| VOL. XXIII. | JULY 1, 1902. | No. 13. |
'I will stand upon my watch, and set my foot upon the Tower, and will watch to see what He shall say unto me, and what answer I shall make to them that oppose me.' Hab. 2:1
Upon the earth distress of nations with perplexity: the sea and the waves (the restless, discontented) roaring: men's hearts failing them for fear and for looking forward to the things coming upon the earth (society): for the powers of the heavens (ecclestiasticism) shall be shaken. . . .When ye see these things come to pass, then know that the Kingdom of God is nigh at hand. Look up, lift up your heads, rejoice, for your redemption draweth nigh. – Luke 21:25-28, 32.
It stands free from all parties, sects and creeds of men, while it seeks more and more to bring its every utterance into fullest subjection to the will of God in Christ, as expressed in the Holy Scriptures. It is thus free to declare boldly whatsoever the Lord hath spoken; – according to the divine wisdom granted unto us, to understand. Its attitude is not dogmatical, but confident; for we know whereof we affirm, treading with implicit faith upon the sure promises of God. It is held as a trust, to be used only in his service; hence our decisions relative to what may and what may not appear in its columns must be according to our judgment of his good pleasure, the teaching of his Word, for the upbuilding of his people in grace and knowledge. And we not only invite but urge our readers to prove all its utterances by the infallible Word to which reference is constantly made, to facilitate such testing.
Those of the interested who, by reason of old age, or other infirmity or adversity, are unable to pay for the TOWER, will be supplied FREE, if they send a Postal Card each December, stating their case and requesting the paper. We are not only willing, but anxious, that all such be on our list continually.
Every letter you send through the mail may be a more or less potent messenger of the truth, even on its outside, by the use of these envelopes. They catch the attention not only of those to whom they are addressed, but postmen and others have an opportunity, and often the curiosity, to read their message of peace; – the gospel in a condensed form. Price 25c per hundred post paid.
The chiefest service we could commend, open to all who are unencumbered and in active use of their faculties, is the colporteur work. It is an honorable form of ministering the truth from house to house, as the apostles served. It is a service which the Lord seems to have blessed as much or more than any other for gathering the "wheat." It is apparent at once to all that to sell such books as the DAWNS at 25 cents each, cannot be for money-making: that it is merely another way of preaching the truth. No other religious books are sold at any such price. Indeed few subscription books sell for less than two to three dollars each. Any who can serve in this work are invited to write to us for "Hints to Colporteurs."
We have now filled all orders for the new Bibles, – so far as our records show. If you have paid for one of them and have not received it make inquiry for it at your express office, and if still not found write us full particulars of the order; – the date, the amount and whether the money was sent by registered mail, or by express or money order. Give name of your express office.
We have many inquiries as to the possibilities of getting more of these Bibles. We answer, that we still have some and those who desire them are welcome to them so long as they last. In French seal, $2. in Persian Levant, silk sewed and leather lined, $3. – carriage prepaid.
AS MANY PRESBYTERIAN MINISTERS will, undoubtedly, claim that their new creed is precisely the old one except that it is worded in more modern language, – that they never did believe in "non-elect infants" and never professed to so believe, etc., etc., it is well that we now record the utterances of some of these brethren who having so long felt uneasy about professing untruths and vowing to teach them to others, are now overjoyed by the relief of the new confession. We give extracts below from Rev. Donehoo's first sermon after the adoption of the new creed (evidently the gentleman's own report) from the "Pittsburg Post," May 26.
The pastor of the West End Presbyterian Church yesterday morning delivered a sermon on the following text: II Thess. 1:8. "We are bound to thank God always for you, brethren, as it is meet, because that your faith groweth exceedingly, and the charity of every one of you all toward each other aboundeth.'
"The time was when it was regarded as the very essence of orthodoxy to believe that religious discovery had reached its utmost limit with the deliverances of the Westminster divines, and that further investigation into the realms of truth exposed the audacious investigator to the charge of disloyalty to the standards, and made a man unworthy of the confidence or even fellowship of his more orthodox brethren. This is not ancient history, but sober facts occurring within a score of years and closing on last Thursday with the practically unanimous adoption of the committee report on creed revision in our General Assembly in New York city. The highest court of our church, composed of men who argued and voted against such a thing, gulped down revision with a relish which seemed to indicate that it was not such an unpleasant dose, after all.
"It is in no spirit of triumph over a prostrate foe that I allude to these things, but simply because I cannot repress my joy that the mists have cleared away, and that a brighter day has dawned upon the church. It is to me an especial cause for rejoicing that I can stand up in the pulpit and offer salvation without any mental reservation, and without any stipulation that the one to whom the offer is extended must first of all be one of that select number who had been chosen from all eternity to be the object of God's sovereign compassion simply for 'His mere good pleasure.'...
"I am glad besides that the ambiguous declaration about 'elect infants dying in infancy' being saved – (as though it was possible for any other than infants to die in infancy) – while a very painful silence is allowed to hang around the fate of other babes that breathe and gasp, and die ere they had made acquaintance with joy or sorrow, sin or goodness – is now to be explained as teaching, what a formidable party in the Westminster Assembly opposed with such persistence that they forced the Assembly to place this ambiguous statement in the Confession (that they believed in the damnation of unelect infants) that God's election embraces all that die in infancy in His purposes of grace. I am glad of that. ...
"Henceforth may we not hope that men will preach God, not as He would be if they could have had their way about it, and not acting as they would have done if they had been in His place, but, as He has revealed Himself in His Word and providence, a God of infinite mercy and love, who is not willing that any should perish, but who would have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth?"
Rev. L. P. Crawford, of Pasadena, Cal., says in the California press: –
"When I was ordained there were three things that I would not subscribe to. To these three points I said 'No.' The first was this, in Chapter III:
"'By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His glory, some men and angels are predestined unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death!'
"I said: 'I can't go it – I'll have to be made over.' [R3032 : page 196]
"Dr. Adams asked me: 'Is there anything else, young man?'
"'Yes, sir, there is,' I said. 'If where it speaks of elect infants, it is to be implied that there are infants that are not elect, then I don't believe it.'
"'Anything else, young brother?' asked Dr. Adams, and I remember it as well as if it was yesterday.
"'Yes,' I said. 'If it is meant that I am to be held responsible for Adam's sins, in the sense that I can be punishable for them, then I don't believe it.'
"'Well, my dear brother,' said Dr. Adams, 'There are a good many of us in the same fix;' and they licensed me.
"Now, these three points that I refused to subscribe to are the principal ones taken up in the revision."
We are glad that the General Assembly has given these brave men their liberty at last; tho we confess we would have admired them still more if they had been courageous enough to have promptly and vigorously obeyed the voices of their consciences; – if they had refused to lend one mite of [R3033 : page 196] their time or influence to God-dishonoring and conscience-searing confessions for the sake of human endorsement. We cannot suppose either that God was pleased to have Drs. Adams and Crawford privately and secretly confess their disbelief to each other while practicing deceit toward the other hundreds of thousands of Presbyterians; – many of whom, unlearned "laity," trusted their public profession too confidingly, and looked not beyond them to the Lamp of God's Word.
But if the boldest are not to be too much praised what shall we say of those who have seemed to have no consciences, or whose reasoning faculties are so dull that even in the light of this twentieth century they are such "blind guides" that the old Confession is still good enough for them? We say that only very young or bewildered or stupid sheep will any longer accept the ipse dixit of such Shepherds. We advise that their every expression be scrutinized in the light of God's Word, as more likely to be false than true. We bring no railing accusation against any of them, but merely state facts and their own confessions. As we understand the Word, the Lord will rebuke them shortly, in the approaching great time of trouble. But, alas for the poor blind sheep who are following them into that ditch!
The Chicago Tribune has kept record of the calamities of the year and makes the following report: –
"Nature has not been so busy with her forces of devastation for many years past as she has been during the first five months of the present year. Volcanic eruptions and earthquakes have destroyed 48,450 lives, storms 704, tornadoes 416, cyclones 220, floods 333, avalanches 228, tidal waves 103, snow-slides 39 and waterspouts 12, a total of 50,505 lives destroyed by nature's elemental disturbances. If to this were added the lives lost by agencies over which man has more or less control, such as fires, mine disasters, explosions, railroad accidents, and vessel wrecks, it would be increased to over 60,000, and this takes no account of individual lives lost in this country, which would bring the grand total up to about 100,000 lives lost in the short period of five months."
The Boston Watchman (Baptist) says of the divine permission of calamities:
"This problem baffles the author of the Book of Job, and all the discoveries of science and the light of the Christian revelation do not resolve the thick darkness that settles about it. When trouble comes for which we can see no moral antecedent and no good result, the irrepressible cry bursts from every human heart, 'Why?' And there is no answer but the answer of Job: 'Tho he slay me, yet will I trust in him.'
"From our point of view the events of life are often wholly irreconcilable with our faith in the divine goodness. And yet we do not lose our faith. We believe that God is working out for us and for the race purposes of goodness that we cannot understand. That, it seems to us, is the Christian attitude toward this problem. Christianity does not resolve it, while it makes many other solutions of it untenable. But Christianity, in its revelation of the Father, inspires a confidence in Him that is not shaken by our inability to understand His way."
"It was the Lisbon earthquake which shook Voltaire's faith in a God who governs, who pervades all places and ages, and who has established a direct relation between himself and mankind. He was compelled to ask, What was my God doing? Why did the Universal Father crush to shapelessness thousands of his poor children, even at the moment when they were upon their knees returning thanks to him?"
In view of the fact that the world is now in transition – from "the present evil world" to the "new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness," – from the reign of sin and death under "the Prince of darkness" to the Millennial reign of the great Life Giver – it will not surprise us at all if the next twelve years shall prove to be full of horrors. The conditions now prevailing in the earth are not such as will be appropriate during the Millennium, and the changes will mean great disturbances of celestial and terrestrial affairs pertaining to our earth. These will naturally occasion great suffering and loss of life unless divine power be miraculously interposed for humanity's protection; and we see no reason to expect such interposition. On the contrary, we understand the Scriptures to teach that the divine plan is so timed that these physical disturbances will constitute a part of the great chastisement which the Lord designs shall break the proud hearts of men preparatory to his offer to all of the Balm of Gilead – restitution. – Acts 3:19-21.
One effect of these calamities will surely be the overthrow of the faith of many, – of all who are merely nominal believers, whose faith led them to no love for the Lord and to no study of his Word and to no self-consecration to good works. Of these, as the Prophet has declared: –
Of this time and its peculiar work not only in the convulsions of nature, but also in its social, financial and religious convulsions, the Lord's Word declares: "Forasmuch as this people draw near unto me with their mouth, and with their lips do [R3033 : page 197] honor me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men: Therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvelous work and a wonder among this people;...for the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid." "None of the wicked shall understand; but the wise [the taught of God] shall understand." – Isa. 29:13,14; Dan. 12:4,9,10.
