve this fact for two or three thousand years in his history, until the manna fell in the wilderness, (see exo. xvi: ) and then state that the seventh day sabbath commenced, as _some_ will have it? i answer, for the very best of reasons, that it did not commence there. let us examine the text. "and it came to pass, that on the sixth day they gathered twice as much bread as on any preceding day, and _all the rulers of the congregation came and told moses_. and he said unto them this is that which the lord hath said, _to-morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath_, bake that which ye will bake, &c. &c." if this had been the establishing of the holy sabbath and moses had said to-morrow _shall be_ the sabbath, then would it have been clear; but no, he speaks as familiarly about it as we do when we say that to-morrow is the sabbath, showing conclusively that it was known before, or how could the people have known that they must gather two day's manna on friday the sixth day, unless they had had some previous knowledge of the sabbath? for moses had already taught them not to "leave any of it until the morning"--v. . the th verse shows that the sabbath had not yet come since their receiving the manna, because it spoiled and "bred worms by the next morning;" whereas, on the sabbath morning it was found sweet and eatible-- th v. this was the thirtieth day after leaving egypt ( st v.) and twenty days before it was given on sinai. the weekly sabbath then was appointed before this or before the days of moses. where was it then? answer in the second chapter of genesis and no where else; and the same week on which the manna fell, the weekly sabbath was revived among or with god's chosen people. grotius tells us "that the memory of the creation's being performed in seven days, was preserved not only among the greeks and italians, but among the celts and indians." other [ ]writers say assyrians, egyptians, arabians, britons and germans, all of whom divide their time into weeks. philo says "the sabbath is not peculiar to any one people or country, but is common to all the world." josephus states "that there is no city either of greeks or barbarians or any _other nation_, where the religion of the sabbath is not known." but as they, like the great mass of god's professed people in christendom, paid little or no heed to what god had said about the particular day, (except the jews, and a few others) they (as we are informed in history) adopted peculiar days to suit themselves, viz: the christian nations chose to obey the pope of rome, who changed the _seventh_ day sabbath to the first day, and called it the holy sabbath; the persians selected monday; the grecians tuesday; the assyrians wednesday; the egyptians thursday; the turks friday, and the jews the seventh day, saturday, as god had commanded. three standing miracles a week, for about forty years annually, ought to perpetuate the sabbath. st, double the quantity of manna on the sixth day; d, none on the seventh; d, did not spoil on the seventh day. if it does not matter which day you keep holy to the lord, then all these nations are right. now reflect one moment on this, and then open your bible and read the commandment of the god of all these nations! "remember! (what you have been taught before) _the sabbath day to keep it holy_;" (which day is it lord?) "_the_ seventh _is the sabbath of the lord thy god: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy man servant nor thy maid servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger, that is within thy gates_." who is the stranger? (gentiles.) now the reason for it will carry us back to paradise. "_for in six days the lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is; and rested on the_ seventh; _wherefore the lord blessed the sabbath day and hallowed it_." "wherefore the children of israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the _sabbath_ throughout their generations for a _perpetual covenant_; it is a sign between me and the children of israel _forever_." (why is it lord?) "_for in six days the lord made heaven and earth, and on the_ seventh _day he rested and was refreshed_." exo. xx and xxxi.--which day now will you choose? o, says the reader, the seventh if i knew which of the days it was. if you don't know, why are you so sure that the _first_ day is right? o, [ ]because the history of the world has settled that and this is the most we can know. very well then, does not the _seventh_ come the day before the eighth? if we have not got the days of the week right now, it is not likely that we ever shall. god does not require of us any more than what we know; by that we shall be judged. luke xxii: , . once more; think you that the spirit of god ever directed moses when he was giving the history of the creation of the world, to write that he (god) "blessed the _seventh_ day and sanctified it, because that in it he had rested from all his work." unless he meant it to be dated from that very day? why, this is as clear to the unbiassed mind as it is that god created man the sixth day. would it not be the height of absurdity to attempt to prove that god only intended adam should be created at some future period, or that the creation of the heavens and earth was not in the beginning, but some twenty five hundred years afterwards? all this would be as cogent reasoning as it would be to argue that god did not intend this day of _rest_ should commence until about twenty-five hundred years afterwards. (the word sabbath signifies rest.) it follows then irresistibly, that the weekly sabbath was not made for the jews only, (but as jesus says, for 'man') for the jews had no existence until more than two thousand years after it was established. president humphrey in his essays on the sabbath says, "that he (god) instituted it when he rested from all his work, on the _seventh_ day of the first week, and gave it primarily to our first parents, and through them to all their posterity; that the observance of it was enjoined upon the children of israel soon after they left egypt, not in the form of a new enactment, but as an ancient institution which was far from being forgotten, though it had doubtless been greatly neglected under the cruel domination of their heathen masters; that it was re-enacted with great pomp and solemnity, and written in stone by the finger of god at sinai; that the sacred institution then took the form of a statute, with explicit prohibitions and requirements, and has never been repealed or altered since; that it can never expire of itself, because it has no limitation." in deut. vii: - , god gives his reasons for selecting the jews to keep his covenant in preference to any other nation; only seventy at first--x: . god calls it his "sabbath," and refers us right back to the creation for [ ]proof. "for in six days the lord made heaven and earth and sea, and all that in them is, and rested on the _seventh_," &c. here then we stand fixed by the immutable law of god, and the word of jesus, that "the sabbath was made for man!" paul says, "there is no respect of persons with god." rom. ii: . isaiah shows us plainly that the jew is not the only one to be blessed for keeping the sabbath. he says "blessed is the _man_ (are not the gentiles men?) that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it." "also the sons of the stranger, (who are these if they are not gentiles?) every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, (does he mean me? yes, every gentile in the universe, or else he respects persons) even them will i bring to my holy mountain and make them joyful in my house of prayer; for my house shall be called an house of prayer for _all_ people." isa. lvi: , , . if this promise is not to the gentile as well as the jew, then "_the_ house of prayer for all people" is no promise to the gentile. now we ask, if god has ever abrogated the law of the sabbath? if he has it can easily be found. we undertake to say without fear of contradiction, he has not made any such record in the bible; but on the contrary, he calls it a perpetual covenant, a "sign between me and the children of israel forever," for the reason that he rested on the seventh day, exo. xxxi: , . says one, has not the ceremonial law been annulled and nailed to the cross? yes, but what of that? why then the sabbath must be abolished, for paul says so! where? why in cols. d chapter, and xiv. romans. how can you think that god ever inspired paul to say that the _seventh_ day sabbath was made void or nailed to the cross at the crucifixion, when he never intended any such change; if he did, he certainly would have deceived the inhabitants of jerusalem, in the promise which he made them about two thousand four hundred and forty-six years ago! turn now to jer. xvii: , and tell me if he did not promise the inhabitants of jerusalem that their city should remain forever if they would hallow the sabbath day. now suppose the inhabitants of jerusalem had entered into this agreement, and entailed it upon their posterity (because you see it could not have been fulfilled unless it had continued from generation to generation,) to keep the sabbath holy, would not god have been bound to let jerusalem remain forever? you say yes. well, then, i ask you to show how he could have [ ]kept that promise inviolate if he intended in less than six hundred and fifty years to change this seventh day sabbath, and call the first day of the week the sabbath, or abolish it altogether? i say, therefore, if there has been any change one way or the other in the sabbath, since that promise, it would be impossible to understand any other promise in the bible; how much more reasonable to believe god than man. if men will allow themselves to believe the monstrous absurdity that forever, as in this promise, ended at the resurrection, then they can easily believe that the sabbath was changed from the _seventh_ to the first day of the week. or if they choose the other extreme, abolished until the people of god should awake to be clothed on with immortality. heb. iv: . now does it not appear plain that the sabbath is from god, and that it is coeval and co-extensive (as is the institution of marriage) with the world. that it is without limitation; that there is not one thus saith the lord that it ever was or ever will be abolished, in time or eternity.--see exod. xxxi: , ; and isa. lxvi: , ; heb iv: , . but let us return and look at the subject as we have commenced in the light of paul's argument to the romans and collossians, for here is where all writers on this subject, for the change or the overthrow of the _seventh_ day sabbath attempt to draw their strong arguments. the second question then, is this: has the sabbath been abolished since the seventh day of creation? if so, when, and where is the proof? the text already referred to, is in rom. xiv: , .--"one man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. let every man be 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." does the apostle here mean to say, that under the new or christian dispensation it is a matter of indifference which day of the week is kept as a sabbath, or whether any sabbath at all is kept? was that institution which the people of god had been commanded to call a delight, the holy of the lord, honorable, now to be esteemed of so carnal a nature as to be ranked among the things which jesus "took out of the way, nailing it to [ ]his cross." if this be true, then has jesus, in the same manner, abolished the eight last verses in the fifty-eighth of isaiah, and the d, th and th verses of the th chapter have no reference to the gentile since the crucifixion. o lord help us rightly to understand and divide thy word. but is it not evident from the four first verses in the same chapter of romans, that paul is speaking of feast days; hear him explain. "destroy not him with thy _meat_ for whom christ died. for the kingdom of god is not meat and drink." , v, also , . giving them again in substance the decrees which had been given by the apostles in their first conference, in a. d. ; held at jerusalem. see acts xv: . james proposes their letter to the gentiles should be "that they abstain from pollution of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood;" to which the conference all agreed. now please read their unanimous _decrees_ (xvi: ,) from twenty-three to thirty verses. "for it seemed good to the holy ghost and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things." "that ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication, from which if ye keep yourselves ye shall do well." reading along to the th of the next chapter, we find paul establishing the churches with these decrees; (see , ,) and at philippi he holds his meeting, (not in the jews synagogue) but at the river's side, on the _sabbath_ day. a little from this it is said that paul is in thesalonica preaching on the sabbath days. luke says this was his _manner_. what was it? why, to preach on the sabbath days (not st days.) observe here were three sabbaths in succession. xvii: . a little while from this paul locates himself in corinth, and there preaches to the jews and greeks (or gentiles) a year and six months _every sabbath_. now this must have been seventy-eight in succession. xviii: , . does this look like abolishing the sabbath day? has anything been said about the st day yet? no, we shall speak of that by and by. before this he was in antioch. "and when the jews were gone out of the synagogue the gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath. and the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of god." xiii: , . here is proof that the gentiles kept the sabbath. now i wish to place the other strong text which is so strangely adhered to for abolishing or changing this sab[ ]bath along side of this, that we may understand his meaning. "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." "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." coll. ii: , . now here is one of the strong arguments adhered to by all those who say the seventh day sabbath was abolished at the crucifixion of our lord: while on the other hand by the great mass of the christian world, (so called,) the seventh day sabbath ceased here, and in less than forty-eight hours the change was made to the first day of the week. now remember paul's manner, (before stated) itinerating from city to city and nation to nation, always preaching to jews and gentiles on the seventh day sabbath, (for there is no other day called the lord's sabbath in the bible.) now if the apostle did mean to include the sabbath of the lord god with the jewish feasts and sabbaths in the text, then the course he took to do so, was the strangest imaginable. his _manner_ always was, as recorded, with the exception of one night, to preach on the very day that he was laboring to abolish. if you will look at the date in your bibles, you will learn this same apostle had been laboring in this way as a special messenger to the gentiles, between twenty and thirty years since (as you say) the sabbath was changed or abolished, and yet never uttered one word with respect to any other day in the week to be set apart as a holy day or sabbath. i understand all the arguments about his laboring in the jewish synagogue on their sabbath, because they were open for worship on that day, &c., but he did not always preach in their synagogues. he says that he preached the kingdom of god, and labored in his own hired house for two years. he also established a daily meeting for disputation in the school of tyranus.--acts xix: . again he says, i have "kept _back_ nothing that was profitable _unto you_. (now if the sabbath had been changed or abolished, would it not have been _profitable_ to have told them so?) and have taught you publicly, and from house to house." "for i have not shunned to declare unto you all the council of god."--acts xx; , . then it is clear that he taught them by example that the sabbath of the lord god was not abolished. luke says it was the _custom_ (or manner) of christ [ ]to teach in the synagogues on the sabbath day. iv: , . mark says, "and when the sabbath day was come he began to teach in their synagogue." mark vi: .--now if jesus was about to abolish or change this sabbath, (which belonged to the first code, the moral law, and not the ceremonial, the second code, which was to be nailed to his cross, or rather, as said the angel gabriel to daniel, ix: , "he (christ) in the midst of the week shall cause the _sacrifice_ and _oblation_ to cease," meaning that the jewish sacrifices and offerings would cease at his death.) jesus did not attend to any of the ceremonies of the jews except the passover and the feasts of tabernacles. why did he say, "think not i am come to destroy the _law_ or the prophets? i am not come to destroy but fulfill. one jot or one title shall in no wise pass from the _law_ until all be fulfilled." "whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments" &c. did he mean the ten commandments? yes; for he immediately points out the third, not to take god's name in vain; sixth and seventh, not to kill nor to commit adultery, and styles them the _least_. then, the others, which include the fourth, of course were greater than these. matt. v; - , , , , and were not to be broken nor pass away. then the sabbath stands unchanged. almost every writer which i have read on the subject of abolishing or changing the seventh day sabbath, calls it the jewish sabbath, hence their difficulty. how can it be the jewish sabbath when it was established two thousand years before there was a jew on the face of the earth, and certainly twenty-five hundred before it was embodied in the decalogue, or re-enacted and written in stone by the finger of god at sinai. god called this his _sabbath_, and jesus says it was made for man, (not particularly for the jews.) "well," says one, "what is the meaning of the texts which you have quoted, where it speaks of sabbaths?"--answer: these are the jewish sabbaths! which belong to them as a nation, and are connected with their feasts. god by hosea makes this distinction, and says, "i will also cause all _her_ mirth to cease, her feast days, her new moons, and _her_ sabbaths, and all her solemn feasts." these then belong to the text quoted, and not god's sabbath. do you ask for the proof? see xxiii levit. . "_these are the_ feasts _of the lord, which ye shall proclaim in their [ ]seasons_, every thing upon his day"-- th v. (may we not deviate a little? if you do it will be at your peril.) fifteenth and sixteenth verses give them a fifty day's sabbath; twenty-fourth verse says: "speak unto the children of israel, saying in the seventh month in the first day of the month, shall ye have a _sabbath_, a memorial of blowing of trumpets, an holy convocation." "also on the tenth day of the seventh month there shall be a day of atonement. it shall be unto you a _sabbath_ of rest." , . "also on the fifteenth day of the seventh month when ye shall have gathered in the fruit of the land, ye shall keep a feast unto the lord seven days. on the first shall be a sabbath, and on the eighth day shall be a sabbath. th v. and moses _declared_ unto the children of israel the feasts of the lord." th v. now here we have four kinds of _jewish_ sabbaths, also _called_ "feasts _of the lord_," to be kept annually. the first fifty days or seven weeks sabbath ends the third month, seventh. in three months and twenty-four days more commences the second sabbath, seventh month, first; the next, the tenth; the last the fifteenth of the month. between the first two sabbaths there is an interval of one hundred and twelve days; the next two, ten days, and the next, five days. now it can be seen at a glance, that neither of these sabbaths could be on the seventh day any oftener than other annual feast could come on that day. these then are what hosea calls her sabbaths. paul calls them holy days, _new moons, and sabbaths_; and this is what they are stated to be. the first day of the seventh month is a _new moon_ sabbath, the tenth is a sabbath of rest and holy convocation, a day of atonement, and the fifteenth a feast of sabbaths. do you ask for any more evidence that these are the jewish sabbaths, and that god's sabbath is separate from them? read then what god directed moses to write in the third verse: "six days shall work be done, but the _seventh_ day is the sabbath of rest, an holy convocation, ye shall do no work therein, it is the sabbath of the lord in your dwellings." now moses has here declared from the mouth of the lord, that these are all the feast of the lord, (there is no more nor less) and every thing is to be upon _his day_, and he has clearly and definitely separated his sabbath from the other four. but let us look at the text again. coll. ii; - . see v. [ ]"which are a _shadow_ of things to come." what did the apostle say were _shadows_? why, meat, drink, holy day, new moon, sabbath days. th v. heb. ix: . what does he mean by shadow? see heb. x: , . just what i have stated on page . now here we have one _clear_, positive point. if the seventh day sabbath is included in the th verse, then it must be a _shadow_; if it is not a _shadow_, then paul has no reference to it, and it stands forever! moses says the ten commandments were written by the finger of god on tables of stone; whatever god has done with his own hand is stamped with immortality, and is as enduring as the sun, moon and stars. psl. viii: . but if the th commandment, the sabbath of the lord is a _shadow_ then all the other nine commandments _must_ be. let us look at what are called by our lord the least commandments, the th and th. "thou shalt not kill."--"thou shalt not commit adultry." math. v: , , . are these _shadows_? is there an individual with common sense in the world that dare risk his reputation in such kind of logic? then it is as clear as a sun beam that all the others are tangible substances, and will continue in full force while immortality endures; especially the th commandment, the sabbath. see isa. : , heb. iv: , rev. : . and in the th and th chapters of numbers the sacrifices and offerings for each of these days are made so plain, beginning with the sabbath, th v. that we have only to read the following to understand. . xxix: . first day, seventh month, (new moon;) th v., th day sabbath; th v., th day sabbath, and th v., d day sabbath. i will endeavor to present it in a clearer point of view: feast by fire connected with the lord's and the jewish sabbaths. the daily or continual [always] lambs morning and evening. quarts of flour for a meat offering, - / pints of oil, pints of wine--xxviii: - . the sabbath day. lambs, and six quarts of flour with oil. here follow the jewish feasts with their sabbaths: st.-- th week sabbath, bullocks, ram, lambs, goat, quarts of flour--xxviii: , . d.-- th month sabbath, bullock, ram, lambs, kid, quarts of flour--xxix: - . d.-- th of th month sabbath, bullock, ram, lambs, kids, quarts of flour-- - . th.-- th of th month sabbath, bullocks, rams, lambs, kids, - / bushels of flour-- - . th.-- th day sabbath, bullock, ram, lambs, goat, quarts of flour-- - . [ ]"and moses told the children of israel according to all that the lord commanded moses." here is the th day sabbath, which makes jewish sabbaths, every one of them differing from the other and the lord's sabbath, no more connected with them than in the xxiii of levit. just named. here then is an unanswerable argument for a separation of the jewish from the lord's sabbath, and shows conclusively what paul calls "shadows" in ii col: , and hosea "her sabbaths." and in the days of nehemiah when ezra had read the law to the people, viii (more than one thousand years after they were promulgated,) they bound themselves under an oath "to walk in god's law which was given _by the hand of moses_, the servant of god." "and to observe and _do all the commandments_ of the lord, our lord." x: . and that there might be no misunderstanding about the kind of sabbaths, they say, "if the people bring ware or any victuals on the sabbath day to sell, that we would not buy it of them on the sabbath or on the holy day," ( v.) but they would "charge themselves yearly with a third part of a shekel" (to pay for) "the burnt _offerings_ of the _sabbaths_, of the _new moons_, for the _set feasts_," &c. ( v.) for the house of god, including what has already been set forth in leviticus and numbers. now as their feast days commenced and ended with a sabbath, so when their feasts ceased to be binding on them these sabbaths must also, and all were "nailed to the cross." now i ask if there is one particle of proof that the sabbath of the lord is included in these sabbaths and feast days?--who then dare join them together or contradict the most high god, and call his the _jewish_ sabbath? _theirs_ was nailed to the cross when jesus died, while the lord's is an _everlasting_ sign a _perpetual covenant_. the jews, as a nation, broke their covenant. jesus and his disciples were one week (the last of the seventy) that is seven years, confirming the new covenant for another people, the gentiles. now i ask if this changing the subjects from jew to gentile made void the commandments and law of god, or in other words, abolished the fourth commandment? if so, the other nine are not binding. it cannot be that god ever intended to mislead his subjects. let us illustrate this. suppose that the congress of these united states in their present emergency, should promulgate two separate codes of laws, one to be perpetual, and the other temporary, to be abolished when peace was proclaimed between this country and mexico. the time _comes_, the temporary laws are [ ]abolished: but strange to hear, a large portion of the people are now insisting upon it that because peace is proclaimed that both these codes of laws are forever abolished; while another class are _strenuously_ insisting that it is only the _fourth_ law in the perpetual code that's now abolished, with the temporary and all the rest is still binding. opposed to all these is a third class, headed by the ministers and scribes of the nation, who are writing and preaching from maine to florida, insisting upon it without fear of contradiction, that when peace was proclaimed this fourth law in the perpetual code was to change its date to another day, gradually, (while some of them say immediately) and thenceforward become perpetual, and the other code abolished; and yet not one of these is able to show from the proceedings of congress that the least alteration had ever been made in the perpetual code. thus, to me, the case stands clear that neither of the laws or ten commandments in the first code, ever has or ever can be annulled or changed while mortality is stamped on man, for the very reason that god's moral law has no limitation. jesus then brought in a new covenant, which continued the sabbath by writing his law upon their hearts. paul says, "written not with ink, but with the spirit of the living god; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart." cor. iii: . and when writing to the romans he shows _how_ the gentiles are a law unto themselves. he says, they "shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their consciences always bearing them witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another," (when will this be paul) "in the day when god shall judge the secrets of men by jesus christ according to my gospel." ii: , . how plain that this is all the change. the jews by nature had the law given them on tables of stone, while the gentiles had the law of commandments written on their hearts. paul tells the ephesians that it was "the law of commandments contained in ordinances," (ii: ) not on tables that were nailed to the cross. if the ten commandments, first written by the finger of god on stone, and then at the second covenant on fleshy tables of the heart, are shadows can any one tell where we shall find the substance? we are answered, in christ. well, hear isaiah. he says, "that he (christ) will magnify the law and make it honorable." xlii: . again, i ask, where was the necessity and of what use were the ten commandments written on our hearts, if it was not to render perfect obedience to [ ]them. if we do not keep the day god has sanctified, then we break not the least, but one of the greatest of his commandments. before we leave this part of our subject let us examine cor. iii: , , , . i have been told that these verses clearly prove the abolition of the commandments. it is admitted by all our opponents, that the change which they so much insist upon, respecting the commandments, took place at the crucifixion of our lord. it is clear from ii col: that the hand-writing of ordinances (the law of moses) was then taken out of our way, and all that was contrary to us, but the commandments were never contrary to us, especially the th, the sabbath, for "it was made for man." the d or gospel covenant paul tells the hebs. is written upon our hearts. viii: . this is the same ten commandments; then instead of being taken away or abolished they are still nearer to us. see also d v of d cor: iii. if paul was laboring here to show the abolition of the ten commandments in a. d. , (look at the top of your bible for the date) pray tell me if you can what he meant by writing to the romans the very same year and telling them that "the _law was holy, and the commandments holy, just and good_." that he meant no other than the _law_ and _commandments_ in the decalogue, see xiii: , . about four years after this he is exhorting the ephesians to the keeping the th commandment. he says it is the "first commandment with promise." vi: . the same year that he writes the romans he dates his st epistle to the cor. in ch. vii: , and says circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, (what _is_, paul?) but the _keeping the commandments of god_. now all this was certainly more than twenty-five years after the crucifixion. is not the proof then positive and forever established that paul's preaching is right to the point in establishing the commandments of god instead of abolishing them? if i have not made it plain here, i would just say once more, that the apostle's argument where he refers to the abolition of the law in rom., cor., gall., see v: , eph. and heb. he always means the carnal commandments and laws of moses, and not the commandments of god, as he has shown. see acts xxi: , . here is circumcision, and the customs, the _law_ of moses, and not one breath about the sabbath. but if you will trace back to the xviii: , , you will see that instead of abolishing the sabbath, paul had just come from corinth, where he had been preaching for sabbaths in succession. o lord help thy people [ ]to see these truths and keep thy law! still, there are many other texts relating to the law, presented by the opposite view, to show that the law respecting the sabbath is abolished. let us look at some of them. but it will be necessary in the first place, to make a clear distinction between what is commonly called the moral and ceremonial law. bro. s. s. snow, in writing on this subject about one year ago, in the jubilee standard, asks "by what authority this distinction is made." he says, "neither our lord or his apostles made any such distinction. when speaking of the law they never used the terms moral or ceremonial, but always spake of it as a _whole_, calling it _the_ law," and further says, "we must have a 'thus saith the lord' to satisfy us." so i say. i have no doubt but thousands have stopped here; indeed, it has been to me the most difficult point to settle in this whole question. now let us come to it fairly, and we shall see that the old and new testament writers have ever kept up the distinction, although it may in some parts seem to be one code of laws. from the twentieth chapter of exodus, where the law of the sabbath was re-enacted, and onward, we find two distinct codes of laws. the first was written on two tables of stone with the _finger_ of god; the _second_ was taken down from his mouth and recorded by the hand of moses in a book. paul calls the latter carnal commandments and ordinances, (rites or _ceremonies_) which come under two heads, religious and political, and are moses's. the first code is god's. for proof see exo. xvi: , . "how long refuse ye to keep _my_ commandments and _my_ laws: see for that the lord hath given you the sabbath--and so the people rested on the sabbath day." also in the book of leviticus where the law of ceremonies is given to the levites or priests, moses closes with these words "_these_ are the commandments which the lord commanded moses for the children of israel in mount sinai"; in heb. vii: , , called carnal commandments. again, "the lord said unto moses, come up to me into the mount, and be there; and i will give thee tables of stone, and a law, and commandments which i have written." exo. xxiv: . further he calls them the ten commandments--xxxiv: . and moses puts them, "into the ark"--xl: . _now for the second code of laws._ see deut. xxxl: , ; and xxiv: . "and when moses had [ ]finished writing the law, he commanded them to put _this book_ of the law (of ceremonies) in the side of the ark of the covenant to be read at the end of every seven years."--this is not the song of deliverance by moses in the forty-four verses of the thirty-second chapter. for, eight hundred and sixty-seven years after this, in the reign of josiah, king of israel, the high priest found this book in "the temple," ( chron. xxxiv: , ) which moved all israel. one hundred and seventy-nine years further onward, ezra was from morning till noon reading out of this book. neh. viii: ; heb. ix: . paul's comments. bro. snow says in regard to the commandments, "the principles of moral conduct embraced in the law, were binding before the law was given, (meaning that one of course at mount sinai) and are binding _now_; it is immutable and eternal! they are comprehended in one word, love." if he meant, as we believe he did, to comprehend what jesus did in the xix. and xxii. chap. matt. - , and paul, and james, and john after him, then we ask how it is possible for him to reject from that code of laws, the only one, _the seventh day rest_, that was promulgated at the _beginning_, while at the same time the other nine, that were not written until about three thousand years afterwards, were eternally binding; without doubt, the whole ten commandments are coeval and coextensive with sin.--again he says, "we readily admit, that if what is called the decalogue or ten commandments be binding on us, _we ought_ to observe the seventh day, for that was appointed by the lord as the sabbath day." let us see if jesus and his apostles do not make it binding. _first then, the distinction of the two codes by jesus._ the pharisees ask the saviour why his disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? his answer is, "why do ye transgress the commandment of god?" and he immediately cites them to the fifth commandment, matt. xv: . again, "the law and the prophets were until john; since that time the kingdom of god is preached," &c.--luke xvi: . jesus was three years after this introducing the gospel of the kingdom, unwaveringly holding his meetings on the sabbath days, (which our opponents say were now about to be abolished; others say changed,) and never uttering a syllable to show to the contrary, but this was and always would be the holy day for worship. mark says when the sabbath (the seventh day, for there was no other,) was come, he began to teach in the synagogue, vi: [ ] . luke says, "as his _custom_ was, he went into the synagogue and taught on the sabbath day." iv: , . will it be said of him as it is of paul on like occasions, some thirty years afterwards that he uniformly held his meetings on the sabbath because he had no where else to preach, or that this day was the only one in the week in which the people would come out to hear him? every bible reader knows better; witness the five thousand and the seven thousand, and the multitude that thronged him in the streets, in the cities and towns where they listened to him; besides, he was now establishing a new dispensation, while theirs was passing away. then he did not follow any of their customs or rites or ceremonies which he had come to abolish. i have already quoted matt. : , , where jesus said he had come to fulfil the law, and immediately begins by showing them that they are not to violate one of the least of the commandments, and cites them to some--see v: , , , . again, he is tauntingly asked "which is the great commandment in the law: jesus said unto him, 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." xxii: , . here jesus has divided the ten commandments into two parts, or as it is written on two tables of stone. the first four on the first table treat of those duties which we owe to god--the other six refer to those which we owe to man requiring perfect obedience. once more, "one came and said unto him, good master what good thing shall i do that i may have eternal life? he said, if thou wilt enter into life keep the commandments. then he asked him which. he cited him to the last part of what he called the second, loving his neighbor as himself." if he had cited him to the first table, as in the xxii, quoted above, he could not have replied "_all_ these have i kept from my youth up." why? because he would have already been perfect, for jesus in reply to his question, what he should do to inherit eternal life, said he must "keep the commandments." matt. xix: - .--is not the sabbath included in these commandments?--surely it is! then how absurd to believe that jesus, just at the close of his ministry, should teach that the way, the only way, to enter into life, was to keep the commandments, [ ]one of which was to be abolished in a few months from that time, without the least intimation from him or his father that it was to take place. i say again, if the sabbath is abolished, we ask those who teach it to cite us to the chapter and verse, not to the law of rites and ceremonies which are abolished, for we have already shown that the sabbath was instituted more than twenty-five hundred years before moses wrote the carnal ordinances or ceremonies. god said, "abraham kept _my_ charge, _my_ commandments, _my_ statutes, and _my_ laws." gen. xxvi: . this must include the sabbath, for the sabbath was the first law given, therefore if abraham did not keep the sabbath, i cannot understand what commandments, statutes, and laws mean in this chapter. jesus says, "as i have kept my father's commandments," john xv: . did he keep the commandments? yes. mark and luke, before quoted--(but more of this in another place.) in john vii: , jesus speaks of "moses law," "_your law_," x: . again, "_their_ law." xv: . here then we show that jesus kept up a clear distinction between what god calls _my_ law and commandments and moses law, "_their_ law," "_your_ law." let us now look at the argument of the apostles. paul preaching at antioch taught the brethren that by jesus christ all who believe in him "are justified from all things from which ye could not be justified by the _law of moses_." acts xiii: . the pharisee said "that it was needful to circumcise them and commend them to keep the _law of moses_." xv: . again, when paul had come to jerusalem the second time, (fourteen years from the time he met the apostles in conference where they established the decrees for the churches. see acts xx: ; gal. ii: ,) the apostles shewed him how many thousands of jews there were which believed and were zealous of the _law_; "and they are informed of thee, that thou teachest _all_ the jews which are among the gentiles, to forsake _moses_ and the _customs_." xxi: , . any person who will carefully read the eight chapters here included, must be thoroughly convinced that the apostle's troubles were about the law of ceremonies written and given by moses, and nothing to do with the ten commandments. for you see a little before he comes to jerusalem, he had been preaching at corinth every sabbath for eighteen months. xviii: , . and this, be it remembered, was more than twenty years after the jewish sabbaths and ceremonies were nailed to the cross.--and [ ]you see that paul was the man above all the apostles to be persecuted on account of the abolition of the jews' law of ceremonies, for he was the "_great_ apostle to the gentiles:" and if the "sabbath of the lord our god" was to have been abolished when the saviour died, paul was the very man selected for that purpose. it is clear, therefore, that he did not abolish the seventh day sabbath among the gentiles. this same apostle tells the romans "that christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth." x: . again, that "sin shall not have dominion over you, for ye are not under the _law_ but under grace." vi: . once more: he says the gentiles having not the _law_, are a _law_ unto themselves.--why? because, he says in the next verse, it shews the _law_ written on their hearts. the law of ceremonies? no that which was on tables of stone. ii: - . we might quote much more which looks like embracing the whole law. let us now look at a few texts in the same letter, which will draw a distinguishing line between the two codes of laws. paul, in the vii ch. - v, brings to view the carnal commandment, and the one unto life, and sums up his argument in these words: "wherefore the _law_ is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good." in the v he quotes from the decalogue. again, he that loveth another hath fulfilled the _law_. how? why thou shalt not steal, nor commit adultery, nor bear false witness, nor covet, thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. therefore _love_ is the fulfilling of the law. rom. xiii: , .--this then is what the saviour taught the young man to do--to secure "eternal life." matt. once more, in concluding a long argument on the law in rom. iii: he closes with this language: "do we then make void the law through faith? god forbid ye, _we establish the law_."--what _law_ is here established? not the law of rites and ceremonies. what then, for paul means some law. it can be no other than what he calls the law of "life," of "love," the ten commandments. how could even that be established twenty-nine years after the crucifixion if one of the _greatest_ commandments had been abolished out of the code, that is the sabbath. paul's letter to the corinthians teaches that "circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the _keeping_ of the commandments of god." vii: . again, in his epistle to the galatians, his phraseology is somewhat changed, but the argument is to the same point, although [ ]some passages read as though every vestage of _law_ was swept by the board when jesus hung upon the cross. for instance, such as the following: "but that no man is justified by the _law_ in the sight of god it is evident, for the just shall live by faith, and the law is not of faith, but the man that doeth them shall live by them." "christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the _law_, being made a curse for us." "but before faith came we were kept under the _law_, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed." "wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto christ that we might be justified by faith, but after that faith has come we are no longer under a schoolmaster." gal. iii: - , - . again: "for as many as are of the works of the _law_ are under the curse." v. now are we to understand from these texts that whosoever continueth in the _law_ is cursed, and that the law _the whole law_, was abolished when christ came as our schoolmaster, he being the "end of the law?" rom. x: . if so, how is it possible for any man, even paul himself, to be saved. but we do not believe that paul taught these brethren any different doctrine than what has already been shown in the acts, romans, and corinthians, and also the eph., phil., col., and heb. if he did not mean the law written by the hand of moses, distinguishing it from the _law_ of the ten commandments, written by the finger of god on tables of stone, then pray tell me if you can, what he means (in the closing of this argument,) by saying, "for _all_ the law is fulfilled in one word, even this: thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." v: . surely he is quoting the saviour's words in matthew xxii: , relative to the commandment of the lord our god.--to his son timothy he says: "now the end of the commandment is charity," (love) meaning of course the last part of the ten commandments. in vi: , he says: "bear ye one anothers burdens and so fulfil the _law_ of christ." does this differ from the _law_ of god? yes, a little, for it is the new commandment, (some say the eleventh.) see john xiii: . "a new commandment i give unto you, (what is it, lord?) that ye love one another." and also xv: . the other is to love our neighbor as ourself.--john says: "and this commandment have we from him (christ,) that he who loveth god loveth his brother also." john iv: , and ii: - . in his letter to the ephesians he says: "having abolished in his flesh the _enmity_ even the law of commandments contained in [ ]ordinances." ii: . see the reverse in vi: v. to the collossians he asks, "why as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances which all are to perish with their using?" and says: "touch not, taste not, handle not." (does paul here teach us to forsake the ordinances of god, instituted by the saviour--baptism and the lord's supper? yes, just as clearly as he does to forsake the whole law.) when writing to the hebrews more than thirty years after the crucifixion, he calls these ordinances _carnal_, imposed on them (the jews) until christ our high priest should come. ix: , . he also calls the law of commandments carnal too, and says: "for there is verily a disannulling of the commandments going before, for the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did." vii: , - . "for when moses had spoken _every precept_ to all the people according to the _law_ he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book and all the people." ix: . now we see clearly that the book of the law of moses, from which paul has been quoting through the whole before mentioned epistles, is as distinctly separate from the tables of stone (or fleshly table of the heart,) as they were when deposited in the ark thirty-three hundred years ago. therefore we think that here is clear proof that he has kept up the distinction between the "handwriting of ordinances" (meaning moses' own handwriting in his book,) and the "ten commandments writen by the finger of god." let us now turn to the epistle of james, said to be written more than twenty-five years after the law of ceremonies was nailed to the cross, and see if he does not teach us distinctly, that we are bound to keep the commandments given on tables of stone. he says, "the man that shall be a doer of the _perfect law_ of liberty shall be blessed in his deed." i: . "if ye fulfill the royal _law_ according to the scripture, thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself, ye do well." why? because the saviour in quoting from the commandments, in answer to the ruler, what he should do to inherit eternal life, taught the same doctrine. matt. xix: . further: "for whosoever shall keep the whole _law_ and yet offend in one point, shall be guilty of _all_." in the next verse he quotes from the ten commandments again, namely, adultery and murder (what the saviour in the fifth chapter of matt. calls the [ ]least, that is the smallest commandment,) and says if we commit them we become transgressors of the _law_. of what _law_? next verse says the _law_ of _liberty_ by which we are to be "judged." ii: , . now will it not be admitted by every reasonable person that james has included the whole of the ten commandments, by calling them the perfect law of liberty. d, "the royal _law_ according to the scripture," and d, "the _law of liberty_ by which we are to be judged." (royal relates to imperial and kingly.) perfect means complete, _entire_, the whole. then i understand james thus: this _law_ emenated from the king, the supreme ruler of the universe, and to be perfect must be just what it was when it came from his hand, and that no _change_ had, or could take place, (and remember now, this is more than twenty-five years since the ceremonies with the jewish sabbaths were nailed to the cross,) for the very best of reasons, until the judgment, because he shows we are to be judged by _that law_. then i ask by what parity of reasoning any one can make the law of the ten commandments perfect, while they at the same time assert that the fourth one is abolished? and that on no better evidence than calling it the jewish sabbath. now let us look at the apostle john's testimony. "and hereby we do know that we know him if we keep his commandments. he that saith i know him and keepeth not his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him." now no man, more especially one who professes to abide by the whole truth, feels entirely easy if he is called a _liar_. now john please explain yourself.--hear him: "brethren, i write no new commandment unto you, but an _old_ commandment that ye had from the beginning. the old commandment is the _word_ which ye have heard from the beginning." what do you mean by _beginning_? turn to my gospel, st ch. "in the _beginning_ was the word,"--"the same was in the _beginning_ with god." , . see gen. i ch: "in the _beginning_ god created the heavens and the earth." then you are pointing us to the seventh day of creation, in which god instituted the seventh day sabbath of rest, for the _old_ commandment in the _beginning_. ii: . certainly there is no other place to point to. does not jesus point to the same place for the _beginning_ when marriage was first instituted. matt. xix: . in my second letter to the church, i have taught the same doctrines: viz. "this is the commandment that as ye [ ]have heard from the _beginnings ye should walk in it_." (practice it.) ii: , . "a _new_ commandment i write unto you." ii: v. this is the one that jesus gave us on that memorable night in which he was betrayed, after he had instituted the sacrament and washed our feet. he said "by this shall all men know that ye are my disciples if ye have love one to another." xiii: , . the first then teaches us, love to god; d, to love our neighbor as ourself; "on these two commandments (says jesus) hang all the law and the prophets." then we understand this is the essence of the ten commandments, and if we do not keep the sabbath we do not love god. jesus says, "if ye love me keep my commandments." we are repeatedly told that the sabbath was changed or forever abolished, at the crucifixion of our lord; and it is stated by the most competent authorities that john wrote this epistle about sixty years afterwards, and that about six years after this our blessed lord revealed to him the state of the church down to the judgment of the great day. in the xiv ch. rev. - , he saw three angels following each other in succession: first one preaching the everlasting gospel (second advent doctrine); d, announcing the fall of babylon; d, calling god's people out of her by showing the awful destruction that awaited all such as did not obey. he sees the separation and cries out, "here is the patience of the saints, here are they that keep the _commandments_ of god and the faith of jesus." and this picture was so deeply impressed upon his mind, that when the savior said to him "behold i come quickly and my reward is with me," he seemed to understand this, saying--"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." now it seems to me that the seventh day sabbath is more clearly included in these commandments, than thou shalt not steal, nor kill, nor commit adultery, for it is the only one that was written at the creation or in the _beginning_. he allows no stopping place this side of the gates of the city. then, if we do not keep that day, john has made out his case, that we are all _liars_. we say in every other case the type must be continued until it is superseded by the antetype: as in the case of the passover, until our lord was crucified. so then, as paul tells us, "there remaineth a keeping of the sabbath to the people of god;" and that we believe will be in the millenium, the seven thousandth year, so that the seventh [ ]day sabbath and no other will answer for the type, and those who keep the first or the eighth day sabbath cannot consistently look for the antetype of rest or the great sabbath, short of one thousand years in future. again: isaiah says: "to the law and to the testimony if they speak not according to his word it is because there is no light in them." viii: . now if the gentiles are under no law, as is asserted, pray tell me what right, the gentiles, have we to appeal to the law and testimony, or to this text. in the xxiv. of matt. our saviour says to his disciples in answer to their questions, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming and the end of the world? "when ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation spoken of by daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place," &c. v. "pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day." v. the first question is, at what age of the world is this, where our lord recognizes the sabbath. st. it is agreed on all hands that this time to which he here refers, never transpired until the destruction of jerusalem in a. d. , about years after his crucifixion. d. some others say down to the second advent! the first mentioned is safe ground and sufficient for our purpose; nor need we stop to inquire why our lord gave these directions, it is forever settled that he directed the minds of his followers to the, not _a_ sabbath. keep it in remembrance, that he told the pharisees that he was lord, not of _a_, but of the sabbath, meaning that one which of course had already been established. the d question is, did our lord ever trifle with or mislead his disciples? the response is no! then it is clear that if he taught them to pray at all, it must be in faith, and he of course would hear them and mediate with the father to change the day of their flight. i ask what kind of a prayer and with what kind of faith would his disciples have asked to have this day changed, if, as we are told, it was abolished some forty years before, and they had, contrary to the will of god, persisted in keeping up the seventh day sabbath. any one who has confidence in god's word, knows that such a prayer never would be answered. what if you do say the jews always kept that sabbath, and it was the same seventh day sabbath that they kept when he was teaching them in their synagogues? i say so too! and that fact will be presented by and by, in its place. this does not touch the point. jesus was here, giving instruction to his [ ]followers, both jew and gentile, respecting _the_ sabbath which they would have to do with. it is immaterial what kind of sophistry is presented to overthrow the point, nothing can touch it short of proving it a mistranslation. jesus did here recognize the perpetuity of the _seventh day sabbath_. and john will continue to make all men liars that say they know him, and refuse the light presented and disregard this commandment. if god instituted the sabbath in paradise and has not abolished it here, then it must be _perpetual_. if paul's argument in iii. rom. that the law is established through faith, is correct, then it is _perpetual_. if james' royal _perfect law_ of liberty, which we are to be doers of, and judged by, means the commandments, then is the sabbath _perpetual_. if the apostle john has made out a clear case by citing us back to the _beginning_ of creation, and by walking in and doing these commandments, we shall have right to the tree of life and enter in by the gates into the city; then it must be _perpetual_. if the earthly sabbath is typical of the heavenly, then must it be _perpetual_. if not one jot or one tittle can ever pass from the law, then must it be _perpetual_. if the saviour, in answer to the young man who asked him what he should do to inherit _eternal life_, gave a safe direction for gentiles to follow, viz: "if thou wilt enter into _life_ keep the commandments" (and these included those commandments which his father had given,) then, without _contradiction_ the sabbath is _perpetual_, and all the arguments which ever can be presented against the fourth commandment being observed before god wrote it on tables of stone to prove that it is not binding on gentiles, fall powerless before this one sentence: _if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments._ i say the proof is positive that the sabbath was a constituent part of the commandments, and jesus says the sabbath was made for man. the jews were only a _fragment of creation_. "the principle is settled in all governments that there are but two ways in which any law can cease to be binding upon the people. it may expire by its own limitations, or it may be repealed by the same authority which enacted it; and in the latter case the repealing act must be as explicit as that by which the obligation was originally imposed." now we have it in proof that the sabbath was instituted in paradise, the _first_ of all laws without any limitation, and no enactment by god to abolish it, unless what we have already referred to can be considered proof. one more passage which i have not alluded to, will show that [ ]it was not abolished at the crucifixion, for his disciples kept the sabbath while he was resting in his tomb. see luke xxiii: , . let us now pass to another part of the subject. the third question: was the seventh day sabbath ever changed? if so when, and for what reason? here we come to a question which has more or less engaged the attention of the whole christian world, and the greater portion of those who believe in a crucified saviour say that this change took place, and is dated from his resurrection. some say subsequently, while a minority insist upon it that there is no proof for the change. now to obtain the truth and nothing but the truth on this important subject, i propose to present, or quote from standard authors on both sides of the question, and try the whole by the standard of divine truth. st. buck's theological dictionary, to which no doubt thousands of ministers and laymen appeal to sustain their argument for the change, says: "under the christian dispensation the sabbath is _altered_ from the _seventh_ to the _first day_ of the week." the arguments for the change are these: st. "the _seventh_ day was observed by the jewish church in memory of the rest of god; so the _first_ day of the week has always been observed by the christian church in memory of _christ's resurrection_. d. christ made repeated visits to his disciples on that day. d. it is called the lord's day. rev. i: .-- th. on this day the apostles were assembled, when the holy ghost came down upon them to qualify them for the conversion of the world. th. on this day we find paul at troas when the disciples came together to break bread. th. the directions the apostles gave to christians plainly alludes to their assembling on that day. th. pliny bears witness of the first day of the week being kept as a festival in honor of the resurrection of christ." "numerous have been the days appointed by man for religious services, but these are not binding because of _human_ institution. not so the sabbath. it is of _divine_ institution, so it is to be kept holy onto the lord." doct. dodridge, whose ability and piety have seldom or rarely been disputed, comments on some of the above articles thus: (commentary p. .) "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." i cor. xvi: . "show that it was to be put into a [ ]common stock. the argument drawn from hence for the religious observance of the first day of the week in these primitive churches of corinth and galacia is too _obvious_ to need any further illustration, and yet too important to be passed by in entire silence." again, p. , "i was in the spirit on the lord's day," &c. rev. i: . "it is so very unnatural and contrary to the use of the word in all other authors to interpret this of the jewish sabbath, as mr. baxter justly argues at large, that i cannot but conclude with him and the generality of christian writers on this subject, that this text _strongly_ infers the extraordinary regard paid to the first day of the week in the apostle's time as a day solemnly consecrated to christ in the memory of his resurrection from the dead." there is much more, but these are his strong arguments. i shall quote some more from the commentaries by and by. i wish to place by the side of these arguments one from the british quarterly theological review and ecclesiastical recorder, of jan. , which i extract from 'the _institution of the sabbath day_,' by wm. logan fisher, of philadelphia, a book in which there is much valuable information on this subject, though i disagree with the writer, because his whole labor is to abolish the sabbath; yet he gives much light on this subject, from which i take the liberty to make some quotations. but to the quarterly review of : "it is said that the observance of the seventh day sabbath is transferred in the christian church to the first day of the week. we ask by what authority, and are very much mistaken if an examination of all the texts of the new testament, in which the first day of the week or lord's day is mentioned, does not prove that there is no divine or apostolic precept enjoining its observance, nor any certain evidence from scripture that it was, in fact, so observed in the times of the apostles. accordingly we search the scriptures in vain, either for an apostolic precept, appointing the first day of the week to be observed in the place of the jewish sabbath, or for any unequivocal proof that the first christians so observed it--there are only three or, at most four passages of scripture, in which the first day of the week is mentioned. the next passage is acts xx: . 'upon the first day of the week when the disciples some together to break bread, paul preached unto them.' all that st. luke here tells us plainly is, that on a particular occasion the christians of troas met together on the first day of the week to celebrate the eucharist and to hear paul preach. this is the only place in scripture in which the first day of the week is in any way connected with any acts of public worship, and he who would certainly infer from this solitary instance that the first day of every week was consecrated by the apostles to religious purposes, must be far gone in the art of drawing universal conclusion from particular premises." on page , mr. fisher says: [ ]"i have examined several different translations of the scriptures, both from the hebrew and septuagint, with notes and annotations more extensive than the texts; have traced as far as my leisure would permit, various ecclesiastical histories, some of them voluminous and of ancient date; have paid considerable attention to the writings of the earliest authors in the christian era, and to rare works, old and of difficult access, which treat upon this subject; i have read with care many of the publications of sectarians to sustain the institution; i have omitted nothing within my reach, and i have found not one shred of argument, or authority of any kind, that may not be deemed of partial and sectarian character, to support the institution of the first day of the week, as a day of peculiar holiness. but, in place of argument, i have found opinions without number--volumes filled with idle words that have no truth in them. in the want of texts of scripture, i have found perversions; in the want of truth, false statements. i have seen it stated that justin marter in his apology speaks of sunday as a holy day; that eusebius, bishop of cesarea, who lived in the fourth century, establishes the fact of the transfer of the seventh to the first day, by christ himself. these things are not true. these authors say no such thing. i have seen other early authors referred to as establishing the same point, but they are equally false." here then is the testimony of four authors, two for the change and two against it, from the old and new world. no truth seeking, unbiassed mind can hesitate for a moment on which side to decide, after comparing them with the inspired word. doctor jenks of boston, author of the comprehensive commentary, (purporting to comprehend _all_ other commentators on the bible,) after quoting author after author on this subject, ventures forth with _his_ unsupported opinion in these words: "here is a christian sabbath observed by the disciples and _owned by our lord_. the visit christ made to his disciples was on the first day of the week, and the first day of the week is the only day of the week or month or year ever mentioned by numbers in all the new testament, and that is several times spoken of as a day _religiously_ observed." where? echo answers, where! heman humphrey, president of amherst college, from whose book i have already made some quotations, after devoting some thirty-four pages to the establishment and perpetuation of the seventh day sabbath, comes to his fourth question, viz: "has the day been changed?" singular as this question may appear by the side of what he had already written to establish and perpetuate the seventh day sabbath from the seventh day of creation down to the resurrection of the just, but as every man feels that it is his privilege to justify and explain, when precept and practice do not agree--so is it with president humphrey, he can [ ]now shape the scriptures to suit every one that has followed in the wake of pope gregory for years. he says, "the fourth commandment is so expressed as to admit of a change in the day,"--thus striking vitally every argument he had before presented. hear him--he says the seventh day is the sabbath; "it was so at that time (in the beginning) and for many ages after, but it is not said that it always _shall be_--it is the _sabbath_ day which we are to remember; and so at the close, it was the _sabbath_ which was hallowed and blessed and not the _seventh day_. the sabbath then, the holy rest itself, is one thing. the day on which we are to rest is another." i ask, in the name of common sense, how we should know how or when to keep the sabbath, if it did not matter which day. if the president could not see the sanctification of the seventh day in the decalogue, what did he mean by quoting gen. ii: , so often, where it says "_god blessed the seventh day and sanctified it_." again, he says, "redemption is a greater work than creation, hence the change." fifthly, god early consecrated the christian sabbath by a most remarkable outpouring of his spirit at the day of pentecost. and that jesus has left us his own example by not saying a syllable after his resurrection about keeping the _jewish sabbath_. he also quotes the four passages about jesus and his disciples keeping the first day of the week. here, he says, the inference to our mind is _irresistible_--for keeping the first day of the week instead of the _seventh_. and further says, it might be proved by innumerable quotations from the writings of the apostolic fathers, &c. all this may be very true in itself, but it all falls to the ground for the want of one single precept from the bible. if redemption, because it was greater than creation, and the remarkable display of god's power at the pentecost, and christ never saying any thing about the _jewish sabbath_ after his resurrection are such _strong_ proofs that the perpetual seventh day sabbath was changed to the first day at that time, and must be believed because learned men say so, what shall we do with the sixth day, on which our blessed saviour expired on the cross; darkness for three hours had covered the earth, and the vail of the temple was rent from top to bottom, and there was such an earthquake throughout vast creation that we have only to open our eyes and look at the rent rocks for a clear and perfect demonstration that this whole globe was shaken from centre to circumference, [ ]and the graves of the dead were opened. matt xxvii: , . you may answer me that popery has honored that day by calling it good friday, and the next first day following easter sunday, &c., but after all nothing short of bible argument will satisfy the earnest inquirer after truth.--the president had already shown that the _jewish_ sabbath was abolished at christ's death. what reason, then had he to believe that the saviour would speak of it afterwards.--so also the pentecost had been a type from the giving the law at sinai to be kept annually for about years, consequently it would be solemnized on every day of the week at each revolving year, as is the case with the th of july: three years ago it was on the fourth day and now it comes on the seventh day of the week. further, see peter standing amidst the amazed multitude, giving the scripture reason for this miraculous display of god's power. he does not give the most distant hint that this was, or was to be, the day of the week for worship, or the true sabbath, neither do any of the apostles, then, or afterwards, for when they kept this day the next year, it must have been the second day of the week. we must have better evidence than what has been adduced, to believe this was the sabbath, for according to the type, seven sabbaths were to be complete, (and there was no other way given them to come to the right day,) from the day they kept the first or from the resurrection. here then is proof positive that the sabbath in this year was the day before the pentecost. see luke xxiii: , . if president h. is right, then was there two sabbaths to be kept in succession in one week. where is the precept? no where! well, says the inquirer, i want to see the bible proof for this "_christian sabbath observed by the disciples, and owned by our lord_." w. jenks. here it will be necessary for us to understand, first how god has computed time. in gen. i. we read, "and god said let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven, to divide the day from the night, and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years." v. v. says "the greater light to rule the day,"--from sunrise to sunset. now there are many modes invented for computing time. we say our day begins at o'clock at night; seamen begin theirs twelve hours sooner, at noon; the jews commence their days at o'clock in the evening, between the two extremes. are we _all_ right? no! who shall settle this question? god! very well: he called the light day and the darkness he called night, and the evening and the [ ]morning were the first day. gen. i: . then the twenty-four hour day commenced at o'clock in the evening. how is that, says one? because you cannot regulate the day and night to have what the saviour calls twelve hours in a day, without establishing the time from the centre of the earth, the equator, where, at the beginning of the sacred year, the sun rises and sets at o'clock. at _this_ time, while the sun is at the summer solstice, the inhabitants at the north pole have no night, while at this same time at the south it is about all night, therefore the inhabitants of the earth have no other right time to commence their twenty-four hour day, than beginning at o'clock in the evening. god said to moses "_from even to even, shall you celebrate your sabbath_." then of course the next day must begin where the sabbath ended. history shows that the jews obeyed and commenced their days at o'clock in the evening. now then we will try to investigate the main argument by which these authors, and thousands of others say the sabbath was changed. the first is in john xx: , "then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled _for fear of the jews_ (mark it) came jesus and stood in their midst, and said peace be unto you." here we understand this to be the same day of the resurrection. on that day he travelled with the two disciples to emans, sixty furlongs ( - / miles,) and they constrained him to abide with them, for it was towards evening and the _day was far spent_. luke xxiv: . after this the disciples travelled - / miles back to jerusalem, and soon after they found the disciples, the saviour, as above stated, was in their midst. now it cannot be disputed but what this was the evening after the resurrection, for jesus rose in the morning, some ten or eleven hours after the first day had commenced. then the evening of the first day was passing away, and therefore the evening brought to view in the text was the close of the first day or the commencing of the second. mcknight's translation says, "in the evening of that day." purver's translation says, "the evening of that day on the first after the sabbath." further, wherever the phrase first day of the week, occurs in the new testament, the word day is in _italics_, showing that it is not the original, but supplied by translators. again, it is asserted that jesus met with his disciples the next first day. see v: "and _after_ eight days again his disciples were within, and thomas with them, then came jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said peace be unto you." [ ]dr. adam clark in referring to this v, says: "it seems likely that this was precisely on that day se'night on which christ had appeared to them before; and from this we may learn that this was the weekly meeting of the apostles." now it appears to me that a little child, with the simple rules of addition and subtraction, could have refuted this man. i feel astonished that men who profess to be ambassadors for god do not expose such downright perversions of scripture, but it may look clear to those who want to have it so. not many months since, in conversation with the second advent lecturer in new bedford, i brought up this subject. he told me i did not understand it. see here, says he, i can make it plain, counting his fingers thus: sunday, monday, tuesday, wednesday, thursday, friday, saturday, sunday--does'nt that make eight days after? and because i would not concede, he parted from me as one that was obstinate and self-willed. afterwards musing on the subject, i said, this must be the way then to understand it: _count sunday twice_. if any of them were to be paid for eight days labor, they would detect the error in a moment if their employer should attempt to put the first and last days together, and offer them pay but for seven. eight days _after_ the evening of the _first_ day would stand thus: the second day of the week would certainly be the first of the eight. then to count eight days of twenty-four hours _after_, we must begin at the close of the evening of the first, and count to the close of the evening of the second day; to where the jews (by god's command) commenced their third day. but suppose we calculate it by our mode of keeping time. our lord appears to his disciples the first time at the close of sunday evening. now count eight days _after_, (with your fingers or anything else,) and it will bring you to monday evening. now i ask if this looks like sunday, the first day of the week? father miller also gives his reasons for the change, in his lecture on the great sabbath: "one is christ's resurrection and his often meeting with his disciples _afterwards_ on that day. this, with the example of the apostles, is strong evidence that the proper creation sabbath to man, came on the first day of the week." his proof is this: "adam must have rested on the first day of his life, and thus you will see that to adam it was the first day of the week, for it would not be reasonable to suppose that adam began to reckon time before he was created." he certainly could not be able to work six days before the first sabbath. and thus [ ]with the second adam; the first day of the week he arose and lived. and we find by the _bible_ and by history, that the first day of the week "_was ever afterwards observed as a day of worship_." now i say there is no more truth in these assertions, than there is in those i have already quoted. there is not one passage in the bible to show that christ met with his disciples on the first day of the week after the day of his resurrection, nor that the first day of the week was _ever afterwards_ observed as a day of worship; save only in one instance, and that shall be noticed in its place. and it seems to me if adam could not reckon time only from his creation then by the same rule no other man could reckon time before his birth, and by this showing christ could not reckon his time until after his resurrection. it is painful to me to expose the errors of one whom i have so long venerated, and still love for the flood of light he has given the world in respect to the second advent of our saviour; but god's word must be vindicated if we have to cut off a right arm, "there is nothing true but truth!" i pray god to forgive him in joining the great multitude of advent believers, to sound the retreat back beyond the _tarrying_ time, just when the virgins had gained a glorious victory over the world, the flesh, and the devil! go back from this to the slumbering quarters now; nothing but treachery to our master's cause ever dictated such a course! i never can be made to believe that our glorious commander designed that we should leave our sacrifices smoking on the altar of god, in the midst of the enemies' land, but rather that we should be pushing onward from victory to victory, until we are established in the capital of _his_ kingdom. would it have been expedient or a mark of courage in general taylor, after he had conquered the mexican army on the th may last, to have retreated back to the capital of the u. states, to place himself and army on the _broad platform_ of liberty, and commence to travel the ground over again for the purposes of pursuing and overcoming his vanquished foe? no! every person of common sense knows that such a course would have overwhelmed him and all his followers with unutterable disgrace, no matter how unrighteous the contest. not so with this, for our cause is one of the most glorious, tho it be the most trying that the sun ever shown upon since god placed it in the heavens. onward and victory, then, are our watchwords, and no retreating back to, or beyond the cry at _midnight_! but to the subject. did our saviour ever meet with his disciples on the first day of the week after the [ ]evening of the day of his resurrection? the xxi. ch. john says "they went a fishing, and while there jesus appeared unto them." in the th v. he says, "this is now the third time that jesus showed himself to the disciples after that he was risen from the dead." now turn to cor. xv: - : paul's testimony is, "that he was seen of cephas, then of the twelve, after that of above five hundred brethren at once, and then of james, then of all the apostles." these are all that are specified, up to his going into heaven. now pray tell me if you can, where these men got their information respecting the frequent meetings on the first day of the week. the bible says no such thing. but let us pursue the subject and look at the third text, "upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in _store_, as god has prospered him, that there be no gatherings when i come." now please turn back to dr. dodridge's authority, he says the argument is too obvious to need illustration, that the money was put into common stock, and that this was the religious observance of the first day of the week. now whoever will read the first six verses of this chapter, and compare them with rom. xv: - , will see that paul's design was to collect some money for the poor saints at jerusalem, and their laying it by them in store until he came that way; for it plainly implies that they were at home, for no one could understand that you had money lying by you in store, if it was in common stock or in other hands. again, see acts xviii: , . paul preaching every sabbath day, at this very time, for eighteen months, to these very same corinthians, bids them farewell, to go up to the feast at jerusalem. v. by reading to xxi. ch. v. you have his history until he arrives there. now i ask, if dr. dodridge's clear illustration can or will be relied on, when luke clearly teaches that paul's _manner_ was, and that he did always preach to them on the sabbath, which, of course, was the seventh day, and not the first day of the week. fourth text, john says: i was in the spirit on the lord's day. here dr. d. concludes with the generality of christian writers on this subject that this strongly infers the extraordinary regard paid to the first day of the week, as solemnly consecrated in christ, &c. if the scripture any where called this the lord's day, there might be some reason to believe their statements, but the seventh day sabbath is called the lord's day. see exod. xx: . mr. fisher, in speaking of the late harrisburg convention of - , says, "the most spirited debate that occurred [ ]at the assembly was to fix a proper name for the first day of the week, whether it should be called _sabbath_, the _christian sabbath_ or _lord's_ day. the reason for this dispute was, that there was no authority for calling the first day of the week by either one of these names. to pretend that that command was fixed and unchangeable, and yet to alter it to please the fancy of man, is in itself ridiculous. it is hardly possible in the nature of man, that a class of society should be receiving pay for their services and not be influenced thereby;--in the nature of things they will avoid such doctrines as are repugnant to them that give them bread." now we come to the fifth and last, and only one spoken of in all the new testament, for a meeting on the first day of the week. luke says, "upon the first day of the week when the disciples came together to break bread, paul preached unto them, _ready to depart on the morrow_: and continued his speech until midnight." acts xx: . now by following the scripture mode of computing time, from o'clock in the evening to o'clock in the morning, as has been shown, paul to commence on the beginning of the first day would begin on what we call saturday evening at o'clock, and preach till midnight. after that he restores to life the young man, then breaks bread and talked till the break of day, which would be sunday morning. then he commenced his journey for jerusalem and travelled and sailed all day sunday, the first day of the week, and two other days in succession. xx: - . now it seems to me, if paul did teach or keep the first day of the week for the sabbath or a holy day he violated the sanctity of it to all intents and purposes, without giving one single reason for it; all the proof presented here is a night meeting. please see the quotation from the british quarterly review. but let us look at it the way in which _we_ compute time: i think it will be fair to premise, that about midnight was the middle of paul's meeting; at any rate there is but one midnight to a twenty-four hour day. _we_ say that sunday, the first day of the week, does not commence until o'clock saturday night. then it is very clear, if he is preaching on the first day till midnight, according to our reckoning it must be on sunday night, and his celebrating the lord's supper after midnight would make it that he broke bread on _monday, the second day_, and that the day time on sunday is not included, unless he had continued his speech through the day till midnight. now the text says that on the first day of the week they came together to break bread. to _prove that [ ]they did break bread on that day_, we must take the mode in which the jews computed time, and allow the first day of the week to begin at o'clock on saturday evening, and to follow paul's example, pay no regard to the first day, after daylight, but to travel, &c. if _our_ mode of time is taken, they broke bread on the second day, and that would destroy the meaning of the text. here then, in this text, is the _only_ argument that can be adduced in the scriptures of divine truth, for a _change of the perpetual seventh day_ sabbath of the lord our god to the first day of the week. now i'll venture the assertion, that there is no law or commandment recorded in the bible, that god has held so sacred among men, as the keeping of his sabbath. where then, i ask, is the living man that dare stand before god and declare that here is the change for the church of god to keep the first instead of the seventh day of the week for the sabbath. if it could be proved that paul preached here all of the first day, the only inference that could be drawn, would be, to break bread on that day! there is one more point worthy of our attention, that is, the teaching and example of jesus. i have been told by one that is looked up to as a strong believer in the second coming of the lord this fall, that jesus broke the sabbath. jesus says, i have kept my father's commandments. it is said that he "broke the sabbath," because he allowed his disciples to pluck the corn and eat it on that day, and the pharisees condemned them. he says, "if ye had known what this meaneth, i will have mercy and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the _guiltless_." then they were not _guilty_. see deut. xxiii: . he immediately cites them to david and his men, shewing that it was lawful and right when hungry, even to eat the shoe bread that belonged only to the priests, and told them that he was lord of the sabbath day. here he shows too, that he was with his disciples passing to the synagogue to teach; they ask him if it is lawful to teach on the sabbath day. he asks them if they had a sheep fall into the ditch on the sabbath, if they would not haul him out? how much better then is a man than a sheep? wherefore it is lawful to do well on the sabbath days; and immediately healed the man with the withered hand. matt. xii: - . on another sabbath day, while he was teaching, he healed a woman that had been bound of satan eighteen years; and when the ruler of the synagogue began to find fault, he called him a hypocrite, and said "doth not each one of you on the sabbath [ ]day loose his ox or his ass from the stall and lead him away to watering; and all his adversaries were _ashamed_." luke xiii: - . the xiv. chapter of luke is quoted to prove that he broke the sabbath because he went into the pharisee's house with many others on the sabbath day to eat bread. here he saw a man with the dropsy and he asked them if it was lawful to heal on the sabbath day. 'and they held their peace, and he took him and healed him,' and asked them 'which of them having an ox or an ass fall into the pit, would not straightway pull him out on the sabbath day; and they could not answer him again.' - v. and 'he continued to teach them, by showing them when they made a feast to call the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind, and then they should be blessed.' read the chapter, and you will readily see that he took this occasion, as the most befitting, to teach them by parables, what their duty was at weddings and feasts, in the same manner as he taught them in their synagogues. there is still another passage, and i believe the only one, to which reference has been made, (except where he opened the eyes of a man that was born blind,) for proof that he broke the sabbath. it is recorded in john v: - . here jesus found a man that had been sick thirty-eight years, by the pool of bethesda, 'he saith unto him rise, take up thy bed and walk,--therefore did they persecute jesus and sought to slay him because he had done these things on the sabbath day.' v. 'but jesus answered them, my father worketh hitherto and i work.' if they did not work every hour and moment of time, it would be impossible for man to exist: here undoubtedly he had reference to these and other acts of necessity and mercy; but the great sin for which professors in this enlightened age charge the saviour with in this transaction, is, in directing the man to take up his bed, contrary to law. it is clear the people were forbidden to carry burthens on the sabbath day, as in jer. xvii: , , but by reading the th v. in connection with neh. xiii: - , we learn that this prohibition related to what was lawful for them to do on the other six days of the week, viz. merchandise and trading. see proof, neh. x: ; also unlawful, as in amos viii: . we need not nor we cannot misunderstand the fourth commandment taken in connection with the other nine; they were simple and pure written by the finger of god; but in the days of our saviour it had become heavily laden with jewish traditions, hence when jesus appeals to them whether it is [ ]lawful to do good and to heal on the sabbath days, their mouths are closed because they cannot contradict him from the law nor the prophets. the saviour no where interferes with them in their most rigid observance of the day; but when they find fault with him for performing his miracles of mercy on that day, he tells them they have broken the law; and in another place, "if a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision without breaking the law of moses, are ye angry at me because i have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day?" he then says, "judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment." vii: , . did he break the sabbath? now the law requires that the beasts shall rest; but what is the practice of many of those who are the most strict in keeping sunday for the sabbath. sick, or well, ministers or laymen, do they not ride back and forth to meeting? again, is it right and lawful to carry forth our dead on the sabbath? or carry the communion service back and forth. the apostle says, 'believe and be baptized.' suppose this should be on the sabbath and we were some distance from the water, would any one interfere with us if we carried our change of apparel with us and back again, or have we in so doing transgressed the law; if we have, it is high time we made a full stop. jesus undoubtedly had good reasons for directing the sick man to take up his bed and walk, but i cannot learn that he justified any one else in carrying their bed on the sabbath, unless in a case of necessity and mercy, such as he cited them to, as watering their cattle, and pulling them out of the ditch, and eating when hungry, and being healed when sick. be it also remembered that when the sanhedrim tried him they did not condemn him, as in the other cases cited; so in this, they failed for want of scripture testimony. he was the lord of the sabbath, and the law of ceremonies were now about to cease forever, the ten commandments with the keeping of the sabbath therefore were to be stripped of these ceremonies and all of their traditions, and left as pure to be written on the hearts of the gentiles as when first written on tables of stone, therefore jesus taught that it was right to do good on the sabbath day, and whoever follows his example and teaching will keep the seventh day sabbath holy and acceptable to god. they will also judge righteous judgment, and not according to appearance. there is but one christian sabbath named, or established in the bible, and that individual, whoever he is, that [ ]undertakes to abolish or change it, is the _real sabbath breaker_. remember that the keeping the commandments is the only safe guide through the gates into the city. my friends and neighbors, and especially my family, know that i have for more than twenty years, strictly endeavored to keep the first day of the week for the sabbath, and i can say that i did it in all good conscience before god, on the ocean, and in foreign countries as well as my own, until about sixteen months since i read an article published in the hope of israel, by a worthy brother, t. m. preble, of nashua, which when i read and compared with the bible, convinced me that there never had been any change. therefore the seventh day was the sabbath, and god required me as well as him to keep it holy. many things now troubled my mind as to how i could make this great change, family, friends, and brethren; but this one passage of scripture was, and always will be as clear as a sunbeam. "_what is that to thee: follow thou me._" in a few days my mind was made up to begin to keep the fourth commandment, and i bless god for the clear light he has shed upon my mind in answer to prayer and a thorough examination of the scriptures on this great subject. contrary views did, after a little, shake my position some, but i feel now that there is no argument nor sophistry that can becloud my mind again this side of the gates of the holy city. brother marsh, who no doubt thinks, and perhaps thousands besides, that his paper is what it purports to be, the voice of truth, takes the ground with the infidel that there is no sabbath. brother s. s. snow, of new york, late editor of the jubilee standard, publishes to the world that he is the elijah, preceding the advent of our saviour, restoring all things: (the seventh day sabbath must be one of the all things,) and yet he takes the same ground with br. marsh, that the sabbath is forever abolished. as the seventh day sabbath is a real prophecy, a picture (and not a shadow like the jewish sabbaths,) of the thing typified which is to come, i cannot see how those who believe in the change or abolition of the type, can have any confidence to look to god for the great antetype, the sabbath of rest, to come to them. brother j. b. cook has written a short piece in his excellent paper, the advent testimony. it was pointed and good, but too short; and as brother preble's tract now before me, did not embrace the arguments which have been presented since he published it, it appeared [ ]to me that something was called for in this time of falling back from this great subject. i therefore present this book, hoping at least, that it will help to strengthen and save all honest souls seeking after truth. a word respecting the history. at the close of the first century a controversy arose, whether both days should be kept or only one, which continued until the reign of constantine the great. by his laws, made in a. d. , it was decreed for the future that sunday should be kept a day of rest in all the cities and towns; but he allowed the country people to follow husbandry. history further informs us that constantine murdered his two sisters husbands and son, and his own familiar friend, that same year, and the year before boiled his wife in a cauldron of oil.--the controversy still continued down to a. d. , when pope gregory passed a law abolishing the seventh day sabbath, and establishing the first day of the week. see baronius councils, . barnfield's eng. page , states that the parliament of england met on sundays till the time of richard ii. the first law of england made for keeping of sunday, was in the time of edward iv. about . as these two books are not within my reach, i have extracted from t. m. preble's tract on the sabbath. mr. fisher says, it was dr. bound one of the rigid puritans, who applied the name _sabbath_ to the first day of the week, about the year . "the word sunday is not found in the bible," it derived its name from the heathen nations of the north, because the day was dedicated to the sun. neither is the sabbath applied to the first day any more than it is to the sixth day of the week. while daniel beheld the little horn, (popery) he said, among other things, he would _think_ to change times and laws. now this could not mean of men, because it has ever been the prerogative of absolute rulers like himself, to change manmade laws, nor the law of moses, for that had been abolished years before the pope finally changed the sabbath to the st day of the week. then to make the prophecy harmonize with the scripture, he must have meant times and laws established by god, because he might think and pass decrees as he has done, but he, nor all the universe could ever change god's times and laws. jesus says that "times and seasons were in the power of the father." the sabbath is the most important law which god ever instituted. "how long refuse ye to keep my commandments, and my laws, see for that the lord hath given you [ ]the sabbath." exod. xvi: , . then it's clear from the history, that this is in part what daniel meant. now the second advent believers have professed all confidence in his visions; why then doubt this. whoever feels disposed to defend and sustain the decrees of that "blasphemous" dower, and especially pope gregory and the great constantine, the murderer, shown to be the _moral_ reformer in this work of changing the sabbath, are welcome to their principles and feelings. i detest these acts, in common with all others which have emanated from these ten and one horned powers. the revelations show us clearly that they were originated by the devil. if you say this history is not true then you are bound to refute it. if you cannot, you are as much in duty bound to believe it as any other history, even, that george washington died in ! if the bible argument, and testimony from history are to be relied on as evidence, then it is as clear as a sunbeam that the seventh day sabbath is a perpetual sign, and is as binding upon man as it ever was. but we are told we must keep the first day of the week for the sabbath as an ordinance to commemorate the resurrection of jesus. i for one had rather believe paul. see rom. vi: - ; gal. iii: ; col. ii: . a word more respecting time. see st page. here i have shown that the sun in the centre, regulates all time for the earth--fifty-two weeks to the year, one hundred and sixty-eight hours to the week, the seventh of which is twenty-four hours. jesus says there are but twelve hours in the day, (from sunrise to sunset.) then twelve hours night to make a twenty-four hour day, you see, must always begin at a certain period of time. no matter, then whether the sun sets with us at eight in summer or o'clk in winter. now by this, and this is the scripture rule, days and weeks can, and most probably are, kept at the north and south polar regions. what an absurdity to believe that god does exonerate our fathers and brothers from keeping his sabbath while they are in these polar regions, fishing for seals and whales, should it be with them either all day or all night. if they have lost their reckoning of days and weeks, because there was, or was not any sun six months of the time, how could they learn what day of the week it was when they see the sun setting at o'clock on the equator, if bound home from the south? by referring to luke, xxiii ch. , , and xxiv: , we see that the people in palestine had kept the days and weeks right from [ ]the creation; since which time, astronomers teach us that not even fifteen minutes have been lost. god does not require us to be any more exact in keeping time, than what we may or have learned from the above rules, but i am told there is a difference in time of twenty-four hours to the mariner that circumnavigates the globe. that, being true, is known to them, but it alters no time on the earth or sea. but, says one, i should like to keep the sabbath in _time_, just as jesus did. then you must live in palestine, where their day begins seven hours earlier than ours; and yet it is at o'clock in the evening the same period, though not the same by the sun, in which we begin our day. let me illustrate: our earth, something in the form of an orange, is whirling over every twenty-four hours. it measures three hundred and sixty degrees, or about twenty-one thousand six hundred miles round, in the manner you would pass a string round an orange. now divide this three hundred and sixty degrees by the twenty-four hour day, and the result is fifteen degrees, or nine hundred miles. then every fifteen degrees we travel or sail eastward, the sun rises and sets one hour earlier in the period of the twenty-four hours: therefore those who live in palestine, one hundred and seven degrees east of us, begins and closes the day seven hours earlier, so in proportion all the way round the globe, the sun always stationary! then the sabbath begins precisely at o'clock on friday evening, every where on this globe, and ends at the same period on what we call saturday evening. god says 'every thing on its day,' 'from even unto even shall ye celebrate your sabbath;' 'the evening and the morning was the first day.' he is an exact time keeper! i say then, in the name of all that is holy, heavenly and true, and as immortality is above all price, let us see to it that we are found fearing god and keeping his commandments, for this, we are taught, 'is the whole duty of man.' the proof is positive that the seventh day sabbath is included in the commandments. bro. marsh says, "keeping the sabbath is embraced in this covenant, deut. v: - , made with the children of israel at horeb. it was not made with their fathers (the patriarchs) but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day. v. . this testimony first _negative_, he made it not with our fathers, and then _positive_ with _us_, is conclusive. not a single proof can be presented from either the old or new testament that it was instituted for any other people or nation." now it is clear and positive [ ]that if the sabbath is not binding on any other people than the jews, by the same rule not one of the commandments is binding on any other people, who dare take such infidel ground? was not the second covenant written on the hearts of the gentile, even the law of commandments? which paul says 'is holy, just and good.' thirty years after the crucifixion he directs the ephesians to the keeping the fifth commandment, that they may live long on the _earth_ not the land of canaan. vi: , . did not god say that abraham kept his commandments, statutes, and laws? this embraced the sabbath for circumcision, and the sabbath were then the only laws, or statutes, or commandments written. the fourth commandment was given two thousand years before abraham was born! is not the stranger and all within their gates included in the covenant to keep the sabbath? see exod. xx: . and did not god require them to keep the sabbath before he made this covenant with them in horeb? see exod. xvi: - . does not isaiah say that god will bless the _man_, and the _son_ of _man_, and the _sons_ of the _stranger_, that keep the sabbath? these certainly mean the gentiles. lvi: - , - . also, in the lviii. ch. , , the promise is to all that keep the sabbath. to what people _did_ the sabbath belong at the destruction of jerusalem, nearly forty years after the crucifixion? matt. xxiv: . the gentiles certainly were embraced in the covenant by this time! why was it paul's manner always to preach on the seventh day sabbath to jews and gentiles? by what authority do you call the seventh day sabbath, the jewish sabbath? the bible says it is the sabbath of the _lord our god_! and jesus said that he was the 'lord of the sabbath day.' he moreover told the jews that the sabbath was made for man! where do you draw the distinguishing line, to show which is and which is not man between the _natural seed of abraham_ and the gentiles? "is he the god of the jews only? is he not also of the gentiles? yes, of the gentiles also!" then paul says 'there is no difference,' and that 'there is no respect of persons with god.' is it not clear, then, that the sabbath was made for adam and his posterity, the whole family of _man_? how very fearful you are that god's people should keep the bible sabbath! you say, 'let us be cautious, lest we disinherit ourselves by seeking the inheritance under the wrong covenant.' your meaning is, not to seek to keep the sabbath covenant, but the one made to abraham. [ ]if you can tell us what precept there is in the abrahamic covenant that we must now keep to be saved, that is not embraced in the one given at mount sinai, then we will endeavor to keep that too, with the sabbath of the lord our god. if the sabbath, as you say, is abolished, why do you, joseph marsh, continue to call the first day of the week the sabbath. see v. t., th july. if you profess to utter the voice of truth from the bible, do be consistent, and also willing that _other papers_, besides yours and the advent herald, should give the present truth to the flock of god. i say let it go with lightning speed, every way, as does the political news by the electric telegraph. if the whole law and the prophets hang on the commandments, and by keeping them we enter into life, how will you, or i, enter in if we do not 'keep the commandments.' see exod. xvi: - . jesus says, "therefore whosoever shall break one of these least commandments and shall teach men so, shall be called the least in the kingdom," &c. "fear god and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man." amen! god has made three everlasting covenants with man. the first one is the covenant of inheritance "confirmed unto jacob for a law and unto israel for an _everlasting_ inheritance." see psl. cv: - . acts vii: - . eph. i: . second is an "_everlasting covenant of redemption_." see isa. lxi: , . "i have made a covenant with my chosen, i have sworn unto david my servant, thy seed will i establish forever." psl. lxxxix: - . see also - vs. "my covenant will i not _break_, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips. once have i sworn by my holiness that i will not lie unto david, his seed shall endure forever, and his throne as the sun before me--it shall be established forever as the moon and as a faithful witness in heaven." isa. says it is sure, lv: ; liv: , . ezekiel calls it a covenant of peace. xxxiv: . in xxxvii ch. and v. he shows clearly that david is christ, and this "covenant of peace is an everlasting covenant with his israel, and will be _known_ when his sanctuary is in the midst of them forever more." v. the very same is brought to view by paul. rom. xi: , . _these two everlasting covenants_ are conditional, and in the future. the living saints of god inherit them by keeping [ ]the 'commandments of god and testimony of jesus', which can be nothing more nor less than what jer. and paul calls the 'new or second covenant.' jer. xxxi: - ; heb. viii: - ; by us the gospel covenant, confirmed by christ and his apostles years ago. dan. ix: ; acts x: - ; heb. ii: , . the old or first covenant was delivered to moses at mount sinai years ago, and is about years older than the _new_, or _second_, or what we call the gospel covenant. paul to the heb. ix: , says, 'this first covenant had ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary,' meaning the old tabernacle with all its appendages, (see v.,) and was dedicated with the blood of bulls and goats. , v. (macknight's trans.). see also exo. xxiv: ; lev. xvi: . this same covenant was the ten commandments 'written on tables of stone by the finger of god.' exo. xxxiv: , ; deut. ix: - . paul calls it the ark of the covenant. heb. ix: . moses built a tabernacle for it. exo. xl: , . david had it in his heart to build a house for it. chr. xxviii: . solomon built _the_ house (the temple) and put the ark into it. ch. vi: . these ten commandments then, was the first _covenant_. the tabernacle and all its furniture was appended to it, and was called the sanctuary, the building that contained it. this covenant was broken by the jews, with whom it was first made. deut. xxxi: , ; jer. xxxi: ; ezek. xvi: , ; and xvii: ; isa. xxxiii: . now how evident it is that the jewish nation did not destroy nor abolish this covenant by breaking it. as well may it be said that the man who violates the law of his country has abolished or destroyed the whole law. no, no! men can no more destroy the law god has made than they can put out the light of the sun. they can destroy themselves, but god's work can they never. hear god speak and may his word annihilate every thought to the contrary: "the lord thy god he is the faithful god, which keepeth _covenant_ and mercy with them that love him and _keep his commandments_ to a thousand _generations_." is not this as much as , years in the future? will he break it, then think ye? no, you know it means forever! deut. vii: . do you still doubt. let him speak once more. "_my covenant will i not break nor alter_ [look at this, you that say god has _altered_ this covenant so as to change this sabbath from the th to the st day of the week.] _the thing that has gone out of my mouth._" psl. lxxxix: . then it is immutable! unchangeable! immortal! as well may man undertake to annihilate the sun. [ ]jesus then, as i have shown, came to establish the new _covenant_, and as i have before stated, he stripped off all these appendages, the _law of ceremonies_, the _hand writing_ of _ordinances_, the _carnal commandments_ (paul,) from the first _covenant_, the ten commandments, leaving them pure as when they first came from his father's hand, and nailed as paul shows to the col. all these ceremonies to his cross, at the same hour he sealed the new _covenant_ with his blood, called the _everlasting covenant_. heb. xiii: . paul in the viii. ch. on this covenant, extracts from jer. xxxi: - , which shows us clearly what he means (see - v,) and says in the v., if the first one had been faultless then no place could be found for the second. v. says this covenant is established on better promises because jesus is the mediator of it. xii: . in x: , , he quotes from the viii. ch. to show that the holy ghost is also a witness. see how, in ii. rom. - , "when the gentiles which have not the _law_, (that is the ten commandments on tables of stone) do the things contained in the _law_ (the ten commandments) they show the work of the _law_ (the ten commandments) written on their hearts, their thoughts in the mean while accusing, or else excusing, (when, paul?) in the day when god shall judge the secrets of men by my gospel." then it must be now. oh no, says the reader, paul means at the day of judgment.--i am glad you admit that condemnation overtakes the transgressors of the law written on our hearts somewhere. for proof that he means the commandments read , v.; you will of course understand that it is not the law of ceremonies, for these had been abolished more than years before. see chronology a. d. . now see heb. viii: again. "i will put my _laws_ into their minds and write them in their hearts." this is the very same, the commandment, the _covenant_, for there is no other _law_ called god's _law_ that we can refer to in the bible but this. in jer. xxxii: , the everlasting covenant which paul quotes in xiii heb. is the same promise as in jer. xxxi. now in ezek. xvi: . this is the first covenant to moses; that it is broken see v. - , shows the second covenant as in jer., read the history in the chapter. in ch. xx: , where the promise is, "i will bring you into the bond (or delivering, see margin,) of the covenant." at first view it would appear as though here was another implied, but i think the preceding verses, particularly the th and th, show it to be the covenant in which the [ ]sabbath is included, or it may be the everlasting covenant of redemption, given to jesus just previous to the resurrection. paul clearly shows that there are but two covenants under the law in his allegory to the galatians iv: - , and these two must of necessity, as i have shown embrace the ten commandments. now has this new covenant been broken by man as was the first? hear isaiah: "behold the lord maketh the earth empty, the inhabitants of the earth burned, and but few left." why? "because they have broken the everlasting covenant." see xxiii: . read the whole chapter. paul says that the professed church in the last days will be covenant breakers. tim. iii: - . (macknight's translation.) this must of course be violating, especially, the fourth commandment, the lord's sabbath. it would be the height of absurdity to attempt to apply it to the first day of the week, because this is included in the six working days, which god never sanctified nor set apart for an holy day. now what is to be appended to this everlasting covenant (called new not in respect of its date: it being made from everlasting, and will continue forever,) to ensure us an entrance into the gates of the holy city. answer. the _testimony of jesus_. rev. xii: . "that old dragon the devil is pursuing the remnant (the last end) of god's children, which keep the commandments of god, and have the testimony of jesus christ." in the xiv: , john says the faith of jesus, (same meaning.) now what is this faith or "testimony of jesus?" john shows that he was banished to patmos for the "word of god and the _testimony_ of jesus christ." rev. , , he says he "bore record of the _testimony_ of jesus," "and what he saw." v. just what jesus had directed his disciples to do. see math. xxviii: , . "teach all nations to observe all things whatsoever i have commanded you." this then is what makes the covenant new, appending to it the teaching or testimony of jesus, after the ceremonial law had been "nailed to the cross." here it is perfectly clear that the everlasting _covenant_ the ten commandments have undergone no change whatever. indeed it is impossible that the law of god could be changed; do you say it is possible i may be mistaken? then i will appeal to jesus. he says "it is easier for heaven and earth to pass than _one_ tittle of the _law_ to fail." you say this is no proof, for the law of god is the word taught in the old and new testaments. see here then, in matt. v: , . is not this the same _law_ as in luke : ? yes. [ ]very well then, see next verse, here he unhesitatingly calls them the commandments; for proof that he means the ten commandments, read st verse, "shall not kill," now th "nor commit adultery," then d, "nor take god's name in vain." his exposition of them as a whole is certainly as clear as this in matt. xxii: - , reduced to two precepts, love god, and love your neighbor, on these two hang all the law (ceremonial) and the prophets. dont you see then that if this _law_ is taken away, changed or abolished, that the prophets must fall with it, as certainly as a building would if the foundation was swept away?