We are now in the little season appointed of the Lord for the sealing of his servants in their foreheads – intellectually. It behooves us therefore to give heed to the sealing of our own heads and hearts by availing ourselves of the assistances which the Lord now provides. Failure to do this and the giving of heart and time to the world or pleasure and self means disrespect to the great Teacher, and love of the present world rather than of that which is to come; and the reward of such a course is – to be left in darkness with the world. (I Cor. 4:2; Matt. 25:30.) Another duty of the hour, that will be appreciated only by the faithful, is the gathering together unto the Lord (out of sectarianism and darkness) of the Lord's jewels, the elect whose eyes of understanding have not yet been opened to present truth. These calamities, which will overthrow the faith of some, will stir up the truly consecrated to a closer investigation of the divine Word and plan, and thus prove helps not hindrances, even as all things work together for good to them that love God.
Now is the time to be on the alert to render assistance to this class of our "brethren" still asleep and in darkness but now awakening and needing sympathizing hearts and helping hands. Our late issue of the tract "Calamities – Why God Permits Them," may prove a help, an entering wedge to something more elaborate – to some volume of Millennial Dawn. Order these to use as sample copies, freely.
First, we have the love for the world. "God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son" to die for us. (John 3:16.) Second, in a much higher and special sense, "The Father himself loveth you" – you who have accepted Jesus Christ as your Redeemer, and who, in his name and strength and merit have consecrated yourselves to him – you are seeking now to walk not after the flesh but after the spirit. (John 16:27.) But that this special love of God can be lost in part, or eventually wholly, is clearly set forth by the Apostle's statement, "Keep yourselves in the love of God". (Jude 21.) If any, after having tasted of the good Word of God, the powers of the world to come, and being made partakers of the holy spirit, etc., shall [R3034 : page 197] walk after the flesh and not after the spirit, we may be sure that such will proportionately lose the love of God; – and, if he persist in this course, as a result will ultimately be "none of his." For, instead of loving such, who through their knowledge and attainments and disobedient course have become wicked, the Lord declares that he is "angry with the wicked," and that "all the wicked will he destroy." – Psa. 7:11; 145:20; Heb. 6:4-6; 10:26-29.
As sons of the Highest, who are seeking to be like unto our Father in heaven, and like unto the copy which he has set before us in his dear Son, our Lord, we are to have for the world in general that broad sympathetic pity and mercy-love which would delight in doing any and everything possible to be done for their uplifting, in accord with the divine program, in the divine time and order. Like our Father and our Elder Brother, we are to love the brethren "with a pure heart, fervently" – with sincerity. This love for the brethren is nothing like the love for the world. It is not the pity-love, nor mere generosity. It is far more; it is brotherly love. All of the children of God are brethren, as new creatures; all these brethren have hopes, ambitions, interests and promises linked together in the Lord Jesus and in the heavenly Kingdom in which they hope to share. All these brethren are joint-heirs, fellow-heirs one with the other and with the Lord. They are partners; their interests are mutual and co-ordinating.
Additionally, they have a special mutual sympathy of compassion; for while, as new creatures, they are rich in divine favor and promises, they all have serious weaknesses, according to the flesh – draw-backs; altho the Lord is not reckoning with them according to the flesh, but according to the spirit, the intention, the heart desires, nevertheless, they each and all have besetments arising from these weaknesses and imperfections of the earthly tabernacle, which cause them to "groan," and to sympathize one with the other in their groanings. As the Apostle says, "We which have the first-fruits of the spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the deliverance of our body" – the complete Church. Thus the sons of God have a further mutual sympathy and [R3034 : page 198] love and care for each other, an interest in each other, helpfulness toward each other, which is entirely beyond and above and outside of any feelings which could possibly be appreciated by the world or exercised toward it; – because the world has no such conflict between the old nature and the new; no such covenant of sacrifice; no such acceptance in the Beloved; no such union of heart and purpose and aim and spirit. Oh, yes! the exhortation to love as brethren, fervently, is one which appeals to us specially.
But now we come to another point. Our love for the brethren cannot be exactly of the same measure and exactly of the same intensity or fervency toward all. There is something which guages or regulates it. What is it? It is that we love God and the glorious principles of righteousness, which are represented in his character; and we love our Lord Jesus from the same standpoint, as being the very exemplifications of all that is good, noble, true, just, generous, loving; and our love for the brethren must, of necessity, be in proportion as we find the brethren to be copies of our Lord. We do not mean copies in the flesh, but viewed from the Lord's standpoint; copies in spirit, copies in heart, copies in motive, copies in intention, copies in loving zeal for righteousness, truth, etc. Thus, as we grow in the love of God and in the love of Christ and in the love of the principles which they represent, we grow also in love toward all men and toward the brethren, but particularly toward those who are growing most in likeness to the Lord. This is not partiality; this is not doing to others different from what we should wish them to do to us. This is following the Lord Jesus' example; for we find that amongst his apostles, even, all of whom were chosen, there were three specially beloved; and of those three one is specially noted as "that disciple whom Jesus loved." He was specially loved, because he was specially lovable; and so with us and the brethren. We should love them all warmly, fervently, but of necessity with varying degrees of fervor, and the fervor should increase with each in proportion as we note his growth in heart-likeness to our Lord.
And if this be so, what shall we say of those who, after having come to a knowledge of the truth, and after having tasted and appreciated its goodness, fall away into sin? – of those who cease to walk after the spirit, and begin to walk after the flesh? Can our love for them burn with the same fervency as before? By no means; it should not do so. As the Apostle says in our text, we should make a difference. In doing so we are following the example of our Heavenly Father; for we have just noted that only by walking after the spirit can any of us keep ourselves in the love of God. Only by following the same course, therefore, should any be able to keep himself in the love of the brethren. Any deflection should bring corresponding loss of brotherly love and fellowship.
This making of a difference is really essential to the purity and progress of the Church. If we make no difference between those brethren who walk after the spirit and those who walk disorderly, or after the flesh, we are taking away the very premium and blessing which the Lord intended should go to those who walk after the spirit; and we are giving a premium, which the Lord did not intend should be given, to those who walk contrary to his Word, after the flesh. It is as much our duty to withdraw fellowship from those who are unworthy of it as it is our duty to grant fellowship, and that with fervency, to those whom we see to be walking in the footsteps of Jesus. We are not to think that it is love that is prompting us to take the wrong course of encouraging wrong-doers, – it is not love, but ignorance; and the remedy for ignorance is to learn of the Lord, from his Word and from his example.
The Apostle Paul calls our attention to our duty respecting the brethren, and how we should conduct ourselves toward them under varying circumstances, saying that faithful brethren should be esteemed very highly in love for their works' sake; that other brethren who are unruly should be warned; that those who are feeble in their mental comprehension of the truth should be strengthened; that those who are weak should be helped, supported; and that we should exercise patience toward all. – I Thess. 5:12-14.
We are at present specially referring to the proper attitude to be observed toward unruly brethren – they are not to be treated as those who are esteemed very highly in love for their works; otherwise they would be encouraged in being unruly. On the contrary they are to be warned, cautioned, – in love, truly, and with patience, but not with marks of the same love and esteem as tho they were walking orderly in the footsteps of Jesus and in harmony with the directions of his Word. The marks and evidences of our love and esteem must be sincere; and must be in proportion as we see in the brethren evidences of the right desires of heart, – to walk after the spirit of the truth. The Apostle Paul intimates how our disapproval ought to be shown, in cases which seem, in our judgment, to be of sufficient importance to demand a manifestation of disapproval.
Evidently the Apostle did not mean that the brethren should be watching each other for an occasion of fault-finding in every word and every act; but that, on the contrary, they should be so full of love one for the other that trivial matters would be entirely passed over, as merely of the weakness of the flesh, and not at all of intention, of the heart. The matters to be considered worthy of manifestations of disapproval and warning are, rather, those which are so open and manifest on the surface as to leave no room to question the fact that they are displeasing to the Lord, and injurious in their influence upon the brother or upon the household of faith. For instance, if the brother had been seen under the influence of liquor; if he had been heard to utter vile or otherwise improper language; if it were a matter of general knowledge that he was living in sin; these would be such grounds as we believe the Apostle had in mind. But evidently the Apostle had no intention of cultivating a spirit of fault-finding and judging one another as respects the heart and private affairs, – use of time or money, etc. These belong to our individual stewardship [R3034 : page 199] and none should endeavor to interfere with the proper liberties of conscience and conduct which the Lord has granted to each. The Apostle is very stringent in his condemnation of such judging of one another, which so often leads to roots of bitterness, misunderstanding, disfellowship, etc., and which, as the old leaven, should be purged out of our hearts and lives. – Rom. 14:10,13.
But now, for those who "obey not our word," the apostolic Scriptural directions in respect to their conduct, etc., is "note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed." Nevertheless, knowing the tendency of the fallen mind to go from one extreme to another, either of too great leniency or of too great severity, the apostle continues, "Yet count him not an enemy, but admonish as a brother." (2 Thess. 3:13-15.) To admonish as a brother does not mean to denounce roundly and severely; it means to admonish in a spirit of love, gentleness, meekness, patience, and with a sincere desire to help the brother to see the fault which we are certain exists, and which we are sure is not evil surmising on our part.
The Apostle John shows us that this matter of distinguishing as between brethren that are to be esteemed and brethren that are to be warned, appertains not merely to conduct but also to doctrinal matters. Yet we may be sure that he does not mean that we are to disfellowship a brother merely because of some differences of view on non-essential questions. We may be sure that he does mean his words to apply strictly and only to the fundamentals of the doctrine of Christ: for instance, faith in God; [R3035 : page 199] faith in Jesus as our Redeemer; faith in the promises of the divine Word. These will be marks of a "brother," if supported by Christian conduct, walking after the spirit of the truth; – even tho the brother might have other views which would differ from ours in respect to certain features of the plan of God not so clearly and specifically set forth in the Scriptures. But for those whom we recognize as being doctrinally astray from the foundation principles of Christ, the Apostle intimates that very drastic measures are appropriate; – not persecutions, nor railing; not bitter and acrimonious disputes; not hatred, either open or secret; but a proper showing of our disfellowship with the false doctrines held and taught by them; a proper protection, so that our influence shall not be in any manner or degree used to uphold his denial of the fundamentals of the Gospel. This drastic course is outlined by the Apostle in these words: "If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine [confessing Christ to have come into the world, in the flesh, to redeem our race, etc.] receive him not into your house, neither bid him God-speed; for he that biddeth him God-speed is partaker of his evil deeds." – 2 John 10,11.
But, as our text intimates, we are to use discretion, judgment, – "and of some have compassion, making a difference." Some we may recognize as being merely entrapped of the Adversary, either in sin or in false doctrine, as the case may be, and not wilfully, intelligently, of their own volition. Toward such, still maintaining an attitude of firmness, we are nevertheless to express freely our trust that they are only temporarily wrong; and to seek to restore them, either doctrinally or in respect to their perverse moral course, to the position of fellowship with the Lord and with all the brethren who are in fellowship with him. Others we are to "save with fear, pulling them out of the fire." We may be obliged to speak very plainly to them; we may be obliged to tear open and expose before their eyes the sores of their own immoral course, showing them, as the case may be, the grossness of the sin or the grossness of the error in which they are involved; and doing so perhaps in strong language, if we realize that nothing short of this has availed to arouse them from their lethargy. In pulling them out of sin we are "pulling them out of the fire" – out of the Second Death – as the Apostle James says, speaking of this same class: "Let him know that he who converteth a sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death" – a brother who is a sinner, a brother, he explains, who has "erred from the truth." – James 5:19,20.