--the argument is clear that the prophecies cannot be sustained without the _law_. again, see luke x: - . the lawyer says, "master what shall i do to inherit eternal life?" jesus "said unto him what is written in the law? how readest thou?" he begins and quotes the two precepts (the essence of the ten commandments) given by the saviour in matt. xxii. jesus says "thou hast answered right, this do and _thou shalt live_." is this a safe rule for us? yes, if you can believe the saviour. i ask if it could be so if any of the _law_ should fail? no, that would undermine the foundation. then i have not appealed to jesus in vain. if all of this does not convince you, just hear the prophets. "the good man's delight is in the _law_ of the lord, and in his _law_ doth he meditate day and night." psl. i: , . "the _law_ of the lord is _perfect_, converting the soul." xix. "the _law_ of thy mouth is better unto me than thousands of gold and silver." xix: . "great peace have they that love _thy_ law, and nothing shall offend them." . does the changing of the law by the little horn bring peace? "he that turneth away his ear from hearing the _law_, even his prayer shall be an abomination." prov, : . read this passage again. you that say the lord is not so particular about his _law_, whether we keep this day or that for a holy day. he says "every thing upon his day." "seal the _law_ among my disciples." isa. viii: . what for? "it will be binding on them in the new heavens and the new earth." : , , "to the _law_ and the testimony." . what can you prove by it if it is changed or abolished? "he will magnify the _law_ and make it honorable." : . how could he do that if he was going to change or destroy it. "the people in whose heart is my _law_, fear ye not the reproach of men." : . "after those days saith the lord, i will put my laws in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts." jer. : [ ] . then we are certainly bound to obey them. "her priests have violated my _law_--and have put no difference between the holy and profane--and have hid their eyes from my sabbaths, and i am profaned among them." ezek. xxii: . it is just so; we believe it, lord. it is even among them that say they are looking for jesus daily. hear the apostles. "we establish the _law_." rom. iii: . "the _law is holy, just and good_." what do you mean paul? the professed christian world dont believe your testimony: they are teaching that certain part of this _law_ was changed or abolished years before you made this assertion. see chronology. "love is the fulfilling of the _law_." xiii: . see matt. vii: , and gal. v: . james says it is a "_perfect royal law of liberty_." see page , ch. : , and ii: , , , , and iv: . this testimony is also rejected as an absurdity, being no better than paul's, years out of date, for they will have it that the th commandment, the sabbath, was changed at the resurrection. _the commandments of god_ mean the same as the law.--"all his commandments are sure, they are established _forever and ever_." who then can change the sabbath? "a good understanding have all they that do his commandments." "blessed is the man that delighteth greatly in his commandments." psl. cxi: and cxii. "o let me not wander from thy commandments." xix: , and . "i will delight myself in thy commandments which i have loved." . "thy commandment is exceeding broad." . "all thy commandments are truth." . can it be proved that god ever altered or changed the truth? yes, if it can be proved that he changed the sabbath. "o that thou hadst harkened to my commandments, then had thy peace been as a river, and thy righteousness as the waves of the sea." isa. : . see jesus' exposition and reference to the commandments matt. v: , xv: - . we are told by those who can hardly bear a contradiction, that the th commandment means jesus for father, and new jerusalem for mother. jesus shows it is our natural parents, and so does paul to the eph. vi: - . see also matt. xix: - , and xxii: - . mark xii: - , john xiii: , xiv: , and xv: . the last three quotations relate to his own commandment. see john's testimony on this point. st john ii: , , iii: , . rev. xii: , and xiv: . now let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter, "fear god and keep his commandments; for this is the _whole_ duty of man," "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: , ecc. xii: . do you ask for the foundation for this mass of evidence? when israel violated the holy sabbath of rest given in the beginning, gen. ii: , , john ii: , the lord said unto moses, how long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws? what are they, lord? answer, the seventh day sabbath. see exo. xvi: - . now if we trace the bible through in relation to the sabbath we shall learn that the lord's threatenings, judgments, and promises, are more than ten fold in comparison with the other nine commandments. what is the reason of this? answer, the keeping of god's sabbath holy sanctifies and saves the soul! but the keeping of one, or all the other nine without it will not. now, dear reader, if you are still undecided about the keeping of god's sabbath, let me persuade you to read these two pages over again, and settle in your mind what you will do with this mass of testimony, directly from god; his prophets; jesus christ and his apostles. dare you say you are now 'living by every word of god,' and yet reject all this, with what other testimony is here presented to prove the keeping of the seventh day sabbath? dare you run such a risk because the great mass of professed believers in christendom are doing so? do you think you can be saved by such a _faith_ and _practice_? your ministering spirit (if you yet have one,) says no, no! utterly impossible! then receive the truth in the love of it. do you perceive that the seventh day sabbath is god's first _law_ for man? gen. ii: , , and the very last promise he ever made to man of a future inheritance is based on the 'doing of these commandments.' it would not help your case at all if you could make out five thousand, instead of ten, commandments; for you would still have to include the ten to get them all. what a beautiful delineation the cxix psalm is, of this wonderful prototype delivered by god to moses at mount sinai. the _commandments_ are rehearsed twenty-two times. the _law_ twenty-three. the _testimony_ twenty-three. the _statutes_ twenty-one. the _precepts_ twenty-two. the _judgments_ twenty-two. the _word_ thirty-eight. all referring to the ark of the covenant of god. see how perfectly david and nehemiah links them together with the sabbath in the xix psl: - ; neh. ix: , . 'the [ ]_commandments_, _law_, _testimony_ and _judgments_, are true and righteous all together.' proof--_commandments_ and _laws_, exo. xvi: - ; _testimony_, exo. xxv: ; isa. viii: ; _word_, exo. xxxiv: ; mark vii: , ; _statutes_ and _judgments_, deut. vi: , ; x: ; lev. xviii: ; _precepts_, neh. ix: , ; dan. ix: . who believes that the person that refrains from worshiping 'idols or images,' will be saved for that? or because he honors his father or mother? or because he is no murderer? or does not commit adultery, or steal, or bear false witness, or covet, or not swear? thousands on thousands have conformed to some and even all the nine, that made no pretensions to religion. we must keep the whole if we would be saved; neither can we be saved by keeping the sabbath alone. james says 'if we fail in one we are guilty of the whole.' god says 'verily my sabbaths ye shall keep--that ye may know that i the lord do sanctify you.' exo. xxxi: . now i ask if there is any wise men among us that can tell us how the soul is sanctified unless he keeps the sabbath holy. ezekiel says the sabbath was given that we might know that the lord sanctifies. xx. says the reader, what do you think about those that have died in faith, keeping the first day sabbath? just as i do of those that never heard the everlasting gospel at the hour of his judgment. look at the state of the world _now_, since they have rejected this message, the answer is plain then that condemnation comes, when light or present truth is presented and rejected. we may think our plea of ignorance may excuse us now. but just think of that awful hour, that gathering storm that is now clothing the moral world with darkness that may be felt. the sure and certain precursor of that tremendous "rush" when god roars out of zion, and utters his voice from jerusalem, preparatory to the sign of the son of man in heaven and the trump of the archangel and a great sound, with so much power that earth and sea will reel, and rock, and rend; and cast forth the righteous dead, and the living saints changed; all going up together to meet their glorified lord. no plea of ignorance will then answer our purpose: thoughts then rushing through our minds with more than lightning speed, will touch every point as on the magnetic telegraph, and show us where and when we rejected the present truth. good god help the honest ones to see it now, for then it certainly will be forever too late. that god's holy sabbath is a present truth i have not a shadow [ ]of a doubt; that it is stamped with immortality and will be present truth forever and ever, no mortal can dispute:--it was established in paradise without limitation. gen. ii: , . god says "my _covenant will i not_ break _nor_ alter." jesus has shown that not one tittle of this covenant can be _altered_, and told his children (not the jews only) how they should pray about the sabbath years after his death. a little farther in the distance stands john the last of the disciples pointing us to paradise for the commandments. after wading through a few years tribulation, in vision he sees the new jerusalem, the mother of us all, the paradise restored, and cries out "blessed are they that do (that practice) his commandments, they are going into the city." there they will keep the sabbath without opposition, as at the beginning. isa. : , heb. iv: . this looks just like god's work. man has undertaken to "_break_ and _alter_" this _law_ by changing the sabbath. it would be much easier for him to bail the ocean dry, and carry the water to jupiter by the spoonful; and sweep the thick clouds from the heavens in a thunder storm with the wing of a raven. who then can alter this covenant? echo answers, who can alter this covenant? now who cannot see clearly that the main pillar and foundation of this _everlasting covenant_ is the ten _commandments_, the _law_ of god, the constitution of the bible: for every nation, kindred, tongue, and people, given first in paradise, re-enacted with the nine additional _commandments_, written on tables of stone by the finger of god on mount sinai, giving it the form of a statute, then delivered to moses, broken by the jewish, just as men break any law without destroying it. the same ten commandments and laws, called by paul the _new_ or _second_ and _everlasting covenant_, confirmed by jesus, and sealed with his own blood eighteen hundred years ago, written in our minds and our hearts from one generation to another to the present time, always understood when developed in the believer's _practising_ and _doing_ them, with the promise annexed that such obedience will be rewarded by an entrance into the holy city. rev. xxii: . now in this covenant or ten commandments god has given us a perpetual covenant, a sign forever, and this is the seventh day sabbath. see exo. : . this may bear some comparison with the visions of ezekiel and john. "their work was as it were a wheel in the middle of a wheel." "i will give him a white stone, and in [ ]the stone a new name." so with the sabbath it is the main and essential thing. it is clearly that if we keep this holy as god has shown us, then we shall be sanctified. so we see a holy sanctified soul cannot violate the commandments. but if we reject the light and still persist in saying we will keep one of the working days holy which god never _sanctified_ nor set apart for us, "how does the love of god dwell in that soul?" "if ye love me keep my commandments." now the history of god's people for the last seven years, or more, is described by john in rev. xiv: - . an angel preaching the everlasting gospel at the hour of god's judgment. this without any doubt represents all those who were preaching the second advent doctrine since . during this proclamation, there followed another angel, saying "babylon is fallen, is fallen." this angel was some of the same advent lecturers, (for invisible angels dont preach to men.) and the third angel follows them, showing the curse that befell all such as "worship the beast or his image, or _receive his mark_," that is, if they go back again. the same angel or voice that is brought to view in ch. : , you see he follows the one that announces the fall of babylon, and cries, come out of her my people: this was a little before and during a cry at midnight in the fall of . and god's people did respond to that call and come out, does any one ask where from? answer, the professed churches and no where else. these churches then are babylon! now when this cry ended, john describes another very different company, in their patience, (or trying time,) keeping the commandments of god and the faith or testimony of jesus; who are they? why, the very same that came out of babylon. well, were they not all good christians that obeyed and came out of babylon? they will be if they belong to this last company and pass through the trial. but did they not keep the commandments of god before this company was developed? yes all but the th commandment. therefore as i have shown, john gave us no credit for keeping the first for the seventh day sabbath, neither could it be called keeping the commandments, for if we did it ever so ignorantly, even, we still violated the very essential _law_ in the commandments, and all that john could say therefore was, that them which had the mark of the beast kept some of the commandments. james says "if we fail in one we are guilty of the whole." now that such a people can be found on the earth as [ ]described in the v. and have been uniting in companies for the last two years, on the commandments of god and faith or testimony of jesus, is indisputable and clear. i say here then is demonstrated proof that babylon has fallen, and whoever undertakes to prove the contrary must annihilate this people, or "pervert the scriptures." john further shows that this is a remnant (which of course means the last end) made war with, (his meaning is clear,) for "keeping the commandments of god and the testimony of jesus christ." xii: . here another question arises, why this people should be persecuted for keeping the commandments, &c., when all, even them which have the mark of the beast, profess to keep them. i suppose all that enrages the devil and his army is this; that this remnant are actually _practising_ what they believe is the testimony of god and the testimony of jesus, selling what they have, giving alms, laying up their treasure in heaven, casting themselves entirely loose from this wicked world; doing as their master told them to do, "washing one another's feet," and as the apostles have taught, 'greet all the brethren with an holy kiss,' 'salute every saint in christ jesus.' living 'by every word which proceedeth out of the mouth of god,' practice keeping the sabbath holy, just as god has told them in the commandments. but says the reader, there are tens of thousands that are looking for jesus, that dont believe the above doctrines, what will become of them? consult john, he knows better than we do; he has only described two companies. see xiv: - , . one is keeping the commandments and faith of jesus. the other has the mark of the beast. how? see page . is it not clear that the first day of the week for the sabbath or holy day is a mark of the beast. it surely will be admitted that the devil was and is the father of all the wicked deeds of imperial and papal rome. it is clear then from this history that sunday, or first day, is his sabbath throughout christendom. and that he has succeeded among other civilized nations to sanctify and set apart for holy days every working day which god gave us, that _he_ did not sanctify. see page th. he will be very careful therefore not to make _war_ on any but those who keep god's sabbath holy. contrast this with page . john shows that these will all be judged according to their works, or as their work shall be. but them that do (that practice) his commandments may enter in through the gates into the city. but do not some of the rest go in? he does not say they do. he [ ]says his reward is with him to give to every man according as his work shall be. well, who are left out? see v. "and whosoever loveth and maketh a _lie_." now see of john ii. "he that saith i know him and keepeth not his commandments is a _liar_." but does not the vii rev. describe a great multitude saved after the , ? yes, but i conclude that these were raised from the dead. the original design of sending out this work was to show that these commandments, the keeping of the lord's sabbath, would save the _living_ saints only at the coming of jesus. now that the keeping of the seventh day sabbath has been made void by the working of satan, and is to be restored as one of the _all_ things spoken of by all the holy prophets since the world began, before jesus can come, is evident. see acts iii: , . "and they that shall be of thee shall _build the old waste places--thou shalt raise up the foundation of many generations_, and thou shalt be called the repairer _of the breach, the_ restorer _of paths to dwell in_." isa. : . the two following verses show that keeping or restoring the sabbath is the special work. jesus says, "they shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven, that _do_ and _teach_ the commandments." that there will yet be a mighty struggle about the restoring and keeping the seventh day sabbath, that will test every living soul that enters the gates of the city, cannot be disputed. it is evident the devil is making war on all such. see rev. xii: . "remember the sabbath day and keep it holy." amen. who are the true israel? in the xxxi. ch. of exod., god says, "wherefore the children of israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations for a _perpetual_ covenant; it is a _sign_ between me and the children of israel _forever_." , v. _who are the true israelites?_ answer, god's people. hear paul: "is he the god of the jews only? is he not also of the gentiles? yes of the gentiles, also; from uncircumcision through _faith_" rom. iii: , . god gave his re-enacted commandment or covenant to the natural jew in b. c. . they broke this covenant, as he told moses they would, for which he partially destroyed and dispersed them; god then brought in a new covenant which continued the sign of the sabbath, which was [ ]confirmed by jesus and his apostle about years from the first. see heb. viii: , , ; rom. ii: . their breaking the first covenant never could destroy the commandments of god. therefore this new or second covenant, made with the house of israel, heb. viii: , (not the natural jew only.) is indelibly written upon the heart. now every child takes the name of his parents. let us see what the angel gabriel says to mary concerning her son: "the lord god will give him the throne of david _his_ father, and he shall reign over the house of jacob forever." luke i: , . now the prophecy: "there shall come a star out of _jacob_ and a sceptre shall rise out of _israel_." num. now years before jesus was born, god changed jacob's name to _israel_, because he prevailed with him. this then is the family name for all who overcome or prevail. god gave this name to his spiritual child, namely, _israel_. then jesus will "reign over the house of _israel_ forever." this must include all that are saved in the everlasting kingdom. further, joseph was the natural son of jacob, or _israel_. in his prophetic view and dying testimony to his children, he says, joseph is a fruitful bough, from _thence is the shepherd_ the stone of _israel_. gen. xlix: - . then this shepherd (jesus) is a descendant, and is of the house of _israel_. does he not say that he is the shepherd of the sheep?--what, of the jews only? no, but also of the gentile, "for the promise is not through the law (of ceremonies) but through the righteousness of _faith_," rom. iv: . micah says, "they shall smite the judge of _israel_, that _is to be the ruler in israel_." v: , . now jesus never was a _judge_ nor _ruler_ in _israel_. this, then, is a prophecy in the future, that he will judge, and be the ruler over, the whole house of _israel_. all the family, both natural jew and gentile, will assume the family name, the _whole israel_ of god. the angel gabriel's message, then, is clear; david is the father of jesus, according to the flesh, and jacob, or rather israel his father, and jesus reigns over the house of israel forever. paul says, "he is not a jew which is one outwardly but he is a jew which is one inwardly." rom. ii. "there is no difference between the jew and greek, (or gentile) for they are not all _israel_ that are of _israel_, neither because they are the seed of abraham are they all children." why? because the children of the promise, of isaac (is the true seed.) chs. ix and x. to the gallatians he says, "now to abraham (the grandfather of israel) and his seed were the [ ]promises made: not to many, but as of one and to thy seed which is christ--then says, then says, there is neither jew nor greek--but one in christ jesus, and if ye be christ then are ye abraham's seed and heirs according to the promise." iii. "and as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the israel of god." vi. this, then, is the name of the whole family in heaven; christ is god's only son and lawful heir, none but the true seed can be joint heirs with christ in the covenant made with abraham. ezekiel's prophecy in xxxvii. ch., god says "he will bring up out of their _graves_ the _whole house of israel_." "and i will put my spirit in you and ye shall _live_." - . if god here means any other than the spiritual _israel_, then universalism is true--for the _whole_ house of natural israel did not die in faith; if the wicked jews are to be raised and live before god, then will _all_ the wicked! for god is no respecter of persons: "and the heathen shall know that i the lord do sanctify _israel_ when my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them forevermore." v. here, then, we prove that the dead and living saints are the whole _israel_ of god, and the covenant and sign is binding on them into the gates of the holy city. rev. xx: . two questions for shepherds and principals of the flock, any where and every where. when and where has god abolished his _commandments_ and laws? namely the seventh day sabbath as recorded in exo. xvi: - . when, and where did god ever sanctify the _first_, or any other day but the seventh to be kept for a holy day of rest? will god ever justify any living soul for attempting to keep one of the six working days holy? [ ]recapitulation . page . _when was the sabbath instituted?_ here we have endeavored to show when, and how it continued until its re-enactment on mount sinai. . page . _has the sabbath been abolished since the seventh day of creation? if so, when, and where is the proof?_ here we believe we have adduced incontestible proof from the scriptures; from the two separate codes of laws given, viz: the first on tables of stone, called by god, prophets, jesus, and his apostle. . the commandments of god. d code, the book of moses, as written from the mouth of god, the book of ceremonies, combining ecclesiastical and civil law, which paul shows was nailed to the cross with all _their sabbaths_ as _carnal commandments_, (the law of ceremonies,) because their feasts commenced and ended with a sabbath. see lev xxiii. please read from th page onward, how jesus and the apostle make the distinction. . page . _was the seventh day sabbath ever changed? if so, when, and for what reason?_ here we find, by examining the proofs set forth by those who favor and insist upon the change, that there is not one passage of scripture in the bible to sustain it, but to the contrary, that jesus kept it and gave directions about it at the destruction of jerusalem. paul also, and other apostles taught how we were to keep the commandments. . page . the history which is uncontroverted. . the time when the sabbath commences. see pages and , not , as on page . the sun in the centre of the globe, at the commencement of the sacred year (march or april) is the great regulator or time-keeper for every living soul on this planet. gen. : , exo. xii: . . page begins with the _covenants_. here by tracing them through the bible we find them founded on the ten commandments. the sabbath of the lord our god, the connecting link, or covenant within the covenant; the first _law_ ever given, annexed to the last promise ever made, which if obeyed will save them that are alive when jesus comes ... sabbath holy. ... principals of the flock. transcriber's notes page numbers from the original have been retained and enclosed in [] square brackets. words in italics in the original are surrounded by _underscores_. ellipses on page represent text missing in the original. when a copy of the book with the missing text intact is found, this file will be updated. this is an old text. as such, spelling is often inconsistent. spelling has been left as in the original with the exception of typographical errors. the following typographical errors have been corrected: page iii: proving clearly that the doing of[of missing in original] these commandments page : two thousand years before{original has befere} abraham page : adopted peculiar{original has pecular} days to suit themselves page : xviii:[original has xvii] , . page : (when will{original has wlil} this be paul) page : also d v{original has dv} of d cor: iii page : follow any of their{original has heir} customs page : without the least intimation{original has ntimation} from him page : the man that{original has tha} shall page : taught the same doctrines{original has doctrince} page : we are repeatedly{original has re- on one line and repeatedly on the next} told page : d{original has d}, announcing the fall of babylon page : and this{original has this this} picture page : the christians of troas{original has traos} page : ever mentioned by numbers{original has uumbers} page : at the summer solstice{original has solistice} page : lev. xvi{original has vvi}: . page : broken the everlasting{original has everlastidg} covenant page : keeping the commandments{original has commandmentr} page : covenant which continued{original has eontinued} page : christ{original has cbrist} is god's only son page : - .{original has - } the following punctuation corrections have been made to the text. page i: from the _beginning_."{period and quotation mark missing in original} page iv: as was the first edition.{period missing in original} page : claimed as the father of the jews{original has extraneous parenthesis} page : _statutes_ and my _laws_."{quotation mark missing in original} page : children of israel _forever_."{quotation mark missing in original} page : "well,"{quotation mark missing in original} says one, page : psl.{period missing in original} viii: . page : heb. iv: ,{comma missing in original} rev. : page : third part of a shekel"{quotation mark missing in original} page : for sabbaths in succession.{period missing in original} page : children of israel in mount sinai"{quotation mark missing in original} page : i have already quoted matt. : ,{comma is missing in original} page : tauntingly asked "{original has single quote}which is the page : john xv:{original has comma} page : "_great_ apostle to the gentiles:"{quotation mark is missing in original} page : "{quotation mark is missing in original}circumcision is nothing page : gal.{period is missing in original} iii: - , - . page : perish with their using?"{quotation mark is missing in original} page : handwriting in his book,{original has period} page : i:{original has semi-colon} . page : justin marter in his apology{original has extraneous period} page : "{quotation mark missing in original}it was so at that time page : from sunrise to sunset.{period missing in original} page : gen.{period missing in original} i: . page : time before he was created."{quotation mark missing in original} page : xxi.{original has comma} ch. john page : judge righteous judgment."{original has single quote} page : {original has extraneous quotation mark}jesus says there are but twelve page : {original has extraneous single quote}this testimony first page : see exod. xvi: - .{period missing in original} page : the wrong covenant.'{quotation mark missing in original} page : eph.{period missing in original} i: . page : brought to view by paul.{period missing in original} page : rom. xi: , .{period missing in original} page : testimony of jesus'{quotation mark missing in original} page : in the viii. ch.{period missing in original} on this covenant page : quotes from the viii. ch.{period missing in original} page : in ch.{period missing in original} xx: page : of the covenant."{period and quotation mark missing in original} page : they that love _thy_{original has extraneous comma} law page : shall be an abomination."{quotation mark missing in original} page : isa.{original has comma} viii: . page : :{original has comma} , page : profaned among them."{quotation mark missing in original} page : rom. iii: .{period missing in original} page : "{quotation mark missing in original}_perfect royal law of liberty_." page : waves of the sea."{quotation mark missing in original} page : gen.{original has comma} ii: , page : into the city.{period missing in original} page : in the middle of a wheel.{period missing in original} page : _of paths to dwell in_."{quotation mark missing in original} page : children of israel _forever_."{quotation mark missing in original} page : righteousness of _faith_,"{quotation mark missing in original} the seventh day sabbath, a perpetual sign, from the beginning to the entering into the gates of the holy city, according to the commandment. by joseph bates: "brethren, i write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the _beginning_. the old commandment is the word which ye have heard from the _beginning_." _john_ ii: . "in the _beginning_ god created the heaven and the earth." gen. i: . "and god blessed the seventh day, and rested from all his work." ii: . "blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life and enter in," &c. _rev._ xxii: . new-bedford press of benjamin lindsey . [ ]preface. to the little flock. "remember the sabbath day to keep it holy." "six days work may be done, but the _seventh_ is the sabbath of the lord thy god: in it thou shalt not do any work." this commandment i conceive to be as binding now as it ever was, and will be to the entering into the "gates of the city." rev. xxii: . i understand that the _seventh_ day sabbath is not the _least_ one, among the all things that are to be restored before the second advent of jesus christ, seeing that the imperial and papal power of rome, since the days of the apostles, have changed the seventh day sabbath to the first day of the week! twenty days before god re-enacted and wrote the commandments with his finger on tables of stone, he required his people to keep the sabbath. exo. xvi: , . here he calls the sabbath "_my commandments and my laws_." now the savior has given his comments on the commandments. see matt. xxii: , . "on these two (precepts) hang all the law and the prophets." then it would be impossible for the sabbath to be left out. a question was asked, what shall i do to inherit eternal life? says jesus, "if thou wilt enter into life keep the commandments"--xix. here he quotes five from the tables of stone. if he did not mean all the rest, then he deceived the lawyer in the two first precepts, love to god and love to man. see also matt. v: , , , , . paul comments thus. "the law is holy, and the commandments holy, just and good." "circumcision and uncircumcision is nothing but the keeping the commandments of god." "all the law is fulfilled in one word: thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." john says, "the old commandment is the word from the beginning."-- , . gen. ii: . "he carries us from thence into the gates of the city." rev. xxii: . here he has particular reference to the sabbath. james calls it the _perfect_, royal law of liberty, which we are to be doers of, and be judged by. take out the fourth commandment and the law is imperfect, and we shall fail in one point. the uncompromising advocate for present truth, which feeds and nourishes the little flock in whatever country or place, is the restorer of all things; one man like john the baptist, cannot discharge this duty to every kindred, nation, tongue and people, and still remain in one place. the truth is what we want. _fairhaven_, august . joseph bates. [ ]the sabbath. first question is, when was the sabbath instituted? those who are in the habit of reading the scriptures just as they find them, and of understanding them according to the established rules of interpretation, will never be at a loss to understand so plain a passage as the following: "and god blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it; because that in it he had rested from all his work which god created and made." gen. ii: . moses, when referring to it, says to the children of israel, "this is that which the lord hath _said_, to-morrow is the rest of _the_ holy sabbath unto the lord." exod. xvi: . then we understand that god established the seventh day sabbath in paradise, on the very day when he rested from all his work, and not one week, nor one year, nor two thousand five hundred and fourteen years afterwards, as some would have it. is it not plain that the sabbath was instituted to commemorate the stupendous work of creation, and designed by god to be celebrated by his worshipers as a weekly sabbath, in the same manner as the israelites were commanded to celebrate the passover, from the very night of their deliverance till the resurrection of jesus from the dead; or as we, as a nation, annually celebrate our national independence; or as type answers to antetype, so we believe this must run down, to the "keeping of the sabbath to the people of god" in the immortal state. it is argued by some, that because no mention is made of the sabbath from its institution in paradise till the falling of the manna in the wilderness, mentioned in exo. xvi: , that it was therefore _here_ instituted for the jews, but [ ]we think there is bible argument sufficient to sustain the reply of jesus to the pharisees, "that the sabbath was made for man and not man for the sabbath." if it was made for any one exclusively it must have been for adam, the father of us all, two thousand years before abraham (who is claimed as the father of the jews) was born. john says, the old commandment was from the beginning-- : ii: . there is pretty strong inference that the antideluvians measured time by weeks from the account given by noah, when the waters of the deluge began to subside. he "sent out a dove which soon returned." at the end of _seven_ days he sent her out again; and at the end of _seven_ days more, he sent her out a third time. now why this preference for the number _seven_? why not five or ten days, or any other number? can it be supposed that his fixing on upon _seven_ was accidental? how much more natural to conclude that it was in obedience to the authority of god, as expressed in the d chap. of gen. a similar division of time is incidentally mentioned in gen. xxix:--"fulfill her _week_ and we will give thee this also; and jacob did so and fulfilled her _week_." now the word _week_ is every where used in scripture as we use it; it never means more nor less than _seven_ days (except as symbols of years) and one of them was in all other cases the sabbath. but now suppose there had been an entire silence on the subject of the sabbath for this twenty-five hundred years, would that be sufficient evidence that there was none. if so, we have the same evidence that there was no sabbath from the reign of joshua till the reign of david, four hundred and six years, as no mention is made of it in the history of that period. but who can be persuaded that samuel and the pious judges of israel did not regard the sabbath. what does god say of abraham? that he "obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my _commandments_, my _statutes_ and my _laws_." (see what he calls them in exo. xvi: , .) this, of course, includes the whole. then abraham reverenced god's sabbath. once more, there is no mention of the circumcision from the days of joshua till the days of jeremiah, a period of more than eight hundred years. will it be believed that samuel and david, and all those pious worthies with the whole jewish nation, neglected that essential seal of the covenant for eight hundred years? it cannot be admitted for a moment. how [ ]then can any one suppose from the alleged silence of the sacred history that adam, enoch, noah and abraham, kept no sabbath, because the fact was not stated? if we turn to jer. ix: , , we find that they had not neglected this right of circumcision, only they had not circumcised their hearts; so that the proof is clear, that silence respecting the keeping any positive command of god, is no evidence that it is not in full force. again, if the sabbath was not instituted in paradise, why did moses mention it in connection with the creation of the world? why not reserve this fact for two or three thousand years in his history, until the manna fell in the wilderness, (see exo. xvi: ) and then state that the seventh day sabbath commenced, as _some_ will have it? i answer, for the very best of reasons, that it did not commence there. let us examine the text. "and it came to pass, that on the sixth day they gathered twice as much bread as on any preceding day, and _all the rulers of the congregation came and told moses_. and he said unto them this is that which the lord hath said, _to-morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath_, bake that which ye will bake, &c. &c." if this had been the establishing of the holy sabbath and moses had said to-morrow _shall be_ the sabbath, then would it have been clear; but no, he speaks as familiarly about it as we do when we say that to-morrow is the sabbath, showing conclusively that it was known before, or how could the people have known that they must gather two day's manna on friday the sixth day, unless they had had some previous knowledge of the sabbath? for moses had already taught them not to "leave any of it until the morning"--v. . the th verse shows that the sabbath had not yet come since their receiving the manna, because it spoiled and "bred worms by the next morning;" whereas, on the sabbath morning it was found sweet and eatible-- th v. this was the thirtieth day after leaving egypt ( st v.) and twenty days before it was given on sinai. the weekly sabbath then was appointed before this or before the days of moses. where was it then? answer, in the second chapter of genesis and no where else; and the same week on which the manna fell, the weekly sabbath was revived among or with god's chosen people. grotius tells us "that the memory of the creation's being performed in seven days, was preserved not only among the greeks and italians, but among the celts and indians." other [ ]writers say assyrians, egyptians, arabians, britons and germans, all of whom divide their time into weeks. philo says "the sabbath is not peculiar to any one people or country, but is common to all the world." josephus states "that there is no city either of greeks or barbarians or any _other nation_, where the religion of the sabbath is not known." but as they, like the great mass of god's professed people in christendom, paid little or no heed to what god had said about the particular day, (except the jews, and a few others) they (as we are informed in history) adopted peculiar days to suit themselves, viz: the christian nations chose to obey the pope of rome, who changed the _seventh_ day sabbath to the first day, and call it the holy sabbath; the persians selected monday; the grecians tuesday; the assyrians wednesday; the egyptians thursday; the turks friday, and the jews the seventh day, saturday, as god had commanded. three standing miracles a week, for about forty years annually, ought to perpetuate the sabbath. st, double the quantity of manna on the sixth day; d, none on the seventh; d, did not spoil on the seventh day. if it does not matter which day you keep holy to the lord, then all these nations are right. now reflect one moment on this, and then open your bible and read the commandment of the god of all these nations! "remember! (what you have been taught before) _the sabbath day to keep it holy_;" (which day is it lord?) "_the_ seventh _is the sabbath of the lord thy god: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy man servant nor thy maid servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger, that is within thy gates_." who is the stranger? (gentiles.) now the reason for it will carry us back again to paradise. "_for in six days the lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested on the_ seventh; _wherefore the lord blessed the sabbath day and hallowed it_." "wherefore the children of israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the _sabbath_ throughout their generations for a _perpetual covenant_; it is a sign between me and the children of israel _forever_." (why is it lord?) "_for in six days the lord made heaven and earth, and on the_ seventh _day he rested and was refreshed_." exo. xx and xxxi. which day now will you choose? o, says the reader, the seventh if i knew which of the days it was. if you don't know, why are you so sure that the _first_ day is right? o, [ ]because the history of the world has settled that, and this is the most we can know. very well then, does not the _seventh_ come the day before the eighth? if we have not got the days of the week right now, it is not likely that we ever shall. god does not require of us any more than what we know; by that we shall be judged. luke xxiii: , . once more: think you that the spirit of god ever directed moses when he was giving the history of the creation of the world, to write that he (god) "blessed the _seventh_ day and sanctified it, because that in it he had rested from all his work," unless he meant it to be dated from that very day? why, this is as clear to the unbiassed mind as it is that god created man the sixth day. would it not be the height of absurdity to attempt to prove that god only intended adam should be created at some future period, or that the creation of the heavens and earth was not in the beginning, but some twenty-five hundred years afterward? all this would be as cogent reasoning as it would be to argue that god did not intend this day of _rest_ should commence until about twenty-five hundred years afterwards. (the word sabbath signifies rest.) it follows then irresistibly, that the weekly sabbath was not made for the jews only, (but as jesus says, for 'man') for the jews had no existence until more than two thousand years after it was established. president humphrey in his essays on the sabbath says, "that he (god) instituted it when he rested from all his work, on the _seventh_ day of the first week, and gave it primarily to our first parents, and through them to all their posterity; that the observance of it was enjoined upon the children of israel soon after they left egypt, not in the form of a new enactment, but as an ancient institution which was far from being forgotten, though it had doubtless been greatly neglected under the cruel domination of their heathen masters; that it was reenacted with great pomp and solemnity, and written in stone by the finger of god at sinai; that the sacred institution then took the form of a statute, with explicit prohibitions and requirements, and has never been repealed or altered since; that it can never expire of itself, because it has no limitation." in deut. vii: - , god gives his reasons for selecting the jews to keep his covenant in preference to any other nation; only seventy at first--x: . god calls it his [ ]"sabbath," and refers us right back to the creation for proof. "for in six days the lord made heaven and earth and sea, and all that in them is, and rested on the _seventh_," &c. here then we stand fixed by the immutable law of god, and the word of jesus, that "the sabbath was made for man!" paul says, "there is no respect of persons with god." rom. ii: . isaiah shows us plainly that the jew is not the only one to be blessed for keeping the sabbath. he says "blessed is the _man_ (are not the gentiles men) that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it." "also the sons of the stranger, (who are these if they are not gentiles?) every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, (does he mean me? yes, every gentile in the universe, or else he respects persons) even them will i bring to my holy mountain and make them joyful in my house of prayer; for my house shall be called an house of prayer for _all_ people." isa. lvi: , , . if this promise is not to the gentile as well as the jew, then "_the_ house of prayer for all people" is no promise to the gentile. now we ask, if god has ever abrogated the law of the sabbath? if he has it can easily be found. we undertake to say without fear of contradiction, he has not made any such record in the bible; but to the contrary, he calls it a perpetual covenant, a "sign between me and the children of israel forever," for the reason that he rested on the seventh day. exo. xxxi: , . says one, has not the ceremonial law been annulled and nailed to the cross? yes, but what of that? why then the sabbath must be abolished, for paul says so! where? why in cols. d chapter, and xiv. romans. how can you think that god ever inspired paul to say that the _seventh_ day sabbath was made void or nailed to the cross at the crucifixion, when he never intended any such change; if he did, he certainly would have deceived the inhabitants of jerusalem, in the promise which he made them about two thousand four hundred and forty-six years ago! turn now to jer. xvii: , and tell me if he did not promise the inhabitants of jerusalem that their city should remain forever if they would hallow the sabbath day. now suppose the inhabitants of jerusalem had entered into this agreement, and entailed it upon their posterity (because you see it could not have been fulfilled unless it had continued from generation to generation,) to keep the sabbath holy, would not god have been bound to let jerusalem remain forever? you say [ ]yes. well, then, i ask you to shew how he could have kept that promise inviolate if he intended in less than six hundred and fifty years to change this seventh day sabbath, and call the first day of the week the sabbath, or abolish it altogether? i say, therefore, if there has been any change one way or the other in the sabbath, since that promise, it would be impossible to understand any other promise in the bible; how much more reasonable to believe god than man. if men will allow themselves to believe the monstrous absurdity that forever, as in this promise, ended at the resurrection, then they can easily believe that the sabbath was changed from the _seventh_ to the first day of the week. or if they choose the other extreme, abolished until the people of god should awake to be clothed on with immortality. heb. iv: . now does it not appear plain that the sabbath is from god, and that it is coeval and co-extensive (as is the institution of marriage) with the world. that it is without limitation; that there is not one thus saith the lord that it ever was or ever will be abolished, in time or eternity.--see exod. xxxi: , ; and isa. lxvi: , ; heb. iv: , . but let us return and look at the subject as we have commenced in the light of paul's argument to the romans and collossians, for here is where all writers on this subject, for the change or the overthrow of the _seventh_ day sabbath attempt to draw their strong arguments. the second question then, is this: has the sabbath been abolished since the seventh day of creation? if so, when, and where is the proof? the text already referred to, is in rom. xiv: , .--"one man esteemeth one day above another; another esteemeth every day alike. let every man be 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." does the apostle here mean to say, that under the new or christian dispensation it is a matter of indifference which day of the week is kept as a sabbath, or whether any sabbath at all is kept? was that institution which the people of god had been commanded to call a delight, the holy of the lord, honorable, now to be esteemed of so carnal a nature as to be ranked among [ ]the things which jesus "took out of the way, nailing it to his cross." if this be true, then has jesus, in the same manner, abolished the eight last verses in the fifty-eighth of isaiah, and the d, th and th verses of the th chapter have no reference to the gentile since the crucifixion. o lord help us rightly to understand and divide thy word. but is it not evident from the four first verses in the same chapter of romans, that paul is speaking of feast days; giving them again in substance the decrees which had been given by the apostles in their first conference, in a. d. , held at jerusalem. see acts xv: . james proposes their letter to the gentiles should be "that they abstain from pollution of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood;" to which the conference all agreed. now please read their unanimous _decrees_ (xvi: ,) from twenty-three to thirty verses. "for it seemed good to the holy ghost and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things." "that ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication, from which if ye keep yourselves ye shall do well." reading along to the th of the next chapter, we find paul establishing the churches with these decrees; (see , ,) and at philippi he holds his meeting, (not in the jews synagogue) but at the river's side, on the _sabbath_ day. a little from this it is said that paul is in thesalonica preaching on the sabbath days. luke says this was his _manner_! what was it? why, to preach on the sabbath days, (not st days.) observe here was three sabbaths in succession. xvii: . a little while from this paul locates himself in corinth, and there preaches to the jews and greeks (or gentiles) a year and six months _every sabbath_. now this must have been seventy-eight in succession. xviii: , . does this look like abolishing the sabbath day? has anything been said about the st day yet? no, we shall speak of that by and by. before this he was in antioch. "and when the jews were gone out of the synagogue the gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath. and the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of god." xiii: , . here is proof that the gentiles kept the sabbath. now i wish to place the other strong text which is so strangely adhered to for abolishing or changing this [ ]sabbath along side of this, that we may understand his meaning. "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." "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." coll. ii: , . now here is one of the strong arguments adhered to by all those who say the seventh day sabbath was abolished at the crucifixion of our lord; while on the other hand by the great mass of the christian world, (so called,) the seventh day sabbath ceased here, and in less than forty-eight hours the change was made to the first day of the week. now remember paul's manner, (before stated) itinerating from city to city and nation to nation, always preaching to jews and gentiles on the seventh day sabbath, (for there is no other day called the lord's sabbath in the bible.) now if the apostle did mean to include the sabbath of the lord god with the jewish feasts and sabbaths in the text, then the course he took to do so, was the strangest imaginable. his _manner_ always was, as recorded, with the exception of one night, to preach on the very day that he was laboring to abolish. if you will look at the date in your bibles, you will learn this same apostle had been laboring in this way as a special messenger to the gentiles, between twenty and thirty years since (as you say) the sabbath was changed or abolished, and yet never uttered one word with respect to any other day in the week to be set apart as a holy day or sabbath. i understand all the arguments about his laboring in the jewish synagogue on their sabbath, because they were open for worship on that day, &c., but he did not always preach in their synagogues. he says that he preached the kingdom of god, and labored in his own hired house for two years. he also established a daily meeting for disputation in the school of tyranus. acts xix: . again he says, i have "kept _back_ nothing that was profitable _unto you_. (now if the sabbath had been changed or abolished, would it not have been _profitable_ to have told them so?) and have taught you publicly, and from house to house." "for i have not shunned to declare unto you all the council of god."--acts xx: , . then it is clear that he taught them by example that the sabbath of the lord god was not abolished. luke says it was the _custom_ (or manner) of christ [ ]to teach in the synagogues on the sabbath day. iv: , . mark says, "and when the sabbath day was come he began to teach in their synagogue." mark vi: .--now if jesus was about to abolish or change this sabbath, (which belonged to the first code, the moral law, and not the ceremonial, the second code, which was to be nailed to his cross, or rather, as said the angel gabriel to daniel, ix: , "he (christ) in the midst of the week shall cause the _sacrifice_ and _oblation_ to cease," meaning that the jewish sacrifices and offerings would cease at his death.) jesus did not attend to any of the ceremonies of the jews except the passover and the feasts of tabernacles. why did he say, "think not i am come to destroy the _law_ or the prophets? i am not come to destroy but fulfill. one jot or one title shall in no wise pass from the _law_ 'till all be fulfilled." "whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments" &c. did he mean the ten commandments? yes; for he immediately points out the third, not to take god's name in vain; sixth and seventh, not to kill nor to commit adultery, and styles them the _least_. then the others, which include the fourth, of course were greater than these. matt. v: , , , , , and were not to be broken nor pass away. then the sabbath stands unchanged. almost every writer which i have read on the subject of abolishing or changing the seventh day sabbath, call it the jewish sabbath, hence their difficulty. how can it be the jewish sabbath when it was established two thousand years before there was a jew on the face of the earth, and certainly twenty-five hundred before it was embodied in the decalogue, or re-enacted and written in stone by the finger of god at sinai. god called this his _sabbath_, and jesus says it was made for man, (not particularly for the jews.) "well," says one, "what is the meaning of the texts which you have quoted, where it speaks of sabbaths?"--answer: these are the jewish sabbaths! which belong to them as a nation and are connected with their feasts. god by hosea makes this distinction, and says, "i will also cause all _her_ mirth to cease, her feast days, her new moons and _her_ sabbaths, and all her solemn feasts." these then belong to the text quoted, and not god's sabbath. do you ask for the proof? see xxiii levit. . "_these are the_ feasts _of the lord, which ye shall proclaim in their [ ]seasons_, every thing upon his day"-- th v. (may we not deviate a little? if you do it will be at your peril.) fifteenth and sixteenth verses gives them a fifty day's sabbath; twenty-fourth verse says: "speak unto the children of israel, saying in the seventh month in the first day of the month, shall ye have a _sabbath_, a memorial of blowing of trumpets, an holy convocation." "also on the tenth day of the seventh month there shall be a day of atonement. it shall be unto you a _sabbath_ of rest." , . "also on the fifteenth day of the seventh month when ye shall have gathered in the fruit of the land, ye shall keep a feast unto the lord seven days. on the first shall be a sabbath, and on the eighth day shall be a sabbath. v. and moses _declared_ unto the children of israel the feasts of the lord." v. now here we have four kinds of _jewish_ sabbaths, also _called_ "feasts _of the lord_," to be kept annually. the first fifty days or seven weeks sabbath ends the third month, seventh. in three months and twenty-four days more commences the second sabbath, seventh month, first; the next, the tenth; the last the fifteenth of the month. between the first two sabbaths there is an interval of one hundred and twelve days; the next two, ten days, and the next, five days. now it can be seen at a glance, that neither of these sabbaths could be on the seventh day any oftener than other annual feast could come on that day. these then are what hosea calls her sabbaths. paul calls them holy days, _new moons, and sabbaths_; and this is what they are stated to be. the first day of the seventh month is a _new moon_ sabbath, the tenth is a sabbath of rest and holy convocation, a day of atonement, and the fifteenth a feast of sabbaths. do you ask for any more evidence that these are the jewish sabbaths, and that god's sabbath is separate from them? read then what god directed moses to write in the third verse: "six days shall work be done, but the _seventh_ day is the sabbath of rest, an holy convocation, ye shall do no work therein, it is the sabbath of the lord in all your dwellings." now moses has here declared from the mouth of the lord, that these are all the feast of the lord, (there is no more nor less) and every thing is to be upon _his day_, and he has clearly and definitely separated his sabbath from the other four. and in the th and th chapters of numbers the sacrifices [ ]and offerings for each of these days are made so plain, beginning with the sabbath, v, that we have only to read the following to understand. . xxix: . first day, seventh month, (new moon;) v, th day sabbath; v; th day sabbath, and v, d day sabbath. and in the days of nehemiah when ezra had read the law to the people, viii (more than one thousand years after they were promulgated,) they bound themselves under an oath "to walk in god's law which was given _by the hand of moses_, the servant of god." "and to observe and _do all the commandments_ of the lord, our lord." x: . and that there might be no misunderstanding about the kind of sabbaths, they say, "if the people bring ware or any victuals on the sabbath day to sell, that we would not buy it of them on the sabbath or on the holy day," ( v.) but they would "charge themselves yearly with a third part of a shekel" (to pay for) "the burnt _offerings_ of the _sabbaths_, of the _new moons_, for the _set feasts_," &c. ( v.) for the house of god, including what has already been set forth in leviticus and numbers. now as their feast days commenced and ended with a sabbath, so when their feasts ceased to be binding on them these sabbaths must also, and all were "nailed to the cross." now i ask if there is one particle of proof that the sabbath of the lord is included in these sabbaths and feast days? who then dare join them together or contradict the most high god, and call his the _jewish_ sabbath. _theirs_ was nailed to the cross when jesus died, while the lord's is an _everlasting_ sign a _perpetual covenant_. the jews, as a nation, broke their covenant. jesus and his disciples were one week (the last of the seventy) that is seven years, confirming the new covenant for another people, the gentiles. now i ask if this changing the subjects from jew to gentile made void the commandments and law of god, or in other words, abolished the fourth commandment; if so, the other nine are not binding. it cannot be that god ever intended to mislead his subjects. let us illustrate this. suppose that the congress of these united states in their present emergency, should promulgate two separate codes of laws, one to be perpetual, the other temporary, to be abolished when peace was proclaimed between this country and mexico. the time _comes_, the temporary laws are abolished; but strange to hear, a large portion of the people are now insisting upon it that because peace is proclaimed that both [ ]these codes of laws are forever abolished; while another class are _strenuously_ insisting that it is only the _fourth_ law in the perpetual code that's now abolished, with the temporary and all the rest is still binding. opposed to all these is a third class, headed by the ministers and scribes of the nation, who are writing and preaching from maine to florida, insisting upon it without fear of contradiction, that when peace was proclaimed this fourth law in the perpetual code was to change its date to another day; gradually, (while some of them say immediately) and thenceforward become perpetual, and the other code abolished; and yet not one of these are able to show from the proceedings of congress that the least alteration had ever been made in the perpetual code. thus, to me, the case stands clear that neither of the laws or ten commandments in the first code, ever has or ever can be annulled or changed while mortality is stamped on man, for the very reason that god's moral law has no limitation. jesus then brought in a new covenant, which continued the sabbath by writing his law upon their hearts. paul says "written not with ink, but with the spirit of the living god; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart." cor. iii: . and when writing to the romans he shews _how_ the gentiles are a law unto themselves. he says, they "shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their consciences always bearing them witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another," (when will this be paul) "in the day when god shall judge the secrets of men by jesus christ according to my gospel." ii: , . how plain that this is all the change. the jews by nature had the law given them on tables of stone, while the gentiles had the law of commandments written on their hearts. paul tells the ephesians that it was "the law of commandments contained in ordinances," (ii: ) not on tables that were nailed to the cross. if the ten commandments, first written by the finger of god on stone, and then at the second covenant on fleshy tables of the heart, are shadows, can any one tell where we shall find the substance? we are answered, in christ. well, hear isaiah. he says, "that he (christ) will magnify the law and make it honorable." lxii: . again, i ask, where was the necessity and of what use were the ten commandments written on our hearts, if it was not to render perfect obedience to them. if we do not keep the day god has sanctified, then [ ]we break not the least, but one of the greatest of his commandments. still, there are many other texts relating to the law, presented by the opposite view, to show that the law respecting the sabbath is abolished. let us look at some of them. but it will be necessary in the first place, to make a clear distinction between what is commonly called the moral and ceremonial law. bro. s. s. snow, in writing on this subject about one year ago, in the jubilee standard, asks "by what authority this distinction is made." he says "neither our lord or his apostles made any such distinction. when speaking of the law they never used the terms moral or ceremonial, but always spake of it as a _whole_, calling it _the_ law," and further says, "we must have a thus saith the lord to satisfy us." so i say! i have no doubt but thousands have stopped here; indeed, it has been to me the most difficult point to settle in this whole question. now let us come to it fairly, and we shall see that the old and new testament writers have ever kept up the distinction, although it may in some parts seem to be one code of laws. from the twentieth chapter of exodus, where the law of the sabbath was re-enacted, and onward, we find two distinct codes of laws. the first was written on two tables of stone with the _finger_ of god; the _second_ was taken down from his mouth and recorded by the hand of moses in a book. paul calls the latter carnal commandments and ordinances, (rites or _ceremonies_) which come under two heads, religious and political, and are moses's. the first code is god's. for proof see exo. xvi: , . "how long refuse ye to keep _my_ commandments and _my_ laws: see for that the lord hath given you the sabbath; and so the people rested on the sabbath day." also in the book of leviticus, where the law of ceremonies is given to the levites or priests, moses closes with these words: "_these_ are the commandments which the lord commanded moses for the children of israel in mount sinai;" in heb. vii: , , called carnal commandments. again, "the lord said unto moses, come up to me into the mount, and be there: and i will give thee tables of stone, and a law, and commandments which i have written." exo. xxiv: . further he calls them the ten [ ]commandments--xxxiv: . and moses puts them "into the ark"--xl: . _now for the second code of laws._ see deut. xxxi: , ; and xxiv: . "and when moses had finished writing the law, he commanded them to put _this book_ of the law (of ceremonies) in the side of the ark of the covenant, to be read at the end of every seven years." this is not the song of deliverance by moses in the forty-fourth verse of the thirty-second chapter. for, eight hundred and sixty-seven years after this, in the reign of josiah, king of israel, the high priest found this book in "the temple," ( chron. xxxiv: , ) which moved all israel. one hundred and seventy-nine years further onward, ezra was from morning till noon reading out of this book. neh. viii: ; heb. ix: . paul's comments. bro. snow says in regard to the commandments, "the principles of moral conduct embraced in the law, was binding before the law was given, (meaning that one of course at mt. sinai) and is binding _now_; it is immutable and eternal! it is comprehended in one word, love." if he meant, as we believe he did, to comprehend what jesus did in the xix. and xxii. chap. matt. - , and paul, and james, and john after him, then we ask how it is possible for him to reject from that code of laws, the only one, _the seventh day rest_, that was promulgated at the _beginning_, while at the same time the other nine, that were not written until about three thousand years afterwards, were eternally binding; without doubt, the whole ten commandments are co-eval and co-extensive with sin. again, he says, "we readily admit, that if what is called the decalogue or ten commandments be binding on us, _we ought_ to observe the seventh day, for that was appointed by the lord as the sabbath day." let us see if jesus and his apostles do not make it binding. _first then, the distinction of the two codes by jesus._ the pharisees ask the saviour why his disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? his answer is, "why do ye transgress the commandment of god?" and he immediately cites them to the fifth commandment, matt. xv: . again, "the law and the prophets were until john; since that time the kingdom of god is preached," &c. luke xvi: . jesus was three years after this introducing the gospel of the kingdom, unwaveringly holding his meetings on the sabbath days, (which our opponents say were now about to be _abolished_; others say changed,) and never uttering a syllable to show to the contrary, but that this was [ ]and always would be the holy day for worship. mark says when the sabbath (the seventh day, for there was no other,) was come, he began to teach in the synagogue, vi: . luke says, "as his _custom_ was, he went into the synagogue and taught on the sabbath day." iv: , . will it be said of him as it is of paul on like occasions, some thirty years afterwards, that he uniformly held his meetings on the sabbath because he had no where else to preach, or that this day was the only one in the week in which the people would come out to hear him? every bible reader knows better; witness the five thousand and the seven thousand, and the multitudes that thronged him in the streets, in the citys and towns where they listened to him; besides, he was now establishing a new dispensation, while theirs was passing away. then he did not follow any of their customs or rites or ceremonies which he had come to abolish. i have already quoted matt. v: , , where jesus said he had come to fulfil the law, and immediately begins by showing them that they are not to violate one of the least of the commandments, and cites them to some--see vi: , , , . again, he is tauntingly asked "which is the great commandment in the law: jesus said unto him, 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." xxii: , . here jesus has divided the ten commandments into two parts, or as it is written on two tables of stone. the first four on the first table treat of those duties which we owe to god--the other six refers to those which we owe to man, requiring perfect obedience. once more, "one came and said unto him, good master what good thing shall i do that i may have eternal life? he said, if thou wilt enter into life keep the commandments. then he asked him which? he cited him to the last part of what he called the second, loving his neighbor as himself." if he had cited him to the first table, as in the xxii, quoted above, he could not have replied "_all_ these have i kept from my youth up." why? because he would have already been perfect, for jesus in reply to his question, what he should do to inherit eternal life, said he must "keep the commandments." matt. xix: - . is not the sabbath included in these commandments? surely [ ]it is! then how absurd to believe that jesus, just at the close of his ministry, should teach that the way, the only way, to enter into life, was to keep the commandments, one of which was to be abolished in a few months from that time, without the least intimation from him or his father that it was to take place. i say again, if the sabbath is abolished, we ask those who teach it to cite us to the chapter and verse, not to the law of rites and ceremonies which are abolished, for we have already shown that the sabbath was instituted more than twenty-five hundred years before moses wrote the carnal ordinances or ceremonies. god said, "abraham kept _my_ charge, _my_ commandments, _my_ statutes, and _my_ laws." gen. xxvi: . this must include the sabbath, for the sabbath was the first law given, therefore if abraham did not keep the sabbath, i cannot understand what commandments, statutes and laws mean in this chapter. jesus says, "as i have kept my father's commandments," john xv: . did he keep the commandments? yes. mark and luke, before quoted--(but more of this in another place.) in john vii: , jesus speaks of "moses law," "_your law_." x: . again, "_their law_." xv: . here then we show that jesus kept up a clear distinction between what god calls _my_ law and commandments and moses law, "_their_ law," "_your_ law." let us now look at the argument of the apostles. paul preaching at antioc taught the brethren that by jesus christ all who believed in him "are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the _law of moses_." acts xiii: . the pharisees said "that it was needful to circumcise them and commend them to keep the _law of moses_." xv: . again, when paul had come to jerusalem the second time, (fourteen years from the time he met the apostles in conference where they established the decrees for the churches. see acts xx: ; gal. ii: ,) the apostles shewed him how many thousands of jews there were which believed and were zealous of the _law_: "and they are informed of thee, that thou teachest _all_ the jews which are among the gentiles to forsake _moses_ and the _customs_." xxi: , . any person who will carefully read the eight chapters here included, must be thoroughly convinced that the apostle's troubles were about the law of ceremonies written and given by moses, and nothing to do with the ten commandments. for you see a little before he comes to jerusalem, he had been preaching at corinth every [ ]sabbath for eighteen months. xxiii: , . and this, be it remembered, was more than twenty years after the jewish sabbaths and ceremonies were nailed to the cross.--and you see that paul was the man above all the apostles to be persecuted on account of the abolition of the jews' law of ceremonies, for he was the "_great_ apostle to the gentiles:" and if the "sabbath of the lord our god" was to have been abolished when the saviour died, paul was the very man selected for that purpose. it is clear, therefore, that he did not abolish the seventh day sabbath among the gentiles. this same apostle tells the romans "that christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth." x: . again, that "sin shall not have dominion over you, for ye are not under the _law_ but under grace." vi: . once more: he says the gentiles having not the _law_, are a _law_ unto themselves. why? because, he says in the next verse, it shows the _law_ written on their hearts. the law of ceremonies? no; that which was on tables of stone. ii: - . we might quote much more which looks like embracing the whole law. let us now look at a few texts in the same letter, which will draw a distinguishing line between the two codes of laws. paul, in the vii ch. - v. brings to view the carnal commandment, and the one unto life, and sums up his argument in these words: "wherefore the _law_ is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good." in the v he quotes from the decalogue. again, he that loveth another hath fulfilled the _law_. how? why thou shalt not steal, nor commit adultery, nor bear false witness, nor covet, thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. therefore _love_ is the fulfilling of the law. rom. xiii: , .--this then is what the saviour taught the young man to do to secure "eternal life." matt. once more, in concluding a long argument on the law in rom. iii: , he closes with this language: "do we then make void the law through faith? god forbid ye, _we establish_ the _law_."--what _law_ is here established? not the law of rites and ceremonies. what then, for paul means some _law_. it can be no other than what he calls the law of "life," of "love," the ten commandments. how could even that be established twenty-nine years after the crucifixion, if one of the _greatest_ commandments had been abolished out of the code, that is the sabbath. paul's letter to the corinthians teaches that "circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing but the _keeping_ [ ]of the commandments of god." vii: . again, in his epistle to the galatians, his phraseology is somewhat changed, but the argument is to the same point, although some passages read as though every vestage of _law_ was swept by the board when jesus hung upon the cross. for instance, such as the following: "but that no man is justified by the _law_ in the sight of god it is evident, for the just shall live by faith, and the law is not of faith, but the man that doeth them shall live by them." "christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the _law_, being made a curse for us." "but before faith came we were kept under the _law_, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed." "wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto christ that we might be justified by faith, but after that faith has come we are no longer under a schoolmaster." gal. iii: - , - . again: "for as many as are of the works of the _law_ are under the curse." v. now are we to understand from these texts that whosoever continueth in the _law_ is cursed, and that the law, _the whole law_, was abolished when christ came as our schoolmaster, he being the "end of the law?" rom. x: . if so, how is it possible for any man, even paul himself, to be saved. but we do not believe that paul taught these brethren any different doctrine than what has already been shown in the acts, romans, and corinthians, and also the eph., phil., col., and heb. if he did not mean the law written by the hand of moses, distinguishing it from the _law_ of the ten commandments, written by the finger of god on tables of stone, then pray tell me if you can, what he means (in the closing of this argument,) by saying, "for _all_ the law is fulfilled in one word, even this: thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." v: . surely he is quoting the saviour's words in matt. xxii: , relative to the commandment of the lord our god. to his son timothy he says: "now the end of the commandment is charity," (love) meaning of course the _last_ part of the ten commandments. in vi: , he says: "bear ye one anothers burdens and so fulfil the _law_ of christ." does this differ from the _law_ god? yes, a little, for it is the new commandment, (some say the eleventh.) see john xiii: . "a new commandment i give unto you, (what is it, lord?) that ye love one another." and also xx: . the other is to love our neighbor as ourself. john says: "and this commandment have we from him (christ,) that he who loveth god loveth his brother [ ]also." john iv: , and ii: - . in his letter to the ephesians he says: "having abolished in his flesh the _enmity_ even the law of commandments contained in ordinances." ii: . see the reverse. vi: . to the colossians he asks, "why as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances where all are to perish with their using?" and says: "touch not, taste not, handle not." (does paul here teach us to forsake the ordinances of god, instituted by the saviour--baptism and the lord's supper? yes, just as clearly as he does to forsake the whole law.) when writing to the hebrews more than thirty years after the crucifixion, he calls these ordinances _carnal_, imposed on them (the jews) until christ our high priest should come. ix: , . he also calls the law of commandments _carnal_, too, and says: "for there is verily a disannulling of the commandments going before, for the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did." vii: , - . "for when moses had spoken _every precept_ to all the people according to the _law_ he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book and all the people." ix: . now we see clearly that the book of the law of moses from which paul has been quoting through the whole before mentioned epistles, is as distinctly separate from the tables of stone (or fleshly table of the heart,) as they were when deposited in the ark thirty-three hundred years ago. therefore we think that here is clear proof that he has kept up the distinction between the "handwriting of ordinances" (meaning moses' own handwriting in his book,) and the "ten commandments written by the finger of god." let us now turn to the epistle of james, said to be written more than twenty-five years after the law of ceremonies were nailed to the cross, and see if he does not teach us distinctly, that we are bound to keep the commandments given on tables of stone. he says, "the man that shall be a doer of the _perfect law_ of liberty shall be blessed in his deed." i: . "if ye fulfill the royal _law_ according to the scripture, thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself, ye do well." why? because the saviour in quoting from the commandments, in answer to the ruler, what he should do to inherit eternal life, taught the same doctrine. matt. xix: . further: "for whosoever shall keep the whole _law_ and yet offend in one point, shall be guilty of _all_." in the next verse he quotes from the [ ]ten commandments again, namely, adultery and murder, (what the saviour in the fifth chapter of matt. calls the least, that is the smallest commandment,) and says if we commit them we become transgressors of the _law_. of what _law_? next verse says the _law_ of _liberty_ by which we are to be "judged." ii: , . now will it not be admitted by every reasonable person that james has included the whole of the ten commandments, by calling them the perfect law of liberty. d, "the royal _law_ according to the scripture," and d, "the _law of liberty_ by which we are to be judged." (royal relates to imperial and kingly.) perfect means complete, _entire_, the whole. then i understand james thus: this _law_ emanated from the king, the supreme ruler of the universe, and to be perfect must be just what it was when it came from his hand, and that no _change_ had, or could take place, (and remember now, this is more than twenty-five years since the ceremonies with the jewish sabbaths were nailed to the cross,) for the very best of reasons, until the judgment, because he shows that we are to be judged by _that law_. then i ask by what parity of reasoning any one can make the law of the ten commandments perfect, while they at the same time assert that the fourth one is abolished? and that on no better evidence than calling it the jewish sabbath. now let us look at the apostle john's testimony. "and hereby we do know that we know him if we keep his commandments. he that saith i know him and keepeth not his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him." now no man, more especially one who professes to abide by the whole truth, feels entirely easy if he is called a _liar_. now john please explain yourself. hear him: "brethren, i write no new commandment unto you but an _old_ commandment which ye had from the beginning. the old commandment is the _word_ which ye have heard from the beginning." what do you mean by _beginning_? turn to my gospel, st ch. "in the _beginning_ was the word,"--"the same was in the _beginning_ with god." , . see gen. i ch.: "in the _beginning_ god created the heavens and the earth." then you are pointing us to the seventh day of creation, in which god instituted the seventh day sabbath of rest, for the _old_ commandment in the _beginning_. ii: . certainly there is no other place to point to. does not jesus point us to the same place for the _beginning_ when marriage was first instituted. matt. xix: . [ ]in my second letter to the church, i have taught the same doctrine: viz. "this is the commandment that as ye have heard from the _beginning ye should walk in it_." (practice it.) ii: , . "a _new_ commandment i write unto you." th v. this is the one that jesus gave us on that memorable night in which he was betrayed, after he had instituted the sacrament and washed our feet. he said "by this shall all men know that ye are my disciples if ye have love one to another." xiii: , . the first then teaches us, love to god, d, to love our neighbor as ourself; "on these two commandments (says jesus) hang all the law and the prophets." then we understand this is the essence of the ten commandments, and if we do not keep the sabbath we do not love god. jesus says, "if ye love me ye will keep my commandments." we are repeatedly told that the sabbath was changed or forever abolished, at the crucifiction of our lord, and it is stated by the most competent authorities that john wrote this epistle about sixty years afterwards, and that about six years after this our blessed lord revealed to him the state of the church down to the judgment of the great day. in the xiv ch. rev. - , he saw three angels following each other in succession: first one preaching the everlasting gospel (second advent doctrine); d, announcing the fall of babylon; d, calling god's people out of her by showing the awful destruction that awaited all such as did not obey. he sees the separation and cries out, "here is the patients of the saints, here are they that keep the _commandments_ of god and the faith of jesus." and this picture was so deeply impressed on his mind, that when the saviour said to him "behold i come quickly and my reward is with me," he seemed to understand this, saying--"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." xxii: . now it seems to me that the seventh day sabbath is more clearly included in these commandments, than thou shalt not steal, nor kill, nor commit adultery, for it is the only one that was written at the creation or in the _beginning_. he allows no stopping place this side of the gates of the city. then, if we do not keep that day, john has made out his case, that we are all _liars_. we say in every other case the type must be continued until it is superseded by the antitype, as in the case of the passover, until our lord was crucified. so then, as paul tells us, "there remaineth a keeping of the sabbath to the people of god," and that we believe will be in the milenium, [ ]the seven thousandth year, so that the seventh day sabbath and no other will answer for the type, and those who keep the first or the eighth day sabbath cannot consistently look for the antitype of rest or the great sabbath, short of one thousand years in the future. again: isaiah says: "to the law and to the testimony if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." viii: . now if the gentiles are under no law, as 'is asserted,' pray tell me what right, as gentiles, have we to appeal to the law and testimony, or to this text. in the xxiv. of matt. our saviour says to his disciples, in answer to their questions, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and the end of the world? "when ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation spoken of by daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place," &c. v. "pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day." v. the first question is, at what age of the world is this, where our lord recognizes the sabbath? st. it is agreed on all hands that this time to which he here refers, never transpired until the destruction of jerusalem in a.d. , about forty years after his crucifiction. d. some others say, down to the second advent! the first mentioned is safe ground and sufficient for our purpose; nor need we stop to inquire why our lord gave these directions, it is forever settled that he directed the minds of his followers to the, not _a_ sabbath. keep it in remembrance, that he told the pharisees that he was lord, not of _a_, but of the sabbath, meaning that one which of course had already been established. the d question is, did our lord ever trifle with, or mislead his disciples? the response is no! then it is clear that if he taught them to pray at all, it must be in faith, and he of course would hear them and mediate with the father to change the day of their flight. i ask what kind of a prayer and with what kind of faith would his disciples have asked to have this day changed, if as we are told, it was abolished some forty years before, and they had, contrary to the will of god, persisted in keeping up this seventh day sabbath. any one who has confidence in god's word, knows that such a prayer never would be answered. what if you do say the jews always kept that sabbath, and it was the same seventh day sabbath which they kept when he was teaching them in their synagogues? i, say so too! (and that fact will be presented by and by, in its place.) this does not touch the point. jesus was here giving instructions to his [ ]followers, both jew and gentile, respecting _the_ sabbath which they would have to do with. it is immaterial what kind of sophistry is presented to overthrow the point, nothing can touch it short of proving it a mistranslation. jesus did here recognize the perpetuity of the _seventh day sabbath_. and john will continue to make all men liars that say they know him and refuse the light presented and disregard this commandment. if god instituted the sabbath in paradise and has not abolished it here, then must it be _perpetual_? if paul's argument in iii. rom. that the law is established through faith, is correct then is it _perpetual_. if james' royal _perfect law_ of liberty, which we are to be doers of, and judged by, means the commandments, then is the sabbath _perpetual_. if the apostle john has made out a clear case, by citing us back to the _beginning_ of creation, and by _walking_ in and doing these commandments, we shall have right to the tree of life and enter in by the gates into the city; then it _must be perpetual_. if the earthly sabbath is typical of the heavenly, then must it be _perpetual_. if not one jot or one tittle can ever pass from the law, then must it be _perpetual_. if the saviour, in answer to the young man who asked him what he should do to inherit _eternal life_, gave a safe direction for gentiles to follow, viz: "if thou wilt enter into _life_ keep the commandments (and these included those commandments which his father had given), then, without _contradiction_ the sabbath is _perpetual_, and all the arguments which ever can be presented against the fourth commandment being observed before god wrote it on tables of stone to prove that it is not binding on gentiles, falls powerless before this one sentence: _if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments._ i say the proof is positive that the sabbath was a constituent part of the commandments, and jesus says the sabbath 'was made for man.' the jews were only a _fragment of creation_. "the principle is settled in all governments that there are but two ways in which any law can cease to be binding upon the people. it may expire by its own limitations, or it may be repealed by the same authority which enacted it; and in the latter case the repealing act must be as explicit as that by which the obligation was originally imposed." now we have it in proof that the sabbath was instituted in paradise, the _first_ of all laws without any limitation, and no enactment by god to abolish it, unless what we have already referred to can be considered proof. one more passage which i have not alluded to will show that it was not [ ]abolished at the crucifiction, for his disciples kept the sabbath while he was resting in his tomb. see luke xxiii: , . let us now pass to another part of the subject. the third question: was the seventh-day sabbath ever changed? if so, when, and for what reason? here we come to a question which has more or less engaged the attention of the whole christian world, and the greater portion of those who believe in a crucified saviour say that this change took place, and is dated from his resurrection. some say subsequently, while a minority insist upon it that there is no proof for the change. now to obtain the truth and nothing but the truth on this important subject, i propose to present, or quote from standard authors on both sides of the question, and try the whole by the standard of divine truth. st. buck's theological dictionary, to which no doubt thousands of ministers and laymen appeal to sustain their argument for the change, says: "under the christian dispensation the sabbath is _altered_ from the _seventh_ to the _first day_ of the week." the arguments for the change, are these: st. "the _seventh_ day was observed by the jewish church in memory of the rest of god; so the _first_ day of the week has always been observed by the christian church in memory of _christ's resurrection_. d. christ made repeated visits to his disciples on that day. d. it is called the lord's day. rev. i: . th. on this day the apostles were assembled, when the holy ghost came down so visibly upon them to qualify them for the conversion of the world. th. on this day we find paul at troas when the disciples came together to break bread. th. the directions the apostles gave to christians plainly alludes to their assembling on that day. th. pliny bears witness of the first day of the week being kept as a festival in honor of the resurrection of christ." "numerous have been the days appointed by man for religious services, but these are not binding because of _human_ institution. not so the sabbath. it is of _divine_ institution, so it is to be kept holy unto the lord." doct. dodridge, whose ability and piety has seldom or rarely been disputed, comments on some of the above articles thus: (commentary p. .) "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." cor. xvi: . "show that it was to be put into a [ ]common stock. the argument drawn from hence for the religious observance of the first day of the week in these primitive churches of corinth and galacia is too _obvious_ to need any further illustration, and yet too important to be passed by in entire silence." again, p. , "i was in the spirit on the lord's day," &c. rev. i: . "it is so very unnatural and contrary to the use of the word in all other authors to interpret this of the jewish sabbath, as mr. baxter justly argues at large, that i cannot but conclude with him and the generality of christian writers on this subject, that this text _strongly_ infers the extraordinary regard paid to the first day of the week in the apostle's time as a day solemnly consecrated to christ in memory of his resurrection from the dead." there is much more, but these are his strong arguments. i shall quote some more from the commentaries by and by. i wish to place by the side of these arguments one from the british quarterly theological review and ecclesiastical recorder, of jan. , which i extract from 'the _institution of the sabbath day_,' by wm. logan fisher, of philadelphia, a book in which there is much valuable information on this subject, though i disagree with the writer, because his whole labor is to abolish the sabbath; yet he gives much light on this subject, from which i take the liberty to make some quotations. but to the quarterly review of : "it is said that the observance of the seventh day sabbath is transferred in the christian church to the first day of the week. we ask by what authority, and are very much mistaken if an examination of all the texts of the new testament, in which the first day of the week or lord's day is mentioned, does not prove that there is no divine or apostolic precept enjoining its observance, nor any certain evidence from scripture that it was, in fact, so observed in the times of the apostles. accordingly we search the scriptures in vain, either for an apostolic precept, appointing the first day of the week to be observed in the place of the jewish sabbath, or for any unequivocal proof that the first christians so observed it--there are only three or, at most four places of scripture, in which the first day of the week is mentioned. the next passage is in acts xx: . 'upon the first day of the week when the disciples came together to break bread, paul preached unto them.' all that st. luke here tells us plainly is, that on a particular occasion the christians of troas met together on the first day of the week to celebrate the eucharist and to hear paul preach. this is the only place in [ ]scripture, in which the first day of the week is in any way connected with any acts of public worship, and he who would certainly infer from this _solitary instance_ that the first day of every week was consecrated by the apostles to religious purposes, must be far gone in the art of drawing universal conclusion from particular premises." on page , mr. fisher says, "i have examined several different translations of the scriptures, both from the hebrew and the septuagint, with notes and anotations more extensive than the texts; have traced as far as my leisure would permit, various ecclesiastical histories, some of them voluminous and of ancient date; have paid considerable attention to the writings of the earliest authors in the christian era, and to rare works, old and of difficult access, which treat upon this subject; i have read with care many of the publications of sectarians to sustain the institution; i have omitted nothing within my reach, and i have found not one shred of argument, or authority of any kind, that may not be deemed of partial and sectarian character, to support the institution of the first day of the week as a day of peculiar holiness. but, in the place of argument, i have found opinions without number--volumes filled with idle words that have no truth in them. in the want of texts of scripture, i have found perversions; in the want of truth, false statements. i have seen it stated that justin marter in his apology, speaks of sunday as a holy day; that eusebius, bishop of cesarea, who lived in the fourth century, establishes the fact of the transfer of the _seventh_ to the first day, by christ himself. these things are _not true_. these authors say no such thing. i have seen other early authors referred to as establishing the same point, but they are equally false." here then is the testimony of four authors, two for the change and two against it, from the old and new world. no truth seeking, unbiased mind can hesitate for a moment on which side to decide, after comparing them with the inspired word. doctor jenks of boston, author of the comprehensive commentary, (purporting to comprehend _all_ other commentators on the bible,) after quoting author after author, on this subject, ventures forth with _his_ unsupported opinion in these words: "here is a christian sabbath observed by the disciples and _owned_ by _our lord_. the visit christ made to his disciples was on the first day of the week, and the first day of the week is the only day of the week or month or year ever mentioned by numbers in all the new [ ]testament, and that is several times spoken of as a day _religiously_ observed." where? echo answers, where! heman humphrey, president of amherst college, from whose book i have already made some quotations, after devoting some thirty-four pages to the establishment and perpetuation of the seventh day sabbath, comes to his fourth question, viz. 'has the day been changed?' singular as this question may appear by the side of what he had already written to establish and perpetuate the seventh day sabbath from the seventh day of creation down to the resurrection of the just, but as every man feels that it his privilege to justify and explain, when precept and practice does not agree--so is it with president humphrey, he can now shape the scriptures to suit every one that has followed in the wake of pope gregory for years. he says, "the fourth commandment is so expressed as to admit of a change in the day,"--thus striking vitally every argument he had before presented. hear him--he says the seventh day is the sabbath; "it was so at that time, (in the beginning) and for many ages after, but it is not said, that it always _shall be_--it is the _sabbath_ day which we are to remember; and so at the close, it is the _sabbath_ which was hallowed and blessed and not the _seventh_ day. the sabbath then, the holy rest itself, is one thing. the day on which we are to rest is another." i ask, in the name of common sense, how we should know how or when to keep the sabbath if it did not matter which day. if the president could not see the sanctification of the seventh day in the decalogue what did he mean by quoting gen. ii: , so often, where it says "_god blessed the seventh day and sanctified it._" again, he says "redemption is a greater work than creation, hence the change." fifthly, god early consecrated the christian sabbath by a most remarkable outpouring of his spirit at the day of pentecost. and that jesus has left us his own example by not saying a syllable after his resurrection about keeping the _jewish sabbath_. he also quotes the four passages about jesus and his disciples keeping the first day of the week. here, he says, the inference to our minds is _irresistible_--for keeping the first day of the week instead of the _seventh_. and further says, "it might be proved by innumerable quotations from the writings of the apostolic fathers," &c. all this may be very true in itself, but it all falls to the ground for the want of one single precept from the bible. if redemption, because it was greater than creation, and the remarkable display of god's power at the [ ]pentecost, and christ never saying any thing about the _jewish sabbath_ after his resurrection are such _strong_ proofs that the perpetual seventh day sabbath was changed to the first day at that time, and must be believed because learned men say so, what shall we do with the sixth day, on which our blessed saviour expired on the cross; darkness for three hours had covered the earth, and the vail of the temple was rent from top to the bottom, and there was such an earthquake throughout vast creation that we have only to open our eyes and look at the rent rocks for a clear and perfect demonstration that this whole globe was shaken from centre to circumference, and the graves of the dead were opened. matt. xxvii: , . you may answer me that popery has honored that day by calling it good friday, and the next first day following easter sunday, &c., but after all, nothing short of bible argument will satisfy the earnest inquirer after truth. the president had already shown that the _jewish_ sabbath was abolished at christ's death. what reason then had he to believe that the saviour would speak of it afterwards. so also the pentecost had been a type from the giving the law at sinai to be kept annually for about years, consequently it would be solemnized on every day of the week, at each revolving year, as is the case with the th of july: three years ago it was on the fourth day and now it comes on the seventh day of the week. further, see peter standing amidst the amazed multitude, giving the scripture reason for this miraculous display of god's power. he does not give the most distant hint that this was, or was to be, the day of the week for worship, or the true sabbath, neither do any of the apostles then, or afterwards, for when they kept this day the next year, it must have been the second day of the week. we must have better evidence than what has been adduced, to believe this was the sabbath, for according to the type, seven sabbaths were to be complete, (and there was no other way given them to come to the right day,) from the day they kept the first, or from the resurrection. here then is proof positive that the sabbath in this year was the day before the pentecost. see luke xxiii: , . if president h. is right, then was there two sabbaths to be kept in succession in one week. where is the precept? no where! well, says the inquirer, i want to see the bible proof for this '_christian sabbath observed by the disciples, and owned by our lord_.' w. jenks. here it will be necessary for us to understand, first how god has computed time. in gen. i. we read, "and [ ]god said let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven, to divide the day from the night, and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years." v. v. says, "the greater light to rule the day,"--from sunrise to sunset. now there are many modes invented for computing time. we say our day begins at o'clock at night; seamen begin theirs twelve hours sooner, at noon; the jews commence their days at o'clock in the evening, between the two extremes. are we _all_ right? no! who shall settle this question? god! very well: he called the light day, and the darkness he called night, and the evening and the morning were the first day. gen. i: . then the twenty-four hour day commenced at o'clock in the evening. how is that, says one? because you cannot regulate the day and night to have what the saviour calls twelve hours in the day, without establishing the time from the centre of the earth, the equator, where, at the beginning of the sacred year, the sun rises and sets at o'clock. at _this_ time, while the sun is at the summer solstice, the inhabitants of the north pole have no night, while at this same time at the south it is about all night, therefore the inhabitants of the earth have no other right time to commence their twenty-four hour day, than beginning at o'clock in the evening. god said to moses '_from even, unto even, shall you celebrate your sabbath_.' then of course the next day must begin where the sabbath ended. history shows that the jews obeyed and commenced their days at o'clock in the evening. now then we will try to investigate the main argument by which these authors, and thousands of others say the sabbath was changed. the first is in john xx: , "then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week when the doors where shut where the disciples were assembled _for fear of the jews_ (mark it) came jesus and stood in their midst, and said peace be unto you." here we understand this to be the same day of the resurrection. on that same day he travelled with the two disciples to emans, sixty furlongs ( - / miles), and they constrained him to abide with them, for it was toward evening and the _day was far spent_. luke xxiv: . after this the disciples travelled the - / miles back to jerusalem and soon after they found the disciples, the saviour, as above stated, was in their midst. now it cannot be disputed but what this was the evening after the resurrection, for jesus rose in the morning, some ten or eleven hours after the first day had commenced. then the evening of the first day was passing away, and therefore the evening brought to view in [ ]the text was the close of the first day or the commencing of the second. mcknight's translation says, "in the evening of that day." purver's translation says, "the evening of that day on the first after the sabbath." further, wherever the phrase first day of the week, occurs in the new testament, the word day is in _italics_, showing that it is not the original; but supplied by translators. again, it is asserted that jesus met with his disciples the next first day. see v: "and _after_ eight days again his disciples were within, and thomas with them, then came jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said peace be unto you." dr. adam clark in referring to this v, says: "it seems likely that this was precisely on that day se'night on which christ had appeared to them before; and from this we may learn that this was the weekly meeting of the apostles." now it appears to me that a little child, with the simple rules of addition and subtraction, could have refuted this man. i feel astonished that men who profess to be ambassadors for god do not expose such downright perversion of scripture, but it may look clear to those who want to have it so. not many months since, in conversation with the second advent lecturer in new bedford, i brought up this subject. he told me i did not understand it. see here, says he. i can make it plain, counting his fingers thus: sunday, monday, tuesday, wednesday, thursday, friday, saturday, sunday--does'nt that make eight days after? and because i would not concede, he parted from me as one that was obstinate and self-willed. afterwards musing on the subject, i said, this must be the way then to understand it: _count sunday twice._ if any of them were to be paid for eight days labor, they would detect the error in a moment if their employer should attempt to put the first and last days together, and offer them pay but for seven. eight days _after_ the evening of the first day would stand thus: the second day of the week would certainly be the first of the eight. then to count eight days of twenty-four hours _after_, we must begin at the close of the evening of the first, and count to the close of the evening of the second day; to where the jews (by god's command) commenced their third day. but suppose we calculate it by our mode of keeping time. our lord appears to his disciples the first time at the close of sunday evening. now count eight days _after_, (with your fingers or anything else,) and it will bring you to monday evening. now i ask if this looks like sunday, the first day of the week? [ ]father miller also gives his reasons for the change, in his lecture on the great sabbath: "one is christ's resurrection and his often meeting with his disciples _afterwards_ on that day. this, with the example of the apostles, is strong evidence that the proper creation sabbath to man, came on the first day of the week." his proof is this: "adam must have rested on the first day of his life, and thus you will see that to adam it was the first day of the week, for it would not be reasonable to suppose that adam began to reckon time before he was created." he certainly could not be able to work six days before the first sabbath. and thus with the second adam; the first day of the week he arose and lived. and we find by the _bible_ and by history, that the first day of the week "_was ever afterwards observed as a day of worship_." now i say there is no more truth in these assertions, than there is in those i have already quoted. there is not one passage in the bible to show that christ met with his disciples on the first day of the week after the day of his resurrection, nor that the first day of the week was _ever afterwards_ observed as a day of worship; save only in one instance, and that shall be noticed in its place. and it seems to me if adam could not reckon time only from his creation then by the same rule no other man could reckon time before his birth, and by this showing christ could not reckon his time until after his resurrection. it is painful to me to expose the errors of one whom i have so long venerated, and still love for the flood of light he has given the world in respect to the second advent of our saviour; but god's word must be vindicated if we have to cut off a right arm, "there is nothing true but truth!" i pray god to forgive him in joining the great multitude of advent believers, to sound the retreat back beyond the _tarrying_ time, just when the virgins had gained a glorious victory over the world, the flesh, and the devil! go back from this to the slumbering quarters now; nothing but treachery to our master's cause ever dictated such a course! i never can be made to believe that our glorious commander designed that we should leave our sacrifices smoking on the altar of god, in the midst of the enemies' land, but rather that we should be pushing onward from victory to victory, until we are established in the capital of _his_ kingdom. would it have been expedient or a mark of courage in general taylor, after he had conquered the mexican army on the th may last, to have retreated back to the capital of the u. states, to place himself and army on the _broad platform_ of liberty, and [ ]commence to travel the ground over again for the purpose of pursuing and overcoming his vanquished foe? no! every person of common sense knows that such a course would have overwhelmed him and all his followers with unutterable disgrace, no matter how unrighteous the contest. not so with this, for our cause is one of the most glorious, tho' it be the most trying that ever the sun shone upon since god placed it in the heavens. onward and victory, then, are our watchwords, and no retreating back to, or beyond the cry at _midnight_! but to the subject. did our saviour ever meet with his disciples on the first day of the week after the evening of the day of his resurrection? the xxi. ch. john says "they went a fishing, and while there jesus appeared unto them." in the th v. he says, "this is now the third time that jesus shewed himself to his disciples after that he was risen from the dead." now turn to cor. xv: - : paul's testimony is, 'that he was seen of cephas, then of the twelve, after that of above five hundred brethren at once, and then of james, then of all the apostles.' these are all that are specified, up to his going into heaven. now pray tell me if you can, where these men got their information respecting the frequent meetings on the first day of the week. the bible says no such thing. but let us pursue the subject and look at the third text, "upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in _store_, as god has prospered him, that there be no gatherings when i come." now please turn back to dr. dodridge's authority, he says the argument is too obvious to need any illustration, that the money was put into common stock, and that this was the religious observance of the first day of the week. now whoever will read the first six verses of this chapter, and compare them with rom. xv: - , will see that paul's design was to collect some money for the poor saints at jerusalem, and their laying it by them in store until he came that way; for it plainly implies that they were at home, for no one could understand that you had money lying by you in store, if it was in common stock or in other hands. again, see acts xviii: , . paul preaching every sabbath day, at this very time, for eighteen months, to these very same corinthians, bids them farewell, to go up to the feast at jerusalem, v. by reading to xxi. ch. v. you have his history until he arrives there. now i ask, if dr. dodridge's clear illustration can or will be relied on, when luke clearly teaches that paul's _manner_ was, and that he did always preach to them on the sabbath, which, of course, [ ]was the seventh day, and not the first day of the week. fourth text, john says: i was in the spirit on the lord's day. here dr. d. concludes with the generality of christian writers on this subject that this strongly infers the extraordinary regard paid to the first day of the week, as solemnly consecrated to christ, &c. if the scripture any where called this the lord's day, there might be some reason to believe their statements, but the seventh day sabbath is called the lord's day. see exod. xx: . mr. fisher, in speaking of the late harrisburg convention of - , says, "the most spirited debate that occurred at the assembly was to fix a proper name for the first day of the week, whether it should be called _sabbath_, the _christian_ sabbath or _lord's_ day. the reason for this dispute was, that there was no authority for calling the first day of the week by either one of these names. to pretend that that command was fixed and unchangeable, and yet to alter it to please the fancy of man, is in itself ridiculous. it is hardly possible in the nature of man, that a class of society should be receiving pay for their services and not be influenced thereby:--in the nature of things they will avoid such doctrines as are repugnant to them that give them bread." now we come to the fifth and last, and only one spoken of in all the new testament, for a meeting on the first day of the week. luke says, "upon the first day of the week when the disciples came together to break bread, paul preached unto them, _ready to depart on the morrow_: and continued his speech until midnight." acts xx: . now by following the scripture mode of computing time, from o'clock in the evening to o'clock in the morning, as has been shown, paul to commence on the beginning of the first day would begin on what we call saturday evening at o'clock, and preach till midnight. after that he restores to life the young man, then breaks bread and talked till the break of day, which would be sunday morning. then he commenced his journey for jerusalem and travelled and sailed all day sunday, the first day of the week, and two other days in succession. xx: - . now it seems to me, if paul did teach or keep the first day of the week for the sabbath or a holy day, he violated the sanctity of it to all intents and purposes, without giving one single reason for it; all the proof presented here is a night meeting. please see the quotation from the british quarterly review. but let us look at it the way in which _we_ compute time: i think it will be fair to premise, that about midnight was the middle of [ ]paul's meeting; at any rate there is but one midnight to a twenty-four hour day. we say that sunday, the first day of the week, does not commence until o'clock saturday night. then it is very clear, if he is preaching on the first day till midnight, according to our reckoning it must be on sunday night, and his celebrating the lord's supper after midnight would make it that he broke bread on _monday, the second day_, and that the day time on sunday is not included, unless he had continued his speech through the day till midnight. now the text says that on the first day of the week they came together to break bread. to _prove that they did break bread on that day_, we must take the mode in which the jews computed time, and allow the first day of the week to begin at o'clock on saturday evening, and to follow paul's example, pay no regard to the first day, after daylight, but to travel, &c. if _our_ mode of time is taken, they broke bread on the second day, and that would destroy the meaning of the text. here then, in this text, is the _only_ argument that can be adduced in the scriptures of divine truth, for a _change of the perpetual seventh day_ sabbath of the lord our god to the first day of the week. now i'll venture the assertion, that there is no law or commandment recorded in the bible, that god has held so sacred among men, as the keeping of his sabbath. where then, i ask, is the living man that dare stand before god and declare that here is the change for the church of god to keep the first instead of the seventh day of the week for the sabbath. if it could be proved that paul preached here all of the first day, the only inference that could be drawn, would be, to break bread on that day! there is one more point worthy of our attention, that is, the teaching and example of jesus. i have been told by one that is looked up to as a strong believer in the second coming of the lord this fall, that jesus broke the sabbath. jesus says, i have kept my father's commandments. it is said that he 'broke the sabbath,' because he allowed his disciples to pluck the corn and eat it on that day, and the pharisees condemned them. he says, "if ye had known what this meaneth, i will have mercy and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the _guiltless_." then they were not _guilty_. see deut. xxiii: . he immediately cites them to david and his men, shewing that it was lawful and right when hungry, even to eat the shoe bread that belonged only to the priests, and told them that he was lord of the sabbath day. here he shows too, that he was with his [ ]disciples passing to the synagogue to teach; they ask him if it was lawful to heal on the sabbath day. he asks them if they had a sheep fall into the ditch on the sabbath, if they would not haul him out? how much better then is a man than a sheep? wherefore it is lawful to do well on the sabbath days; and immediately healed the man with a withered hand. matt. xii: - . on another sabbath day, while he was teaching, he healed a woman that had been bound of satan eighteen years, and when the ruler of the synagogue began to find fault, he called him a hypocrite, and said "doth not each one of you on the sabbath day loose his ox or his ass from the stall and lead him away to watering; and all his adversaries were _ashamed_." luke xiii: - . the xiv. chapter of luke is quoted to prove that he broke the sabbath because he went into the pharisees house with many others on the sabbath day to eat bread. here he saw a man with the dropsy and he asked them if it was lawful to heal on the sabbath day. 'and they held their peace and he took him and healed him,' and asked them 'which of them having an ox or an ass fall into the pit, would not straitway pull him out on the sabbath day; and they could not answer him again.' - v. and 'he continued to teach them, by showing them when they made a feast to call the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind, and then they should be blessed.' read the chapter, and you will readily see that he took this occasion, as the most befitting, to teach them by parables, what their duty was at weddings and feasts, in the same manner as he taught them in their synagogues. there is still another passage, and i believe the only one, to which reference has been made, (except where he opened the eyes of a man that was born blind,) for proof that he broke the sabbath. it is recorded in john v: - . here jesus found a man that had been sick thirty-eight years, by the pool of bethesda, 'he saith unto him rise, take up thy bed and walk,--therefore did they persecute jesus and sought to slay him, because he had done these things on the sabbath day.' v. 'but jesus answered them, my father worketh hitherto and i work.' if they did not work every hour and moment of time, it would be impossible for man to exist: here undoubtedly he had reference to these and other acts of necessity and mercy; but the great sin for which professors in this enlightened age charge the saviour with in this transaction, is, in directing the man to take up his bed, contrary to law. it is clear the people [ ]were forbidden to carry burthens on the sabbath day, as in jer. xvii: , , but by reading the th v. in connection with neh. xiii: - , we learn that this prohibition related to what was lawful for them to do on the other six days of the week, viz. merchandise and trading. see proof, neh. x: : also unlawful, as in amos viii: . we need not, nor we cannot misunderstand the fourth commandment, taken in connection with the other nine, they were simple and pure written by the finger of god; but in the days of our saviour it had become heavily laden with jewish traditions, hence when jesus appeals to them whether it is lawful to do good and to heal on the sabbath days, their mouths are closed because they cannot contradict him from the law nor the prophets. the saviour no where interferes with them in their most rigid observance of the day; but when they find fault with him for performing his miracles of mercy on that day, he tells them they have broken the law; and in another place, "if a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision without breaking the law of moses, are ye angry at me because i have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day?" he then says, "judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment." vii: , . did he break the sabbath? now the law requires that the beasts shall rest; but what is the practice of many of those who are the most strict in keeping sunday for the sabbath. sick, or well, ministers or laymen, do they not ride back and forth to meeting? again, is it right and lawful to carry forth our dead on the sabbath? or carry the communion service back and forth. the apostle says, 'believe and be baptized.' suppose this should be on the sabbath and we were some distance from the water, would any one interfere with us if we carried our change of apparel with us and back again, or have we in so doing transgressed the law; if we have, it is high time we made a full stop. jesus undoubtedly had good reasons for directing the sick man to take up his bed and walk, but i cannot learn that he justified any one else in carrying their bed on the sabbath, unless in a case of necessity and mercy, such as he cited them to, as watering their cattle, and pulling them out of the ditch, and eating when hungry, and being healed when sick. be it also remembered that when the sanhedrim tried him they did not condemn him, as in the other cases cited; so in this, they failed for want of scripture testimony. he was the lord of the sabbath, and the law of ceremonies were now about [ ]to cease forever, the ten commandments with the keeping of the sabbath therefore were to be stripped of these ceremonies and all of their traditions, and left as pure to be written on the hearts of the gentiles as when first written on tables of stone, therefore jesus taught that it was right to do good on the sabbath day, and whoever follows his example and teaching will keep the seventh day sabbath holy and acceptable to god. they will also judge righteous judgement, and not according to appearance. there is but one christian sabbath named, or established in the bible, and that individual, whoever he is, that undertakes to abolish or change it, is the _real sabbath breaker_. remember that the keeping the commandments is the only safe guide through the gates into the city. my friends and neighbors, and especially my family, know that i have for more than twenty years, strictly endeavored to keep the first day of the week for the sabbath, and i can say that i did it in all good conscience before god, on the ocean, and in foreign countries as well as my own, until about sixteen months since i read an article published in the hope of israel, by a worthy brother, t. m. preble, of nashua, which when i read and compared with the bible, convinced me that there never had been any change. therefore the seventh day was the sabbath, and god required me as well as him to keep it holy. many things now troubled my mind as to how i could make this great change, family, friends, and brethren and, but this one passage of scripture was, and always will be as clear as a sunbeam. "_what is that to thee: follow thou me._" in a few days my mind was made up to begin to keep the fourth commandment, and i bless god for the clear light he has shed upon my mind in answer to prayer and a thorough examination of the scriptures on this great subject. contrary views did, after a little, shake my position some, but i feel now that there is no argument nor sophistry that can becloud my mind again this side of the gates of the holy city. brother marsh, who no doubt thinks, and perhaps thousands besides, that his paper is what it purports to be, the voice of truth, takes the ground with the infidel that there is no sabbath. brother s. s. snow, of new york, late editor of the jubilee standard, publishes to the world that he is the elijah, preceding the advent of our saviour, restoring all things: (the seventh day sabbath must be one of the all things,) and yet he takes the same ground with br. marsh, that the sabbath [ ]is forever abolished. as the seventh day sabbath is a real prophecy, a picture (and not a shadow like the jewish sabbaths,) of the thing typified which is to come, i cannot see how those who believe in the change or abolition of the type, can have any confidence to look to god for the great antetype, the sabbath of rest, to come to them. brother j. b. cook has written a short piece in his excellent paper, the advent testimony. it was pointed and good, but too short; and as brother preble's tract now before me, did not embrace the arguments which have been presented since he published it, it appeared to me that something was called for in this time of falling back from this great subject. i therefore present this book, hoping at least, that it will help to strengthen and save all honest souls seeking after truth. a word respecting the history. at the close of the first century a controversy arose, whether both days should be kept or only one, which continued until the reign of constantine the great. by his laws, made in a. d. , it was decreed for the future that sunday should be kept a day of rest in all the cities and towns; but he allowed the country people to follow husbandry. history further informs us that constantine murdered his two sisters husbands and son, and his own familiar friend, that same year, and the year before boiled his wife in a cauldron of oil.--the controversy still continued down to a. d. , when pope gregory passed a law abolishing the seventh day sabbath, and establishing the first day of the week. see baronius councils, . barnfield's eng. page , states that the parliament of england met on sundays till the time of richard ii. the first law of england made for keeping of sunday, was in the time of edward iv. about . as these two books are not within my reach, i have extracted from t. m. preble's tract on the sabbath. mr. fisher says, it was dr. bound one of the rigid puritans, who applied the name _sabbath_ to the first day of the week, about the year . "the word sunday is not found in the bible," it derived its name from the heathen nations of the north, because the day was dedicated to the sun. neither is the sabbath applied to the first day any more than it is to the sixth day of the week. while daniel beheld the little horn, (popery) he said, among other things, he would _think_ to change times and laws. now this could not mean of men, because it ever has been the prerogative of absolute rulers like himself, to change [ ]manmade laws. then to make the prophecy harmonize with the scripture, he must have meant times and laws established by god, because he might think and pass decrees as he has done, but he, nor all the universe could ever change god's times and laws. jesus says that "times and seasons were in the power of the father." the sabbath is the most important law which god ever instituted. "how long refuse ye to keep my commandments, and my laws, see for that the lord hath given you the sabbath." exod. xvi: , . then it's clear from the history, that this is in part what daniel meant. now the second advent believers have professed all confidence in his visions: why then doubt this. whoever feels disposed to defend and sustain the decrees of that "blasphemous" power, and especially pope gregory and the great constantine, the murderer, shown to be the _moral_ reformer in this work of changing the sabbath, are welcome to their principles and feelings. i detest these acts, in common with all others which have emanated from these ten and one horned powers. the revelations show us clearly that they were originated by the devil. if you say this history is not true then you are bound to refute it. if you cannot, you are as much in duty bound to believe it as any other history, even, that george washington died in ! if the bible argument, and testimony from history are to be relied on as evidence, then it is as clear as a sunbeam that the seventh day sabbath is a perpetual sign, and is as binding upon man as it ever was. but we are told we must keep the first day of the week for the sabbath as an ordinance to commemorate the resurrection of jesus. i for one had rather believe paul. see rom. vi: - ; gal. iii: ; col. ii: . a word more respecting time. see st page. here i have shown that the sun in the centre, regulates all time for the earth--fifty-two weeks to the year, one hundred and sixty-eight hours to the week, the seventh of which is twenty-four hours. jesus says there are but twelve hours in the day, (from sunrise to sunset.) then twelve hours night to make a twenty-four hour day, you see, must always begin at a certain period of time. no matter then whether the sun sets with us at eight in summer or o'clk in winter. now by this, and this is the scripture rule, days and weeks can, and most probably are, kept at the north and south polar regions. what an absurdity to believe that god does exonerate our fathers and brothers from [ ]keeping his sabbath while they are in these polar regions, fishing for seals and whales, should it be with them either all day or all night. if they have lost their reckoning of days and weeks, because there was, or was not any sun six months of the time, how could they learn what day of the week it was when they see the sun setting at o'clock on the equator, if bound home from the south? by referring to luke, xxiii ch. , , and xxiv: , we see that the people in palestine had kept the days and weeks right from the creation; since which time, astronomers teach us that not even fifteen minutes have been lost. god does not require us to be any more exact in keeping time, than what we may or have learned from the above rules, but i am told there is a difference in time of twenty-four hours to the mariner that circumnavigates the globe. that, being true, is known to them, but it alters no time on the earth or sea. but, says one, i should like to keep the sabbath in _time_, just as jesus did. then you must live in palestine, where their day begins seven hours earlier than ours; and yet it is at o'clock in the evening the same period, though not the same by the sun, in which we begin our day. let me illustrate: our earth, something in the form of an orange, is whirling over every twenty-four hours. it measures three hundred and sixty degrees, or about twenty-one thousand six hundred miles round, in the manner you would pass a string round an orange. now divide this three hundred and sixty degrees by the twenty-four hour day, and the result is fifteen degrees, or nine hundred miles. then every fifteen degrees we travel or sail eastward, the sun rises and sets one hour earlier in the period of the twenty-four hours: therefore those who live in palestine, one hundred and seven degrees east of us, begins and closes the day seven hours earlier, so in proportion all the way round the globe, the sun always stationary! then the sabbath begins precisely at o'clock on friday evening, every where on this globe, and ends at the same period on what we call saturday evening. god says 'every thing on its day,' 'from even unto even shall ye celebrate your sabbath;' 'the evening and the morning was the first day.' he is an exact time keeper! i say then, in the name of all that is holy, heavenly and true, and as immortality is above all price, let us see to it that we are found fearing god and keeping his commandments, for this, we are taught, 'is the whole duty of man.' the proof is positive that the seventh day sabbath is included in the commandments. [ ]bro. marsh says, "keeping the sabbath is embraced in this covenant. deut. v: - , made with the children of israel at horeb. it was not made with their fathers (the patriarchs) but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day. v. . this testimony first _negative_, he made it not with our fathers, and then _positive_ with _us_, is conclusive. not a single proof can be presented from either the old or new testament, that it was instituted for any other people or nation." now it is clear and positive that if the sabbath is not binding on any other people than the jews, by the same rule not one of the commandments is binding on any other people, who dare take such infidel ground? was not the second covenant written on the hearts of the gentile, even the law of commandments? which paul says 'is holy, just and good.' thirty years after the crucifixion he directs the ephesians to the keeping the fifth commandment, that they may live long on the _earth_ not the land of canaan. vi: , . did not god say that abraham kept his commandments, statutes, and laws? this embraced the sabbath for circumcision, and the sabbath were then the only laws, or statutes, or commandments written. the fourth commandment was given two thousand years before abraham was born! is not the stranger and all within their gates included in the covenant to keep the sabbath? see exod. xx: . and did not god require them to keep the sabbath before he made this covenant with them in horeb? see exod. xvi: - . does not isaiah say that god will bless the _man_, and the _son_ of _man_, and the _sons_ of the _stranger_, that keep the sabbath? these certainly mean the gentiles. lvi: - , - . also, in the lviii. ch. , , the promise is to all that keep the sabbath. to what people did _the_ sabbath belong at the destruction of jerusalem, nearly forty years after the crucifixion? matt. xxiv: . the gentiles certainly were embraced in the covenant by this time! why was it paul's manner always to preach on the seventh day sabbath to jews and gentiles? by what authority do you call the seventh day sabbath, the jewish sabbath? the bible says it is the sabbath of the _lord our god_! and jesus said that he was the 'lord of the sabbath day.' he moreover told the jews that the sabbath was made for man! where do you draw the distinguishing line, to show which is and which is not man between the _natural seed of abraham_ and the gentiles? "is he the god of the jews only? is he not also of the [ ]gentiles? yes, of the gentiles also!" then paul says 'there is no difference,' and that 'there is no respect of persons with god.' is it not clear, then, that the sabbath was made for adam and his posterity, the whole family of _man_? how very fearful you are that god's people should keep the bible sabbath! you say, 'let us be cautious, lest we disinherit ourselves by seeking the inheritance under the wrong covenant.' your meaning is, not to seek to keep the sabbath covenant, but the one made to abraham. if you can tell us what precept there is in the abrahamic covenant that we must now keep to be _saved_, that is not embraced in the one given at mount sinai, then we will endeavor to keep that too, with the sabbath of the lord our god. if the sabbath, as you say, is abolished, why do you, joseph marsh, continue to call the first day of the week the sabbath. see v. t., th july. if you profess to utter the voice of truth from the bible, do be consistent, and also willing that _other papers_, besides yours and the advent herald, should give the present truth to the flock of god. i say let it go with lightning speed, every way, as does the political news by the electric telegraph. if the whole law and the prophets hang on the commandments, and by keeping them we enter into life, how will you, or i, enter in if we do not 'keep the commandments.' see exod. xvi: - . jesus says, "therefore whosoever shall break one of these least commandments and shall teach men so, shall be called the least in the kingdom," &c. "fear god and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man." amen! in the xxxi. ch. of exod., god says, "wherefore the children of israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations for a _perpetual_ covenant; it is a _sign_ between me and the children of israel _forever_." , v. _who are the true israelites?_ answer, god's people. hear paul: "is he the god of the jews only? is he not also of the gentiles? yes, of the gentiles also; from uncircumcision through _faith_." rom. iii: , . god gave his re-enacted commandment or covenant to the natural jew in b. c. . they broke this covenant, as he told moses they would, for which god partially destroyed and dispersed them; god then brought in a new covenant which continued the sign of the sabbath, which was confirmed by jesus and his apostle about years from the first. see heb. viii: , , ; rom. ii: . their breaking the first covenant never could [ ]destroy the commandments of god. therefore this new, or second covenant, made with the house of israel, heb. viii: v. (not the natural jew only,) is indelibly written upon the heart. now every child takes the name of his parents. let us see what the angel gabriel says to mary concerning her son: "the lord god will give him the throne of david _his_ father, and he shall reign over the house of jacob forever." luke i: , . now the prophecy: "there shall come a star out of _jacob_ and a sceptre shall rise out of _israel_." num. now years before jesus was born, god changed jacob's name to _israel_, because he prevailed with him. this then is the family name for all who overcome, or prevail. god gave this name to his spiritual child, namely, _israel_. then jesus will 'reign over the house of _israel_ forever.' this must include all that are saved in the everlasting kingdom. further, joseph was the natural son of jacob or _israel_. in his prophetic view and dying testimony to his children, he says, joseph is a fruitful bough, from _thence is the shepherd_ the stone of _israel_. gen. xlix: - . then this shepherd (jesus) is a descendant, and is of the house of _israel_. does he not say that he is the shepherd of the sheep,--what, of the jews only? no, but also of the gentile, 'for the promise is not through the law (of ceremonies) but thro' the righteousness of _faith_.' rom. iv: . micah says, 'they shall smite the judge of _israel_, that is to be the ruler in israel. v: , . now jesus never was a _judge_ nor _ruler_ in _israel_. this, then, is a prophecy in the future, that he will judge, and be the ruler over the whole house of _israel_. all the family, both natural jew and gentile, will assume the family name, the _whole israel_ of god. the angel gabriel's message, then, is clear; david is the father of jesus, according to the flesh, and jacob, or rather israel his father, and jesus reigns over the house of israel forever. paul says, 'he is not a jew which is one outwardly, but he is a jew which is one inwardly.' rom. ii. 'there is no difference between the jew and the greek, (or gentile) for they are not all _israel_ which are of _israel_, neither because they are the seed of abraham are they all children.' why? because the children of the promise, of isaac (is the true seed.) ix. and x. ch. to the gallatinns he says, 'now to abraham (the grandfather of israel) and his seed were the promises made; not to many, but as of one and to thy seed, which is christ--then says, there is neither jew nor greek--but one in christ jesus, and if [ ]ye be christ then are ye abraham's seed and heirs according to the promise.' iii. 'and as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the israel of god.' vi. this, then, is the name of the whole family in heaven; christ is god's only son and lawful heir; none but the true seed can be joint heirs with christ in the covenant made with abraham. ezekiel's prophecy in xxxvii. chapter, god says 'he will bring up out of their _graves_ the whole house of israel,' 'and i'll put my spirit in you and ye shall _live_.' - . if god here means any other than the spiritual _israel_, then universalism is true--for the _whole_ house of natural israel did not die in faith; if the wicked jews are to be raised and live before god, then will _all_ the wicked! for god is no respecter of persons: 'and the heathen shall know that i the lord do sanctify _israel_ when my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them forever more.' v. here, then, we prove, that the dead and living saints are the whole _israel_ of god, and the covenant and sign is binding on them into the gates of the holy city. rev. xx: . [ ]recapitulation page . _when was the sabbath instituted?_ here we have endeavored to show when, and how it continued until its re-enactment on mount sinai. page . _has the sabbath been abolished since the seventh day of creation? if so, when, and where is the proof?_ here we believe we have adduced incontestible proof from the scriptures; from the two separate codes of laws given, viz: the first on tables of stone, called by god prophets, jesus, and his apostle. . the commandments of god. d code, the book of moses, as written from the mouth of god, the book of ceremonies, combining ecclesiastical and civil law, which paul shows was nailed to the cross with all _their sabbaths_ as _carnal commandments_, because their feasts commenced and ended with a sabbath. see lev. xxiii. please read from th page onward, how jesus and the apostle make the distinction. page . _was the seventh day sabbath ever changed? if so, when, and for what reason?_ here we find, by examining the proofs set forth by those who favor and insist upon the change, that there is not one passage of scripture in the bible to sustain it, but to the contrary, that jesus kept it and gave directions about it at the destruction of jerusalem. paul also, and other apostles taught how we were to keep the commandments. page . th, the history which is uncontroverted. th, the time when the sabbath commences. th, who are true israel. transcriber's notes page numbers from the original have been retained and enclosed in [] square brackets. page was blank in the original. this is an old text. as such, spelling is often inconsistent. spelling has been left as in the original with one exception. the following typographical error has been corrected: page : so is[original has ts] it with president humphrey the following puntuation corrections have been made to the text. page : but the keeping the commandments of god."[ending quotation mark missing in scan] page : my _commandments_, my _statutes_ and my _laws_."[ending quotation mark missing in scan] page : children of israel _forever_."[ending quotation mark missing in scan] page : [quotation mark missing in original]"for it seemed good page : school of tyranus.[original has extraneous quotation mark] page : third part of a shekel"[quotation mark missing in original] (to pay for) "the burnt _offerings_ page : children of israel in mount sinai;"[quotation mark missing in original] page : not under the _law_ but under grace.[period missing in original]" page : the commandment is charity,"[quotation mark missing in original] page : "touch not, taste not, handle not.[original has comma]" page : a better hope did."[quotation mark missing in original] page : argument he had before presented.[period missing in original] page : "[quotation mark missing in original]it was so at that time page : "[quotation mark missing in original]it might be proved page : before he was created."[quotation mark missing in original] page : luke xiii: - .[original has comma] page : the advent testimony.[original has comma] page : [original has extraneous quotation mark]jesus says there are but twelve hours page : [original has extraneous quotation mark]this testimony first _negative_ page : under the wrong covenant.'[quotation mark missing in original] page : nor _ruler_ in _israel_.[period missing in original] page : ix.[original has comma] and x. ch. page : rom. ii.[original has rom,ii.] catalogue of books, pamphlets, tracts, &c., issued by the seventh-day adventist publishing association. the advent review & herald of the sabbath, weekly. terms, $ . a year, in advance. the youth's instructor, monthly, devoted to moral and religious instruction. terms, cts. a year, in advance. the health reformer, monthly, devoted to an exposition of the laws of life, etc. terms, $ . a year, in advance. the advent tidende, a religious monthly in the danish language. terms, $ . a year, in advance. the svensk advent hÀrold, a religious monthly in the swedish tongue. terms, $ . a year, in advance. hymn and tune book.-- hymns-- tunes. $ . . the history of the sabbath and first day of the week. by j. n. andrews. pp., $ . . the christian life and public labors of wm. miller, the noted lecturer and writer upon the prophecies. $ . . thoughts on the book of daniel, critical and practical. by u. smith. bound, $ . ; condensed edition, paper, cts. thoughts on the revelation, critical and practical. by u. smith. pp., $ . . the nature and destiny of man. by u. smith. pp., bound, $ . , paper, cts. the constitutional amendment: or a discussion between w. h. littlejohn and the editor of the _christian statesman_ on the sabbath question. $ . . the spirit of prophecy. by mrs. e. g. white. $ . . life of elder joseph bates. $ . . the game of life, with notes. three illustrations, × inches each, representing satan playing with man for his soul. in board, cts., in paper, cts. (poem.) a word for the sabbath: or false theories exposed. by u. smith. d ed. revised and enlarged. cts. the united states in prophecy. by u. smith. bound, cts.; paper, cts. progressive bible lessons for youth, in boards, cts. " " " children, " cts. (see third page of cover.) the complete testimony of the fathers of the _first three centuries_ concerning the sabbath and first day by eld. j. n. andrews second edition. steam press of the seventh-day adventist publishing association battle creek, mich.: . preface. the testimony for first-day sacredness is very meager in the scriptures, as even its own advocates must admit. but they have been wont to supply the deficiency by a plentiful array of testimonies from the early fathers of the church. here, in time past, they have had the field all to themselves, and they have allowed their zeal for the change of the sabbath to get the better of their honesty and their truthfulness. the first-day sabbath was absolutely unknown before the time of constantine. nearly one hundred years elapsed after john was in vision on patmos before the term "lord's day" was applied to the first day. during this time, it was called "the day of the sun," "the first day of the week," and "the eighth day." the first writers who gave it the name of "lord's day," state the remarkable fact that in their judgement the true lord's day consists of every day of a christian's life, a very convincing proof that they did not give this title to sunday because john had so named it on patmos. in fact, no one of those who give this title to sunday ever assigned as a reason for so doing that it was thus called by john. nor is there any intimation in one of the fathers that first-day observance was an act of obedience to the fourth commandment, nor one clear statement that ordinary labor on that day was sinful. in order to show these facts, i have undertaken to give every testimony of every one of the fathers, prior to a. d. , who mentions either the sabbath or the first day. though some of these quotations are comparatively unimportant, others are of very great value. i have given them all, in order that the reader may actually possess their entire testimony. i have principally followed the translation of the "ante-nicene christian library," and have in every case made use of first-day translations. the work has been one of great labor to me, and i trust will be found of much profit to the candid reader. j. n. andrews. _lancaster, mass., jan. , ._ preface to the second edition. in this edition every quotation has been carefully compared with the works of the fathers from which they were taken. a few minor errors have been detected, but none of importance. the work is commended to the attention of candid inquirers with the prayer that god will make it instrumental in opening the eyes of many to the truth concerning his holy day. j. n. a. _neuchátel, switzerland, april , ._ testimony of the fathers. chapter i. introductory statement. with respect to the sabbath, the religious world may be divided into three classes:-- . those who retain the ancient seventh-day sabbath. . those who observe the first-day sabbath. . those who deny the existence of any sabbath.[a] it is inevitable that controversy should exist between these parties. their first appeal is to the bible, and this should decide the case; for it reveals man's whole duty. but there is an appeal by the second party, and sometimes by the third, to another authority, the early fathers of the church, for the decision of the question. the controversy stands thus: the second and third parties agree with the first that god did anciently require the observance of the seventh day; but both deny the doctrine of the first, that he still requires men to hallow that day; the second asserting that he has changed the sabbath to the first day of the week; and the third declaring that he has totally abolished the institution itself. the first class plant themselves upon the plain letter of the law of god, and adduce those scriptures which teach the perpetuity and immutability of the moral law, and which show that the new covenant does not abrogate that law, but puts it into the heart of every christian. the second class attempt to prove the change of the sabbath by quoting those texts which mention the first day of the week, and also those which are said to refer to it. the first day is, on such authority, called by this party the christian sabbath, and the fourth commandment is used by them to enforce this new sabbath. the third class adduce those texts which assert the dissolution of the old covenant; and those which teach the abolition of the ceremonial law with all its distinction of days, as new moons, feast days, and annual sabbaths; and also those texts which declare that men cannot be justified by that law which condemns sin; and from all these contend that the law and the sabbath are both abolished. but the first class answer to the second that the texts which they bring forward do not meet the case, inasmuch as they say nothing respecting the change of the sabbath; and that it is not honest to use the fourth commandment to enforce the observance of a day not therein commanded. and the third class assent to this answer as truthful and just. to the position of the third class, the first make this answer: that the old covenant was made between god and his people _concerning_ his law;[b] that it ceased because the people failed in its conditions, the keeping of the commandments; that the new covenant does not abrogate the law of god, but secures obedience to it by putting it into the heart of every christian; that there are two systems of law, one being made up of typical and ceremonial precepts, and the other consisting of moral principles only; that those texts which speak of the abrogation of the handwriting of ordinances and of the distinction in meats, drinks, and days, pertain alone to this shadowy system, and never to the moral law which contains the sabbath of the lord; and that it is not the fault of the law, but of sinners, that they are condemned by it; and that justification being attained only by the sacrifice of christ as a sin offering, is in itself a most powerful attestation to the perpetuity, immutability, and perfection, of that law which reveals sin. and to this answer the second class heartily assent. but the second class have something further to say. the bible, indeed, fails to assert the change of the sabbath, but these persons have something else to offer, in their estimation, equally as good as the scriptures. the early fathers of the church, who conversed with the apostles, or who conversed with some who had conversed with them, and those who followed for several generations, are by this class presented as authority, and their testimony is used to establish the so-called christian sabbath on a firm basis. and this is what they assert respecting the fathers: that they distinctly teach the change of the sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the week, and that the first day is by divine authority the christian sabbath. but the third class squarely deny this statement, and affirm that the fathers held the sabbath as an institution made for the jews when they came out of egypt, and that christ abolished it at his death. they also assert that the fathers held the first day, not as a sabbath in which men must not labor lest they break a divine precept, but as an ecclesiastical institution, which they called the lord's day, and which was the proper day for religious assemblies because custom and tradition thus concurred. and so the third class answer the second by an explicit denial of its alleged facts. they also aim a blow at the first by the assertion that the early fathers taught the no-sabbath doctrine, which must therefore be acknowledged as the real doctrine of the new testament. and now the first class respond to these conflicting statements of the second and the third. and here is their response:-- . that our duty respecting the sabbath, and respecting every other thing, can be learned only from the scriptures. . that the first three hundred years after the apostles nearly accomplished the complete development of the great apostasy, which had commenced even in paul's time; and this age of apostatizing cannot be good authority for making changes in the law of god. . that only a small proportion of the ministers and teachers of this period have transmitted any writings to our time; and these are generally fragments of the original works, and they have come down to us mainly through the hands of the romanists, who have never scrupled to destroy or to corrupt that which witnesses against themselves, whenever it has been in their power to do it. . but inasmuch as these two classes, viz., those who maintain the first-day sabbath, and those who deny the existence of any sabbath, both appeal to these fathers for testimony with which to sustain themselves, and to put down the first class, viz., those who hallow the ancient sabbath, it becomes necessary that the exact truth respecting the writings of that age, which now exist, should be shown. there is but one method of doing this which will effectually end the controversy. this is to give every one of their testimonies concerning the sabbath and first-day in their own words. in doing this the following facts will appear:-- . that in some important particulars there is a marked disagreement on this subject among them. for while some teach that the sabbath originated at creation and should be hallowed even now, others assert that it began with the fall of the manna, and ended with the death of christ. and while one class represent christ as a violator of the sabbath, another class represent him as sacredly hallowing it, and a third class declare that he certainly did violate it, and that he certainly never did, but always observed it! some of them also affirm that the sabbath was abolished, and in other places positively affirm that it is perpetuated and made more sacred than it formerly was. moreover, some assert that the ten commandments are absolutely abolished, whilst others declare that they are perpetuated, and are the tests of christian character in this dispensation. some call the day of christ's resurrection the first day of the week; others call it the day of the sun, and the eighth day; and a larger number call it the lord's day, but there are no examples of this application till the close of the second century. some enjoin the observance of both the sabbath and the first day, while others treat the seventh day as despicable. . but in several things of great importance there is perfect unity of sentiment. they always distinguish between the sabbath and the first day of the week. the change of the sabbath from the seventh day to the first is never mentioned in a single instance. they never term the first day the christian sabbath, nor do they treat it as a sabbath of any kind. nor is there a single declaration in any of them that labor on the first day of the week is sinful; the utmost that can be found being one or two vague expressions which do not necessarily have any such sense. . many of the fathers call the first day of the week the lord's day. but none of them claim for it any scriptural authority, and some expressly state that it has none whatever, but rests solely upon custom and tradition. . but the writings of the fathers furnish positive proof that the sabbath was observed in the christian church down to the time when they wrote, and by no inconsiderable part of that body. for some of them expressly enjoined its observance, and even some of those who held that it was abolished speak of christians who observed it, whom they would consent to fellowship if they would not make it a test. . and now mark the work of apostasy: this work never begins by thrusting out god's institutions, but always by bringing in those of men and at first only asking that they may be tolerated, while yet the ones ordained of god are sacredly observed. this, in time, being effected, the next effort is to make them equal with the divine. when this has been accomplished, the third stage of the process is to honor them above those divinely commanded; and this is speedily succeeded by the fourth, in which the divine institution is thrust out with contempt, and the whole ground given to its human rival. . before the first three centuries had expired, apostasy concerning the sabbath had, with many of the fathers, advanced to the third stage, and with a considerable number had already entered upon the fourth. for those fathers who hallow the sabbath do generally associate with it the festival called by them the lord's day. and though they speak of the sabbath as a divine institution, and never speak thus of the so-called lord's day, they do, nevertheless, give the greater honor to this human festival. so far had the apostasy progressed before the end of the third century, that only one thing more was needed to accomplish the work as far as the sabbath was concerned, and this was to discard it, and to honor the sunday festival alone. some of the fathers had already gone thus far; and the work became general within five centuries after christ. . the modern church historians make very conflicting statements respecting the sabbath during the first centuries. some pass over it almost in silence, or indicate that it was, at most, observed only by jewish christians. others, however, testify to its general observance by the gentile christians; yet some of these assert that the sabbath was observed as a matter of expediency and not of moral obligation, because those who kept it did not believe the commandments were binding. (this is a great error, as will appear in due time.) what is said, however, by these modern historians is comparatively unimportant inasmuch as their sources of information were of necessity the very writings which are about to be quoted. . in the following pages will be found, in their own words, every statement[c] which the fathers of the first three centuries make by way of defining their views of the sabbath and first-day. and even when they merely allude to either day in giving their views of other subjects, the nature of the allusion is stated, and, where practicable, the sentence or phrase containing it is quoted. the different writings are cited in the order in which they purport to have been written. a considerable number were not written by the persons to whom they were ascribed, but at a later date. as these have been largely quoted by first-day writers, they are here given in full. and even these writings possess a certain historical value. for though not written by the ones whose names they bear, they are known to have been in existence since the second or third century, and they give some idea of the views which then prevailed. first of all let us hear the so-called "apostolical constitutions." these were not the work of the apostles, but they were in existence as early as the third century, and were then very generally believed to express the doctrine of the apostles. they do therefore furnish important historical testimony to the practice of the church at that time. mosheim in his historical commentaries, cent. , sect. , speaks thus of these "constitutions":-- "the matter of this work is unquestionably ancient; since the manners and discipline of which it exhibits a view are those which prevailed amongst the christians of the second and third centuries, especially those resident in greece and the oriental regions." of the "apostolical constitutions," guericke's church history speaks thus:-- "this is a collection of ecclesiastical statutes purporting to be the work of the apostolic age, but in reality formed gradually in the second, third, and fourth centuries, and is of much value in reference to the history of polity, and christian archæology generally."--_ancient church_, p. . chapter ii. testimony of the apostolical constitutions. "have before thine eyes the fear of god, and always remember the ten commandments of god,--to love the one and only lord god with all thy strength; to give no heed to idols, or any other beings, as being lifeless gods, or irrational beings or dæmons. consider the manifold workmanship of god, which received its beginning through christ. thou shalt observe the sabbath, on account of him who ceased from his work of creation, but ceased not from his work of providence: it is a rest for meditation of the law, not for idleness of the hands." book ii., sect. , par. . this is sound sabbatarian doctrine. but apostasy had begun its work in the establishment of the so-called lord's day, which was destined in time to drive out the sabbath. the next mention of the sabbath also introduces the festival called lord's day, but the reader will remember that this was written, not in the first century, but the third:-- "let your judicatures be held on the second day of the week, that if any controversy arise about your sentence, having an interval till the sabbath, you may be able to set the controversy right, and to reduce those to peace who have the contests one with another against the lord's day." book ii., sect. , par. . by the term lord's day the first day of the week is here intended. but the writer does not call the first day the sabbath, that term being applied to the seventh day. in section , paragraph , christians are commanded to assemble for worship "every day, morning and evening, singing psalms and praying in the lord's house: in the morning saying the sixty-second psalm, and in the evening the hundred and fortieth, but principally on the sabbath day. and on the day of our lord's resurrection, which is the lord's day, meet more diligently, sending praise to god that made the universe by jesus and sent him to us." "otherwise what apology will he make to god who does not assemble on that day to hear the saving word concerning the resurrection, on which we pray thrice standing, in memory of him who arose in three days, in which is performed the reading of the prophets, the preaching of the gospel, the oblation of the sacrifice, the gift of the holy food." the writer of these "constitutions" this time gives the first day great prominence, though still honoring the sabbath, and by no means giving that title to sunday. but in book v., section , paragraph , we have a singular testimony to the manner in which sunday was spent. thus the writer says:-- "now we exhort you, brethren and fellow-servants, to avoid vain talk and obscene discourses, and jestings, drunkenness, lasciviousness, luxury, unbounded passions, with foolish discourses, since we do not permit you so much as on the lord's days, which are days of joy, to speak or act anything unseemly." from this it appears that the so-called lord's day was a day of greater mirth than the other days of the week. in book v., section , paragraph , it is said:-- "but when the first day of the week dawned he arose from the dead, and fulfilled those things which before his passion he foretold to us, saying: 'the son of man must continue in the heart of the earth three days and three nights.'" in book v., section , paragraph , the writer names the days on which christians should fast:-- "but he commanded us to fast on the fourth and sixth days of the week; the former on account of his being betrayed, and the latter on account of his passion. but he appointed us to break our fast on the seventh day at the cock-crowing, but to fast on the sabbath day. not that the sabbath day is a day of fasting, being the rest from the creation, but because we ought to fast on this one sabbath only, while on this day the creator was under the earth." in paragraph , christians are forbidden to "celebrate the day of the resurrection of our lord on any other day than a sunday." in paragraph , they are again charged to fast on that one sabbath which comes in connection with the anniversary of our lord's death. in paragraph , the first day of the week is four times called the lord's day. the period of days from his resurrection to his ascension is to be observed. the anniversary of christ's resurrection is to be celebrated by the supper. "and let this be an everlasting ordinance till the consummation of the world, until the lord come. for to jews the lord is still dead, but to christians he is risen: to the former, by their unbelief; to the latter, by their full assurance of faith. for the hope in him is immortal and eternal life. after eight days let there be another feast observed with honor, the eighth day itself, on which he gave me, thomas, who was hard of belief, full assurance, by showing me the print of the nails, and the wound made in his side by the spear. and again, from the first lord's day count forty days, from the lord's day till the fifth day of the week, and celebrate the feast of the ascension of the lord, whereon he finished all his dispensation and constitution," etc. the things here commanded can come only once in a year. these are the anniversary of christ's resurrection, and of that day on which he appeared to thomas, and these were to be celebrated by the supper. the people were also to observe the day of the ascension on the fifth day of the week, forty days from his resurrection, on which day he finished his work. in paragraph , they are commanded to celebrate the anniversary of the pentecost. "but after ten days from the ascension, which from the first lord's day is the fiftieth day, do ye keep a great festival; for on that day, at the third hour, the lord jesus sent on us the gift of the holy ghost." this was not a weekly but a yearly festival. fasting is also set forth in this paragraph, but every sabbath except the one christ lay in the tomb is exempted from this fast, and every so-called lord's day:-- "we enjoin you to fast every fourth day of the week, and every day of the preparation [the sixth day], and the surplusage of your fast bestow upon the needy; every sabbath day excepting one, and every lord's day, hold your solemn assemblies, and rejoice; for he will be guilty of sin who fasts on the lord's day, being the day of the resurrection, or during the time of pentecost, or, in general, who is sad on a festival day to the lord. for on them we ought to rejoice, and not to mourn." this writer asserts that it is a sin to fast or mourn on sunday, but never intimates that it is a sin to labor on that day when not engaged in worship. we shall next learn that the decalogue is in agreement with the law of nature, and that it is of perpetual obligation:-- in book vi., section , paragraph , it is said: "he gave a plain law to assist the law of nature, such an one as is pure, saving, and holy, in which his own name was inscribed, perfect, which is never to fail, being complete in ten commands, unspotted, converting souls." in paragraph it is said: "now the law is the decalogue, which the lord promulgated to them with an audible voice." in paragraph he says: "you therefore are blessed who are delivered from the curse. for christ, the son of god, by his coming has confirmed and completed the law, but has taken away the additional precepts, although not all of them, yet at least the more grievous ones; having confirmed the former, and abolished the latter." and he further testifies as follows: "and besides, before his coming he refused the sacrifices of the people, while they frequently offered them, when they sinned against him, and thought he was to be appeased by sacrifices, but not by repentance." for this reason the writer truthfully testifies that god refused to accept their burnt-offerings and sacrifices, their new moons and their sabbaths. in book vi., section , he says: "he who had commanded to honor our parents, was himself subject to them. he who had commanded to keep the sabbath, by resting thereon for the sake of meditating on the laws, has now commanded us to consider of the law of creation, and of providence every day, and to return thanks to god." this savors somewhat of the doctrine that all days are alike. yet this cannot be the meaning; for in book vii., section , paragraph , he enjoins the observance of the sabbath, and also of the lord's-day festival, but specifies one sabbath in the year in which men should fast. thus he says:-- "but keep the sabbath, and the lord's-day festival; because the former is the memorial of the creation, and the latter, of the resurrection. but there is one only sabbath to be observed by you in the whole year, which is that of our lord's burial, on which men ought to keep a fast, but not a festival. for inasmuch as the creator was then under the earth, the sorrow for him is more forcible than the joy for the creation; for the creator is more honorable by nature and dignity than his own creatures." in book vii., section , paragraph , he says: "on the day of the resurrection of the lord, that is, the lord's day, assemble yourselves together, without fail, giving thanks to god," etc. in paragraph , the writer brings in the sabbath again: "o lord almighty, thou hast created the world by christ, and hast appointed the sabbath in memory thereof, because that on _that day_ thou hast made us _rest from our works_, for the meditation upon thy laws." in the same paragraph, in speaking of the resurrection of christ, the writer says:-- "on which account we solemnly assemble to celebrate the feast of the resurrection on the lord's day," etc. in the same paragraph he speaks again of the sabbath: "thou didst give them the law or decalogue, which was pronounced by thy voice and written with thy hand. thou didst enjoin the observation of the sabbath, not affording them an occasion of idleness, but an opportunity of piety, for their knowledge of thy power, and the prohibition of evils; having limited them as within an holy circuit for the sake of doctrine, for the rejoicing upon the seventh period." in this paragraph he also states his views of the sabbath, and of the day which he calls the lord's day, giving the precedence to the latter:-- "on this account he permitted men every sabbath to rest, that so no one might be willing to send one word out of his mouth in anger on the day of the sabbath. for the sabbath is the ceasing of the creation, the completion of the world, the inquiry after laws, and the grateful praise to god for the blessings he has bestowed upon men. all which the lord's day excels, and shows the mediator himself, the provider, the law-giver, the cause of the resurrection, the first-born of the whole creation," etc. and he adds: "so that the lord's day commands us to offer unto thee, o lord, thanksgiving for all. for this is the grace afforded by thee, which on account of its greatness has obscured all other blessings." it is certainly noteworthy that the so-called lord's day, for which no divine warrant is produced, is here exalted above the sabbath of the lord notwithstanding the sabbath is acknowledged to be the divine memorial of the creation, and to be expressly enjoined in the decalogue, which the writer declares to be of perpetual obligation. tested by his own principles, he had far advanced in apostasy; for he held a human festival more honorable than one which he acknowledged to be ordained of god; and only a single step remained; viz., to set aside the commandment of god for the ordinance of man. in book viii., section , paragraph , it is said, when a bishop has been chosen and is to be ordained,-- "let the people assemble, with the presbytery and bishops that are present, on the lord's day, and let them give their consent." in book viii., section , paragraph , occurs the final mention of these two days in the so-called "apostolical constitutions." "let the slaves work five days; but on the sabbath day and the lord's day let them have leisure to go to church for instruction in piety. we have said that the sabbath is on account of the creation, and the lord's day, of the resurrection." to this may be added the th canon of the apostles, which is appended to the "constitutions":-- "if any one of the clergy be found to fast on the lord's day, or on the sabbath day, excepting one only, let him be deprived; but if he be one of the laity, let him be suspended." every mention of the sabbath and first-day in that ancient book called "apostolical constitutions" is now before the reader. this book comes down to us from the third century, and contains what was at that time very generally believed to be the doctrine of the apostles. it is therefore valuable to us, not as authority respecting the teaching of the apostles, but as giving us a knowledge of the views and practices which prevailed in the third century. at the time these "constitutions" were put in writing, the ten commandments were revered as the immutable rule of right, and the sabbath of the lord was by many observed as an act of obedience to the fourth commandment, and as the divine memorial of the creation. but the first-day festival had already attained such strength and influence as to clearly indicate that ere long it would claim the entire ground. but observe that the sabbath and the so-called lord's day are treated as distinct institutions, and that no hint of the change of the sabbath to the first day of the week is ever once given. the "apostolical constitutions" are cited first, not because written by the apostles, but because of their title. for the same reason the so-called epistle of barnabas is quoted next, not because written by that apostle, for the proof is ample that it was not, but because it is often quoted by first-day writers as the words of the apostle barnabas. it was in existence, however, as early as the middle of the second century, and, like the "apostolical constitutions," is of value to us in that it gives some clue to the opinions which prevailed in the region where the writer lived, or at least which were held by his party. chapter iii. barnabas--pliny--ignatius--the church at smyrna--the epistle to diognetus--recognitions of clement--syriac documents concerning edessa. testimony of the epistle of barnabas. in his second chapter this writer speaks thus:-- "for he hath revealed to us by all the prophets that he needs neither sacrifices, nor burnt-offerings, nor oblations, saying thus, 'what is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me, saith the lord? i am full of burnt-offerings, and desire not the fat of lambs, and the blood of bulls and goats, not when ye come to appear before me: for who hath required these things at your hands? tread no more my courts, not though ye bring with you fine flour. incense is a vain abomination unto me, and your new moons and sabbaths i cannot endure.' he has therefore abolished these things, that the new law of our lord jesus christ, which is without the yoke of necessity, might have a human oblation." the writer may have intended to assert the abolition of the sacrifices only, as this was his special theme in this place. but he presently asserts the abolition of the sabbath of the lord. here is his fifteenth chapter entire:-- "further, also, it is written concerning the sabbath in the decalogue which [the lord] spoke, face to face, to moses on mount sinai, 'and sanctify ye the sabbath of the lord with clean hands and a pure heart.' and he says in another place, 'if my sons keep the sabbath, then will i cause my mercy to rest upon them.' the sabbath is mentioned at the beginning of the creation [thus]: 'and god made in six days the works of his hands, and made an end on the seventh day, and rested on it, and sanctified it.' attend, my children, to the meaning of this expression, 'he finished in six days.' this implieth that the lord will finish all things in six thousand years, for a day is with him a thousand years. and he himself testifieth, saying, 'behold to-day will be as a thousand years.' therefore, my children, in six days, that is, in six thousand years, all things will be finished. 'and he rested on the seventh day.' this meaneth: when his son, coming [again], shall destroy the time of the wicked man, and judge the ungodly, and change the sun, and the moon, and the stars, then shall he truly rest on the seventh day. moreover, he says, 'thou shalt sanctify it with pure hands and a pure heart.' if, therefore, any one can now sanctify the day which god hath sanctified, except he is pure in heart in all things, we are deceived. behold, therefore: certainly then one properly resting sanctifies it, when we ourselves, having received the promise, wickedness no longer existing, and all things having been made new by the lord, shall be able to work righteousness. then we shall be able to sanctify it, having been first sanctified ourselves. further, he says to them, 'your new moons and your sabbaths i cannot endure.' ye perceive how he speaks: your present sabbaths are not acceptable to me, but that is which i have made [namely this], when, giving rest to all things, i shall make a beginning of the eighth day, that is, a beginning of another world. wherefore, also, we keep the eighth day with joyfulness, the day, also, on which jesus rose again from the dead. and when he had manifested himself, he ascended into the heavens." here are some very strange specimens of reasoning. the substance of what he says relative to the present observance of the sabbath appears to be this: no one "can now sanctify the day which god hath sanctified except he is pure in heart in all things." but this cannot be the case until the present world shall pass away, "when we ourselves, having received the promise, wickedness no longer existing, and _all things having been made new_ by the lord, shall be able to work righteousness. then we shall be able to sanctify it, having been first sanctified ourselves." men cannot therefore keep the sabbath while this wicked world lasts. and so he says, "your present sabbaths are not acceptable to me." that is to say, the keeping of the day which god has sanctified is not possible in such a wicked world. but though the seventh day cannot now be kept, the eighth day can be, and ought to be, because when the seventh thousand years are past there will be at the beginning of the eighth thousand the new creation. so the persons represented by this writer, do not attempt to keep the seventh day which god sanctified, for that is too pure to keep in this world, and can only be kept after the saviour comes at the commencement of the seventh thousand years; but they "keep the eighth day with joyfulness, the day also on which jesus rose again from the dead." sunday, which god never sanctified, is exactly suitable for observance in the world as it now is. but the sanctified seventh day "we shall be able to sanctify" when all things have been made new. if our first-day friends think these words of some unknown writer of the second century more honorable to the first day of the week than to the seventh, they are welcome to them. had the writer said, "it is easier to keep sunday than the sabbath while the world is so wicked," he would have stated the truth. but when in substance he says, "it is more acceptable to god to keep a common than a sanctified day while men are so sinful," he excuses his disobedience by uttering a falsehood. several things however should be noted:-- . in this quotation we have the reasons of a no-sabbath man for keeping the festival of sunday. it is not god's commandment, for there was none for that festival; but the day god hallowed being too pure to keep while the world is so wicked, sunday is therefore kept till the return of the lord, and then the seventh day shall be truly sanctified by those who now regard it not. . but this writer, though saying what he is able in behalf of the first day of the week, applies to it no sacred name. he does not call it christian sabbath, nor lord's day, but simply "the eighth day," and this because it succeeds the seventh day of the week. . it is also to be noticed that he expressly dates the sabbath from the creation. . the change of the sabbath was unknown to this writer. he kept the sunday festival, not because it was purer than the sanctified seventh day, but because the seventh day was too pure to keep while the world is so wicked. testimony of the epistle of pliny. pliny was the roman governor of bithynia in the years and . he wrote a letter to the emperor trajan, in which he states what he had learned of the christians as the result of examining them at his tribunal:-- "they affirmed that the whole of their guilt or error was, that they met on a certain stated day [_stato die_], before it was light, and addressed themselves in a form of prayer to christ, as to some god, binding themselves by a solemn oath, not for the purposes of any wicked design, but never to commit any fraud, theft, or adultery; never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to eat in common a harmless meal."--_coleman's ancient christianity_, chap. i. sect. . the letter of pliny is often referred to as though it testified that the christians of bithynia celebrated the first day of the week. yet such is by no means the case, as the reader can plainly see. coleman says of it (page ):-- "this statement is evidence that these christians kept a day as holy time, but whether it was the last, or the first day of the week, does not appear." such is the judgment of an able, candid, first-day church historian of good repute as a scholar. an anti-sabbatarian writer of some repute speaks thus:-- "as the sabbath day appears to have been quite as commonly observed at this date as the sun's day (if not even more so), it is just as probable that this 'stated day' referred to by pliny was the _seventh_ day, as that it was the _first_ day; though the latter is generally taken for granted."--_obligation of the sabbath_, p. . every candid person must acknowledge that it is unjust to represent the letter of pliny as testifying in behalf of the so-called christian sabbath. next in order of time come the reputed epistles of ignatius. testimony of the epistles of ignatius. of the fifteen epistles ascribed to ignatius, eight are, by universal consent, accounted spurious; and eminent scholars have questioned the genuineness of the remaining seven. there are, however, two forms to these seven, a longer and a shorter, and while some doubt exists as to the shorter form, the longer form is by common consent ascribed to a later age than that of ignatius. but the epistle to the magnesians, which exists both in the longer and in the shorter form, is the one from which first-day writers obtain ignatius' testimony in behalf of sunday, and they quote for this both these forms. we therefore give both. here is the shorter:-- "for the divinest prophets lived according to christ jesus. on this account also they were persecuted, being inspired by his grace to fully convince the unbelieving that there is one god, who has manifested himself by jesus christ his son, who is his eternal word, not proceeding forth from silence, and who in all things pleased him that sent him. if, therefore, those who were brought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the sabbath, but living in the observance of the lord's day, on which also our life has sprung again by him and by his death--whom some deny, by which mystery we have obtained faith, and therefore endure, that we may be found the disciples of jesus christ, our only master--how shall we be able to live apart from him, whose disciples the prophets themselves in the spirit did wait for him as their teacher? and therefore he whom they rightly waited for, being come, raised them from the dead." chaps. viii. and ix. this paragraph is the one out of which a part of a sentence is quoted to show that ignatius testifies in behalf of the lord's-day festival, or christian sabbath. but the so-called lord's day is only brought in by means of a false translation. this is the decisive sentence: #mêketi sabbatizontes, alla kata kyriakên zôên zôntes#; literally: "no longer sabbatizing, but living according to lord's life." eminent first-day scholars have called attention to this fact, and have testified explicitly that the term lord's day has no right to appear in the translation; for the original is not #kyriakên hêmeran#, lord's day, but #kyriakên zôên#, lord's life. this is absolutely decisive, and shows that something akin to fraud has to be used in order to find a reference in this place to the so-called christian sabbath. but there is another fact quite as much to the point. the writer was not speaking of those then alive, but of the ancient prophets. this is proved by the opening and closing words of the above quotation, which first-day writers always omit. the so-called lord's day is inserted by a fraudulent translation; and now see what absurdity comes of it. the writer is speaking of the ancient prophets. if, therefore, the sunday festival be inserted in this quotation from ignatius he is made to declare that "the divinest prophets," who "were brought up in the ancient order of things," kept the first day and did not keep the sabbath! whereas, the truth is just the reverse of this. they certainly did keep the sabbath, and did not keep the first day of the week. the writer speaks of the point when these men came "to the newness of hope," which must be their individual conversion to god. they certainly did observe and enforce the sabbath after this act of conversion. see isa., chaps. , ; jer. ; eze., chaps. , , . but they did also, as this writer truly affirms, live according to the lord's life. the sense of the writer respecting the prophets must therefore be this: "no longer [after their conversion to god] observing the sabbath [merely, as natural men] but living according to the lord's life," or "according to christ jesus." so much for the shorter form of the epistle to the magnesians. though the longer form is by almost universal consent of scholars and critics pronounced the work of some centuries after the time of ignatius, yet as a portion of this also is often given by first-day writers to support sunday, and given too as the words of ignatius, we here present in full its reference to the first day of the week, and also to the sabbath, which they generally omit. here are its statements:-- "let us therefore no longer keep the sabbath after the jewish manner, and rejoice in days of idleness; for 'he that does not work, let him not eat.' for, say the [holy] oracles, 'in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat thy bread.' but let every one of you keep the sabbath after a spiritual manner, rejoicing in meditation on the law, not in relaxation of the body, admiring the workmanship of god, and not eating things prepared the day before, nor using lukewarm drinks, and walking within a prescribed space, nor finding delight in dancing and plaudits which have no sense in them. and after the observance of the sabbath, let every friend of christ keep the lord's day as a festival, the resurrection day, the queen and chief of all the days [of the week]. looking forward to this, the prophet declared, 'to the end, for the eighth day,' on which our life both sprang up again, and the victory over death was obtained in christ," etc. chapter ix. this epistle, though the work of a later hand than that of ignatius, is valuable for the light which it sheds upon the state of things when it was written. it gives us a correct idea of the progress of apostasy with respect to the sabbath in the time of the writer. he speaks against jewish superstition in the observance of the sabbath, and condemns days of idleness as contrary to the declaration, "in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat thy bread." but by days of idleness he cannot refer to the sabbath, for this would be to make the fourth commandment clash with this text, whereas they must harmonize, inasmuch as they existed together during the former dispensation. moreover, the sabbath, though a day of abstinence from labor, is not a day of idleness, but of active participation in religious duties. he enjoins its observance after a spiritual manner. and after the sabbath has been thus observed, "let every friend of christ keep the lord's day _as a festival_, the resurrection day, the queen and chief of all the days." the divine institution of the sabbath was not yet done away, but the human institution of sunday had become its equal, and was even commended above it. not long after this, it took the whole ground, and the observance of the sabbath was denounced as heretical and pernicious. the reputed epistle of ignatius to the trallians in its shorter form does not allude to this subject. in its longer form, which is admitted to be the work of a later age than that of ignatius, these expressions are found:-- "during the sabbath, he continued under the earth;" "at the dawning of the lord's day he arose from the dead;" "the sabbath embraces the burial; the lord's day contains the resurrection." chap. ix. in the epistle to the philippians, which is universally acknowledged to be the work of a later person than ignatius, it is said:-- "if any one fasts on the lord's day or on the sabbath, except on the paschal sabbath only, he is a murderer of christ." chap. xiii. we have now given every allusion to the sabbath and first-day that can be found in any writing attributed to ignatius. we have seen that the term "lord's day" is not found in any sentence written by him. the first day is never called the christian sabbath, not even in the writings falsely attributed to him; nor is there in any of them a hint of the modern doctrine of the change of the sabbath. though falsely ascribed to ignatius, and actually written in a later age, they are valuable in that they mark the progress of apostasy in the establishment of the sunday festival. moreover, they furnish conclusive evidence that the ancient sabbath was retained for centuries in the so-called catholic church, and that the sunday festival was an institution entirely distinct from the sabbath of the fourth commandment. testimony of the church at smyrna. the epistle of polycarp makes no reference to the sabbath nor to the first day of the week. but "the encyclical epistle of the church at smyrna concerning the martyrdom of the holy polycarp," informs us that "the blessed polycarp suffered martyrdom" "on the great sabbath at the eighth hour." chapter xxi. the margin says: "the great sabbath is that before the passover." this day, thus mentioned, is not sunday, but is the ancient sabbath of the lord. testimony of the epistle to diognetus. this was written by an unknown author, and diognetus himself is known only by name, no facts concerning him having come down to us. it dates from the first part of the second century. the writer speaks of "the superstition as respects the sabbaths" which the jews manifested, and he adds these words: "to speak falsely of god, as if he forbade us to do what is good on the sabbath days--how is not this impious?" but there is nothing in this to which a commandment-keeper would object, or which he might not freely utter. the "recognitions of clement" is a kind of philosophical and theological romance. it purports to have been written by clement of rome, in the time of the apostle peter, but was actually written "somewhere in the first half of the third century." testimony of the recognitions of clement. in book i., chapter xxxv., he speaks of the giving of the law thus:-- "meantime they came to mount sinai, and thence the law was given to them with voices and sights from heaven, written in ten precepts, of which the first and greatest was that they should worship god himself alone," etc. in book iii., chapter lv., he speaks of these precepts as tests: "on account of those, therefore, who by neglect of their own salvation please the evil one, and those who by study of their own profit seek to please the good one, ten things have been prescribed as a test to this present age, according to the number of the ten plagues which were brought upon egypt." in book ix., chapter xxviii., he says of the hebrews, "that no child born among them is ever exposed, and that on every seventh day they all rest," etc. in book x., chap. lxxii., is given the conversion of one faustinianus by st. peter. and it is said, "he proclaimed a fast to all the people, and on the next lord's day he baptized him." this is all that i find in this work relating to the sabbath and the so-called lord's day. the writer held the ten commandments to be tests of character in the present dispensation. there is no reason to believe that he, or any other person in that age, held the sunday festival as something to be observed in obedience to the fourth commandment. testimony of the syriac documents concerning edessa. on pages - of this work is given what purports to be "the teaching of the apostles." on page , the ascension of the lord is said to have been upon the "first day of the week, and the end of the pentecost." two manifest falsehoods are here uttered; for the ascension was upon thursday, and the pentecost came ten days after the ascension. it is also said that the disciples came from nazareth of galilee to the mount of olives on that selfsame day before the ascension, and yet that the ascension was "at the time of the early dawn." but nazareth was distant from the mount of olives at least sixty miles! on page , a commandment from the apostles is given: "on the first [day] of the week, let there be service, and the reading of the holy scriptures, and the oblation," because christ arose on that day, was born on that day, ascended on that day, and will come again on that day. but here is one truth, one falsehood, and two mere assertions. the apostles are represented, on page , as commanding a fast of forty days, and they add: "then celebrate the day of the passion [friday], and the day of the resurrection," sunday. but this would be only an annual celebration of these days. and on pages and they are also represented as commanding service to be held on the fourth and sixth days of the week. the sabbath is not mentioned in these "documents," which were written about the commencement of the fourth century, when, in many parts of the world, that day had ceased to be hallowed. chapter iv. testimony of justin martyr. justin's "apology" was written at rome about the year . his "dialogue with trypho the jew" was written some years later. in searching his works, we shall see how much greater progress apostasy had made at rome than in the countries where those lived whose writings we have been examining. and yet nearly all these writings were composed at least a century later than those of justin, though we have quoted them before quoting his, because of their asserted apostolic origin, or of their asserted origin within a few years of the times of the apostles. it does not appear that justin, and those at rome who held with him in doctrine, paid the slightest regard to the ancient sabbath. he speaks of it as abolished, and treats it with contempt. unlike some whose writings have been examined, he denies that it originated at creation, and asserts that it was made in the days of moses. he also differs with some already quoted in that he denies the perpetuity of the law of ten commandments. in his estimation, the sabbath was a jewish institution, absolutely unknown to good men before the time of moses, and of no authority whatever since the death of christ. the idea of the change of the sabbath from the seventh day of the week to the first, is not only never found in his writings, but is absolutely irreconcilable with such statements as the foregoing, which abound therein. and yet justin martyr is prominently and constantly cited in behalf of the so-called christian sabbath. the roman people observed a festival on the first day of the week in honor of the sun. and so justin in his apology, addressed to the emperor of rome, tells that monarch that the christians met on "the day of the sun," for worship. he gives the day no sacred title, and does not even intimate that it was a day of abstinence from labor, only as they spent a portion of it in worship. here are the words of his apology on the sunday festival:-- "and on the day called sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying, amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. and they who are well to do, and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succors the orphans and widows, and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds, and the strangers sojourning among us, and, in a word, takes care of all who are in need. but sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which god, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and jesus christ our saviour on the same day rose from the dead. for he was crucified on the day before that of saturn (saturday); and on the day after that of saturn, which is the day of the sun, having appeared to his apostles and disciples, he taught them these things, which we have submitted to you also for your consideration." chap. lxvii. not one word of this indicates that justin considered the sunday festival as a continuation of the sabbath of the fourth commandment. on the contrary, he shows clearly that no such idea was cherished by him. for though the fourth commandment enjoins the observance of the seventh day because _god rested on that day_ from the work of creation, justin urged in behalf of the sunday festival that it is _the day on which he began his work_. the honor paid to that festival was not therefore in justin's estimation in any sense an act of obedience to the fourth commandment. he mentions as his other reason for the celebration by christians of "the day of the sun," that the saviour arose that day. but he claims no divine or apostolic precept for this celebration; the things which he says christ taught his apostles being the doctrines which he had embodied in this apology for the information of the emperor. and it is worthy of notice that though first-day writers assert that "lord's day" was the familiar title of the first day of the week in the time of the apocalypse, yet justin, who is the first person after the sacred writers that mentions the first day, and this at a distance of only years from the date of john's vision upon patmos, does not call it by that title, but by the name which it bore as a heathen festival! if it be said that the term was omitted because he was addressing a heathen emperor, there still remains the fact that he mentions the day quite a number of times in his "dialogue with trypho," and yet never calls it "lord's day," nor indeed does he call it by any name implying sacredness. now we present the statements concerning the sabbath and first-day found in his "dialogue with trypho the jew." the impropriety, not to say dishonesty, of quoting justin in behalf of the modern doctrine of the change of the sabbath, will be obvious to all. he was a most decided no-law, no-sabbath writer, who used the day commonly honored as a festival by the romans, as the most suitable, or most convenient, day for public worship, a position identical with that of modern no-sabbath men. justin may be called a law man in this sense, however, that while he abolishes the ten commandments, he calls the gospel "the new law." he is therefore really one who believes in the gospel and denies the law. but let us hear his own words. trypho, having in chapter viii. advised justin to observe the sabbath, and "do all things which have been written in the law," in chapter x. says to him, "you observe no festivals or sabbaths." this was exactly adapted to bring out from justin the answer that though he did not observe the seventh day as the sabbath, he did thus rest on the first day, if it were true that that day was with him a day of abstinence from labor. and now observe justin's answer given in chapter twelve:-- "the new law requires you to keep perpetual sabbath, and you, because you are idle for one day, suppose you are pious, not discerning why this has been commanded you; and if you eat unleavened bread, you say the will of god has been fulfilled. the lord our god does not take pleasure in such observances: if there is any perjured person or a thief among you, let him cease to be so; if any adulterer, let him repent; then he has kept the sweet and true sabbaths of god." this language plainly implies that justin held all days to be alike, and did not observe any one day as a day of abstinence from labor. but in chapter xviii., justin asserts that the sabbaths--and he doubtless includes the weekly with the annual--were enjoined upon the jews for their wickedness:-- "for we too would observe the fleshly circumcision, and the sabbaths, and in short, all the feasts, if we did not know for what reason they were enjoined you--namely, on account of your transgressions and the hardness of your hearts. for if we patiently endure all things contrived against us by wicked men and demons, so that amid cruelties unutterable, death and torments, we pray for mercy to those who inflict such things upon us, and do not wish to give the least retort to any one, even as the new law-giver commanded us: how is it, trypho, that we would not observe those rites which do not harm us--i speak of fleshly circumcision, and sabbaths, and feasts?" not only does he declare that the jews were commanded to keep the sabbath because of their wickedness, but in chapter xix. he denies that any sabbath existed before moses. thus, after naming adam, abel, enoch, lot, and melchizedek, he says:-- "moreover, all those righteous men already mentioned, though they kept no sabbaths, were pleasing to god." but though he thus denies the sabbatic institution before the time of moses, he presently makes this statement concerning the jews:-- "and you were commanded to keep sabbaths, that you might retain the memorial of god. for his word makes this announcement, saying, 'that ye may know that i am god who redeemed you.'" [eze. : .] the sabbath is indeed the memorial of the god that made the heavens and the earth. and what an absurdity to deny that that memorial was set up when the creative work was done, and to affirm that twenty-five hundred years intervened between the work and the memorial! in chapter xxi. justin asserts "that god enjoined you [the jews] to keep the sabbath, and imposed on you other precepts for a sign, as i have already said, on account of your unrighteousness, and that of your fathers," &c., and quotes ezekiel to prove it. yet that chapter declares that it was in order that they might know who was that being who sanctified them, _i. e._, that they might know that their god was the creator, that the sabbath was made to them a sign. in chapter xxiii., he again asserts that "in the times of enoch" no one "observed sabbaths." he then protests against sabbatic observance as follows:-- "do you see that the elements are not idle, and keep no sabbaths? remain as you were born. for if there was no need of circumcision before abraham, or of the observance of sabbaths, of feasts and sacrifices, before moses; no more need is there of them now, after that, according to the will of god, jesus christ the son of god has been born without sin, of a virgin sprung from the stock of abraham." that is to say, there was no sabbatic institution before moses, and neither is there any since christ. but in chapter xxiv., justin undertakes to bring in an argument for sunday, not as a sabbath, but as having greater mystery in it, and as being more honorable than the seventh day. thus, alluding to circumcision on the eighth day of a child's life as an argument for the first-day festival, he says:-- "it is possible for us to show how the eighth day possessed a certain mysterious import, which the seventh day did not possess, and which was promulgated by god through these rites." that is to say, because god commanded the hebrews to circumcise their children when they were eight days old, therefore all men should now esteem the first day of the week more honorable than the seventh day, which he commanded in the moral law, and which justin himself, in chapter xix., terms "the memorial of god." in chapter xxvi., justin says to trypho that-- "the gentiles, who have believed on him, and have repented of the sins which they have committed, they shall receive the inheritance along with the patriarchs and the prophets, and the just men who are descended from jacob, even although they neither keep the sabbath, nor are circumcised, nor observe the feasts." and in proof of this, he quotes from isa. , and , and , respecting the call of the gentiles. upon this (chapter xxvii.), trypho the jew very pertinently asks:-- "why do you select and quote whatever you wish from the prophetic writings, but do not refer to those which expressly command the sabbath to be observed? for isaiah thus speaks [chap. : , ], 'if thou shalt turn away thy foot from the sabbath,'" etc. to which justin makes this uncandid answer:-- "i have passed them by, my friends, not because such prophecies were contrary to me, but because you have understood, and do understand, that although god commands you by all the prophets to do the same things which he also commanded by moses, it was on account of the hardness of your hearts, and your ingratitude towards him, that he continually proclaims them, in order that, even in this way, if you repented, you might please him, and neither sacrifice your children to demons, nor be partakers with thieves," etc. and he adds: "so that, as in the beginning, these things were enjoined you because of your wickedness, in like manner, because of your steadfastness in it, or rather your increased proneness to it, by means of the same precepts, he calls you [by the prophets] to a remembrance or knowledge of it." these are bitter words from a gentile who had been a pagan philosopher, and they are in no sense a just answer unless it can be shown that the law was given to the jews because they were so wicked, and was withheld from the gentiles because they were so righteous. the truth is just the reverse of this. eph. . but to say something against the sabbath, justin asks:-- "did god wish the priests to sin when they offer the sacrifices on the sabbaths? or those to sin, who are circumcised and do circumcise on the sabbaths; since he commands that on the eighth day--even though it happen to be a sabbath--those who are born shall be always circumcised?" and he asks if the rite could not be one day earlier or later, and why those "who lived before moses" "observed no sabbaths?" what justin says concerning circumcision and sacrifices is absolutely without weight as an objection to the sabbath, inasmuch as the commandment forbids, not the performance of religious duties, but our own work. ex. : - . and his often repeated declaration that good men before the time of moses did not keep the sabbath, is mere assertion, inasmuch as god appointed it to a holy use in the time of adam, and we do know of some in the patriarchal age who kept god's commandments, and were perfect before him. in chapter xxix., justin sneers at sabbatic observance by saying, "think it not strange that we drink hot water on the sabbaths." and as arguments against the sabbath he says that god "directs the government of the universe on this day equally as on all others," as though this were inconsistent with the present sacredness of the sabbath, when it was also true that god thus governed the world in the period when justin acknowledges the sabbath to have been obligatory. and he again refers to the sacrifices and to those who lived in the patriarchal age. in chapter xli., justin again brings forward his argument for sunday from circumcision:-- "the command of circumcision, again, bidding [them] always circumcise the children on the eighth day, was a type of the true circumcision, by which we are circumcised from deceit and iniquity through him who rose from the dead on the first day after the sabbath [namely, through], our lord jesus christ. for the first day after the sabbath, remaining the first of all the days, is called, however, the eighth, according to the number of all the days of the cycle, and [yet] remains the first." sunday-keeping must be closely related to infant baptism, inasmuch as one of the chief arguments in modern times for the baptism of infants is drawn from the fact that god commanded the hebrews to circumcise their male children; and justin found his scriptural authority for first-day observance in the fact that this rite was to be performed when the child was eight days old! yet this eighth day did not come on one day of the week, only, but on every day, and when it came on the seventh day it furnished justin with an argument against the sacredness of the sabbath! but let it come on what day of the week it might (and it came on all alike), it was an argument for sunday! o wonderful _eighth_ day, that can thrive on that which is positively fatal to the seventh, and that can come every week on the first day thereof, though there be only seven days in each week! in chapters xliii., and xlvi., and xcii., justin reiterates the assertion that those who lived in the patriarchal age did not hallow the sabbath. but as he adds no new thought to what has been already quoted from him, these need not be copied. but in chapter xlvii., we have something of interest. trypho asks justin whether those who believe in christ, and obey him, but who wish to "observe these [institutions] will be saved?" justin answers: "in my opinion, trypho, such an one will be saved, if he does not strive in every way to persuade other men ... to observe the same things as himself, telling them that they will not be saved unless they do so." trypho replied, "why then have you said, 'in my opinion, such an one will be saved,' unless there are some who affirm that such will not be saved?" in reply, justin tells trypho that there were those who would have no intercourse with, nor even extend hospitality to, such christians as observed the law. and for himself he says:-- "but if some, through weak-mindedness, wish to observe such institutions as were given by moses (from which they expect some virtue, but which we believe were appointed by reason of the hardness of the people's hearts), along with their hope in this christ, and [wish to perform] the eternal and natural acts of righteousness and piety, yet choose to live with the christians and the faithful, as i said before, not inducing them either to be circumcised like themselves, or to keep the sabbath, or to observe any other such ceremonies, then i hold that we ought to join ourselves to such, and associate with them in all things as kinsmen and brethren." justin's language shows that there were sabbath-keeping christians in his time. such of them as were of jewish descent no doubt generally retained circumcision. but it is very unjust in him to represent the gentile sabbath-keepers as observing this rite. that there were many of these is evident from the so-called "apostolical constitutions," and even from the ignatian epistles. one good thing, however, justin does say. the keeping of the commandments he terms the performance of "the eternal and natural acts of righteousness." he would consent to fellowship those who do these things provided they made them no test for others. he well knew in such case that the sabbath would die out in a little time. himself and the more popular party at rome honored as their festival the day observed by the heathen romans, as he reminds the emperor in his apology, and he was willing to fellowship the sabbath-keepers if they would not test him by the commandments, _i. e._, if they would fellowship him in violating them. that justin held to the abrogation of the ten commandments is also manifest. trypho, in the tenth chapter of the dialogue, having said to justin, "you do not obey his commandments," and again, "you do not observe the law," justin answers in chapter xi. as follows:-- "but we do not trust through moses, or through the law; for then we would do the same as yourselves. but now--for i have read that there shall be a final law, and a covenant, the chiefest of all, which it is now incumbent on all men to observe, as many as are seeking after the inheritance of god. for the law promulgated on horeb is now old, and belongs to yourselves alone; but this is for all universally. now, law placed against law has abrogated that which is before it, and a covenant which comes after in like manner has put an end to the previous one." we must, therefore, pronounce justin a man who held to the abrogation of the ten commandments, and that the sabbath was a jewish institution which was unknown before moses, and of no authority since christ. he held sunday to be the most suitable day for public worship, but not upon the ground that the sabbath had been changed to it, for he cuts up the sabbatic institution by the roots; and so far is he from calling this day the christian sabbath that he gives to it the name which it bore as a heathen festival. chapter v. irenæus--dionysius--melito--bardesanes. testimony of irenÆus. this father was born "somewhere between a. d. and a. d. ." he was "bishop of lyons in france during the latter quarter of the second century," being ordained to that office "probably about a. d. ." his work _against heresies_ was written "between a. d. and a. d. ." first-day writers assert that irenæus "says that the lord's day was the christian sabbath." they profess to quote from him these words: "on the lord's day every one of us christians keeps the sabbath, meditating on the law and rejoicing in the works of god." no such language is found in any of the writings of this father. we will quote his entire testimony respecting the sabbath and first-day, and the reader can judge. he speaks of christ's observance of the sabbath, and shows that he did not violate the day. thus he says:-- "it is clear, therefore, that he loosed and vivified those who believe in him as abraham did, doing nothing contrary to the law when he healed upon the sabbath day. for the law did not prohibit men from being healed upon the sabbaths; [on the contrary] it even circumcised them upon that day, and gave command that the offices should be performed by the priests for the people; yea, it did not disallow the healing even of dumb animals. both at siloam and on frequent subsequent occasions, did he perform cures upon the sabbath; and for this reason many used to resort to him on the sabbath days. for the law commanded them to abstain from every servile work, that is, from all grasping after wealth which is procured by trading and by other worldly business; but it exhorted them to attend to the exercises of the soul, which consist in reflection, and to addresses of a beneficial kind for their neighbor's benefit. and therefore the lord reproved those who unjustly blamed him for having healed upon the sabbath days. for he did not make void, but fulfilled the law, by performing the offices of the high priest, propitiating god for men, and cleansing the lepers, healing the sick, and himself suffering death, that exiled man might go forth from condemnation, and might return without fear to his own inheritance. and again, the law did not forbid those who were hungry on the sabbath days to take food lying ready at hand: it did, however, forbid them to reap and to gather into the barn."--_against heresies_, b. iv. chap. viii. sects. , . the case of the priests on the sabbath he thus presents:-- "and the priests in the temple profaned the sabbath, and were blameless. wherefore, then, were they blameless? because when in the temple they were not engaged in secular affairs, but in the service of the lord, fulfilling the law, but not going beyond it, as that man did, who of his own accord carried dry wood into the camp of god, and was justly stoned to death." book iv. chap. viii. sect. . of the necessity of keeping the ten commandments, he speaks thus:-- "now, that the law did beforehand teach mankind the necessity of following christ, he does himself make manifest, when he replied as follows to him who asked him what he should do that he might inherit eternal life: 'if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.' but upon the other asking, 'which?' again the lord replied: 'do not commit adultery, do not kill, do not steal, do not bear false witness, honor father and mother, and thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself,'--setting as an ascending series before those who wished to follow him, the precepts of the law, as the entrance into life; and what he then said to one, he said to all. but when the former said, 'all these have i done' (and most likely he had not kept them, for in that case the lord would not have said to him, 'keep the commandments'), the lord, exposing his covetousness, said to him, 'if thou wilt be perfect, go, sell all that thou hast, and distribute to the poor; and come follow me,' promising to those who would act thus, the portion belonging to the apostles.... but he taught that they should obey the commandments which god enjoined from the beginning, and do away with their former covetousness by good works, and follow after christ." book iv. chap. xii. sect. . irenæus certainly teaches a very different doctrine from that of justin martyr concerning the commandments. he believed that men must keep the commandments, in order to enter eternal life. he says further:-- "and [we must] not only abstain from evil deeds, but even from the desires after them. now he did not teach us these things as being opposed to the law, but as fulfilling the law, and implanting in us the varied righteousness of the law. that would have been contrary to the law, if he had commanded his disciples to do anything which the law had prohibited." book iv. chap. xiii. sect. . he also makes the observance of the decalogue the test of true piety. thus he says:-- "they (the jews) had therefore a law, a course of discipline, and a prophecy of future things. for god at the first, indeed, warning them by means of natural precepts, which from the beginning he had implanted in mankind, that is, by means of the decalogue (which, if any one does not observe, he has no salvation), did then demand nothing more of them." book iv. chap. xv. sect. . the precepts of the decalogue he rightly terms "natural precepts," that is, precepts which constitute "the work of the law" written by nature in the hearts of all men, but marred by the presence of the carnal mind or law of sin in the members. that this law of god pertains alike to jews and to gentiles, he thus affirms:-- "inasmuch, then, as all natural precepts are common to us and to them (the jews), they had in them, indeed, the beginning and origin; but in us they have received growth and completion." book iv. chap. xiii. sect. . it is certain that irenæus held the decalogue to be now binding on all men; for he says of it in the quotation above, "which if any one does not observe, he has no salvation." but, though not consistent with his statement respecting the decalogue as the law of nature, he classes the sabbath with circumcision, when speaking of it as a sign between god and israel, and says, "the sabbaths taught that we should continue day by day in god's service." "moreover the sabbath of god, that is, the kingdom, was, as it were, indicated by created things; in which [kingdom], the man who shall have persevered in serving god shall, in a state of rest, partake of god's table." he says also of abraham that he was "without observance of sabbaths." book iv. chap. xvi. sects. , . but in the same chapter he again asserts the perpetuity and authority of the decalogue in these words:-- "preparing man for this life, the lord himself did speak in his own person to all alike the words of the decalogue; and therefore, in like manner, do they remain permanently with us, receiving, by means of his advent in the flesh, extension and increase, but not abrogation." section . this statement establishes the authority of each of the ten commandments in the gospel dispensation. yet irenæus seems to have regarded the fourth commandment as only a typical precept, and not of perpetual obligation like the others. irenæus regarded the sabbath as something which pointed forward to the kingdom of god. yet in stating this doctrine he actually indicates the origin of the sabbath at creation, though, as we have seen, elsewhere asserting that it was not kept by abraham. thus, in speaking of the reward to be given the righteous, he says:-- "these are [to take place] in the times of the kingdom, that is, upon the seventh day, which has been sanctified, in which god rested from all the works which he created, which is the true sabbath of the righteous, in which they shall not be engaged in any earthly occupation; but shall have a table at hand prepared for them by god, supplying them with all sorts of dishes." book v. chap. xxxiii. sect. . and he elsewhere says: "in as many days as this world was made, in so many thousand years shall it be concluded.... for the day of the lord is as a thousand years: and in six days created things were completed: it is evident, therefore, that they will come to an end at the sixth thousand year." book v. chap. xxviii. sect. . though irenæus is made by first-day writers to bear a very explicit testimony that sunday is the christian sabbath, the following, which constitutes the seventh fragment of what is called the "lost writings of irenæus," is the only instance which i have found in a careful search through all his works in which he even mentions the first day. here is the entire first-day testimony of this father:-- "this [custom], of not bending the knee upon sunday, is a symbol of the resurrection, through which we have been set free, by the grace of christ, from sins, and from death, which has been put to death under him. now this custom took its rise from apostolic times, as the blessed irenæus, the martyr and bishop of lyons, declares in his treatise _on easter_, in which he makes mention of pentecost also; upon which [feast] we do not bend the knee, because it is of equal significance with the lord's day, for the reason already alleged concerning it." this is something very remarkable. it is not what irenæus said, after all, but is what an unknown writer, in a work entitled _quæs. et resp. ad othod._, says of him. and all that this writer says of irenæus is that he declares the custom of not kneeling upon sunday "took its rise from apostolic times"! it does not even appear that irenæus even used the term lord's day as a title for the first day of the week. its use in the present quotation is by the unknown writer to whom we are indebted for the statement here given respecting irenæus. and this writer, whoever he be, is of the opinion that the pentecost is of equal consequence with the so-called lord's day! and well he may so judge, inasmuch as both of these catholic festivals are only established by the authority of the church. the testimony of irenæus in behalf of sunday does therefore amount simply to this: that the resurrection is to be commemorated by "not bending the knee upon sunday"! the fiftieth fragment of the "lost writings of irenæus" is derived from the nitrian collection of syriac mss. it relates to the resurrection of the dead. in a note appended to it the syriac editor says of irenæus that he "wrote to an alexandrian to the effect that it is right, with respect to the feast of the resurrection, that we should celebrate it upon the first day of the week." no extant writing of irenæus contains this statement, but it is likely that the syriac editor possessed some portion of his works now lost. and here again it is worthy of notice that we have from irenæus only the plain name of "first day of the week." as to the manner of celebrating it, the only thing which he sets forth is "not bending the knee upon sunday." in the thirty-eighth fragment of his "lost writings" he quotes col. : , but whether with reference to the seventh day, or merely respecting the ceremonial sabbaths, his comments do not determine. we have now given every statement of irenæus which bears upon the sabbath and the sunday. it is manifest that the advocates of first-day sacredness have made irenæus testify in its behalf to suit themselves. he alludes to the first day of the week once or twice, but never uses for it the title of lord's day or christian sabbath, and the _only_ thing which he mentions as entering into the celebration of the festival was that christians should not kneel in prayer on that day! by first-day writers, irenæus is made to bear an explicit testimony that sunday is the lord's day and the christian sabbath! and to give great weight to this alleged fact, they say that he was the disciple of polycarp, who was the disciple of john: and whereas john speaks of the lord's day, irenæus, who must have known what he meant by the term, says that the lord's day is the first day of the week! but polycarp, in his epistle, does not even mention the first day of the week, and irenæus, in his extended writings, mentions it only twice, and that in "lost fragments," preserved at secondhand, and in neither instance does he call it any thing but plain "first day of the week"! and the only honor which he mentions as due this day is that the knee should not be bent upon it! and even this was not spoken of every sunday in the year, but only of "easter sunday," the anniversary of christ's resurrection! here we might dismiss the case of irenæus. but our first-day friends are determined at least to connect him with the use of lord's day as a name for sunday. they therefore bring forward eusebius, who wrote years later, to prove that irenæus did call sunday by that name. eusebius alludes to the controversy in the time of irenæus, respecting the _annual_ celebration of christ's resurrection in what was called the festival of the passover. he says (eccl. hist., b. v. chap. xxiii.) that the bishops of different countries, and irenæus was of the number, decreed "that the mystery of our lord's resurrection should be celebrated on no other day than the lord's day; and that on this day alone we should observe the close of the paschal fasts," and not on the fourteenth of the first month as practiced by the other party. and in the next chapter, eusebius represents irenæus as writing a letter to this effect to the bishop of rome. but observe, eusebius does not quote the words of any of these bishops, but simply gives their decisions in his own language. there is therefore no proof that they used the term lord's day instead of first day of the week. but we have evidence that in the decision of this case which irenæus sent forth, he used the term "first day of the week." for the introduction to the fiftieth fragment of his "lost writings," already quoted, gives an ancient statement of his words in this decision, as plain "first day of the week." it is eusebius who gives us the term lord's day in recording what was said by these bishops concerning the first day of the week. in his time, a. d. , lord's day had become a common designation of sunday. but it was not such in the time of irenæus, a. d. . we have found no writer who flourished before him who applies it to sunday; it is not so applied by irenæus; and we shall find no decisive instance of such use till the close of the second century. testimony of dionysius, bishop of corinth. this father, about a. d. , wrote a letter to the roman church, in which are found these words:-- "we passed this holy lord's day, in which we read your letter, from the constant reading of which we shall be able to draw admonition, even as from the reading of the former one you sent us written through clement." this is the earliest use of the term lord's day to be found in the fathers. but it cannot be called a decisive testimony that sunday was thus known at this date, inasmuch as every writer who precedes dionysius calls it "first day of the week," "eighth day," or "sunday," but never once by this title; and dionysius says nothing to indicate that sunday was intended, or to show that he did not refer to that day which alone has the right to be called the lord's "holy day." isa. : . we have found several express testimonies to the sacredness of the sabbath in the writers already examined. testimony of melito, bishop of sardis. this father wrote about a. d. . we know little of this writer except the titles of his books, which eusebius has preserved to us. one of these titles is this: "on the lord's day." but it should be remembered that down to this date no writer has called sunday the lord's day; and that every one who certainly spoke of that day called it by some other name than lord's day. to say, therefore, as do first-day writers, that melito wrote of sunday, is to speak without just warrant. he uses #greek: tês kyriakês#, "the lord's," but does not join with it #hêmera#, a "day," as does john. he wrote of something pertaining to the lord, but it is not certain that it was the lord's day. moreover, clement, who next uses this term, uses it in a mystical sense. testimony of the heretic bardesanes. bardesanes, the syrian, flourished about a. d. . he belonged to the gnostic sect of valentinians, and abandoning them, "devised errors of his own." in his "book of the laws of countries," he replies to the views of astrologers who assert that the stars govern men's actions. he shows the folly of this by enumerating the peculiarities of different races and sects. in doing this, he speaks of the strictness with which the jews kept the sabbath. of the new sect called christians, which "christ at his advent planted in every country," he says:-- "on one day, the first of the week, we assemble ourselves together, and on the days of the readings we abstain from [taking] sustenance." this shows that the gnostics used sunday as the day for religious assemblies. whether he recognized others besides gnostics, as christians, we cannot say. we find no allusion, however, to sunday as a day of abstinence from labor, except so far as necessary for their meetings. what their days of fasting, which are here alluded to, were, cannot now be determined. it is also worthy of notice that this writer, who certainly speaks of sunday, and this as late as a. d. , does not call it lord's day, nor give it any sacred title whatever, but speaks of it as "first day of the week." no writer down to a. d. , who is known to speak of sunday, calls it the lord's day. chapter vi. theophilus--clement of alexandria. testimony of theophilus of antioch. this father became bishop of antioch in a. d. , and died a. d. . first-day writers represent him as saying, "both _custom_ and _reason_ challenge from us that we should honor the lord's day, seeing on that day it was that our lord jesus completed his resurrection from the dead." these writers, however, give no reference to the particular place in the works of theophilus where this is to be found. i have carefully examined every paragraph of all the extant writings of this father, and that several times over, without discovering any such statement. i am constrained, therefore, to state that nothing of the kind above quoted is to be found in theophilus! and further than this, the term lord's day does not occur in this writer, nor does he even refer to the first day of the week except in quoting genesis , in a _single instance_! but though he makes no mention of the sunday festival, he makes the following reference to the sabbath in his remarks concerning the creation of the world:-- "moreover [they spoke], concerning the seventh day, which all men acknowledge; but the most know not that what among the hebrews is called the 'sabbath,' is translated into greek the 'seventh' (#hebdomas#), a name which is adopted by every nation, although they know not the reason of the appellation." _theophilus to autolycus_, b. ii. chap. xii. though theophilus is in error in saying that the hebrew word _sabbath_ is translated into greek _seventh_, his statement indicates that he held the origin of the sabbath to be when god sanctified the seventh day. these are the words of scripture, as given by him, on which he wrote the above:-- "and on the sixth day god finished his works which he made, and rested on the seventh day from all his works which he made. and god blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it; because in it he rested from all his works which god began to create." book ii. chap. xi. in the fifteenth chapter of this book, he compares those who "keep the law and commandments of god" to the fixed stars, while the "wandering stars" are "a type of the men who have wandered from god, abandoning his law and commandments." of the law itself, he speaks thus:-- "we have learned a holy law; but we have as law-giver him who is really god, who teaches us to act righteously, and to be pious, and to do good." after quoting all but the third and fourth commandments, he says: "of this great and wonderful law which tends to all righteousness, the ten heads are such as we have already rehearsed." book iii. chap. ix. he makes the keeping of the law and commandments the condition of a part in the resurrection to eternal life:-- "for god has given us a law and holy commandments; and every one who keeps these can be saved, and, obtaining the resurrection, can inherit incorruption." book ii. chap. xxvii. and yet this man who bears such a noble testimony to the commandments and the law, and who says not one word concerning the festival of sunday, is made to speak explicitly in behalf of this so-called christian sabbath! testimony of clement of alexandria, a. d. . this father was born about a. d. , and died about a. d. . he wrote about a. d. , and is the first of the fathers who uses the term lord's day in such a manner as possibly to signify by it the first day of the week. and yet he expressly speaks of the sabbath as a day of rest, and of the first day of the week as a day for labor! the change of the sabbath and the institution of the so-called christian sabbath were alike unknown to him. of the ten commandments, he speaks thus:-- "we have the decalogue given by moses, which, indicating by an elementary principle, simple and of one kind, defines the designation of sins in a way conducive to salvation," etc.