Finally, we remark that the dealing of the brethren with the disorderly is not to be in the nature of a punishment; for it is not with us to punish. "Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord." Our warnings or reproofs or withdrawals of fellowship, are to be merely in the nature of correctives, with a view, as the Apostle says, to the restoring of such an one. "Ye that are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted"; – if not in the same manner, possibly in some other manner, in which you are weaker. – Gal. 6:1.
As to what would be a sufficiency of evidence of repentance and reformation, each will require great wisdom and grace to determine. The heart in which brotherly love dwells richly, the heart which loves righteousness and hates iniquity, the heart which realizes its own imperfections, and that it is acceptable only through the Beloved and the New Covenant – that heart will rejoice at the first evidences of contrition and repentance on the part of the disorderly brother. If very full of love, his heart may go out to him almost too quickly; he may need to restrain himself; especially if it be a second or a third offense of the kind, or the circumstances otherwise very grievous. It will be apparently his duty to look for works in harmony with the repentance, and to wait to see some demonstration, in the nature of restitution for wrong done, or such an open and radical change of conduct as will give evidence that the heart has returned to its loyalty to God, to the truth, and to righteousness.
The erring brother, truly repentant, will not be averse to giving such evidences, nor consider it unreasonable that his professed reformation shall be thus attested. Indeed, we may expect that such will feel so humbled in respect to his attitude, and the disgrace which he may have brought upon the cause, that he will feel disposed of himself, either to remain absent for a while from the company of the brethren, in penitence, or, if acceptable to their company, he will feel disposed to take a back seat – [R3035 : page 200] a very humble position amongst the brethren. And if the repentant offender had occupied the position of a leader in the company, humility on his part, no less than discretion on the part of the brethren, would seem to indicate that he should not be restored to any official or leading position in the congregation for a considerable time, – until ample evidence had been given of the sincerity of his reformation.
But we close as we began, by urging that facts, evil deeds or evil doctrines, and not evil surmisings, knowledge, and not rumors, are the bases of Scriptural disfellowship. Hence the necessity for the observance of the Lord's rule. (Matt. 18:15.) While we are not to close our eyes to wrong in a brother, love will refuse to keep picking to find fault where none is openly apparent. And if fault is apparently discovered it is not to be "discussed among the brethren," but as the Lord directs should be taken direct to the offender by the discoverer and not so much as mentioned to others unless offender refuse to hear; – refuses to correct the fault. Oh, how much trouble would be saved, how many mistakes and heart-aches avoided if this rule were strictly followed!
Three routes led from Egypt toward Canaan, and the Lord chose for his people the most roundabout way of the three: he had in view from the first, their need of training. Their long bondage had made them servile and weak, lacking in self-reliance in the new way and fearful that their leader, in whom they trusted remarkably, might yet prove incompetent for their deliverance. What a resemblance to all this we find in the spiritual Israelites! when first leaving the world and its rudiments – although trusting in Christ, our fully accepted Leader, how apt we are to feel fearful of our ability, even under his guidance, to gain the promised glorious deliverance from sin and its slavery!
The first disappointment in the journey was when the supply of water which they were carrying became exhausted and they had reached the waters of Marah (bitter) and found them brackish and unfit to drink; their disappointment was intense and they murmured against Moses. He in turn cried unto the Lord for help, and in response was shown a tree which being cast into the waters purified them. This was the first lesson of trust, and the Lord impressed it upon them as such. (Ex. 15:25,26.) This experience was followed by a joyful one when their journey brought them to Elim, to its many water-springs and its palm groves, where they rested. Similarly the spiritual Israelite is not long out of Egypt before he is permitted to have trying experiences; and seeking refreshment he perhaps finds bitter disappointments, corresponding to the waters of Marah. The first impulse of the beginner in this way will probably be in the nature of murmuring which, whether so intended or not, is a reflection upon the wisdom and guidance of our Leader. The lesson to be learned is perfect trust: to look to the Lord to turn our bitter disappointments into profitable lessons. As Moses purified the waters of Marah, so our still mightier Leader can make out bitter experiences sweet if we will but trust him. Then to us also comes a season of rest and refreshment, an Elim condition. The Lord does not permit us to have bitterness and trials continually, lest we should become thoroughly discouraged. He leads us sometimes by still waters, restoring our soul, refreshing and resting us in his grace, and these experiences rightly received and producing in us thankfulness and appreciation, tend to make us stronger for the further journey and lessons in the wilderness school of the present life.
But evidently the lessons at Marah and Elim were not sufficient for Israel; they had not yet learned to trust the Lord, nor, that murmuring was an improper course; and so we find them murmuring again that Moses had led them out into the wilderness, away from the flesh-pots and leeks and onions of Egypt, to perish of hunger in the wilderness. How much more appropriate it would have [R3036 : page 200] been had they said to themselves, The Lord through Moses is our leader, and we will trust in him. Let us pray unto the Lord our God that he will supply all our needs according to the abundance of his wisdom and grace and power. However, they were not sufficiently advanced to take such a reasonable position, and were, therefore, infantile of disposition, so merely gave a wail of despair and disappointment. But the Lord was gracious and patient, and although he upbraided and instructed them respecting improprieties of their course, he, nevertheless, answered their wail as he would have answered their more appropriate petition for "things needful."
It was necessary that the Israelites should learn the lesson of their complete dependence upon the Lord – the lesson of trust – hence the Lord did not [R3036 : page 201] prepare for them the bounties of manna and quails until they felt their need. Had these been given without their need being first felt, no doubt the Lord's bounty would have been considered as merely a part of his responsible duty; whereas, having learned of their need, they were the better prepared to appreciate the provision, and also to realize its miraculous source. So it is with the spiritual Israelites in respect to spiritual necessities, encouragements, food, sustenance: they are permitted to feel their needs, and to ask that they may receive spiritual nutriment freely.
That the lesson might be the more impressed, the Lord first explained to Moses what he was about to do, and that there was a lesson to the people in connection with it; subsequently Moses and Aaron laid the promise before the people – that the Lord would give them flesh to eat that very evening; and that beginning with the next morning God would provide them with bread from heaven. They properly took no credit for this to themselves, but on the contrary, appealed to the people that they did wrong in murmuring against them as their leaders, and assuring them that they were really murmuring against the Lord their real leader. Had Moses and his assistant Aaron, and not the Lord, been their leaders, they would have taken great risks indeed in coming out, even from bondage, into the wilderness; because however well-intentioned Moses might have been, he was incompetent to supply the necessities for so vast a multitude. Evidently the people believed when they left Egypt that the Lord was leading and that Moses was merely his representative, and the fact that they now murmured against Moses and not against the Lord implied a lack of faith and a lack of trust, a disposition to fear that Moses was leading them on his own responsibility. Moses, on the other hand, meekly ignores his own relationship to the work, and loyally points them to the Lord as being the one who had led them thus far, and who was thoroughly competent to supply all their needs and to perform toward them all of his good promises. Spiritual Israelites are similarly to keep in mind the fact that they are not following human leaders; that the real Director of the course of spiritual Israel, the real Leader, is the Lord; and that men, at the very most, are his honored representatives. In cases of disappointment of expectations we are to remember that God was and is our real Leader, and are not to doubt, not to murmur, but to learn the lesson of trust, of confidence, and to cry unto the Lord for further deliverances.
Human nature is vividly illustrated in the cry of the Israelites against Moses; their plaint was "Would to God we had died by the hand of the Lord in the land of Egypt, when we sat by the flesh pots, when we did eat bread to the full! for ye have brought us forth into this wilderness to kill this whole assembly with hunger." They forgot all about the bitter bondage of Egypt; the making of bricks without straw; the task masters; and how they had cried out to the Lord for deliverance; they remembered only some of the pleasant things – and we are not to expect, under all the circumstances narrated, that they had any superabundance in the matter of food. So now the discontented mind fails to see the leadings of God's providences, – leaves him out of its calculations, – forgets the exceeding great and precious promises set before us in the Scriptures, for the time thinks only of the things given up. How apt are all to remember the pleasures and gratifications of the sinful condition, and to forget its burdens and heartaches and disappointments!
All Israel, probably, was assembled, in its representatives, the chief men of all the tribes, and these matters were explained, and the lesson still further impressed, by the manifestation to them of the brightness of the Lord's glory in a cloud. The lesson of trust was being impressed; they were to know the Lord as their Leader and that all the provisions for their necessities were from him, although they were announced to them by the Lord's servants. This lesson, too, is for us.
After these instructions had prepared them, the quails came and the manna. A strong wind from the sea brought quail in immense numbers, which, wearied with the journey, were unable to fly high and thus came within the reach of the Israelites, many of them falling from sheer exhaustion. This was no less a miracle than if natural means had not been used in connection with it; the lesson of trust which it taught was that God is abundantly able to control the natural means in fulfilment of his promises. Travelers in that region tell us that such occurrences are not uncommon; one of these says, "I have myself found the ground in Algeria, in the month of April, covered with quail for an extent of many acres, at daybreak, where the previous evening there had not been one."
The provision of the manna was a miracle of another kind: wholly aside from the natural order of things, so far as we may be able to discern. The manna fell early in the morning and could be gathered after the dew had disappeared; it was evidently deposited in or from the dew by some power of God working probably in harmony with the natural laws of chemistry, not yet thoroughly understood. The grains were small and white and required painstaking labor to gather; nor was it then ready for use, but required to be either boiled or baked to prepare it as food. (vs. 23). Everything connected with the manna indicates not only that it was a most stupendous miracle, but a continuous one – lasting from this time for forty years; until Israel had entered the land of Canaan and ate of the old corn of the land. Again, it was miraculous that a double portion fell on the sixth day of the week and none on the seventh; and that it would spoil if kept over any night except the one following the sixth day.
By these two miracles Israel was taught the great lesson of confidence in God, – that to him and him alone they were to look as their Leader. And so to spiritual Israel the Lord gives providential leadings, teaching them the same lesson of trust in himself. To us this applies not only in respect to earthly food, in supply of our physical necessities, [R3036 : page 202] but also to the heavenly food and the supply of all our spiritual necessities. It teaches the same lesson that is expressed in our Lord's prayer, our Golden Text; namely, "Give us this day our daily bread." The Lord's people are to recognize God's providences daily; to walk by faith, not by sight. We see but the one step before us, and that sometimes indistinctly in the light of the lamp of the divine Word; its more distinct utterances are in respect to the ultimate end of the Lord's leadings; – that he has accepted us, as his people, under the Mediator of the New Covenant; that he is leading us by him through present experiences, trials and testings, in order that we may be made meet for the inheritance of the saints in light; – that he will continue to lead us if we will continue to follow, and will ultimately bring all of his faithful into the promised land, the heavenly Canaan.
The Lord's supply of our earthly needs is perhaps best represented by the provision of the quails. He overrules natural affairs to provide us the things needful, sometimes more and sometimes less abundantly. And as the Israelites doubtless ate of the quails not only at the time of their gathering, but preserved some of them for future use, so we in respect to earthly things are to use the things of this world as not abusing them. We are to use them wisely, remembering that while they come to us in the ordinary course of life, they are, nevertheless, God's provision and to be used with frugality and judgment, to his praise. If the supply is abundant, we are to be thankful, and if it is deficient we are to trust. We are to learn the lesson of trust; and that after having done what we are able to do in the way of providing for our necessities, we can safely leave all else to him with whom we have to do, – our Father in Heaven.
The lesson from the manna seems more particularly to illustrate our spiritual supplies, which come wholly from above. The manna is called in the Scriptures "The corn of heaven," "the bread of the mighty" – "angels' food." (Psa. 78:24,25; I Cor. 10:3.) Our Lord interprets the manna as a symbol of himself, – the Truth – of which a man may eat and never die. Nevertheless, this bread, although given freely, demands labor on the part of those who would appropriate it and obtain from it spiritual sustenance; it must be gathered, and it must be prepared as food. We cannot expect to come to Christ and to receive in an instant and without effort on our own part all the gracious mercy, blessing and truth that is in him. The truth is God's gift, to be sure; but it is so given as to require the putting forth of energy on our part, which will demonstrate our need, our hunger, our appreciation of this "bread of life." Neither can we receive enough in one day or one month or one year to sustain us perpetually; we need to come to the Lord daily, and to receive from him through his Word and spirit the life-giving forces by which we may be sustained day by day in the trials of life, – and by which we may grow strong [R3037 : page 202] in the Lord and in the power of his might.
Lord, evermore give us this bread! – day by day, until, entering into the antitypical Canaan, the heavenly Kingdom, we shall have no further need of this daily supply, but be changed, perfected as new creatures in Christ Jesus in the First Resurrection!
Another incident worthy of notice occurred about this time: Jethro, Moses' father-in-law, came to meet him here, bringing Moses' family (Ex. 18); moreover, the Lord used this man for giving Moses some valuable suggestions respecting the government of the Israelites; and Moses was humble enough to receive such instruction as of the Lord, notwithstanding the fact that it came from an Ethiopian, one who was not of the seed of Abraham, and who did not join himself to them. Thus God sometimes even now uses outsiders to give suggestions and lessons to his covenant people; and wise is the man or woman humble enough to receive instruction from any quarter – when found to be in [R3037 : page 203] harmony with the divine will. The advice given to Moses, – that he should no longer attempt to be the law-giver for the people in all the minutiae of their affairs, but a sort of supreme judge, and Mediator between God and the people, was a wise suggestion, evidently from the Lord, by whomsoever given. So also was the next suggestion, that the people be organized according to their tribes and families, and that each tribe should thus have, in itself, its own proper servants and officers and judges for minor details. Of this arrangement some one has said, "This [arrangement] became the basis (Kalisch) of Alfred the Great's Saxon constitution, and thus the basis of the constitution of modern England and America" – a government of the people, by the people, through their own representatives.
The transaction at Mt. Sinai was so arranged as deeply to impress all who were present. It was to be another lesson for the people respecting God, his right to control them and his will concerning them. Boundary marks were fixed around the mountain, which was declared holy because of the Lord's presence in it; a man or beast trespassing upon it was subject to death: meantime the mountain shook with earthquakes, and fire and smoke, thunders and lightnings, and trumpet-like sounds and voices manifested to the Israelites the importance of the event at hand. But if the Lord thus impressed them by the solemnity of their surroundings with the importance of the covenant which he was about to make with them, his message to them, introducing the commandments, was very gracious and gentle. In this preamble he reminds them that he, the Lord, had brought them out of the land of Egypt: they had by this time gotten beyond any desire to return to Egypt; they were learning to trust in the Lord, to realize his care and protection and deliverance from enemies and from want.
Meantime, the people, in obedience to the Lord's direction, had purified themselves, their clothing and their camp; and, as directed, they were endeavoring to abstain from all impurities, as a prerequisite to their meeting with and entering into covenant relationship with the Lord of Hosts. The spiritual Israelite also has something analogous to this. First he must realize the justice of God and the greatness of God, and his own unworthiness and weaknesses; he must see something of the terrors of Sinai before he will be in the proper condition to receive the favors which our Lord desires to bestow. Properly, he too will seek to purge himself so far as possible from all filth of the flesh; properly also, he will seek a mediator, and as the Israelites said to Moses, so will he say to Christ, "Entreat the Lord for us, that we may speak to thee, and speak thou to him." We realize our need of a mediator through whom the Word of the Lord will come to us, and by whose merit and grace we shall be helped in satisfying the demands of the divine law.
But a greater lesson is included in this type. In this still larger view Moses typified Christ Jesus the Head, and the Church, his body, complete; in this larger view Israel typifies so many of the world of mankind as are desirous of entering covenant relationship with God; in this larger view the fire and smoke and voices and trumpets and earthquakes of Mt. Sinai represent the great time of trouble and manifestations of divine power which are to come in the end of this Gospel age to convince the world of its need of the Lord's help and to make the world ready to enter into the New Covenant. In this larger view the three days of purification, setting bounds about the Mount, etc., represent the period of this Gospel age from the first advent down to the glorification of the Church – typified in the going up of Moses into the mountain, to be the representative of the people, to receive the Lord's Law and to bring it down to the people. Thus counting the matter according to the days of the week, – a thousand years to each day, – our Lord's first advent occurred early on the fifth day; – the fifth day has passed, the sixth day has passed, and we are now in the early morning of the seventh or "Millennial" day; and it is in this third day "early in the morning" that the antitypical Moses [Christ and the Church] is to ascend into the mountain, Kingdom of the Lord. It is in this third day, and very shortly now we believe, that the great and terrible manifestations of divine dignity and majesty are to be made known to the world in general.
This is in full accord with the statement of the Apostle referring to this time, and to this same type. (Heb. 12:22-29.) For some time the Lord has been dealing with the world with a view to the bringing in of this New Covenant. Two (thousand year) days ago we approached the mountain, the Kingdom of God; there God, through the antitype of Moses, began to mark out the bounds of the Kingdom class, who might and who might not approach, come into the Kingdom. From that time the proclamation of purification has been made, the people being commanded to cleanse themselves; or, as the Apostle again says, "The times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent: because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness, by that man whom he hath ordained" – Christ. – Acts 17:30,31.
The instruction to purify and to get ready has been more or less heard and more or less heeded throughout the world; and now, shortly, we may expect the marshaling of the people as described in Ex. 19:17-20, so graphically described by the Apostle as picturing the events with which the present age is to close: "Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven." He explains that in the great changes now at hand the transformation will be a complete one, which will thoroughly shake out and remove everything in connection with the civil, religious and social affairs of man that is not in harmony with the laws of the Kingdom – the Millennial Kingdom. Only the faithful who shall constitute the Kingdom-class shall stand the shaking of this time. – Heb. 12:26-28. [R3038 : page 204]
The law delivered to Moses was upon two tables of stone. Although not so specified, it is a generally accepted opinion that the first four commandments were upon one stone and the remaining six upon the other. This would make about an even division as respects the matter; but more particularly it divides as between the duties of Israel toward God and toward men. Although the Decalogue (the law in ten commandments) was given to fleshly Israel and not to spiritual Israel, nevertheless, the latter may learn from it some very valuable lessons respecting the divine will. God does not address the house of Sons as he addresses the house of servants, – ours are not commands as to what we shall not do; ours is one command respecting our duty toward God, and it is so comprehensive that it takes in all that was said to Israel in the ten commandments, and as we shall presently see, much more.
(1) "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." The thought is not that they were prohibited from having other gods before Jehovah, in the sense of superiority, implying that they might have some gods on an equality with or inferior to him. Rather, the thought is that they should have no other gods in his presence – that so long as they recognized Jehovah as their God, none others were to be recognized in any sense or degree.
(2) The Second Commandment is an elaboration of the first, lest the people might say, 'We will have no other gods, but we will make for us images to represent our one God so that they may help the mind through the eye. But the Lord prohibits this, and we can readily see the wisdom of the prohibition. Many Christian people have felt that they could pray before pictures of the Lord or while looking at a crucifix, better than without such an aid: indeed we know that Greek and Roman Catholics throughout the world (nearly three times as numerous as those termed Protestants) continually use images, pictures, beads, etc., as reminders and helps to the mind and faith; but we believe that the effect has been seriously injurious; the tendency downward rather than upward, and that this, to some extent, accounts for the fact that the races using images, etc., are inferior to those not using them, but practicing the higher and purer worship of God which recognizes no intermediary, no crucifix, no image, no picture, but communes directly with the Lord.
The Gospel Church has a still higher thought than was given to the Jews on this subject. Our Master's words suggest that even fathers and mothers and wives and children might intrude upon our love and devotion and take the place of the Lord in our affections; and that this must not be permitted by any who would be of the elect. In comparison we must love less than God all other beings, so that the first strength of our love and devotion may be given to our Creator. "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, mind, soul and strength." This would also include the thought that wealth, or self or ambition must not be permitted to take the chief place in those who would be the Lord's. Many seem to be in danger along these lines. We cannot read their hearts, but the vast majority not only of the world, but of those who profess devotion to the Lord, are bowing themselves down to idols of wealth, social ambition, personal ambition, etc., and serving these with all the strength and time and means and knowledge which they have consecrated to the Lord. We are not saying a word against the procuring of "things needful" in a manner "honest in the sight of all men;" we refer to something beyond this, – the attempt to lay up riches, honor, etc., with the time and knowledge and talents consecrated to the Lord. Is not this idol worship from the standpoint of the New Covenant?
The Lord announces himself as a jealous God who wants all of our affections, all of our confidence, our entire trust. He wants that we should be so fully in accord with him that his will shall be supreme in all the affairs of life. This is not to be considered selfishness on the part of the Almighty; because this, under his overruling providences, means to his creatures the largest amount of happiness, the largest amount of success in the duties and affairs of the present life, and the largest amount of preparation for the blessings which the Lord has prepared for and promised to those who love him.
The declaration that the Lord will visit the iniquities of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of those that hate him, and show mercy unto thousands of them that love him and keep his commandments, does not represent anger, bitterness, resentment, selfishness; – rather these words express the law of nature, under which in wisdom God has placed humanity. Every one who uses his mind and his talents in accord with the Lord's will, brings a blessing not only upon himself but extends, in a natural way, that blessing to his children and theirs. On the contrary, those who live contrary to the Lord, who mind earthly things, become more and more "earthly", "sensual," "devilish," and surely transmit these groveling and deficient tendencies to their children, influencing and injuring them unto the third and fourth generation, in a perfectly natural manner.