--_the instructor_, b. iii. chap. xii. he thus alludes to the sabbath:-- "thus the lord did not hinder from doing good while keeping the sabbath; but allowed us to communicate of those divine mysteries, and of that holy light, to those who are able to receive them."--_the miscellanies_, b. i. chap. i. "to restrain one's self from doing good is the work of vice; but to keep from wrong is the beginning of salvation. so the sabbath, by abstinence from evils, seems to indicate self-restraint." book iv. chap. iii. he calls love the lord of the sabbath:-- "he convicted the man, who boasted that he had fulfilled the injunctions of the law, of not loving his neighbor; and it is by beneficence that the love which, according to the gnostic ascending scale, is lord of the sabbath, proclaims itself." book iv. chap. vi. referring to the case of the priests in eze. : , he says:-- "and they purify themselves seven days, the period in which creation was consummated. for on the seventh day the rest is celebrated; and on the eighth, he brings a propitiation, as it is written in ezekiel, according to which propitiation the promise is to be received." book iv. chap. xxv. we come now to the first instance in the fathers in which the term lord's day is perhaps applied to sunday. clement is the father who does this, and he very properly substantiates it with evidence. he does not say that saint john thus applied this name, but he finds authority for this in the writings of the heathen philosopher plato, who, he thinks, spoke of it prophetically! "and the lord's day plato prophetically speaks of in the tenth book of the _republic_, in these words: 'and when seven days have passed to each of them in the meadow, on the eighth day they are to set out and arrive in four days.' by the meadow is to be understood the fixed sphere, as being a mild and genial spot, and the locality of the pious; and by the seven days each motion of the seven planets, and the whole practical art which speeds to the end of the rest. but after the wandering orbs the journey leads to heaven, that is, to the eighth motion and day. and he says that souls are gone on the fourth day, pointing out the passage through the four elements." book v. chap. xiv. by the eighth day to which clement here applies the name of lord's day the first day is possibly intended, though he appears to speak solely of mystical days. but having said thus much in behalf of the eighth day, he in the very next sentence commences to establish from the greek writers the sacredness of that seventh day which the hebrews hallowed. this shows that whatever regard he might have for the eighth day, he certainly cherished the seventh day as sacred. thus he continues:-- "but the seventh day is recognized as sacred, not by the hebrews only, but also by the greeks; according to which the whole world of all animals and plants revolves. hesiod says of it:-- "'the first, and fourth, and seventh days were held sacred.' "and again: 'and on the seventh the sun's resplendent orb.' "and homer: 'and on the seventh then came the sacred day.' "and: 'the seventh was sacred.' "and again: 'it was the seventh day, and all things were accomplished.' "and again: 'and on the seventh morn we leave the stream of acheron.' "callimachus the poet also writes: 'it was the seventh morn, and they had all things done.' "and again: 'among good days is the seventh day, and the seventh race.' "and: 'the seventh is among the prime, and the seventh is perfect.' "and: 'now all the seven were made in starry heaven, in circles shining as the years appear.' "the elegies of solon, too, intensely deify the seventh day." book v. chap. xiv. some of these quotations are not now found in the writings which clement cites. and whether or not he rightly applies them to the seventh-day sabbath, the fact that he does so apply them is incontestible proof that he honored that day as sacred, whatever might also be his regard for that day which he distinguishes as the eighth. in book vi., chapter v., he alludes to the celebration of some of the annual sabbaths. and in chapter xvi., he thus speaks of the fourth commandment:-- "and the fourth word is that which intimates that the world was created by god, and that _he gave us the seventh day as a rest_, on account of the trouble that there is in life. for god is incapable of weariness, and suffering, and want. _but we who bear flesh need rest. the seventh day, therefore, is proclaimed a rest_--abstraction from ills--preparing for the primal day, our true rest; which, in truth, is the first creation of light, in which all things are viewed and possessed. from this day the first wisdom and knowledge illuminate us." this certainly teaches that the sabbath was made for man, and that he now needs it as a day of rest. it also indicates that clement recognized the authority of the fourth commandment, for he treats of the ten commandments in order, and comments on what each enjoins or forbids. in the next paragraph, however, he makes some remarkable suggestions. thus he says:-- "having reached this point, we must mention these things by the way; since the discourse has turned on the seventh and the eighth. for the eighth may possibly turn out to be properly the seventh, and the seventh, manifestly the sixth, and the latter,[d] properly the sabbath, and the seventh, a day of work. for the creation of the world was concluded in six days." book vi. chap. xvi. clement thinks it possible that the eighth day (sunday), may really be the seventh day, and that the seventh day (saturday) may in fact be the true sixth day. but let not our sunday friends exult at this, for clement by no means helps their case. having said that sunday may be properly the seventh day, and saturday manifestly the sixth day, he calls "the latter properly the sabbath, and the seventh a day of work"! by "the latter," of necessity must be understood the day last mentioned, which he says should be called not the seventh, but the sixth; and by "the seventh," must certainly be intended that day which he says is not the eighth, but the seventh, that is to say, sunday. it follows therefore in the estimation of clement that sunday was a day of ordinary labor, and saturday, the day of rest. he had an excellent opportunity to say that the eighth day or sunday was not only the seventh day, but also the true sabbath, but instead of doing this he gives this honor to the day which he says is not the seventh but the sixth, and declares that the real seventh day or sunday is "a day of work." and he proceeds at length to show the sacredness and importance of the number six. his opinion of the numbering of the days is unimportant; but the fact that this father who is the first writer that connects the term lord's day with the eighth day or sunday, does expressly represent that day as one of ordinary labor, and does also give to the previous day the honors of the sabbath is something that should shut the mouths of those who claim him as a believer in the so-called christian sabbath. in the same chapter, this writer alludes to the sabbath vaguely, apparently understanding it to prefigure the rest that remains to the people of god:-- "rightly, then, they reckon the number seven motherless and childless, interpreting the sabbath, and figuratively expressing the nature of the rest, in which 'they neither marry nor are given in marriage any more.'" the following quotation completes the testimony of clement. he speaks of the precept concerning fasting, that it is fulfilled by abstinence from sinful pleasure. and thus he says:-- "he fasts, then, according to the law, abstaining from bad deeds, and, according to the perfection of the gospel, from evil thoughts. temptations are applied to him, not for his purification, but, as we have said, for the good of his neighbors, if, making trial of toils and pains, he has despised and passed them by. the same holds of pleasure. for it is the highest achievement for one who has had trial of it, afterwards to abstain. for what great thing is it, if a man restrains himself in what he knows not? he, in fulfillment of the precept, according to the gospel, keeps the lord's day, when he abandons an evil disposition, and assumes that of the gnostic, glorifying the lord's resurrection in himself." book vii. chap. xii. clement asserts that one fasts according to the law when he abstains from evil deeds, and, according to the gospel, when he abstains from evil thoughts. he shows how the precept respecting fasting is fulfilled when he speaks of one who "in fulfillment of the precept, according to the gospel, keeps the lord's day when he abandons an evil disposition." this abandonment of an evil disposition, according to clement, keeps the lord's day, and glorifies the lord's resurrection. but this duty pertains to no one day of the week, but to all alike, so that he seems evidently to inculcate a perpetual lord's day, even as justin martyr enjoins the observance of a "perpetual sabbath," to be acceptably sanctified by those who maintain true repentance. though these writers are not always consistent with themselves, yet two facts go to show that clement in this book means just what his words literally import, viz., that the keeping of the lord's day and the glorifying of the resurrection is not the observance of a certain day of the week, but the performance of a work which embraces every day of one's whole life. . the first of these facts is his express statement of this doctrine in the first paragraph of the seventh chapter of this book. thus he says:-- "now, we are commanded to reverence and to honor the same one, being persuaded that he is word, saviour, and leader, and by him, the father, not on special days, as some others, but _doing this continually in our whole life_, and in every way. certainly the elect race, justified by the precept, says, 'seven times a day have i praised thee.' whence _not_ in a specified place, or selected temple, or at _certain festivals_, and on _appointed days_, but _during his whole life_, the gnostic in every place, even if he be alone by himself, and wherever he has any of those who have exercised the like faith, honors god; that is, acknowledges his gratitude for the knowledge of the way to live." book vii. chap. vii. . the second of these facts is that in book vi., chapter xvi., as already quoted, he expressly represents sunday as "a day of work." certainly clement of alexandria should not be cited as teaching the change of the sabbath, or advocating the so-called christian sabbath. chapter vii. testimony of tertullian, a. d. . this writer contradicts himself in the most extraordinary manner concerning the sabbath and the law of god. he asserts that the sabbath was abolished by christ, and elsewhere emphatically declares that he did not abolish it. he says that joshua violated the sabbath, and then expressly declares that he did not violate it. he says that christ broke the sabbath, and then shows that he never did this. he represents the eighth day as more honorable than the seventh, and elsewhere states just the reverse. he asserts that the law is abolished, and in other places affirms its perpetual obligation. he speaks of the lord's day as the eighth day, and is the second of the early writers who makes an application of this term to sunday, if we allow clement to have really spoken of it. but though he thus uses the term like clement he also like him teaches a perpetual lord's day, or, like justin martyr, a perpetual sabbath in the observance of every day. and with the observance of sunday as the lord's day he brings in "offerings for the dead" and the perpetual use of the sign of the cross. but he expressly affirms that these things rest, not upon the authority of the scriptures, but wholly upon that of tradition and custom. and though he speaks of the sabbath as abrogated by christ, he expressly contradicts this by asserting that christ "did not at all rescind the sabbath," and that he imparted an additional sanctity to that day which from the beginning had been consecrated by the benediction of the father. this strange mingling of light and darkness plainly indicates the age in which this author lived. he was not so far removed from the time of the apostles but that many clear rays of divine truth shone upon him; and he was far enough advanced in the age of apostasy to have its dense darkness materially affect him. he stood on the line between expiring day and advancing night. sometimes the law of god was unspeakably sacred; at other times tradition was of higher authority than the law. sometimes divine institutions were alone precious in his estimation; at others he was better satisfied with those which were sustained only by custom and tradition. tertullian's first reference to sunday is found in that part of his apology in which he excuses his brethren from the charge of sun-worship. thus he says:-- "others, again, certainly with more information and greater verisimilitude, believe that the sun is our god. we shall be counted persians, perhaps, though we do not worship the orb of day painted on a piece of linen cloth, having himself everywhere in his own disk. the idea, no doubt, has originated from our being known to turn to the east in prayer. but you, many of you, also, under pretense sometimes of worshiping the heavenly bodies, move your lips in the direction of the sunrise. in the same way, if we devote sunday to rejoicing, from a far different reason than sun-worship, we have some resemblance to those of you who devote the day of saturn to ease and luxury, though they, too, go far away from jewish ways, of which indeed they are ignorant."--_thelwell's translation_, sect. . several important facts are presented in this quotation. . sunday was an ancient heathen festival in honor of the sun. . those christians who observed the festival of sunday were claimed by the heathen as sun-worshipers. . the entrance of the sunday festival into the church in an age of apostasy when men very generally honored it, was not merely not difficult to be effected, it was actually difficult to be prevented. it would seem from the closing sentence that some of the heathen used the seventh day as a day of ease and luxury. but mr. reeve's translation gives a very different sense. he renders tertullian thus:-- "we solemnize the day after saturday in contradistinction to those who call this day their sabbath, and devote it to ease and eating, deviating from the old jewish customs, which they are now very ignorant of." the persons here mentioned so contemptuously could not be heathens, for they do not call any day "their sabbath." nor could they be jews, as is plain from the form of expression used. if we accept mr. reeve's translation, these persons were christians who observe the seventh day. tertullian does not say that the sunday festival was observed by divine authority, but that they might distinguish themselves from those who call the seventh day the sabbath. tertullian again declares that his brethren did not observe the days held sacred by the jews. "we neither accord with the jews in their peculiarities in regard to food, nor in their sacred days."--_apology_, sect. . but those christians who would not keep the sabbath because the festival of sunday was in their estimation more worthy of honor, or more convenient to observe, were greatly given to the observance of other days, in common with the heathen, besides sunday. thus tertullian charges home upon them this sin:-- "the holy spirit upbraids the jews with their holy days. 'your sabbaths, and new moons, and ceremonies,' says he, 'my soul hateth.' by us (to whom sabbaths are strange, and the new moons, and festivals formerly beloved by god) the saturnalia and new year's and mid-winter's festivals and matronalia are frequented--presents come and go--new year's gifts--games join their noise--banquets join their din! oh! better fidelity of the nations to their own sect, which claims no solemnity of the christians for itself! not the lord's day, not pentecost, even if they had known them, would they have shared with us; for they would fear lest they should seem to be christians. _we_ are not apprehensive lest we seem to be _heathens_! if any indulgence is to be granted to the flesh, you have it. i will not say your own days, but more too; for to the _heathens_ each festive day occurs but once annually; _you_ have a festive day every eighth day."--_on idolatry_, chap. xiv. these sunday-festival christians, "to whom sabbaths" were "strange," could not have kept sunday as a sabbath. they had never heard that by divine authority the sabbath was changed from the seventh to the first day of the week, and that sunday is the christian sabbath. let any candid man read the above words from tertullian, and then deny, if he can, that these strangers to the sabbath, and observers of heathen festivals, were not a body of apostatizing christians! hereafter tertullian will give an excellent commentary on his quotation from isaiah. it seems from him that the so-called lord's day came once in eight days. were these words to be taken in their most obvious sense, then it would come one day later each week than it did the preceding week, and thus it would come successively on all the days of the week in order, at intervals of eight days. he might in such case well say:-- "however, _every_ day is the lord's; every hour, every time, is apt for baptism; if there is a difference in the _solemnity_, in the _grace_, distinction there is none."--_on baptism_, chap. xix. but it seems that tertullian by the eighth day intended sunday. and here is something from him relative to the manner of keeping it. thus he says:-- "in the matter of _kneeling_ also, prayer is subject to diversity of observance, through the act of some few who abstain from kneeling on the sabbath; and since this dissension is particularly on its trial before the churches, the lord will give his grace that the dissentients may either yield, or else indulge their opinion without offense to others. we, however (just as we have received), only on the day of the lord's resurrection ought to guard not only against kneeling, but every posture and office of solicitude; deferring even our businesses, lest we give any place to the devil. similarly, too, in the period of pentecost; which period we distinguish by the same solemnity of exultation. but who would hesitate _every_ day to prostrate himself before god, at least in the first prayer with which we enter on the daylight."--_on prayer_, chap. xxiii. a more literal translation of this passage would expressly connect the term lord's day with the day of christ's resurrection, the original being "die dominico resurrexionis." the special weekly honor which tertullian would have men confer solely upon sunday was to pray on that day in a _standing_ posture. and somewhat to his annoyance, "some few" would thus act with reference to the sabbath. there is, however, some reference to the deferral of business on sunday. and this is worthy of notice, for it is the first sentence we have discovered that looks like abstinence from labor on sunday, and we shall not find another before the time of constantine's famous sunday law, a. d. . but this passage is far from asserting that labor on sunday was sinful. it speaks of "deferring even our businesses;" but this does not necessarily imply anything beyond its postponement during the hours devoted to religious services. and we shall find nothing in tertullian, nor in his cotemporaries, that will go beyond this, while we shall find much to restrict us to the interpretation of his words here given. tertullian could not say that sabbaths were strange to him and his brethren if they religiously refrained from labor on each sunday. but let us hear him again concerning the observance of sunday and kindred practices:-- "we take also, in meetings before daybreak, and from the hand of none but the presidents, the sacrament of the eucharist, which the lord both commanded to be eaten at meal-times, and enjoined to be taken by all [alike]. as often as the anniversary comes round, we make offerings for the dead as birth-day honors. we count fasting or kneeling in worship on the lord's day to be unlawful. we rejoice in the same privilege also from easter to whit-sunday. we feel pained should any wine or bread, even though our own, be cast upon the ground. at every forward step and movement, at every going in and out, when we put on our clothes and shoes, when we bathe, when we sit at table, when we light the lamps, on couch, on seat, in all the ordinary actions of daily life, we trace upon the forehead the sign [of the cross]. "if, for these and other such rules, you insist upon having positive scripture injunction, you will find none. tradition will be held forth to you as the originator of them, custom, as their strengthener, and faith, as their observer. that reason will support tradition, and custom, and faith, you will either yourself perceive, or learn from some one who has."--_de corona_, sects. and . the things which he counted unlawful on sunday he expressly names. these are fasting and kneeling on that day. but ordinary labor does not come into his list of things unlawful on that day. and now observe what progress apostasy and superstition had made in other things also. "offerings for the dead" were regularly made, and the sign of the cross was repeated as often as god would have men rehearse his commandments. see deut. : - . and now if you wish to know tertullian's authority for the sunday festival, offerings for the dead, and the sign of the cross, he frankly tells you what it is. he had no authority from the scriptures. custom and tradition were all that he could offer. modern divines can find plenty of authority, from the scriptures, as they assert, for maintaining the so-called lord's day. tertullian knew of none. he took the sunday festival, offerings for the dead, and the sign of the cross, on the authority of custom and tradition; if you take the first on such authority, why do you not, also, the other two? but tertullian finds it necessary to write a second defense of his brethren from the charge of being sun-worshipers, a charge directly connected with their observance of the festival of sunday. here are his words:-- "others, with greater regard to good manners, it must be confessed, suppose that the sun is the god of the christians, because it is a well-known fact that we pray towards the east, or because we make sunday a day of festivity. what then? do you do less than this? do not many among you, with an affectation of sometimes worshiping the heavenly bodies likewise, move your lips in the direction of the sunrise? it is you, at all events, who have even admitted the sun into the calendar of the week; and you have selected its day [sunday], in preference to the preceding day, as the most suitable in the week for either an entire abstinence from the bath, or for its postponement until the evening, or for taking rest, and for banqueting. by resorting to these customs, you deliberately deviate from your own religious rites to those of strangers. for the jewish feasts are the sabbath and 'the purification,' and jewish also are the ceremonies of the lamps, and the fasts of unleavened bread, and the 'littoral prayers,' all which institutions and practices are of course foreign from your gods. wherefore, that i may return from this digression, you who reproach us with the sun and sunday should consider your proximity to us. we are not far off from your saturn and your days of rest."--_ad nationes_, b. i. chap. xiii. tertullian in this discourse addresses himself to the nations still in idolatry. the heathen festival of sunday, which was with some nations more ancient, had been established among the romans at a comparatively recent date, though earlier than the time of justin martyr, the first christian writer in whom an authentic mention of the day is found. the heathen reproached the early sunday christians with being sun-worshipers, "because," says tertullian, "we pray towards the east, or because we make sunday a day of festivity." and how does tertullian answer this grave charge? he could not say, we do it by command of god to honor the first day of the week, for he expressly states in a former quotation that no such precept exists. so he retorts thus: "what then? do you [heathen] do less than this?" and he adds: "you have selected its day [sunday] in preference to the preceding day" (saturday), etc. that is to say, tertullian wishes to know why, if the heathen could choose sunday in preference to saturday, the christians could not have the same privilege! could there be a stronger incidental evidence that sunday was cherished by the early apostatizing christians, not because commanded of god, but because it was generally observed by their heathen neighbors, and therefore more convenient to them? but tertullian next avows his faith in the ten commandments as "the rules of our regenerate life," that is to say, the rules which govern christian men; and he gives the preference to the seventh day over the eighth:-- "i must also say something about the period of the soul's birth, that i may omit nothing incidental in the whole process. a mature and regular birth takes place, as a general rule, at the commencement of the tenth month. they who theorize respecting numbers, honor the number ten as the parent of all the others, and as imparting perfection to the human nativity. for my own part, i prefer viewing this measure of time in reference to god, as if implying that the ten months rather initiated man into the ten commandments; so that the numerical estimate of the time needed to consummate our natural birth should correspond to the numerical classification of _the rules of our regenerate life_. but inasmuch as birth is also completed with the seventh month, i more readily recognize in this number than in the eighth the honor of a numerical agreement with the sabbatical period; so that the month in which god's image is sometimes produced in a human birth, shall in its number tally with the day on which god's creation was completed and hallowed."--_de anima_, chap. xxxvii. this kind of reasoning is of course destitute of any force. but in adducing such an argument tertullian avows his faith in the ten commandments as the rule of the christian's life, gives the preference to the seventh day as the sabbath, and deduces the origin of the sabbath from god's act of hallowing the seventh day at creation. though tertullian elsewhere, as we shall see, speaks lightly of the law of god, and represents it as abolished, his next testimony most sacredly honors that law, and while acknowledging the sabbath as one of its precepts, he recognizes the authority of the whole code. thus he says:-- "of how deep guilt, then, adultery--which is likewise a matter of fornication, in accordance with its criminal function--is to be accounted, the law of god first comes to hand to show us; if it is true [as it is], that after interdicting the superstitious service of alien gods, and the making of idols themselves, after commending [to religious observance] the veneration of the sabbath, after commanding a religious regard toward parents, second [only to that] toward god, [that law] laid, as the next substratum in strengthening and fortifying such counts, no other precept than 'thou shalt not commit adultery.'"--_on modesty_, chap. v. and of this precept tertullian presently tells us that it stands "in the very forefront of _the most holy law_, among the primary counts of _the celestial edict_." in his treatise "on fasting," chapter xiv., he terms "the sabbath--a day never to be kept as a fast except at the passover season, according to a reason elsewhere given." and in chapter xv., he excepts from the two weeks in which meat was not eaten "the sabbaths" and "the lord's days." but in his "answer to the jews," chapter ii., he represents the law as variously modified from adam to christ; he denies "that the sabbath is still to be observed;" classes it with circumcision; declares that adam was "inobservant of the sabbath," affirms the same of abel, noah, enoch, and melchizedek, and asserts that lot "was freed from the conflagration of the sodomites" "for the merits of righteousness, without observance of the law." and in the beginning of chapter iii., he again classes the sabbath with circumcision, and asserts that abraham did not "observe the sabbath." in chapter iv., he declares that "the observance of the sabbath" was "temporary." and he continues thus:-- "for the jews say, that from the beginning god sanctified the seventh day, by resting on it from all his works which he made; and that thence it was, likewise, that moses said to the people: 'remember the day of the sabbaths,'" etc. now see how tertullian and his brethren disposed of this commandment respecting the seventh day:-- "whence we [christians] understand that _we_ still more ought to observe a sabbath from all 'servile work' always, and not only every seventh day, but through all time." that is to say in plain language, they would, under pretense of keeping every day as a sabbath, not only work on the seventh day of the week, but on all the days of the week. but this plainly proves that tertullian did not think the seventh day was superseded by the first. and thus he proceeds:-- "and through this arises the question for us, _what_ sabbath god willed us to keep." our first-day friends quote tertullian in behalf of what they call the christian sabbath. had he believed in such an institution he would certainly have named it in answer to this question. but mark his answer:-- "for the scriptures point to a sabbath eternal and a sabbath temporal. for isaiah the prophet says, '_your_ sabbaths my soul hateth.' and in another place he says, 'my sabbaths ye have profaned.' whence we discern that the temporal sabbath is human, and the eternal sabbath is accounted divine." this temporal sabbath is the seventh day; this eternal sabbath is the keeping of all days alike, as tertullian affirms that he and those with him did. he next declares that isaiah's prediction respecting the sabbath in the new earth (isa. : , ), was "fulfilled in the times of christ, when all flesh--that is, every nation--came to adore in jerusalem god the father." and he adds: "thus, therefore, before this temporal sabbath [the seventh day], there was withal an eternal sabbath foreshown and foretold," _i. e._, the keeping of all days alike. and this he fortifies by the assertion that the holy men before moses did not observe the seventh day. and in proof that the sabbath was one day to cease, he cites the compassing of jericho for seven days, one of which must have been the sabbath. and to this he adds the case of the maccabees who fought certain battles on the sabbath. in due time we shall see how admirably he answers such objections as these of his own raising. in chapter vi., he repeats his theory of the "sabbath temporal" [the seventh day], and the "sabbath eternal" or the "spiritual sabbath," which is "to observe a sabbath from all 'servile works' always, and not only every seventh day, but through all time." he says that the ancient law has ceased, and that "the new law" and the "spiritual sabbath" have come. in the twentieth chapter of his first book against marcion, tertullian cites hosea : , and isa. : , , to prove that the sabbath is now abrogated. and in his fifth book against marcion, chapter iv., he quotes gal. : ; john : ; isa. : , ; amos : , and hosea : , to prove that "the creator abolished his own laws," and that he "destroyed the institutions which he set up himself." these quotations are apparently designed to prove that the sabbath is abolished, but he does not enter into argument from them. but in the nineteenth chapter of this book he quotes col. : , , and simply says of the law: "the apostle here teaches clearly how it has been abolished, even by passing from shadow to substance--that is, from figurative types to the reality, which is christ." this remark is truthful and would justly exclude the moral law from this abolition. but in chapter xxi. of his second book against marcion, he answers the very objection against the sabbath which himself has elsewhere urged, as we have noticed, drawn from the case of jericho. he says to marcion:-- "you do not, however, consider the law of the sabbath: they are human works, not divine, which it prohibits. for it says, 'six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work; but the seventh day is the sabbath of the lord thy god: in it thou shalt not do any work.' what work? of course your own. the conclusion is, that from the sabbath day he removes those works which he had before enjoined for the six days, that is, your own works; in other words, human works of daily life. now, the carrying around of the ark is evidently not an ordinary daily duty, nor yet a human one; but a rare and a sacred work, and, as being then ordered by the direct precept of god, a divine one.... thus, in the present instance, there is a clear distinction respecting the sabbath's prohibition of human labors, not divine ones. accordingly, the man who went and gathered sticks on the sabbath day was punished with death. for it was his own work which he did; and this the law forbade. they, however, who on the sabbath carried the ark round jericho, did it with impunity. for it was not their own work, but god's, which they executed, and that, too, from his express commandment." in the following chapter he again cites isa. : - , as proof that the sabbath is abolished. he will, however, presently explain this text which he has so many times used against the sabbath, and show that it actually has no such bearing. in the meantime he will again declare that joshua did not break the sabbath, and having done this he will find it in order again to assert that "the sabbath was actually then broken by joshua." in his fourth book against marcion, chapter xii., he discusses the question whether christ as lord of the sabbath had the right to annul the sabbath, and whether in his life he did actually violate it. to do this he again cites the case of jericho, and actually affirms that the sabbath was broken on that occasion, and at the same time denies it. thus he says:-- "if christ interfered with the sabbath, he simply acted after the creator's example; inasmuch as in the siege of the city of jericho the carrying around the walls of the ark of the covenant for eight days running, and therefore on a sabbath day, actually annulled the sabbath, by the creator's command--according to the opinion of those who think this of christ [luke : - ] in their ignorance that neither christ nor the creator violated the sabbath, as we shall by-and-by show. and yet the sabbath was actually then broken by joshua, so that the present charge might be alleged also against christ." the sabbath was not violated in the case of jericho, and yet it certainly was there violated! tertullian adds that if christ hated the sabbath he was in this like the creator himself, who declares [isa. : ] that he hates it. he forgets that the creator has expressly declared his great regard for the sabbath by this very prophet [chap. : , ], and overlooks the fact that what god hates is the hypocritical conduct of the people as set forth in isaiah . in his fourth book against marcion, chapter xvi., christ is mentioned as the lord of the sabbath, but nothing is said bearing upon sabbatic obligation. in chapter xxx., of this same book, he alludes to the cure wrought by christ upon the sabbath day, mentioned in luke : - , and says, "when, therefore, he did a work according to the condition prescribed by the law, he affirmed, instead of breaking, the law," etc. in the twelfth chapter of this book, however, he asserts many things relative to christ. he says that the disciples in rubbing out the ears of corn on the sabbath "had violated the holy day. christ excuses them and became their accomplice in breaking the sabbath." he argues that as the sabbath from the beginning, which he here places at the fall of the manna though elsewhere dating it from the creation, had never been designed as a day of fasting, the saviour did right in justifying the act of the disciples in the cornfield. and he terms the example of david a "colorable precedent" to justify the eating of the corn. but though he represents the saviour as "annulling the sabbath" at this time, he also asserts that in this very case "he maintains the honor of the sabbath as a day which is to be free from gloom rather than from work." he justifies the saviour in his acts of healing on the sabbath, declaring that in this he was doing that which the sabbath law did not forbid. tertullian next affirms precisely the reverse of many things which he has advanced against the sabbath, and even answers his own objections against it. thus he says:-- "in order that he might, whilst allowing that amount of work which he was about to perform for a soul, remind them what works the law of the sabbath forbade--even human works; and what it enjoined--even divine works, which might be done for the benefit of any soul, he was called 'lord of the sabbath' because he maintained the sabbath as his own institution. now, even if he had annulled the sabbath, he would have had the right to do so, as being its lord, [and] still more as he who instituted it. but lie did not utterly destroy it, although its lord, in order that it might henceforth be plain that the sabbath was not broken by the creator, even at the time when the ark was carried around jericho. for that was really god's work, which he commanded himself, and which he had ordered for the sake of the lives of his servants when exposed to the perils of war." book iv. chap. xii. in this paragraph tertullian explains the law of god in the clearest manner. he shows beyond all dispute that neither joshua nor christ ever violated it. he also declares that christ did not abolish the sabbath. in the next sentence he goes on to answer most admirably his own repeated perversion of isaiah : , , and to contradict some of his own serious errors. listen to him:-- "now, although he has in a certain place expressed an aversion of sabbaths, by calling them '_your sabbaths_,' reckoning them as men's sabbaths, not his own, because they were celebrated without the fear of god by a people full of iniquities, and loving god 'with the lip, not the heart,' he has yet put his own sabbaths (those, that is, which were kept according to his prescription) in a different position; for by the same prophet, in a later passage, he declares them to be 'true, delightful, and inviolable.' [isa : ; : .] thus _christ did not at all rescind the sabbath_: he kept the law thereof, and both in the former case did a work which was beneficial to the life of his disciples (for he indulged them with the relief of food when they were hungry), and in the present instance cured the withered hand; in each case intimating by facts, 'i came not to destroy the law, but to fulfill it,' although marcion has gagged his mouth by this word." here tertullian shows that god did not hate his own sabbath, but only the hypocrisy of those who professed to keep it. he also expressly declares that the saviour "did not at all rescind the sabbath." and now that he has his hand in, he will not cease till he has testified to a noble sabbatarian confession of faith, placing its origin at creation, and perpetuating the institution with divine safeguards and additional sanctity. moreover he asserts that christ's adversary [satan] would have had him do this to some other days, a heavy blow as it happens upon those who in modern times so stoutly maintain that he consecrated the first day of the week to take the place of the creator's rest-day. listen again to tertullian, who continues as follows:-- "for even in the case before us he fulfilled the law, while interpreting its condition; [moreover,] he exhibits in a clear light the different kinds of work, while doing what the law excepts from the sacredness of the sabbath, [and] while imparting to the sabbath day itself, which _from the beginning_ had been consecrated by the benediction of the father, an additional sanctity by his own beneficent action. for he furnished to this day divine safeguards,--a course which his adversary would have pursued for some other days, to avoid honoring the creator's sabbath, and restoring to the sabbath the works which were proper for it. since, in like manner, the prophet elisha on this day restored to life the dead son of the shunammite woman, you see, o pharisee, and you too, o marcion, how that it was [proper employment] for the creator's sabbaths of old to do good, to save life, not to destroy it; how that christ introduced nothing new, which was not after the example, the gentleness, the mercy, and the prediction also of the creator. for in this very example he fulfills the prophetic announcement of a specific healing: 'the weak hands are strengthened,' as were also 'the feeble knees' in the sick of the palsy."--_tertullian against marcion_, b. iv. chap. xii. tertullian mistakes in his reference to the shunammite woman. it was not the sabbath day on which she went to the prophet. kings : . but in the last three paragraphs quoted from him, which in his work form one continuous statement, he affirms many important truths which are worthy of careful enumeration. they are as follows:-- . christ, in determining what should, and what should not, be done on the sabbath, "was called 'lord of the sabbath,' because he maintained the sabbath as his own institution." . "the sabbath was not broken by the creator, even at the time when the ark was carried around jericho." . the reason why god expressed his aversion to "your sabbaths," as though they were "men's sabbaths, not his own," was "because they were celebrated without the fear of god, by a people full of iniquities." see isa. : , . . "by the same prophet [isa. : ; : ], he declares them [the sabbaths] to be 'true and delightful and inviolable.'" . "thus christ did not at all rescind the sabbath." . "he kept the law thereof." . "the sabbath day itself, which from the beginning had been consecrated by the benediction of the father." this language expressly assigns the origin of the sabbath to the act of the creator at the close of the first week of time. . christ imparted to the sabbath "an additional sanctity by his own beneficent action." . "he furnished to this day divine safeguards,--a course which his adversary would have pursued for some other days, to avoid honoring the creator's sabbath, and restoring to the sabbath the works which were proper for it." this last statement is indeed very remarkable. christ furnished "the creator's sabbath," the seventh day, with "divine safeguards." his adversary (the adversary of christ is the devil) would have had this course "pursued for some other days." that is to say, the devil would have been pleased had christ consecrated some other day, instead of adding to the sanctity of his father's sabbath. what tertullian says that the devil would have been pleased to have christ do, that our first-day friends now assert that he did do in the establishment of what they call the christian sabbath! such an institution, however, was never heard of in the days of the so-called christian fathers. notwithstanding tertullian's many erroneous statements concerning the sabbath and the law, he has here borne a noble testimony to the truth, and this completes his words. chapter viii. fabian--origen--hippolytus--novatian. testimony of the epistles and decrees of pope fabian. this man was bishop of rome from a. d. to a. d. . the letters ascribed to fabian were probably written at a considerably later date. we quote them, however, at the very point of time wherein they claim to have been written. their testimony is of little importance, but they breathe the self-important spirit of a roman bishop. we quote as follows:-- "you ought to know what is being done in things sacred in the church of rome, in order that, by following her example, ye may be found to be true children of her who is called your mother. accordingly, as we have received the institution from our fathers, we maintain seven deacons in the city of rome, distributed over seven districts of the state, who attend to the services enjoined on them week by week, and on the lord's days, and the solemn festivals," etc.--_epistle first._ this pope is said to have made the following decree, which contains the only other reference to the so-called lord's day to be found in the writings attributed to him:-- "we decree that on each lord's day the oblation of the altar should be made by all men and women in bread and wine, in order that by means of these sacrifices they may be released from the burden of their sins."--_decrees of fabian_, b. v. chap. vii. in these quotations we see that the roman church is made the mother of all churches, and also that the roman bishop thinks himself the rightful ruler over all christian people. and it is in fit keeping with these features of the great apostasy that the pope, instead of pointing sinful men to the sacrifice made on calvary, should "decree that on each lord's day" every person should offer an "oblation" of "bread and wine" on the altar, "that by means of these sacrifices they may be released from the burden of their sins"! testimony of origen. origen was born about a. d. , probably at alexandria in egypt. he was a man of immense learning, but unfortunately adopted a spiritualizing system in the interpretation of the scriptures that was the means of flooding the church with many errors. he wrote during the first half of the third century. i have carefully examined all the writings of every christian writer preceding the council of nice with the single exception of origen. some of his works, as yet, i have not been able to obtain. while, therefore, i give the entire testimony of every other father on the subject of inquiry, in his case i am unable to do this. but i can give it with sufficient fullness to present him in a just light. his first reference to the sabbath is a denial that it should be literally understood. thus he says:-- "there are countless multitudes of believers who, although unable to unfold methodically and clearly the results of their spiritual understanding, are nevertheless most firmly persuaded that neither ought circumcision to be understood literally, nor the rest of the sabbath, nor the pouring out of the blood of an animal, nor that answers were given by god to moses on these points. and this method of apprehension is undoubtedly suggested to the minds of all by the power of the holy spirit."--_de principiis_, b. ii. chap. vii. origen asserts that the spiritual interpretation of the scriptures whereby their literal meaning is set aside is something divinely inspired! but when this is accepted as the truth who can tell what they mean by what they say? in the next chapter he quotes isa. : , , but with reference to the subject of the soul and not to that of the sabbath. in chapter xi., alluding again to the hidden meaning of the things commanded in the scriptures, he asserts that when the christian has "returned to christ" he will, amongst other things enumerated, "see also the reasons for the festival days, and holy days, and for all the sacrifices and purifications." so it seems that origen thought the spiritual meaning of the sabbath, which he asserted in the place of the literal, was to be known only in the future state! in book iv. chapter i., he quotes col. : , but gives no exposition of its meaning. but having asserted that the things commanded in the law were not to be understood literally, and having intimated that their hidden meaning cannot be known until the saints are with christ, he proceeds in section of this chapter to prove that the literal sense of the law is impossible. one of the arguments by which he proves the point is, that men were commanded not to go out of their houses on the sabbath. he thus quotes and comments on ex. : :-- "'ye shall sit, every one in your dwellings; no one shall move from his place on the sabbath day,' which precept it is impossible to observe literally; for no man can sit a whole day so as not to move from the place where he sat down." origen quotes a certain samaritan who declares that one must not change his posture on the sabbath, and he adds, "moreover the injunction which runs, 'bear no burden on the sabbath day,' seems to me an impossibility." this argument is framed for the purpose of proving that the scriptures cannot be taken in their literal sense. but had he quoted the text correctly there would be no force at all to his argument. they must not go out to gather manna, but were expressly commanded to use the sabbath for holy convocations, that is, for religious assemblies. lev. : . and as to the burdens mentioned in jer. : - , they are sufficiently explained by neh. : - . such reasons as these for denying the obvious, simple signification of what god has commanded, are worthy of no confidence. in his letter to africanus, origen thus alludes to the sabbath, but without further remarking upon it:-- "you will find the law about not bearing a burden on the sabbath day in jeremiah as well as in moses." though these allusions of origen to the sabbath are not in themselves of much importance, we give them all, that his testimony may be presented as fully as possible. his next mention of the sabbath seems from the connection to relate to paul:-- "was it impious to abstain from corporeal circumcision, and from a literal sabbath, and literal festivals, and literal new moons, and from clean and unclean meats, and to turn the mind to the good and true and spiritual law of god," etc.--_origen against celsus_, b. ii. chap. vii. we shall soon get his idea of the true sabbath as distinguished from the "literal" one. he gives the following reason for the "literal sabbath" among the hebrews:-- "in order that there might be leisure to listen to their sacred laws, the days termed 'sabbath,' and the other festivals which existed among them, were instituted." book iv. chap. xxxi. what origen mentions as the reason for the institution of the sabbath is in fact only one of its incidental benefits. the real reason for its institution, viz., that the creation of the heavens and the earth should be remembered, he seems to have overlooked because so literally expressed in the commandment. of god's rest-day he thus speaks:-- "with respect, however, to the creation of the world, and the 'rest [_sabbatismou_] which is reserved after it for the people of god,' the subject is extensive, and mystical, and profound, and difficult of explanation." book v. chap. lix. origen's next mention of the sabbath not only places the institution of the sabbath at the creation, but gives us some idea of his "mystical" sabbath as distinguished from "a literal" one. speaking of the creator's rest from the six days' work he thus alludes to celsus:-- "for he [celsus] knows nothing of the day of the sabbath and rest of god, _which follows the completion of the world's creation_, and _which lasts during the duration of the world_, and in which all those will keep festival with god who have done all _their_ works in _their_ six days, and who, because they have omitted none of their duties, will ascend to the contemplation [of celestial things], and to the assembly of righteous and blessed beings." book vi. chap. lxi. here we get an insight into origen's mystical sabbath. it began at creation, and will continue while the world endures. to those who follow the letter it is indeed only a weekly rest, but to those who know the truth it is a perpetual sabbath, enjoyed by god during all the days of time, and entered by believers either at conversion or at death. and this last thought perhaps explains why he said before that the reasons for days observed by the hebrews would be understood after this life. but last of all we come to a mention of the so-called lord's day by origen. as he has a mystical or perpetual sabbath like some of the earlier fathers, in which, under pretense of keeping every day as a sabbath, they actually labor on every one, so has he also, like what we have found in some of them, a lord's day which is not merely one definite day of the week, but which embraces every day, and covers all time. here are his words:-- "for 'to keep a feast,' as one of the wise men of greece has well said, 'is nothing else than to do one's duty;' and that man truly celebrates a feast who does his duty and prays always, offering up continually bloodless sacrifices in prayer to god. that therefore seems to me a most noble saying of paul, 'ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. i am afraid of you, lest i have bestowed upon you labor in vain.' "if it be objected to us on this subject that we ourselves are accustomed to observe certain days, as, for example, the lord's day, the preparation, the passover, or pentecost, i have to answer, that to the perfect christian, who is ever in his thoughts, words, and deeds, serving his natural lord, god the word, _all his days are the lord's_, and _he is always keeping the lord's day_." book viii., close of chapter xxi. and beginning of chapter xxii. with respect to what he calls the lord's day, origen divides his brethren into two classes, as he had before divided the people of god into two classes with respect to the sabbath. one class are the imperfect christians, who content themselves with the literal day; the other are the perfect christians, whose lord's day embraces all the days of their life. undoubtedly origen reckoned himself one of the perfect christians. his observance of the lord's day did not consist in the elevation of one day above another, for he counted them all alike as constituting one perpetual lord's day, the very doctrine which we found in clement of alexandria, who was origen's teacher in his early life. the keeping of the lord's day with origen as with clement embraced all the days of his life, and consisted according to origen in serving god in thought, word, and deed, continually; or as expressed by clement, one "keeps the lord's day when he abandons an evil disposition, and assumes that of the gnostic." these things prove that origen did not count sunday as the lord's day to be honored above the other days as a divine memorial of the resurrection, for he kept the lord's day during every day in the week. nor did he hold sunday as the lord's day to be kept as a day of abstinence from labor, while all the other days were days of business, for whatever was necessary to keeping lord's day he did on every day of the week. as to the imperfect christians who honored a literal day as the lord's day, origen shows what rank it stood in by associating it with the preparation, the passover, and the pentecost, all of which in this dispensation are mere church institutions, and none of them days of abstinence from labor. the change of the sabbath from the seventh day to the first, or the existence of the so-called christian sabbath was in origen's time absolutely unknown. testimony of hippolytus, bishop of portus. hippolytus, who was bishop of portus, near rome, wrote about a. d. . it is evident from his testimony that he believed the sabbath was made by god's act of sanctifying the seventh day at the beginning. he held that day to be the type of the seventh period of a thousand years. thus he says:-- "and years must needs be accomplished, in order that the sabbath may come, the rest, the holy day on which god rested from all his works. for the sabbath is the type and emblem of the future kingdom of the saints, when they shall reign with christ, when he comes from heaven, as john says in his apocalypse: for a day with the lord is as a thousand years. since, then, in six days god made all things, it follows that six thousand years must be fulfilled."--_commentaries on various books of scripture._ sect. , on daniel. the churches of ethiopia have a series of canons, or church rules, which they attribute to this father. number thirty-three reads thus:-- "that commemoration should be made of the faithful dead every day, with the exception of the lord's day." the church of alexandria have also a series which they ascribe to him. the thirty-third is thus given:-- "of the _atalmsas_ (the oblation), which they shall present for those who are dead, that it be not done on the lord's day." the thirty-eighth one has these words:-- "of the night on which our lord jesus christ rose. that no one shall sleep on that night, and wash himself with water." these are the only things in hippolytus that can be referred to the sunday festival. prayers and offerings for the dead, which we find some fifty years earlier in tertullian, are, according to hippolytus, lawful on every day but the so-called lord's day. they grew up with the sunday festival, and are of equal authority with it. tertullian, as we have already observed, tells us frankly that there is no scriptural authority for the one or the other, and that they rest on custom and tradition alone. testimony of novatian, a roman presbyter. novatian, who wrote about a. d. , is accounted the founder of the sect called _cathari_, or _puritans_. he tried to resist some of the gross corruptions of the church of rome. he wrote a treatise on the sabbath, which is not extant. there is no reference to sunday in any of his writings. in his treatise "on the jewish meats," he speaks of the sabbath thus:-- "but how perverse are the jews, and remote from the understanding of their law, i have fully shown, as i believe, in two former letters, wherein it was absolutely proved that they are ignorant of what is the true circumcision, and what the true sabbath." chapter i. if we contrast the doctrine of the pharisees concerning the sabbath with the teaching of the saviour, or with that of isaiah in his fifty-eighth chapter, we shall not think novatian far from the truth in his views of the jewish people. in his treatise "concerning the trinity" is the following allusion to the sabbath:-- "for in the manner that as man he is of abraham, so also as god he is before abraham himself. and in the same manner as he is as man the 'son of david,' so as god he is proclaimed david's lord. and in the same manner as he was made as man 'under the law,' so as god he is declared to be 'lord of the sabbath.'" chapter xi. these are the only references to the sabbath in what remains of the writings of novatian. he makes the following striking remarks concerning the moral law:-- "the law was given to the children of israel for this purpose, that they might profit by it, and return _to those virtuous manners_, which, although _they have received them from their fathers_, they had corrupted in egypt by reason of their intercourse with a barbarous people. finally, also, those _ten commandments_ on the tables _teach nothing new_, but _remind_ them of _what had been obliterated_--that righteousness in them, which had been put to sleep, might revive again as it were by the afflatus of the law, after the manner of a fire [nearly extinguished]."--_on the jewish meats_, chap. iii. it is therefore certain that in the judgment of novatian, the ten commandments enjoined nothing that was not sacredly regarded by the patriarchs before that jacob went down into egypt. it follows, therefore, that in his opinion the sabbath was made, not at the fall of the manna, but when god sanctified the seventh day, and that holy men from the earliest ages observed it. the sunday festival with its varied names and titles he never mentions. chapter ix. cyprian--dionysius of alexandria--anatolius--commodianus--archelaus. testimony of cyprian, bishop of carthage. cyprian wrote about a. d. . i find only two references to sunday in his works. the first is in his thirty-second epistle (the thirty-eighth of the oxford edition), in which he says of one aurelius that "he reads on the lord's day" for him. but in the second instance he defines the meaning of the term, and gives evidence in support of his application of it to the first day of the week. he is arguing in behalf of infant baptism, or rather in controverting the opinion that baptism should be deferred till the child is eight days old. though the command to circumcise infants when eight days of age is one of the chief grounds of authority for infant baptism, yet the time in that precept according to cyprian does not indicate the age of the child to be baptized, but prefigures the fact that the eighth day is the lord's day. thus he says:-- "for in respect of the observance of the eighth day in the jewish circumcision of the flesh, a sacrament was given beforehand in shadow and in usage; but when christ came, it was fulfilled in truth. for because the eighth day, that is, the first day after the sabbath, was to be that on which the lord should rise again, and should quicken us, and give us circumcision of the spirit, the eighth day, that is, the first day after the sabbath, and the lord's day, went before in the figure; which figure ceased when by and by the truth came, and spiritual circumcision was given to us."--_epistle_ lviii. sect. ; in the oxford edition, _epistle_ lxiv. circumcision is made to prove twin errors of the great apostasy, _infant baptism_ and that _the eighth day is the lord's day_. but the eighth day in the case of circumcision was not the day succeeding the seventh, that is, the first day of the week, but the eighth day of the life of each infant, and therefore it fell on one day of the week as often as upon another. such is the only argument addressed by cyprian for first-day sacredness, and this one seems to have been borrowed from justin martyr, who, as we have seen, used it about one hundred years before him. it is however quite as weighty as the argument of clement of alexandria, who adduced in its support what he calls a prophecy of the eighth day out of the writings of the heathen philosopher plato! and both are in the same rank with that of tertullian, who confessed that they had not the authority of scripture, but accepted in its stead that of custom and tradition! in his "exhortation to martyrdom," section , cyprian quotes the larger part of matt. , and in that quotation at verse , the sabbath is mentioned, but he says nothing concerning that institution. in his "testimonies against the jews," book i., sections and , he says "that the former law which was given by moses, was about to cease," and that "a new law was to be given;" and in the conclusion of his "treatise against the jews," section , he says "that the yoke of the law was heavy which is cast off by us," but it is not certain that he meant to include in these statements the precepts of the moral law. testimony of dionysius, bishop of alexandria. this father, who was one of origen's disciples, wrote about a. d. . in the first canon of his "epistle to bishop basilides" he treats of "the proper hour for bringing the fast to a close on the day of pentecost." he has occasion to quote what the four evangelists say of the sabbath and first-day in connection with the resurrection of christ. but in doing this he adds not one word expressive of first-day sacredness, nor does he give it any other title than that of plain "first day of the week." the seventh day is simply called "the sabbath." he also speaks of "the preparation and the sabbath" as the "last two days" of a six days' fast, at the anniversary of the week of christ's death. testimony of anatolius, bishop of laodicea. this father wrote about a. d. . he participated in the discussion of the question whether the festival of easter, or passover, should be celebrated on the fourteenth day of the first month, the same day on which the jews observed the passover, or whether it should be observed on the so-called lord's day next following. in this discussion he uses the term lord's day, in his first canon once, quoting it from origen; in his seventh, twice; in his tenth, twice; in his eleventh, four times; in his twelfth, once; in his sixteenth, twice. these are all the instances in which he uses the term. we quote such of them as shed any light upon the meaning of it as used by him. in his seventh canon he says: "the obligation of the lord's resurrection binds to keep the paschal festival on the lord's day." in his tenth canon he uses this language: "the solemn festival of the resurrection of the lord can be celebrated only on the lord's day." and also "that it should not be lawful to celebrate the lord's mystery of the passover at any other time but on the lord's day, on which the resurrection of the lord from death took place, and on which rose also for us the cause of everlasting joy." in his eleventh canon he says: "on the lord's day was it that light was shown to us in the beginning, and now also in the end, the comforts of all present and the tokens of all future blessings." in his sixteenth canon he says: "our regard for the lord's resurrection which took place on the lord's day will lead us to celebrate it on the same principle." the reader may be curious to know why a controversy should have arisen respecting the proper day for the celebration of the passover in the christian church when no such celebration had ever been commanded. the explanation is this: the festival was celebrated solely on the authority of tradition, and there were in this case two directly conflicting traditions, as is fully shown in the tenth canon of this father. one party had their tradition from john the apostle, and held that the paschal feast should be celebrated every year "whenever the fourteenth day of the moon had come, and the lamb was sacrificed by the jews." but the other party had their tradition from the apostles peter and paul that this festival should not be celebrated on that day, but upon the so-called lord's day next following. and so a fierce controversy arose which was decided in a. d. , by the council of nice, in favor of saint peter, who had on his side his pretended successor, the powerful and crafty bishop of rome. the term lord's day is never applied to sunday till the closing years of the second century. and clement, who is the first to make such an application, represents the true lord's day as made up of every day of the christian's life. and this opinion is avowed by others after him. but after we enter the third century the name lord's day is quite frequently applied to sunday. tertullian, who lived at the epoch where we first find this application, frankly declares that the festival of sunday, to which he gives the name of lord's day, had no scriptural authority, but that it was founded upon tradition. but should not the traditions of the third century be esteemed sufficient authority for calling sunday the lord's day? the very men of that century who speak thus of sunday strenuously urge the observance of the feast of the passover. shall we accept this festival which they offer to us on the authority of their apostolic tradition? as if to teach us the folly of adding tradition to the bible as a part of our rule of faith, it happens that there are, even from the early part of the second century, two directly conflicting traditions as to what day should be kept for the passover. and one party had theirs from saint john, the other had theirs from saint peter and saint paul! and it is very remarkable that although each of these parties claimed to know from one or the other of these apostles that they had the right day for the passover and the other had the wrong one, there is never a claim by one of these fathers that sunday is the lord's day because john on the isle of patmos called it such! if men in the second and third centuries were totally mistaken in their traditions respecting the passover, as they certainly were, shall we consider the traditions of the third century sufficient authority for asserting that the title of lord's day belongs to sunday by apostolic authority? testimony of commodianus. this person was a native of africa, and does not appear to have ever held any office in the christian church. he wrote about a. d. . the only allusions made by him to the sabbath are in the following words addressed to the jews:-- "there is not an unbelieving people such as yours. o evil men! in so many places, and so often rebuked by the law of those who cry aloud. and the lofty one despises your sabbaths, and altogether rejects your universal monthly feasts according to law, that ye should not make to him the commanded sacrifices; who told you to throw a stone for your offense."--_instructions in favor of christian discipline_, sect. . this statement is very obscure, and there is nothing in the connection that sheds any light upon it. his language may have reference to the ceremonial sabbaths, or it may include also the sabbath of the lord. if it includes the sabbath made for man it may be intended, like the words of isa. : , , to rebuke the hypocrisy of those who profess to keep it rather than to condemn the institution itself. he makes only one use of the term lord's day, and that is as obscure as is his reference to the subject of the sabbath. here it is:-- "neither dost thou fear the lord, who cries aloud with such an utterance; even he who commands us to give food even to our enemies. look forward to thy meals from that tobias who always on _every day_ shared them entirely with the poor man. thou seekest to feed him, o fool, who feedeth thee again. dost thou wish that he should prepare for me, who is setting before him his burial? the brother oppressed with want, nearly languishing away, cries out at the splendidly fed, and with distended belly. what sayest thou of the lord's day? if he have not placed himself before, call forth a poor man from the crowd whom thou mayest take to thy dinner. in the tablets is your hope from a christ refreshed." section . whether commodianus meant to charge his brethren to relieve the hungry on one day only of the week, or whether he held to such a lord's day as that of clement of alexandria, origen, and others (namely, one that includes every day of the life of him who refrains from sin), and so would have his brethren imitate tobias, who fed the hungry _every day_, must be left undetermined. he could not have believed that sunday was the lord's day by divine appointment, for he refers to the passover festival (which rests solely upon the traditions and commandments of men) as coming "once in the year" and he designates it as "easter that day of ours _most blessed_." section . the day of the passover was therefore in his estimation the most sacred day in the christian church. testimony of archelaus, bishop of cascar. this person wrote about a. d. , or according to other authorities he wrote not far from a. d. . he flourished in mesopotamia. what remains of his writings is simply the record of his "disputation with manes," the heretic. i do not find that he ever uses the term "lord's day." he introduces the sabbath and states his views of it thus:-- "moses, that illustrious servant of god, committed to those who wished to have the right vision, an emblematic law, and also a real law. thus, to take an example, after god had made the world, and all things that are in it, in the space of six days, he rested on the seventh day from all his works; by which statement i do not mean to affirm that he rested because he was fatigued, but that he did so as having brought to its perfection every creature which he had resolved to introduce. and yet in the sequel it (the new law) says: 'my father worketh hitherto, and i work.' does that mean, then, that he is still making heaven, or sun, or man, or animals, or trees, or any such thing? nay; but the meaning is, that when these visible objects were perfectly finished, he rested from that kind of work; while, however, he still continues to work at objects invisible with an inward mode of action, and saves men. in like manner, then, the legislator desires also that every individual among us should be devoted unceasingly to this kind of work, even as god himself is; and he enjoins us consequently to rest continuously from secular things, and to engage in no worldly sort of work whatsoever; and this is called our sabbath. this he also added in the law, that nothing senseless should be done, but that we should be careful and direct our life in accordance with what is just and righteous." section . these words appear to teach that he held to a perpetual sabbath, like justin martyr, tertullian, and others. yet this does not seem possible, inasmuch as, unlike justin, who despises what he calls days of "idleness," this writer says that we are "to engage in no worldly sort of work whatsoever and this is that our sabbath." it is hardly possible that he could hold it a wicked thing to labor on one or all of the six working days. yet he either means to assert that it is sinful to work on a single one of the days, or else he asserts the perpetual obligation of that sabbath which it is manifest he believed originated when god set apart the seventh day, and which he acknowledges on the authority of what "he also added in the law." we shall shortly come to his final statement, which seems clearly to show that the second of these views was the one held by this writer. after showing in this same section that the death penalty at the hand of the magistrate for the violation of the sabbath is no longer in force because of forgiveness through the saviour, and after answering the objection of manes in sections , , , that christ in healing on the sabbath directly contradicted what moses did to those who in his time violated the sabbath, he states his views of the perpetuity of the ancient sabbath in very clear language. thus he says:-- "again, as to the assertion that the sabbath has been abolished, we deny that he has abolished it plainly (_plane_); for he was himself also lord of the sabbath. and this (the law's relation to the sabbath) was like the servant who has charge of the bridegroom's couch, and who prepares the same with all carefulness, and does not suffer it to be disturbed or touched by any stranger, but keeps it intact against the time of the bridegroom's arrival; so that when he is come, the bed may be used as it pleases himself, or as it is granted to those to use it whom he has bidden enter along with him." section . three things are plainly taught. . the law sacredly guarded the sabbath till the coming of christ. . when christ came, he did not abolish the sabbath, for he was its lord. . and the whole tenor of this writer's language shows that he had no knowledge of the change of the sabbath in honor of christ's resurrection, nor does he even once allude to the first day of the week. chapter x. victorinus--peter--methodius--lactantius--poem on genesis--conclusion. testimony of victorinus, bishop of petau. this person wrote about a. d. . his bishopric was in germany. of his work on the "creation of the world," only a fragment is now preserved. in the first section he speaks thus of the sanctification of the seventh day:-- "god produced that entire mass for the adornment of his majesty in six days; on the seventh to which he consecrated it [some words are here lost out of the text] with a blessing. for this reason, therefore, because in the septenary number of days both heavenly and earthly things are ordered, in place of the beginning. i will consider of this seventh day after the principle of all matters pertaining to the number seven." victorinus, like some other of the fathers, held that the "true and just sabbath should be observed in the seventh millenary." he believed that the sabbath was abolished by the saviour. he was in sympathy with the act of the church of rome in turning the sabbath into a fast. he held to a two days' weekly fast, as his words necessarily imply. he would have men fast on the sixth day to commemorate christ's death, and on the seventh, lest they should seem to keep the sabbath with the jews, but on the so-called lord's day they were to go forth to their bread with giving of thanks. thus he reasons:-- "on this day [the sixth] also, on account of the passion of the lord jesus christ, we make either a station to god, or a fast. on the seventh day he rested from all his works, and blessed it, and sanctified it. on the former day [the sixth] we are accustomed to fast rigorously, that on the lord's day we may go forth to our bread with giving of thanks. and let the _parasceve_ [the sixth day] become a rigorous fast, lest we should appear to observe any sabbath with the jews, which christ himself, the lord of the sabbath, says by his prophet that 'his soul hateth;' which sabbath he in his body abolished, although, however, he had formerly himself commanded moses that circumcision should not pass over the eighth day, which day very frequently happens on the sabbath, as we read written in the gospel. moses, foreseeing the hardness of that people, on the sabbath raised up his hands, therefore, and thus fastened himself to a cross. and in the battle they were sought for by the foreigners on the sabbath day, that they might be taken captive, and, as if by the very strictness of the law, might be fashioned to the avoidance of its teachings." section . these statements are in general of little consequence, but some of them deserve notice. first, we have one of the grand elements which contributed to the abandonment of the sabbath of the lord, viz., hatred toward the jews for their conduct toward christ. those who acted thus forgot that christ himself was the lord of the sabbath, and that it was his institution and not that of the jews to which they were doing despite. secondly, it was the church of rome that turned the sabbath into a fast one hundred years before this, in order to suppress its observance, and victorinus was acting under its instructions. thirdly, we have a reference to the so-called lord's day, as a day of thanksgiving, but no connection between it and the sabbath is indicated for in his time the change of the sabbath had not been thought of. he has other reasons for neglecting the seventh day which here follow:-- "and thus in the sixth psalm for the eighth day, david asks the lord that he would not rebuke him in his anger, nor judge him in his fury; for this is indeed the eighth day of that future judgment, which will pass beyond the order of the sevenfold arrangement. jesus also, the son of nave, the successor of moses, himself broke the sabbath day; for on the sabbath day he commanded the children of israel to go round the walls of the city of jericho with trumpets, and declare war against the aliens. matthias also, prince of judah, broke the sabbath; for he slew the prefect of antiochus the king of syria on the sabbath, and subdued the foreigners by pursuing them. and in matthew we read, that it is written isaiah also and the rest of his colleagues broke the sabbath--that that true and just sabbath should be observed in the seventh millenary of years. wherefore to those seven days the lord attributed to each a thousand years; for thus went the warning: 'in mine eyes, lord, a thousand years are as one day.' therefore in the eyes of the lord each thousand of years is ordained, for i find that the lord's eyes are seven. wherefore, as i have narrated, that true sabbath will be in the seventh millenary of years, when christ with his elect shall reign." section . this completes the testimony of victorinus. he evidently held that the sabbath originated at the sanctification of the seventh day, but for the reasons here given, the most of which are trivial, and all of which are false, he held that it was abolished by christ. his argument from the sixth psalm, and from isaiah's violation of the sabbath, is something extraordinary. he had an excellent opportunity to say that though the seventh-day sabbath was abolished, yet we have the christian sabbath, or the lord's day, to take its place. but he shows positively that he knew of no such institution; for he says, "that true and just sabbath" will be "in the seventh millenary of years." testimony of peter, bishop of alexandria. this father wrote about a. d. . in his "canon " he thus sets forth the celebration of the fourth, the sixth, and the first days of the week:-- "no one shall find fault with us for observing the fourth day of the week, and the preparation [the sixth day], on which it is reasonably enjoined us to fast according to the tradition. on the fourth day, indeed, because on it the jews took counsel for the betrayal of the lord; and on the sixth, because on it he himself suffered for us. but the lord's day we celebrate as a day of joy, because on it he rose again, on which day we have received it for a custom not even to bow the knee." on this balsamon, an ancient writer whose commentary is appended to this canon, remarks that this canon is in harmony with the th apostolical canon, which declares "that we are not to fast on the sabbath, with one exception, the great sabbath [the one connected with the passover], and to the th canon, which severely punishes those who do not fast in the holy lent, and on every fourth day of the week and day of preparation." so it appears that they were commanded by the canons to fast on the fourth and sixth days of the week, and forbidden to do this on the sabbath and first-day. zonaras, another ancient commentator upon the canons of peter, gives us the authority upon which these observances rest. no one of these three days is honored by god's commandment. zonaras mentions the fasts on the fourth and sixth days, and says no one will find fault with these. but he deems it proper to mark peter's reason for the lord's-day festival, and the nature of that festival. thus he says:-- "but on the lord's day we ought not to fast, for it is a day of joy for the resurrection of the lord, and on it, says he, we have received that we ought not even to bow the knee. this word, therefore, is to be carefully observed, 'we have received' and 'it is enjoined upon us according to the tradition.' for from hence it is evident that long-established custom was taken for law. moreover, the great basil annexes also the causes for which it was forbidden to bend the knee on the lord's day, and from the passover to pentecost." the honors which were conferred upon this so-called lord's day are specified. they are two in number. . it was "a day of joy," and therefore not a day of fasting. . on it they "ought not even to bow the knee." this last honor however applied to the entire period of fifty days between the passover and the pentecost as well as to each sunday in the year. so that the first honor was the only one which belonged to sunday exclusively. that honor excluded fasting, but it is never said to exclude labor, or to render it sinful. and the authority for these two first-day honors is frankly given. it is not the words of holy scripture nor the commandment of god, but "it is enjoined upon us according to the tradition. for from hence it is evident that long-established custom was taken for law." such is the testimony of men who knew the facts. in our days men dare not thus acknowledge them, and therefore they assert that the fourth commandment has been changed by divine authority, and that it is sinful to labor upon the first day of the week. testimony of methodius, bishop of tyre. this father wrote about a. d. , and suffered martyrdom in a. d. . a considerable portion of his writings have come down to our time, but in them all i find not one mention of the first day of the week. he held to the perpetuity of the ten commandments, for he says of the beast with ten horns:-- "moreover, the ten horns and stings which he is said to have upon his heads are the ten opposites, o virgins, to the decalogue, by which he was accustomed to gore and cast down the souls of many, imagining and contriving things in opposition to the law, 'thou shalt love the lord thy god,' and to the other precepts which follow."--_banquet of the ten virgins_, discourse viii. chap. xiii. in commenting on the feast of tabernacles (lev. : - ) he says:-- "these things being like air and phantom shadows, foretell the resurrection and the putting up of our tabernacle that had fallen upon the earth, which at length, in the seventh thousand of years, resuming again immortal, we shall celebrate the great feast of true tabernacles in the new and indissoluble creation, the fruits of the earth having been gathered in, and men no longer begetting and begotten, but god resting from the works of creation." discourse ix. chap. i. methodius understood the six days of creation, and the seventh day sanctified by the creator, to teach that at the end of years the great day of joy shall come to the saints of god:-- "for since in six days god made the heaven and the earth, and finished the whole world, and rested on the seventh day from all his works which he had made, and blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, so by a figure in the seventh month, when the fruits of the earth have been gathered in, we are commanded to keep the feast to the lord, which signifies that, when this world shall be terminated at the seventh thousand years, when god shall have completed the world, he shall rejoice in us." discourse ix. chap. i. sect. . in the fifth chapter of this discourse he speaks of the day of judgment as "the millennium of rest, which is called the seventh day, even the true sabbath." he believed that each day of the first seven represented one thousand years, and so the true sabbath of the lord sets forth the final triumph of the saints in the seventh period of a thousand years. and in his work "on things created," section , he refers to this representation of one day as a thousand years, and quotes in proof of it ps. : , . then he says:-- "for when a thousand years are reckoned as one day in the sight of god, and from the creation of the world to his rest is six days, so also to our time, six days are defined, as those say who are clever arithmeticians. therefore, they say that an age of six thousand years extends from adam to our time. for they say that the judgment will come on the seventh day, that is, in the seventh thousand years." the only weekly sabbath known to methodius was the ancient seventh day sanctified by god in eden. he does not intimate that this divine institution has been abolished; and what he says of the ten commandments implies the reverse of that, and he certainly makes no allusion to the festival of sunday, which on the authority of "custom" and "tradition" had been by so many elevated above the sabbath of the lord. testimony of lactantius. lactantius was born in the latter half of the third century, was converted about a. d. , and died at treves about a. d. . he was very eminent as a teacher of rhetoric, and was intrusted with the education of crispus, the son of constantine. the writings of lactantius are quite extensive; they contain, however, no reference to the first day of the week. of the sabbath he speaks twice. in the first instance he says that one reason alleged by the jews for rejecting christ was, "that he destroyed the obligation of the law given by moses; that is, that he did not rest on the sabbath, but labored for the good of men," etc.--_divine institutes_, b. iv. chap. xvii. it is not clear whether lactantius believed that christ violated the sabbath, nor whether he did away with the moral law while teaching the abrogation of the ceremonial code. but he bears a most decisive testimony to the origin of the sabbath at creation:-- "god completed the world and this admirable work of nature in the space of six days (as is contained in the secrets of holy scripture), and consecrated the seventh day, on which he had rested from his works. but this is the sabbath day, which in the language of the hebrews received its name from the number, whence the seventh is the legitimate and complete number." book vii. chap. xiv. it is certain that lactantius did not regard the sabbath as the memorial of the flight out of egypt, but as that of the creation of the heavens and the earth. he also believed that the seven days prefigured the seven thousand years of our earth's history:-- "therefore, since all the works of god were completed in six days, the world must continue in its present state through six ages, that is, six thousand years. for the great day of god is limited by a circle of a thousand years, as the prophet shows, who says, 'in thy sight, o lord, a thousand years are as one day.' and as god labored during those six days in creating such great works, so his religion and truth must labor during these six thousand years, while wickedness prevails and bears rule. and again, since god, having finished his works, rested the seventh day and blessed it, at the end of the six thousandth year all wickedness must be abolished from the earth, and righteousness reign for a thousand years and there must be tranquility and rest from the labors which the world now has long endured." book vii. chap. xiv. thus much for lactantius. he could not have believed in first-day sacredness, and there is no clear evidence that he held to the abrogation of the sabbath. finally we come to a poem on genesis by an unknown author, but variously attributed to cyprian, to victorinus, to tertullian, and to later writers. testimony of the poem on genesis. "the seventh came, when god at his works' end did rest, decreeing it sacred unto the coming ages' joys." lines - . here again we have an explicit testimony to the divine appointment of the seventh day to a holy use while man was yet in eden, the garden of god. and this completes the testimony of the fathers to the time of constantine and the council of nice. one thing is everywhere open to the reader's eye as he passes through these testimonies from the fathers: they lived in what may with propriety be called the age of apostatizing. the apostasy was not complete, but it was steadily developing itself. some of the fathers had the sabbath in the dust, and honored as their weekly festival the day of the sun, though claiming for it no divine authority. others recognize the sabbath as a divine institution which should be honored by all mankind in memory of the creation, and yet at the same time they exalt above it the festival of sunday, which they acknowledge had nothing but custom and tradition for its support. the end may be foreseen: in due time the sunday festival obtained the whole ground for itself, and the sabbath was driven out. several things conspired to accomplish this result:-- . the jews, who retained the ancient sabbath, had slain christ. it was easy for men to forget that christ as lord of the sabbath had claimed it as his institution, and to call the sabbath a jewish institution which christians should not regard. . the church of rome as the chief in the work of apostasy took the lead in the earliest effort to suppress the sabbath by turning it into a fast. . in the christian church almost from the beginning men voluntarily honored the fourth, the sixth, and the first days of the week to commemorate the betrayal, the death, and the resurrection of christ, acts of respect in themselves innocent enough. . but the first day of the week corresponded to the widely observed heathen festival of the sun, and it was therefore easy to unite the honor of christ with the convenience and worldly advantage of his people, and to justify the neglect of the ancient sabbath by stigmatizing it as a jewish institution with which christians should have no concern. the _progressive_ character of the work of apostasy with respect to the sabbath is incidentally illustrated by what giesler, the distinguished historian of the church, says of the sabbath and first-day in his record of the first, the second, and the third century. of the first century he says:-- "whilst the christians of palestine, who kept the whole jewish law, celebrated of course all the jewish festivals, the heathen converts observed only the sabbath, and, in remembrance of the closing scenes of our saviour's life, the passover ( cor. : - ), though without the jewish superstitions, gal. : ; col. : . besides these the sunday as the day of our saviour's resurrection (acts : ; cor. : ; rev. : ), #hê kyriakê hêmera#, was devoted to religious worship."--_giesler's ecclesiastical history_, vol. i. sect. , edition . sunday having obtained a foothold, see how the case stands in the second century. here are the words of giesler again:-- "both sunday and the sabbath were observed as festivals; the latter however without the jewish superstitions therewith connected."--_id._ vol. i. sect. . this time, as giesler presents the case, sunday has begun to get the precedence. but when he gives the events of the third century he drops the sabbath from his record and gives the whole ground to the sunday and the yearly festivals of the church. thus he says:-- "in origen's time the christians had no general festivals, excepting the sunday, the parasceve (or preparation), the passover, and the feast of pentecost. soon after, however, the christians in egypt began to observe the festival of the epiphany, on the sixth of january."--_id._ vol. i. sect. . these three statements of giesler, relating as they do to the first, second, and third centuries, are peculiarly calculated to mark the progress of the work of apostasy. coleman tersely states this work in these words:-- "the observance of the lord's day was ordered while the sabbath of the jews was continued; nor was the latter superseded until the former had acquired the same solemnity and importance, which belonged, at first, to that great day which god originally ordained and blessed.... but in time, after the lord's day was fully established, the observance of the sabbath of the jews was gradually discontinued, and was finally denounced as heretical."--_ancient christianity exemplified_, chap. xxvi. sect. . we have traced the work of apostasy in the church of christ, and have noted the combination of circumstances which contributed to suppress the sabbath, and to elevate the first day of the week. and now we conclude this series of testimonies out of the fathers by stating the well-known but remarkable fact, that at the very point to which we are brought by these testimonies, the emperor constantine while yet, according to mosheim, a heathen, put forth the following edict, a. d. , concerning the ancient sunday festival:-- "let all the judges and town people, and the occupation of all trades, rest on the venerable day of the sun: but let those who are situated in the country, freely and at full liberty, attend to the business of agriculture; because it often happens that no other day is so fit for sowing corn and planting vines; lest, the critical moment being let slip, men should lose the commodities granted by heaven." by the act of a wicked man the heathen festival of sunday has now ascended the throne of the roman empire. we cannot here follow its history through the long ages of papal darkness and apostasy. but as we close, we cite the words of mosheim respecting this law as a positive proof that up to this time, as shown from the fathers, sunday had been a day of ordinary labor when men were not engaged in worship. he says of it:-- "the first day of the week, which was the ordinary and stated time for the public assemblies of the christians, _was, in consequence of a peculiar law enacted by constantine, observed with greater solemnity than it had formerly been_."--mosheim, century , part ii. chap. iv. sect. . this law restrained merchants and mechanics, but did not hinder the farmer in his work. yet it caused the day to be observed with greater solemnity than formerly it had been. these words are spoken with reference to christians, and prove that in mosheim's judgment, as a historian, sunday was a day on which ordinary labor was customary and lawful with them prior to a. d. , as the record of the fathers indicates, and as many historians testify. but even after this the sabbath once more rallied, and became strong even in the so-called catholic church, until the council of laodicea a. d. prohibited its observance under a grievous curse. thenceforward its history is principally to be traced in the records of those bodies which the catholic church has anathematized as heretics. footnotes: [a] those who compose this class are unanimous in the view that the sunday festival was established by the church; and they all agree in making it their day of worship, but not for the same reason; for, while one part of them devoutly accept the institution as the lord's day on the authority of the church, the other part make it their day for worship simply because it is the most convenient day. [b] such is the exact nature of the covenant mentioned in ex. : ; and paul, in heb. : - , quotes this passage, calling the covenant therein mentioned "the first testament," or covenant. [c] the case of origen is a partial exception. not all his works have been accessible to the writer, but sufficient of them have been examined to lay before the reader a just representation of his doctrine. [d] we notice that one first-day writer is so determined that clement shall testify in behalf of sunday, that he deliberately changes his words. instead of giving his words as they are, thus: "the _latter_, properly the sabbath," in which case, as the connection shows, saturday is the day intended, he gives them thus: "the _eighth_, properly the sabbath," thereby making him call sunday the sabbath. this is a remarkable fraud, but it shows that the words as written by clement could not be made to uphold sunday. see "the lord's day," by rev. g. h. jenks, p. . transcriber's notes: text in italics is surrounded by underscores: _italics_. greek transliterations are surrounded by pound signs: #hebdomas#. obvious typographical errors have been corrected. public domain works at the university of michigan's making of america collection.) transcriber’s notes: text enclosed by underscores is in italics (_italics_). additional transcriber’s notes are at the end. * * * * * life incidents. * * * * * life incidents, in connection with the great advent movement, as illustrated by the three angels --of-- revelation xiv. by elder james white. “and he said unto me, unto two thousand and three hundred days, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.”--daniel. “and the angel which i saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth, lifted up his hand to heaven, and aware by him that liveth forever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer.... and he said unto me, thou must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings.”--john. volume one. steam press of the seventh-day adventist publishing association, battle creek, mich. . preface. the writer of these pages does not entertain the idea that he has done justice to the subject upon which they treat. the field is a wide one, and to do the subject full justice, would require much time, and many volumes the size of this. and it has been while laboring with the churches in michigan that these thoughts have been hastily gathered from personal knowledge and experience, and from the writings of those who were deeply imbued with the sweet spirit of revealed truth. more time, undivided attention to the subject, and more pages, would greatly improve the work. but even such as it is, it is commended to the prayerful consideration of the reader, in confidence that it is calculated to revive the advent hope and faith in the hearts of the fainting, and to cheer way-worn pilgrims to mount zion, and lead them to take fresh courage in the lord. and may it not also be hoped that this historical sketch of the great advent movement will lead some to see the subject clearly in the light of the sacred scripture and christian experience, and embrace the truth of god. the writer has passed rapidly over the incidents in his early life, and has given only those of later years, which were connected with the advent cause. his object has been to give those facts only which would serve to honor and magnify the name and power of god in the exhibition of divine truth. the fact, however, that he has been connected with the advent cause since , may serve as an apology for introducing some incidents of personal second-advent experience into this work. it has been with great pleasure that the great advent movement has been revived in the preparation of these pages. it has been an intellectual and spiritual feast. the fundamental principles of the glorious doctrine of the soon coming of christ, never appeared more firmly established. and the facts in second-advent history, fulfilling prophecy, never seemed so important to the people of god, as an anchor in the perilous storms of these last days, as since examining anew this whole question. may god make this work as great a blessing to the reader as it has been made to the writer in its preparation. j. w. [illustration] contents. ancestry and early life, - christian experience, - impressions of duty, - william miller, - his views of prophecy, - daniel, chapter ii, - daniel, chapter vii, - daniel, chapter viii, - the days, - his public labors, - conversion of one hundred infidels, - miller and the prophecies, - my public labors, - rise and progress of adventism, - the signs of the times, - united effort, - camp-meeting era, - the great tent, - the midnight cry, - mr. miller’s visit to washington, - termination of the prophetic times, modes of opposition, - extent of the work, - advent books, lecturers and writers, - what adventism has accomplished, - permanency of the work, - the exeter camp-meeting, - character of the work, - the passing of the time, - argument from the types, - the seventh angel, - the first message, - the second message, - the third message, - rise and progress of the third message, - introduction of the sabbath, - first conference of believers, - mrs. white’s experience, - second general conference, - the opposition, - a paper started, - the review and herald, - purifying process, - tent meetings, - removal to michigan, - power press, publishing association, - organization, - systematic benevolence, - glance at the past, - tongue of slander, - present position and work, - the law and the gospel, - god’s memorial, - * * * * * life incidents. ancestry and early life. i was born in palmyra, somerset county, maine, august th, . bloomfield, me., which now forms a part of skowhegan, was the birthplace of my father, deacon john white. at the age of twenty-one he commenced life in the new township of palmyra. at that time there were but twenty acres of trees felled on his land. the old farm is situated on the west side of a body of water which is called, as seen upon the large map of somerset county, white’s pond. on this farm he lived and labored fifty-one years. he has since spent one year and a half in ohio, and seven years at battle creek, michigan, where he now resides. my father descended from one of the pilgrims who came to america in the ship may flower, and landed upon plymouth rock, december, . on board that ship was the father of perigrine white, who wore a pair of silver knee-buckles, such as may be seen in the picture of the venerable signers of the declaration of independence. the knee-buckles worn by this man were afterward given to his son, perigrine white, who was born on the passage to this country, with the request that they should be handed down in this line of the white family to the eldest son of each successive generation, whose name should be called john. my father had those buckles thirty years. they were as familiar to me in my boyhood days as the buttons upon my coat. he gave them to my brother john, who has passed them down to his son john, a young man of eighteen years. my father possessed from his youth great physical strength, and activity of body and mind. with his own hands he cleared the heavy timber from his land. this revealed stones in the soil, which his own hands removed and placed into stone fence, to prepare the way for the plow. he toiled on for more than half a century, till the rock-bound soil was literally worn out, and much of the old farm lost its power to produce crops. at the age of seventy-four he left it and sought rest in the more congenial climate of the west. his religious experience, of more than sixty years, has been marked with firmness and zeal, and yet with freedom from that bigotry which prevents investigation and advancement, and shuts out love for all who seek to worship god in spirit and in truth. at the age of twenty-one he was sprinkled, and joined the congregational church, but never felt satisfied that in being sprinkled he had received christian baptism. several years later, a baptist minister came into that new part of the state and taught immersion. my father was immersed and became a baptist deacon. still later he embraced the views held by the christian denomination, which were more liberal and scriptural than those of the calvinistic baptists of those days, and communed with that people. the baptists called a special meeting. the minister and many of the church members were present. the minister invited several to open the meeting with prayer, but each in his turn wished to be excused. he waited. finally, my father opened the meeting. they then excluded him for communing with the christians. the minister made an effort to have some one close the meeting. no one moved. my father closed their meeting with prayer, and left them with feelings of love and tenderness. he soon joined the christian church, and served them as deacon nearly forty years. during this entire period he was present at every conference meeting held by the church, excepting one, which, according to their custom, was held on saturday afternoon of every fourth week. as early as my father read with deep interest the lectures of william miller upon the second coming of christ. he has ever since that time cherished faith in the leading points of the advent doctrine. in , with my good mother, he embraced the sabbath, and dwells upon the evidences of the bible sabbath with clearness and much pleasure. my mother is a granddaughter of dr. samuel shepard, one of the first and most eminent baptist ministers of new england. she possessed great firmness of constitution, a good mind, and a most amiable disposition. her entire religious experience, for more than sixty years, has been marked with a meek and quiet spirit, devotion to the cause of christ, and a consistent walk and godly conversation. my venerable parents have reached the good old age of more than fourscore years. they keep house alone, and enjoy as much of life as their advanced age will allow. yet each year visibly brings then nearer the grave. god grant that as they are being gently lowered to its embrace, they may sweetly ripen for immortality, to be given at the soon coming of christ. in my father’s family i stood in the center of nine children, four above me and four below me. but this family chain is now much worn, and nearly half its links are broken. the four above me in years, all live. all below me sleep. time, toil and care have made their unmistakable impress on the remaining five. my remaining brothers are both ministers, one of the m. e. church, of ohio, the other of the regular baptist, of vermont. two sisters live in maine. one brother is supposed to have lost his life by the indians, in returning from california. another sleeps beside a sister in mount hope cemetery, rochester, n. y., while another brother, who died at the age of three years, rests in the old burying-ground in palmyra, maine. my parents say i was an extremely feeble child. and, what added greatly to my difficulties, and cut off their hopes of my life, when less than three years old, i had what the doctors called worm fever, resulting in fits, which turned my eyes and nearly destroyed my sight. i am reported to have been extremely cross-eyed--not naturally, but from affection of the nerves--a feeble, nervous, partially-blind boy. these are sufficient reasons why i could not enjoy the common advantages of school. and not until i was sixteen years old, when my health and strength greatly improved, and my eyes became quite natural, could i read a single verse in the testament without resting my eyes. i felt keenly the fact that i was behind my school-mates in education. and with the poor advantages of those times i could do but little toward making up the almost total loss of ten years. i grew rapidly, and at eighteen was ahead of my years in size and strength. this added to my embarrassment as i entered the academy at st. albans, me., at the age of nineteen. i could not then work a simple problem in single rule of three, and i could not tell a verb from an adverb or an adjective, and was deficient in the other common branches. my friends advised me to turn my attention to farming, and not think of seeking for an education. but i could not take their advice. at the close of the term of twelve weeks, i received from the preceptor, c. f. allen, a certificate of my qualifications to teach the common branches, and the winter following taught school. this required close study eighteen hours of each twenty-four. a victory was gained. much of my time previous to this i had viewed myself as nearly worthless in the world, and regretted my existence. but now i was beginning to hope that i had powers to become a man. no privation nor hardship formed an obstacle in my way. my father gave me my time at nineteen, and a suit of clothes. all i asked of my parents in addition to this was three dollars to pay my tuition, and six days’ rations of bread to take with me each monday morning for three months, as i should walk five miles to the school. at the close of my first term of school-teaching i again attended school at st. albans five weeks, then shouldered my pack and walked to the penobscot river, forty miles, to offer myself as a raw hand in a saw mill. in the mill i cut my ankle, which resulted in permanent weakness and occasional painful lameness in my left foot. for twenty-six years i have been unable to bear my weight upon my left heel. at the end of four months i returned home. i had lost much time in consequence of the severe wound in my ankle joint, and after paying my board during the time lost, i had but thirty dollars and a scanty amount of worn clothing. in order to be qualified to teach a school where i could get first-class wages, it was necessary for me to attend school. i therefore immediately packed up my books and humble apparel for the school at reedfield, me., then favorably known as being under the control and support of the episcopal methodists. during that term my object was to thoroughly qualify myself to teach the common branches. besides these, i took up natural philosophy, algebra, and latin. at the close of that term i had conquered all the arithmetics within my reach, was regarded as a good grammarian, was prepared to teach penmanship, and was told by my preceptor that i could fit for college in one year. my thirst for education increased, and my plans were laid to take a college course and pay my way, if labor, economy, and study would accomplish it. i had but little else to thank but god and my own energies for what advancement i had made. at reedfield i wore old clothes, while my class-mates wore new, and lived three months on corn-meal pudding prepared by myself, and a few raw apples, while they enjoyed the conveniences and luxuries of the boarding house. with the close of this term, also closed my school studies. i have attended high school, in all, twenty-nine weeks, and the entire cost of tuition, books, and board, has not exceeded fifty dollars. my apology for being so definite in this part of my narrative, is a desire to help those young men who wish to obtain an education while suffering under the unfriendly influences of poverty and pride. a poor boy may obtain an education by calling to his aid industry, economy, and application to his books. such an one will prize his education, and be likely to make a good use of it. while the young man who looks to his father’s purse, puts on fine clothes, spends much of his time in fashionable calls, and acts the part of the spendthrift, will not get a thorough education, and will probably make a poor use of what he does obtain. the following winter, covering a part of and , i taught a large school, and also gave lessons in penmanship in two districts. and with my winter’s earnings in my pocket, i returned home with a firm purpose to pursue my studies. christian experience. at the age of fifteen i was baptized, and united with the christian church. but at the age of twenty i had buried myself in the spirit of study and school teaching, and had lain down the cross. i had never descended to the common sin of profanity, and had not used tobacco, tea and coffee, nor had i ever raised a glass of spirituous liquor to my lips. yet i loved this world more than i loved christ and the next, and was worshiping education instead of the god of heaven. in this state of mind i returned home from my second and last school, when my mother said to me: “james, bro. oakes, of boston, has been lecturing at our meeting house on the second coming of christ about the year , and many believe the doctrine, and there has followed these lectures a good reformation, in which most of your mates have experienced religion.” i had regarded what was commonly called millerism as wild fanaticism, and this impression was confirmed by hearing one james hall, of maine, speak upon the subject at the house of worship at palmyra. but now that my mother, in whose judgment and piety i had reason to confide, spoke to me upon the subject in words of earnestness, candor and solemnity, i was shocked and distressed. in spite of me, conviction would fasten upon my mind that these things might be so. but, then, how could i have it so? i was unprepared, and my plans for this life were made. the conversation continued: “but, mother, this preacher oakes, of whom you speak, professes to know more than the lord and his angels, in teaching the time of the second advent. christ himself has said, ‘but of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven; neither the son, but the father.’ this man oakes is certainly wise above that which is written.” “‘as the days of noah were, so shall also the coming of the son of man be.’ god gave the time to noah. the bible says, ‘my spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh; yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.’ gen. vi, . noah had this time given him in which to build the ark and warn the world. and his message, based upon the word of the lord that a flood of water would destroy man and beast from off the face of the earth at the close of the one hundred and twenty years, condemned the world. “jesus also says in this connection, that there shall be signs in the sun, moon, and stars, and adds, ‘when ye shall see all these things, _know_ that it is near, even at the doors.’ “but paul has said, ‘for yourselves know perfectly that the day of the lord so cometh as a thief in the night.’ thess. v, . this language is very plain, and shows that as the thief in the stillness of night quietly seeks his plunder, without giving notice, so christ will come when least expected, hence this idea of warning the world of his soon coming is a mistake.” “but, james, of whom is the apostle in this verse speaking? not of christians, but of the ungodly. they will not receive the warning. they will not be looking for christ. they will be buried up in the spirit of this world. they will be saying, peace and safety, and they will be suddenly and unexpectedly destroyed. not so with those who love jesus and his appearing. they will receive the warning. they will be looking for, waiting for, and loving the appearance of the dear saviour, and that day will not come upon them as a thief. notice with care the two classes mentioned in the two following verses. one is the ungodly. the other is the brethren. the day of the lord will come on one class as a thief; but not so with the other. ‘for when they shall say, peace and safety, then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child, and they shall not escape. but ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief.’” my good mother was ready to meet, calmly and pleasantly, all my objections, and i was now disposed to view the subject as worthy of my attention. and when in the house of god i heard my schoolmates speak of the love of christ, and the glory of his appearing, i was deeply impressed that the hand of god was in the advent doctrine. impressions of duty. as i returned to the lord, it was with strong convictions that i should renounce my worldly plans and give myself to the work of warning the people to prepare for the day of god. i had loved books generally, but, in my backslidden state, had neither time nor taste for the study of the sacred scriptures, hence was ignorant of the prophecies. i had, however, some knowledge of the bible history of man, and had the idea that the race in six thousand years had depreciated physically, and, consequently, mentally. the subject came before my mind in this form: man once lived nearly one thousand years. in length of days he has dwindled to seventy. in a few centuries, should time continue, with the same results upon the lifetime of man, the race would cease to exist. i had renounced the doctrine of the conversion of the world, and the temporal millennium, in which the soil and man were to be gradually restored to their eden state, as taught me by my father. i therefore saw the necessity, in the very nature of things, for some great change, and the second coming of christ seemed to be the event which would most probably bring about the change in man, and in the earth, to remove the curse and its results, and restore all to its eden perfection and glory. my mind turned to the young people of the school i had just left. in that school of fifty scholars, twenty were near my own age, several were older. my school was a happy one. i loved my scholars, and this love was mutual. as we parted, at the close of the last day of school, i said to them, “i am engaged to teach this school next winter, and should i fulfill this engagement, i will not ask one of you to obey my orders better than you have this term.” as i found comfort in prayer, i began to pray for my scholars, and would sometimes wake myself in the night praying vocally for them. a strong impression came upon me, as if a voice said, visit your scholars from house to house and pray with them. i could not conceive of a heavier cross than this. i prayed to be excused, that i might pursue my studies; but no relief came. i prayed for clearer evidence, and the same impression seemed to say, visit your scholars. in this state of mind i went into my father’s field, hoping that i could work off the feelings under which i suffered. but they followed me, and increased. i went to the grove to pray for relief. none came. but the impression, visit your scholars, was still more distinct. my spirit rose in rebellion against god, and i recklessly said, i will not go. these words were accompanied with a firm stamp of the foot upon the ground, and in five minutes i was at the house, packing my books and clothes for newport acadamy. that afternoon i rode to the place with eld. bridges, who talked to me all the way upon the subject of preaching, greatly to my discomfort. the next morning i secured a boarding place, and took my position in several classes in the school, and commenced study with a _will_ to drive off my convictions. but in this i did not succeed. i became distressed and agitated. after spending several hours over my books, i tried to call to mind what i had been studying. this i could not do. my mental confusion was complete. the spirit of god had followed me into the school-room in mercy, notwithstanding my rebellion, and i could find no rest there. firmly i resolved that i would do my duty, and immediately took my cap and went directly from the door of that school-room, on foot, to the town of troy, the place of my last school. i had gone but a few rods on my way, when sweet peace from god flowed into my mind, and heaven seemed to shine around me. i raised my hands and praised god with the voice of triumph. with a light heart and cheerful step i walked on till sundown, when i came to a humble cottage which attracted my especial attention. i was strongly impressed to call, but had no reason for so doing, as it was but a few miles to the school district, where i should find a hearty welcome. i decided to go past this house, as i did not wish to find myself in the awkward position of calling upon strangers without some good reason. but the impression to call increased, and the excuse to ask for a drink of water occurred to me, and i stepped to the door and called for water. a man in the noon of life waited upon me, then kindly said, “walk in.” i saw that he had been weeping. in one hand he held the bible. when i had taken the chair he offered me, this sad stranger addressed me in a most mournful manner, as follows: “i am in trouble. i am in deep affliction. to-day i have buried my dear son, and i have not the grace of god to sustain me. i am not a christian, and my burden seems greater than i can bear. will you please stop all night with me?” he wept bitterly. why he should so directly open his afflicted mind to a young stranger, has ever been to me a mystery. i could not refuse his invitation, and concluded to stop for the night. i told him my brief experience, and pointed him to christ, who says, “come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and i will give you rest. take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for i am meek and lowly in heart, and ye shall find rest unto your souls. for my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” we bowed in prayer, and my new friend seemed relieved. then we sought rest in sleep. in the morning i assisted him in erecting the family altar, and went on my way. i have neither seen nor heard from him since. but i had walked only two miles on that delightful spring morning, when all nature, animate and inanimate, seemed to join my glad heart in the praise of god, before the same impression came upon me, as i was passing a neat log cottage. something said to me, go into the house. i stepped to the door, and called for a drink of water. and who should bring it to me but a young lady who had attended my school the past winter. as she recognized me, she exclaimed, “why, schoolmaster, walk in.” this family had just moved from the district, three miles, to a new settlement surrounded by forests. the father was absent. the mother and children greeted me with more than usual cordiality, each calling me, master. there was the place for my work to commence. i told my errand, and asked the privilege to pray. “oh, yes!” said the already weeping woman. “but let me send out the children and call in my neighbors.” some half-dozen little boys and girls received dispatches from their mother, and cheerfully ran to as many log cottages with the word, “our schoolmaster is at our house, and wishes to pray, and mother wants you to come as soon as you can.” in less than half an hour i had before me a congregation of about twenty-five. in conversing with them, i learned that not one of that company professed christianity. lectures on the second advent had been given near them, and a general conviction that the doctrine might be true rested upon the people. and as i related my experience of the few weeks in the past, stating my convictions relative to the soon coming of christ, all were interested. i then bowed to pray, and was astonished to find that these twenty-five sinners all bowed with me. i could but weep. they all wept with me. and after pointing them to christ, as best i could with my limited experience and knowledge of the scriptures, i shook their hands, said farewell, and joyfully pursued my journey. as i entered the district i had so recently left, all seemed changed, yet no changes worthy of note had taken place but in me. the school-house where i had spent happy hours in teaching willing minds, was closed, and my scholars were pursuing their daily tasks in the field and kitchen. i had left them, a proud, prayerless backslider, but now had come to pray with them. it seemed to me that the lord could not have selected a duty more humbling to my pride. the district was made up of universalists, formal professors, respectable sinners, and infidels. my employer, who had also engaged me to teach their school the next winter, was an infidel. i lost no time in making known the object of my visit, and in visiting and praying from house to house. no one opposed me. some were deeply affected and bowed with me. my infidel friend said to me as i asked permission to pray in his house, “i am very sorry, mr. white, to find you in this state of mind. you are a good teacher, and a gentleman. i shall not forbid you.” this reception was decidedly cold when compared with what i had met from others. this infidel was evidently much disgusted and disappointed, but tried to conceal his feelings out of respect to mine. i tried to pray, and passed to the next house. in a few days my work in this direction was finished for that time, and i returned home with the sweet assurance that i had done my duty. a few weeks afterward, however, i visited the place again. a general reformation was in progress, under the labors of a christian minister. on sunday, the meeting was held in a barn. the interest was general, and the congregation large. after the minister closed his remarks, i improved a few moments. i felt deeply, and my testimony reached the people, especially my scholars and their parents. the following summer, lectures were given in the town-house, and the next winter most of the people of that town embraced religion. much of the summer i was unsettled as to duty. i had visited my scholars, and sometimes hoped to be excused from anything further of the kind, and feel free to pursue my studies. but the definite idea of proclaiming the soon coming of christ, and warning the people to prepare for the day of the lord, was impressed upon my mind. i did not dare attend school. the spirit of the lord had driven me from the school-room once, and in following a sense of duty i had been greatly blessed. how could i resist present convictions, and again try to shut myself away from the lord, over my books? but how could i renounce all my fondly-cherished hopes of the future? my brother in ohio said to me by letter: “come out into the sunny west, james, and i will help you.” “well,” said i, “when i become a scholar.” how could i give up my school books, and with my small stock of education think of becoming a preacher? a school-mate, elbridge smith, who had also been a room-mate at st. albans and at reedfield, was a special friend of mine. he was a fine young man, of good habits, yet not a christian. i loved him for what he was, and we mutually in confidence freely stated to each other all our plans, hopes and difficulties. to this young man i first opened my mind freely upon the subject of the second advent, and my convictions of duty to preach the doctrine. he treated the matter with candor, and seemed troubled as he learned from my own lips that i was inclined to believe that christ would come about the year . he had given the subject no study, but evidently feared it might be so. he replied as follows: “you know i am not a christian, and therefore am poorly prepared to give you advice in relation to religious duty. i think of these things more than many suppose, though i publicly take no personal interest in them. i, however, think it well for me, and safe for you, to say at this time, follow the convictions of your own mind.” i highly esteem this friend of my youth for his candor and good counsel. who could have done better? we have met but a few times since, as i soon left that part of the state to proclaim the coming of the lord, and he for bowdoin college. he graduated in two years from that time, studied law, and now elbridge smith is a judge somewhere in the west. the struggle with duty was a severe one. but i finally gave out an appointment, and had some freedom. i soon sent an appointment to speak at the troy town-house. the congregation was large. had rather a lean time, and felt embarrassed. and what seemed to well-nigh finish me, a good, honest, simple-hearted woman came up to me at the close of the meeting and said: “elder white, please come to our house and take dinner.” the word elder cut me to the heart. i was confused and almost paralyzed. i will not attempt to narrate anything further that occurred on that day. the remaining portion of the day has ever seemed like a blank. i can only remember my confusion and anguish of spirit as i heard the unexpected word, elder. i was unreconciled at the prospect before me, yet dared not refuse what seemed to be duty, and turn to my books. i was urged to speak in the presence of two young preachers, and attempted to preach. in twenty minutes became confused and embarrassed, and sat down. i lacked resignation and humility, therefore was not sustained. i finally gave up all for christ and his gospel, and found peace and freedom. soon my mind was especially called to the second advent by hearing elders j. v. himes and a. hale speak several times upon the subject, in the city of bangor, me. i then saw that it was a subject that required study, and felt the importance of commencing in earnest to prepare myself to teach others. i purchased advent publications, read them closely, studied my bible, and spoke a few times during the summer on the second coming of christ with freedom, and felt encouraged. william miller. in september, elders himes, miller, and others, held a meeting in the mammoth tent in eastern maine. in company with one moses polly, a christian minister of my acquaintance, i attended that meeting. i there for the first time saw that great and good man, william miller. his form and features showed great physical and mental strength. the benevolent, affable, and kind spirit manifested by him in conversation with numerous strangers who called on him to ask questions, proved him a humble, christian gentleman. infidels, universalists, and some others came to him with opposing questions. he was quick to perceive their designs, and with becoming firmness and dignity promptly met their objections and sent them away in silence. so long had he, even then, been in the field, meeting opposition from every quarter, that he was prepared for any emergency. in his public labors his arguments were clear, and his appeals and exhortations most powerful. the tent in which he spoke was a circle whose diameter was one hundred and twenty feet. on one occasion, when this tent was full, and thousands stood around, he was unfortunate in the use of language, which the baser sort in the crowd turned against him by a general burst of laughter. he left his subject with ease, and in a moment his spirit rose above the mob-like spirit that prevailed, and in language the most scorching he spoke of the corruption of the hearts of those who chose to understand him to be as vile as they were. in a moment all was quiet. and the speaker continued to describe the terrible end of the ungodly in a solemn and impressive manner. he then affectionately exhorted them to repent of their sins, come to christ, and be ready for his appearing. many in that vast crowd wept. he then resumed his subject, and spoke with clearness and spirit, as though nothing had happened. in fact, it seemed that nothing could have occurred to fully give him the ears of the thousands before him, and to make his subject so impressive as this circumstance. god raised up paul to do a great work in his time. in order that the gentiles might be clearly taught the great plan of redemption through jesus, and that the infidelity of the jews might be met, a great man was selected. martin luther was the man for his time. he was daring and sometimes rash, yet was a great and good man. the little horn had prevailed, and millions of the saints of the most high had been put to death. to fearlessly expose the vileness of the papal monks, and to meet their learning and their rage, and also to win the hearts of the common people with all the tenderness and affection of the gospel, called for just such a man as martin luther. he could battle with the lion, or feed and tenderly nurse the lambs of christ’s fold. so william miller, in the hands of god, was the man for his time. true, he was a farmer, and had been in the service of his country, and had not the benefits of an early classical education. and it was not till he had passed the noon of life that god called him to search his word and open the prophecies to the people. he was, however, a historian from his love of history, and had a good practical knowledge of men and things. he had been an infidel. but on receiving the bible as a revelation from god, he did not also receive the popular, contradictory ideas that many of its prophecies were clad in impenetrable mystery. said william miller: “the bible, if it is what it purports to be, will explain itself.” he sought for the harmony of scripture and found it. and in the benevolence of his great and good heart and head, he spent the balance of his life in teaching it to the people in his written and oral lectures, and in warning and exhorting them to prepare for the second coming of christ. much of the fruits of his labors are now seen. much more will be seen hereafter. heaven will be hung with the fruits of the labors of this truly great and good man. he sleeps. but if it can be said of any who have toiled and worn and suffered amid vile persecutions, “blessed are the dead which die in the lord from henceforth, that they may rest from their labors, and their works do follow them,” it can be said of wm. miller. he nobly and faithfully did his duty, and the popular church, united with the world, paid him in persecutions and reproaches. the very name of wm. miller was despised everywhere, and millerism was the jeer of the people from the pulpit to the brothel. but, dear reader, if your deed of real estate be registered at the office of the county clerk, rough hands may tear the paper you hold in your hand which you call a deed, and your title is no less secure. and however roughly and wickedly men may have handled the name of wm. miller here, when the final triumphant deliverance of all who are written in the book of life comes, his will be found among the worthies, safe from the wrath of men and the rage of demons, securing to him the reward of immortality according to his works. as i have introduced to the reader the man whom god raised up to lead off in the great advent movement, it may be expected that something of his life, experience and labors should here be given. i have room for only a very few sketches from his memoir. he was born in pittsfield, mass., february, . his biographer says: “in his early childhood, marks of more than ordinary intellectual strength and activity were manifested. a few years made these marks more and more noticeable to all who fell into his society. but where were the powers of the inner man to find the nutriment to satisfy their cravings, and the field for their exercise? “besides the natural elements of education, the objects, the scenes, and the changes of the natural world, which have ever furnished to all truly great minds their noblest aliment, the inspiring historical recollections associated with well-known localities of the neighboring country, and the society of domestic life, there was nothing within william’s reach but the bible, the psalter and prayer-book, till he had resided at low hampton several years. “his mother had taught him to read, so that he soon mastered the few books belonging to the family; and this prepared him to enter the senior class when the district school opened. but if the terms were short, the winter nights were long. pine knots could be made to supply the want of candles, lamps, or gas. and the spacious fireplace in the log house was ample enough as a substitute for the school-house and lecture-room. “he possessed a strong physical constitution, an active and naturally well-developed intellect, and an irreproachable moral character. he had appropriated to his use and amusement the small stock of literature afforded by the family while a child. he had enjoyed the limited advantages of the district school but a few years before it was generally admitted that his attainments exceeded those of the teachers usually employed. he had drank in the inspiration of the natural world around him, and of the most exciting events of his country’s history. his imagination had been quickened, and his heart warmed, by the adventures and gallantries of fiction, and his intellect enriched by history. and some of his earliest efforts with the pen, as well as the testimony of his associates, show that his mind and heart were ennobled by the lessons, if not by the spirit and power of religion. what, now, would have been the effect of what is called a regular course of education? would it have perverted him, as it has thousands? or would it have made him instrumental of greater good in the cause of god? “whatever might have been the result of any established course of education in the case of wm. miller, such a course was beyond his reach: he was deprived of the benefit, he has escaped the perversion. let us be satisfied.” william miller was married in , and settled in poultney, vt. his biographer continues: “but the men with whom he associated from the time of his removal to poultney, and to whom he was considerably indebted for his worldly favors, were deeply affected with skeptical principles and deistical theories. they were not immoral men; but, as a class, were good citizens, and generally of serious deportment, humane, and benevolent. however, they rejected the bible as the standard of religious truth, and endeavored to make its rejection plausible by such aid as could be obtained from the writings of voltaire, hume, volney, paine, ethan allen, and others. mr. miller studied these works closely, and at length avowed himself a deist. as he has stated the period of his deistical life to have been twelve years, that period must have begun in ; for he embraced or returned to the christian faith in . it may fairly be doubted, however, notwithstanding his known thoroughness and consistency, whether mr. miller ever was fully settled in that form of deism which reduces man to a level with the brutes, as to the supposed duration of their existence. and the question is worthy of a little inquiry, to what extant was he a deist?” he received a captain’s commission, and entered the army in . he returned from the army, and moved his family to low hampton, n. y., to begin there the occupation of farming, in . “as a farmer, he had more leisure for reading; and he was at an age when the future of man’s existence _will_ demand a portion of his thoughts. he found that his former views gave him no assurance of happiness beyond the present life. beyond the grave all was dark and gloomy. to use his own words: ‘annihilation was a cold and chilling thought, and accountability was sure destruction to all. the heavens were as brass over my head, and the earth as iron under my feet. _eternity!--what was it? and death!--why was it?_ the more i reasoned, the further i was from demonstration. the more i thought, the more scattered were my conclusions. i tried to stop thinking, but my thoughts would not be controlled. i was truly wretched, but did not understand _the cause_. i murmured and complained, but knew not of whom. i knew that there was a wrong, but knew not how or where to find the right. i mourned, but without hope.’ he continued in this state of mind for some months, feeling that eternal consequences _might_ hang on the nature and object of his belief. “it devolved on captain miller, as usual in the minister’s absence, to read a discourse of the deacons’ selection. they had chosen one on the importance of parental duties. soon after commencing, he was overpowered by the inward struggle of emotion, with which the entire congregation sympathized, and took his seat. his deistical principles seemed an almost insurmountable difficulty with him. ‘soon after, suddenly,’ he says, ‘the character of the saviour was vividly impressed upon my mind. it seemed that there might be a being so good and compassionate as to himself atone for our transgressions, and thereby save us from suffering the penalty of sin. i immediately felt how lovely such a being must be; and imagined that i could cast myself into the arms of, and trust in the mercy of, such an one. but the question arose, how can it be proved that such a being does exist? aside from the bible, i found that i could get no evidence of the existence of such a saviour, or even of a future state. i felt that to believe in such a saviour, without evidence, would be visionary in the extreme. “‘i saw that the bible did bring to view just such a saviour as i needed; and i was perplexed to find how an uninspired book should develop principles so perfectly adapted to the wants of a fallen world. i was constrained to admit that the scriptures must be a revelation from god. they became my delight; and in jesus i found a friend. the saviour became to me the chiefest among ten thousand; and the scriptures, which before were dark and contradictory, now became the lamp to my feet and light to my path. my mind became settled and satisfied. i found the lord god to be a rock in the midst of the ocean of life. the bible now became my chief study, and i can truly say, i searched it with great delight. i found the half was never told me. i wondered why i had not seen its beauty and glory before, and marveled that i could have ever rejected it. i found everything revealed that my heart could desire, and a remedy for every disease of the soul. i lost all taste for other reading, and applied my heart to get wisdom from god.’ “mr. miller immediately erected the family altar; publicly professed his faith in that religion which had been food for his mirth, by connecting himself with the little church that he had despised; opened his house for meetings of prayer; and became an ornament and pillar in the church, and an aid to both pastor and people. the die was cast, and he had taken his stand for life as a soldier of the cross, as all who knew him felt assured; and henceforth the badge of discipleship, in the church or world, in his family or closet, indicated whose he was, and whom he served. “his pious relations had witnessed with pain his former irreligious opinions; how great were their rejoicings now! the church, favored with his liberality, and edified by his reading, but pained by his attacks on their faith, could now rejoice with the rejoicing. his infidel friends regarded his departure from them as the loss of a standard-bearer. and the new convert felt that henceforth, wherever he was, he must deport himself as a christian, and perform his whole duty. his subsequent history must show how well this was done. “soon after his renunciation of deism, in conversing with a friend respecting the hope of a glorious eternity through the merits and intercessions of christ, he was asked how he knew there was such a saviour. he replied, ‘it is revealed in the bible.’ ‘how do you know the bible is true?’ was the response, with a reiteration of his former arguments on the contradictions and mysticisms in which he had claimed it was shrouded. “mr. miller felt such taunts in their full force. he was at first perplexed; but, on reflection, he considered that if the bible is a revelation of god, it must be consistent with itself; all its parts must harmonize, must have been given for man’s instruction, and, consequently, must be adapted to his understanding. he therefore said, ‘give me time, and i will harmonize all those apparent contradictions to my own satisfaction, or i will be a deist still.’ “he then devoted himself to a prayerful reading of the word. he laid aside all commentaries, and used the marginal references and his concordance as his only helps. he saw that he must distinguish between the bible and all the peculiar partisan interpretations of it. the bible was older than them all, must be above them all; and he placed it there. he saw that it must correct all interpretations; and in correcting them, its own pure light would shine without the mists which traditionary belief had involved it in. he resolved to lay aside all preconceived opinions, and to receive with child-like simplicity, the natural and obvious meaning of the scripture. he pursued the study of the bible with the most intense interest--whole nights as well as days being devoted to that object. at times delighted with truth, which shone forth from the sacred volume, making clear to his understanding the great plan of god for the redemption of fallen man; and at times puzzled and almost distracted by seemingly inexplicable or contradictory passages, he persevered until the application of his great principle of interpretation was triumphant. he became puzzled only to be delighted, and delighted only to persevere the more in penetrating its beauties and mysteries. “his manner of studying the bible is thus described by himself: ‘i determined to lay aside all my prepossessions, to thoroughly compare scripture with scripture, and to pursue its study in a regular, methodical manner. i commenced with genesis, and read verse by verse, proceeding no faster than the meaning of the several passages should be so unfolded as to leave me free from embarrassment respecting any mysticisms or contradictions. whenever i found anything obscure, my practice was to compare it with all collateral passages; and, by the help of cruden, i examined all the texts of scripture in which were found any of the prominent words contained in any obscure portion. then, by letting every word have its proper bearing on the subject of the text, if my view of it harmonized with every collateral passage in the bible, it ceased to be a difficulty. in this way i pursued the study of the bible, in my first perusal of it, for about two years, and was fully satisfied that it is its own interpreter. i found that by a comparison of scripture with history, all the prophecies, as far as they have been fulfilled, had been fulfilled literally; that all the various figures, metaphors, parables, similitudes, &c., of the bible, were either explained in their immediate connection, or the terms in which they were expressed were defined in other portions of the word; and when thus explained, are to be literally understood in accordance with such explanation. i was thus satisfied that the bible is a system of revealed truths, so clearly and simply given, that the wayfaring man, though a fool, need not err therein.’ in pursuing his study of the holy scriptures, mr. miller adopted the following rules of interpretation: “ . every word must have its proper bearing on the subject presented in the bible. proof, matt. v, . “ . all scripture is necessary, and may be understood by a diligent application and study. proof, tim. iii, - . “ . nothing revealed in the scriptures can or will be hid from those who ask in faith, not wavering. proof, deut. xxix, ; matt. x, , ; cor. ii. ; phil. iii, ; isa. xlv, ; matt. xxi, ; john xiv, , ; xv, ; james i, , ; john v, - . “ . to understand doctrine, bring all the scriptures together on the subject you wish to know; then let every word have its proper influence; and if you can form your theory without a contradiction, you cannot be in error. proof, isa. xxviii, - ; xxxv, ; prov. xix, ; luke xxiv, , , ; rom. xvi, ; james v, ; pet. i, , . “ . scripture must be its own expositor, since it is a rule of itself. if i depend on a teacher to expound to me, and he should guess at its meaning, or desire to have it so on account of his sectarian creed, or to be thought wise, then his guessing, desire, creed, or wisdom, is my rule, and not the bible. proof, ps. xix, - ; cxix, - ; matt. xxiii, - ; cor. ii, - ; eze. xxxiv, , ; luke xi, ; matt. ii, , . “ . god has revealed things to come, by visions, in figures and parables; and in this way the same things are oftentime revealed again and again, by different visions, or in different figures and parables. if you wish to understand them, you must combine them all in one. proof, ps. lxxxix, ; hos. xii, ; hab. ii, ; acts ii, ; cor. x, ; heb. ix, , ; ps. lxxviii, ; matt. xiii, , ; gen. xli, - ; dan. ii, vii and viii; acts x, - . “ . visions are always mentioned as such. cor. xii, . “ . figures always have a figurative meaning, and are used much in prophecy to represent future things, times and events--such as mountains, meaning governments, dan. ii, , ; beasts, meaning kingdoms, dan. vii, , ; waters, meaning people, rev. xvii, , ; day, meaning year, &c. eze. iv, . “ . parables are used as comparisons, to illustrate subjects, and must be explained in the same way as figures, by the subject and bible. mark iv, . “ . figures sometimes have two or more different significations, as day is used in a figurative sense to represent three different periods of time, namely: first, indefinite, eccl. vii, ; second, definite, a day for a year, eze. iv, ; and third, a day for a thousand years, pet. iii, . “the right construction will harmonize with the bible, and make good sense; other constructions will not. “ . if a word makes good sense as it stands, and does no violence to the simple laws of nature, it is to be understood literally; if not, figuratively. rev. xii, , ; xvii, - . “ . to learn the meaning of a figure, trace the word through your bible, and when you find it explained, substitute the explanation for the word used; and if it make good sense, you need not look further; if not, look again. “ . to know whether we have the true historical event for the fulfillment of prophecy: if you find every word of the prophecy (after the figures are understood) is literally fulfilled, then you may know that your history is the true event; but if one word lacks a fulfillment, then you must look for another event, or wait its future development; for god takes care that history and prophecy shall agree, so that the true believing children of god may never be ashamed. ps. xxii, ; isa. xlv, - ; pet. ii, ; rev. xvii, ; acts iii, . “ . the most important rule of all is, that you must have _faith_. it must be a faith that requires a sacrifice, and, if tried, would give up the dearest object on earth, the world and all its desires--character, living, occupation, friends, home, comforts, and worldly honors. if any of these should hinder our believing any part of god’s word, it would show our faith to be vain. nor can we ever believe so long as one of these motives lies lurking in our hearts. we must believe that god will never forfeit his word; and we can have confidence that he who takes notice of the sparrow’s fall, and numbers the hairs of our head, will guard the translation of his own word, and throw a barrier around it, and prevent those who sincerely trust in god, and put implicit confidence in his word, from erring far from the truth. “while thus studying the scriptures,” continuing the words of his own narrative, “i became satisfied if the prophecies which have been fulfilled in the past are any criterion by which to judge of the manner of the fulfillment of those which are future, that the popular views of the spiritual reign of christ--a temporal millennium before the end of the world, and the jews’ return--are not sustained by the word of god; for i found that all the scriptures on which those favorite theories are based, are as clearly expressed as are those that were _literally_ fulfilled at the first advent, or at any other period in the past. i found it plainly taught in the scriptures that jesus christ will again descend to this earth, coming in the clouds of heaven, in all the glory of his father. “i need not speak of the joy that filled my heart in view of the delightful prospect, nor of the ardent longings of my soul for a participation in the joys of the redeemed. the bible was now to me a new book. it was indeed a feast of reason; all that was dark, mystical or obscure, to me, in its teachings, had been dissipated from my mind before the clear light that now dawned from its sacred pages; and oh, how bright and glorious the truth appeared! all the contradictions and inconsistencies i had before found in the word were gone; and, although there were many portions of which i was not satisfied i had a full understanding, yet so much light had emanated from it to the illumination of my before darkened mind, that i felt a delight in studying the scriptures which i had not before supposed could be derived from its teachings. i commenced their study with no expectation of finding the time of the saviour’s coming, and i could at first hardly believe the result to which i had arrived; but the evidence struck me with such force that i could not resist my convictions. i became nearly settled in my conclusions, and began to wait, and watch, and pray, for my saviour’s coming.” “from the time that mr. miller became established in his religious faith, till he commenced his public labors--a period of twelve or fourteen years--there were few prominent incidents in his life to distinguish him from other men. he was a good citizen, a kind neighbor, an affectionate husband and parent, and a devoted christian; good to the poor, and benevolent, as objects of charity were presented; in the sunday school was teacher and superintendent; in the church he performed important service as reader and exhorter, and, in the support of religious worship, no other member, perhaps, did as much as he. he was very exemplary in his life and conversation, endeavored at all times to perform the duties, whether public or private, which devolved on him, and whatever he did was done cheerfully, as for the glory of god. his leisure hours were devoted to reading and meditation; he kept himself well informed respecting the current events of the time; occasionally communicated his thoughts through the press, and often for his own private amusement, or for the entertainment of friends, indulged in various poetical effusions, which, for unstudied productions, are possessed of some merit; but his principal enjoyment was derived from the study of the bible.” his views of prophecy. what can be more natural than for man, as he looks forth upon a world where evil is everywhere present, and the marks of disorder and decay everywhere visible, to inquire whether or not this state of things shall always continue? and what inquiry can be of more interest and importance to the race than that which has respect to the age of the world in which we live? it would therefore be reasonable to conclude that god would give to man a revelation informing him in respect to subjects of such absorbing interest. and the declaration of the scripture is in strict accordance with enlightened reason, when it says, “surely the lord god will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants, the prophets.” amos iii, . the object of prophecy is to forewarn the world of things to come, in time for the requisite preparation, and to inspire the people of god with fresh courage as they see the time for the full fruition of their hopes drawing nigh. no judgment has ever come upon the world unheralded; and none have ever fallen therein unwarned. and if, from the uniform dealings of god with our world in the past, we may judge of the future, then may we conclude that of the events yet to transpire, and above all, the great event in which earth’s drama shall close--the ushering in of the great day of the lord, and the coming of the son of man--something will be known, and the world be faithfully warned thereof, ere they shall take place. in calling attention to these things, william miller and his associates were accused of prying into the secrets of the almighty. from this charge, however, they needed no better vindication than the language of moses, in deut. xxix, : “the secret things belong unto the lord our god, but those things _which are revealed_ belong unto us and to our children forever.” prophecy belongs to that portion of the bible which may properly be denominated a revelation. it is designed to reveal to us things of which we could not in any other way gain information. again, they were met with the plea that the prophecies could not be understood. but says the saviour, referring directly to the prophecy of daniel, “whoso readeth _let him understand_.” matt. xxiv, . that many of the prophecies, such as those portions of daniel which reach to the close of earthly governments, have not been understood, is very true. but to assert that they cannot at any time be understood, is a virtual denial that they are a portion of god’s revelation to man. the prophecy of daniel, reaching far into the future, could not be understood by the prophet himself. neither could it be understood by any until the time of the end, when much of it should be fulfilled. hence the answer of the angel to the anxious inquiry of the prophet: “and i heard, but i understood not: then said i, o my lord, what shall be the end of these things? and he said, go thy way, daniel, for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. many shall be purified and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly, and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.” chap. xii, - . again says the angel to the prophet: “but thou, o daniel, shut up the words and seal the book, even to the time of the end. many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.” verse . from the very nature of the prophecy of daniel, it was closed up and sealed till the time of the end, when, most of its prophetic history being past, it was to be unsealed, understood, and many were to run to and fro with the knowledge of the great subject upon which it treats. the result of the increase and spread of knowledge in relation to the approaching judgment, which is the great theme of the prophecy, is also given. the wicked shall do wickedly, and none of the wicked shall understand. but the wise shall understand. with these remarks the attention of the reader is called to daniel, chapter ii. the scene opens with the kingdom of babylon, or chaldea, at the summit of its greatness and glory, b. c. . nebuchadnezzar, the chaldean monarch, as it is natural for man to do, had been anxiously looking into the future, and pondering what should come to pass thereafter. verse . instead of rebuking or discouraging this spirit of inquiry in man, god takes occasion to grant to the king, and through him to the world, the information which he sought. under the symbol of a great image he presents before him the most impressive history of the world, from that time on, that can anywhere be found. this image’s head was of fine gold, symbolizing the kingdom of babylon, then existing. in his interpretation, the prophet addressed himself to the king in the following words: “thou art this head of gold.” verse . the breast and arms of silver represented media and persia, which shortly supplanted babylon in the empire of the world. the belly and sides of brass prefigured grecia, which, conquering its predecessors, enjoyed its period of universal dominion. and finally rome, the legs of the image, bore its iron sway over all the earth. in development of the ten toes, said the prophet: “the kingdom shall be divided” [verse ]: and so was rome divided into ten kingdoms between the years a. d. and . what next? the monarch beheld till a stone cut out of the mountain without hands smote the image upon its feet, ground its metallic parts to powder, became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth. the inspired interpretation of this impressive scene is given thus: “in the days of these kings shall the god of heaven set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed, ... but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.” verse . the prophetic history of babylon, media and persia, and grecia, has long since been completed, and that of rome also has been fulfilled, excepting the dashing in pieces to give place to the immortal kingdom of god. and mark: the stone smote the image upon the feet. and it was in the days of the kings, or kingdoms, represented by the ten toes of the image, that the god of heaven was to set up an eternal kingdom purely his. this kingdom is not yet established. it is evident that it was not set up at the time of christ’s first advent, from the fact that rome was not then divided into the ten kingdoms, represented by the ten toes of the image. paul looked forward to this kingdom in his solemn charge to timothy in view of the judgment at the appearing and kingdom of christ. tim. iv, . for this kingdom all christians were to pray, “thy kingdom come.” matt. vi, . james speaks of this kingdom as a matter of promise to the poor of this world, rich in faith. chap. ii, . adventists never believed, however, that all that is said in the new testament relative to the kingdom of heaven relates to the future kingdom of glory. especially in some of the parables of our lord does the term refer to the work of grace with the people of god in this mortal state. but if we may be allowed to express the relation between believers and their lord in this mortal state by the term kingdom of grace; and the future relation of immortal beings with the king of kings by the kingdom of glory, the position that the kingdom was set up at the first advent is not relieved of any of its difficulties. for certainly the kingdom of grace was established immediately after the fall. adam, abel, enoch, noah, abraham, and moses, were as truly the subjects of the kingdom of grace as the apostles of jesus. with this view of the subject every text relative to the kingdom can be harmonized. it is true that both john and jesus proclaimed the kingdom of heaven at hand. the immortal kingdom of glory was then at hand in the sense that it was the next universal kingdom to come. in the time of the babylonian kingdom, the kingdom of persia was at hand. the kingdom of greece was at hand in the period occupied by media and persia. and in the days of that kingdom, rome was at hand, for it was the next kingdom to succeed. in this sense was the kingdom of heaven at hand in the days of the ministry of john and of christ. daniel, chapter vii. in this chapter we have the same great outline of this world’s history as symbolized by the image of chapter ii, again brought to view, but in a different form. the prophet here saw four great beasts, explained in verse to be four great kingdoms, corresponding respectively to the gold, silver, brass, and iron, of the great image. the first was like a lion, and had eagles’ wings. verse . the chaldean empire, as advanced to its summit of prosperity under nebuchadnezzar, was intended by this beast.--_scott._ the second like to a bear, and it raised itself up on one side, and had three ribs in its mouth. verse . a fit emblem of the character and conquest of the persian nation which succeeded babylon, b. c. .--_prideaux_, vol. i, p. . and lo, another like a leopard, which had four wings and four heads. verse . this was the emblem of the grecian or macedonian empire, which for the time was the most renowned in the world. it was erected by alexander the great on the ruins of the persian monarchy, and it continued in four divisions under his successors. the leopard being exceedingly fierce and swift, represented the kingdom, and especially under alexander, its founder, but the swiftness of the quadruped was not an adequate emblem of the rapidity with which he made his conquests; the leopard had therefore four wings of a fowl upon his back.--_scott._ _prideaux_, vol. i, p. . _rollin’s hist. of alexander_. and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly. verse . the kingdom that succeeded greece was rome, the invincible fortitude, hardiness and force of which, perhaps were never equaled. this beast had ten horns. these are declared in verse to be ten kingdoms. the ten kingdoms are enumerated by marchiaval, bishop lloyd, and dr. hales, as follows, . the huns, a. d. . . the ostrogoths, a. d. . . the visgoths, a. d. . . the franks, a. d. . . the vandals, a. d. . . the suevi, a. d. . . the burgundians, a. d. . . the heruli and rugii, or thuringi, a. d. . . the anglo-saxons, a. d. . . the lombards, a. d. . it is certain that the roman empire was divided into ten kingdoms; and though they might be sometimes more and sometimes fewer, yet they were still known by the name of the ten kingdoms of the western empire.--_scott._ i considered the horns, and behold there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots. in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things. verse . this little horn is by all protestants acknowledged to be a symbol of the papacy. said the angel, speaking of this horn, “he shall subdue three kings.” verse . the three kingdoms that were plucked up to make way for the papacy were, . the heruli, in . . the vandals, in . and , the ostrogoths in . _gibbon’s decline and fall_. into the hands of this power the saints, times, and laws, were to be given for a time, times, and the dividing of time, ( years; see rev. xii, , ). from , when the papacy was set up, years extend to ; and it is a notable fact of history, that on the th of february, , berthier, a general of bonaparte’s, at the head of the republican army of france, entered rome and took it. the papal government was abolished, and the pope died in exile in . (see _croley_ on the apocalypse, _their’s history of the french revolution_, _clarke_ on dan. vii, .) the papacy has never been restored to its former power. we are by this chain of prophecy brought down to the eighteenth century. and the prophet does not see this beast gradually changing his wild and ferocious nature to the innocence and gentleness of the lamb, to make way for a temporal millennium; but he looks only a step further, and says, “_i beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame._” dan. vii, . daniel, chapter viii. it is characteristic of the different chains of prophecy, that each succeeding one introduces particulars not furnished in any previously given. the seventh of daniel, after covering the general field symbolized by the image of chapter ii, instructs us more particularly concerning the development of the little horn, or man of sin. in the eighth chapter we are again conducted over a portion of the world’s great highway, with additional particulars concerning the mighty kingdoms that stand as waymarks along our journey. on the symbols of this chapter, the ram, he-goat, and horn which waxed exceeding great, the prophet received the following instruction: the ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of media and persia. verse . the persian division of the empire was the highest and came up last. the ram with the two horns was the well-known emblem of the medes and persians. it was usual for the persian kings to wear a diadem made like a ram’s head of gold.--_scott._ and the rough goat is the king of grecia; and the great horn that is between his eyes, is the first king. verse . this was alexander, who was born b. c. , decided the fate of persia at the battle of arbela, b. c. , and died eight years thereafter in a drunken fit, at the age of , b. c. . and whereas the great horn being broken, four came up in its stead, four kingdoms, said the angel, shall stand up out of the nation. verse . these were macedonia, thrace, syria, and egypt, into which the empire was divided shortly after alexander’s death, governed respectively by cassander, lysimachus, seleucus, and ptolemy. and out of one of them came forth a little horn. verses , - . rome was not connected with the people of god, and hence is not introduced into prophecy, till after its conquest of macedonia, one of the horns of the goat; hence it is represented as coming forth from one of those horns. that this little horn which waxed exceeding great was rome, the following considerations prove: . it was to rise in the latter part of their kingdom, that is, of the four kingdoms. so did rome, so far as its place in the prophecy is concerned. its connection with the jews commenced b. c. .-- mac. viii. _josephus’ antiq._, b. xii, c. x, sec. . _prideaux_, vol. ii., p. . . it was little at first. so was rome. . it waxed “exceeding great, towards the east and towards the south.” so did rome. it conquered macedonia, b. c. ; syria, &c., to the river tigris, b. c. ; egypt, b. c. . from this horn’s increasing toward the _south_ and _east_ particularly, sir isaac newton infers that it arose in the north-west corner of the goat’s dominion, _i. e._, in italy; which points directly to the romans. . it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground. so did rome; persecuting the disciples and ministers of jesus as no other power ever did. . he magnified himself even to the prince of the host. thus did rome, when both herod and pontius pilate conspired against jesus. . he shall destroy, wonderfully, the mighty and the holy people. let from to millions of martyrs make good this charge against persecuting rome. see _religious encyclopedia_. . it was the only power that succeeded the four kingdoms which waxed exceeding great. . in this vision grecia succeeds medo-persia, just as it had been seen _twice before_; and it is absurd to suppose that the power which follows them in this vision is a _different_ power from the one which _twice before_ had been seen _succeeding them_, in chapters ii and vii; and that power was rome. . he shall be broken without hand. how clear a reference to the stone cut out without hand, which smites the image upon its feet. chap ii, . the days. besides the symbols of governments contained in dan. viii, there is a definite period of time brought to view, which claims attention. as recorded in verse , daniel heard one saint ask another the question, how long the vision should be concerning the daily [sacrifice] and the transgression of desolation to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot. the angel then addressed himself to daniel and said, “unto two thousand and three hundred days, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.” waiving for the present the question as to what may constitute the sanctuary, we wish to ascertain if possible the nature, the commencement, and termination of this period of time. there are two kinds of time to be met with in the bible; literal and symbolic. in symbolic time, a day signifies a year. num. xiv, ; eze. iv, . to which class do the days belong? being brought in connection with acknowledged symbols, it would be both easy and natural to infer that they partook of the nature of the rest of the vision and were symbolic, presenting us with a period of years. and that such is the case is further evident from the fact, as is shown in the investigation of dan. viii, that the field of the prophet’s vision, was the empires of persia, greece and rome. the days there given cannot therefore be literal days; for literal days (scarcely six years and a half) would by no means cover the duration of any one of these empires singly, much less embrace so nearly the whole of their existence put together, as they evidently do. they must consequently denote years. can we now ascertain the commencement of this period? we answer, yes; the key to the matter being in the _ninth_ chapter of daniel, between which and the eighth there is an unmistakable connection, as we shall now endeavor to show. after their mention in verse , the days are not again spoken of in chapter viii. all the other parts of the vision are there fully explained; it must have been, therefore, this point concerning the time, that troubled the mind of the prophet, and in reference to which, solely, that he exclaims at the end of the chapter, i was astonished at the vision, but none understood it. it was in the third year of belshazzar, b. c., , that daniel had this vision of chapter viii. fifty-three years previous to this time, jerusalem had been taken by nebuchadnezzar, and the seventy years’ captivity commenced; and thirty-five years before this, the chaldeans had utterly demolished the city, broken down its walls and burnt the house of god with fire. chron. xxxvi, . daniel had learned from the prophecy of jeremiah, [chapter xxv], that the seventy years of captivity were drawing near their close, in the first year of darius, b. c., , as we read in the first verses of dan. ix; and it is evident that he so far misunderstood the period of the days as to suppose that they ended with the seventy years of israel’s servitude; therefore, turning his face toward the prostrate city and the ruined temple of his fathers, he prays god to cause his face to shine upon his sanctuary which is desolate. verse . “while i was speaking in prayer,” says he, [chapter ix, - ], “even the man gabriel, whom i had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation. and he informed me and talked with me, and said, o, daniel, i am now come forth to give thee skill and understanding. at the beginning of thy supplications the commandment came forth, and i am come to show thee; for thou art greatly beloved; therefore understand the matter, and consider the vision. _seventy weeks_ are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city,” &c. that this is a continuation of the explanation of the vision of chapter viii, would seem sufficiently evident without the aid of any special argument to prove it so. but as there is a vital point that hinges upon this fact, we will offer a few reasons which place it beyond the limits of contradiction. . gabriel had received a charge [chapter viii, ], to make daniel understand the vision; but at the end of that chapter, daniel says he was astonished at the vision, but none understood it. gabriel therefore did not complete his mission in chapter viii; the charge still rested upon him, make this man to understand the vision. . the being who came to daniel at the time of the supplication, was the very same who had appeared to him in the vision at the beginning; namely, gabriel. and that he had now come to undeceive him concerning his application of the time, is evident in that he says, i am _now_ come forth to give thee skill and understanding. why did he not give him a full understanding of the vision at first? we answer, because he revealed to him all that he was then able to bear. he fainted and was sick certain days. . direct reference is made to _the_ vision at the beginning. and if that is not the vision of chapter viii, it is impossible to find it. and again, if gabriel does not explain in chapter ix, what he omitted in chapter viii, it is impossible for any man to show wherein gabriel fulfilled his commission to make this man understand the vision. . when gabriel commenced his further explanation, he did not explain the symbol of the ram; for that he had already explained. he did not explain the goat; for he had likewise explained that. neither did he commence about the little horn; for he had made that plain also in chapter viii. what then did he explain? the very point there omitted; namely, the time: _seventy weeks_ are determined upon thy people, &c. these facts are sufficient to show the connection of dan. ix with the vision of chapter viii. but how do the words of gabriel, seventy weeks are determined upon thy people, &c., explain the period of the days? the answer is, the word rendered determined, signifies literally, _cut off_. gesenius, in his hebrew lexicon, thus defines it: properly, to _cut off_; tropically, to divide, and so to determine, to decree. the englishman’s hebrew concordance says, determined, literally divided. from what period are the seventy weeks divided, or cut off? from the days; for there is no other period given from which they can be taken; and this is placed beyond a doubt by the connection of the two chapters, which has already been proved. having now ascertained that the weeks of dan. ix are the first years of the days, and that consequently the two periods commence together, we further learn that this period of weeks dates from the going forth of a commandment to restore and build jerusalem. dan. ix, . if then we can definitely locate this commandment, we have the starting point for the great period of the years. the bible furnishes us with four tests by which to determine when the true date is found: . from the time of the commandment, years were to witness the completion of the street and wall of jerusalem. dan. ix, . . threescore and two weeks from this time, or, in all, weeks, years, were to extend to messiah the prince. . sixty-nine and a half weeks were to extend to the crucifixion--the cessation of sacrifice and oblation in the midst of the week. verse . . the full period of weeks was to witness the complete confirmation of the covenant with daniel’s people. in the seventh of ezra, we find the decree for which we seek. it went forth in b. c. . much concerning this decree, and the date of its promulgation, might here be said. but a more full explanation of it may more properly be given in another place. i will say, however, that, admitting that b. c. , is the correct date for the commencement of the years, which is susceptible of the clearest proof, none will fail to see how william miller came to the conclusion that this prophetic period would close in the year . from take ---- and there remains “with the solemn conviction,” writes mr. miller, “that such momentous events were predicted in the scriptures, to be fulfilled in so short a space of time, the question came home to me with mighty power regarding my duty to the world, in view of the evidence that had affected my own mind. if the end was so near, it was important that the world should know it. i supposed that it would call forth the opposition of the ungodly; but it never came into my mind that any christian would oppose it. i supposed that all such would be so rejoiced, in view of the glorious prospect, that it would only be necessary to present it, for them to receive it. my great fear was, that, in their joy at the hope of a glorious inheritance so soon to be revealed, they would receive the doctrine without sufficiently examining the scriptures in demonstration of its truth. i therefore feared to present it, lest, by some possibility, i should be in error, and be the means of misleading any. “various difficulties and objections would arise in my mind, from time to time. certain texts would occur to me, which seemed to weigh against my conclusions; and i would not present a view to others, while any difficulty appeared to militate against it. i therefore continued the study of the bible, to see if i could sustain any of these objections. my object was not merely to remove them, but i wished to see if they were valid. “sometimes, when at work, a text would arise like this: of that day and hour knoweth no man, &c., and how, then, could the bible reveal the time of the advent? i would then immediately examine the context in which it was found, and i saw at once that, in the same connection, we are informed how we may know when it is nigh, even at the doors; consequently, that text could not teach that we could know nothing of the time of that event. other texts, which are advanced in support of the doctrine of a temporal millennium, would arise; but, on examining their context, i invariably found that they were applicable only to the eternal state, or were so illustrative of the spread of the gospel here, as to be entirely irrelevant to the position they were adduced to support. “thus, all those passages that speak of the will of god being done on earth as in heaven, of the earth being full of the knowledge of the glory of god, &c., could not be applicable to a time when the man of sin was prevailing against the saints, or when the righteous and wicked were dwelling together, which is to be the case until the end of the world. those which speak of the gospel being preached in all the world, teach that, as soon as it should be thus preached, the end was to come; so that it could not be delayed a thousand years from that time, nor long enough for the world’s conversion after the preaching of the gospel as a witness. “the question of the resurrection and judgment was for a time an obstacle in the way. being instructed that all the dead would be raised at the same time, i supposed it must be so taught in the bible; but i soon saw it was one of the traditions of the elders. “so also with the return of the jews. that question i saw could only be sustained by denying the positive declarations of the new testament, which assert, there is no difference between the jew and the greek; that the promise that he shall be the heir of the world, was not to abraham and his seed through the law, but through the righteousness of faith; that there is neither jew nor greek, bond nor free, male nor female; but that if ye are christ’s, then are ye abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise. i was, therefore, obliged to discard an objection which asserts there is a difference between the jew and greek; that the children of the flesh _are_ accounted for the seed, &c. “in this way i was occupied from to , in weighing the various objections which were being presented to my mind. during that time, more objections arose in my mind, than have been advanced by my opponents since; and i know of no objection that has been since advanced, which did not there occur to me. but, however strong they at first appeared, after examining them in the light of the divine word, i could only compare them to straws, laid down singly as obstacles, on a well-beaten road. the car of truth rolled over them, unimpeded in its progress.” he continued to make the bible his daily study, and became more and more convinced that he had a personal duty to perform respecting what he conceived the bible to teach of the nearness of the advent. these impressions he thus describes: “when i was about my business it was continually ringing in my ears, go and tell the world of their danger. this text was constantly occurring to me: ‘when i say unto the wicked, o wicked man, thou shalt surely die; if thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will i require at thy hand. nevertheless, if thou warn the wicked of his way to turn from it, if he do not turn from his way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul.’ eze. xxxiii, , . i felt that if the wicked could be effectually warned, multitudes of them would repent; and that, if they were not warned, their blood might be required at my hand. i did all i could to avoid the conviction that anything was required of me; and i thought that, by freely speaking of it to all, i should perform my duty, and that god would raise up the necessary instrumentality for the accomplishment of the work. i prayed that some minister might see the truth, and devote himself to its promulgation; but still it was impressed upon me, go and tell it to the world; their blood will i require at thy hand. the more i presented it in conversation, the more dissatisfied i felt with myself for withholding it from the public. i tried to excuse myself to the lord for not going out and proclaiming it to the world. i told the lord that i was not used to public speaking; that i had not the necessary qualifications to gain the attention of an audience; that i was very diffident, and feared to go before the world; that they would not believe me, nor hearken to my voice; that i was slow of speech, of a slow tongue. but i could get no relief. “as mr. miller’s opinions respecting the nearness and nature of the millennium became known, they naturally elicited a good deal of comment among his friends and neighbors, and also among those at a distance. some of their remarks, not the most complimentary to his sanity, would occasionally be repeated to him. “having heard that a physician in his neighborhood had said that esquire miller, as he was familiarly called, was a fine man and a good neighbor, but was a monomaniac on the subject of the advent, mr. miller was humorously inclined to let him prescribe for his case. “one of his children being sick one day, he sent for the doctor, who, after prescribing for the child, noticed that mr. miller was very mute in one corner, and asked what ailed him. “‘well, i hardly know, doctor. i want you to see what does, and prescribe for me.’ “the doctor felt of his pulse, &c., and could not decide respecting his malady; and inquired what he supposed was his complaint. “‘well,’ says mr. miller, ‘i don’t know but i am a monomaniac; and i want you to examine me, and see if i am, and, if so, cure me. can you tell me when a man is a monomaniac?’ “the doctor blushed, and said he thought he could. “mr. miller wished to know how. “‘why,’ said the doctor, ‘a monomaniac is rational on all subjects but one; and when you touch that particular subject he will become raving.’ “‘well,’ says mr. miller, ‘i insist upon it that you see whether i am in reality a monomaniac; and if i am, you shall prescribe for and cure me. you shall, therefore, sit down with me two hours, while i present the subject of the advent to you, and, if i am a monomaniac, by that time you will discover it.’ “the doctor was somewhat disconcerted; but mr. miller insisted, and told him, as it was to present the state of his mind, he might charge for his time as in regular practice. “the doctor finally consented; and, at mr. miller’s request, opened the bible and read from the th of daniel. as he read along, mr. miller inquired what the ram denoted, with the other symbols presented. the doctor had read newton, and applied them to persia, greece, and rome, as mr. miller did. “mr. miller then inquired how long the vision of those empires was to be. “‘ days.’ “‘what!’ said mr. miller, ‘could those great empires cover only literal days?’ “‘why,’ said the doctor, ‘those days are years, according to all commentators; and those kingdoms are to continue years.’ “mr. miller then asked him to turn to the second chapter of daniel, and to the seventh, all of which he explained the same as mr. miller. he was then asked if he knew when the days would end. he did not know, as he could not tell when they commenced. “mr. miller told him to read the ninth of daniel. he read down till he came to the st verse, when daniel saw the man gabriel, whom he had seen in the vision. “‘in what vision?’ mr. miller inquired. “‘why,’ said the doctor, ‘in the vision of the eighth of daniel.’ “‘wherefore, understand the matter, and consider the vision. he had now come, then, to make him understand that vision, had he?’ “‘yes,’ said the doctor. “‘well, seventy weeks are determined; what are these seventy weeks a part of?’ “‘of the days.’ “‘then do they begin with the days?’ “‘yes,’ said the doctor. “‘when did they end?’ “‘in a. d. .’ “‘then how far would the extend after ?’ “the doctor subtracted from , and replied, ‘ . why,’ said he, ‘that is past.’ “‘but,’ said mr. miller, ‘there were from ; in what year would that come?’ “the doctor saw at once that the should be added, and set down and , and, adding them, replied, ‘ .’ “at this unexpected result, the doctor settled back in his chair and colored; but immediately took his hat and left the house in a rage. “the next day he again called on mr. miller, and looked as though he had been in the greatest mental agony. “‘why, mr. miller,’ said he, ‘i am going to hell. i have not slept a wink since i was here yesterday. i have looked at the question in every light, and the vision must terminate about a. d. ; and i am unprepared, and must go to hell.’ “mr. miller calmed him, and pointed him to the ark of safety; and in about a week, calling each day on mr. miller, he found peace to his soul, and went on his way rejoicing, as _great a monomaniac_ as mr. miller. he afterward acknowledged that, till he made the figures , he had no idea of the result to which he was coming.” his public labors. the public labors of mr. miller, according to the best evidence to be obtained, date from the autumn of . he had continued to be much distressed respecting his duty to go and tell it to the world, which was constantly impressed on his mind. one saturday, after breakfast, he sat down at his desk to examine some point, and, as he arose to go out to work, it came home to him with more force than ever, go and tell it to the world. he thus writes: “the impression was so sudden, and came with such force, that i settled down into my chair, saying, i can’t go, lord. why not? seemed to be the response; and then all my excuses came up--my want of ability, &c.; but my distress became so great, i entered into a solemn covenant with god that if he would open the way, i would go and perform my duty to the world. what do you mean by opening the way? seemed to come to me. why, said i, if i should have an invitation to speak publicly in any place, i will go and tell them what i find in the bible about the lord’s coming. instantly all my burden was gone, and i rejoiced that i should not probably be thus called upon; for i had never had such an invitation. my trials were not known, and i had but little expectation of being invited to any field of labor. “in about half an hour from this time, before i had left the room, a son of mr. guilford, of dresden, about sixteen miles from my residence, came in, and said that his father had sent for me, and wished me to go home with him. supposing that he wished to see me on some business, i asked him what he wanted. he replied that there was to be no preaching in their church the next day, and his father wished to have me come and talk to the people on the subject of the lord’s coming. i was immediately angry with myself for having made the covenant i had; i rebelled at once against the lord, and determined not to go. i left the boy without giving him any answer, and retired in great distress to a grove near by. there i struggled with the lord for about an hour, endeavoring to release myself from the covenant i had made with him; but i could get no relief. it was impressed upon my conscience, will you make a covenant with god, and break it so soon? the exceeding sinfulness of thus doing overwhelmed me. i finally submitted, and promised the lord that, if he would sustain me, i would go, trusting in him to give me grace and ability to perform all he should require of me. i returned to the house, and found the boy still waiting. he remained till after dinner, and i returned with him to dresden. “the next day, which, as nearly as i can remember, was about the first sabbath in august, , i delivered my first public lecture on the second advent. the house was well filled with an attentive audience. as soon as i commenced speaking, all my diffidence and embarrassment were gone, and i felt impressed only with the greatness of the subject, which, by the providence of god, i was enabled to present. at the close of the services on the sabbath, i was requested to remain and lecture during the week, with which i complied. they flocked in from the neighboring towns; a revival commenced, and it was said that in thirteen families all but two persons were hopefully converted. “on the monday following i returned home, and found a letter from elder fuller, of poultney, vt., requesting me to go and lecture there on the same subject. they had not heard of my going to dresden. i went to poultney, and lectured there with similar effect. “from thence i went by invitation to pawlet, and other towns in that vicinity. the churches of congregationalists, baptists, and methodists, were thrown open. in almost every place i visited, my labors resulted in the reclaiming of backsliders, and the conversion of sinners. i was usually invited to fields of labor by the ministers of the several congregations whom i visited, who gave me their countenance; and i have never labored in any place to which i was not previously invited. the most pressing invitations from the ministry, and the leading members of the churches, poured in continually from that time, during the whole period of my public labors, and with more than one-half of which i was unable to comply. churches were thrown open everywhere, and i lectured to crowded houses, through the western part of vermont, the northern part of new york, and in canada east; and powerful reformations were the results of my labors.” “conversion of one hundred infidels. “with the st of january, , he commenced a second course of lectures at lansingburgh, n. y., in compliance with the urgent request of the baptist church in that place, and of e. b. crandall, their pastor. the lectures continued nine days, and were listened to by crowded and attentive audiences. the result also was most heart-cheering. infidelity had several strongholds in that neighborhood, and many of that class attended his lectures, and were greatly affected by them. in a letter dated on the th of that month, two weeks after the close of the lectures, a gentleman of that place writes to mr. miller: “‘i have never witnessed so powerful an effect in any place as in this, on all who heard. i am of the opinion that not less than one hundred persons who held infidel sentiments are brought to believe the bible. infidelity is dumb in this place, as if frightened, and converts are many.’ “the following testimony of one who was converted from infidelity during these lectures, is copied from the boston investigator (an infidel paper) of january, : “‘_mr. editor_: i was a warm supporter of the views of abner kneeland, attended his lectures and _protracted dances_, disbelieved in divine revelation and a future existence, and fully accorded with mr. kneeland’s views of religion. having read every work of note that i could obtain, and having heard many lectures opposed to god and the bible, i considered myself prepared to overthrow the christian faith, and feared no argument that could be brought from the bible. with these feelings, i attended a full course of mr. miller’s lectures. he gave his rules of interpretation, and pledged himself to prove his position. i approved of his rules,--to which i refer you,--and the result was, he established the fact that the bible is what it purports to be--the word of god--to my mind, beyond a doubt; and i have taken it as the man of my counsel. i notice your doubts of the truth of the statement in relation to hundreds of infidels being converted under the preaching of mr. miller. this may possibly be owing to your never having given mr. miller a candid and thorough hearing. he is a man mighty in the scriptures, and has done terrible execution in the ranks of the “king’s enemies,” with the sword of the spirit, which is the word of god. i am personally acquainted with nearly one hundred who held to similar views with abner kneeland, who were converted under the preaching of mr. miller; and we did not yield the point without a struggle, nor without due consideration. each and every prop and refuge of infidelity and unbelief was taken away from us, and our sandy foundation was swept by the truth of the almighty as chaff is driven by the wind. yet we parted with them much as a man parts with a _diseased tooth_. we tried to cure and keep it there, and when made to know that the _root_ and foundation was rotten, it was painful to part with; but we rejoice and felt better after the separation; for there is balm in gilead--there is a physician there.’ “from the th to the th of may, mr. miller lectured in groton, mass., and from the d to the th of june, in lynn, mass. in connection with his visit to this place, he made he following entry in his memorandum book: ‘thus ends my tour into massachusetts, making eight hundred lectures from october , , to june , --four years, six months, nine days.’ the editor of the lynn record gave the following notice of mr. miller, and his visit to that place: “‘miller and the prophecies. “‘we took a prejudice against this good man when he first came among us, on account of what we supposed a glaring error in interpreting the scripture prophecies so that the world would come to an end in . we are still inclined to believe this an error or miscalculation. at the same time we have overcome our prejudices against him by attending his lectures, and learning more of the excellent character of the man, and of the great good he has done and is doing. mr. miller is a plain farmer, and pretends to nothing except that he has made the scripture prophecies an intense study for many years, understands many of them differently from most other people, and wishes for the good of others, to spread his views before the public. no one can hear him five minutes without being convinced of his sincerity, and instructed by his reasoning and information. all acknowledge his lectures to be replete with useful and interesting matter. his knowledge of scripture is very extensive and minute; that of the prophecies, especially, surprisingly familiar. his application of the prophecies to the great events which have taken place in the natural and moral world is such, generally, as to produce conviction of their truth, and gain the ready assent of his hearers. we have reason to believe that the preaching or lecturing of mr. miller has been productive of great and extensive good. revivals have followed in his train. he has been heard with attention wherever he has been. “‘there is nothing very peculiar in the manner or appearance of mr. miller. both are at least equal to the style and appearance of ministers in general. his gestures are easy and expressive, and his personal appearance every way decorous. his scripture explanations and illustrations are strikingly simple, natural, and forcible; and the great eagerness of the people to hear him has been manifested wherever he has preached.’ “on his way home he lectured at the following places: commencing on the th of june at westford, vt.; the d, at cambridge, vt.; and on the th, at colchester, vt. as a result of his labors in colchester, twenty-three were added to the baptist church between that time and the d of december following. “the letters addressed to him and his son at this period show that a report was in circulation that he was dead; and as soon as that was successfully contradicted, another was current, that, on re-examining his calculations, he had discovered a mistake of one hundred years. both of these rumors were several times subsequently revived, and had to be as often contradicted. “on the th of september, in compliance with the wish of many in rutland, vt., who were very anxious to hear his course of lectures, he visited that place, and lectured each day, to the d, when he returned to his family, and made arrangements for a second visit to massachusetts. “he commenced his labors at groton, mass., on the th of october, and lectured ten days. in reference to these lectures and others in neighboring towns, silas hawley, congregational minister, wrote from groton, on the th of april, , as follows: “‘mr. miller has lectured in this and adjoining towns with marked success. his lectures have been succeeded by precious revivals of religion in all those places. a class of minds are reached by him not within the influence of other men. his lectures are well adapted, so far as i have learned, for shaking the supremacy of the various forms of error that are rife in the community.’ “closing his lectures in groton, mr. miller gave a third course of lectures in lowell, continuing from the d of october to the st of november. these, like the previous lectures in that place, were attended with precious fruits. “from the d to the th of november, he lectured in haverhill, mass., where he made the acquaintance of elder henry plummer, pastor of the christian church, who embraced his views, and was a steadfast friend till mr. miller’s decease. “on the th of november, mr. miller commenced a course of lectures in exeter, n. h., which continued till the th. on the th, a conference of the christian connection was in session there, and they called on mr. miller in a body. he was a stranger to nearly all of them; and few of them regarded his views with anything more than mere curiosity. several of them questioned him respecting his faith; but they were speedily silenced by the quotation of appropriate tests of scripture. “he arrived in boston on the th of december, and from the th to the th lectured in chardon-street chapel,--his first course of lectures in that city. “on the th of december, mr. miller writes from boston to his son: ‘i am now in this place lecturing twice a day, to large audiences. many, very many, go away unable to gain admittance. many, i am informed, are under serious convictions. i hope god will work in this city.’ “on the th of november, he commenced a course of lectures in new haven, ct., in the m. e. church, rev. mr. law, pastor. on sunday, the th, although the house was large, it was crowded; and in the evening many were unable to gain admittance. he continued there till the th, the interest continuing during the entire course. _the fountain_, a temperance paper published in that city, gave the following account of the meeting: “‘mr. william miller, the celebrated writer and lecturer on the second advent of our saviour, and the speedy destruction of the world, has recently visited our city, and delivered a course of lectures to an immense concourse of eager listeners in the first methodist church. it is estimated that not less than three thousand persons were in attendance at the church, on each evening, for a week; and if the almost breathless silence which reigned throughout the immense throng for two or three hours at a time is any evidence of interest in the subject of the lectures, it cannot be said that our community are devoid of feeling on this momentous question. “‘mr. miller was accompanied and assisted by elder j. v. himes, who is by no means an inefficient coadjutor in this great and important work. we did not attend the whole course, the last three lectures being all we had an opportunity of hearing. we are utterly disappointed. so many extravagant things had been said of the “fanatics” in the public prints, and such distorted statements published in reference to their articles of faith, that we were prepared to witness disgusting and perhaps blasphemous exhibitions of millerism, as the doctrine of the second advent is called. “‘in justice to mr. miller we are constrained to say, that he is one of the most interesting lecturers we have any recollection of ever having heard. we have not the least doubt that he is fully convinced of the truth of the doctrine he labors so diligently to inculcate, and he certainly evinces great candor and fairness in his manner of proving his points. and he proves them, too, to the satisfaction of every hearer;--that is, allowing his premises to be correct, there is no getting away from his conclusions. “‘there was quite a number of believers in attendance from other places, and a happier company we have never seen. we have no means of ascertaining the precise effect of these meetings on this community, but we know that many minds have been induced to contemplate the scripture prophecies in a new light, and not a few are studying the bible with unwonted interest. for our own part, this new view of the world’s destiny is so completely at variance with previous habits of thought and anticipation, that we are not prepared to give it entire credence, though we should not dare hazard an attempt to disprove it. “‘the best part of the story is, that a powerful revival has followed the labors of messrs. miller and company. we learn that over fifty persons presented themselves for prayers at the altar of the methodist church on sunday evening. on monday evening the number was about eighty.’” “from the th to the th of march [ ], mr. miller lectured in medford, mass. while here, a friend took him to a phrenologist in boston, with whom he was himself acquainted, but who had no suspicion whose head he was about to examine. the phrenologist commenced by saying that the person under examination had a large, well-developed, and well-balanced head. while examining the moral and intellectual organs, he said to mr. miller’s friend: “‘i tell you what it is, mr. miller could not easily make a convert of _this man_ to his hair-brained theory. he has too much good sense.’ “thus he proceeded, making comparisons between the head he was examining and the head of mr. miller, as he fancied it would be. “‘oh, how i should like to examine mr. miller’s head!’ said he; ‘i would give it one squeezing.’ “the phrenologist, knowing that the gentleman was a particular friend of mr. miller, spared no pains in going out of the way to make remarks upon him. putting his hand on the organ of marvelousness, he said: ‘there! i’ll bet you anything that old miller has got a bump on his head there as big as my fist;’ at the same time doubling up his fist as an illustration. “the others present laughed at the perfection of the joke, and he heartily joined them, supposing they were laughing at his witticisms on mr. miller. “he pronounced the head of the gentleman under examination the reverse, in every particular, of what he declared mr. miller’s must be. when through, he made out his chart, and politely asked mr. miller his name. “mr. miller said it was of no consequence about putting his name upon the chart; but the phrenologist insisted. “‘very well,’ said mr. m.; ‘you may call it miller, if you choose.’ “‘_miller, miller_,’ said he; ‘what is your first name?’ “‘they call me william miller.’ “‘what! the gentleman who is lecturing on the prophecies?’ “‘yes, sir, the same.’ “at this the phrenologist settled back in his chair, the personation of astonishment and dismay, and spoke not a word while the company remained. his feelings may be more easily imagined than described.” concerning his personal appearance and private character, we must do the reader the service of giving him the following portrait, drawn by a delicate pencil: “i have just had the privilege of meeting with this humble servant of god, at the fireside of a friend, and i can truly say that my earnest expectations were more than realized in the interview. there is a kindness of soul, simplicity, and power, peculiarly original, combined in his manner, and he is affable and attentive to all, without any affectation of superiority. he is of about medium stature, a little corpulent, and in temperament a mixture of sanguine and nervous. his intellectual developments are unusually full, and we see in his head, great benevolence and firmness, united with a lack of self-esteem. he is also wanting in marvelousness, and is naturally skeptical. his countenance is full and round, and much like the engraving we have seen, while there is a peculiar depth of expression in his blue eye, of shrewdness and love. although about sixty-two years of age, his hair is not grey, but of a light glossy auburn, his voice is full and distinct, and his pronounciation somewhat northern-antique. in his social relations, he is gentle and affectionate, and insures the esteem of all with whom he mingles. in giving this charcoal sketch to the public, i have merely sought to correct numerous misstatements, and gratify the honest desire of many distant believers, with a faint outline of the character and appearance of the man whom god has chosen to give the ‘midnight cry’ to a sleeping world.”