The Apostle points out to us that this is the secret of the extreme degradation that we see about us in various parts of the world today. There was a start to all this degradation. Of course the original start to degradation and sin was in the disobedience of father Adam, and in the death-sentence upon him. But in proportion as people since have disregarded the Lord's will and arrangement and laws, so far as they knew them, in the same proportion have they injured and degraded themselves and their posterity. The Apostle's words are, "When they knew God they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and to fourfooted beasts and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, [R3038 : page 205] to dishonor their own bodies between themselves: who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshiped and served the creature more than the Creator." – Rom. 1:21-31.
It has been suggested that the original of vs. 6 might be rendered a thousand generations, and that this would imply a continuation of present conditions of imperfection and need for divine mercy for a period of at least 20,000 years, instead of one thousand – the Millennium. We disagree with such an interpretation entirely, suggesting that in a very proper sense of the word every child is generated, and hence might not improperly be spoken of as a generation. This is in accord with the translation given in the common version which we approve.
The command to the Israelite that he should not take God's name in vain, did not signify that he should not name the name of the Lord, yet going to an extreme in the matter the Israelites avoided the covenant name of God, – Jehovah. The expression, "in vain," evidently signified lightly, frivolously or in any other than a sacred or reverential manner. No such command is needed by the "new creature in Christ." How could he willingly or intentionally speak lightly or irreverently of his Heavenly Father, after being begotten of the holy spirit? To have a will to speak otherwise than reverently would be sure indication that he had not been begotten of the holy spirit; – that he was a bastard and not a son. However there is a sense in which we may well take a lesson from this command to Israel, a sense in which it is applicable to spiritual as well as natural Israel. As a people Israel had taken God's name, – they had professed themselves to be God's people, under his guidance and leadership; it was their duty to see to it that this should not be a vain, empty, or meaningless covenant, or agreement; that it should be carried out to the full. So with us spiritual Israelities, we have entered into a covenant with God; we have named the name of the Lord upon us, calling ourselves his people, claiming him as our Father, and confessing Jesus as our Redeemer. It is proper for us to remember that this solemn profession or obligation or covenant is not a vain, frivolous matter; that it should be entered into with solemnity, and with full appreciation of its importance and of our responsibilities under it. The Lord will not hold us guiltless, if, having taken his name upon us and receiving his benediction as his children, we then either sin wilfully or in any degree reflect dishonor upon him whose name we bear.
The fourth commandment designates the seventh day of the week for rest, not only for the head of the family but for every member of it, including servants and cattle and visitors. It was made the duty of the head of the family to see to it that this divine command was carried out in his home, for the blessing of himself as well as for the comfort and good of those under his care. The new law, Love, the basis of the New Covenant into which we spiritual Israelites, as the "house of sons," have entered, has no command respecting the seventh day of the week, nor indeed respecting any day. If it was good that the Israelites should rest, would it not be good also that we should rest one day in the seven? Yes, surely; on general principles it is advisable that all men observe such a rule of physical rest from toil one day in seven. Is there any reason why we should object to the seventh day of the week for such a rest? None whatever so far as the Christian is concerned.
Being left without a specific law on the subject, he is at liberty to make such arrangements for his rest as will be most profitable to him under the general law of Love. Being without a specific law on the subject Christian people, desiring to have one day of seven for worship, gradually fixed upon the first day of the week as being the one which to them would have the largest meaning, because of its being the Memorial of the Lord's resurrection, and hence, the Memorial of the Christian's joy and faith and hope with respect to the eternal life promised through our Redeemer. Do you consider the choice of the first day of the week a good one? We [R3039 : page 205] certainly are glad that throughout the civilized lands the first day of the week is so observed; we are glad, too, that it is not observed according to the Jewish law, merely as a day of physical rest, but rather that it is much used by Christians as a day of fellowship of spirit and growth in grace, knowledge and love.
But why did the Lord not put in the law of the New Covenant some mention respecting some day of the week, first, seventh or some other day? We answer because the entire law is a "Law of Liberty," – designed to test by its liberty those to whom it is given. It leaves each one unfettered that he may the more abundantly show the kind and extent of his devotion to the Lord. Instead of demanding one day of the seven the Law of Love really controls, regulates our entire time; seven days in the week we are to love the Lord our God with all our heart, mind, soul and strength; and seven days of the week we are to love our neighbor as ourselves; and seven days in the week we are to rest also – rest from our own works – rest by faith in the finished work of Christ – rest in the love of God – rest in the peace of God which passeth all understanding, ruling in our hearts continually. The seventh day commanded to the Jew as his rest day, while it was beneficial to him, was also typical: it typified the Christians' rest of faith, this heart relationship to the Lord, in which, as children of God, all such may continually rejoice – every day and every night. So the Apostle explains the matter (Heb. 4:4-11), declaring further that there is a still larger rest remaining; namely, the eternal life condition to be entered into on the great seventh day, – the Millennial age.
Some have suggested that in the expression "Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy" the word remember implies that the Sabbath day had been previously instituted and commanded; and that this was merely a reminder of it. From this we dissent. There was no law given previous to Israel's arrival at Sinai; there was no mention of the keeping of a Sabbath previous to Israel's arrival [R3039 : page 206] at the wilderness of Sin of which Mt. Sinai is the center. It was instituted in connection with the giving of the manna. (Exod. 16:23.) We are not to read into the Lord's Word what is not there. The words of the text signify that Israel should be careful continually to remember this injunction put upon them, respecting the seventh day, and that thenceforth it should be kept holy, sacred, free from work, as unto the Lord. All this is implied further in the declaration of the 11th verse respecting God's having rested on the seventh day; and the explanation is that similarly, now, in the giving of the law, God was blessing the seventh day and honoring it as a reminder of the six days of creation, and the seventh day in which God rested from creative work.
We have heretofore explained why the days of creation should not be understood as literal days of twenty-four hours each, but as larger days of seven thousand years each; and this subject we hope to treat still more at length (D.V.) in Millennial Dawn, Vol. 6. We merely note here, that the seventh day which God observed was one of these larger days of seven thousand years; and that it began just after the creation of our first parents and that since then God has rested from any creative work, and has merely permitted, as far as earth is concerned, that things already created should take their course; – many of them a downward course, as in the case of man in his fall from primeval perfection into sin and death. The Apostle explains that God is still resting, and waiting for something, – leaving a further work for the Lord Jesus to do, – the work of redemption and restitution. The redemptive work he has already accomplished; the restitution work he will begin as soon as the election of his Church – the "bride," the "Lamb's wife" is accomplished. Meantime God rests, leaving the matter in the hands of him whom he hath ordained to be "Lord of all," and to whom he has decreed all things shall be subject, for the purposes of restitution, – so far as possible. And as God is thus resting and leaving the matter in the hands of Christ, so all who come to a knowledge of the truth, to a knowledge of God's plan, are to rest similarly, – leaving the case in the hands of our glorious Redeemer and seeking so far as we may be able, not to direct him, not to do the work for him, but to co-operate with him in the work which he is now doing in selecting the Church; and by and by, to co-operate as he has promised we may, in the work of blessing and restoring all the families of the earth who will hear his voice and become obedient to his law.
Question. – In what sense can the statement in Job 19:26 be true, since we understand he will not have power to "see God" as a human being?
Answer. – The passage might be understood in two different ways: (a) As an expression of Job's trust in the Lord that notwithstanding the serious malady with which he was afflicted, and the apparent utter destruction of his skin, by a loathsome disease, yet he hoped for recovery and that he should yet praise the Lord in the flesh and in health. Or (b) it may be understood to refer to a future life and Job's confidence that though his sickness might result in death, complete dissolution, yet it did not mean in him an everlasting extinction. As previously stated, God would call and he would answer in his flesh. His seeing God in the flesh should not be understood as that which is impossible, of which our Lord says, "No man hath seen God at any time," and of which the Apostle says, "Whom no man hath seen nor can see." It should be understood in the way in which it is commonly used today; viz., that God's people see him in his works, as we sometimes say, "I see God's hand in this." And again, we are informed that "all flesh shall see the salvation of God." And again, "Look unto me and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth."
Question. – Why do you quote and comment on Luke 22:43,44, when old MSS. omit these verses?
Answer. – Because while some old MSS. omit these verses, we find that others do not. If you will look in the foot-notes of Tischendorf Testament, you will find that "S2" omits these verses: the S represents the Sinaitic MS. but the 2 represents a secondary or altered reading of that MS. From this it is evident that the Sinaitic MS. originally contained these verses; but some later hand obliterated them, thus making this MS. to concur with the Vatican and Alexandrine. On the whole we are inclined to think these verses genuine, partly from the fact that they are in old MSS. and partly from the fact that the incident narrated is only what we should expect under the circumstances.
Question. – In what sense of the word are we "changed from glory to glory," even as by the spirit of the Lord? – 2 Cor. 3:18.
Answer. – After we are justified by faith we are called to the adoption of sonship; and after we accept that call by making a full consecration of ourselves to the Lord we are made recipients of the spirit of his holiness, the spirit of adoption into his family, and after we receive this spirit of adoption we are guided by it and taught by it respecting the things pleasing and acceptable to our heavenly Father; we are, so to speak, under this influence moulded and fashioned into the likeness of his dear Son our Lord Jesus. This moulding and fashioning we are required to do to a considerable extent for ourselves, but are stimulated to such transformation of character by the light of the knowledge of the divine character which we behold in God's Word. This transforming of our characters is not instantaneous but gradual – we grow more and more like Christ, we are changed from glory to glory in our minds, our wills, our hearts, our characters – this change will not be complete until our resurrection, when we shall be like him and see him as he is, and share his glory to the full. An article on this subject will be found in our issue of March 1, 1893.
Dear Brother Russell: – On the occasion of your last visit to our house, you lost on the floor the check you had received for your satchel, etc. at the hotel opposite the depot. I felt sure you would be able to get them without the check, yet I concluded to return it and learn positively that you had procured them. While on this errand I met a man I hadn't seen for years, whom formerly I had known well. I was compelled to introduce myself to him, because he said he couldn't recognize me. When I made myself known he was astounded and said, "Why, what have you been doing to yourself? You look younger than you did when I saw you last, which is more than ten years ago; besides you have lost that care worn-look you had, and now appear so much happier. What has caused such a change in you?" I answered "Good news! The influence of the truth causing me to cast all my care on Him." He said, "I would like to hear something that would be the means of making so great a change in me." I said, "You can hear it if you have ears to hear." I then questioned him as to whether he was still a Christian, and he told me he was seeking diligently to know what was truth, had once left the Methodist Church and attached himself to the Advent denomination, but soon learned he had gained nothing by the change and returned to the Methodists, only to be as dissatisfied as ever. He was really anxious to hear the details of my experience, and seemed glad that I didn't have to go outside God's Word to get the message of comfort. I then told him how MILLENNIAL DAWN came to me and opened the eyes of my understanding, enabling me to realize the truth that God is love, and showing me my privilege to be joint sacrificer with the Lord and co-laborer with him in this the greatest period of all time (thus far) – the harvest of the age. His interest was awakened, he was eager to get the book, even desiring to purchase one at once if I could tell him where to procure it. We were several blocks from Bro. Brown's. He went there with me and took away what I hope will be as great a treasure to him as it has been to me.
So you see, dear brother, the loss of your check, though it may have caused you some annoyance, occasioned that seemingly chance meeting and started another MILLENNIAL DAWN on its wonderful mission.
Two causes make the Washington folks very joyous now; viz., The early prospect of the Volunteer work, and the established fact that there will be a convention here in October. Bro. Fowler, our captain, told me a few days ago that he believed every one would engage in this work; – and why shouldn't we? If we appreciate the opportunity extended us by our dear Lord, we will not only delight to do his will, but will earnestly strive to do it in the most acceptable manner.
Experience has taught us that there is much to be learned; we have realized the necessity of being as "wise as serpents and as harmless as doves." A soft answer has many times turned away wrath; a quiet courteous manner has gained for us respect, and been the means of obtaining an audience with the person, for the printed sermon we have presented, that could not have been accomplished in a loud or boisterous way. To get into a contention, even for the truth, on these occasions diverts from the specific service. There is a time when silence is golden; it seems to me that while engaged in the Volunteer work is that time; the message we deliver will speak more eloquently than mortal tongue, for it is our Lord knocking at the door of the hearts of his people.
And now, Bro. Russell, I entreat you to make use of every opportunity to say to the brethren where ever you may go, to put forth earnest efforts to come to the Annual Convention in Washington, D.C., October 4th, 5th and 6th. Warm hearts will meet them here. We hope for a glorious time of help to the Church, not forgetting the nearly starved and blind and ignorant who are yet where we were once. May our Lord's blessing be on all efforts tending to make this convention a success and may it be with us in this as in all else, "God first," to his honor and glory through Jesus.
With love, I am your brother in the love and service of our Master.
Dear Brother Russell: – I know that your time is very much taken up; but I would love so to tell you of a dear Sister J__________, whom we met in P__________. She came into the DAWN Truths about 1890, and has been a TOWER reader since 1892. She said that in all her Christian life she had felt the need of "light," and that the DAWN truth didn't seem something new, but only the expression of something she has always wanted. She had no education at all, could barely read; and couldn't write. She said when she read the first DAWN, she had to spell out the words. But, notwithstanding, she said, "My heart just runs over with joy all the time, and please say to Brother Russell for me that he has made one poor ignorant old woman's life rich, oh, so rich! and that every word he has written I have read, and not only read, but lived on. May God bless him always!"
How often my own heart feels the blessedness this dear old sister speaks of.
Dear Brother Russell: – I have been wanting to write to you for some time, but have delayed knowing there are so many corresponding with you that your time must be fully occupied. I want to tell you, however, how I am getting along. It is now over four years since I obtained the first volume of MILLENNIAL DAWN. Since then I have obtained and read and reread the five volumes and the WATCH TOWER as well. The light that dawned upon me then has been growing brighter. It took me some time to grasp the truths of God's plan as I see it now. The orthodox (?) teachings were hard to eradicate, but I went to the "law and the testimony" and now I see "the more excellent way" shining out on almost every page of the Word. I purchased a number of vol. I, and loaned them to others that wanted them, also distributed the tracts and TOWERS you sent me. Many persons are interested in a measure; others reject the truth with scorn. I meet opposition from a number of sources, chiefly from the clergy, and especially the Church I formerly belonged to (Baptist). Sermons are preached on "hell," "the immortality of man," "the Holy Ghost," etc. I can thank God for this light he has given me of his Word (through your instrumentality) and smile amid the storm. It inspires me with more energy to use every opportunity to spread the truth.
I have been trying to study the Bible all through life, but found so many perplexities I hardly knew what to think about it, and when I went to the leaders for light, I was told "They are the deep things of God and not for us to understand." Now I can, in the language of the one Christ healed say, "Whereas I was blind, now I see," and I am thankful to my Heavenly Father that I have "eyes to see and ears to hear" the "glad tidings of great joy which shall be to all people."
One minister in this section (the French Missionary) has become quite interested. We can however look forward with joyful anticipation to the good time coming when "the blind eyes will be opened, and deaf ears will be unstopped."
page 209
July 1st
| VOL. XXIII. | JULY 15, 1902. | No. 14. |
'I will stand upon my watch, and set my foot upon the Tower, and will watch to see what He shall say unto me, and what answer I shall make to them that oppose me.' Hab. 2:1
Upon the earth distress of nations with perplexity: the sea and the waves (the restless, discontented) roaring: men's hearts failing them for fear and for looking forward to the things coming upon the earth (society): for the powers of the heavens (ecclestiasticism) shall be shaken. . . .When ye see these things come to pass, then know that the Kingdom of God is nigh at hand. Look up, lift up your heads, rejoice, for your redemption draweth nigh. – Luke 21:25-28, 32.
It stands free from all parties, sects and creeds of men, while it seeks more and more to bring its every utterance into fullest subjection to the will of God in Christ, as expressed in the Holy Scriptures. It is thus free to declare boldly whatsoever the Lord hath spoken; – according to the divine wisdom granted unto us, to understand. Its attitude is not dogmatical, but confident; for we know whereof we affirm, treading with implicit faith upon the sure promises of God. It is held as a trust, to be used only in his service; hence our decisions relative to what may and what may not appear in its columns must be according to our judgment of his good pleasure, the teaching of his Word, for the upbuilding of his people in grace and knowledge. And we not only invite but urge our readers to prove all its utterances by the infallible Word to which reference is constantly made, to facilitate such testing.
Those of the interested who, by reason of old age, or other infirmity or adversity, are unable to pay for the TOWER, will be supplied FREE, if they send a Postal Card each December, stating their case and requesting the paper. We are not only willing, but anxious, that all such be on our list continually.
The chiefest service we could commend, open to all who are unencumbered and in active use of their faculties, is the colporteur work. It is an honorable form of ministering the truth from house to house, as the apostles served. It is a service which the Lord seems to have blessed as much or more than any other for gathering the "wheat." It is apparent at once to all that to sell such books as the DAWNS at 25 cents each, cannot be for money-making: that it is merely another way of preaching the truth. No other religious books are sold at any such price. Indeed few subscription books sell for less than two to three dollars each. Any who can serve in this work are invited to write to us for "Hints to Colporteurs." [R3040 : page 210]
The friends are displaying great energy this year in the distribution of literature near Christian meeting places. We bid you all God-speed in this very effective preaching of the Gospel. Our first order for the special issues of our journal used this year was for 1,000,000 copies. Over one half of this quantity has already gone out to fill large requisitions and nearly 200,000 are on back orders waiting for the papers as fast as the printers can supply them. We hope to get caught up very soon now, and request that those who have sent us small orders for mail shipment exercise just a little more patience. "Let patience have her perfect work." We have just issued 400,000 more of these issues, so as to be ready for your later orders.
Meantime let those who have not been engaged in this branch of the service enquire of themselves whether or not they can afford to miss so grand an opportunity for showing forth the praises of him who has called us out of darkness into his marvellous light. Do you know of and are you using a better method of preaching the truth? "He that reapeth receiveth wages [joy and peace and blessing in the present life even] and gathereth fruit unto everlasting life."
A SCOTTISH READER of Zion's Watch Tower writes: – The month of May annually witnesses the great ecclesiastical meetings known as the General Assemblies of the Presbyterian Churches in Scotland. This year the Assemblies of the Established Church and of the Free Church (the latter consisting of those who did not enter the union between the former Free Church and the former United Presbyterian Church, now called in union the United Free Church) met in Edinburgh, the historic capital of the country, while the Assembly of the United Free Church was held in Glasgow. To readers of Dawn the principal interest in the voluminous discussions, extending over some ten days, will be in respect to the question of the "Higher Criticism" in connection with which there was a great debate in the U.F. Assembly at Glasgow on Friday, 23rd May. The matter arose in this way: Certain memorialists had called attention to the teachings of Professor George Adam Smith (one of the Professors of the Church) in a volume of lectures recently published by him, in which, they contended, views are set forth wholly subversive of the divine authority and authenticity of the Scriptures. The memorial had been remitted to the College Committee for consideration, and this committee, after deliberating, resolved unanimously to recommend that the Assembly should not take any action against Professor Smith. When this recommendation came before the Assembly for disposal extraordinary interest was taken in the proceedings, and the large St. Andrew's Hall was crowded all day. Rev. Dr. Kidd, Glasgow, submitted the report. Principal Rainy moved that the Assembly adopt the recommendation of the report to the effect "that it was not the duty of the Church to institute any process against Professor Smith in connection with his lectures recently published; but at the same time declared that they were not to be held as accepting or authorizing the critical theories therein set forth." The motion also called upon ministers and professors to take care that reverence for Holy Scripture should be conspicuously manifest in their writings.
In a long speech in support of the motion, Principal Rainy contended that the present was not a fitting time to enter into the large question that had been raised, and that a Committee of the Church could not satisfactorily deal with the matter. Neither he nor those associated with him had any desire to make things uncomfortable for Professor Smith. The Bible would live triumphantly through all facts established as facts, and all the consequences following from them. Professor Orr seconded. Dr. John Smith, Edinburgh, moved a long amendment, setting forth that the recommendation of the College Committee did not deal with the most serious matter raised by the memorialists, and that, in view of the manifest danger to the peace and prosperity of the [R3041 : page 211] Church arising directly from the intrusion of this critical controversy in its present form, the Assembly appoint a large and representative Committee to take account of the whole situation with a view to arriving at such conclusions as shall dispel anxiety and clear the testimony of the Church before the world. Dr. John McEwan, Edinburgh, seconded. Dr. Wells moved that the Assembly resolve to appoint a Committee to confer with Dr. George Adam Smith in the hope that the perplexities be removed. Lord Overtoun seconded. Considerable discussion followed. Professor George Adam Smith addressed the House, complaining that he had been misrepresented. Amid loud applause he declared – "From the bottom of my heart I believe in the Bible as the revelation of God to sinful man – a thing which found me long before I found it." On a division, Dr. Smith's amendment was defeated by that of Dr. Wells; and on a further division, the report of the College Committee was approved by 534 to 263 given for Dr. Wells' amendment. This decision, together [R3041 : page 212] with the whole attitude in which the Churches stand towards the Higher Criticism in view of their creeds and standards, such as the "Confession of Faith," has been extensively commented upon by the press of the country. There have, of course, been various opinions expressed; but the following extracts will be found as instructive and suggestive of the real state of matters in Scotland as they are undoubtedly plain and incisive in terms. They are both from the Edinburgh Evening News, an ably edited and influential daily of the Scottish capital. The first extract, a leading article, deals with the general question: –
Some of the influential among the clergy are getting alarmed about the Higher Criticism. This feeling found expression yesterday in the Established Church Assembly. Speaking on the indifference of the masses, Dr. Mair attributed it largely to the Higher Criticism. His words are worth reproduction: "The lapsing class cared nothing at all about creeds, but they did care about their squabbling. They said, 'When you have made up your own minds then we may hear you.' The prime cause was the change in the way of regarding Scripture that had arisen largely from scientific naturalism and from the Higher Criticism acting upon an age which worshiped progress and seemed to think that the newest was always best. He condemned reckless unscientific criticism, which only and always did mischief, and it was remarkable that these things percolated down into the lowest classes even. Had the Churches changed in their way of regarding the Word of God?" Dr. Mair has hit the nail on the head. Why should the working classes attend church? In the days of orthodoxy, when the Bible was believed to be an authoritative revelation, preacher and hearer held definite relations to each other. Sheltered behind a "Thus saith the Lord," the preacher could unfold before his hearers, after the style of Jonathan Edwards, a scheme of Redemption, which in essence was a philosophy of history. Man's creation, his fall, the progressive upward movements under supernatural guidance, as exhibited in the call of Abraham, the selection of the children of Israel, the wilderness legislation, sacrificial and ritualistic, typical of the New Testament revelation – these things formed the staple of orthodox preaching, and gave to human life an organic unity. To the anxious inquirer, with his "What must I do to be saved?" the old divines had a ready and intelligent answer. They could point him to the Cross upon which the Second Person in the Trinity died as an expiation for human guilt. If questioned as to the authority for all this, the orthodox divine could appeal to the Bible as an inspired and infallible record. He could show the organic unity between the Old and New Testaments, and without difficulty could prove from the wilderness legislation and prophetic predictions the transcendent greatness of Christ and the sacrificial nature of his death. What has the Higher Critic to say to the anxious inquirer with his cry, "What must I do to be saved?" The Higher Critic can no longer point to Christ, the Second Person in the Trinity, as the Saviour of sinners. According to the "Encyclopedia Biblica," there was nothing specially supernatural about Christ. The miraculous birth is explained away or ignored, the miracles are attributed to misunderstandings or exaggerations, the supernatural, in short, is reduced to a minimum. Then Professor George Adam Smith has torn to tatters the old Redemption drama, which charmed the heart of John Calvin, Jonathan Edwards, John Knox, Luther, and our own Candlish and Cunningham. According to the Higher Critics, there was no fall, no call of Abraham, no special legislation in the wilderness, no sacrificial symbols of the great sacrifice on Calvary, no predictions of Christ. In a word, the Bible is a collection of mythical stories, from which a preacher may extract a few grains of ethical teaching just as a skillful moralist may extract a few grains of ethical teaching from "Aesop's Fables." The working classes are not fools. They will not attend church to listen to men who themselves are living in a mental fog, men who, if they were honest, would prefer breaking stones on the highway to saturating their souls with hypocrisy for the sake of the loaves and fishes.