--_midnight cry_. here we must leave william miller for the present, to be introduced again in a brief sketch of the rise and progress of adventism. my public labors. on returning from the great camp-meeting in eastern maine, where i heard with deepest interest such men as miller, himes, and preble, i found myself happy in the faith that christ would come about the year . i had given up all to teach the doctrine to others, and to prepare myself to do this was the great object before me. i had purchased the chart illustrating the prophecies of daniel and john, used by lecturers at that time, and had a good assortment of publications upon the manner, object, and time of the second advent. and with this chart hung before me, and these books and the bible in my hands, i spent several weeks in close study, which gave me a clearer view of the subject. in october, , an advent camp-meeting was held in exeter, me., which i attended. the meeting was large, tents numerous, preaching clear and powerful, and the singing of second-advent melodies possessed a power such as i had never before witnessed in sacred songs. my second-advent experience was greatly deepened at this meeting, and at its close i felt that i must immediately go out into the great harvest-field, and do what i could in sounding the warning. i therefore prepared three lectures, one to remove such objections as the time of the advent not to be known, and the temporal millennium, one on the signs of the times, and one on the prophecy of daniel. i had neither horse, saddle, bridle, nor money, yet felt that i must go. i had used my past winter’s earnings in necessary clothing, in attending second-advent meetings, and in the purchase of books and the chart. but my father offered me the use of a horse for the winter, and elder polley gave me a saddle with both pads torn off, and several pieces of an old bridle. i gladly accepted these, and cheerfully placed the saddle on a beech log and nailed on the pads, fastened the pieces of the bridle together with malleable nails, folded my chart, with a few pamphlets on the subject of the advent, over my breast, snugly buttoned up in my coat, and left my father’s house on horseback. i gave from three to six lectures in four different towns around palmyra. speaking, with the blessing of god, gave me freedom and confidence, and as the subject opened to me by study, reflection, and in speaking, i found it necessary to divide subjects, so that i added one discourse, at least, to the little series, at each place. i had a good hearing at all these places, but saw no special results. a school-mate of mine had engaged to teach school in the town of burnham; but by accident had lost an eye, and was told by his physician that he should rest at least one week before teaching. he urged me to teach for him one week. i consented, and on the first day of school gave an appointment for evening lectures. the school-house was crowded. i gave seven lectures, which were listened to with interest and deep feeling. at this place i began to feel the burden of the work, the condition of the people, and love for precious souls, as i had not before. previous to this time i had taken great delight in dwelling upon the evidences of the advent hope and faith. but now i realized that there was a solemn power in these evidences, to convict the people, such as i did not expect to realize. at the close of my last lecture, sixty arose for prayers. i felt deeply the condition of the people. but what could i do for them? i had not anticipated that i should ever have upon my hands sixty repenting sinners, and was wholly unprepared to lead them any farther. my little pond of thought, in the course of seven lectures, had run out, and i dared not undertake to preach a practical discourse for fear it would prove a failure, and injure the well-begun work. in this state of things it occurred to me to send for my brother, who had been in the ministry five years before me, and was favorable to the advent doctrine. he came and labored six weeks, baptized, and organized a large church, for which they paid him sixty dollars. i paid, at the close of my week’s teaching and lecturing, one dollar for horse-keeping, and left for the kennebec. my brother afterward told me that every one he baptized dated their experience from my lectures. at one of the places near my native town, where i had given lectures, i met a gentleman who seemed very much interested in the soon-coming of the lord, who gave me an urgent invitation to visit brunswick, me. he stated that there had been no preaching on the subject in that part of the state, and that the freewill baptists, who were very numerous on the west side of the kennebec river, from augusta to brunswick, would willingly give me a hearing. from that moment i felt inclined to make my course toward brunswick. so, in january, , i left on horseback, thinly clad, and without money, to go more than a hundred miles among strangers. night came on as i drew near augusta, the capital of the state, and i inquired at a humble cottage for entertainment, stating that i was a penniless preacher, and wished to find rest with some christian, who would willingly care for me and my tired horse without charge. “i am a member of the christian church of this place,” said he, “please stop with me.” i gladly accepted the cordial invitation. during the evening my friend stated that elder pearl, a christian minister, was to preach on the next sunday, and invited me to stop and give evening lectures in the school-house, and spend the sunday with my old friend and acquaintance, elder pearl. i did so, and had a good hearing, and was kindly received by elder pearl, who loved the doctrine of christ’s soon coming. i was also invited to speak in the school district east of that, near the kennebec river. the house was filled, and many stood outside at the open windows. a universalist opposed the doctrine i was presenting to the people, and finding he could prevail nothing, brought a mr. w., the editor of the augusta _age_, a noted universalist, to oppose me, and, at the close of my lecture, introduced him to the people, and invited them to stop and hear what he had to say. i was too hoarse to reply, and stated that i had no further claims on the congregation. a dozen voices cried, “clear the way, and let us pass out.” only about twenty-five, and those of the baser sort, remained to hear mr. w. they were, of course, ready to receive what the speaker chose to say, who, being grieved and angry with the youthful lecturer for leaving, and with the people for following me, was in a state of mind to excite in them a mob spirit. the reader may think me rash in depriving the editor of the _age_ of a hearing. but i was an inexperienced youth, and feared a battle, and took this course to avoid it. but a battle came the next evening of a different kind. mr. w.’s hearers decided before leaving the school-house to get all to join them who would, and on the next evening break up the meeting. as i was about to go to the house the next evening, several of my friends came to me and stated that a mob of at least three hundred was around the school-house. they warned me, as i regarded my life, to remain away from the meeting. i went before the lord with the matter, then told my friends that i should go to the school-house, trusting in god to defend me. and as i drew near the house i heard the shouting of the mob, and was again warned by the friends who accompanied me to take their advice, and go no further lest i lose my life. i then stated to them that i believed the lord would in some way defend me, and pressed forward. my friends had resolved that if i went to the place of meeting they would go with me, and stand by me to the last. we found the school-house filled with women, all the windows taken out, and the house surrounded by men enough to fill three such houses. i pressed through the crowd and made my way to the desk. the greatest fear prevailed within the house, while unearthly yells seemed to be the delight of the mob without. the universalist, who had taken the trouble to get mr. w. to the place to oppose me, stood close to the desk, and, as i entered it, said to me: “this, sir, is the result of your conduct last evening, in refusing to hear the gentleman i brought here to reply to you. your meetings will be broken up.” i replied, “very well, sir, if it is the will of god, let it be so.” i then called the meeting to order, and prayed, standing upon my feet. this i did for two reasons. first, want of room to kneel, and, second, it was safer for me to stand with my eyes open and watch this infuriated universalist, who seemed to have all he could do to keep from striking me. while praying, a snow-ball whistled by my head and struck on the ceiling behind me. i read my text from peter, relative to the burning day of god, and commenced commenting upon it, but could be heard by only a few near me, in consequence of the shouting of the mob. many snow-balls were thrown at me through the open windows, but none hit me. i raised my voice above the noise of the mob, but while turning for my proof-texts they seemed to gain advantage over me. and there was too much excitement and fear for my proofs to tell on any mind. my clothing and also my bible were wet from the melted fragments of a hundred snow-balls which had broken upon the ceiling behind me, and had spattered over me and it. that was no time for logic, so i closed my bible and entered into a description of the terrors of the day of god, and the awful end of the ungodly. these opened before me wonderfully. language and power of voice seemed to be given me for the occasion. i was nearly lost to all around me, while the naked glare of the fires of the day of god seemed to light up the field of slaughter of the ungodly men before me. i cried, “repent and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, or you will drink of the wrath of god. repent, and call on god for mercy and pardon. turn to christ and get ready for his coming, or in a little from this, on rocks and mountains you will call in vain. you scoff now, but you will pray then.” the mob seemed more quiet. the night before, a spike was thrown at me and hit me on the forehead, and fell into my bible, and i put it into my pocket. inexpressible pity and love for the crowd came over me, and as i was pointing sinners to the lamb of god, with tears, i held up the spike, saying, “some poor sinner cast this spike at me last evening. god pity him. the worst wish i have for him is, that he was this moment as happy as i am. why should i resent his insult when my master had them driven through his hands,” and at the moment raising my arms and placing my hands upon the ceiling behind me, in the position of christ on the cross. the spirit of god accompanied the words and the gesture to the hearts of the crowd. some shrieked, and a general groan was heard. “hark! hark!” cried a score of voices. in a moment all was silent. in tears i was calling on sinners to turn and live. i spoke of the love of god, the sacrifice of christ; his undying pity for vile sinners. i then spoke of his coming in glory to save all who would seek him now. more than a hundred were in tears. “do you want to see a happy man,” said i; “please look at me.” many were weeping aloud, and i was getting so hoarse that i could hardly be heard for the penitent cries and sobs of those around me. “who are willing to seek christ,” said i, “and with me suffer persecution, and be ready for his coming? who in this crowd wish me to pray for them, that this may be their happy portion? as many as do, please rise up.” nearly one hundred arose. it was nine in the evening, and i was hoarse and weary. i closed with benediction, took my chart and bible, and made my way out through the subdued crowd. some one locked arms with me to assist and guard me. his countenance seemed impressively familiar, yet i did not know him. when i had passed the crowd, i missed him, and, from that evening, who he was, or how he left me, and where he went, have been mysterious. was it an angel of god, sent to stand by me in the perils of that evening? who can say it was not? my lectures continued in this place three or four evenings without the least opposition, and a general reformation followed. in about eight weeks i returned to the place again, and as i entered the door of an especial friend, near the old scene of battle, i recognized my universalist friend. he had been driving some exciting conversation with the lady of the house about me. both appeared greatly agitated as i entered. the lady greeted me cordially, but with expressions of astonishment that i was in her house again. the universalist made for the door, and left in a most abrupt manner. the lady then stated that this man had been talking of me to her in a most abusive manner, and that the last statement he made as i came to her door was as follows: “white is a rascal. he has been overtaken in crime, and is safe in jail. one of my neighbors told me that he saw him yesterday in augusta jail.” this man was overtaken in his guilty folly in a manner he little expected. he had certainly succeeded poorly in his war against me. i did not see this universalist, neither did i hear of him after his hasty retreat homeward, showing as much shame as the face of a guilty man is capable of silently expressing. but let the reader go back with me over these eight weeks to the time i closed my labors in this place. an invitation came for me to visit sidney, and lecture in the methodist meeting-house. cheerfully i accepted, and found a large house filled with attentive hearers. the first evening i spoke on the millennium with freedom. and as i entered the house the second evening, i was told that elder nickerson, the presiding elder, would be present that evening. i felt my youth, my lack of general knowledge of the scriptures, and my brief experience in the things of god. i trembled for the result of that meeting, as i learned that this presiding elder was opposed to the doctrine i was teaching. i was on methodist ground. this led me to pray most earnestly to god for help. my confidence that the lord would be with me grew firm as i entered the pulpit. “i learn,” said i, “that elder nickerson is in the congregation. will he please take a seat with me, and join in the services of the evening?” he cheerfully came forward, and i gave him an advent hymn from the methodist book to read, and found him willing to pray. i then sung an advent melody, and took this text: “but of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my father only.” matt. xxiv, . i stated, . that the subject was the second advent. . that god had not revealed the day nor the hour of that event. . that christ did say, in this connection, that when his people should see the signs in the sun, moon, and stars, that they should know that his coming was near, even at the doors, as truly as men know that summer is near when they see the trees of the field send forth their buds and unfold their leaves. . that, as it was in the days of noah, so should it be at the coming of the son of man. the work of warning the people of the coming flood was given to righteous noah. and in order for him to know when to build the ark, and when to raise his warning voice, the year of the flood was given to him. so shall it be at the coming of the son of man. the world is to be warned of its approaching doom. and to this end the prophecies of daniel and john especially point to this time. the signs in the heavens, on earth, in the church, and a wicked world, all show that christ and the day of vengeance are at hand. the people of that place were divided between methodism and universalism, and it seemed a favorable time to show up from matt. xxiv the view held by universalists that christ came at the destruction of jerusalem. in this i had had some experience, and succeeded in pleasing elder nickerson, who made a few general remarks, not directly opposing me, for fear, as i supposed, of pleasing the universalists, who evidently felt stirred at my discourse. the meeting closed with good feelings between us. but as i left the house, i received an urgent request by several gentlemen to call at the hotel the next morning, at nine, to answer some questions relative to what i had said of universalism. at the hour appointed, i found myself surrounded by several universalists, who were evidently in an unfriendly mood, and as many methodists, who had come to see that the young stripling should be well treated. this was kind in my methodist friends. the interview lasted till the clock struck twelve. my methodist friends expressed themselves satisfied with my answers. the landlord, who was the leading spirit among those professing universalism, then arose and said to me: “mr. white, please walk out to dinner. this afternoon i wish to show you that there is no connection between the old and new testaments.” i was surprised to find that this professed champion of universalism was really an infidel, and declined dining with him, stating that my mission was to those who received the sacred scriptures of both testaments as a harmonious revelation from god. this closed our interview. my methodist friends charged me to be on my guard lest the universalists take advantage of some unguarded expression, and hurt my influence. this was indeed kind in them, and for which i have ever felt to respect them. i gave a few more lectures, and parted with the christian people of that place, with their thanks for my labors among them, and their expressions of joy that universalism had been fearlessly exposed without giving its adherents chance to hurt me. my mind was still on the field of labor farther down the river toward brunswick. my labors thus far in augusta and sidney seemed more accidental, or providential, than in accordance with my design when i left home. and now, with the peace of god ruling in my heart, i journeyed on. as i passed a neat cottage in the town of richmond, the impression came upon me powerfully, as distinctly as if a voice said to me, “call into this house.” i obeyed, and asked for a drink of water. a middle-aged lady laid down the paper she was reading, and upon it placed her glasses, and gravely said to me, “please be seated.” as she stepped to another room to wait upon me, i took up her paper, and to my joyful surprise, saw that it was the _signs of the times_, published by j. v. himes, no. devonshire street, boston. and as i took the water, the following conversation, in substance, commenced: “i see you have the _signs of the times_, which teaches the peculiar sentiments of one william miller. are you a subscriber for it?” “i am, and i think it an excellent periodical. would you like to read it?” i took the paper from her hand, and enjoyed reading several stirring articles from able pens, then passed it to her, and, with an air of indifference, asked, “what do you do with the long cherished opinion of nearly all great and good men, of all denominations, that the temporal millennium, in which the conversion of the whole world and the complete triumph of the church is to take place prior to the second advent?” “i reject the doctrine. and you are mistaken, sir, as to the millennium being a long-cherished sentiment. it is an unscriptural fable of recent date. it has not been the faith of the church until the last century. the parable of the wheat and tares, as explained by our lord, and his declaration that as it was in the days of noah so should it be at the coming of the son of man, forbids the idea. in fact, the prophets of the old testament, and the apostles of the new, describe the last days as dark, gloomy and perilous, with the church fallen, and far from god, and the world filled with crime and violence.” “admitting that you are right on this point, is it not very wrong to set the time, as mr. miller has done?” “bro. miller, in searching the scriptures, has found by the prophetic periods, as he thinks, the time of the end, and, as an honest man, has taken the cross to teach it to the world. he also sees by the signs of the times that christ’s coming is near, even at the doors, and takes the safe side of the question to be ready, and to warn others to get ready. and all those texts usually quoted to show that men are to know nothing of the period of the second advent, do not prove what they are said to prove.” it was evident that this woman was mistress of the subject, and as she proceeded to give the proofs in support of definite time, i interrupted her, stating that i would no longer conceal from her my faith and mission. “i am,” said i, “a full believer in the second advent of christ as taught by wm. miller, and have left all to proclaim it.” “thank the lord!” she exclaimed, “my prayer is answered in sending you here. my husband is a freewill baptist minister, and will be glad to have you speak to the people of his charge here upon the coming of christ. let me have your coat and hat. i will send for some one to care for your horse, and will send an appointment to the school for you to lecture this evening.” “what is your husband’s name?” i inquired. “andrew rollins,” was the reply. “is he a believer in the advent doctrine?” “he does not oppose, and is favorable.” soon elder rollins came in, and his wife introduced me to him as a second-advent lecturer. he asked me a few questions in a grave manner, and looked me over closely, as much as to say, “you are a young stripling to go abroad to lecture upon the prophecies.” i saw that he was a strong man, watching all my words; therefore thought it best for me to be guarded. the appointment flew through that portion of the town, and, at the time appointed, what has ever been known as the reed meeting-house, was filled with both the pious and the curious. and as i sung an advent melody, all listened with solemn silence, and some wept. elder rollins then prayed in a most solemn and fervent manner for the blessing of god to rest upon the youthful stranger who was about to speak to the people. this prayer drew me nearer to him, and i began to feel that in this minister i had found a true friend. and so it proved. at the close of my lectures, there was a general interest and deep conviction upon all minds. the school children committed to memory all my texts, and almost everywhere you might hear them repeating this one from dan. viii: “then i heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, how long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot? and he said unto me, unto two thousand and three hundred days, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.” as i was about to leave, elder rollins said to me, “in two weeks our quarterly meeting, embracing about thirty churches in this locality, will hold its session at richmond village. i would like to have you give some lectures before the preachers, delegates, and brethren who will be present. i will call the matter up in a business session, and they will probably vote you room, if you will decide to be present and speak to us.” “certainly, i shall be glad of the opportunity to speak what i regard important truth to the heads of your denomination in this part of the state, and will, providence permitting, be at the meeting in season.” this said, i rode off on horseback to fill appointments in gardiner and bowdoinham. after filling these appointments, i returned to the quarterly meeting in richmond. and as i entered the place of worship, elder rollins, who was seated beside the pulpit at the further end of the house, arose and said: “bro. white, you will find a seat here by me.” after the sermon, liberty was given for remarks, and i spoke with freedom upon the christian life, and the triumphs of the just at the second advent of christ. many voices cried, “amen! amen!” and most in that large congregation were in tears. the freewill baptists in those days were indeed a free people, and many in that congregation were exceedingly anxious to hear upon the subject of the advent. and as i spoke, they seemed to be finding relief from their pent-up feelings in hearty responses and tears. a portion, however, seemed unmoved, unless it was to show in their countenances that they were displeased. elder rollins then informed me that his brethren had voted in favor of a lecture at that meeting, and the next day rescinded the vote. this displeased him much, and his statement to me relative to the action of his people as to my speaking to them explained to me the existing state of things. near the close of that meeting, after getting my consent, elder rollins arose and said: “bro. white, who sits at my right side, will speak at the reed meeting-house this evening, upon the second coming of our lord jesus christ. come up, brethren, and hear for yourselves. we have sufficient room to entertain you all. come up, brethren--it will not harm any of you to hear upon this subject.” he had as much influence as any minister in that quarterly meeting, and, being disappointed and hurt that his brethren should vote against my lectures, and shut the advent doctrine out of their meeting, was willing they should feel it. he very well knew that most of his brethren would leave their meeting in the village, and go three miles to hear me, and that their appointed business session would be broken up. and so it was. three-fourths of the ministers, and nearly every delegate, left, and the reed meeting-house at an early hour was crowded. my subject was matt. xxiv. the spirit of god gave me great freedom. the interest was wonderful. as i closed with an exhortation to christians to fully consecrate themselves, and be ready, and to sinners to seek christ, and get ready for the coming of the son of man, the power of god came upon me to that degree that i had to support myself with both hands hold of the pulpit. it was a solemn hour. as i viewed the condition of sinners, lost without christ, i called on them with weeping, repeating several times, “come to christ, sinner, and be saved when he shall appear in his glory. come, poor sinner, before it shall be too late. come, sinner, poor sinner, come.” the place was awfully solemn. ministers and people wept--some aloud. at the close of every call to the sinner, a general groan was heard throughout the entire assembly. i had stood upon my feet explaining the chapter and exhorting for more than two hours, and was getting hoarse. i ceased speaking, and wept aloud over that dear people with depth of feeling such as he only knows whom god has called to preach his truth to sinners. it was nine o’clock, and to give liberty to others to speak, would be to continue the meeting till midnight. it was best to close with the deep feeling of the present, but not till all had a chance to vote on the lord’s side. i then called on all in the congregation who would join me in prayer, and those that wished to be presented to the throne of mercy, that they might be ready to meet the saviour with joy at his second coming, to rise up. every soul in that large house, as i was afterward informed by persons in different parts of it, stood up. after a brief season of prayer, the meeting closed. the next morning i returned to the village, accompanied by at least seven-eighths of that freewill baptist quarterly meeting. every one was telling what a glorious meeting they attended the evening before. this did not help the feelings of the few who remained away, who had been instrumental in closing the pulpit at the village against the doctrine of the soon coming of christ. their course only increased the interest to hear me. the independent stand taken by elder rollins resulted in their having a taste of that spiritual food for which they hungered. at intermission, delegates and ministers invited me to join them in making arrangements as to time when i could lecture to the several congregations in that quarterly meeting who had commodious houses of worship. it was then in the middle of february, and it was decided that there remained not more than six weeks of firm sleighing, giving the people a good chance to attend meetings. twelve of the most important places were selected for my labors in six weeks. i was to give ten lectures, which would require of me to speak twenty times a week. this gave me only half a day each week, which i generally found very necessary to travel fifteen or twenty miles to the next place of meeting. at gardiner, near the river, elders purington and bush were holding a protracted meeting with poor success, and were ready to hear me. so were most of the church. some opposed, stating their fears that the advent doctrine would destroy their reformation. they had, after tugging at the wheel several days, on the third or fourth evening of their meeting, after inviting and coaxing for half an hour, prevailed on two persons to take what was called the anxious seat. in this, however, i saw no reformation to spoil. i told these ministers i was ready to commence my work. they hesitated. i proposed to go where the people were all anxious to hear me. they would not consent to have me leave. i waited one day longer, and spoke several times in social meeting. many urged me to lecture. i sent them to the ministers. they labored with the opposition privately. their meeting was becoming divided. i decided to bring the matter to the point of decision, so that i might at once enter upon my work, or leave the place. the ministers held on to me, and also labored with the opposition. i finally stated before the entire congregation that i had been invited to the place, and had been held there one day by their ministers and most of the congregation, waiting for a few individuals to consent to have me lecture; that i should wait no longer; that if i could not commence lectures that evening, i should go where they wanted to hear. i called for a vote of the congregation. nearly all voted for me to remain and commence that evening. the ministers said, “go on with your lectures, and we will stand by you.” as i took the stand that evening, i requested all who loved christ, and the doctrine of his soon coming, to pray for me, and stated that i would excuse those who did not love him enough to see him come in glory from praying for me, as i thought they could to better advantage and profit pray for themselves. every ear was open, and every heart felt. the lord gave perfect freedom in presenting proofs of the advent near, and in exhorting the people to prepare for that day. many were in tears. i left the pulpit, exhorting the people, and calling on them to come forward to the front slips. about thirty came forward. many of them wept aloud. i then turned to the ministers in the stand, saying: “these fears, expressed by some unconsecrated ones, that the glorious doctrine of the second coming of jesus would kill a reformation, are without foundation. do you think the work of reform has been injured here this evening?” “no! no! go on, bro. white; go on. the lord is here.” this meeting, apparently, swept away all opposition, and the way was prepared for a good work. but other appointments would not allow me to remain longer than to give three or four lectures more. the protracted meeting then progressed with success. at richmond corners i gave seven lectures in their new meeting-house, just dedicated, and at the close, two hundred arose for prayers. during the progress of the meetings, a baptist deacon opposed. when i was commenting upon daniel vii, i stated that it was a historical fact that on february , , at the close of the days, berthier, a french general, entered the city of rome and took it, and that on the th of the same month the pope was taken prisoner and shut up in the vatican; and gave dr. adam clarke as one of my authorities. an educated catholic broke in upon me, charging me with falsehood, and offered me five dollars if i would read such a statement from clarke’s comments on daniel. with the promise that i would read clarke the next evening, and by the entreaties and threats of his neighbors, this enraged irishman was kept quiet. the next evening i entered the pulpit with clarke’s commentary under my arm, and, after calling the people to order by singing an advent melody, read what clarke had said upon taking away the dominion of the little horn, which fully sustained what i had stated the previous evening. i then offered the volume to any one who would see if i had read correctly, stating that i had not been to the trouble of going five miles for the commentary in order to claim the five dollars. that i chose to let the gentleman keep his money, and have the truth on the subject besides. there was no reply. a gentleman of fine feelings and good influence in the community, who made no pretensions to piety, arose and said: “i wish to call the attention of this congregation to this one fact, that no persons in this community have manifested opposition to the lectures of mr. white but a baptist deacon and a roman catholic.” many were converted in the vicinity, a strong company of believers was raised up, and a second-advent camp-meeting was held there in the autumn of . at bowdoinham ridge my labors were well received. a protracted meeting was being held with that church by elders quinnum and hathern. they and the church fully co-operated with me, and a good work followed. on the last day i spent in this place i spoke forenoon and afternoon, then invited sinners to come forward for prayers, and joined in prayer for them. when we arose from our knees the sun was just setting, and i had sixteen miles to go to my next appointment, which was that evening. a friend held my horse at the door. i had labored excessively, and was so hoarse that i could hardly speak above a whisper, and my clothes were wet with sweat. i needed rest. but there was my next appointment. the people would be together in about an hour, and i had sixteen miles to go. so i hastily said farewell to the friends with whom and for whom i had labored, mounted my horse and galloped away toward lisbon plains, in a stinging cold february evening. i was chilled, but there was no time to call and warm. my damp clothing nearly froze to me, but i galloped on. as i rode up to the door of the house of worship, an aged freewill baptist minister was saying to the crowd: “i am sorry to say to the congregation that we are disappointed. the speaker we expected to hear this evening has not come.” as this minister raised his hands to dismiss the people with the benediction, i cried: “hold! i am here!” “good!” cried the minister; and the people sat down. they had been waiting for me more than an hour. with a few words of explanation of my late arrival, i commenced to speak; but i was so thoroughly chilled that my chattering teeth would cut off some of my words. however, i soon warmed up, and felt freedom in speaking. but where was my poor horse. his turn had come to be wet with sweat, and to shake with cold. a friend stood at the door watching for my arrival, who took the poor creature, and, as i supposed, took care of it. but he simply tied it to the fence with a rope. heated, wet, and without blanket, it had to stand in the keen wind one hour and a half, trembling with cold until it was ruined. the next morning there was seen in the poor creature a clear case of chest-founder. it is a shame to treat god’s poor creatures thus. i learned from this sad circumstance never to leave my horse without full directions as to its wants. the large house of worship was crowded with attentive hearers three times each day, till my time came to hasten to the next place. on sunday, the presbyterian minister had thirteen hearers. on monday he came to hear me, and as i passed down the symbols of daniel viii, and began to apply the specifications of the little horn of that chapter to the historical facts of rome, he broke in upon me, saying: “you mislead your hearers. antiochus, and not rome, is the subject of this prophecy.” “please wait, sir,” was my reply, “till i have finished speaking, then you can talk as long as the people wish to hear you. be patient, and hear me while i show that rome, and not antiochus epiphanes, is the subject of the prophecy.” the matter was made quite plain, and the minister was told that he could speak. he rose, but his subject was the temporal millennium. all his propositions and proof-texts, which he tediously brought forward, had been examined in my first lecture. but it seemed necessary to briefly reply, notwithstanding it was little more than to repeat the same in the ears of nearly the same congregation. as i closed, a tall, rough-looking, red-shirted lumberman rose up in the house and said: “the difficulty with elder merrill is that he is not ready, and is afraid the lord will come.” the benediction repeated, the meeting closed. good fruits followed in this place. at brunswick, i had a candid hearing in what was called elder lamb’s meeting-house, a very large house of worship. my stay was brief, and most of the members of that numerous church were rich and worldly. they had not sufficient interest to even oppose me. so they heard me with a degree of apparent interest, amounting to little more than curiosity, and let me go. at bowdoin, elder purington received me as a brother, and stood by me till my work was done in that place. the large house of worship was crowded. the people listened with deep interest and feeling. the universalists sent a few questions to the desk in writing, which i enjoyed answering. sinners manifested their desire for salvation, and those who loved christ and his appearing rejoiced in the advent hope and faith. litchfield plains was my next place of labor. the house was crowded the first evening. in fact, it was with difficulty that i found my way to the pulpit. to call the people to order, the first words they heard from me were in singing, “you will see your lord a coming, you will see your lord a coming, you will see your lord a coming, in a few more days, while a band of music, while a band of music, while a band of music, shall be chanting through the air.” the reader certainly cannot see poetic merit in the repetition of these simple lines. and if he has never heard the sweet melody to which they were attached, he will be at a loss to see how one voice could employ them so as to hold nearly a thousand persons in almost breathless silence. but it is a fact that there was in those days a power in what was called advent singing, such as was felt in no other. it seemed to me that not a hand or foot moved in all the crowd before me till i had finished all the words of this lengthy melody. many wept, and the state of feeling was most favorable for the introduction of the grave subject for the evening. the house was crowded three times each day, and a deep impression was made upon the entire community. west gardiner was my next point. elder getchel received me like a brother, and seemed to have a good interest in the subject. the people in this part of the town were nearly all freewill baptists. there had been one large church in the place, composed mostly of farmers possessing more wealth than piety. a part of the church had wanted a popular minister, and because they were opposed in this by a more humble portion, drew off in a church by themselves, built a fine house, and employed a preacher that pleased them. here stood in full view two freewill baptist meeting-houses, each occupied every sunday by two ministers of the same denomination, not always on friendly terms. it was a hard place to labor. while the members of these churches had been occupied with the division in their midst, they had been destitute of the spirit of reformation, and their children had grown nearly to manhood without conversion. these were much affected by my lectures, and sought the lord, while their parents seemed unmoved. i will leave this place in my narrative, for the present, to return again, as i have something more to relate of the good work here in its proper place. according to arrangements at the quarterly meeting at richmond village, i filled all my appointments, and saw in every place more or less of the work of god before i left. but the lectures were usually followed by protracted meetings, and large accessions were made to these churches. at the next quarterly meeting it was publicly stated that within the limits of that quarterly meeting, one thousand souls dated their experience from my lectures during that six weeks. the second day of april, , i mounted my poor, chest-foundered horse, and started for my native town, much worn by the labors of the winter. the snow was very deep. my horse’s feet were much of the time, while passing over the drifts, higher than the tops of the fence-posts. my only suit of clothes was much worn, and i had no money. i had not received the value of five dollars for my labors. yet i was happy in hope. as i journeyed homeward, my horse became very much irritated with frequent turning out into the deep snow and sharp crust in passing teams. several times while passing women and children he crowded nearly into the sleighs where they were. and fearing that he might seriously injure some one, i decided that it was safest, as teams approached, to dismount, crowd the horse out of the road, and hold him with a firm hand until they passed. as i was entering the city of augusta, a farmer was returning home with an empty hay-sled, drawn by six oxen. i chose to ride past this team. the driver sat on the fore part of the sled, and the oxen kept the middle of the road. on being crowded out of the road, my horse became very angry, and as the sled was passing, threw himself over the first set of stakes on to the sled. seeing strong probabilities that i should be thrown on some one of the second set of sharp stakes and killed, i sprang from the horse, quite over the stakes, into the snow on the other side. the team continued to move along with my horse fairly loaded upon the sled; and, by the time i had rescued myself from the snow, was several rods from me. “halloo!” cried i. “please stop your team and let me have my horse.” the good farmer stopped his oxen, and assisted me in unloading my horse, which, when i had mounted, galloped off as well as before. rain came on, and the firmly-trodden drifts became soft, so that my horse with my weight upon him would frequently sink to his body in the snow. i rode all day with my feet out of the stirrups, and as he would plunge into the snow, i would instantly slide off and relieve him of my weight, that he might better struggle out, or if he could not do this alone, assist him by lifting where most needed. april , i reached my father’s house, and, after resting a few weeks till the ground settled, returned to my field of labor, and was rejoiced to learn that the spirit of reformation had swept over the entire field. but the time had fully come for the people in farming districts to hasten out upon their lands, and i found but little chance to get a general hearing excepting on sunday. however, i soon had a call to labor in east augusta. but before going to this place i dreamed that an ox, with very high horns, was pursuing me with very great fury, and that i was fleeing before him for my life. he followed me so closely that i sprang into a house near by and bolted the door. the ox broke down the door and entered. i left the house through an open window, and escaped to the barn. the ox broke down the barn door and entered. i escaped by another door, and as my last resort for safety, crept under the barn floor. the ox tore up the planks with his horns, and drove me from under the barn. and as he was pursuing me in the open field, i felt his horns goading my back. at that moment wings were given me, and i arose and flew with ease to the roof of the house. the disappointed ox stood looking at me, frequently shaking his horns, and appeared wild with rage. my deliverance was complete, and exultingly i flew from the house near the head of the ox, then quickly arose to the roof of the barn. this repeated several times, i awoke. this dream made quite an impression upon my mind, but soon passed from me, and i thought no more of it until brought to my mind by what occurred in connection with my labors at east augusta. as i entered the school-house to meet my first appointment, the only person present was a tall, athletic man, in the middle age of life. as it was a cool evening, he was kindling a fire. he spoke to me in a tone of kindness, but eyed me closely. i was afterward told that walter bolton, for this was his name, was an infidel. he was regarded as a good citizen, but had never before been known to take any interest in religious meetings. he attended all my lectures, and seemed deeply interested, and i often heard remarks from his neighbors like this: “what has got hold of walter bolton to call him out to these meetings? i never saw him in a religious meeting before, unless it were a funeral.” we will leave mr. bolton for the present, and pass to other features of this series of meetings. during the week i gave lectures each evening to small congregations. but sunday morning, at an early hour, the house was crowded. my subject was the millennium. i labored to show, . that those texts usually quoted to prove the conversion of the entire world, did not prove what they are said to prove. . what those texts do teach. in speaking upon isa. lxv, i showed that it was not in this mortal state, upon this old sin-cursed earth, that the leopard would lie down with the kid, and the lion eat straw like the ox, but in the new earth, as plainly declared by the prophet. that beasts, restored from the effects of the curse, would be no more out of their proper places in the earth restored, than when created upon it before the fall. . that certain texts in the old and new testaments, in most distinct and emphatic language, teach that at no period of man’s fallen condition will all men be holy. at the close of this discourse, a universalist preacher present arose and said: “i want five minutes to show that this doctrine has no foundation in the bible, or in common sense.” he had been a regular baptist minister, had engaged in trade, and in the sale of liquor, had backslidden, and was preaching the unconditional salvation of all men. “you will want more than five minutes, sir, to do that,” i replied. “it is already half past twelve, and the people need rest and refreshment. when i have closed this afternoon, you can speak as long as they wish to hear you.” “no; this is just the place and time for me to speak, and the people want to hear me.” “we will submit the matter to the congregation, and let them decide it for us,” was my reply. i then asked those who agreed with me that the gentleman had better wait till afternoon, to rise up. nearly the entire congregation were at once on their feet. i then asked those who chose to have him speak immediately to arise. ten or twelve young men, who looked like finished ruffians, arose. the congregation was immediately dismissed for one hour. in the afternoon i spoke upon matt. xxiv, and, expecting a battle with the universalist preacher, gave some time to the examination of the view that christ came the second time at the destruction of jerusalem. my arguments told on the congregation, and the minister felt it. when i had closed my discourse, i said, “there is now room for that gentleman to speak as long as the people wish to hear him.” he arose embarrassed, and said in substance: “i do not want to act the part of the scoffer, or fall under the denunciation of him who says, ‘my lord delayeth his coming, and smites his fellow servant;’ but i wish to make a few remarks relative to a portion of scripture commented upon by the speaker this forenoon, which you will find in the sixty-fifth chapter of daniel.” he immediately commenced to ridicule the idea of beasts in heaven. i saw at once that it was isa. lxv, and not daniel, that he referred to. and after he had gotten fairly under way, i called his attention to the fact that he had made a mistake in giving the prophet daniel credit for speaking of the lion and the ox both feeding on straw, and the leopard and the kid lodging together. it was not daniel, but another prophet who had thus spoken. he rebuked me for interrupting him. i stated that as he should proceed to show in five minutes that the doctrine i preached had no foundation in scripture, or in common sense, i should see that his reference was all correct. but he affirmed that he was right in quoting daniel, and went on with his remarks in a style well calculated to disgust the people, and turn them in strong sympathy with me. and when his unsanctified tongue was moving off at full speed, i called to him again, saying, “i am not willing the gentleman shall proceed any further till he reads from dan. lxv, the scripture from which he is speaking. please turn and read, sir, and satisfy us all that you are correct, and i will consent for you to go on.” he took up his bible and turned from one side of it to the other, colored up, appeared greatly agitated, and said, “the book of daniel is torn out of my bible.” “here, sir, is mine,” said i, and reaching it toward him, said to those seated near me, “please pass it to him. mine has the book of daniel in it.” as my bible was being passed from seat to seat toward this man, he looked distressed. he could not readily find the book of daniel, not being familiar with his bible, and evidently made the false statement for the occasion, that this book was torn from his bible. he took my bible and searched from one lid to the other several times for the book of daniel, but was so agitated that he could not find it. the people fixed their eyes upon him, some with pity, others with apparent anger, while still another class laughed at him. my pity was moved toward him, and i stated that i could help the gentleman. that it was isaiah, and not daniel, that he wished to quote. that there were but twelve chapters in all the book of daniel, and that he wished to speak upon isa. lxv, - . i then quoted these nine verses from memory, and said, “this is what you want, is it not?” “yes,” was his reply, and after a few broken remarks which showed his complete confusion, he sat down and covered his face with his hands. the people were ashamed of him, and seemed astonished that i should know from his remarks what chapter and verses he wanted, and that, without my bible, i could repeat nearly half a chapter. if the dream of the ox applied to the effort on the part of this universalist minister to crush me, then by this time i had all that victory over him represented by my soaring above him on wings. i then exhorted this poor apostate to turn from his sins, and seek a preparation for the coming of christ. and as i felt the condition of the people, as there was scarcely a praying man or woman present, i exhorted them for half an hour. nearly all wept. the minister did not raise his head. i gave an appointment for another evening meeting. seventy men and women were present. at the close of the lecture i asked those who felt the need of christ and desired my prayers, that they might become christians, to rise up. every one arose, the universalist minister and all. he then stated as follows: “i was once a christian, and was called of god to preach, and if at last i wail in hell, i shall have this to comfort me, that i have been a means in the hands of god of the salvation of sinners.” the reader may judge that by this time this man’s faith in universal salvation had become very much shaken. i then asked all among those who had risen, who would esteem it a privilege to come forward and bow with me, to come to the front seats. all seventy started, and soon the floor in front of the seats was crowded so as to give no one a chance to kneel down. i then told them to go back to their seats and kneel down there as best they could, and give their hearts to the lord. as i knelt every soul present bowed with me. there was no one in all that congregation to join me in vocal prayer, for not one of them enjoyed communion with god. the next day i called at the house of walter bolton. he and his family received me kindly, and conversed with me freely relative to the meetings, and upon the subject of religion in general. before i left, mr. bolton said: “mr. white, when you rode into this place i knew you by sight as if i had been acquainted with you for years. your countenance, hat, coat, horse, saddle and bridle, looked familiar to me. just before you came here to lecture, i dreamed that a young man rode into this place on horseback, to speak upon the second coming of christ. i noticed particularly his appearance and dress. the people asked him many questions, which he readily answered in a manner that carried strong conviction to their minds that the doctrine was true. among these questions were those upon the millennium, suggesting the view that there was to be a thousand years of peace and prosperity to the church, during which time all men were to be holy. they were the very points you examined in your discourse last sunday forenoon, which called out that universalist minister. when i saw you, as you rode to this place, my dream came to my mind with such force that i felt that i must hear you speak. this is the reason why i have attended all your meetings, and have watched their progress with interest. especially when you quoted the very texts which i heard you quote in my dream, and when you made the very remarks upon those texts which i distinctly remember of hearing you make, my feelings were beyond description.” from anything mr. bolton said during this interview with him and family, no one would receive the idea that he had been troubled with infidelity. he was under deep conviction, and seemed to choose the religion of the bible as the theme of conversation. i bowed with this dear family in prayer, and parted with them in tears. the case of walter bolton furnishes an illustration of the simple means by which the lord sometimes softens the hearts and enlightens the minds of those shut up to the hardness and blindness of infidelity, and prepares them for the reception of light and truth. in a few days i returned to palmyra, where i received ordination to the work of the ministry from the hands of ministers of the christian denomination, of which i was a member. but i soon returned back to east augusta and baptized three persons. a fourth candidate stood ready to go into the water, but not being satisfied that she was sincere, i refused to baptize her in the presence of a large congregation at the water. this young woman was disappointed, and joined her parents in expressions and manifestations of anger. they sent for elder hermon stinson, an educated freewill baptist minister of note, who came to the place, baptized the young woman, and organized a small church. and in just four weeks from that time, elder stinson was again called to the place to sit in counsel in the case of this woman, when she was dismissed from the church for bad conduct. fearing that the bitter feelings of this family toward me might involve me in difficulty, i did not visit the place again. during the summer of , i was not able to awaken especial interest at any new place upon the subject of the second advent. i visited the congregation of believers in portland and boston, labored in the hay-field to earn clothing for the winter, and preached in different places where i had the previous winter given lectures. in the autumn of that year, in company with my father and two sisters, i attended the maine eastern christian conference, of which i was a member, held in the town of knox. before we reached the place, as night drew on, a heavy shower of rain compelled us to call at a hotel. in those days singing was our delight. my father had been a teacher of vocal music, and my sisters were first-class singers. and as time began to hang heavily upon our hands, we found relief in singing some of the most stirring revival melodies of those times. the landlord, his family, and many who had been driven in by the rain as we had been, seemed to enjoy our singing, and when we had finished one piece, they would call for another. in this way the evening passed off pleasantly. and when my father called for our bill the next morning, the landlord told him there was none for him to settle, as we had paid him the evening before in singing. he also stated that at any time we would put up with him he would entertain us, and take his pay in singing. the christian denomination in maine, as well as in other states, had been deeply imbued with the spirit of the advent hope and faith. but it was evident before that conference closed, that many, especially among the ministers, were drawing back, and were partaking of the spirit of opposition. the religious meetings and business sessions, however, passed off with a good degree of apparent harmony. no one preached or spoke in favor of the soon advent of christ in a manner to offend any one, and no one directly opposed. but a lack of freedom of spirit was felt by that portion of the conference who were decided believers. this class constituted a majority, and on sunday, the last day of the meeting, i was urged to preach. but i was young, and well knew that according to custom the ablest men present were already selected to preach to the crowd on that day, yet i felt assured by the spirit of god, that i had the word of the lord to speak to the people on that occasion. just as the afternoon service was to commence, i felt so deeply impressed with duty to preach, that several ministers noticed it in my appearance, and came to me, saying: “it is your duty to speak, and we will try and secure the time to you this afternoon.” i then retired from the crowd in and around the house, to pray over the matter, and while bowed before the lord, decided that i would press my way directly toward the pulpit, and if the ministers gave me room, and the time, i would speak. as i came toward the pulpit, i saw that the sofa was filled with ministers, and that one of experience in the ministry sat in the center, directly behind the large bible. this man had been selected to give the last discourse. he had opposed me when lecturing in the west part of the state, and i concluded that he would not consent to give me the time. but as i drew near the pulpit, my brother samuel, who was then a member of the conference, and a bro. chalmers, stepped down from the pulpit, took hold of my arms, and urged me to take a seat upon the sofa, stating to me that if i wished to preach i should have a chance. i replied that if one of them would read advent hymns, the other pray, and i could get hold of the large bible, i would speak. my brother read a hymn, and while bro. chalmers was praying, i took the bible from the stand and turned leaves to certain proof texts. when the prayer was finished, some uneasiness was manifested by several ministers as they saw me in possession of the bible. the second hymn was read and sung, while i held fast the bible. my intentions to preach were by this time well known to all the ministers, yet no one offered to take the bible, or speak to me in reference to occupying the time. the way seemed fully open, and i moved forward with freedom, while responses of “amen,” were heard in different parts of the house from those who cherished the blessed hope of the soon-coming of jesus. at the close of this service, the lord’s supper was to be celebrated, and while the friends of jesus were gathering around his table, i joined with my sisters in singing, “you will see your lord a coming,” &c. our voices were in those days clear and powerful, and our spirits triumphant in the lord. and as we would strike the chorus of each verse--“with a band of music,”--a good bro. clark, who ever seemed to have resting upon him a solemn sense of the great day of god near at hand, would rise, strike his hands together over his head, shout “glory!” and immediately sit down. a more solemn appearing man i never saw. each repetition of this chorus would bring bro. clark to his feet, and call from him the same shout of glory. the spirit of god came upon the brethren, who by this time were seated ready to receive the emblems of our dying lord. the influence of the melody, accompanied by bro. clark’s solemn appearance and sweet shouts, seemed electrifying. many were in tears, while responses of “amen,” and “praise the lord,” were heard from almost every one who loved the advent hope. the emblems were passed, and that yearly meeting closed. in a few weeks i returned to my old field of labor, and gave lectures at brunswick and harpswell, where a good degree of interest was manifested. the field of labor seemed to open before me as winter drew near. i had become acquainted with bro. john pearson, jr., of portland, who had been laboring a portion of his time giving lectures upon the advent near, and i invited him to join me. we labored together in different parts of maine much of the time for nearly one year. at the reed neighborhood, in richmond, we saw a good work. elder e. cromwell, the pastor of the church, embraced the faith in full. i there baptized several. we labored at litchfield and saw a good work. many professed christians embraced the faith, and sinners were converted. the congregationalist minister felt that the work was against his interests, and in private circles opposed. on returning to the place, after an absence of some weeks, i met this minister in the road, and as we passed he seemed to be surprised to meet me again, and said, “why, mr. white, are you yet in the land of the living?” “no, sir,” was the reply, “i am in the land of the dying, but at the soon coming of the lord i expect to go to the land of the living.” we each went our way. the year , jewish time, which was supposed to reach, as stated by mr. miller, from march , , to march , , passed, and many were sadly disappointed in not witnessing the coming of the lord in that year. but these soon found relief in the clear and forcible application to the existing disappointment of those scriptures which set forth the tarrying time. it was as early as that the prophecy of habakkuk suggested the idea of the prophetic chart to the mind of that holy man of god, charles fitch. no one, however, then saw in this prophecy the tarrying time. afterward they could see both the chart and the tarry. here is the prophecy: “write the vision, and make it plain upon tables, that he may run that readeth it. for the vision is yet for an appointed time, but at the end it shall speak and not lie. though it tarry, wait for it; because it will surely come, it will not tarry.” chap. ii, , . true believers were also much comforted and strengthened by that portion of the prophecy of ezekiel which seemed exactly to the point, as follows: “and the word of the lord came unto me, saying, son of man, what is that proverb that ye have in the land of israel, saying, the days are prolonged and every vision faileth? tell them, therefore, thus saith the lord god, i will make this proverb to cease; and they shall no more use it as a proverb in israel; but say unto them, the days are at hand, and the effect of every vision. for there shall be no more any vain vision, nor flattering divination within the house of israel. for i am the lord, i will speak, and the word that i shall speak shall come to pass. it shall be no more prolonged, for in your days, o rebellious house, will i say the word, and will perform it, saith the lord god. again the word of the lord came to me, saying, son of man, behold, they of the house of israel say, the vision that he seeth is for many days to come, and he prophesieth of the times that are far off. therefore, say unto them, thus saith the lord god, there shall none of my words be prolonged any more, but the word which i have spoken shall be done, saith the lord god.” chap. xii, - . there was a general agreement with those who taught the immediate coming of christ, in applying the parable of the ten virgins of matt. xxv to the events connected with the second advent. and the passing of the time of expectation, the disappointment and the delay, seemed to be forcibly illustrated by the tarrying of the bridegroom in the parable. the definite time had passed, yet believers were united in the faith that the event was near. it soon became evident that they were losing a degree of their zeal and devotion to the cause, and were falling into that state illustrated by the slumbering of the ten virgins of the parable, following the tarrying of the bridegroom. the first of may i received an urgent call to visit west gardiner, and baptize. a messenger was sent twenty miles for me. he stated that there were ten or twelve children there, who were convicted by my lectures, who had held their little meetings by themselves, and sought and found the lord, and who had decided to have me baptize them. their parents opposed the idea, and told them that elder getchel, the pastor of the church, would baptize them. they held a little counsel and decided that they would not go into the water unless they could have me to immerse them. their parents yielded and sent for me. but before i reached the place, an effort was made to intimidate these dear children, and, if possible, to frighten them, and thus keep them from doing their duty. “what kind of an experience does mr. white suppose those babies can tell?” said a baptist minister of the most rigid stamp of past times. the large school-house was crowded at the time appointed, and there were three unfriendly ministers present to watch the proceedings. “please vacate these front seats,” said i, “and give those who are to be baptized a chance to come forward.” twelve boys and girls, from seven to fifteen years of age, came forward. it was a beautiful sight, which stirred the very depths of my soul, and i felt like taking charge of them as i would of a class in school. i was determined to help the feelings of those dear children as much as possible, and rebuke their persecutors. after taking my text, “fear not little flock, it is your father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom,” luke xii, , a text quite applicable to the occasion, i stated that i should not require the children before me to relate their experiences before the congregation. that it would be cruel to decide their fitness to follow the lord in the ordinance of baptism by the confidence and freedom they might have in speaking before those professed christians present who felt unfriendly toward them, and that i should, at the close of my discourse, ask them a few questions. the children were much comforted and cheered by the discourse. in fact i was enjoying decidedly a good time with those lambs of the flock. they then arose in their turn and answered some questions, and related particulars as to their conviction of sin, the change they had experienced, and the love of jesus they felt, until the congregation heard twelve intelligent and sweet experiences. it may be proper for me here to state that questions asked these children at the very point in the relation of their experiences when they were becoming confused, and were about to cut their story short, gave them confidence, and helped them to enter into all parts of their experiences. i then called upon all present who felt opposed to the baptism of the little flock before me, to rise up. not one arose. i stated to them that the present was the time to object if they had objections. but if they did not then and there object, to forever be silent. i then said to the children that no one objected, and that the way was fully open before them, and no person from that day had any right to object to their baptism. we went to a beautiful body of water, where i led those dear children down into the liquid grave, and buried them with their divine lord. not one of them strangled or seemed the least agitated. and as i led them out of the water and presented them to their parents, the children met them with a heavenly smile of joy, and i praised the lord with the voice of triumph. this meeting, and that sweet baptism, has lived among the most pleasing memories of the past, and when laboring for the youth in different states, i have probably rehearsed more or less of the particulars of that sweet meeting, and that happy baptism, a hundred times. in the month of june, , a second-advent conference was held at poland, me., which i attended in company with elder pearson. i had traveled extensively in the heat and dust of summer, until my plain clothing was much soiled and worn. and not enjoying my usual freedom of spirits, i chose to remain silent and give others the time. i enjoyed the preaching, however, and the social seasons of this excellent conference, and at its close felt my usual spiritual strength and freedom. there was present at this conference an elder h., from eastern maine, who had much to say in his peculiar, noisy style. he professed to be a man of great faith, and wonderfully filled with the holy spirit. if noise, harsh expressions, rough language generally, and frequent empty shouts of “glory, hallelujah,” constitute the sum total of the fruits of the spirit, then this elder h. was an exceedingly good man. but if love, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, meekness, and temperance, are among the fruits of the spirit, this poor man was sadly deficient. in fact, these precious fruits were not exhibited in him. he enjoyed a shout with those who would join with him, and ever appeared to feel strong and sure of heaven. self appeared in this man, and not christ. he had much to say of humility; but his was evidently on the outside. his style of worship, and pretended humility, are well-described by the apostle as “voluntary humility and will-worship.” at times he was so very humble (?) that he chose not to seat himself at the table with others to take food; but, forgetting the words of the apostle, “let all things be done decently and in order,” he would take food from the table, and go behind the door and eat it, attracting attention to his wonderful humility by shouts. but if corrected for his faults, however carefully, the demon in him was aroused at once. this man had no words of tenderness and comfort for the weak and fainting. so far from this, he even boasted of running over, as he expressed it, this one and the other. he spoke and acted as if he regarded himself as being on exhibition at that meeting as a wonderful specimen of faith and goodness. his career since that time, in following the spirit that seemed to possess him at that conference, has proved that the man was laboring under the sad mistake of supposing himself led by the spirit of god, while being controlled by satan. the reader may be disappointed at the introduction of this unpleasant matter, choosing to read only of those incidents with which are connected the victories of the work and power of god. but it may be for the safety and sure advancement of young disciples, and those of little experience in the conflicts of the christian life, to learn of the trials of the way, and of the wiles of the devil, as to know only of the power and love of god, and the triumphant victories of his truth and people. the various attacks of satan, in order to mislead and finally destroy even honest men and women, may with propriety, in consequence of their numbers, bear the name of legion. and the duty of all is, as stated by our lord, “watch and pray, lest ye enter into temptation.” but he who is filled with pride in spiritual things, and is unteachable--thinks himself especially led by the spirit, and understands all about the work of the lord, who regards himself as an eminent christian, yet is easily tempted, and becomes jealous of being slighted, and even ugly if he does not receive a large share of attention--is a tool for the devil, and an exceedingly dangerous man. he is a medium in the hands of satan through which to affect and mislead the precious flock of christ. let all beware lest they, in some way, be brought more or less under the influence of such, and, in consequence, weave into their experience uncomely stripes of vain religion. such things ever have existed, and ever will exist during the entire period of satan’s efforts to wrest precious souls from the hands of jesus christ. “for there must be also heresies among you,” says paul, “that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.” these, in the lord’s providence, constitute a portion of the fuel to heat the furnace of affliction in which the true christian loses his dross and is refined, so as to reflect in his life the meekness and purity of the loving lamb of god. therefore let not the beloved of the lord think it strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try them, as though some strange thing had happened unto them. but rejoice, inasmuch as they are partakers of christ’s sufferings, that when his glory shall be revealed, they may be glad with exceeding joy. pet. iv, , . the reader will please return to poland conference. one morning about forty brethren and sisters bowed at the family altar, at the house of bro. jordan, while elder h. led in prayer. a portion of that strange prayer was in substance as follows: “o lord, have mercy on bro. white. he is proud, and will be damned unless he gets rid of his pride. have mercy upon him, o lord, and save him from pride. o lord have mercy, and wean him from the pride of life. break him down, lord, and make him humble. have mercy upon him. have mercy.” he went on telling a long story about me, informing the lord of my pride, and how sure i was of destruction unless i should speedily repent, and closed up with vehement cries of “have mercy! have mercy! mercy! mercy!” this was his way of treating those who did not seem to receive him with feelings of great reverence for his special humility and extra holiness. his object in this was to cast fear upon those around him, and thus bring them directly under his influence, that they might show him all that respect which his especial endowments demanded. but he did not succeed in my case. after the company had arisen to their seats, and had for awhile painfully pondered in silence what these things could mean, i drew my chair near elder h., and in a kind manner said to him: “bro. h., i fear you have told the lord a wrong story. you say i am proud. this i think is not true. but why tell this to the lord? he knows more about me than you do. he does not need to be instructed in my case. but this was not your object. you wished to represent me before these brethren and sisters as proud, and have chosen to do so through the medium of prayer to god. now, sir, if i am proud, so much so that you are able to give the lord information on the subject, you can tell me before these present in what i am proud. is it in my general appearance, or my manner of speaking, praying, or singing?” “no, bro. white, it is not in those things.” “well, is it manifested by these worn and soiled clothes? please look me over. is it in my patched boots? my rusty coat? this nearly worn-out vest? these soiled pants? or that old hat i wear?” “no; i do not see pride in any of these things you mention. but, bro. white, when i saw that starched collar on you, god only knows how i felt.” and here the man wept as though his heart would break. this was for effect. it was his usual resort when he had points to carry in a difficult case. in an extremity, tears are not unfrequently woman’s closing and most powerful argument. in her, if her cause be just, they are excusable, and even appropriate and beautiful. but to see a coarse, hard-hearted man, possessing in his very nature but little more tenderness than a crocodile, and nearly as destitute of moral and religious training as a hyena, shedding hypocritical tears for effect, is enough to stir the mirthfulness of the gravest saint. “but let me explain to you, bro. h., about this starched collar. i may be able to help you. when i came to this conference, sister rounds offered to do my washing, and as i had no clean change, she kindly lent me her husband’s shirt, which unfortunately has a starched collar. mine have only a narrow binding round the neck. i wear no collars only in cases of necessity like the present. it is this, sir, that has given rise to all your ado this morning. i usually wear a black alpaca bosom, but am not the owner of a single collar. you have certainly told the lord a wrong story about me, under circumstances the most inexcusable. and i think your first and most important work is to settle this matter with him.” elder h. dropped upon his knees, and said, in substance: “o lord, i have prayed for bro. white, and he is displeased with me for it. have mercy upon him! have mercy! mercy! mercy!” and seeing that none joined with him, not even so much as to kneel, he felt that his effort was proving a failure, and in a subdued tone came to me and said: “why did you not kneel with me? o bro. white, i have felt for you, prayed for you, and have wept over you, and i hope you will not be offended.” “certainly, i am not offended. there is nothing in all this to offend any one. i pity you. you are suffering from unsanctified feelings arising from an unfortunate application of false ideas. your prayers are no more to me than the howling of the winds. and when you, under such circumstances, plead your tears, feelings of shame and inexpressible disgust and pity for you come over me. i advise you to carry this matter no further; and i hope you will learn a good lesson from the folly you have manifested this morning.” by this time i seemed to lose sight of that gloom and despondency under which i had been suffering for several days, and i enjoyed the closing portion of the conference exceedingly well, and from that time felt my usual freedom of spirits. this was my first experience in meeting and rebuking fanaticism, which served to prepare me to deal with it in its ever-varying forms in after time. that fanaticism did arise about this time, and labor to attach itself to the advent cause, i would not deny. i, however, by no means admit the truthfulness of the highly-colored reports of the bitter enemies of the cause. not more than one in ten of the slanderous reports had the least semblance of truth in them. men filled with prejudice and with bitterness against the proclamation of the immediate second advent of christ, mingled with fear that it might be true, were totally unfitted to fairly represent the faith, motives and actions of believers. and there are no good reasons why he who gives a faithful sketch of advent history, should hesitate to admit all the facts relative to fanaticism which have arisen from the bigotry and blind zeal of such men as elder h., and those more designing and shrewd, who have borne the advent name, and have professed the advent faith. is it not one of the plainest facts in sacred history, that when god has especially wrought for his people, satan has ever improved the opportunity to make especial efforts? and, during the entire period of the controversy between christ and his angels, and satan and his angels, when the sons of god come to present themselves before the lord, may they not expect that satan will come also? has not this ever been true in the history of the people of god? and does not the sad experience of the church of jesus christ, since the time where sacred history leaves it, agree with that of the patriarchs and prophets? we read of luther’s perplexities, and of his anguish, in consequence of the conduct of fanatics, and the terrible influence the course of these men had on the great reformation, and count these things among the evidences that god was especially with martin luther. and there were the wesleys, and a host of other good men, who have lifted at the great wheel of reform, and have blessed the world with the inspiring influence of their living faith. these men who kept pace with the spirit of reform, have, in their turn, been annoyed at every step by satan close at their heels, pushing unguarded souls, over-zealous and illy-balanced ones, into fanaticism. the experiences of these men are in harmony with that of the holy men of old, and attest the fact that when and where god works for his people, just there is the time and place for satan to practice his impositions upon those he can get under his foul influence. did satan stir up fanaticism in connection with the advent movement? this is one of the proofs of the genuineness of the work. what! he suffer the world to be warned of their and his approaching doom, and he not be stirred in consequence of it? the church be aroused to action, and to readiness for the day of god, and sinners by thousands leaving his ranks and seeking a preparation to meet the king of kings, and he remain quiet? no. he knows his time is short, hence not only his wrath, but his wiles in all their forms. this is well illustrated by what is said to be a dream. a traveler saw satan seated upon a post, in front of a house of worship, asleep. he aroused him from his slumbers and addressed him as follows: “how is it that you are so quietly sleeping? this i conclude is unusual for you, considering your reputation for activity in your kind of work. is it not?” “yes,” was the reply, “but the people in this house of worship are asleep, and the minister is asleep, and i thought this a good time for me to take a nap.” let the people be aroused to the living truths of the word of god, and to a life of faith and holiness; let them with gladness receive the news of the return and peaceful reign of the just one; let them consecrate themselves and all they have to the lord, and with one united voice swell the note, “behold he cometh,” and you will have good evidence that the powers of darkness are all astir. satan will not sleep then. with vigilance will he manifest his wrath, and, calling to his aid all the fallen angels of his realm, his wiles will be imposed upon all connected with the people of god who are not properly instructed and guarded. but it should be distinctly understood that the proclamation of time in the message symbolized by the first angel of rev. xiv, , , and in the cry “behold the bridegroom cometh,” given in great power in the autumn of , did not produce fanaticism. in those solemn movements, believers were sweetly united in the one blessed hope, and the one living faith. it was when they were left without definite time, during the summer of , that extravagant views of being led by the spirit prevailed, and to some extent brought in fanaticism, division and wild-fire, with their blighting results, among the happy expectants of the king of glory. but when the proclamation of definite time came in the autumn of , fanaticism, ultra holiness, unhappy divisions, and their results, melted away before it like an early autumn frost before the rising sun. rise and progress of adventism. a wide field is before me, and i must study brevity upon this subject, or it will crowd more important matter out of this volume. i can therefore give but a brief sketch of the most prominent features of this great movement. i shall be principally indebted to an article published in the _advent shield_ for may, , written by j. litch, for what is said upon this subject. the first period of expectation had just passed, when mr. litch reviewed the entire ground, and presented facts in the case for the edification and encouragement of believers. these facts can never lose their interest to all true believers, till the advent hope shall be consummated. “the rise of the advent cause, as it has been developed by mr. miller, may be dated a. d. . for although he discovered his principles as early as , it was not until that he first began to publish them abroad. “his first step in this work was the publication of a series of articles on the subject of christ’s second coming, which appeared in the _vermont telegraph_, a baptist paper, published in brandon, vt. those articles were written to rid himself of the strong impression which followed him, that he must go and publish this thing to the world. “but after writing and publishing the above, instead, as he expected, of finding relief from his responsibilities, he only found the inward monitor the more earnestly pressing him, saying, ‘go and tell it to the world, or their blood will i require at thy hand.’ to rid himself of this strong impression, he wrote a synopsis of his views, and in the spring of he published it in pamphlet form, and spread it over the country, and sent it to different parts of the world among the missionary stations.” invitations for mr. miller to lecture came in from all directions, which he accepted, and he continued to travel and labor with great success among the people, but with little encouragement from the ministry. “in mr. miller found a friend who undertook the publication of a volume of lectures, the series which he usually gave as a course. the publication of those lectures constituted a new era in the history of the advent cause; for, from that time, wherever he went and lectured, the written lectures which were left behind continued to preach and establish those who were partially convinced of the truth. his labor, by this means, ceased to be like writing upon the sand, as formerly. it is one of those strongly-marked demonstrations which history presents of the power and influence of the press for good or evil. “those books gradually spread abroad, where he had never been in person, and created an interest in the public mind to investigate the subject for themselves. it was not, however, until the winter of - , that the work attracted much attention in massachusetts. about the month of february, in , several copies of the lectures found their way into massachusetts, and awakened quite a sensation. one copy fell into the hands of the editor of the _boston daily times_, and most of the lectures were re-published in that paper, and obtained quite an extensive reading. the effect was so great that it was found necessary to provide an antidote, in the shape of two letters from the pen of rev. ethan smith.” mr. litch introduces his own interesting experience in the advent cause in the following language: “about the time of the appearance of those lectures in the _boston times_, a copy of the work was put into the hands of the present writer, with a request that he should read it and give his opinion of its merits. the idea of an attempt to discover the time of christ’s second advent was to him so strange, that he could scarcely make up his mind to give the book a perusal. no doubt came into his mind but what he could entirely overthrow the whole system in five minutes. for, thought he, according to paul, [ thess. ii,] the falling away must first come, and the man of sin be revealed; which the great body of commentators understood to be the papal system. but, according to daniel and john, that power is to continue for days, or years; and the date assumed by the most learned writers of the age, for the commencement of the period, was , and consequently it would not end until . this was a decisive argument. however, to gratify a friend, and from a curiosity to know what arguments could be adduced in support of so novel a doctrine, the book was read. there was no difficulty in adopting most of the sentiments advanced in the first lecture. prejudice began to give way, and the idea of the glorious reign of christ on the earth renewed, was most delightful. from that, the days came up, and the evidence presented, by which it was clearly shown that those days terminated in , having begun in . the great argument against the coming of the lord, which had appeared so strong and invulnerable, soon vanished; and a new face shone forth from paul’s argument. the substance of it was, the predicted period having gone by, and the papacy having been consumed away by the spirit of the lord’s mouth, he is next to be destroyed by the brightness of christ’s coming. then there can be no millennium until christ comes--for the reign of the man of sin and a glorious millennium cannot co-exist. thus the old fabled millennium was lost. “before concluding the book, i became fully satisfied that the arguments were so clear, so simple, and withal so scriptural, that it was impossible to disprove the position which mr. miller had endeavored to establish. “the question of duty then presented itself thus: ‘if this doctrine is true, ought you not, as a minister of the gospel, to understand and proclaim it?’ yes, certainly i had. ‘then why not do so?’ why, if it should, after all, prove false, where will my reputation be? and besides, if it is not true, it will bring the bible into disrepute, after the time has gone by. but there is another view to be taken of this subject. how shall we know whether it is true or false? can it be known except by the testimony of the scriptures? what do they teach? this is the true question. if it is true that the lord is coming so soon, the world should know it: if it is not true it should be discussed, and the error exposed. i believe the bible teaches the doctrine; and while i believe thus, it is my duty to make it known to the extent of my power. it is a scriptural subject, and one full of interest; and the discussion of it cannot do harm. these prophecies and periods are in the bible, and mean something--if they do not mean this, what do they mean? thus i reasoned, until the lord, in a night-dream, showed me my own vileness, and made me willing to bear reproach for christ, when i resolved, at any cost, to present the truth on this subject.” as soon as mr. litch came to this decision, he published a synopsis of mr. miller’s views in a pamphlet, entitled the _midnight cry_. he continued to lecture, and also published a second work of pages, entitled “the probability of the second coming of christ about a. d. .” “it was in this work that the calculation on the fall of ottoman supremacy on the th of august, , was first given to the world. so also the argument on the days, showing how all the events which were to precede the time, times and a half, centered in , while the decree of justinian was given in . “this work circulated through new england, and excited something of an interest. the subject rested here, with the exception of a few newspaper articles published in _zion’s herald_, of boston, and _zion’s watchman_, of new york, until the spring of . “in that year ( ) mr. miller was invited into massachusetts to lecture. in that tour he visited and lectured in randolph, lowell, groton, and lynn. his introduction was principally through the influence of elder t. cole, of lowell, a minister of the christian connection. again, in the autumn and winter of the same year, he returned and lectured in exeter, new hampshire, and haverhill, massachusetts, where a good effect was produced. “it was at this exeter meeting that he first became acquainted with elder j. v. himes, and received his first invitation to visit boston and give a course of lectures in the chardon-street chapel. his first course of lectures in that place constituted altogether a new era in the history of adventism. an excitement was produced in boston which demanded light, and prepared the public mind to sustain the enterprise of hiring the marlboro chapel for a course of lectures. from that point an influence was extended through all the adjacent country; and such was the demand for light that it was determined to issue a new and revised edition of the lectures. this work was undertaken, without fee or reward, by that devoted friend of the cause. he cheerfully undertook the revision of the work and the superintendence of publication, which a boston publisher agreed to do if he could have the profits arising from an edition of five thousand copies. this he had. mr. miller has often been blamed for securing the copyright, and hence it is but just to him and the cause to say, that it was the only condition on which the publisher would undertake to issue the work. after selling the five thousand copies, mr. mussey, the publisher, concluded that the demand was over. for the purpose of supplying the public, mr. himes then undertook, at the earnest solicitation and advice of friends, the publication of the work himself. at the same time he abandoned the copyright, and thus, to save reproach on the cause, exposed himself to the competition of any and all who chose to compete with him. the same course has been pursued in reference to all his other publications. notwithstanding all this, all that the tongue of slander could invent has been heaped upon him for the stand he took and the self-denying course he pursued on this subject. “during mr. miller’s lectures in boston, a work entitled ‘illustrations of prophecy, by david campbell,’ appeared. some other works of an ephemeral character, from orthodox, infidel, universalist, and other _ists_, appeared about the same time, and accomplished each their work, by overthrowing--not mr. miller--but one another. “under these repeated attacks from the pulpit and press, it was felt that some organ of communication should be opened, by which the public mind could be disabused in reference to the varied reports which were circulated in reference to mr. miller and his views. he had long sought for some one to take the supervision of a paper through which he could speak to the public; but such a man could not be found, who for love or money would undertake the task, and bear the scorn of an unbelieving world. “the signs of the times. “at this juncture, when the storm of opposition grew heavy, the providence of god raised up a man for this work also. the unwearied friend of this cause, j. v. himes, who has so nobly stood in the front of the hosts and the hottest of the fire, came forward and threw himself into the enterprise, to make up the breach. on the th of march, , without money, patrons, or scarcely friends, he issued the first number of the _signs of the times_. the appearance of that sheet was hailed with joy by many a longing heart, waiting for the consolation of israel. the paper was sustained for the first year at a considerable expense to the editor, besides his own unrequited toil. as might be expected, the enemies of the cause were greatly discommoded by the appearance of such a weapon, both offensive and defensive. nothing which a heart surcharged with gall could invent, or the tongue of envy utter, was left unsaid or unwritten against the editor. but his language was, none of these things move me. he was sufficiently convinced of the truth of the doctrine to know that it was worthy, at least, of a full and candid investigation, and this he determined it should have, so far as he was able to gain thus much for it. “the paper thus started was published for two years as a semi-monthly, and, since then, as a weekly periodical. it has been read by multitudes throughout the united states, and in the british provinces, with the deepest interest, and has been to thousands an angel of mercy and love; the good it has accomplished will only be known in the great day of the lord. “during the same winter ( - ) mr. miller was invited to lecture in portsmouth, n. h., and portland, me. in both these places, as well as in boston and vicinity, his labors were attended with refreshing showers of divine grace. numbers embraced the doctrine of the lord’s speedy coming, who are yet strong in the faith, giving glory to god. this winter’s campaign produced an excitement throughout new england, and raised up friends in almost every town. “as the spring opened and the summer came, the entire community were excited, and expectation on tip-toe, in reference to the th of august and its anticipated events, the fall of the ottoman empire, &c., &c. many were the predictions that when that day should have passed by, as it certainly would do, without the event being realized, then the spell would be broken, and adventism would die. but the time came; and it must be confessed it was for a few weeks a time of trial to many. yet ‘he who tempers the wind to the shorn lamb,’ had compassion on his little ones, and did not suffer them to be tempted above what they were able to bear. and few, very few, even under that trial, shrunk from their faith. the time came and passed by; and, as a matter of course, the distance from constantinople could not be passed without consuming some considerable period of time. but when the fact did reach us, it was found that on the very day anticipated, the th of august, a transfer was made of the supremacy of that empire from mahometan hands. this fact entirely discomfited the hosts of the enemy. the cause again revived, and careered on its way with still greater power than ever before.” united effort. “up to this period all that had been done was accomplished by individual effort. in this depression of affairs, it was determined to hold a ‘second-advent conference’ in boston, where the friends of the cause could congregate and give expression to their feelings, and put forth an effort to arouse the country and the world to a sense of its coming doom. this meeting was assembled in the chardon street chapel, on the th of october, , and continued two days. this was styled ‘the first general conference of second-advent believers.’ it was a season of comfort and refreshing to the lovers of the glorious appearing of our blessed lord. “in the spring of , the writer of this article wrote and published a third work, entitled ‘an address to the clergy.’ it embraced in a short compass an exposition of the nature of the kingdom of god; also an article on the return of the jews, and their title to the land promised to abraham for an everlasting possession. it presented the subject in a light somewhat different from what it had ever been presented before in this country. the effect of it on the clergy was considerable; some were moved by it to give the subject an examination, and became satisfied that it was the true position. it also contained the argument on the fall of the ottoman empire. the second edition, published in , was revised by giving the historical facts, showing the fulfillment of the calculation.” june - , , the second general conference of advent believers was held in lowell, mass. it was a time of deep interest, and gave a new impulse to the cause. during the ensuing summer mr. litch visited the seats of the four new england methodist episcopal annual conferences, and gave lectures which called out more or less of the ministry to hear him. his efforts in this direction removed prejudice, and made a good impression. “the course of adventism was steadily onward, both among clergy and laity, throughout new england. “it was in the autumn of this year that that devoted and beloved brother, c. fitch, returned again to the examination of the question of the lord’s coming, and came out a decided advocate of the doctrine. he at once entered the field, and has proved an efficient auxiliary to the cause. “bro. william miller continued his labors in various parts of the country with great success. bro. himes also devoted as much time as his pastoral and other duties would allow, to lecturing on the subject. “in october another conference was held in portland, me., which gave a new impulse to the work in that section of the country. another conference was appointed and held in the broadway tabernacle, new york city, which was the first successful effort ever made in that city. “from new york city we proceeded to low hampton, the residence of bro. miller, and commenced another conference. it was a season of refreshing to all, and more especially to bro. miller himself. it was the first conference he had ever attended; and to find around him such a host as were congregated there, from east, west, north and south, from canada as well as the states, raised up to proclaim this truth, by the blessing of god on his labors, was to him most refreshing and encouraging. “during the winter of - , conferences were held in various places, which were all attended with good: boston, mass.; dover, n. h.; sandy hill, n. y.; pomfret, ct.; colchester, vt.; ashburnham and lunenburg, mass., &c. the result of them, eternity will unfold; but much fruit was immediately apparent. a large number of ministers of the gospel were awakened, during the winter, to a sense of their duty to investigate the subject, and were induced to preach it more or less in their pulpit ministrations; and some of them devoted themselves entirely to the advent cause, and became efficient lecturers. “as the spring opened, bro. himes determined on sounding the cry abroad more fully in the city of new york; and accordingly, in the month of may, himself with bro. miller went to that city to commence their operations. the apollo hall, on broadway, was rented at a heavy expense, and they commenced their work. the labors of the preceding visit were so far obliterated that none could be found to invite them to their house and give them a night’s lodging. they accordingly took an ante-room adjoining the hall as a sitting and lodging room for a part of the time, until friends were awakened and brought in, who furnished a cot-bed, and thus relieved them from the hard floor. two weeks, under these circumstances, laboring night and day, paying most of their own expenses (for the public collections were very small), were necessary before an impression could be made. one fact should be here recorded: an impression had gone abroad respecting the adventists, that they were monsters, or almost anything but civilized beings. so strong was this impression, and so general, that a number of days had passed and scarcely a lady dared to make her appearance in the meetings. the religious press had sounded the alarm, and spread a panic through the community which it was difficult to remove. but as one after another ventured to look in, and then to listen, the prejudice began to give way, and the congregation to enlarge, and before the meetings closed on anniversary week, the house was well filled with attentive hearers, and a permanent interest secured. it was a great undertaking, but the victory was at length achieved, and a great and glorious harvest has been gathered in. this meeting closed under encouraging circumstances, and filled all who were present with hope as to the future.” camp-meeting era. “while the meetings were progressing in new york, the friends in boston determined on a general rally in that city during anniversary week. accordingly, the melodeon was secured for the occasion, and our meetings began under the most auspicious circumstances. adventism had never seen a brighter day. the attendance was large throughout the entire meeting. although the interests of the week were great, yet none had a larger share of attention than the advent anniversary conference. during that week, among the various other interests which came up for discussion, was the question of holding a camp-meeting, or camp-meetings, during the ensuing summer. this was thought, by many, a great undertaking. what, a little handful of adventists hold a camp-meeting! why, they are hardly able to hold a house-meeting, much less a camp-meeting! however, there was sufficient faith and zeal in the meeting to say try. arrangements were accordingly made by the appointment of a camp-meeting committee, to carry the plan into effect. it was determined to make a most vigorous effort during the summer, for the spread of this great light. for we then thought it doubtful whether we ever should reach another anniversary week, in time. “immediately after the anniversary meetings were over, the writer started for canada east, to fulfill an engagement in stanstead. he left boston on monday morning, and arrived at stanstead, and began his meeting on wednesday. the interest steadily increased from the beginning, and before two weeks were passed, the country, for thirty or forty miles around, was awake to the subject of the lord’s coming. immense concourses assembled both in canada and in derby, vermont, where a course of lectures was given. such was the interest to hear, and the awakening among the people, that it was determined at once to hold a camp-meeting in canada. in accordance with this determination, a place was selected, the ground prepared, and the meeting held in the township of hadley, canada east. such was the good effect of this first meeting, that the people of bolton wished one to be held in their town. this was begun the next week after the hadley meeting closed, and ended on the third of july. during that month’s labor, as near as could be estimated, five or six hundred souls were converted to god. “the last week in june, the first advent camp-meeting held in the states commenced in east kingston, new hampshire, where an immense multitude assembled to hear the word of the kingdom, and worship the god of abraham. thus, instead of one advent camp-meeting during the season, which the unbelief of some thought could hardly be carried through, within one month of the determination to _try_, three such meetings had actually been successful. besides these camp-meetings, there were immense gatherings of the people all through the northern part of vermont and new hampshire, and onward through the state of maine.” the great tent. while these operations were going forward, the plan was started for constructing a large tent sufficient to accommodate four thousand persons, with which to go into the cities where no house was open for lectures. this proposition was at once received by the people, and bro. himes, with the help of other friends, undertook the work. such a tent was completed and pitched in concord, new hampshire, in the latter part of july. the excitement produced by such a movement was still greater than that occasioned by the advent camp-meetings. “the tent was next pitched in albany, new york; then in springfield, and salem, massachusetts, and benson, vermont. and finally, for the last time in the season, in newark, new jersey. in all these places the word took effect, and produced the greatest and most beneficial results. besides the great tent-meetings and numerous courses of lectures, there were held some six or eight camp-meetings, in new england, during the summer and fall. the work spread with a power unparalleled in the history of religious excitements. “during the season, bro. c. fitch made a visit to oberlin institute, where he proclaimed the doctrine of the lord’s coming to the students, as well as faculty of the institution, and in various other places in ohio. while on this tour, the lord wonderfully blessed his labors, and gave him favor in the sight of the people. it was arranged for him to remove his family into that region of country to spend the winter, and lecture in cleveland and vicinity. this movement awakened an interest in that part of the country, which has been increasing to the present time. “after the close of the newark camp or tent-meeting, the cold weather set in, and rendered it impracticable longer to continue these public, out-door meetings, and the laborers began to arrange for a winter’s campaign. bro. himes, together with bro. miller and others, returned to new york, and commenced a course of lectures in the church, corner of catherine and madison streets, where bro. storrs had been laboring with great success for a number of weeks. the interest still continued to increase beyond all expectation. an invitation was also given for a course of lectures in the methodist protestant church, in anthony street, under the pastoral care of bro. e. jacobs. this invitation was accepted by bro. a. hale, and attended with a great blessing. bro. jacobs, and many of his church embraced the doctrine, and began immediately to proclaim it with power. “the midnight cry. “such was the interest in new york city, that it was determined by bro. j. v. himes, to commence a daily advent paper, and publish it at least for four weeks, in which the principal arguments sustaining our views were to be embodied and given to the public in a cheap and popular form. the paper was commenced in the latter part of november, , entitled _the midnight cry_. it was principally under the editorial supervision of our beloved and faithful brother, n. southard. the twenty-four numbers were published, and ten thousand copies of each number circulated. most of these were gratuitously distributed through the post-offices at the expense of the publisher. of course, such a distribution could not fail to awaken an interest throughout the country, of the most salutary character. thousands were enlightened and instructed, and embraced the doctrine, who never heard a lecture on the subject. the ‘_cry_’ has been continued as a weekly paper up to the present time, and has each successive week been extending its sphere of usefulness, and cheering the hearts of thousands of lonely pilgrims in every part of the land. “in february, , bro. miller and bro. himes visited philadelphia, and gave a course of lectures, with very great effect. the city was convulsed throughout with the influence of the lectures. saints rejoiced, the wicked trembled, backsliders quaked, and the word of the lord ran and was glorified. it is doubtful whether mr. miller ever gave a course of lectures with greater effect than at that time. it placed the cause on a permanent foundation in the city, and prepared the way for extending it into the south and west. a book-room was opened in the city early in january, and a small penny paper, the _philadelphia alarm_, was issued. thirteen numbers of it were published, about four thousand copies per number.” efforts were now made in washington, d. c., and pittsburgh, va. “indeed, the whole west seemed ripe and ready for harvest. letters written from pittsburgh, and published in the _midnight cry_, soon aroused the friends at the east, and a number of lecturers immediately started for that field of labor. the advent banner was unfurled in cincinnati, and from thence the light has been spreading all over the western and southern country. “returning from pittsburgh, about the middle of march, the _philadelphia alarm_ was merged in the _trumpet of alarm_, a paper containing the diagrams of the visions of daniel and john, and a connected view of the advent doctrine, gotten up for the express purpose of circulating in the west and south. from twenty-five to thirty thousand copies of it have been circulated. “while these things were going on at the west, the lord was still at work in the east. by his gracious providence, those beloved brethren, n. n. whiting, j. b. cook, and f. g. brown, were brought into the faith and began to proclaim it aloud. the effect of it was electrical. very many, who had previously looked upon the subject as beneath their notice, began to feel that it was possible, after all, that there might be something in it. this induced examination of the evidence, and that again produced conviction of the truth of the doctrine. “in a manner too rapid to record, the advent cause went forward during that winter. i am aware that history loses more than half its interest from the absence of its details; but such are the limits to which this sketch must be confined, it is impossible to enter into the minutiæ of the thing. all that can be done will be to record the outlines of the story. “then, again, bro. fitch’s mission in ohio resulted in the establishment of a second-advent paper in cleveland, which has proved an instrument of great good to the cause in that section of the country. brn. h. b. skinner and l. caldwell, who spent the winter in canada east, also commenced a paper there, devoted to the cause. “as the summer opened, preparations were made for tabernacle and camp-meetings. east, west, and north, they were appointed and held; most of which were attended with the special blessing of god on the people, and greatly extended the knowledge of the advent views. the same anxiety to hear on the subject, which has characterized the doctrine from its beginning, marked it still. not only in places where it had gained a foothold, but in new places where it had never been proclaimed, the greatest anxiety to hear was manifested. “bro. himes undertook the task of again sustaining _the great tent_, and going with it into western new york. this he, in connection with other brethren, carried through. up to that time, no permanent interest had been created in that part of the country. but from the holding of the tent-meetings in rochester and buffalo, the subject took a strong hold on the community through that region of country, and has been steadily going forward ever since. “from buffalo, the tent was taken to cincinnati, ohio, and a full exposition of the advent doctrines given to the people. several courses of lectures, however, had been previously delivered in that city, and the people were thus prepared to improve the privilege of the tent-lectures. there had also been several camp-meetings in the vicinity of the city; so that a great interest prevailed in the country to obtain light on the subject. “in connection with each of the tent meetings, an advent paper was published, in which the main points of the advent doctrine were given to the people, with great effect. “we have not space for a full account of the numerous incidents which marked the labors of the summer and autumn of . but it must be recorded, to the praise of god’s glorious grace, that the work of the lord went steadily forward, bearing down all opposition, from whatever source. “we were deprived, during the entire spring and summer, of the labors of our beloved bro. miller, who was confined to his house by a painful sickness for a number of months. in the fall of the year, as his health improved, he again commenced his arduous work: first making a tour through new england, and then into western new york. during the eight weeks which he spent in the latter tour, he preached eighty-five times, besides all the other duties which devolved upon him, incidental to such a journey. never were his labors attended with better results, or received with greater pleasure, than during that journey. ‘the good seed,’ ‘the word of the kingdom,’ still found good ground, into which it fell, took root, and brought forth fruit. “during this visit to the west, among other places, he visited lockport, new york, the residence of elder e. galusha, so well known in the baptist church in the united states. he had been for several months more or less exercised on the subject of the coming of the lord, and had given it a very candid examination, but had never fully committed himself to it until bro. miller’s lectures in the church of which he had the pastoral charge. he, from that time, became a decided advocate of the doctrine, and has since devoted himself to its advocacy.” mr. miller’s visit to washington. “it had long been in contemplation, by bro. himes, in company with bro. miller, to visit washington city, district of columbia, and sound the alarm in the capital of the nation; but no opportunity presented itself for so doing until the past winter. commencing in boston, they lectured in that city, and from thence came to new york, delivering a course of lectures to a numerous audience; from thence visited philadelphia, spent a week, and gave a course of lectures to an immense concourse of people, with very great effect. from philadelphia, he, in company with the writer, went to washington and commenced a course of lectures, february , . two weeks were spent in different sections of the city, in presenting the doctrines of adventism, and the evidences of the speedy coming of the lord. the attendance was good, and the interest to hear, deep. a greater revolution in public sentiment has rarely been witnessed in so short a time, than was brought about in washington, in reference to the advent doctrine. “during our stay in washington, besides the papers and books which were carried on from the north, a paper was commenced there, called the _southern midnight cry_. two numbers were published and circulated in washington and vicinity, and another in baltimore, while bro. miller was giving his course of lectures in that city. thus ended the winter of - , and brought us to the point which had so long been before us--the end of the jewish year .” the termination of the prophetic times. “as might be expected, as the crisis, the st of march, approached, there was a very general expectation of an entire overthrow of the whole system of adventism. it was supposed that those who had embraced it, if the appointed time should pass, would yield the whole question. but they had not so learned the bible. the doctrine does not consist in merely tracing prophetic periods, although that is an important part of the work. but the whole prophetic history of the world is given in the pages of inspiration, is recorded in history, and affords indubitable evidence of the fact, that we have approached a crisis. and no disappointment respecting a definite point of time can move them, or drive them from their position relative to the speedy coming of the lord. and it yet remains to be shown that our calculations of time are not correct, and are only in error relative to the event which marked its close. this is the most likely. there are, at present, some who falter, but comparatively few, however, who have given up the cause. most stand unmoved amidst all the scoffs and jeers of a reviling world.” modes of opposition. “it has usually been the fact that, as soon as the doctrine of the lord’s speedy coming has been presented in any place, the clergy, in the course of one or two weeks, would begin their attacks from the pulpit. the usual argument has been-- “ . ‘of that day and hour knoweth no man;’ yet these men profess to know the very time when the lord is to come. yes, they profess to know more than the angels, or even the son of god himself. “ . the lord cannot come until after the millennium, during which the whole world is to be righteous, and the lion eat straw like the ox, &c. “ . the jews must be brought in, and restored to palestine, before that day comes. “ . it is to come as a thief, as a snare, &c., on all them that dwell on the earth. but now there are so many who are looking for it, that it cannot come as a snare. “ . it cannot come now, because there are so many learned and holy ministers and christians, that if it should come now, it would take them by surprise. the lord will not come without their knowing it. “ . the world is yet in its infancy; the arts and sciences are just beginning to come to maturity, and fit the world to live, and it cannot be that the lord will come now and destroy it all. “ . then again there is so much waste land to be occupied in the western country, land which has never yet been cultivated at all, that it is not at all reasonable that the lord should destroy it all before it has been improved. “ . but the great argument, the one which has proved the most effectual, has been, that this vision of daniel viii has nothing to do with the coming of christ, or setting up of god’s everlasting kingdom. it simply refers to antiochus epiphanes, and his persecution of the jews, and desecration of the temple, some odd years b. c. thus we have the abomination of desolation spoken of by daniel the prophet, for which the saviour taught his people to look, about two hundred years before the instruction was given. “to the foregoing might be added a number more of the same class, _professedly_ drawn from reason and scripture, but none of them more formidable than those already recorded. do you smile, gentle reader, at the idea of calling these arguments? yet, you may be assured that each of them in turn has been urged by grave men, calling themselves doctors of divinity. “but the most wonderful and overwhelming of all arguments which have ever been presented against the doctrine, is, ‘mr. miller has built some stone wall on his farm!!’ but, i forgot myself; i said the most wonderful; there is another quite its equal: ‘mr. miller refuses to sell his farm!!’ how, oh! how can christ come, when mr. miller will not sell his farm? “but this is not all; for the truth is, ‘mr. himes has published and scattered (a large part of them gratuitously) more than five millions of books and papers. he must be engaged in a speculation; and how can the lord come? oh! how can he come?’ “but to be serious; a word on this subject is due these men, and the cause whose advocates they have been. for those who have known william miller, and have known his personal history, it is not needful we should write. but there are those who know him not; on their account it is, that this memento is here inserted. “when mr. miller first commenced the advocacy of the advent doctrine, he was engaged in agricultural pursuits. he had a farm of his own, was surrounded by an interesting family, and possessed all that could make life easy and agreeable. when the lord called and thrust him out into this work, he was in the decline of life, without the advantages of an academical education, without experience as a public speaker, without ecclesiastical preferments, except as a valued and worthy lay member of the baptist church; the prejudices of both the church and world were decidedly against all attempts to understand the prophetic scriptures, with many other discouraging circumstances. yet, in the face of all discouragements, he went forth taking nothing; but as freely did he bestow on others the light which god had given, as he had received it. “for a number of years after he began this work, he traveled extensively, lectured frequently, endured privation and scoffing, and paid all the expenses of his journeys from his own funds. at the same time he had a large family dependent on him for their subsistence, besides keeping open doors for all the lord’s servants who should choose to come under his roof; where they were always sure to find a hearty welcome. “after pursuing this course for some years, he arranged his domestic affairs, by giving up his farm into the hands of his sons, so as to sustain his family, and have an annuity of one hundred dollars, to clothe himself and meet his other incidental expenses. in this way he continued to travel far and near, wherever providence opened the way, and for the most part bearing his own expenses. this he did until his journeys became so numerous, long and expensive, as to exceed his income. then he permitted the people among whom he labored to pay his traveling expenses. but he has not received enough, since he began his work, to sustain him in it. from the sale of his books he has received no profit. it has been no part of his business to lay up treasures on earth, or accumulate wealth by the gospel of god’s grace. “amidst all the vile and reproachful epithets which have been heaped upon him, all the false and scurrilous reports which have gone the rounds of both pulpit and press, as well as private circles, he has gone on, still pursuing the even tenor of his way, accomplishing the mission on which he set forth. if his remarks concerning the attacks which have been made upon him, have sometimes seemed severe, it will not be wondered at, when it is recollected that it is nothing else but the severity of truth. we will not pretend to say that he has never erred; but this we do say, while we confess, that ‘to err is human,’ few men have gone through an enterprise like this, with fewer errors or blemishes than william miller. “so, likewise, in exposing and reproving the growing corruptions of the church and ministry, he has been thought by many too severe. but this, too, has consisted in the severity of truths which few, in an age of degeneracy like this, had either the independence or courage to speak out. he has spoken aloud what others have thought and repeated only in private. yet, after all, who that knows the man, but loves him? take him all in all, where could an instrument be found better qualified for the station he has filled? “a few words respecting that faithful and devoted friend of the cause of adventism, j. v. himes, must close this part of the present work. from the position he has occupied in the front of the battle, the most deadly shafts of the enemy have been aimed at him. the generous spirit of self-sacrifice with which he came forward and exerted every nerve for the advancement of this great work, excited at once the envy, the wrath, the anger and calumny of the whole host of foes to the doctrine. and no means which could be devised to blast his influence has been wanting from that to the present time. but through grace he has thus far triumphed. i believe the providence of god raised up j. v. himes as an associate and fellow helper of mr. miller, in the great work of arousing the church and the world to prepare for the coming of the lord; and that he has performed the work with fidelity to god and man, and honor to himself.” extent of the work. “we look upon the proclamation which has been made, as being the cry of the angel who proclaimed ‘the hour of his judgment is come.’ rev. xiv, , . it is a sound which is to reach all nations; it is the proclamation of ‘the everlasting gospel,’ or ‘this gospel of the kingdom.’ in one shape or other, this cry has gone abroad through the earth wherever human beings are found, and we have had opportunity to hear of the fact. within the last six years, publications, treating on the subject, have been sent to nearly every english and american missionary station on the globe; to all, at least, to which we have had access. “then again, the great religious papers of the country have all aided in this work; for some of them have published our views, as written by friends, and others have published reviews and everthrows, in which our arguments must be presented, in order to refute them. “by these the truth has been spread into many places where it could not have reached by the ordinary means. then again, the caricatures which have been scattered among the rabble, have carried the great point with them, the coming of the lord to judgment, and the time of his coming. “the secular press has contributed, in no small degree, to increase and spread an interest on the question. even the foolish and false statements which have been put forth, have, in some instances, only turned out for the advancement of the work of god. the story, for instance, which was started by the new york _sun_, that mr. miller had fixed on the d of april, , as the time for christ to come, although entirely false and baseless in itself, yet was so widely circulated, that there was scarcely a place known where the report was not heard and an interest awakened.” advent books. “these have been greatly multiplied within the last four years. as already remarked, the first and most important work published, was mr. miller’s lectures. that volume may be regarded as the seed from which all the rest have germinated. the works of miller, ward, hale, bliss, fitch, storrs, brown, hervey, cook, whiting, starkweather, hawley, litch, fleming, cox, sabine, &c., constitute the second advent library, and exhibit the views which have been presented to the public by the lectures. other sheets and pamphlets have been published. “some of the sheets which have been published and circulated have accomplished a vast amount of good. the ‘clue to the time,’ written by bro. l. hersey, a shoemaker in boston, and a city watchman, with a diagram, has been the means of great good. eternity alone will reveal the many precious souls who have been led to look for the lord’s coming from the reading of one of those sheets.” lecturers and writers. “the mass of lecturers who have been raised up and thrust forth into this work, have been men of sound minds, warm hearts, full of zeal for god and the salvation of men. they have made no great pretensions to learning, in its common acceptation; but yet, as a general thing, they have been close students of the bible, making it a self-interpreting book. nor have they been altogether inattentive to history as their time and means have allowed. it is true that, so far as they have been successful in their work, the excellency of the power has been of god. “but there have been some raised up among us of commanding talents and acquirements; men, who need not blush to stand by the side of the wise and learned of the earth. these were raised up at a time when such assistance was needed, and god has accomplished his work by them. the advent writings exhibit minds accustomed to think and reason, as well as read. although the mass of the books lay no claim to literary merit, yet they have done more to promote a sound, healthy, moral literature, than any other books of the age. they have so selected and arranged historical incidents, in connection with the prophetic scriptures, which embrace the history of the world, as to invest that history with an interest which the mass of readers never before saw or felt. if they have promoted the study of history, much more have they induced a careful study of the scriptures. “it is a lamentable fact, that although this is an age of bibles, yet the great body of professing christians know but little what that bible contains. and wherever advent books have been circulated, instead of superseding the use of the bible, as most books do, they almost invariably send the reader to the sacred storehouse. nothing ever given to the public has excited so much interest in the study of the bible as the proclamation of ‘the hour of his judgment.’ a course of lectures in a village, would open a door for the sale of more bibles in a week than would have been sold before for years. whatever may be the final issue of this question, so far its fruits have been of the best character.” what adventism has accomplished. “ . when this cry first commenced, the prophecies were generally looked upon as a book of mysteries, which it was presumption, if not sacrilege, to attempt to understand or explain. that spell has been broken, and the christian public understand that those deeply-interesting portions of the word of god are also a part of his revelation to man. and even the clergy, of all orders, have been constrained to speak out and give some explanation of the prophecies, however crude it might be. “ . the fable of the world’s conversion, and the universal triumph of christianity, which almost universally prevailed ten years ago, has been exploded, and the church now understands that the man of sin is to remain in the world until the lord comes and destroys him by the brightness of his coming. that there is to be no millennium until ‘the first resurrection,’ at the coming of the lord. that idea cannot be made to grow again as it has done. “ . that kindred doctrine, the return of the jews to palestine, where they are again to be exalted to peculiar privileges, is exposed, and the old apostolic doctrine, that there is no respect of persons with god, is made to stand out in bold relief, so that the church must see and acknowledge it to be the truth of god. “ . it has produced a very general conviction on the public mind, that we are near the end of time, and just ready to appear before the bar of god. the general outlines of prophecy, as exhibited in the four great kingdoms, is seen and acknowledged by very many to be nearly accomplished. and hence the conviction fastens on the mind, that the end of all things is at hand. “ . it has developed a vast amount of german rationalism, neology and infidelity in the church, and has demonstrated the fact, that nearly or quite all the theological schools are under its influence. and it has proved, that if the lord does not come speedily and end the strife, that the country must soon be flooded with this system of neology. “ . wherever it has gone, the advent doctrine has awakened sinners, reclaimed backsliders, quickened believers, and promoted the cause of god generally. thousands on thousands can witness the truth of this remark in their own experience; and will have cause to bless god eternally for the advent doctrine and advent preaching. “ . it has shown professedly orthodox ministers to be so degenerate in their sentiments as to make common cause with infidels and universalists against the coming of the lord. and has also shown the church to be so degenerate as to cast out her children for looking for and speaking of the return of her lord. “ . it has given to the church and world a simple, plain, common-sense system of interpretation of the sacred canon, so that every man, who will take the trouble of reading the bible and collating the different portions of it, may understand the word of god without the aid of learned commentaries.” permanency of the work. “no provision has been made for the establishment of permanent institutions among adventists. indeed, we have no means of ascertaining the number of ministers, and others, who have embraced the advent faith. we only know that there are several hundred congregations, and a still larger number of ministers, who have publicly professed the faith, besides many who still remain in the churches of the land. those who have espoused this cause have honestly believed in the coming of the lord ‘about a. d. ;’ and as honest men they have kept to their work of sounding the alarm. all peculiarities of creed or policy have been lost sight of, in the absorbing inquiry concerning the coming of the heavenly bridegroom. those who have engaged in this enterprise are from all the various sects in the land--protestant episcopal, methodist episcopal, methodist protestant, primitive methodist, wesleyan methodist, close communion baptist, calvinistic and armenian baptists, presbyterians, old and new school congregationalists, old and new school lutheran, dutch reformed, &c., &c. all these have agreed to work together for the accomplishment of a certain object; and the organization to which this has given rise, so far as there is anything which may be called an organization, is of the most simple, voluntary and primitive form. while the engrossing and scriptural character of the grand object has kept those who have been brought under its influence above the considerations which so generally divide the household of faith, it has also made them frank and kind in expressing their minor differences, and forbearing toward each other on subordinate questions upon which they may not see alike. and in this is their strength. “in , robert winter, an englishman by birth, and a primitive methodist by profession, fell in with the adventists in this country and embraced the doctrine. in the fall of the year he resolved to return to england, and proclaim the coming of the lord. he did return, and commenced the work. god owned his truth, and it took effect, and many have been raised up to join with him in spreading the light through these islands of the sea. last summer camp or field meetings were held in different parts of england with great success. “books and papers to a large amount have been sent to england, and scattered abroad through the country; and several books and papers have been republished in that country with great effect. “the british provinces adjoining the united states, have been visited and furnished with the light. our beloved brother hutchinson, in montreal, has published a large amount of matter in his paper, _the voice of elijah_, and sent it over the united kingdoms. “but i must close this brief sketch of the rise and progress of adventism, or my space will be more than full. but a few only out of the multitude of incidents which should enter into a work of this kind have been noticed. but this is all we have room to give in the present sketch. the judge is at the door, and will make a more full and accurate development of this great work than human heart can indite or hand record. concerning adventism, it may be truly said, ‘what hath god wrought?’ “no cause of a moral or religious character, probably, ever made so rapid advances as the cause of adventism. its votaries have usually been the most humble, pious, devoted members of the different churches; men and women who love their lord, and to whom the thought of his glorious advent has been a source of sweetest pleasure. the hand of providence has everywhere opened the way, and provided the means for doing all that human means could do. none of the lecturers have made themselves rich, or even held what little they had when they embarked in the enterprise. everything has been freely sacrificed when the cause demanded it. never have a set of men labored more faithfully and zealously in the cause of god, or with purer motives. but their work is with the lord, and their record on high. “it is asked what we intend to do, now the time is expired? our answer is, we intend, by the lord’s help, to spread the glad tidings of the kingdom of god until it appears. the arguments which have been presented on the prophetic history and periods, together with the signs of the times, have lost none of their strength; and we purpose to continue presenting them until the master comes, that we may be found giving his ‘household meat in due season.’” the exeter, n. h., camp meeting. it was in the month of august, , that the memorable second-advent camp-meeting was held at exeter, n. h. this meeting was large. it was the occasion of a general rally from all parts of new england, and many were present from other states and from the canadas. there were many tents upon the ground, some of them resembling houses of worship, in size and shape, more than the small tents usually seen upon methodist camp grounds. these furnished ample accommodations for the thousands of believers present. there was a general agreement with all adventists at that time, that the special providence of god had directed the advent movement. but the farthest point to which the jewish year could be extended, reaching from march, , to march, , had passed, and believers were left in a state of suspense and uncertainty, evidently not enjoying all the inspiring influence of the advent hope and faith they felt under the proclamation of definite time. and there were other things besides the passing of the time, that cast a degree of general gloom over the second-advent cause at that time. storrs’ six sermons on the immortality question were being widely circulated among adventists, and the doctrine of man’s unconsciousness in death and the destruction of the wicked, was being adopted by some and regarded with favor by many. the time had come, in the providence of god, for this question to be agitated. but its importance could not then be seen by any as it is now regarded since the rise and wide-spreading, desolating influence of spiritualism. those second-advent editors and lecturers, such as litch, hale, bliss, himes, and miller, who did not agree with mr. storrs, not only failed to see that good could result from the agitation of the subject, but were grieved that the once united and happy flock, who were looking for the immediate return of the great shepherd, should have their minds divided by this question. and these men, who felt the responsibilities of the great advent cause, are not to be censured too much for their fears, nor blamed too severely for their efforts to avoid the discussion of so sensitive a question. and while it was being feared that a portion of the advent body were having their minds diverted from the all-important work of warning the world of the soon-coming of the son of man, by an unnecessary discussion of the immortality question, others were causing divisions, and were bringing much labor and perplexity upon the leading men in the cause, by urging upon the flock extreme views of entire consecration, or christian perfection, then taught by the methodists, the men of the oberlin school, and others. and not a few men and women appeared in the advent ranks who professed to be wonderfully led by the holy spirit. these took their position in advance of their brethren. many of them soon became self-righteous, and, notwithstanding their apparent humility, were proud of their spiritual attainments. so wonderfully impressed to do this or that, and so directly taught by the holy spirit in relation to their entire duty, how could they err? the idea of mistakes on their part, in doctrine or in duty, was banished from them. viewing themselves far in advance of their brethren, they were ready to teach even their teachers. and supposing themselves directly taught by the holy spirit, they were ready to reject the instructions and corrections of those who labored to help them. such persons usually advance rapidly in their wild career. they soon fall under the direct power of satan, to be impressed and tempted by him to do this or that thing which may be sinful. they labor under the terrible deception that all their impressions are from the holy spirit, and must at all hazards be promptly obeyed. god pity the poor fanatic, who is thus goaded on by the devil to disgrace himself and wound the cause of christ. in no case could satan strike the advent cause so stunning a blow, and so completely cover it with reproach, as to lead on certain ones who bore the advent name in the wild career of fanaticism. and he knows when to strike. the world had just trembled before the solemn message of the judgment hour, proclaimed with great boldness and power. and believers had lifted up one united voice in confident testimony relative to the period of their joyful expectations. but the time had passed, the world breathed easier, the scoffer triumphed, and believers felt that they had all they could do to hold fast, and not draw back to perdition. this was just the time for satan to strike. more or less had embraced the advent faith from all those religious bodies where the idea was prevailing that scriptural sanctification, purity and holiness, consisted chiefly in happy flights of feeling, and being led in the minutiæ of the christian life by impressions. these had been stirred to the very depths of the soul by the proclamation of the second coming of christ, and felt that if they ever needed holiness it was then necessary, to enable them to stand when he should appear, and that if they should ever follow the leadings of the holy spirit, it was then, as they were engaged in the preparatory work for the judgment. and with their false notions of entire consecration, they were in readiness for the torch of fanaticism. if satan could control these, and bring reproach upon the advent cause, and sadden the hearts of those he could not destroy, he would gain a victory that would cause wicked men and demons to triumph. there was upon the exeter camp-ground a tent from watertown, massachusetts, filled with fanatical persons, as briefly described above. at an early period in this meeting, they attracted much attention by the peculiar style in which they conducted their seasons of social worship in their tent. these were irregular, very lengthy, frequently extending into hours of intermission and rest, continuing nearly all night, and attended with great excitement, and noise of shouting and clapping of hands, and singular gestures and exercises. some shouted so loud and incessantly as to become hoarse, and silent, simply because they could no longer shout, while others literally blistered their hands striking them together. the tent’s company from portland, me., of which i was one of the number, had pitched close by this tent from watertown, before the condition of those who occupied it was generally known, little thinking of the annoyances they were to suffer from these fanatical persons. but these they endured for a while in the hope that they would be corrected and reproved. seeing, however, that they were not the persons to be reformed, and that they grew no better, but, rather worse, the portland brethren moved their tent to a distant part of the ground. but this act, showing the assembled thousands that we had no union with those we left, created sympathy for these fanatics, in not a few who viewed all the dangers of the way on the side of those who were disposed to formality. these joined with the watertown people in the cry of persecution, and shouted glory to god over it, as if a new and brilliant victory had been gained. by this time a general gloom was coming over the meeting, and ministers who had the burden of the work upon them, felt deeply. the wildfire was spreading, and how to stop it was the question. the people were told of the dangers of spiritual magnetism, and were warned to keep away from that tent. but this only caused a crowd of the curious, incautious, and those who claimed a right to investigate, and felt that they were responsible to no one, to gather round this tent. and it was evident that every hour some were being brought under this influence, several of whom were suffering impulse to ride over reason. a minister, possessing more natural eloquence than piety and real moral worth, while attempting to preach from the stand, was rebuked by a clear voice from this tent, and thrown into confusion. “don’t let me fall, brethren,” said he to the large congregation who were turning their attention to the tent from which came the voice. “pray, and keep your minds upon the subject.” he did fall in spirit and freedom, and his effort was a decided failure. elder plummer, of haverhill, mass., who had the especial charge of the meeting, made appropriate remarks upon the condition of things, with great solemnity and deep feeling. he then prayed, calling on god for guidance and help in that critical hour. he prayed like a strong man in agony, whose only hope of deliverance was in god. he then stated something of his opinion of the spirit of fanaticism on the ground, and exhorted the people to look to god for help, and not suffer their minds to be diverted by the interruptions and general noise of the faction on the ground, who were not in harmony with the great objects of the meeting. he stated, in the most solemn manner, that he had no objections to shouts of praise to god, over victories won in his name. but when persons had shouted “glory to god” nine hundred and ninety-nine times, with no evidence of one victory gained, and had blistered their hands in striking them together with violence, he thought it was time for them to stop. but if they would not change their course, it was time for all who wished to be consistent christians to withdraw their sympathy from them, and show their disapproval of their course by keeping entirely away from them. these remarks helped the people generally, but not those who were wild with fanaticism. but none among the preachers and speakers generally had shown up to this time that they had the burden of the meeting upon them, excepting what was seen in elder plummer, in reproving existing wrongs. several spoke from the stand, but they failed to move the people. god evidently had a special message for that people, to be attended with his signal blessing. men of ability spoke of the great lines of prophecy, which proved that the advent of christ was the next great event, and of the signs that the event was at the door; but this was as familiar to that crowd of intelligent believers as the alphabet. just then, as one was speaking with but little force and interest, and the people were becoming weary of being told, in a dull, prosy style, what they already knew, a middle-aged, modest-appearing lady arose in the centre of the audience, and in a calm manner, and with a clear, strong, yet pleasant voice, addressed the speaker as follows: “it is too late, bro. ----. it is too late to spend our time upon those truths, with which we are familiar, and which have been blessed to us in the past, and have served their purpose and their time.” the brother sat down, and the lady continued, while all eyes were fastened upon her. “it is too late, brethren, to spend precious time as we have since this camp-meeting commenced. time is short. the lord has servants here who have meat in due season for his household. let them speak, and let the people hear them. ‘behold the bridegroom cometh, go ye out to meet him.’” this testimony seemed electrifying, and was responded to by choked utterances of “amen,” from every part of that vast encampment. many were in tears. what former speakers had said was forgotten, and the spirit of fanaticism, which an hour before lay upon the burdened feelings of the brethren and sisters like a ponderous leaden weight, was also forgotten. the attention paid to those in fanaticism, and the opposition they were able to call out, were just the coveted fuel to feed the unhallowed flame. and they were destined to triumph, unless the attention of the people could be fastened in another direction. this done, and their power was broken. by the request of many brethren, the next morning, the arguments were given from the stand, which formed the basis of the tenth day of the seventh-month movement. the speaker was solemn and dignified, and showed to the entire satisfaction of that vast body of intelligent believers-- . that all the evidences which had been relied upon as proof that the prophetic days of daniel viii, would end in the year , proved that they would terminate in . the entire body of believers had been united, agreeing with william miller that the days dated from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build jerusalem, b. c. . this point settled, the figures were readily found: from take ---- and there remain but the speaker showed an error in this calculation. he stated that it would require _full_ years _before_ christ, and _full_ years _after_ christ, to make full years, so that if the years commenced with the first day of b. c. , they would reach to the first day of a. d. . . that this prophetic period did not commence with the year , in the spring, but in the autumn of that year. his reasons were-- _a._ that as the seventy prophetic weeks are the first years of the , and as the first seven weeks of the seventy, mark the time of the work of restoring and building jerusalem in troublous times, the great period must commence with the commencement of the work of restoring and building, which did not commence in the spring, on the first month, when ezra started from babylon, but after he had reached jerusalem, in the autumn, probably on the seventh month. “for upon the first day of the first month began he to go up from babylon, and on the first day of the fifth month came he to jerusalem.” ezra vii, . this would give more than two months for necessary preparations for the work of restoring and building to commence on the seventh month, immediately after the great day of atonement. _b._ that as the words of the angel to the prophet daniel--“in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease,”--mean that in the middle of the last week of the seventy, christ should be crucified; and as he was crucified in the spring, that prophetic week of seven years must commence and close in the fall. consequently the seventy weeks commenced and closed in the fall, and, therefore, the days terminate in the fall. . the speaker then introduced the arguments drawn from those types of the law of moses which point to christ, to prove that the second advent of him who was then our high priest would take place in the autumn, even on the tenth day of the seventh jewish month. he reasoned that as the spring types, pointing to the great events connected with the first advent of christ, were fulfilled, not only as to their nature and order, but as to time, so would the autumnal types, pointing to the second advent, be fulfilled as to time. see lev. xxiii. the slaying of the passover lamb was a type of the crucifixion of christ. paul says, christ our passover is sacrificed for us. cor. v, . the sheaf of the first fruits of the harvest, which was waved before the lord, was typical of the resurrection of christ. paul again says, in speaking of the resurrection of the lord and all his people, christ, the first fruits, afterward they that are christ’s at his coming. cor. xv, . as this sheaf was like the grain in all the wide harvest-field, only that it was the first ripe grain, so christ arose from the dead a sample of all the just to be raised at his second coming. then all the saints will have glorious bodies, like that of their divine lord. phil. iii, . the new meat offering was a type of the descent of the holy spirit on the day of pentecost. the speaker stated that christ was offered a sacrifice for sinners on the fourteenth day of the first jewish month, the very day and month on which the passover lamb had been slain for sixteen long centuries. that he was raised from the dead a sample of all the resurrected just on the very day of the month upon which the earliest ripe grain was waved before the lord. and that the descent of the holy spirit on the day of pentecost,--pentecost meaning fifty,--was on the day of the month in which the new meat-offering was presented unto the lord. that new meat-offering was fifty days from the presentation of the wave sheaf. the descent of the holy spirit upon the waiting disciples was on the day of pentecost, or fiftieth day from the resurrection of their divine lord. and, therefore, as the high priest, on the tenth day of the seventh month, on the great day of atonement, came out of the sanctuary and blessed the people, so christ, our great high priest, would upon the same day of the same month, come from heaven to bless his waiting people with immortality. the conclusion seemed irresistible. and what gave it still greater force was the harmony of this position with the proofs presented, that the prophetic period of days would terminate in the fall. the deepest solemnity pervaded the entire encampment. but one view was taken of the subject presented, by nearly all present, namely, that in all probability the speaker was correct, and that in a few short weeks human probation would close forever. but what of the watertown fanatics? in the intense interest upon the subject of time, taken by the entire crowd, these were forgotten. no one seemed to be affected by them, or troubled about them. in fact, they were quiet till they left the ground, and as dumb as if the special rebuke of the lord was upon them. this fact, that fanaticism dried up before the solemn and searching time-message of , like the morning dew before the midsummer’s sun, is of importance to those who suppose that that stirring proclamation caused fanaticism. the next day, by unanimous request of the people, the same speaker repeated, with still greater clearness and force, the same proofs in support of the position that the fast-approaching autumn was the time for the great prophetic periods to terminate, and that the types pointed to the tenth day of the seventh month as the time for our great high priest to come out of heaven and bless his waiting people. this was followed with solemn and stirring discourses in harmony with the time, from elders heath, couch, and eastman. the specifications of the parable of the ten virgins, down as far as the cry at midnight, seemed to have a natural and forcible application to the great advent movement up to that time, and the words, “behold the bridegroom cometh, go ye out to meet him,” already being heard from the lips of those who were looking to the seventh jewish month for the coming of the lord, had a solemn, subduing power in them, such as no others had. the first portion of the parable, and the application of it then made, i will here give: “then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps and went forth to meet the bridegroom. and five of them were wise, and five were foolish. they that were foolish took lamps, and took no oil with them; but the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps. while the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept. and at midnight there was a cry made, behold the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him. then all those virgins arose and trimmed their lamps.” matt. xxv, - . . the ten virgins represent those then interested in the subject of the immediate second coming of christ. . the lamps which the virgins took to light their way at the hour of midnight, represent the prophetic word of the lord. “thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.” ps. cxix, . “we have also a more sure word of prophecy, whereunto ye do well that ye take heed as unto a light that shineth in a dark place.” pet. i, . . the five wise virgins, who took oil in their vessels with their lamps, represent those who had faith, and the work of the grace of god wrought in them. . the five foolish virgins represent those professed believers who lacked true faith, and who had not the work of the grace and spirit of god in them. . the tarry of the bridegroom, the delay in the parable, and the slumbering and sleeping of the virgins, represent the passing of the jewish year, , the disappointment, the suspense and uncertainty which resulted in loss of faith and zeal, manifested by believers before the time passed. it appeared evident that the period of hope deferred and general gloom since the close of the jewish year, , was the night of sleeping and slumbering. . the cry at midnight in the parable, “behold the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him,” represented the solemn message of the tenth day of the seventh month time, , already being heard. it was suggested that the night of tarry in the parable represented half of the prophetic day, or six months, extending from the passing of the time in the spring, to the seventh month in the fall, and that the then present work of waking up under the cry, “behold the bridegroom cometh, go ye out to meet him,” commenced in july, in the middle of the tarrying time, or at midnight. and now the work of waking up the slumbering believers, and giving the last warning to the world, seemed to be crowded into a few weeks. those who received the message felt the burden of the work. language cannot describe the solemnity of that hour. and no one can have any just idea of it, only eye-witnesses upon the grounds, who saw, heard, and felt for themselves. the time for shouting, and display of talent in speaking, singing, and praying, seemed to be past. the brethren and sisters calmly consecrated themselves and their all to the lord and his cause, and with humble prayers and tears sought his pardon and his favor. all those unhappy divisions and extravagancies, which had threatened the prosperity of the advent cause, were lost sight of, and the watchmen, and the people also, were beginning to lift up one united voice, with strength and heartfelt solemnity, “behold the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him.” on returning from the exeter camp-meeting, i visited the advent congregation at poland, me., and attended camp-meetings at litchfield and orington. at these two camp-meetings ministers and people became imbued with the spirit of the seventh-month message. the evidences upon which it was based seemed conclusive, and a power almost irresistible attended it; and the fruits of this message everywhere were alike excellent. whatever of differences of opinion, division in feelings and plans of action, or schisms of any kind that had sprung up during the time of suspense represented by the tarrying of the bridegroom, and the slumbering of the virgins, were now being swept away and lost sight of in the onward course of this mighty movement. the hearts of the believers were being united as never before. the first evening of the orington meeting i spoke to the people, and stated my convictions that christ would come on the tenth day of the seventh jewish month of that year. there was a tent’s company on the ground affected more or less with the spirit of fanaticism, and there was a great want of that solemnity in most all present, which characterized the recent camp-meeting at exeter, n. h., where the evidences in favor of the tenth day of the seventh month had been presented. as i spoke of the disappointment, the tarry, the slumbering and sleeping, and the cry, “behold the bridegroom cometh, go ye out to meet him,” a death-like stillness reigned throughout the entire encampment. the application of advent history thus far to these specifications of the parable seemed so natural and forcible as to convict all. and there was no more heard the irreverent shout of the fanatic, nor the heartless prayer of the formalist, after that evening meeting. as in the days of christ’s first apostles, all were pricked in the heart, and the inquiry of all seemed to be what they should do to be saved. the labor of that meeting, from that time onward to its close, was the presentation of the evidences that the prophetic days of daniel would end that autumn, that the types pointed to the tenth day of the seventh jewish month as the time for the second advent, and that we had reached the point in second-advent history where the slumbering ones were to be aroused by the midnight cry. to this were added practical sermons and solemn exhortations, setting forth the necessity of giving up the world, and consecrating all to the lord. social meetings were marked with great solemnity. sins were confessed with tears, and there was a general breaking down before god, and strong pleadings for pardon, and a fitness to meet the lord at his coming. and the humble disciples of the lord did not seek his face in vain. before that meeting closed, hundreds testified with tears of joy that they had sought the lord and found him, and had tasted the sweets of sins forgiven. the parting was most solemn. that was the last camp-meeting the brethren expected to attend on these mortal shores. and as brother shook the hand of brother, each pointed the other to the final gathering on the immortal shores at the grand encampment of the saints in the new jerusalem. tears flowed profusely, and strong men wept aloud. god grant that those who read these lines may see as good a day. and even now, although more than twenty years have passed since that meeting, and that parting scene, as i write, my being seems to be inspired with its solemn, humble spirit, and my tears will flow. the ministers all fully believed that time was short, and now the work before us was to fly to every part of that wide field, sound the alarm, and wake the slumbering and sleeping ones. in company with one who professed the truth, i visited two towns each day, and sometimes spoke the same day in three different towns. congregations were crowded, and every meeting was wonderfully marked with the presence of the holy spirit. character of the work. as to the character of the work which resulted from giving what was called the midnight cry, it evidently was the special work of god. it was not, as many suppose, the result of fanaticism. . because it bore the marks of the especial providence of god. it was not characterized by those extremes ever manifested where human excitement, and not the word and spirit of god, has the controlling influence. it was in harmony with those seasons of humiliation, rending of heart, confession and complete consecration of all, which are matters of history in the old testament, and are made matters of duty in the new. . because it was subversive of all those forms of fanaticism which had made their appearance somewhat in connection with the second-advent cause. and it is a fact, that satan had crowded upon some who bore the advent name, almost every stripe of fanaticism he had ever invented. but these were at once swallowed up by the solemn power of the midnight cry, as the rods of the magicians were by the rod of aaron. . because the work was marked with sobriety, humility, solemnity, reverence, self-examination, repentance, confessions and tears, instead of lightness, exaltation, trifling, irreverent expressions, self-justification, pride in spiritual things, voluntary humility and will worship, which generally characterize the conduct of fanatics. . because the work bore the fruit of the spirit of god, as set forth in the new testament. it was evidently guided by wisdom from above. the apostle james declares this wisdom to be “first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.” chap. iii, . paul says that the fruit of the spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance. gal. v, , . these are the good fruits of the work and spirit of god, and these did all appear in an eminent sense as the results of the midnight cry. but fanaticisms are the works of the flesh, the power of satan being brought to bear upon the carnal mind. it is true that satan seeks to clothe his work, as far as possible, with that which may resemble garments of truth and righteousness. but the experienced observer will not fail to see that he, and those who are brought under his influence, come infinitely short of counterfeiting the work of god. he may succeed in blinding the eyes of men, so that they may not be able to discern the difference between the work of god and his imperfect mimicry. but the work of high heaven he can not imitate. and when the work of satan in fanaticism is carried out, and its terrible fruit is ripened into bitterness, its contrast with the fruit of the work and spirit of god will be seen as wide as beelzebub with christ, perdition with all its terror and blackness of despair with the matchless glories of the kingdom of god. reader, there is a difference between the road to life, and that leading to death. and these do not lie side by side. they are in opposite directions. do not be deceived by those who mix fanaticism with the work of god, and affirm that the compound all came from heaven. neither be deceived by those who, seeing evidence of fanaticism in some who have been connected with the advent cause, denounce the entire movement as being the work of men, or of satan. i here enter my solemn protest against making one grand second-advent chowder of all that in any way has been connected with the great advent movement, of truth and error, of wisdom from heaven, and the spirit and work of fanaticism, and then presenting it to the people as being all the work of satan, or all the work of god. such insult god by making him the author of fanaticism and confusion. they also please the devil, by attributing the work of god which he has tried to mar, to his satanic power. that they might do this, and make no difference between the pure work of god and the results of his miserable efforts at counterfeiting, is the spur of his ambition. but of all the great religious movements since the days of the first apostles of our lord, none stand out more pure and free from the imperfections of human nature, and the wiles of satan, than that of the autumn of . in fact, after looking back upon it for more than twenty years as the greenest spot on all the way in which god has led his people, i do not see how it could have been better, at least so far as the direct providence and work of god is concerned. it was beyond the control of human hands, or human minds. men and demons sought to hinder and to mar this work, but the power that attended it brushed away their influence, as you would remove a spider’s web, and there stood the work of god free from the print of a man’s hand. but as the reader will be better edified by reading the statements and experience of those ministers who had the burden of the work upon them, and were imbued with the spirit of that solemn message, i will here let them speak in confirmation of the foregoing statements. elder george storrs, new york, september , , says: “i take up my pen with feelings such as i never before experienced. _beyond a doubt_, in my mind, the _tenth day_ of the _seventh month_ will witness the revelation of our lord jesus christ in the clouds of heaven. we are then within a _few days_ of that event. awful moment to those who are unprepared, but glorious to those who are ready. i feel that i am making the _last appeal_ that i shall ever make through the press. my heart is full. i see the ungodly and sinner disappearing from my view, and there now stands before my mind the _professed believers_ in the lord’s near approach. but what shall i say to them? alas! we have been _slumbering_ and _sleeping_, both the _wise_ and the _foolish_; but so our saviour told us it would be; and ‘thus the scriptures are fulfilled,’ and it is the last prophecy relating to the events to precede the personal advent of our lord; now comes the true midnight cry; the previous was but the alarm. now the real one is sounding; and oh, how solemn the hour! the ‘virgins’ have been asleep or slumbering; yes, all of us. asleep on the time; that is the point. some have indeed preached the seventh month, but it was with doubt whether it is this year or some other; and that doubt is now removed from my mind. ‘behold the bridegroom cometh,’ this year, ‘go ye out to meet him.’ we have done with the nominal churches and all the wicked, except so far as this cry may affect them; our work is now to wake up the ‘virgins’ who ‘took their lamps and went forth to meet the bridegroom.’ where are we now? ‘if the vision tarry, wait for it.’ is not that our answer since march and april? yes. what happened while the bridegroom tarried? the virgins all slumbered and slept, did they not? christ’s words have not failed, and ‘the scriptures cannot be broken,’ and it is of no use for us to pretend that we have been awake. we have been slumbering; not on the fact of christ’s coming, but on the time. we came into the tarrying time; we did not know ‘how long’ it would tarry, and on that point we have slumbered. some of us have said in our sleep, ‘don’t fix another time;’ so we slept. now the trouble is to wake us up. lord, help, for vain is the help of man. speak thyself, lord. oh! that the ‘father’ may now ‘make known’ the time. “to illustrate the position we have occupied. time--the preaching of definite time for the coming of our lord, was what led us to take our lamps, and go forth to meet the bridegroom. the great truth, our lord jesus christ is coming again, personally, to this earth, was, so to speak, the rope let down from heaven, made fast to the throne of god, equally immovable as that throne; by faith, as with both hands, we took hold of that rope; under our feet we had solid platform, time, where we stood, and all opponents could not remove it, nor make us let go of the rope. there we stood, and rejoiced in the ‘blessed hope.’ what our opponents never could and never did do, the end of the supposed jewish year effected, viz: swept away our platform from under us, and left us with nothing but the rope to hold on by. did we let go? some have, and drawn back to perdition. but many have continued to hold by the rope. the scoffing winds have beat against us severely, and we have swung in the air, the sport of our opponents. they told us we were now with them, looking for the lord’s coming, but without any definite time; and we have been compelled to admit it, but have refused to let go the rope, saying, ‘if the vision tarry, wait for it.’ but we have not known how long we were thus to swing upon the rope, without a foundation for our feet; and we have not felt the same joy and glory that we did when we stood on definite time. god has been trying our faith, to see if we would hold on. now, once more, he offers us a platform on which to stand. it is in the twenty-fifth chapter of matthew. here we have the chronology of the tarrying time, and its duration. ‘if ye shall receive it,’ you will find once more your feet upon a rock, and the glory that the first belief in time produced in our breast, returns with a large addition to it, even a ‘joy unspeakable and full of glory.’ “the present strong cry of time commenced about the middle of july, and has spread with great rapidity and power, and is attended with a demonstration of the spirit, such as i never witnessed when the cry was ‘ .’ it is now literally, ‘go ye out to meet him.’ there is a leaving all, that i never dreamed could be seen. where this cry gets hold of the heart, farmers leave their farms, with their crops standing, to go out and sound the alarm, and mechanics their shops. there is a strong crying with tears, and a consecration of all to god, such as i never witnessed. there is a confidence in this truth such as was never felt in the previous cry, in the same degree; and a weeping or melting glory in it that passes all understanding, except to those who have felt it. “on this present truth, i, through grace, dare venture all, and feel that to indulge in doubt about it would be to offend god, and bring upon myself ‘swift destruction.’ i am satisfied that now, ‘whosoever shall seek to save his life,’ where this cry has been fairly made, by indulging in an ‘if it don’t come,’ or by a fear to venture out on this truth, ‘shall lose’ his life. it requires the faith that led abraham to offer up isaac, or noah to build the ark, or lot to leave sodom, or the children of israel to stand all night waiting for their departure out of egypt, or for daniel to go into the lion’s den, or the three hebrews to go into the fiery furnace. we have fancied we were going into the kingdom without such a test of faith; but i am satisfied we are not. this last truth brings such a test, and none will venture upon it but such as dare be accounted fools, madmen, or anything else that antediluvians, sodomites, a lukewarm church, or sleeping virgins, are disposed to heap upon them. once more would i cry, ‘escape for thy life;’ look not behind you; ‘remember lot’s wife.’” n. southard, editor of the _midnight cry_, september , , says: “before god, whose swift, approaching judgment will bring every secret thing to light, i wish to say, that up to this hour my professed consecration to him has not been complete. if this fact makes me a hypocrite, i have been one. i have not been dead to the world. if all christians are dead to the world, i have not been a christian. but i now say, let christ be all, and let me be nothing. he has a balm for every wound, for his blood cleanseth from all sin; and i, even i, can stand complete in him. “after writing thus far, i kneeled and asked god for direction as to what i should say next. i arose and took my bible, and opening it, read rev. vii, - : ‘after this i beheld, and lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne and before the lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands; and cried with a loud voice, saying, salvation to our god, which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the lamb,’ &c. if this great multitude is admitted before the throne, is there anything to keep me from being there? they differ in every conceivable particular from each other, except in two. they have all washed their robes in the blood of the lamb, and have all suffered great tribulation for his sake. here, then, is the touchstone. is your robe all washed clean in the blood of christ? or have you been insulting him, by trying to patch up a robe out of the filthy rags of your own righteousness? alas! i have thought that i could rest partly upon myself and partly on christ. i now cast myself naked and helpless upon that mercy which saved the thief on the cross, which received denying peter, which honored mary magdalene as the first witness of his resurrection, and which changed a persecuting saul into a chief apostle. “but can i bear the second mark? can i joyfully endure tribulation for jesus? not in my own strength, but his grace is sufficient for me. in that grace i believe; lord, help mine unbelief. “one of my besetting sins has been a desire to please those around me, instead of inquiring simply, what would the lord have me to do, to be, and to say. i confess this before the world, but i cannot confess that i have not thought i was doing right in publishing the evidence of christ’s near coming. i have not been half enough awake to the greatness of the subject. may god forgive me in this thing, and grant me grace to be wide awake till he comes. dear reader, are you awake? if not, it is high time to awake out of sleep.” elder f. g. brown, october , , says: “i wish to say to all my dear brethren and sisters, who with me have been waiting for the kingdom of heaven, that i am thoroughly convinced that we are now in that portion of the parable of the ten virgins, represented by the cry at midnight, ‘behold the bridegroom cometh, go ye out to meet him.’ i fully respond to the cry; my expiring lamp has been re-kindled, and i am now permitted, by god’s grace, to see additional light blazing from the scriptures, and all converging to one glorious point, the advent of our blessed lord this very month! my dear friends, i have been in an awful, slumbering, sleeping state. i have been on the verge of perdition; though i have never ceased to cherish in my heart the great and leading doctrines of the lord’s coming. i thought a few weeks ago that i was in a pretty good state; awful delusion! look out for deception! awake, and trim your lamps, or you will be lost after all!” elder j. litch, late editor of the _advent herald_, boston, october, , says: “i wish to say to my dear brethren and sisters, who are looking for the coming of the lord on the tenth day of the seventh month, but especially to those who have hesitated on the question, that the strong objections which have existed in my mind against it, are passed away, and i am now convinced that the types, together with the signs of the times, are sufficient authority for believing in the lord’s coming at that time; and henceforth i shall look to that day with the expectation of beholding the king in his beauty. i bless the name of the lord for sending this midnight cry to arouse me to go out to meet the bridegroom. may the lord make us meet for the inheritance of the saints.” william miller, low hampton, n. y., october , , says: “i think i have never seen among our brethren such faith as is manifested in the seventh month. ‘he will come,’ is the common expression. ‘he will not tarry the second time,’ is their general reply. there is a forsaking of the world, an unconcern for the wants of life, a general searching of heart, confession of sin, and a deep feeling in prayer for christ to come. a preparation of heart to meet him seems to be the labor of their agonizing spirits. there is something in this present waking up different from anything i have ever before seen. there is no great expression of joy; that is, as it were, suppressed for a future occasion, when all heaven and earth will rejoice together with joy unspeakable and full of glory. there is no shouting; that, too, is reserved for the shout from heaven. the singers are silent; they are waiting to join the angelic hosts, the choir from heaven. no arguments are used or needed; all seem convinced that they have the truth. there is no clashing of sentiments; all are of one heart and of one mind. our meetings are all occupied with prayer, and exhortation to love and obedience. the general expression is, ‘behold the bridegroom cometh, go ye out to meet him.’ amen. even so come, lord jesus.” i will here give, as the closing testimony relative to the character of the seventh-month movement, one from the “advent shield,” published january, . and let it be borne in mind that the “shield” was a standard work, of pages, for all adventists at that time, and that the following testimony from it was not published till about three months after the seventh-month movement, when adventists had taken time to review the past, and settle, as was supposed, upon a firm, united position. “it produced everywhere the most deep searching of heart and humiliation of soul before the god of high heaven. it caused a weaning of affections from the things of this world, a healing of the controversies and animosities, a confession of wrongs, a breaking down before god, and penitent, broken-hearted supplications to him for pardon and acceptance. it caused self-abasement and prostration of soul, such as we never before witnessed. as god, by joel, commanded, when the great day of god should be at hand, it produced a rending of hearts and not of garments, and a turning unto the lord with fasting, and weeping, and mourning. as god said by zechariah, a spirit of grace and supplication was poured out upon his children; they looked to him whom they had pierced, there was a great mourning in the land, every family apart and their wives apart, and those who were looking for the lord afflicted their souls before him. such was its effect upon the children of god. “while none could deny the possibility of the lord’s then coming, and as the fulfillment of some of the types chronologically at christ’s first advent rendered it highly probable that those which typified the second advent, would also be chronologically fulfilled, so general an awakening, and with such blessed fruits, could not but impress many minds; and those who were not convinced of the soundness of the typical argument, were led to regard it as a fulfillment of the parable of the ten virgins, in the twenty-fifth of matthew,--as their arising to trim their lamps, after having gone forth to meet the bridegroom, and slumbering while he tarried; so that the definite time was finally embraced by nearly all of the advent faith. so universal a movement among those who a short time before were comparatively asleep on this question, could not be unnoticed by the world. “the wicked, consequently, flocked to the various places of meeting, some out of idle curiosity to hear, others out of concern for their spiritual interests, and others still to scoff at solemn things. those who believed they should so shortly stand in their saviour’s presence, and whose works corresponded with their faith, could not but feel a nearness of access to god, and sweet communion with him; and the souls of such were greatly blessed. with a realizing sense of such a nearness of the greatest of all events, as we came up to that point of time, all other unnecessary cares were laid aside, and the whole soul was devoted to a preparation for the great event. god being more ready to give than we are to receive, does not permit any thus to plead in vain; and his holy spirit came down like copious showers upon the parched earth. it was then evident that there was faith upon the earth, such faith as is ever ready to act in accordance with what the soul believes that god has spoken; such faith as would, in obedience to a supposed command, bid all the pleasures of this world adieu, having respect to the recompense of reward. such was a faith like that of abraham’s when, at the command of god, he went out, ‘not knowing whither he went,’ nor withheld his only son; and here were those all ready to join the multitude, who through faith will inherit the promises.” the passing of the time. the tenth day of the seventh month of the jewish year , came and passed, and left impressions upon the minds of believers not easily effaced; and although a quarter of a century has passed since that memorable period, yet that work has not lost its interest and force upon the minds of those who participated in it. even now, when one who shared in that blessed work, and who feels its hallowed influence rekindling upon his mind--if in obedience to the injunction of the apostle when he says, “call to remembrance the former days in which, after ye were illuminated, ye endured a great fight of afflictions, partly whilst ye were made a gazing stock, both by reproaches and afflictions, and partly whilst ye became companions of them that were so used”--shall speak of that solemn work, of that consecration of all, made in full view of eternal scenes, and of that sweet peace and holy joy which filled the minds of the waiting ones, his words will not fail to touch the feelings of all who shared the blessings of that work and have held fast. and those who participated in that movement are not the only ones who can now go back in their experience, and feast upon the faith-reviving, soul-inspiring realities of the past. those who have since embraced the advent faith and hope, and who have seen in the three messages, of revelation xiv, the past consecration and blessedness, the present work of preparation, and the future glory, may go back with us to the autumn of , and with us share the rekindling of the heavenly illumination. was that our jerusalem, where we waited for, and enjoyed, the outpouring of the holy spirit? then as all christians, as well as christ’s first disciples who were present on the occasion, have looked back to the day of pentecost with pleasure and profit, so may these who have embraced the doctrine of the second advent since the memorable seventh-month movement, look back to that period with all that interest those can who participated in it. the impressions made and left upon the minds of believers were deep and lasting. however far one has since departed from god and his truth, there still remains upon the soul of the apostate traces of the work. let him hear the subject afresh; let the simple facts be again brought before his mind, and he will feel upon this subject as he can feel upon no other. and those who took part in that work, who are far backslidden from god, yet cherish regard for the word of god and christian experience, will yet feel deeply over this subject, and the faith of many of them will be resurrected to new life. god grant that these pages may prove a blessing to many such. the disappointment at the passing of the time was a bitter one. true believers had given up all for christ, and had shared his presence as never before. they had, as they supposed, given their last warning to the world, and had separated themselves, more or less, from the unbelieving, scoffing multitude. and with the divine blessing upon them, they felt more like associating with their soon-expected master and the holy angels, than with those from whom they had separated themselves. the love of jesus filled every soul, and beamed from every face, and with inexpressible desires they prayed, “come lord jesus, and come quickly.” but he did not come. and now to turn again to the cares, perplexities, and dangers of life, in full view of the jeers and revilings of unbelievers who now scoffed as never before, was a terrible trial of faith and patience. when elder himes visited portland, me., a few days after the passing of the time, and stated that the brethren should prepare for another cold winter, my feelings were almost uncontrollable. i left the place of meeting and wept like a child. but god did not forsake his people. his spirit upon them still abode, with all who did not rashly deny and denounce the good work in the advent movement up to that time. and with especial force and comfort did such passages as the following, to the hebrews, come home to the minds and hearts of the tried, waiting ones: “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. now the just shall live by faith; but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. but we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.” chap. x, - . the points of interest in this portion of scripture are-- . those addressed are in danger of casting away their confidence in that in which they had done right. . they had done the will of god, and were brought into that state of trial where patience was necessary. . the just at this time are to live by faith, not by doubting whether they had done the will of god, but faith, in that in which they had done the will of god. . those who should not endure the trial of faith, but should cast away their confidence in the work in which they did the will of god, and draw back, would take the direct road to perdition. but why apply all this to the subject of the second advent? answer: because paul applies it there. his words, in the very center of the foregoing quotation from his epistle to the hebrews, forbid any other application: “for yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry.” no one will for a moment question that the second advent is the subject upon which the apostle treats. the peculiar situation of those who should be looking for the second appearing of jesus, is the burden of his exhortation. and how wonderfully applicable to those who were sadly disappointed, tempted and tried, in the autumn of , are his words. with great confidence had they proclaimed the coming of the lord, with the assurance that they were doing the will of god. but as the time passed, they were brought into a position exceedingly trying to faith and patience. hence the words of paul to them, just then, and just there. “cast not away therefore your confidence ... ye have need of patience.... ye have done the will of god.” to this decision of the apostle every true adventist, who tasted the good word of god and the powers of the world to come, in the movement of , will respond, amen. but how fearful the words which follow: “now the just shall live by faith; but if any man draw back my soul shall have no pleasure in him.” as adventists came up to the point of expectation in the blazing light of unsealed prophecy, and the rapidly-fulfilling signs that christ’s coming was at the doors, they walked, as it were, by sight. but now they stand with disappointed hopes, and stricken hearts, and live by faith in the sure word, and the work of god in their second-advent experience. with these who hold fast, god is well pleased; but in those who draw back he has no pleasure. these believe to the saving of the soul; while those who become impatient, cast away their confidence in the way god has led them, and give it up as the work of man, or of satan, and draw back to perdition. this and many other portions of scripture of like import, having a direct application to the condition of believers at that time, served not only as an encouragement to them to hold fast their faith, but as a warning to them not to apostatize. and a general impression remained upon the minds of believers for some time after the disappointment, that the seventh-month movement was in the direct providence of god, and that those who had been engaged in this work had done his will. and according to the best light they then had, there was a general agreement that the seventh-month movement was the last great test, that the harvest of the earth was ripe for the sickle of the son of man, and that the door was shut. that the salvation of the soul, or perdition, hung upon the manner in which those who heard treated that solemn message, i doubt not. and this is especially clear in the case of the disappointed believers after the time passed. in holding fast and believing, there was salvation; in drawing back, the result would be perdition. the view, however, that the harvest of the earth was ripe, and that the door was shut, was soon abandoned. but although all, long since, gave up this position as incorrect, i fail to see why they should be censured for taking it upon the passing of the time. in fact, the conclusion seems very natural, and i hardly see how they could have come to any other. i will here mention some of the reasons why such a conclusion was reasonable, if not unavoidable. . william miller and others had taught that the door would be shut, and that probation would close a short time before the second advent. in a letter to elder j. v. himes, october , , he said: “i am strong in the opinion that the next will be the last lord’s day sinners will ever have in probation. and within ten or fifteen days from thence, they will see him whom they have hated and despised, to their shame and everlasting contempt.” . and, certainly, that probation will close prior to the second advent is plainly taught in the following emphatic testimony from rev. xxii, , : “he that is unjust, let him be unjust still; and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still; and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still; and he that is holy, let him be holy still. and behold i come quickly.” i will only add, that the order of events here given is, first, the final decision of all men living at the close of probation, and, second, then follows the advent of him who says, “and behold i come quickly.” . all true believers expected that probation would close as soon as the tenth day of the seventh month. and as the time of expectation drew near, their burdened spirits felt more and still more heavily the weight and responsibility of doing every duty to others. but as the point of expectation was finally reached, all this burden at once fell off. this was as true of the isolated brother or sister, in some distant part of the country, as with those in the crowded city mingling with hundreds of like faith. it was true of all. all felt that their work in warning sinners was done. no one can have a just idea of this great change, only those who participated in the movement, and came up to the time of expectation with the burden of the solemn work upon them. jesus had not come as they expected, and why this great change had come over all was a matter of proper inquiry. and how natural the conclusion, to say the least, that probation was ended. . the change that had suddenly come over the ungodly seemed to strengthen the conviction that the door was shut. although the passing of the time, removing their fears, may now be regarded as a sufficient cause for the change in them, yet at that time the fiend-like conduct of many after the tenth day passed, who but a few hours or days before had appeared penitent, gave the idea that the restraining influence of the spirit of god had forever left them. in view of these things it should not be a matter of surprise to any, that adventists were agreed that the midnight cry was the last great test, that the work for the world was finished, and that the door was shut. that this was their faith, may be seen by reviewing the writings of leading men in the cause, published immediately after the passing of the time. william miller, in a letter addressed to j. v. himes, says: “we have done our work in warning sinners, and in trying to awaken a formal church. god, in his providence, has shut the door; we can only stir one another up to be patient; and be diligent to make our calling and election sure. we are now living in the time specified by malachi iii, ; also dan. xii, ; rev. xxii, - . in this passage we cannot help but see that a little while before christ should come, there would be a separation between the just and unjust, the righteous and wicked, between those who love his appearing and those who hate it. and never, since the days of the apostles, has there been such a division line drawn as was drawn about the tenth day of the seventh jewish month. since that time they say ‘they have no confidence in us.’ we have now need of patience, after we have done the will of god, that we may receive the promise.” the _advent herald_, for november , , j. v. himes, s. bliss, and a. hale, editors, says: “but the alarm was everywhere made; the cry was everywhere given. and again we can see that god was with us. it was a soul-purifying work; and the children of god bowed themselves in his presence and received blessings to their souls, unprecedented in the history of the advent cause. and yet we are disappointed; the day passed away and we are still here. and those who only looked on, and passed by, were ready to exclaim that it was all a delusion; and that now of a certainty we must relinquish all our hopes, and abandon all our expectations. we, however, do not thus feel. as great a paradox as it may be to our opponents, yet we can discern in it the leadings of god’s providence; and when we are reviled and censured by those to whom the world look as the gamaliels of our age, we feel that they are only speaking evil of the things they understand not. “those who have not been in this late movement, can appreciate nothing respecting it. and we regard it as another, and a more searching test, than the first proclamation of the time. it has searched jerusalem as with candles; and it has purged out the old leaven. it has tested the hearts of all who heard it, and awakened a love for the lord’s appearing; or it has called forth a hatred, more or less perceivable, but known to god, of his coming. it has drawn a line, and awakened sensibilities, so that those who will examine their own hearts, may know on which side of it they would have been found, had the lord then come; whether they would have exclaimed, ‘lo! this is our god, we have waited for him and he will save us;’ or whether they would have called to rocks and mountains to fall on them to hide them from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the lamb. god thus, as we believe, has tested his people, has tried their faith, has proved them, and seen whether they would shrink, in the hour of trial, from the position in which he might see fit to place them; and whether they would relinquish this world and rely with implicit confidence in the work of god. “and we as much believe that we have done the will of god in thus sounding the alarm, as we believe that jonah did when he entered into nineveh a day’s journey, and cried, saying, ‘yet forty days and nineveh shall be overthrown.’ nineveh was not then overthrown; nor has the lord yet wrought deliverance in the earth, nor the inhabitants of the world fallen. was jonah a false prophet when he preached the _time_ of nineveh’s destruction? no; he had only preached the preaching that god had bid him. but god had said that ‘at what instant i shall speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom to pluck up and to pull down and to destroy it; if that nation against whom i have pronounced, turn from their evil, i will repent of the evil that i thought to do unto them.’ jer. xviii, , . ‘so, the people of nineveh believed god and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them; and god saw their works that they turned from their evil way; and god repented of the evil that he said he would do unto them; and he did it not.’ the preaching of jonah served as a test to the inhabitants of nineveh, and accomplished god’s purposes, as much as it would have done had the city perished. “so we believe that this last cry has been a test; and that with our views of duty, we should as much have sinned against god, had we refrained from giving that message, as jonah did when ‘he rose up to flee unto tarshish from the presence of the lord;’ that we should as much have sinned, had we refused to give heed to it, as the ninevites would in refusing to repent at his preaching; and that all who are angry that we have preached a time which has not been realized, are as guilty as jonah was when he was angry and prayed the lord to take his life from him, because god had spared that great city.” the following is from the _advent herald_ of october , , relative to the suspension of meetings in the advent tabernacle of boston. the article from which it is taken, had previously been inserted in several of the daily papers of that city. it is important, as it correctly sets forth the views and feelings of adventists at that time. in view of such testimony, it is vain for any man to deny that it was the universal belief of adventists, in the autumn of , that their work for the world was forever done. after giving some of the reasons why they expected the lord on the tenth day of the seventh month, the writer of the article says: “with this expectation we were desirous to meet once more, to mingle our prayers, and to encourage one another in the last work of preparation; and for this purpose we had met at our well-known place of worship in this city. we gave no special notice of our meeting, we made no appeal to the public, and it was characterized by no exercises which were calculated to excite either the mirth or vengeance of any portion of the community. “we were serious, we were bowed in penitence and prayer before god, or heartily affected by the mutual confessions of tried and dear friends. we had no ill-feeling to indulge toward any man; we felt that we were done with the world, and had forgiven them the many injuries they had inflicted upon us; but stale and silly slanders in reference to us were revived; the restless spirits of the community have been aroused; we could not meet in peace, and our meetings in consequence have been suspended. and we now make these remarks to disabuse the public, and with the hope that some, who would not otherwise give their attention to the calls of the present time, may lay them to heart. “to the city authorities, who faithfully rendered their services, we are grateful, though we could not promote the objects of the meeting when such protection was needed. “we forgive our enemies. they have not injured us; and oh! that they could see how much they may have injured themselves; but we have done with them now. we expect the realization of the promise of god. he who delivered noah and lot; he who brought his people out of egypt and babylon, has promised (as we believe) to save them finally ‘by his son from heaven.’ we expect it. we have hazarded all on that expectation; and we only ask that god may give us, and all who look for him, grace to abide the issue. “in behalf of the adventists in boston and vicinity, “joshua v. himes.” i have not a word of censure for a single soul who came to the honest conclusion that the work of warning sinners closed with the burden of the midnight cry. and more, i solemnly believe that the providence of god brought us to that position. and there the advent hosts should have remained, patiently waiting, watching and praying, until our true position could have been clearly seen by the light of the heavenly sanctuary. argument from the types. in the providence of god, in the seventh-month movement the attention of the people was turned to the types of the law of moses. the argument which had been given, that as the vernal types, namely, the passover, the wave sheaf, and the meat-offering, were fulfilled in their order and time in the crucifixion, the resurrection of christ, and the descent of the holy spirit on the day of pentecost, so would the autumnal types be fulfilled as to time, in the events connected with the second advent, seemed to be conclusive and satisfactory. the position taken was, that as the high priest came out of the typical sanctuary on the tenth day of the seventh month and blessed the people, so christ, our great high priest, would on that day come out of heaven to bless his waiting people. but it should be borne in mind that at that time those types which point to the work in the heavenly sanctuary were not understood. in fact, no one had any definite idea of the tabernacle of god in heaven. we now see that the two holies of the typical sanctuary, made by the direction of the lord to moses, with their two distinct ministrations--the daily and the yearly services,--were, in the language of paul to the hebrews, “patterns of things in the heavens,” “figures of the true,” chapter ix. he also says of the work of the jewish priests in chapter viii, “who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things.” his words mean simply this: in heaven there is a sanctuary where christ ministers, and that sanctuary has two holies, and two distinct ministrations, as truly as the earthly sanctuary had. if his words do not mean this, they have no meaning at all. how natural, then, the conclusion, that as the jewish priests ministered daily in connection with the holy place of the sanctuary, and on the tenth day of the seventh month, at the close of their yearly round of service, the high priest entered the most holy place to make atonement for the cleansing of the sanctuary, so christ ministered in connection with the holy place of the heavenly sanctuary from the time of his ascension to the ending of the days of dan. viii, in , when on the tenth day of the seventh month of that year he entered the most holy place of the heavenly tabernacle to make a special atonement for the blotting out of the sins of his people, or, which is the same thing, for the cleansing of the sanctuary. “unto two thousand three hundred days,” said the angel to the prophet, “then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.” the typical sanctuary was cleansed from the sins of the people with the offering of blood. the nature of the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary may be learned from the type. by virtue of his own blood, christ entered the most holy to make a special atonement for the cleansing of the heavenly tabernacle. for clear and full expositions of the sanctuary and the nature of its cleansing, see works upon the subject by j. n. andrews and u. smith, for sale at the review office, battle creek, mich. with this view of the heavenly sanctuary before the reader, he can see the defect in the seventh-month theory. it now appears evident that the conclusion that christ would come out of heaven on that day is not justified by the premises in the case. but if christ’s ministry in the heavenly sanctuary was to last but one year, on the last day of which he would make an atonement for the cleansing of the heavenly tabernacle, according to the type, then the conclusion that he would on that day come out and bless his waiting people, would be irresistible. but let it be remembered that “the law having a shadow of good things to come,” was “not the very image of the things.” in the shadow, the round of service, first in the holy place for the entire year, save one day, and second, in the most holy place on the last day of that year, was repeated each successive year. but not so in the ministry of christ. he entered the holy place of that heavenly sanctuary at his ascension once for all. there he ministered till the time for the cleansing of the sanctuary at the close of the days in the autumn of . to accomplish this work, he then entered the most holy place once for all. christ suffered upon the cross--not often--but once for all. he entered upon his work in the holy place once for all. and he cleanses the heavenly sanctuary for the sins of his people once for all. his ministry in the holy, from his ascension in the spring of a. d. to the autumn of , was eighteen hundred and thirteen years and six months. the period of his ministry in the most holy can no more be defined before its close, than the time of his ministry in the holy could be defined before it terminated. therefore, however much the tenth-day atonement for the cleansing of the typical sanctuary proved that our great high priest would enter the most holy of the heavenly tabernacle on the tenth day of the seventh month, it proved nothing to the point that he would on that day come out of the most holy place. but just what was accomplished on the tenth day of the seventh month became a matter of discussion. some took the rash position that the movement had not been directed by the providence of god. they cast away their confidence in that work, not having sufficient faith and patience to “wait” and “watch,” until it should be explained by the light of the sanctuary and the three messages of rev. xiv, and they drew back, to say the least, toward perdition. others trembled for this fearful step, and felt the deepest solicitude for the welfare of the flock, and exhorted the brethren to patiently wait and watch for the coming of the lord, in full faith that god had been in the work. among these was william miller. in a letter published in the _advent herald_ for dec. , , he says: “dear bro. himes: be patient, establish your heart, for the coming of the lord draweth nigh. 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.” the following is from the cheering pen of eld. f. g. brown, who was not only a man of ability, but one who drank deeply at the fountain of advent experience. he saw and felt the danger of drawing back, and wrote the following letter to encourage his brethren to hold fast and believe to the saving of the soul. it was written nov. , , and published in the _advent herald_. “dear brethren and sisters: the great god has dealt wonderfully with us. when we were in a state of alarming blindness in relation to the coming of the great and terrible day of the lord, he saw fit to awaken us from our death-like slumbers, to a knowledge of these things. how little of our own or man’s agency was employed in this work, you know. our prejudices, education, tastes, both intellectual and moral, were all opposed to the doctrine of the lord’s coming. we know that it was the almighty’s arm that disposed us to receive this grace. the holy ghost wrought it in our inmost souls, yea, incorporated it into our very being, so that it is now a part of us, and no man can take it from us. it is our hope, our joy, our all. the bible reads it, every page is full of the lord’s immediate coming, and much from without strengthens us in the belief that the judge standeth at the door! at present everything tries us. well, we have heretofore had almost uninterrupted peace and exceeding great joy. true, we have had some trials formerly, but what were they in comparison with the glory to be revealed? we are permitted to live in the days of the son of man, which jesus spake of as a desirable day. how special the honor! how unspeakable the privilege! “and shall we be so selfish as not to be willing to endure a little trial for such a day, when all our worthy and honored predecessors have so patiently submitted to the toils and sufferings incident to their pilgrimage and to their times? let it never be! we know that god has been with us. perhaps never before this has he for a moment seemed to depart from us. shall we now begin like the children of israel to doubt, and to fear, and repine, after he has so frequently and signally shown us his hand in effecting for us one deliverance after another? has god blessed us with sanctification, and salvation, and glory, now to rebuke and destroy us? the thought is almost blasphemous. away with it! have we been so long with our lord and yet not know him? have we read our bibles in vain? have we forgotten the record of his wonderful dealings unto his people in all past ages? let us pause, and wait, and read, and pray, before we act rashly or pronounce a hasty judgment upon the ways and works of god. if we are in darkness, and see not as clearly as heretofore, let us not be impatient. we shall have light just as soon as god sees it will be for our good. mark it, dearly beloved, our great joshua will surely bring us unto the goodly land. i have no kind of fears of it, and i will not desert him before he does me. “he is doing the work just right. glory to his name! remember, you have been sailing a long, long voyage, and you began to think yourselves pretty skillful sailors until you approached the home coast, when the pilot coming on board, you had to relinquish the charge to him, and oh! how hard it is to commit all your precious cargo and your noble vessel into his hands. you fear, you tremble, lest the gallant ship should become a wreck, and the dearly-bought freight be emptied into the ocean! but don’t fear. throw off the master, and like a good, social, relieved officer, go and take your place with the humble, yet sturdy crew, and talk over home scenes and endearments. cheer up, ‘all’s well.’ “you have finished your work, and now be patient, and you shall have the reward. “it was necessary that our ‘faith’ and ‘patience’ should be tried before our work could be completed. we closed up our work with the world some time ago. this is my conviction. and now god has given us a little season of self-preparation, to prove us before the world. who now will abide the test? who is resolved to see the end of his faith, live or die? who will go to heaven if he has to go alone? who will fight the battle through, though the armor-bearers faint, and fear, and fail? who will keep his eye alone on the floating flag of his king, and, if need be, sacrifice his last drop of blood for it? such only are worthy to be crowned, and such only will reap the glorious laurels. “we must be in speaking distance of port. god’s recent work for us proves it. we needed just such a work if christ is coming forthwith. i bless god for such glorious manifestations of himself to his people. don’t dishonor him, questioning whether it might not have been the work of man, for he will vindicate that, and his word, too, very shortly, is my solemn belief. do not be allured by the baits that may be flung out to draw you back from your confidence in god. the world and the nominal church know nothing at all of your hope. they cannot be made to understand us. let them alone. you have buried your name and reputation once, and now do not go to digging it up again, when all manner of evil is spoken of you, falsely, for christ’s sake. pray for your enemies. do look straight ahead, lest your minds again become occupied with earth--its business, cares, labors, pleasures, friends. the bible, the bible, is the best teacher now. prayer, prayer, is the best helper. the next signal we have will be the final one. oh! shall any of us be found with our lamps going out when the master comes? oh! how impressive the saviour’s repeated admonition, _watch, watch, watch_.” many concluded that great changes took place on the tenth day of the seventh month, closely connected with the final destiny of men, but as yet there was no well-defined position as to what did take place. joseph marsh, editor of the _voice of truth_, nov. , , says: “we did believe that he would come at that time; and now, though we sorrow on account of our disappointment, yet we rejoice that we have acted according to our faith. we have had, and still have, a conscience void of offense in this matter, toward god and man. god has blessed us abundantly, and we have not a doubt but that all will soon be made to work together for the good of his dear people, and his glory. “we cheerfully admit that we have been mistaken in the nature of the event we expected would occur on the tenth day of the seventh month; but we cannot yet admit that our great high priest did not on that very day accomplish all that the type would justify us to expect. we now believe he did.” where are we in the fulfillment of prophecy? soon became a matter of most interesting inquiry. some yielded to the clamors of the church and world, who called for confessions that they had been mistaken at least in the time, and among this number were several able ministers. their fearful course greatly increased the anxiety to understand the real position. the hour was a most trying one. there seemed to be a strong inclination with many to draw back, which ripened in them into a general stampede in the direction of egypt. finally, not a few settled, with more or less clearness, upon a position embracing the following points: . that the parable of the ten virgins represented the great advent movement, each specification illustrating a corresponding event connected with second-advent history. . that, in answer to the inquiry, where are we? the point of time was reached, when the words of our lord following the parable were applicable, “watch, therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the son of man cometh.” matt. xxv, . . that the time had come to liken, or to compare, the experience of those who were looking for the kingdom, here called the kingdom of heaven, with an eastern marriage, and that in order to do this, both must be matters of history, showing that each specification in the parable was already fulfilled. . that the time when to compare second-advent experience with the events in the marriage was definitely pointed out by our lord when he says, “_then_ shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins.” when? he had just closed a description of two kinds of servants in chapter xxiv, one servant giving meat to his master’s household in due season, the other smiting this good and faithful servant, and in his heart saying, “my lord delayeth his coming.” just then may the events connected with advent history be compared with the specifications of the parable. these two servants had been engaged in the same work. but by some means one begins to say in his heart, my lord delayeth his coming, and smites his fellow. no one who wished to see, could fail to see a clear fulfillment of this illustration in the labors and general course of advent ministers soon after the passing of the time. all came up to that time apparently a band of brothers. the time passed. some became impatient and cast away their confidence in the work, confessed to a scoffing church and world, and because others would not confess as they had done, that a human or satanic influence had controlled them, they were ready to smite those who were strengthening the master’s household with the bread of heaven. the spiritual food for that time was by no means that teaching which would let them down from the position they had taken, and send them weeping and mourning back to egypt. but meat in due season was those expositions of god’s word which showed his hand in the movement, and such cheering testimonies as are quoted in the foregoing pages in vindication of the advent movement. how humiliating and painful the fact that satan is permitted to bring the spiritual warfare within the second-advent ranks. . that in the sense of the parable the bridegroom had come. come where? answer, to the marriage. was the marriage of the lamb to take place in this world at the second appearing of christ? the bridegroom had not come. but if the marriage of the lamb was to take place in heaven, the position might be correct. and right here the charge of our lord to the waiting ones comes in with peculiar force: “let your loins be girded about, and your lights burning, and ye yourselves like unto men that wait for their lord when he will return from the wedding.” luke xii, , . if our lord at his second appearing returns from the wedding, then the marriage of the lamb must take place in heaven prior to his return. therefore, the coming of the bridegroom in the parable illustrated some change in the position and work of our great high priest in heaven in reference to the marriage of the lamb. in a letter to the _voice of truth_ for feb. , , william miller says: “i presume, bro. marsh, you have seen brn. hale and turner’s _advent mirror_, printed in boston, jan., , concerning the marriage, in the parable of the virgins. i do believe in the main they are right--that cannot be the personal coming of christ. why, say you? read luke xii, : ‘and ye yourselves like unto men that wait for their lord, when he shall return from the wedding, that when he cometh and knocketh, they may open to him immediately.’ you see his coming, for which we look, is after the wedding. “has christ come in the sense spoken of, matt. xxv, ? i think he has. “i know many of my brethren whom i highly esteem, will, and do, disagree with me on this matter. i would advise them not to have any hardness. remember what james says, v, : ‘grudge not one against another, brethren, lest ye be condemned: behold the judge standeth before the door.’ it would seem that in this very time when we have need of patience, the apostle, by the inspiration of the divine spirit, foresaw that there would be danger of grudging, or grieving one another, and warns us not to do it, lest ye be condemned: for ‘the judge standeth before the door!’ “let the dear brethren see to it, that we give meat in due season. let no one say in his heart, my lord delayeth his coming, and begin to beat and bruise, and grudge against his fellow-servant. he that seeks to save his life now by conformity to the world, or worldly men, will lose it; and he that loses his life now for the truth’s sake, will find eternal life.” . that the established view, that in the marriage of the lamb the church is the bride of christ, was among the errors of past times. by investigation it was clearly seen that there were two things which the scriptures of the old and new testaments illustrate by marriage. first, the union of god’s people in all past ages, as well as at the present time, with their lord. second, christ’s reception of the throne of david, which is in the new jerusalem. but union of believers with their lord has existed since the days of adam, and cannot be regarded as the marriage of the lamb. it is supposed that isaiah [liv, ,] speaks of the church when he says, “thy maker is thine husband;” but paul, in gal. iv, applies this prophecy to the new jerusalem. says john, speaking of christ, “he that hath the bride is the bridegroom.” john iii, . that christ is here represented in his relation to his followers by a bridegroom, and his followers by a bride, is true; but that he and they are here called the bridegroom and bride, is not true. no one believes that the event called the marriage of the lamb took place eighteen hundred years since. paul, in writing to the church, cor. xi, , says, “i have espoused you to one husband, that i may present you a chaste virgin to christ.” but does this prove that the marriage of the lamb took place in corinth? or, did paul only wish to represent by marriage, the union which he had effected, through the gospel, between christ and the church at corinth? he also says, eph. v, , “for the husband is the head of the wife, even as christ is the head of the church.” but please turn and read from verse , and it will be seen that paul’s subject is the relation and duty of man and wife to each other. this is illustrated and enforced by the relation of christ and the church. those who suppose that paul is here defining who the lamb’s wife is, are greatly mistaken. that is not his subject. he commences, “wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands.” verse . “husbands, love your wives.” verse . it is, indeed, an excellent subject, but has nothing to do in determining what the bride is. the marriage of the lamb does not cover the entire period of probation, in which believers are united to their lord, from adam to the close of probation. it is one event, to take place at one point of time, and that is just prior to the resurrection of the just. then what is the bride in the marriage of the lamb? said the angel to john, “come hither, i will show thee the bride, the lamb’s wife.” rev. xxi, . did the angel show john the church? let john testify. “and he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me that great city, the holy jerusalem, descending out of heaven from god.” verse . the new jerusalem is also represented as the mother. “but jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.” gal. iv, . christ is represented (isa. ix, ,) as the “everlasting father” of his people; the new jerusalem, the mother, and the subjects of the first resurrection, the children. and, beyond all doubt, the resurrection of the just is represented by birth. how appropriate, then, is the view that the marriage of the lamb takes place in heaven before the lord comes, and before the children of the great family of heaven are brought forth at the resurrection of the just. let those who are disposed to cling to the old view that the church is the bride, and that the marriage is after christ comes, and the saints are caught up to heaven, answer the following questions: . who are illustrated by the man found at the marriage, matt. xxii, not having on the wedding garment? . will any be caught up by mistake, to be bound hand and foot, and be cast down to the earth again? . if the church is the wife, who are they that are called to the marriage as guests? . jerusalem above is the mother of the children of promise; but if the church is the lamb’s wife, who are the children? . that the door was shut. the clear light from the heavenly sanctuary that a door, or ministration, was opened at the close of the days, while another was closed at that time, had not yet been seen. and in the absence of light in reference to the shut and open door of the heavenly sanctuary, the reader can hardly see how those who held fast their advent experience, as illustrated by the parable of the ten virgins, could fail to come to the conclusion that probation for sinners had closed. but light on the subject soon came, and then it was seen that although christ closed one ministration at the termination of the days, he had opened another in the most holy place, and still presented his blood before the father for sinners. as the high priest, in the type, on the tenth day of the seventh month, entered the most holy place, and offered blood for the sins of the people, before the ark of the testament and the mercy-seat, so christ, at the close of the days, came before the ark of god and the mercy-seat to plead his blood in behalf of sinners. mark this: the great redeemer then approached the mercy-seat in behalf of sinners. was the door of mercy closed? this is an unscriptural expression, but, if i may be allowed to use it, may i not say that in the fullest sense of the expression the door of mercy was opened on the tenth day of the seventh month, ? beside the ark of god containing the ten precepts of his holy law, over which was the mercy-seat, did the trusting ones now behold their merciful high priest. they had stood in harmony with the whole advent host at the passing of the time, then represented as “the church in philadelphia;” meaning brotherly love. and with what inexpressible sweetness did the following words addressed to that church come home to their stricken hearts: “these things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of david, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth. i know thy works. behold, i have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it.” rev. iii, , . adventists were agreed that the seven churches of rev. ii and iii, symbolized seven states of the christian church, covering the entire period from the first advent of christ to his second appearing, and that the sixth state addressed represented those who with one united voice proclaimed the coming of jesus, in the autumn of . this church was about to enter upon a period of great trial. and they were to find relief from it, so far as ascertaining their true position is concerned, by light from the heavenly sanctuary. after the light should come, then would also come the battle upon the shut and open door. here was seen the connecting link between the work of god in the past advent movement, present duty to keep the commandments of god, and the future glory and reward. and as these views were taught in vindication of the advent movement, in connection with the claims of the sabbath of the fourth commandment, these men, especially those who had given up their advent experience, felt called upon to oppose. and their opposition, as a general thing, was most violent, bitter, and wicked. the shut and open door of the heavenly sanctuary constituted the strong point upon which the matter turned. if we were right on the subject of the cleansing of the sanctuary, then the door or ministration of the holy place was shut, and the door or ministration of the most holy place was opened, the days had ended, the preaching of time was correct, and the entire movement was right. but let our opponents show that we were in error upon the sanctuary question, that christ had not entered the most holy place to cleanse the sanctuary, then the days had not ended, the preaching of the time was an error, and the entire movement was wrong. and, again, if the door or ministration of the most holy place was opened, and the faith of the waiting ones was to view jesus standing before the mercy-seat and the ark of the ten commandments in heaven, how forcible the arguments for the perpetuity and claims of the entire law of god, the fourth precept not excepted. the hand of the lord was with those who took a firm position that the great advent movement had been in his direct providence, and that the time had come for the sabbath reform, and many embraced these views. then it was that our opponents arose in the spirit of persecution, manifesting the wrath of the dragon against those who kept the commandments of god, and labored to open the door that had been shut, and to shut that door which had been opened, and thus put an end to the matter. hence the strong expressions quoted above--“he that openeth and no _man_ shutteth, and shutteth and no _man_ openeth.” “behold i have set before thee an open door, and no _man_ can shut it.” nothing can be plainer than that man, or a set of men, near the close of the history of the church, would war against the truth of god in reference to the shut and open door. and to this day those who retain the spirit of war upon those who keep the commandments of god, make the belief in the shut and open door odious, and charge it all upon seventh-day adventists. many of them, however, are not unaware of the injustice of this. some of this people did believe in the shut door, in common with the adventists generally, soon after the passing of the time. some of us held fast this position longer than those did who gave up their advent experience, and drew back in the direction of perdition. and god be thanked that we did hold fast to that position till the matter was explained by light from the heavenly sanctuary. and it may be worthy of notice that although the belief in, and abandonment of, the shut-door position has been general, there have been two distinct and opposite ways of getting out of it. one class did this by casting away their confidence in the advent movement, by confessions to those who had opposed and had scoffed at them, and by ascribing the powerful work of the holy spirit to human or satanic influences. these got out of the position on the side of perdition. another class heeded the many exhortations of christ and his apostles, applicable to their position, with its trials, dangers, and duties--watch--be ye therefore patient--cast not away therefore your confidence--for ye have need of patience--hold fast. they waited, watched, and prayed, till light came, and they by faith in the word saw the open door of the heavenly sanctuary, and jesus there pleading his precious blood before the ark of the most holy place. but what was that ark? it was the ark of god’s testimony, the ten commandments. reader, please follow these trusting, waiting ones, as they by faith enter the heavenly sanctuary. they take you into the holy place and show you “the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread,” and other articles of furniture. then they lead you into the most holy where stands jesus, clad in priestly garments, before the mercy-seat which is upon, and but the cover of, the ark containing the law of god. they lift the cover and bid you look into the sacred ark, and there you behold the ten commandments, a copy of which god gave to moses. yes, dear reader, there, safe from the wrath of man and the rage of demons, beside his own holiness, are the ten precepts of god’s holy law. the waiting, watching, praying ones, embraced the fourth precept of that law, and with fresh courage took their onward course to the golden gates of the city of god, cheered by the closing benediction of the son of god: “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.” thus they came out of the position of the shut door on the side of loyalty to the god of high heaven, the tree of life, and the eternal city of the redeemed. the reader will not fail to see the difference between their course and getting out of the shut door on the side of perdition. god pity the apostate. the seventh angel. the seventh angel, the last of the seven trumpet angels, had been supposed to be the same as the “last trump,” which will awake the righteous dead. but many among the adventists were about this time taking a different view of the subject. the six former trumpet angels were symbols, and each had occupied a period of time, during which a series of events took place. why not the seventh be a symbol covering a period of time, during which a series of events might also transpire? but the scenes connected with the last trump mentioned by the apostle, are represented as transpiring “in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye.” not so with the events under the sounding of the seventh angel. “but in the days of the voice of the seventh angel,” is the testimony of rev. x, . as this entire chapter has a direct bearing upon the subject of the great advent movement as symbolized by the three messages of rev. xiv, i will here give it with a few brief remarks of application. “and i saw another mighty angel come down from heaven, clothed with a cloud; and a rainbow was upon his head, and his face was as it were the sun, and his feet as pillars of fire. and he had in his hand a little book open: and he set his right foot upon the sea, and his left foot on the earth, and cried with a loud voice, as when a lion roareth: and when he had cried, seven thunders uttered their voices. and the angel which i saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth, lifted up his hand to heaven, and sware by him that liveth forever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer.” verses - . i will briefly call attention to the following points in the above quotation: . the angel, in a most solemn manner, swore that there should be time no longer. this does not mean that with the oath of the angel, time, as measured by days, months and years, would cease; for the next verse speaks of the “days” of the voice of the seventh angel. and even from the second advent of christ and the resurrection of the just, a thousand years are marked as reaching to the resurrection of the unjust. in fact, while the earth and the sun and moon shall endure and continue their revolutions, so long will there be days, months and years. and there is no scripture evidence that these bodies will ever cease to exist. the oath of the angel, therefore, must refer to prophetic time. . the angel holds in his hand, as he swears upon the subject of time, a little book open. it may be inferred from this language, that this book was at some time closed up. this was true of the book of daniel. “but thou, o daniel, shut up the words and seal the book, even to the time of the end; many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.” dan. xii, . it was to be sealed only to the time of the end, when it was to be opened, knowledge of the subject of which it treats should be increased, and many run to and fro in the scriptures and obtain knowledge upon the subject. if this open book in the hand of the angel represents the unsealed book of daniel, how forcible the application of his solemn oath to the manner in which the close of prophetic time was proclaimed in . the oath of this angel must be regarded as a symbol of a most solemn and positive message proclaimed by the servants of god. his right foot upon the earth, and his left upon the sea, represent its extent, and shows that it was to be borne to the people by sea and by land. the prophet continues: “but in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of god shall be finished, as he hath declared to his servants, the prophets.” verse . why introduce the sounding of the seventh angel thus, unless his sounding commenced with the termination of the prophetic time? he is to continue his sounding a period of days, probably prophetic, meaning years, and in the beginning of his sounding, or during the first portion of the period of his sounding, the mystery of god is to be finished. this mystery is the gospel considered with especial reference to the means by which its blessings are secured to the nations of the earth. it is something which, before the apostles’ days, even from the foundation of the world, was not made known as it was then revealed. rom. xvi, , ; eph. iii, - . it was known that the woman’s seed should bruise the serpent’s head, and that in abraham and his seed should all the nations of the earth be blessed; but how this was to be accomplished was not understood till more fully revealed at the first advent of the saviour, and set forth by the preaching of his apostles. before this it was not seen that when the redeemer should be manifested to the world, all walls of partition shall be broken down, all distinctions be obliterated, and jew and gentile, male and female, bond and free, be on equal terms and in equal measure blessed in him. hence paul presents as the distinguishing feature of the mystery of god, the fact “that the gentiles should be fellow-heirs, and of the same body, and partakers of the promise in christ by the gospel,” and that in christ all might be gathered together in one. eph. iii, ; i, , . hence we more fully define the mystery of god to mean the great plan of salvation, as it centers in the work of christ, and is revealed in the new testament. see also eph. vi, ; col. iv, ; and gal. i, , , compared with eph. iii, . the finishing of the mystery of god is the completion of the great plan of salvation in connection with christ’s ministry in the heavenly sanctuary. in the type the yearly round of service was finished on the tenth day of the seventh month. in the antitype christ entered the most holy place of the heavenly sanctuary at the end of the days, to finish the great plan of salvation. the mystery of god was to be finished, as he had declared by his servants, the prophets; and the cleansing of the sanctuary spoken of by the prophet daniel, is only another expression signifying the same thing as the finishing of the mystery of god. hence the seventh angel began to sound at the close of the days, in , when the cleansing of the sanctuary, or the finishing of the mystery of god, commenced. a series of events to occur under the sounding of the seventh angel is mentioned in chapter xi. after the announcement, in verses - , of his sounding, during which period all earthly kingdoms are to pass into the hands of the king of kings, an event which interests both earth and heaven, and calls for the grateful thanks of the good of both worlds, this series is given as follows: . “and the nations were angry.” this is supposed to have reference to the political commotions and wars of the nations, which the prophets of god have described as marking the closing hours of probation. . “and thy wrath is come.” this has reference to the seven last plagues, which will be poured out immediately following the ministry of christ in the heavenly sanctuary. . “and the time of the dead, that they should be judged.” this is not the investigative judgment of the righteous. that closes with the ministry of christ in the heavenly sanctuary. it is the judgment of the wicked dead. we are therefore carried forward in this third event to the time of christ’s appearing in the clouds of heaven, and the resurrection of the just, when he and they will sit in judgment on the cases of the wicked during the one thousand years. . “and that thou shouldst give reward unto thy servants, the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great” it is true that all these receive immortality at the second coming of christ, at the commencement of this great judgment period; but their reward embraces the promised inheritance, the new earth, which will not appear till the close of the one thousand years. “blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth.” then, at the close of the one thousand years, will the prophets, the saints, and all who fear the name of god, both small and great, receive their full reward. . “and shouldst destroy them which destroy the earth.” this is also the period of the final destruction of god’s enemies, who have taken part in destroying (corrupting, margin,) the earth. and here closes the sounding of the seventh angel, or the third woe. the prophet still continues: “and the voice which i heard from heaven spake unto me again, and said, go, and take the little book which is open in the hand of the angel which standeth upon the sea and upon the earth. and i went unto the angel, and said unto him, give me the little book. and he said unto me, take it, and eat it up; and it shall make thy belly bitter, but it shall be in thy mouth sweet as honey. and i took the little book out of the angel’s hand, and ate it up; and it was in my mouth sweet as honey; and as soon as i had eaten it my belly was bitter.” verses - . in this highly-figurative portion of the prophecy, john, in receiving the little book from the hand of the angel, represents those who received the doctrine of the coming and kingdom of christ, as proclaimed in connection with the time, based upon the prophecy of daniel. his eating the little book, and enjoying its sweetness, represents the holy delight with which they feasted upon the gospel of the coming kingdom. in the symbol, the little book in the mouth of john was as sweet as honey. “what is sweeter than honey?” and what could feast the consecrated soul, imbued with the love of jesus, as the news of his soon return in glory, with all the holy angels, to redeem those who loved and looked for his appearing? but in the symbol there is a change from the sweetness of honey to bitterness. this represents the change from the joy of bright hope to the painful sadness of disappointment, experienced by believers at the passing of the time. the hope and faith had been to them an anchor in the storm, a shield in the fight, and their exceeding joy all the day long; and as they drew near the point of expectation, their hopes grew brighter, their faith stronger, and their joys were complete. the time passed; and only those who felt it can form any idea of the bitterness of that disappointment. probably there never has been a time since the crucifixion, that the high expectations and bright hopes of the disciples of jesus, have been so completely crushed as at the passing of the time in . and the feelings of the many thousands of disappointed ones were like those expressed by mary: “they have taken away the lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him.” a good degree of relief, however, very soon came in the well-defined position that there was a time of waiting for the lord, and trial of faith, after just such a disappointment as believers had experienced. and with it came also the general impression that our work, in bearing testimony to the world, was finished. the solemn announcement of the hour of god’s judgment, in the first message of rev. xiv, had been made. the stirring testimony in reference to the condition of those who rejected this message, and still clung to a corrupted christianity, symbolized by the second message, had been borne. everywhere among believers had been heard the solemn cry, “babylon is fallen, is fallen.” “come out of her my people.” and these messages were clearly seen to be in the past. but when was the third message to be given? this is one of the series, all of which are to be given in the history of god’s people in this mortal state. this is as distinctly marked in the prophetic sketch of rev. xiv, as the first and second messages are. and although the disappointed ones felt for a time that their work in warning the world was done, yet god designed to roll upon them again the burden of his work, and they go forth and proclaim the third message. this work, dear reader, is most clearly pointed out in the remaining verse of the chapter upon which i have been commenting: “and he said unto me, thou must prophesy again before many peoples and nations and tongues and kings.” to prophesy sometimes means simply to teach, as in cor. xi, , ; xiv, , ; matt. vii, . in the first and second messages the prophecies had been opened to the people, and they had been taught the solemn and stirring truths relating to the judgment. believers had come up to the time of expectation with a testimony for the people, and the burden of the work upon them. the time passed, and with it also passed from them the burden of the work, and they suddenly found themselves destitute of any message for the people. they felt that their work was done for the world. in that position they should have waited until the great truths connected with the third message were seen by the light of the heavenly sanctuary, and the spirit of god impressed them with the new work before them, to proclaim the third message, expressed by the prophetic words, “thou must prophesy [teach the people] again.” this brings me to consider briefly the three messages of rev. xiv. the first message. “and i saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, saying with a loud voice, fear god, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come; and worship him that made heaven and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.” rev. xiv, , . this is called the first angel, because it is the first of the series. see verse . john calls it “another angel,” from the fact that he had previously seen an angel flying in the midst of heaven. this proclamation is one of pre-eminent importance. it is not a mere local judgment, but one that concerns all the inhabitants of the earth. hence it has reference to the final judgment scene. it is the same gospel that paul preached that is here styled the “everlasting gospel.” but the great truth uttered by this angel would not have been a truth if uttered by paul, for he lived at the commencement of the gospel dispensation, and this proclamation relates to its closing scenes. it seems to be the same as “this gospel of the kingdom,” that our lord presents in matt. xxiv, , as the sign of the end of this dispensation, and which was to be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations before the end should come. the truth on this point is well expressed in the following language of the late mr. bliss, editor of the _advent herald_, december , : “as an indication of the approach of the end, there was, however, to be seen another angel flying through the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people. rev. xiv, . the burden of this angel was to be the same gospel which had been before proclaimed; but connected with it was the additional motive of the proximity of the kingdom, ‘saying with a loud voice, fear god, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come; and worship him that made heaven and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.’ verse . no mere preaching of the gospel without announcing its proximity, could fulfill this message.” in harmony with this testimony from the editor of the _herald_, i will here give another from a tract on prophecy, published by j. v. himes about the same time, which also speaks of the character of the message and the time of its application. the title of the tract is “our specific work.” “the proclamation of an everlasting gospel, ‘the hour of his judgment is come,’ rev. xiv, , , is the leading advent proclamation. “the facts summed up are these: john, looking into the distant future, gazing upon the theatre of the final conflict, sees a messenger, a minister of an everlasting gospel, fly through mid-heaven, with a special, elevated, joyous, public, proclamation, requiring haste and extraordinary energy in its delivery. the proclamation contains a fact, and a command founded upon that fact. . the fact: ‘the hour of his judgment is come.’ . the command: ‘fear god,’ &c. these are the elements of this special commission. the work of this symbol agent is thus clearly defined; no terms more specific. “does this messenger symbolize a class of teachers? such has been the general understanding of expositors. mr. wesley and dr. benson so interpret the passage. on this point there is great unanimity. it is plain from the fact that it is said to preach. that class of people is modern. mr. wesley and dr. benson make this messenger symbolize the protestant reformers in the days of luther. with their view agree a mass of expositors. this commission, however, cannot be luther’s. “that body must exist somewhere, and, in its character and in the nature of its work, it must agree with the symbol messenger. they must agree as face to face in a mirror. can such a body be found? the proclamation above stated has been heard. the world can bear testimony to this. the cry, ‘the hour of his judgment is come,’ sounded through all christendom. the multitudes heard, and scoffed, or trembled. by what body of believers was this proclamation made? not by those who taught that that judgment was a thousand years in the future. no church which holds to the doctrine of a spiritual reign can be that body, as the elements of their proclamation flatly contradict those elements above stated. such a body now existing can be found alone among those who constitute the advent believers in europe and america.” in proof that this message has not been fulfilled in the history of the church in ages past, i offer the following reasons: . no proclamation of the hour of god’s judgment come, has ever been made in any past age. . if such a proclamation had been made many centuries in the past, as some contend, it would have been a false one. . the prophecies on which such a proclamation to men in a state of probation must be based, were closed up and sealed to the time of the end. . the scriptures plainly locate the message of warning respecting the judgment in a brief space immediately preceding the advent of our lord; thus directly contradicting the view that locates these messages in past ages. we now offer proof in support of the foregoing propositions. if they are sustained, they establish the fact that the present generation is that one to which the angels’ messages are addressed. we earnestly invite all who wish the truth, to weigh this part of the argument with especial care. . has the proclamation of the hour of god’s judgment come, been made in any past age? if such a proclamation has never been made in past centuries, there is an end to controversy on this part of the subject. no persons have ever been able to show any such proclamation in the past. the apostles did not make such a proclamation. on the contrary, they plainly inform us that the day of the lord was not then at hand. martin luther did not make this proclamation; for he thought the judgment about three hundred years in the future. and finally, the history of the church presents no such proclamation in the past. had the first angel preached to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, that the hour of god’s judgment had come, the publicity of such a proclamation would be a sufficient guaranty that the history of the world would contain some record of the fact. its total silence respecting such a proclamation, is ample proof that it never was made, and should put to silence those who make such an affirmation. . we are on firm ground, also, when we say that had such a proclamation been made to the world in past ages, it would have been a false proclamation. four reasons sustain this statement. . there is no part of the bible on which such a message, centuries in the past, could have been based. hence had such a proclamation been made, it would have been without scriptural foundation, and consequently not from heaven. . it would have been in direct opposition to those scriptures which locate the judgment, and the warning respecting its approach, in the period of the last generation. the scriptures which sustain these two reasons we shall presently cite. . the history of the world amply evinces that the hour of god’s judgment had not come ages in the past. . nor would it be true of past ages, if limited to babylon. for rev. xviii, - , clearly shows that the hour of babylon’s judgment is yet in the future. it is certain, therefore, that the angel with the proclamation respecting the hour of god’s judgment, has not given it at a time when it would be not only destitute of scriptural support, but would absolutely contradict their plain testimony. . the prophecies which give us the time of the judgment, and which present the succession of events leading down to that great crisis, were closed up and sealed till the time of the end. we refer particularly to the prophecies of daniel. see chap. viii, , ; xii, , . hence it is evident that god reserves the warning to that generation which alone needs it. noah’s warning respecting the flood, was alone applicable to those who should witness it; thus also the warning respecting the judgment is alone applicable to that generation which lives in the last days. . the bible locates these messages in the period which immediately precedes the second advent, and plainly warns us against the proclamation of the judgment at hand prior to that time. here we join issue with our opponents. instead of finding that the apostles gave this proclamation, as some teach, we shall find indubitable evidence that they located this warning far in the future, and that they admonished the church to heed none that should precede a given time. if we recur to the book of acts, we shall find paul preaching before felix, of the judgment to come; and before the athenians, that god hath appointed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness by jesus christ. acts xxiv, ; xvii, . but that book nowhere intimates that christ was immediately coming to judgment. peter points his hearers to the future, saying, that the heavens which had then received christ, must retain him until the times of restitution. acts iii, . the first epistle to the thessalonians may seem to teach that the apostles expected the coming of christ to judgment in their day. indeed, it is evident that such an idea was received from it by the thessalonian church. hence it was, that in his second epistle to them, paul found it necessary to speak explicitly on the point. he tells them that the coming of christ to the judgment could not take place until the great apostasy; and as the result of that apostasy, that the man of sin should be revealed, showing himself that he is god, and exalting himself above all that is called god, or that is worshiped. that this mystery of iniquity is the great romish apostasy, none but a papist will deny. paul reminds the thessalonians that he had told them of these things when he was yet with them. and where could paul have learned this fact, which he had thus stated to them? he was accustomed to reason from the scriptures, and not to deal in assertion. hence, it is very evident that he refers to the prophecy of daniel, which in its seventh chapter has given the successive events which intervened between its time and the judgment. in this series of events it has with wonderful precision described the power to which paul has referred as the man of sin. no protestant will deny the identity of daniel’s little horn and paul’s man of sin. and as daniel has brought it into a series of events which ends with the judgment and the setting up of the everlasting kingdom, it was an easy matter for paul to tell where in this series of events he stood, and whether the judgment was its next event or not. the apostle, therefore, plainly tells him that that day was not at hand. for the man of sin, the little horn, must arise and perform his predicted work, and when that should be accomplished, the coming of christ should transpire, to consume “that wicked” with its brightness. now when was the little horn to arise? daniel was told that it should arise after the ten horns upon the fourth beast; or, in other words, after the fourth empire should be divided into ten kingdoms, which was accomplished about five hundred years after christ. the judgment therefore could not come prior to that time. but how long was this little horn to have power to wear out the saints? daniel informs us that it should be for “a time and times, and the dividing of time.” how long is this period? rev. xii shows that it is prophetic days, or years. verses , . it follows therefore that the apostle carries the mind forward five hundred years to the development of the man of sin, and thence years for his triumph, before the judgment could be preached as an event immediately impending. whoever will carefully read dan. vii, will get the original of paul’s argument in thess. ii, and will not fail to see the force of his statement. the papal supremacy began , and ended in with the overthrow of the pope’s temporal power. the warning of paul against a false proclamation respecting the judgment at hand, therefore, expires at that time, and not before. for we have then reached the point of time where the last important event in dan. vii, before the judgment has transpired. an angel from heaven preaching the hour of god’s judgment come, many years in the past, would be giving a different gospel from that preached by paul. those who locate the angel of rev. xiv, , , in past ages, virtually place upon his head the anathema of paul in gal. i, . and what is of very deep interest, the point of time at which paul’s warning expires is the commencement of the time of the end--the very point to which the visions of daniel were closed up and sealed. compare chapter xi, , ; vii, , and the fact that the years’ persecution of the saints terminates with the commencement of the time of the end, will appear obvious. how gloriously does this view of the subject make the truth of god shine out! for the warning of the apostle against a false proclamation of the judgment at hand, expires at the very point where the seal is taken from those prophecies which show when the judgment sits. and it is respecting this period, the time of the end, that it is said, many shall run to and fro, and knowledge [on the very subject which was before concealed] shall be increased. then the time of the end is the period in which the judgment-hour cry, and the subsequent messages are to be given. dan. viii, , ; xii, , . another important argument on this point is found in what our lord has said relative to the signs of his second advent. the church were to understand when his coming was at hand, by the fulfillment of certain promised tokens. until these should be seen, they were not authorized to look for the immediate advent of the lord. but when the signs which our lord promised began to appear, his church might then know that his coming to judge the quick and the dead was at hand. it is an interesting fact that christ has marked the time in which these signs were to begin to appear. consequently the messages in question could not be delivered prior to that time. “immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken.” matt. xxiv, . “but in those days, after that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken.” mark xiii, , . we think there can be no mistake that in these scriptures our lord refers to the papal tribulation of daniel the prophet. the signs of his second coming were to commence “_in_ those days,” but “_after_ that tribulation.” in other words, the prophetic days should not be quite over, but their tribulation should be ended, when the sun should be darkened. the sun was darkened in , and the tribulation of those days was then past, but the days did not expire till . thus we have the signs of our lord’s immediate advent just opening upon us, as we come down to the time of the end, the period when the vision should be unsealed, and many run to and fro with the word of warning to a perishing world. the extent of this proclamation is worthy of notice. an english writer, mourant brock, thus remarks: “it is not merely in great britain that the expectation of the near return of the redeemer is entertained, and the voice of warning raised, but also in america, india, and on the continent of europe. in america about three hundred ministers of the word are thus preaching ‘this gospel of the kingdom;’ whilst in this country, about seven hundred of the church of england are raising the same cry.”--_advent tracts_, vol. ii, p. . dr. joseph wolfe traveled in arabia felix, through the region inhabited by the descendants of hobab, moses’ father-in-law. in yemen he saw a book which he mentions thus: “the arabs of this place have a book called seera, which treats of the second coming of christ, and his reign in glory.” “in yemen he spent six days with the rechabites. ‘they drink no wine, plant no vineyards, sow no seed, live in tents, and remember the words of jonadab, the son of rechab. with them were children of israel, of the tribe of dan, who reside near terim in hatramawt, who expect, in common with the children of rechab, the speedy arrival of the messiah in the clouds of heaven.’”--_wolfe’s mission to bokhara_. “in wirtemberg there is a christian colony numbering hundreds, who look for the speedy advent of christ; also another of like belief on the shores of the caspian; the molokaners, a large body of dissenters from the russian greek church, residing on the shores of the baltic--a very pious people, of whom it is said, ‘taking the bible alone for their creed, the _norm_ of their faith is simply the holy scriptures’--are characterized by the ‘expectation of christ’s immediate and visible reign upon earth.’ in russia the doctrine of christ’s coming and reign is preached to some extent, and received by many of the lower class. it has been extensively agitated in germany, particularly in the south part among the moravians. in norway, charts and books on the advent have been circulated extensively, and the doctrine received by many. among the tartars in tartary, there prevails an expectation of christ’s advent about this time. english and american publications on this doctrine have been sent to holland, germany, india, ireland, constantinople, rome, and to nearly every missionary station on the globe. at the turks islands, it has been received to some extent among the wesleyans. mr. fox, a scottish missionary to the teloogoo people, was a believer in christ’s soon coming. james mcgregor bertram, a scottish missionary of the baptist order at st. helena, has sounded the cry extensively on that island, making many converts and pre-millennialists; he has also preached it at south africa, at the missionary stations there. david n. lord informs us that a large proportion of the missionaries who have gone from great britain to make known the gospel to the heathen, and who are now laboring in asia and africa, are millennarians; and joseph wolfe, d. d., according to his journals, between the years and , proclaimed the lord’s speedy advent in palestine, egypt, on the shores of the red sea, mesopotamia, the crimea, persia, georgia, throughout the ottoman empire, in greece, arabia, turkistan, bokhara, affghanistan, cashmere, hindostan, thibet, in holland, scotland and ireland, at constantinople, jerusalem, st. helena, also on shipboard in the mediterranean, and at new york city, to all denominations. he declares he has preached among jews, turks, mohammedans, parsees, hindoos, chaldeans, yesedes, syrians, sabeans, to pachas, sheiks, shahs, the kings of organtsh and bokhara, the queen of greece, etc. and of his extraordinary labors the _investigator_ says: ‘no individual has, perhaps, given greater publicity to the doctrine of the second coming of the lord jesus christ, than has this well-known missionary to the world. wherever he goes, he proclaims the approaching advent of the messiah in glory.’”--_voice of the church_, pp. - . the following, from the pen of the editor of the _voice of truth_ for january, , fairly represents the position of all american adventists at that time: “we are doubtless near that auspicious hour when the harvest of the earth will be reaped, as described in rev. xiv, - . the history of god’s people in this mortal state, as given in that chapter, before being glorified, is nearly complete. the everlasting gospel, as described in verses and , has been preached unto every nation, kindred, tongue, and people; saying with a loud voice, fear god, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come, and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters. no case can be more clearly demonstrated with facts than that this message has been borne to every nation and tongue under heaven, within a few past years, in the preaching of the coming of christ in , or near at hand. through the medium of lectures and publications the sound has gone into all the earth, and the word unto the ends of the world.” but those were disappointed who expected the lord would come in and in . this fact, with many, is sufficient reason for rejecting all the testimony in the case. to them the position that the advent movement was in fulfillment of prophecy, when at the same time those who took part in the movement were sorely disappointed, is an absurdity. we acknowledge the disappointment, but cannot acknowledge that this furnishes a just reason for denying the hand of god in that work. it is a fact that god’s people have fulfilled prophecy, and at the same time been disappointed in their hopes. this was the case with the disciples and the shouting multitude on the occasion of our lord meekly riding into jerusalem, when they cried, “hosannah to the son of david: blessed is he that cometh in the name of the lord; hosannah in the highest.” the prophet of god had said, “rejoice greatly, o daughter of zion; shout, o daughter of jerusalem: behold, thy king cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.” zech. ix, . and his words must be fulfilled. that which inspired the shouts of the disciples was the expectation that their master would then ascend to the throne of david and reign among them. but in this they were disappointed. in a few days their hopes died, as he expired upon the cross. did they fulfill prophecy? no one will deny that they did? were their expectations which moved them to fulfill the prophecy realized? they were utterly disappointed. and while those were disappointed in every particular, adventists, in , were right in three of the four leading points of the advent faith. these points were, first, the manner and object of christ’s second advent; second, the application of the prophetic symbols of the book of daniel; third, prophetic time; and fourth, the event to take place at the end of the prophetic periods. in respect to the first three points, the adventists of were right. as to the fourth, they were mistaken. the angel did not tell daniel that christ would come at the end of the days. his words to the prophet are: “unto two thousand and three hundred days, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.” the subject of the cleansing of the sanctuary of dan. viii, , is now understood, and seen to be quite another thing than the second coming of jesus christ in the clouds of heaven, to redeem his people and destroy his enemies by the fires of the last day. disappointment by no means proves that god has no hand in the guidance of his people. it should lead them to correct their errors, but it should not lead them to cast away their confidence in god. it was because the children of israel were disappointed in the wilderness that they so often denied divine guidance. they are set forth as an admonition to us, that we should not fall after the same example of unbelief. but it must be apparent to every student of the scriptures, that the angel who proclaims the hour of god’s judgment, does not give the latest message of mercy. rev. xiv, presents two other and later proclamations, before the close of human probation. this fact alone is sufficient to prove that the coming of the lord does not take place at the close of the first angel’s proclamation. the second message. “and there followed another angel, saying, babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.” this angel is spoken of as the second, because the one following it is, in the language of inspiration itself, called the third. in commenting upon language so highly symbolic, the first point is to determine the meaning of the symbol introduced. . what, then, is the babylon of this message? it is here simply called “that great city.” but it is elsewhere spoken of in the book of revelation in a manner which cannot fail to lead to a correct solution of this question. in rev. xvii, , this same city is called a woman. “and the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.” now a woman is always in the scriptures, when used as a symbol, taken to represent religious organizations, the true church being represented by a virtuous woman, as in chapter xii, and the false by a corrupt woman, as in the text before us, and many other places. babylon is something distinct from the civil powers of the earth; for with her the kings of the earth form unlawful connections. it is the place where the people of god as a body are, for they are at a certain time called away from her communion. these considerations show that we are not to look to any literal city for the babylon of the apocalypse, nor to any civil powers, but to ecclesiastical or church organizations. is, then, any particular church, to the exclusion of all others, designated by the term babylon? it would not be consistent to suppose this; for . the term babylon, from babel, where god confounded the language of men, signifies mixture, confusion. in the sense in which we have shown it to be used in the book of revelation, it must denote conflicting and discordant religious creeds and systems. but this would not be applicable to any one religious denomination, as each of these denominations is more or less a unit. . the people of god who are called out of babylon, are not as a body connected with any single denomination. hence we must understand by the term all the false and corrupted systems of christianity. that the romish and greek churches are included in these, few will be disposed to deny; while the protestant churches, alas! more or less identified with war, for a long time the bulwark of american slavery, fatally conformed to the world, and guilty of the long catalogue of sins charged by paul upon professed christians in the last days, tim. iii, - , must be reckoned as a member of the family. in this branch of the family we find that mixture and confusion in the multiplicity of sects and creeds which most fitly answers to the import of the term. . what is the fall of babylon? evidently a moral fall. in rev. xviii, - , where a second and subsequent announcement of this event seems to be given, we read, “babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.” that is, as the result of her fall she had sunk to this deplorable condition. having fallen, her iniquities rapidly increased, her sins reached unto heaven, and god’s people are called out. verses , . hence this fall is a moral one. the absurdity of applying this to rome or any other literal city, where but few, if any, of the people of god are, and out of which they could not be called after its fall or destruction, must be very apparent. the harmony of applying it to a religious body which can apostatize and become corrupt, and from which the people of god can be subsequently called out, is equally clear, and the necessity for such an application no less evident. no other is at all admissible. the cause of the fall of babylon is said to be because she “made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.” her fornication was her unlawful connection with the kings of the earth. the wine of this is that with which the church has intoxicated the nations of the earth. there is but one thing to which this can refer, and that is, false doctrine. this harlot, in consequence of her unlawful union with the powers of earth, has corrupted the pure truths of the bible, and with the wine of her false doctrine has intoxicated the nations. as a few of the gross errors which she has caused the masses to receive as bible truth, we mention the following: . that the soul is immortal. . that sprinkling and pouring are baptism. . that sunday is the sabbath. . that there are to be a thousand years of peace and prosperity before the coming of the lord. . that the saints’ inheritance is not the earth made new, but an immaterial, intangible region beyond the bounds of time and space. . that the second advent is to be understood spiritually, and that it took place at the destruction of jerusalem, or that it takes place at conversion or at death. . that it is right and scriptural to hold human beings in bondage; and . that it is of no consequence, if we may judge from their practice, to come out and be separate from the world. most of these pernicious errors protestant sects have drawn from the romish mother, and others they have themselves originated, showing conclusively that they are but the daughters of the great apostasy. we have seen that babylon is composed of several divisions; and we know that the name of the whole is frequently applied to any one of its parts. hence the name babylon may be applied to any one of these divisions. consequently when it is announced that babylon is fallen, it is not necessary to understand that as a whole it experienced a moral change for the worse. it would be true if such change took place in any one of its great branches. the cry, babylon is fallen, being given subsequent to the first message, is evidence that the fall took place at that time. the truths connected with the proclamation of the first angel were calculated to correct many of the fundamental errors of babylon, and open the way for the reception of the whole truth in place of her false doctrines. that these errors were honestly held by the different churches, is not to be questioned. but after light has been given to a person sufficient to enable him to discard an error, he becomes guilty for longer retaining it. so when babylon, through the proclamation of the first message, was called upon to correct her errors, and redeem her influence over the people, and refused to do so, she then became guilty of willfully refusing the truth, and making the nations intoxicated with her false teaching. just as the people of god when they are called out after her fall, become guilty by longer retaining their connection with her. hence the proclamation of the fall of babylon comes in after the first message, stating the consequence of her rejection of that message. that message has already been located in the present generation; and rev. xviii shows that babylon’s fall must take place in the last days, as it is just previous to her final destruction. but as we look over apostate christendom, we see that the romish and greek churches are no more corrupt, either in doctrine or practice, than they have been for ages past. no marked change for the worse has taken place in those bodies within the present generation, nor is there scarcely room for them to become worse than they have already for centuries been. we therefore look to the religious bodies composing the great protestant family for the fulfillment of the announcement made in the second message, especially in our own country, where the first message was more definitely proclaimed. the inquiry now arises, has there been any moral declension in these bodies within the memory of the generation now living? did any such change take place with them about the time of the first message, and have they since been filling up their cup of iniquity, as represented in rev. xviii? if so, we have the place for an unmistakable application of the second message. but that we may not seem to judge these denominations ourselves, as we might be accused of not rendering impartial judgment, we will let their own members speak, and on their testimony will let the question rest. to show that we are not alone in ranking the popular protestant sects as a part of babylon, we offer the following. if they themselves claim it, we are not disposed to dispute it. mr. william kinkade, in his “bible doctrine,” p. , says: “i also think christ has a true church on earth, but its members are scattered among the various denominations, and are all more or less under the influence of mystery babylon and her daughters.” mr. hopkins, in a treatise on the millennium, says: “there is no reason to consider the antichristian spirit and practices confined to that which is now called the church of rome. the protestant churches have much of antichrist in them, and are far from being wholly reformed from her corruptions and wickedness.” mr. simpson, in his “plea for religion,” says: “for though the pope and church of rome is at the head of the grand years’ delusion, yet all other churches, of whatever denomination, whether established or tolerated, which partake of the same spirit, or have instituted doctrines or ceremonies inimical to the pure and unadulterated gospel of christ, shall sooner or later share in the fate of that immense fabric of human ordinances; and that protestant churches should imitate the church of rome, in this worst part of its conduct, can never be sufficiently bewailed.” alexander campbell says: “the worshiping establishments now in operation throughout christendom, increased and cemented by their respective voluminous confessions of faith, and their ecclesiastical constitutions, are not churches of jesus christ, but the legitimate daughters of that mother of harlots, the church of rome.” lorenzo dow says of the romish church: “if she be a mother, who are the daughters? it must be the corrupt, national, established churches that came out of her.” _dow’s life_, p. . in the religious encyclopedia, (art. antichrist), we read: “the writer of the book of revelation tells us he heard a voice from heaven, saying, ‘come of her, my people, that ye partake not of her sins, and receive not of her plagues.’ if such persons are to be found in the ‘mother of harlots,’ with much less hesitation may it be inferred that they are connected with her unchaste daughters, those national churches which are founded upon what are called protestant principles.” in the spring and summer of , a distinct message was proclaimed, setting forth the fallen condition of the churches, which resulted in calling from them fifty thousand believers in the immediate coming of christ. and the testimonies from the very churches they had left could but convince them that they had entertained correct views of the fallen state of the churches, and had done the will of god in separating from them. the _christian palladium_ for may , , speaks in the following mournful strains: “in every direction we hear the dolorous sound, wafting upon every breeze of heaven, chilling as the blast from the icebergs of the north--settling like an incubus on the breasts of the timid, and drinking up the energies of the weak; that lukewarmness, division, anarchy and desolation are distressing the borders of zion.” the _religious telescope_, of , uses the following language: “we have never witnessed such a general declension of religion as at the present. truly the church should awake and search into the cause of this affliction; for an affliction every one that loves zion must view it. when we call to mind how ‘few and far between’ cases of true conversion are, and the almost unparalleled impenitence and hardness of sinners, we almost involuntarily exclaim, ‘has god forgotten to be gracious? or is the door of mercy closed?’” these testimonies only are offered out of much of like import that might be quoted, as they are specimens of the whole. but it may be said that our views of the moral fall and spiritual death of the churches are shown to be incorrect by the great revivals of . of the fruit of these revivals let the leading congregational and baptist papers of boston bear testimony. says the _congregationalist_ for november , : “the revival piety of our churches is not such that one can confidently infer, from its mere existence, its legitimate, practical fruits. it ought, for example, to be as certain, after such a shower of grace, that the treasuries of our benevolent societies would be filled, as it is after a plentiful rain, that the streams will swell in their channels. but the managers of our societies are bewailing the feebleness of the sympathy and aid of the churches. “there is another and sadder illustration of the same general truth. the _watchman and reflector_ recently stated that there had never been among the baptists so lamentable a spread of church dissension as prevails at present. and the sad fact is mentioned that this sin infects the very churches which shared most largely in the late revival. and the still more melancholy fact is added, that these alienations date back their origin, in most cases, to the very midst of that scene of awakening. even a glance at the weekly journals of our own denomination, will evince that the evil is by no means confined to the baptists. our own columns have, perhaps, never borne so humiliating a record of contentions, and ecclesiastical litigation as during the last few months.” a presbyterian pastor, of belfast, ireland, uses the following language respecting the recent revivals in this country: “the determination to crush all ministers who say a word against their national sin [slavery], the determination to suffocate and suppress the plain teachings of scripture, can be persisted in and carried out at the very time these new york christians are expecting the religious world to hail their revivals. until the wretchedly-degraded churches of america do the work of god in their own land, they have no spiritual vitality to communicate to others; their revivals are in the religious world what their flaunted cries of liberty, intermingled with the groans of the slave, are in the political.” _new york independent_, _december_, . during the time of the great irish revival of the past year [ ] the general assembly of the presbyterian church of ireland, held its session in belfast. says the belfast _news-letter_ of september : “here in this venerable body of ministers and elders, we find two ministers openly giving each other the lie, and the whole general assembly turned into a scene of confusion bordering upon a riot.” these sad facts need no comment. in ireland the ministers of the gospel are unable to meet in general assembly without a riot among themselves; in america prayers for the enslaved were not allowed in the revival meetings. no wonder that fruit of genuine piety is difficult to be found. how unlike what god designed that his people should be, has this great city become! the church of christ was to be the light of the world, a city set upon a hill, which could not be hid. matt. v, - . but instead of this, his professed people have united with the world and joined affinity with it. this unlawful union of the church and the world (james iv, ,) has resulted in her rejection by god; for how can the god of truth and holiness recognize as his people, those who in addition to their departure from their lord, have rejected with scorn the tidings of his speedy coming? the following extract is from an address before the theological school, cambridge, mass.: “i think no man can go with his thoughts about him into one of our churches without feeling that what hold the public worship had on men is gone or going. it has lost its grasp on the affections of the good, and the fear of the bad. it is already beginning to indicate character and religion to withdraw from religious meetings. i have heard a devout person, who prized the sabbath, say in bitterness of heart, ‘on sunday it seems wicked to go to church.’ and the motive that holds the best there is now only a hope, and a waiting.” prof. s. c. bartlett, of chicago, in the new york _independent_, says: “religion now is in a different position from methodism then. to a certain extent it is a very reputable thing. christianity is, in our day, something of a success. men ‘speak well of it.’ ex-presidents and statesmen have been willing to round off their career with a recognition of its claims. and the popularity of religion tends vastly to increase the number of those who would secure its benefits without squarely meeting its duties. the church courts the world, and the world caresses the church. the line of separation between the godly and the irreligious fades out into a kind of penumbra, and zealous men on both sides are toiling to obliterate all difference between their modes of action and enjoyment.” for further testimony from their own lips respecting the state of the churches, their covetousness, pride in church buildings, operatic singing in their worship, their religious gambling, their endorsement of dancing, their zeal for worldly pleasure, and their pride and fashion, we refer the reader to the works entitled “the three messages,” and “the state of the churches,” for sale at the review office, battle creek, mich. the third message. “and the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, if any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of god, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the lamb; and the smoke of their torment ascendeth up forever and ever; and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name. here is the patience of the saints; here are they that keep the commandments of god and the faith of jesus.” rev. xiv, - . this is the most solemn warning that the bible contains. as the pen of inspiration has recorded this language for our instruction, it will be wise for us to listen and obey. it is certain that church history presents no testimony that this message has been heard in the past. and the fact that the first and second angels of this series apply to the present generation, most clearly establishes the point that this message does not belong to past ages. said j. v. himes, in : “but the fourteenth chapter [of rev.] presents an astounding cry, yet to be made, as a warning to mankind in that hour of strong temptation. verses - . a denunciation of wrath so dreadful cannot be found in the book of god, besides this. does it not imply a strong temptation, to require so terrific an admonition?” it is proper that i should here notice three symbols employed in this message, namely, the beast, his image and his mark, and call attention to four other distinct points embraced by it. these are, the patience of the saints, the commandments of god, the faith of jesus, and the penalty threatened. . the beast. the familiar manner in which the beast, the image, and the mark, are introduced in this message, shows that they are symbols which are elsewhere explained in the prophetic word; for when a symbol is first introduced into prophecy, specifications and particulars are given sufficient to lead the humble seeker after truth to an understanding of it. we find no such particulars in this message respecting the symbols here introduced, and therefore look for them in other portions of the book of revelation. in chapter xiii, , and onward, we find a power introduced under the symbol and name of “a beast.” the time and manner of its use is given, its characteristics are pointed out, its work is described, the time of its duration is stated, and the termination of its career is foretold. that this is the beast mentioned in the third message is certain; for it is the only symbol in the book of revelation which bears the unqualified title of “the beast.” in verse of chapter xiii, another beast is introduced, but after being once named as another beast, it is ever after designated by the pronoun he. this other beast makes an image to the first beast, and causes all to receive the mark of that beast. no other image or mark as pertaining to any beast are anywhere introduced; hence these are the ones referred to in the third message. therefore the symbols before us are all described in chapter xiii. we now inquire, what power is represented by the beast? to learn this, we go still further back, to chapter xii, where we find a power symbolized by a great red dragon, which is the one next preceding the beast of chapter xiii. the seven heads and ten horns upon both of these symbols, show that they represent two phases of the same power. by universal consent of protestant expositors, the great red dragon is considered a representative of pagan rome. the next phase presented by rome after the pagan form was the papal. rome papal succeeded rome pagan. the dragon gave his seat, power, and great authority to the beast. hence the beast can represent none other but papal rome. this is further shown by the identity that exists between this beast and the little horn of dan. vii, , - , which protestant commentators all agree is a symbol of the papacy. if the reader will compare carefully the verses referred to in dan. vii, with rev. xiii, - , he will see, . that both these powers are blasphemous powers, speaking great words and blasphemies against god. . that they both make war with the saints, and prevail against, or overcome them. . that they both have a mouth speaking great things. . that they both succeed the pagan form of the roman empire. . that they both continue a time, times, and dividing of time, or years. . that both at the end of the specified period lose their dominion. now here are points that prove identity; for when we have in prophecy two symbols, as in this instance, representing powers that come upon the stage of action at the same time, occupy the same territory, maintain the same character, do the same work, exist the same length of time, and at the end of that time meet the same fate, those symbols represent the same identical power. now all these particulars do apply alike to the little horn of dan. vii, and the beast of rev. xiii, conclusively showing that they both represent the same power. no more need here be said to show that the beast is the papacy. those who wish to pursue the argument more at length, will find it presented in works published at the review office. . the image. this is the image of the beast we have just been considering. an image is a representation, similitude, copy or likeness, of any person or thing. as the beast is the papal church, a church having civil power to carry out its decrees, and execute whatever penalty it might affix to the crime of heresy, an image of this beast must be an ecclesiastical organization, possessing the same essential features and established upon the same basis. do we anywhere see any room for, or any indications of, a movement of this kind? the power that forms the image, is the second beast of rev. xiii, called another beast having two horns like a lamb. any inquiry respecting the image, properly calls for a previous examination of this two-horned beast symbol; but for this we have not space in the present work. a few propositions only can here be laid down; and perhaps this is all that is in the present case essential, as they will be found abundantly proved in other works. . the two-horned beast is a symbol of the united states of america. . its two horns represent the two leading principles of this government, republicanism and protestantism. . it occupies the right territory to answer to the prophecy; for as it is another beast, it must be located outside of the territory occupied by the first beast and its ten horns, . it was seen coming up at the right time, the time when the first beast went into captivity, in . this nation was then beginning to attract the notice of the world as a rapidly-developing and rising power. . it bears the right form of government, which, according to the prophecy, must be republican, not monarchical. . it is performing the work assigned it in the prophecy. in short, it most admirably fits every part of the prophetic description. the formation of the image is yet future; but if we are right in the application of the two-horned beast, we are to look for it in our own country; and within a very short time; as the career of all earthly governments is soon to close in the ushering in of the day of the lord. let us then notice how the way is prepared and preparing for this last great act of the two-horned beast. under the mild influence of one of the lamblike horns, the protestant principle that all have liberty to worship god according to the dictates of their own consciences, which the government has thus far guaranteed to all its subjects, churches have multiplied in the land. but these churches have rejected light and truth, and as a body have met with a moral fall. a catalogue of twenty immoral features, with no good ones, is the photograph which paul gives in tim. iii, - , of the popular churches of these last days. but many of the people of god are yet to be found in connection with these churches, and are yet to be called out. rev. xviii, . and when this shall be accomplished, and the good have all left the nominal churches, when the saving influence of such is all withdrawn from their communion, then we shall have most fitting material for the formation of an image to the beast; for they will then be ready for any acts of persecution and oppression against the people of god, which satan can induce those to enter upon who are led captive by him at will. and where could we more naturally look for an image to the mother of harlots, than to the daughters? we may be sure that the child will develop into a perfect image of its mother. then let these fallen churches, from whom the good have all departed, and the grace of god is withdrawn, be formed into an ecclesiastical organization, and let the government grant it power (which of course it will not have till the government does grant it) to enforce its dogmas under the pains and penalties of the civil law, and what do we have? an exact image to the first beast, a church clothed with power to enforce its doctrines upon dissenters with fire and sword. that the churches in the condition to which these are fast tending, will be ready for such a work, history and analogy abundantly prove. and here would be an organization, separate from the government, constituting no part of it, yet created by it, and forming a most perfect counterpart to the prophecy of the image of the beast. and now we ask, do we see any indications of a movement of this kind? we answer, yes, as the following extracts out of many that might be given will show. let it be remembered that first it is “said” to them that dwell on the earth, the people of the nation, that they should make an image to the beast. the question must first be agitated, and the movement be recommended, before the public mind will be prepared for decisive action in the matter. dr. lyman beecher, as quoted by lorenzo dow, said: “there is a state of society to be formed by an extended combination of institutions, religious, civil and literary, which never exists without the co-operation of an educated ministry.” rev. charles beecher, in his sermon at the dedication of the second presbyterian church, fort wayne, indiana, february , , said: “thus are the ministry of the evangelical protestant denominations, not only formed all the way up, under a tremendous pressure of merely human fear, but they live, and move, and breathe, in a state of things radically corrupt, and appealing every hour to every baser element of their nature to hush up the truth, and bow the knee to the power of apostasy. was not this the way things went with rome? are we not living her life over again? and what do we see just ahead? another general council! a world’s convention! evangelical alliance, and universal creed!” in a speech delivered in new york, mr. havens said: “for my own part, i wait to see the day when a luther shall spring up in this country who shall found a great american catholic church, instead of a great roman catholic church; and who shall teach men that they can be good catholics without professing allegiance to a pontiff on the other side of the atlantic.” the _northwestern christian advocate_, of december , , of the president’s message says: “the chief magistrate sees in the dogmas of the quiet past, nothing equal to the stormy present. he sees that history must be made. he sees further, that the union may be saved, if christianity and statesmanship may join hands.” there are movements already inaugurated to form a great union of the popular churches. rev. j. s. smart (methodist), in a published sermon on the “political duties of christian men and ministers,” says: “i claim that we have, and ought to have, just as much concern in the government of this country as any other men.... we are the mass of the people. virtue in this country is not weak; her ranks are strong in numbers, and invincible from the righteousness of her cause. invincible if united! let not her ranks be broken by party names.” in a speech delivered in new york city, on “the coming conflict,” february, , the speaker said: “the time is coming when an attempt will be made to engraft a religion upon the laws of the country, and make adherence to a certain form of religion absolutely necessary for an applicant for office.” an association has just been formed for the purpose of securing the adoption of certain measures for the amending of the national constitution, so that it shall speak out the religious views of the majority, and, especially to enforce sunday-keeping under the popular name of “christian sabbath.” it is called the “national association,” and its officers are a long array of reverends, d. d.’s, honorables, esquires, &c. in their address they say: “men of high standing, in every walk of life, of every section of the country, and of every shade of political sentiment and religious belief, have concurred in the measure.” in their appeal they most earnestly request every lover of his country to join in forming auxiliary associations, circulate documents, attend conventions, sign the memorial to congress, &c., &c. in their plea for an amended constitution, they ask the people to “consider that god is not once named in our national constitution. there is nothing in it which requires an ‘oath of god,’ as the bible styles it (which, after all, is the great bond both of loyalty in the citizen and of fidelity in the magistrate); nothing which requires the observance of the day of rest and of worship, or which respects its sanctity. if we do not have the mails carried and the post offices open on sunday, it is because we happen to have a postmaster-general who respects the day. if our supreme courts are not held, and if congress does not sit on that day, it is custom, and not law, that makes it so. nothing in the constitution gives sunday quiet to the custom house, the navy yard, the barracks, or any of the departments of government. “consider that they fairly express the mind of the great body of the american people. this is a christian people. these amendments agree with the faith, the feelings, and the forms of every christian church or sect. the catholic and the protestant, the unitarian and the trinitarian, profess and approve all that is here proposed. why should their wishes not become law? why should not the constitution be made to suit and to represent a constituency so overwhelmingly in the majority?... this great majority is becoming daily more conscious not only of their rights but of their power. their number grows, and their column becomes more solid. they have quietly, steadily opposed infidelity, until it has, at least, become politically unpopular. they have asserted the rights of man and the rights of the government, until the nation’s faith has become measurably fixed and declared on these points. and now that the close of the war gives us occasion to amend our constitution, that it may clearly and fully represent the mind of the people on these points, they feel that it should also be so amended as to recognize the rights of god in man and in government. is it anything but due to their long patience that they be at length allowed to speak out the great facts and principles which give to all government its dignity, stability, and beneficence?” we offer these extracts simply to show the tendency of the popular agitation on this subject. it indicates what is in the hearts of leading ones in the popular churches, and what they are waiting to do, as soon as they shall have the power. it is corroborative evidence that the application we make of the two-horned beast, and the image, is correct. . the mark and worship of the beast. the two-horned beast causes men to worship the first beast and receive his mark. the worship and mark are alike enforced by the two-horned beast. it is this worship and mark against which the third angel warns us. it becomes, therefore, a matter of solemn moment to inquire what is meant by these expressions, since the message levels against these things, whatever they are, a denunciation more terrific than any other threatening that can be found in the word of god. the sin must be one which is most presumptuous and heaven-daring. what is it? many are ready to assert that we never can know, and accuse us of prying into secret things, when we raise the question. but is this possible? if we cannot know what the mark and worship are, we are liable to receive the one, and perform the other, without knowing it. we then become subject to the terrible punishment threatened. but would god ever punish a person thus for sins which he did not know he was committing? never. it would be contrary to the principles on which he has thus far dealt with mankind, and contrary to the justice of his own nature. and a special message, that of the third angel, is sent out to warn men, not against something they are never to know anything about, but against a plain and open act of disloyalty to god, which the two-horned beast is to require of them, and to which if they yield, they must drink of the unmingled wrath of god. we return to the inquiry, what is the mark of the beast? the beast, as we have seen, is the papacy. the two-horned beast which is to enforce the mark is our own government. what is the mark of the papacy which this nation is to enforce? it must be something on which they occupy common ground, and in which both are equally interested. the mark of any power must be something to distinguish the adherents of that power. this none can dispute. and that which distinguishes the adherents of any power, must be some law, requirement, or institution of that power. it can be nothing else. the mark of the beast, then, must be some requirement, of course of a religious nature, which the papacy has instituted, and to which it claims obedience from its followers, as a token of its right to legislate in religious matters. this is an unavoidable conclusion from the foregoing principles, which must be admitted as sound. again, the beast has been shown to be identical with the little horn of dan. vii, and of that power it is said that he should “think to change times and laws.” what laws are these which the papacy should think to change, but not have power to change? it must be divine laws, the laws of god; for all human laws may be changed by earthly powers. this power is again brought to view under the title of the “man of sin;” thess. ii, ; and of him it is said that he “exalteth himself above all that is called god.” how could he do this? there is one way, and only one, in which it could be done, and that is, to change the law of god by putting in place of some of its requirements an enactment of his own, and demanding obedience to that change, to the violation of the law of god. in all these testimonies, the evidence tends with wonderful harmony to one conclusion, namely, that the papacy was to promulgate some religious enactment, which would involve a change of the law of god, and obedience to which would stand as an acknowledgment of its supremacy in religious things. if we can find a papal enactment of such a nature, this surely must be the mark of the beast. it may now facilitate our investigations of this subject to appeal directly to the romish church for information. among its claims and institutions do we find anything of this kind? we do; and it may surprise some protestants to learn that it is the institution of sunday in place of the sabbath of the fourth commandment. hear what that church claims on the subject of the change of the sabbath: “_q._ have you any other way of proving that the _church has power_ to institute festivals of precept? “_a._ had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her;--she could not have _substituted the observance of sunday_, the first day of the week, for the observance of saturday, the seventh day, a change for which there is no scriptural authority.”--_doct. catechism._ “_q._ how prove you that the church _hath power_ to command feasts and holy days? “_a._ _by the very act of changing the sabbath into sunday_, which protestants allow of; and, therefore, they fondly contradict themselves, by keeping sunday strictly, and breaking most other feasts commanded by the same church. “_q._ how prove you that? “_a._ because by keeping sunday, they _acknowledge the church’s power_ to ordain feasts, &c.”--_abridgment of chris. doc._, pp. - . these extracts are from standard roman catholic works, and clearly set forth the claim of that church. when a person is charged with a crime and confesses it, that is usually considered sufficient to settle the matter and preclude the necessity of any further investigation. the prophecy declared that the little horn should think to change times and laws; and here the papacy claims to have accomplished this very work; and we must admit the claim or give up the prophecy as a failure; for no other fulfillment can be shown. what need have we of further evidence? notice, also, how admirably this work of the papacy answers to all the prophecies touching it. . it is a change of the law of god, such as the little horn was to accomplish; for the fourth commandment requires the observance of the seventh day as a memorial of creation, while this requires the observance of the first day for another reason. . it is a work by which it sets itself up above god, as the man of sin was to do; for it places its institution in place of that of jehovah, and demands obedience to it on its own authority in preference to the requirement of god. . it involves on the part of those who understandingly yield to it, that worship which the beast, rev. xiii, , was to receive from those that dwell on the earth. . it is in striking contrast with the commandments of god, which those are found keeping, rev. xiv, , who refuse the mark and worship of the beast. . it is claimed as a token of the authority of the church to ordain religious institutions, just such as the mark of the beast must be intended to show; for, in so many words, the “_very act_ of changing the sabbath into sunday,” is claimed by that church as proof of its power to command feasts and holy days; and the observance of this institution is considered by them as an _acknowledgment_ of such power. . protestants have brought this error from the romish church, and though they rest it on different ground, are equally tenacious of the institution, and equally zealous for its preservation. as above quoted from the address of the “national association” for amending the constitution, catholic and protestant are alike interested in this matter; and the protestant will, of course, be ready to join with the catholic in upholding that which is to him equally dear. here, then, we have an institution of the papacy which admirably answers to every specification of the prophecy, and which singularly enough, this nation, though protestant, is taking steps to make a national institution, and will soon be ready to enforce by the civil arm. for proof that sunday-keeping has no foundation in the scriptures, but is an institution of the papacy, as romanists claim, see history of the sabbath, and other works, published at the review office. if, then, the keeping of a counterfeit sabbath, and one so long and generally observed as the first day of the week, constitute the mark of the beast, the question will doubtless arise in many minds, if the good of past ages who have lived in the observance of this institution, have borne the mark of the beast, and rendered worship to that antichristian power; and if the many christians of the present time who are still keeping the first day, are worshiping the beast, and wearing his mark. by those who wish to raise a blind prejudice against the views of s. d. adventists, we are uniformly represented as so teaching. but it is purely a misrepresentation. we do not so teach; nor does such a conclusion follow from our premises. it has already been noticed that the mark and worship of the beast are both enforced by the two-horned beast. now, in view of this fact, there can be no worship nor reception of the mark, such as is contemplated in the prophecy, till it is enforced by this power. the great majority of protestants who have kept the first day of the week as the sabbath, although it is an institution of the papacy, have not had the remotest idea that it had any connection whatever with that false system of worship. have such been worshiping the beast, while they have been keeping sunday without a thought of that power, honestly supposing they were keeping a bible institution? by no means. have they had the mark of the beast? not at all. the denunciation of the third message is against those who knowingly keep sunday as an institution of the beast. it speaks of those who are enlightened in the matter, and of those alone. and for a person thus enlightened, knowing what god requires and what the beast requires, to basely yield to the requirements of the beast, to avoid persecution, turning away in a cowardly manner from what he knows god requires, from motives of worldly interest,--this is what makes his sin so presumptuous and heaven-daring in the sight of god; this is what calls forth the terrible threatening uttered by the third angel. but the good of past ages have not kept the day with any such understanding of the matter, nor from any such motives. just so with the mass of protestants now living. but the third message is sent forth to warn us in reference to an issue yet future. the people of god are coming up to translation. they must be freed from papal errors. the truth is to be agitated; and the antagonism between the requirements of god and those of antichristian powers, is to be set in a clearly-defined light before the people. the issue is to be met understandingly, the two-horned beast demanding from its subjects the reception of the mark, and the performance of the worship of the first beast, on pain of death, and god commanding us to refuse the mark and worship of the beast, and keep his commandment, on pain of drinking his unmingled wrath. with this issue before them, those who yield to his requirements instead of the requirements of god, will worship the beast and receive his mark. thus seeking to save their lives by avoiding the wrath of earthly powers, they will lose them by becoming exposed to the wrath of god. till this issue is upon the people, under the enactment of civil law, we accuse no one of worshiping the beast or receiving his mark. and the third message is sent forth to warn men to put away their errors and receive the truth, that they may be prepared to stand when this fiery ordeal shall come, and, at last, having gotten the victory over the beast, his image, his mark, and the number of his name, to sing the victor’s song upon the sea of glass. . the patience of the saints. the chronology of the third message is distinctly marked as being the period of “the patience of the saints” which follows the proclamation of the two former messages. “here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of god, and the faith of jesus.” verse . and this period of the saints’ patience is marked by a most important fact, namely, the keeping of the commandments of god and the faith of jesus. we have seen that the first angel’s message refers to the solemn proclamation of the immediate second advent, consequently the period of patience here brought to view must be the same as that which in many scriptures is located immediately preceding the second advent. a few texts must suffice as examples. “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. now the just shall live by faith; but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. but we are not of them who draw back unto perdition, but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.” heb. x, - . “be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the lord. behold, the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, and hath long patience for it, until he receive the early and latter rain. be ye also patient, stablish your hearts: for the coming of the lord draweth nigh. grudge not one against another, brethren, lest ye be condemned: behold the judge standeth before the door. take, my brethren, the prophets, who have spoken in the name of the lord, for an example of suffering affliction, and of patience.” james v, - . “because thou hast kept the word of my patience, i also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth. behold, i come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown.” rev. iii, , . “and it shall be said in that day, lo, this is our god; we have waited for him, and he will save us: this is the lord; we have waited for him, we will be glad and rejoice in his salvation.” isa. xxv, . . the commandments of god. the period of the saints’ patience is distinguished by the fact that they are keeping the commandments of god, and the faith of jesus. it should be distinctly noticed that the commandments here brought to view, are not the commandments of christ. there maybe a certain sense in which all the precepts of the saviour may be called the commandments of god; that is, if viewed as proceeding from the sovereign authority of the father; but when the commandments of god are spoken of in distinction from the testimony or faith of jesus, there is but one thing to which reference can be made, namely, the commandments which god gave in person, the ten commandments. see john xv, . “if ye keep my commandments ye shall abide in my love; even as i have kept my father’s commandments, and abide in his love.” and thus we find the law of god which he proclaimed in person referred to in the new testament as “the commandments of god,” or as “the commandments.” “and he said unto him, why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, god: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. he saith unto him, which? jesus said, thou shalt do no murder, thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not bear false witness, honor thy father and thy mother, and thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” matt. xix, - . “and they returned and prepared spices and ointment; and rested the sabbath day, according to the commandment.” luke xxiii, . “think not that i am come to destroy the law or the prophets: i am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. for verily i say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” matt. v, - . “honor thy father and thy mother (which is the first commandment with promise), that it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth.” eph. vi, , . “but he answered and said unto them, why do ye also transgress the commandment of god by your tradition? for god commanded, saying, honor thy father and mother: and he that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. but ye say, whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, it is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; and honor not his father or his mother, he shall be free. thus have ye made the commandment of god of none effect by your tradition.” matt. xv, - . “what shall we say then? is the law sin? god forbid. nay, i had not known sin, but by the law; for i had not known lust, except the law had said, thou shalt not covet.” rom. vii, . . the faith of jesus. this term is used in distinction from the commandments of god. it does not refer to a particular degree or kind of faith which the saviour exercised in the performance of his miracles; for it appears that he wrought these by the power which he had already received from his father. matt. viii, , ; mark i, , ; luke v, , . the world itself was made by him. john i. he had ample power, therefore, to perform every miracle which he wrought. there is but one other thing to which this term can refer, namely, the precepts and doctrines of our lord as recorded in the new testament. thus “the faith of the gospel” (phil. i, ) must refer to the precepts and doctrines of the gospel. the faith to which a multitude of the priests were obedient (acts vi, ), which was resisted by elymas the sorcerer (acts xiii, ), which was committed to the apostles for the obedience of all nations (rom. i, ), which paul testifies that he had kept ( tim. iv, ), and which is to be earnestly maintained, as once delivered to the saints (jude ), must refer, we think, to the precepts and doctrines of the everlasting gospel. that the faith of jesus is used in this sense in rev. ii, , we think cannot be denied. “thou holdest fast my name,” says jesus, “and hast not denied my faith.” that this is the sense in which it is used in rev. xiv, , is further evident from the fact that it is spoken of as kept in the same manner that the commandments of god are kept. “here are they that keep the commandments of god [the father], and the faith of jesus” [the son]. this excludes alike the blind jew, who makes his boast in the law and rejects jesus, and also the christian who professes faith in christ while he breaks the commandments of god. it embraces christian commandment-keepers only. . the penalty threatened. the fearful penalty connected with the warning of the third angel consists of two things: . the wine of the wrath of god, poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation. . the torment with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and of the lamb. let us carefully consider each in order. what is the wine of the wrath of god? the next chapter clearly explains this point. “and i saw another sign in heaven, great and marvelous, seven angels having the seven last plagues; for in them is filled up the wrath of god. and one of the four beasts gave unto the seven angels seven golden vials, full of the wrath of god, who liveth forever and ever.” rev. xv, , . it follows therefore that the wine of the wrath of god is the seven last plagues. this fact will be further apparent as we proceed to show that these plagues are future. that the plagues pertain to the future, we think can be established beyond controversy. . the wrath of god as threatened by the third angel, is poured out in the seven last plagues; for the first plague is inflicted on the very class that the third angel threatens. compare rev. xiv, , ; xvi, , . this fact proves that the plagues must be future when the third angel’s message is given; and it also proves the identity of the wrath of god without mixture, and the seven last plagues. . we have shown that the plagues, and the wrath of god without mixture, are the same. and wrath without mixture must be wrath with nothing else; that is, wrath without mercy. god has not yet visited the earth with unmixed wrath; nor can he while our great high priest ministers in the heavenly sanctuary, and stays the wrath of god by his intercession for sinful men. when the plagues are poured out, mercy has given place to vengeance. . hence it is that the seven angels are represented as receiving the vials of the wrath of god, the seven last plagues, after the opening of the temple of god in heaven. if we turn to rev. xi, - , we shall find that the opening of the temple in heaven is an event that transpires under the sounding of the seventh angel. and that account concludes with a brief statement of the events of the seventh vial or last plague. now if we turn to chapter xv, - , and xvi, - , we shall read an expanded view of the facts stated in chapter xi, - , and shall find that the two accounts conclude in the same manner, namely, with the events of the last plague. these scriptures show that the seven angels do not receive the vials of the wrath of god to pour out upon the earth until the temple in heaven is opened. that temple is opened under the voice of the seventh angel. the third woe is by reason of the voice of the seventh angel. chap. viii, ; ix, ; xi, . the seven plagues are poured out under the sounding of that angel, hence the plagues are future, and constitute the third woe. the foregoing reasons establish the fact that the plagues are future. we see no reason why they will not be similar in character to those poured out on egypt, while their consequences will be far more terrific and dreadful. may god count us worthy to escape the things coming on the earth, and to stand before the son of man. the seven last plagues are poured out on the living wicked; but the second part of the penalty affixed to the warning of the third angel, is not inflicted until the end of the thousand years, when all the wicked are raised and suffer it together. this part of the penalty i will now consider. “he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the lamb; and the smoke of their torment ascendeth up forever and ever,” &c. the final perdition of ungodly men, in the lake of fire, is without doubt the subject of these awful words. that we may rightly understand this text, we call attention to several important facts. . the punishment of the wicked will be inflicted upon them on this earth; for the final conflagration of our globe is to constitute the lake of fire in which they are rewarded, each according to his works. “behold the righteous shall be recompensed in the earth; much more the wicked and the sinner.” prov. xi, . “but the heavens and the earth which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.” pet. iii, . “but the fearful and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolators, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.” rev. xxi, . “for behold the day cometh that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble; and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.” mal. iv, . “and when the thousand years are expired, satan shall be loosed out of his prison, and shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, gog and magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. and they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from god out of heaven and devoured them.” rev. xx, - . . the prophet isaiah (chapter xxxiv) describes the final conflagration of our globe in language which is a complete parallel to that of the third angel in describing the punishment of the wicked. those who contend that isaiah refers only to ancient idumea, must admit that the period of time described in this strong language, must finally come to an end. and those who admit that isaiah, in the language we are about to quote, refers to the conflagration of our earth, will find in what follows ample proof that that scene will finally close. “for it is the day of the lord’s vengeance, and the year of recompenses for the controversy of zion. and the streams thereof shall be turned into pitch, and the dust thereof into brimstone, and the land thereof shall become burning pitch. it shall not be quenched night nor day; the smoke thereof shall go up for ever; from generation to generation it shall lie waste; none shall pass through it for ever and ever.” chap. xxxiv, - . . but this terrific scene of final conflagration is not to last throughout unlimited duration. for the earth having been burned, and all its elements melted, new heavens and new earth are to follow, as the present earth succeeded to that which was destroyed by water. and in the earth thus made new the righteous are to be recompensed. “but the day of the lord will come as a thief in the night; in which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also; and the works that are therein shall be burnt up. seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness; looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of god, wherein the heavens, being on fire, shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.” pet. iii, - . “and i saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.” rev. xxi, . . thus however dreadful and long-continued the punishment of the wicked will be (for each is to be punished according to his deserts), that punishment will finally result in the utter destruction of all transgressors. all the wicked will god destroy. ps. cxlv, . they shall die the second death. rev. xxi, ; rom. vi, ; eze. xviii, , . they shall perish, being consumed into smoke. ps. xxxvii, , , . they shall be punished with everlasting destruction, being burned up in unquenchable fire. thess. i, ; matt. iii, . and thus having been consumed, root and branch, they shall be as though they had not been. mal. iv, ; obadiah . rise and progress of the third message. the position of all adventists after the passing of the time, was at best a very trying one, and the work for a time moved slowly, attended with much opposition. to “hold fast the beginning of their confidence” in the great movement, in the face of a scoffing world and church, and amid violent opposition from those who were drawing back from the faith, was a severe trial of faith and patience. and the numbers who had the moral courage, and shared sufficiently in the grace of god, to do this, were found to be small. those who cowardly yielded to the clamors of opponents, to confess that they had been in error on the time, occupied the unhappy position of wearing the advent name after giving up as error the very means which had made them adventists. while those who apostatized so far as to give up the advent faith, hope, and name, for a place in some one of the nominal churches, were destined to be regarded as vacillating, and ever feel the sting of remorse for so great a weakness as embracing the “blessed hope.” those who wished to renounce the advent faith, and free themselves from the reproach suffered by those who adhered to it, might find a degree of relief for the present in confessing their way back into the church. but of those who have been imbued with the spirit of the advent faith and hope, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have been partakers of the holy ghost, and have tasted the good word of god, and the powers of the world to come, and have apostatized, there are few who can again enjoy the insipid piety of the popular churches. in fact such persons are very unhappy and dissatisfied with their position and relations in religious matters, unless their apostasy has been so sinful as to obliterate from the soul all traces of christian experience, and they be given over to the sensual pleasures of this life. may god pity this unhappy class, and may they again stand with those who are looking for the blessed hope. but the position of those who discard the great movement which made them adventists, and yet cherish some of the leading views of william miller, and rejoice in the advent name, is more inconsistent, and their course far more sinful in the sight of god, than that of those who made an entire surrender of both position and name. what a position in the sight of god, angels and men! they bless the advent faith, hope and name, and curse the very means which has made them what they profess to be! these may hold the doctrines of the personal coming of christ, the literal resurrection of the dead, and life and immortality alone through christ to be given at the resurrection of the just, but while failing to acknowledge the hand of god in the advent movement in the past, and standing opposed to the third angel’s message of the present, have no well-defined position as to the plan of god in warning the world and proving his people preparatory to the coming of the son of man. and it is because of the ignorance of the people as to the true position, and because there is no real cross in what these men do teach, that they have influence. some of them speak of millerism and miller, as they would of mormonism and the notorious smith, and yet claim to be adventists. but if the hand of god has been with those who have borne the advent name at any time, it was during the great time movement of and . more recent time movements and operations of various kinds, by those who regard that grand movement as an error of millerism, compare with it about the same as a rushlight compares with the noonday sun. and these men will speak proudly of their advent faith, and bless the advent name, while they curse the great advent movement, which has brought the advent doctrine before the present generation. the sin against the holy ghost, which had no forgiveness in the days of christ, was to attribute the work of the spirit, in the miracles of jesus, to satan. how much less, think you, is the sin of those who deny the work of the spirit of god in the advent movement, and attribute the power which attended that work to human and satanic influences? i do not say that all adventists, besides seventh-day adventists, take the foregoing positions. most of them, however, do; and the candid reader who regards the view of the great advent movement taken in these pages with favor, will not fail to see both the glaring inconsistencies and the sinfulness of the positions taken by these professed adventists. but the true position is free from such absurdities, and is harmonious in itself. it honors god, vindicates his word, and sustains christian experience. it explains the past, definitely points out present duty, and lights up the glorious future. it presents a connected system of truth, the most beautiful in all its parts, that the mind of man ever contemplated. the period of the third message dates from the disappointment in , and from that time to the present the development of its great truths has been progressive. immediately after the passing of the time, not a few took a firm stand that the first and second messages were in the past, that the midnight cry had been given, that the days had ended, and that we had reached the patient waiting, watching time. but it was not until the subject of the cleansing of the sanctuary was brought out in , that the termination of the days became one of the clearest points in the entire system of second-advent truth. this established us in the fulfillment of the first and second messages in the past, opened before us the ark of god containing the ten precepts of his holy law in the most holy place of the heavenly sanctuary, and called our attention to the third message, with its solemn warning to flee the worship of the beast and his image, and in its stead keep the commandments of god and the faith of jesus. how forcible the closing words of the third angel: “here is the patience of the saints, here are they that keep the commandments of god and the faith of jesus.” and how natural the conclusion that the sabbath reform should come in right here. introduction of the sabbath. as early as , sister preston, a seventh-day baptist, who was a believer in the soon coming of christ, introduced the sabbath to the adventists of washington, n. h., and made a good impression. with the help of the publications of her people, and the blessing of god, about forty embraced the sabbath. the truth on this subject reached other points in new hampshire. about that time elder t. m. preble embraced the sabbath, and began to teach it. he called the attention of adventists to the question, by a pamphlet on the subject, dated february , . after showing the claims of the bible sabbath, and the fact that it was changed to sunday by the papacy, he said; “thus we see dan. vii, , fulfilled, the little horn changing times and laws. therefore it appears to me that all who keep the first day for the sabbath, are the pope’s sunday-keepers, and god’s sabbath-breakers.” but elder preble, not seeing the sabbath reform under the message of the third angel, and that in the ripening of the harvest of the earth, the sabbath was to be a test, continued his ministerial labors in connection with those who bitterly opposed it. he soon lost his interest in the subject, and has since become one of its bitterest opposers. the same is true of elder j. b. cook, and a few other advent ministers, who at a later point of time, embraced the sabbath and abandoned it. elder preble had, however, called the attention of adventists to this subject, and several in different parts of new england embraced the sabbath, whose interest in it did not prove as transient as his had been. in , elder joseph bates, then of fairhaven, mass., began to teach the sabbath of the bible, and several in massachusetts, and maine, embraced it as the fruit of his labors. he wrote and circulated gratuitously a small work upon the subject. by reading this little pamphlet, i was established upon the sabbath, and began to teach it. this little work reached several in connecticut, and with bro. bates’ personal labors, brought over to the sabbath a number in western new york and different parts of new england. but these were generally the poor of this world, and the very few among them who had means, did not realize that on them rested the responsibility of sending the truth to others. hence the cause moved slowly. in the autumn of , bro. bates sat down to write a work of more than one hundred pages, with only a york shilling at his command. and i was chopping cord-wood for my daily bread for the support of my little family, where i could earn but fifty cents a day. we two were alone in publicly teaching the sabbath. under such circumstances we could do but little in the cause. i state these things to show the reader the humble manner in which this cause commenced, and the sacrifices then made to spread the truth. i well remember when bro. bates felt deeply impressed with the duty to labor in vermont, and, being destitute of means, resolved to start on foot from fairhaven, mass. a natural sister of mrs. w. had come from maine to fairhaven, to perform the duties of the kitchen for one dollar a week, and in this way raise means to spread the truth. on learning bro. bates’ intention to perform the long journey on foot, she went to her employer and asked for five dollars, which she obtained and gave to bro. bates to help him on his way to vermont. god greatly blessed the mission, as many witnesses, who still observe the sabbath, can testify. let not those brethren and sisters who take but little interest in spreading the truth, blush at this simple narrative. he who notices the sparrows, saw this act of self-sacrifice, and set his seal of approbation. it was written in the books from which all are to be judged according to their deeds. and did not the angels who rejoice much over one repenting sinner, rejoice over this simple means of sending the light of present truth among the green mountains of vermont? that sister will receive her reward. i write not these things to shame the wealthy believer, who is burying himself up in his wealth and his cares, and losing his interest in the cause, and his hold on heaven; but i design to state facts that you may be led to seek that spirit of sacrifice, which those who were first in this cause evinced, that you may walk in that humble path of obedience in which they walked, and enjoy the blessing of entire consecration, which then rested upon them. first conference of believers. in the spring of , in company with bro. bates, mrs. w. and self attended a conference of believers, at rocky hill, conn. this was the first general meeting held by seventh-day adventists. in point of numbers and influence, it marked a new era in the cause; and yet we all numbered less than thirty. the brethren were much encouraged, and bro. bates began to labor more extensively as the way opened before him. mrs. white’s experience. here i must introduce the part which the spirit of god has led mrs. w. to act in connection with this cause. i do this, . because her experience and labors have been closely connected with its rise and progress. . because of the spirit of prejudice and enmity existing against her calling and labors. this is manifested by those who are ignorant of the facts in the case, or if not wholly ignorant, are led by a spirit of frenzied persecution. the bearing which this has upon the cause is a sufficient reason for laying the facts as they are before the public. . because of the importance of her work, in connection with this cause, as will be seen in the following pages. it was but a few weeks after the passing of the time, in , that she had her first vision. the circumstances of this manifestation are briefly stated by mrs. w. as follows: “i visited sister h., one of our advent sisters, whose heart was knit with mine. in the morning we bowed at the family altar. it was not an exciting occasion. there were but five of us present, all females. while praying, the power of god came upon me, as i never had felt it before. i was surrounded with light, and was rising higher and higher from the earth,” &c. (_spir. gifts_, vol. ii, p. .) her condition in vision may be described as follows: . she is utterly unconscious of everything transpiring around her, as has been proved by the most rigid tests, but views herself as removed from this world, and in the presence of heavenly beings. . she does not breathe. during the entire period of her continuance in vision, which has at different times ranged from fifteen minutes to three hours, there is no breath, as has been repeatedly proved by pressing upon the chest, and by closing the mouth and nostrils. . immediately on entering vision, her muscles become rigid, and joints fixed, so far as any external force can influence them. at the same time her movements and gestures, which are frequent, are free and graceful, and cannot be hindered nor controlled by the strongest person. . on coming out of vision, whether in the day-time or a well-lighted room at night, all is total darkness. her power to distinguish even the most brilliant objects, held within a few inches of the eyes, returns but gradually, sometimes not being fully established for three hours. this has continued for the past twenty years; yet her eyesight is not in the least impaired, few persons having better than she now possesses. she has probably had, during the past twenty-three years, between one and two hundred visions. these have been given under almost every variety of circumstance, yet maintaining a wonderful similarity; the most apparent change being, that of late years they have grown less frequent, but more comprehensive. she has been taken off in vision most frequently when bowed in prayer. several times, while earnestly addressing the congregation, unexpectedly to herself and to all around her, she has been instantly prostrated in vision. this was the case june , , in the presence of not less than two hundred sabbath-keepers, in the house of worship, in battle creek, mich. on receiving baptism at my hands, at an early period of her experience, as i raised her up out of the water, immediately she was in vision. several times, when prostrated by sickness, she has been relieved in answer to the prayer of faith, and taken off in vision. at such times her restoration to usual health has been wonderful. at another time, when walking with friends, in conversation upon the glories of the kingdom of god, as she was passing through the gate before her father’s house, the spirit of god came upon her, and she was instantly taken off in vision. and what may be important to those who think the visions the result of mesmerism, she has a number of times been taken off in vision, when in prayer alone in the grove or in the closet. it may be well to speak as to the effect of the visions upon her constitution and strength. when she had her first vision, she was an emaciated invalid, given up by her friends and physicians to die of consumption. she then weighed but eighty pounds. her nervous condition was such that she could not write, and was dependent on one sitting near her at the table to even pour her drink from the cup to the saucer. and notwithstanding her anxieties and mental agonies, in consequence of her duty to bring her views before the public, her labors in public speaking, and in church matters generally, her wearisome travels, and home labors and cares, her health and physical and mental strength have improved from the day she had her first vision. as to the character of the visions, i only wish to state at present that this may be learned by reading the several volumes of “spiritual gifts,” for sale at the review office. as to their fruits, and the nature of the opposition they have met, i shall speak more fully hereafter. second general conference. in the summer of , we received an invitation to hold a conference with the few friends in western new york. i was destitute of means, and with feeble health entered the hay-field to earn the sum necessary to bear our expenses to that meeting. i took a large job of mowing, and when fainting beneath the noonday sun, i would bow before god in my swath, call upon him for strength, rise refreshed, and mow on again. in five weeks i earned enough to bear our expenses to the conference. bro. bates joined us at this meeting. the notice had been given to all in the empire state who were in sympathy with our views, and there was a general rally; yet there were not more than forty present. and what confusion of sentiment among this few! a spirit of discussion and contention for points not important prevailed, so that we who had come so far could hardly have chance to give our message, and the meeting would have proved a failure, and the good brethren would have separated in confusion and trial, had not the lord worked in a special manner. his spirit rested upon mrs. w., and she was taken off in vision. the entire congregation believed that it was the work of god, and were deeply affected. she related what she had seen, which was given to correct some errors among them, and in melting strains exhorted them to leave their errors, and those points on which they had differed, and unite on the important truths of the third message. and on that good evening the brethren sacrificed their babel of sentiments and united on the truth. and what was the result? harmony began to prevail, and many came flocking to the standard of truth. the fruit of this vision was good. it could not have been the work of an enemy, according to the test given by our lord, in matt. vii, - : “beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. ye shall know them by their fruits. do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. a good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. wherefore, by their fruits ye shall know them.” the opposition. by the spring of the subject of the sabbath began to attract considerable notice from advent believers, who, seeing that the first day of the week could not be sustained by divine authority, were falling back to the position of no sabbath in the christian dispensation. and it may be worthy of notice, that this is the result everywhere the sabbath question is discussed. the reason why the regular baptists have taken this position more generally than any other denomination, may be because of their relation to the seventh-day baptists, who have more or less brought the subject to their notice. as an illustration of this point, when william e. arnold, of rochester, n. y., in , stated to elder joseph marsh his convictions of duty to observe the seventh day as the sabbath, elder marsh replied that the first day of the week, as the sabbath for christians, was clearly proved from the word of god, and the unvarying practice of the christian church. mr. arnold invited him to give the subject especial attention. he promised to do so and report the next sunday. his report was simply this: that he had examined the subject, and had become satisfied that the sabbath was jewish, and that there was none for christians. the change from the first day to no sabbath cannot be regarded in any better light than a change from bad to worse, and it is a matter of grief that thousands, finding themselves utterly unable to sustain the observance of first-day, take refuge from the pointed arrows of truth in this comparatively strong hold of unbelief. the masses are ignorant of the facts relative to the first day of the week. they think the new testament abounds with direct testimony that it is sacred time. elder joseph bates asserted in a grove, in connecticut, in , that there was not one text in the new testament which taught a change of the sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the week. an intelligent-appearing gentleman interrupted by saying, “there are more than twenty.” “well,” said bro. bates, “will you please to give us one?” the gentleman replied, “i can give you twenty.” bro. b. urged, “if you can give twenty, you can certainly give one. we wait for one; only give us one text.” the gentleman was silent and bro. b. went on with his subject. it is a fact that the first day of the week is mentioned in the new testament only eight times, and is not in a single instance spoken of as a sacred day. inspiration gives it the simple title of first day of the week. see matt. xxviii, ; mark xvi, , ; luke xxiv, ; john xx, , ; acts xx, ; cor. xvi, . it is also a fact that inspiration in the new testament gives the seventh day of the week the sacred title of sabbath, fifty-nine times, and in every instance refers to the day on which god rested, and which he sanctified and blessed. see matt. xii, , , , , , , ; xxiv, ; xxviii, ; mark i, ; ii, , , , ; iii, , ; vi, ; xv, ; xvi. ; luke iv, , ; vi, , , , , , ; xiii, , , , ; xiv, , , ; xxiii, , ; john v, , , , ; vii, , ; ix, , ; xix, ; acts i, ; xiii, , , , ; xv, ; xvi, ; xvii, ; xviii, . those who examine the subject are generally compelled to admit that there is no inspired testimony favoring a change of the day. some, however, cling to the idea that the change is sustained by the example of christ and the apostles. as far as the example of our lord is concerned, they can refer us to but two instances of his meeting his disciples on the first day of the week. the first occasion was when he appeared to them on the evening of the day of his resurrection; and they were astonished to learn that he had risen from the dead. the second was eight days after this, and hence could not be upon the first day of the week; and neither of these meetings, so far as we have any proof, were from previous appointment, or designed for religious worship. and there is no evidence that the apostles regarded the first day of the week as a day of worship. there is no record of a single instance of their holding a meeting in the daytime of the first day of the week. it is true that paul met with his brethren, at troas, on a first-day evening to break bread. that meeting continued all night on the first day of the week. the night is the first half of the twenty-four hour day. therefore that meeting was held on what we call saturday night. the next morning, sunday, paul started on his long journey to jerusalem, and spent the last half of that day in traveling on foot, and sailing with his brethren toward mitylene. thus we have apostolic example for regarding the first day as a proper day for secular business. neither can cor. xvi, , serve the cause of first-day observance. this text does not refer to a single element of the sabbath. holy time, rest from labor, and public assembling for divine worship, are not intimated therein. justin edwards, in his notes on the new testament, comments on this text thus: “lay by him in store; at home. that there be no gatherings; that their gifts might be ready when the apostle should come.” with this now contrast new testament testimony relative to the sabbath. our lord recognized the existence of the sabbath at the destruction of jerusalem, a. d. , as verily as the seasons of the year. “and pray ye that your flight be not in the winter neither on the sabbath day.” he refers to a definite day. not one day in seven and no day in particular, but the day of the sabbath. in mark ii, , he says, the sabbath was made for man. in luke xxiii, , is the record of the disciples’ resting the sabbath day according to the commandment. this act of resting on the sabbath was after the crucifixion, and the record of it was made by inspiration nearly thirty years later still. the book of acts shows what the apostles did. which day of the week did they observe as the sabbath? the writer of the book of acts records instances of the apostles’ holding meetings upon the sabbath. on one occasion when paul had been addressing a mixed assembly, “the gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them, the next sabbath,” showing that it was understood even by the gentiles, that the sabbath was paul’s regular day of worship. acts xiii, . and the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together, to hear the word of god. verse . at another time paul and timotheus, on the sabbath, went out of the city of philippi to a place “by the river side, where prayer was wont to be made,” and held a public meeting. lydia believed, and was baptized, and her household. but was the sabbath paul’s regular preaching day? was this his manner? let chapter xvii, , answer. “and paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures.” chapter xviii, - , 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 . how long did he remain at corinth? “and he continued there a year and six months, teaching the word of god among them.” verse . here is apostolic example for seventy-eight successive sabbaths. and it will be seen by verses - , 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, , , 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 and . 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. , . 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, . ‘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, - . ‘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. , . 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. 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, . that christ was the christian’s lawgiver, and . 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, - , 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, . 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, - ,) 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, - ; lev. xxiv, - . that christ, as a prophet, or teacher, was like moses, we have the united testimony of moses, (deut. xviii, ,) the lord, (verse ,) and peter, (acts iii, ,) 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, . “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, . “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, , . “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, . 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, , . 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, . “and i will pray the father, and he shall give you another comforter, that he may abide with you forever.” verse . 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, , . 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, , 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, . this was the prayer of jesus. ‘i have no greater joy than to hear that my children walk in truth.’ john, . “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.’ cor. xiii, . thy law is truth.’ ps. cxix, . 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, . “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 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 , . 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, , 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. , 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 $ 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 $ ; since, it has increased to $ , . 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 . the first meeting of the kind was held in battle creek, mich., june and , 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 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 , , i offered the following resolutions, which were unanimously adopted: “ . that the advent review office still remain the property of the church. “ . that the advent review office be removed to battle creek, mich. “ . that a financial committee of three be chosen, whose duty it shall be to move the office, and publish the _advent review_. “ . 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 , , which sanctioned the doings of the conference of september , , and elected uriah smith resident editor of the _review_. the last paper published in rochester, n. y., was dated october , , and its publication was resumed in battle creek, december , 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 , , 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 , , 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 , , showed the amount of property belonging to the association, free from all incumbrance, to be $ , . . organization. the subject of church order had been from time to time set forth in the _review_ since , 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 - , 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. , , as an appeal from that church to the churches and brethren in michigan. this system is based on cor. xvi, : “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, . that they give at the rate of two cents each week upon every one hundred dollars worth of property which they possess. . 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, . 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, . 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, , 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 , 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.” john ii, . and it was designed that the coming of christ should be viewed near by believers, every step of the way from the disappointment in 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 , 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 ; 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 and , 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, , . 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 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, , 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 , 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 , . 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 , , 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 , , 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 .’ 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 . 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, . 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 , _. 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: . mrs. w. never was at st. louis, gratiot county, michigan. . she never had a vision in gratiot county. . her standard of morality ever has been the ten commandments. . 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. . she has ever borne the most decided testimony against any departure from the principles guarded by the ten commandments. . 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, . 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 . 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. . 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 . 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 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. . we solemnly believe that it was the design of god that definite time should be proclaimed, and that the 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, . 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, , , , . 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. , renders dan. vii, , 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_, ( .) to cast, to throw, dan. iii, , , ; vi, . ( .) to set, to place, _e. g._, thrones. dan vii, ; comp. rev. iv, .” 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, st. 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. d. the opening of the life-records of men, from which they are to be judged. d. 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. . 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, . 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, - . notice, first, that the prophet points to the last days, as quoted by peter. acts ii, - . 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, ? “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, , “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, - , 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, - ; matt. xxviii, - ; eph. iv, - ; cor. xii, , ; xiii, - ; i, - ; rev. xix, ; thess. v; matt. vii, - ; isa. viii, , ; jer. xiv, ; xxiii, , ; viii, , ; v, , . 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 cor. i, ; rom. xv, ; phil. ii, , ; pet. iii, ; v, . 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, - . 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 cor. xii, , 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. cor. xiii. - : “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.” . 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. , : “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, . “be ye also patient, stablish your hearts; for the coming of the lord draweth nigh.” james v, . “here is the patience of the saints, here are they that keep the commandments of god, and the faith of jesus.” rev. xiv, . 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. . 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. . 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. . 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, , . 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 ,) 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, . 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, . 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.” cor. x, - . 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, . 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, - . compare deut. vi, ; lev. xix, . 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. [illustration] 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. [illustration] 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, . “i had not known sin but by the law.” chap. vii, . as proof that this knowledge did exist immediately after the fall, see gen. iv, , , ; vi, , , . also, noah was righteous before god. chap. vii, . he was a preacher of righteousness. pet. ii, . by his preaching right-doing, reproving the sins of the people of his time, he condemned the world. heb. xi, . 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, ; xviii, , , ; xix, . the blessing of god came upon abraham, because he obeyed his voice and kept his commandments. gen. xxvi, . those who refused obedience, experienced his wrath for their transgressions. the cities of the plain were condemned for their unlawful deeds. pet. ii, - . 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. john iii, . 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, . 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, . jesus answered them and said, “my doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.” john vii, . “i do nothing of myself, but as my father hath taught me, i speak these things.” chap. viii, . “the word which ye hear, is not mine, but the father’s which sent me.” chap. xiv, . 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, . 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.” john ii, . 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, , . 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, . 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. [illustration] 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, , ; viii, , . 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, . 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, , . 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: . the sacred record nowhere intimates that the sabbath was instituted at sinai, while it distinctly locates its institution at creation. . the sabbath being made for man, mark ii, , 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. . 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, , . 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 , , 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: . the bible is silent relative to redemption’s being greater than creation. who knows that it is? . 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? . 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. . 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. . 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, . 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.” cor. xi, . 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, . 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, , . 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, , 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. : “the” inserted (to the next)