[We are quoting the above not endorsing it all. The editor would be very interested in seeing Bible proofs about the "Trinity." He is sure that neither the thought, nor the word Trinity is Scriptural. It is such careless use of the Bible that has given Higher Critics the foothold they have obtained.]
The second – also a leading article – appeared on the day following the decision in the Professor Smith case: –
There is no use mincing matters. The Protestant Church is an organized hypocrisy, and its leaders arrant humbugs. It is actually come to this that if the author of the "Age of Reason" were alive today he would not be spoken of derisively as Tom Paine, the infidel, but the Rev. Thomas Paine, D.D., Professor of Hebrew and Old Testament Exegesis, U.F. College, Glasgow. He would have no difficulty in preaching from a Protestant pulpit. That means that while professing to pin its faith on the Bible as an authoritative, supernatural revelation, the Protestant Church is now willing to tolerate in its pulpits and its professorial chairs men who hold the views of the famous Paine. What were the conclusions reached by Paine? Pretty much the conclusions reached by the Higher Critics who today fill the highest positions in Protestant Churches. In order to justify this assertion it will be necessary to examine the views of the Higher Critics in detail. Let us begin with the first book in the Bible, Genesis. What do the Higher Critics say about that book? For answer let us turn to the article on Genesis by Professor G. F. Moore in the second volume of the "Encyclopedia Biblica." According to Professor Moore, Genesis was written about the eighth century B.C. Consequently, Moses could not be the author. As to its historical value, the Professor shows what he thinks of it by talking of "the legends of Abraham, and especially of Isaac." In a similar strain writes Professor Adam Smith, whose case was before the U.F. Assembly yesterday. Paine in his book gives ground also for believing that Genesis could not be the work [R3041 : page 213] of Moses, and that it was a collection of traditions, stories and fables. Thus both the theological professors and Paine reach substantially the same conclusion. The close agreement between the Higher Critics of today and Paine is still further seen in the article on Historical Literature, also by Professor Moore, who remarks that "the stories of the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, Israel, and his sons, are told with a wealth of circumstance and a vividness of color which show that we have entered the realm of pure legend." Let us turn to the article "Elijah," and what do we find? At the opening of the article we find the author, the Rev. W. E. Addis, Manchester, writing as follows: "We shall be better able to appreciate his (Elijah's) position when we have examined the legendary narratives in which his history is enshrined." It is the same with Elisha. Mr. Addis here also complains of the difficulty of reaching historic fact on account of the legendary nature of the Biblical account. This is very much the position of Professor Smith. Here, too, is substantial agreement with Paine, who, instead of using the word "legendary," uses the word "romancing." Take a crucial instance, the famous prediction in Isaiah about the Messiah. Here is what Professor Smith says: "Isaiah meant no more than that some one should be born whose character and hopes should be proof that God was with his people. Whether the promised unborn was an individual or a future generation of Israel it is difficult to make out; but probably the latter is what Isaiah intends." Professor Smith further knocks the feet from the famous prediction by stating that the word "virgin" should be really translated "marriageable woman." That is rather a severe blow at the incarnation as detailed by Matthew. The notable feature is that this is precisely the theory of Paine, who, if alive today, instead of being persecuted as a base infidel, would be drawing a handsome salary as a professor of theology in the U.F. Church. Dr. Rainy justifies this kind of tomfoolery on the plea that the question about the authenticity of the Bible is under grave discussion, and that we had better wait for light. That is to say, the Church is no longer the witness of God upon earth, but a huge debating society, in which large salaries are paid to those who set themselves to destroy the creed to which they have subscribed. The proceedings of yesterday confirm us in our old opinion, that the Church has become a colossal sham, and the clergy a band of sleek-faced Jesuitical trimmers, whose moral obliquity is only equalled by their intellectual dishonesty.
A BROTHER sends us with the following questions, a book now having an extensive sale in the South, and calculated to stir up strife with its teaching that the negro is not human, but a beast. Our answers review the statements of said book.
(1) Question. – Are there any grounds for the belief of some that the negro is one of the lower animals, in the Scriptures called a "beast" and created, like the other beasts, prior to the creation of Adam, who was the first that was called a man?
Answer. – Of course whoever advances such a theory must at least fancy that he has proofs to support it, and frequently the wish to find such proofs misleads the judgment and causes the individual to accept as proofs, matters which would not be proofs if regarded in an unprejudiced manner. In our opinion there are no such proofs, but strong testimony of the Scriptures to the contrary. Science has proven that somehow the Creator has fixed boundaries and limitations which hinder the different species from intermingling. Even where the species closely resemble each other in many respects, as for instance, the horse and donkey, the dog and the cat, a cross-breed with powers of propagation cannot be secured. This law, which it is well known obtains throughout the animal kingdom, should in all reason be applicable to mankind; and hence, if whites and negroes were of different species they could not, by commingling, produce offspring capable of propagation. Briefly stated, this is the scientific side of the question, which cannot be set aside by any amount of sophistry or theorizing. It will stand as a fact after the theorizing is dead. From the Scriptural standpoint the answer is equally specific. Note the Apostle's words, "God that made the world and all things therein...hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth," – Acts 17:24-28.
(2) Question. – Those who take the view I mention, claim that Cain's sin consisted in marrying a negress, and that it was for this reason that God would not accept his sacrifice. It claims also that the crime of all nations, leading to their degeneracy and divine disfavor, has in every instance been the commingling of the white "man" and the black "beast"; and that the different colored races, yellow, red, brown, are the result of these admixtures, and that hence heathendom prevails amongst the various colored races, while Christianity prevails amongst the whites. What answer would you make to this proposition?
Answer. – The proposition is wholly illogical. It is not true that divine favor has gone with the whites exclusively, and against the blacks and other colored races; civilizing the whites and barbarizing the others. If civilization and barbarity are to be the tests entirely, we have only to take in a wide scope of history to see the fallacy of the view presented. Eighteen centuries ago the white peoples of Europe, with their straight silky hair, were savages, idolaters, barbarians – far more degraded than were the millions of India and the millions of China at the same time. This disproves this theory at a glance.
Furthermore, the Children of Israel, who for eighteen centuries before that had been the favored people of God, and respecting whom it was written, "You only have I known (recognized) of all the families of the earth," are not a fair skinned and straight and silky haired people. Their hair is quite [R3042 : page 214] kinky, and their skin is quite swarthy, altho they also are a part of the Caucasian race. Furthermore, we notice in the case of that nation that whereas they were subjects of divine favor for eighteen hundred years, and then became objects of divine disfavor for a similar period, it was not because of their having intermarried with blacks, but for a very different reason – because of their rejection of Messiah. This proves that alienation from God which constitutes the heathen "strangers, aliens and foreigners," was not because of intermarriage with the blacks.
If those who favor this theory should persist in saying that all who are strangers from God and from the commonwealth of Israel, were rejected and utterly cast off because of impurity of blood through negro admixture, let us reflect further that these Gentile nations include our own forefathers, the barbarians of Europe. And let us further reflect that however cast off they were, and from whatever reason they were cast off, their debt, their penalty, was paid by the great ransom sacrifice which our Lord Jesus gave – not for the Jews only, but for the Gentiles also, by which we, who were once aliens and strangers and foreigners, have been brought nigh to God, and granted the privilege of becoming his sons.
But the entire argument is fallacious. Their conjecture respecting Cain's transgression is trumped up based upon a slight imperfection in the translation of our common version Bibles, which read, "If thou doest well shalt thou not be accepted? And if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire and thou shalt rule over him." (Gen. 4:7.) This latter statement is still further twisted out of shape to prove the point by making it read, "Unto thee shall her desire be, and thou shalt rule over her," and making the "her" apply to the negress, whom Cain is supposed to have accepted as a wife. On the contrary, the Scriptural account shows that Cain had no wife at the time of this injunction. It was subsequent to this that Cain went and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden, and knew his wife, and she conceived. (Verses 16,17.) Cain's wife was undoubtedly one of his sisters, for such was the custom of early times, nor was it necessary to bar by law intermarriage between blood relations. The necessity for this at the present time lies in the fact that the race has greatly degenerated, and that the idiosyncrasies of one family need to be offset by different peculiarities of another – and sound advice is that all mating should be between those of dissimilar temperaments. In the present run-down mental and physical condition of the human family in-breeding tends to produce insanity and physical degeneracy, while interbreeding gives better results, by scattering and offsetting the weaknesses of each tribe or family.
There is nothing said respecting any sin on Cain's part up to the time he became jealous of his brother, and his murderer. He did entirely right to bring to the Lord the offering which he did bring of the fruits of the ground; nor was the Lord displeased with this. The fact that Abel's offering was accepted while Cain's was rejected, should have been understood by him as indicating the kind of sacrifice which would be best pleasing to the Lord, and straightway he should have procured and presented animal sacrifices: then, undoubtedly, his would have been as truly acceptable as Abel's. The Lord from the very first wished to teach his creatures that the only reconciliation for sin would be through the shedding of blood; thus he foreshadowed to them the great sacrifice for sin – the blood of Christ. "Without shedding of blood there is no remission."
Cain should, therefore, have congratulated his brother Abel, and have been thankful for this clear manifestation of what kind of a sacrifice would be pleasing to his Creator; but instead we are told that he was wroth, angry. It was for this anger that the Lord reproved him as the context clearly shows. The Lord said to Cain in substance: Why are you angry? Do you wish to bring me a sacrifice? Are you angry because I have shown you the kind of sacrifice which I wished to receive? Are you jealous because this manifestation of my wishes came to you through your brother? Evidently you are in a wrong condition. If you would do the acceptable thing, would you not be accepted as well as Abel, and your sacrifice as well as his? And if now that you know what would please me you do not do so, would it not prove that sin lies at the door, that your heart is not right? Then follows the twisted statement which we here give from Leeser's translation – "If thou doest not well (now that you know what my will is) sin lieth at the door, and unto thee is its desire, but thou canst rule over it;" – you can get the victory over this wrong attitude of mind if you but so desire. But instead of getting the victory over his jealousy, Cain permitted it to grow; and getting into an altercation with his brother the envious, murderous feelings of his heart gave vent to the blow which made him the first murderer.
The Scriptural evidences are wholly against the theory mentioned in the question. Take, for instance, the fact that Moses married a negress, and had children by her. According to the theory we are criticising this would have been an unpardonable sin in God's sight, a carnal union between a man and a beast. According to this theory Moses would have been rejected utterly from divine favor. But what do we find? Quite to the contrary. It was after this marriage that God chose Moses to be his representative and the leader of his people out of Egyptian bondage. Moreover, it was when Moses' brother Aaron and his sister Miriam, especially the latter, upbraided him for his marriage to a negress, that the Lord defended him in the matter, and smote Miriam with the plague of leprosy as a punishment for her improper conduct and language respecting this subject. (See the account, Num. 12.) Zipporah was an Ethiopian, described in the Hebrew text as a Cushite. Ebed melech, also an Ethiopian, was one of King Zedekiah's household, and be it noted that he was both thoughtful and zealous for the Lord's prophet, Jeremiah, and was the commander of the thirty men who delivered him from prison (Jer. 38:7-12.) Hence the argument of those who claim that the negro is devoid of organizing intelligence or ability, except as he may have an admixture of white blood, is shown to be fallacious.
We have already quoted from the Apostle Paul that all nations are mentioned as of one blood; and this again borne out by his statement that those who [R3043 : page 215] accept Christ, whether Jew or Gentile, barbarian or Scythian, bond or free, are "all one in Christ Jesus." – Gal. 3:28; Col. 3:11.
The Ethiopian eunuch to whom Philip was sent with the messages of salvation was unquestionably a black man – "Can the Ethiopian change his skin?" (Jer. 13:23; Acts 8:27.) We find no suggestion on Philip's part that this Ethiopian was not a man, but a beast; but quite to the contrary, he was ready to preach the Gospel to him and to accept him as a brother in Christ upon his confession of faith.
The Queen of Sheba who visited Solomon in the height of his glory is presumed to have been a negress: the present Emperor of Abyssinia claims to be a descendant of Solomon by this Queen – he is a black man, and an able warrior and general, as the Italian army, attempting to invade his country a few years ago, learned to its cost – its serious defeat. Solomon is presumed, by some, to have referred to the Queen of Sheba in his Songs or Canticles 1:5,6.
(3) Question. – If the foregoing is not the solution of the racial distinctions amongst men, what would you suggest as a reasonable explanation?
Answer. – From the Scriptural standpoint we must and do recognize all of the human family as one race, of which father Adam was the original head; a later head being Noah. Accepting as we do the Bible narrative of the flood (and it is confirmed by similar, though less explicit, narratives amongst all ancient peoples) we need not go back of Noah and his family in seeking a cause for the differences. Taking Mt. Ararat as the central joint from which post-diluvian humanity spread itself over the earth, we may reasonably suppose that his three sons and their posterity went in different directions, the one northward, the other southward, and the third eastward. There is a general concensus of opinion that it was Ham who went southward, and whose posterity afterward peopled Africa; that it was Shem who remained near the Mediterranean and became the millions of Armenia, Persia, Assyria, Egypt and India; and that Japheth went northward and eastward, and that his posterity is represented in the Turks, Russians, Chinese, etc.
In attempting to account for the wide differences between whites and blacks, and the lesser differences between these and the yellow, brown, and red, we are treading upon uncertain ground, – as all ground must be in which our imperfect knowledge and imperfect reasoning powers have not inspired direction from the Lord's Word. Hence it should be understood at the outstart that all that we or others can do is to guess on this subject – respecting the differences in shape of head, color of skin, shape of eyes, peculiarities of hair, the nose, lips, etc. Undoubtedly, the climate and the soil have much to do with these differences, just as they have much to do with changes in vegetation. For instance, the apple which reaches so great a degree of perfection in a cold climate, if transferred, even gradually, to a warm one will do poorly, and if it does not die out entirely will at least undergo a transformation, in harmony with the change of soil and climate. The same is noticeable in the quince, the plum and the grape, the orange, etc. Is there more difference between the different races of human species than between the different kinds of grapes – some sweet, some sour; some larger, some smaller; some round, some oblong, some pear-shaped; some white, some green, some reddish, some purple; some with solid meat, some half full of juice, some with seeds and some without? Yet it is not questioned that all grapes are of one family.
Again, consider the dog species. Some are sleek and some are rough; some are very woolly and some are without hair; some white, some brown, some tan; some large, some small, etc. Does any one dispute that all dogs are of one species? Appropriately we find that locality and climate and the kind of food subsisted upon had much to do with these differences. True, we see dogs in various countries of different breeds, now, yet we recognize each breed as having had originally a distinctive home: as for instance, the St. Bernard of the Alps, the Spitz of the Artic regions, the Scotch terrier, the Collie and the Newfoundland – each had its own place, and was developed under peculiar conditions, which for the time kept it separate from others. We are to remember that for long centuries neither dogs nor their masters roamed the world over as at present, but were content with their own home country, which, with its peculiar conditions, and customs, gradually fixed certain characteristics of thought, manner, language and outer appearance. As a consequence, an experienced eye will know a Scotchman fresh from his native heath as quickly as he would recognize his dog. And the same with other peoples.
When we find that Europe, which was settled much more recently by its present inhabitants, has in so short a time divided itself into so many different nations, and when we remember that Europeans have stirred and commingled with each other far more than the peoples of other parts of the earth, it helps us to see how gradually, through many centuries, other peoples have undergone still greater changes.
In considering this matter we are not to forget the strong pre-natal influence of the mother's mind upon her offspring, – co-operating with the influences of climate and soil. To illustrate: Suppose a missionary and his wife removed to China; not only would the influence of the climate and soil be manifested upon themselves, but the same would be still more manifested in their children. Whoever will give careful attention to this matter will notice that each succeeding child born in that foreign country will have increasingly more resemblance to the Chinese – the hair, the skin, the shape of the eyes, and in general all features will bear closer resemblance with each succeeding child. We can readily suppose that if so much change occurs in a few years, ten or twenty centuries under similar conditions would turn any white people into regular Chinese, even supposing there were no intermarrying. The mother, while carrying her unborn child, has continually before her the Chinese type of countenance – eyes, hair, color, etc., and the continual impress of these upon her mind could not fail, according to the law of our being, to influence her offspring in the manner noted. [R3043 : page 216]
Indeed a traveler, a scientist, has lately reported to the civilized world that he found in China a district where there were ruins of a very ancient Hebrew temple, and tablets in Hebrew. The people of the district informed him that they had a tradition that their fathers once spoke and understood the language of the tablets (Hebrew), had emigrated thither many centuries before, adopting the Chinese customs and language and, gradually, their appearance also.
The effect would be similar in India. Undoubtedly the stronger contrast between the white and the black would require a longer time to be brought about; but we should expect that neither of these extremes fairly represented the original, if we may judge of Adam, Noah and Abraham by the only nation whose ancestors can be traced unblemished back to these heads of the race, – the Jews. We may suppose that they were neither as white as some of us, nor as black as the negro, but of a swarthy, tawny color. If this be true, the extreme whiteness of some peoples is not to be considered the original standard, but a deflection on the one side, as the negro and others are deflections on the other side. We are not to forget, either, that Africa is inhabited by various tribes or nations of negroes – some more and some less degraded than the average. Those brought to America as slaves were of various tribes; – from among whom we doubt not the Lord is making choice of some for the prospective "Royal Priesthood."
While it is true that the white race exhibits some qualities of superiority over any other, we are to remember that there are wide differences in the same Caucasian (Semitic and Aryan) family; and also we should remember that some of the qualities which have given this branch of the human family its preeminence in the world are not such as can be pointed to as in all respects admirable. Indeed we can not but wonder whether if the Gospel had been sent into Asia instead of into Europe it might not have found amongst the people of India a soil much more naturally adapted to the development of the peaceable fruits of righteousness. However, that the Gospel was divinely directed into Europe is most manifest (Acts 16:6,9), and sooner or later we shall see the full meaning of this divine providence. Perhaps the Lord intends to show that as typical Israel was a stiff-necked generation, so also spiritual Israel will be taken from amongst similar classes; and all the more show forth the power of the truth, by taking the elect Church chiefly from amongst the most quarrelsome, aggressive, selfish and dominating of humanity, and transforming these through the power of the truth into exemplifications of patience, humility, love and peace. The secret of the greater intelligence and aptitude of the Caucasian undoubtedly in great measure is to be attributed to the commingling of blood amongst its various branches; and this was evidently forced in large measure by circumstances under divine control. It remains to be proven that the similar commingling of the various tribes of Chinese for several centuries would not equally brighten their intellects; and the same with the peoples of India and Africa.
(4) Question. – Those who hold that the negro is a beast deny that he is the offspring of Noah's sons, and claim that the curse of Noah was not upon Ham, but upon one of Ham's sons, Canaan. They belittle Noah's curse, by saying that it was the senseless babbling [R3044 : page 216] of a drunken sot. What say you on this point?
Answer. – Those who use such language evidently are not familiar with the subject sufficiently to discuss it at all. The word "curse" is used by Noah after the same manner that God is said to have cursed the earth, and cursed mankind; from which curse man was redeemed by our Lord. The word "curse" here is used in the sense of penalty, retribution, and not in the sense of an imprecation or a profane denunciation. God declared man to be under the sentence of his divine law, – a death-sentence "curse" or penalty. Noah declared, prophetically, that Ham's characteristics which had led him to unseemly conduct disrespectful to his father, would be found cropping out later, inherited by his son, – and prophetically he foretold that this degeneracy would mark the posterity of Canaan, degrading him, making him servile. We are not able to determine to a certainty that the sons of Ham and Canaan are the negroes; but we consider that general view as probable as any other.
Respecting Noah: It is a great mistake to charge him with being a drunken sot, and thus slanderously to set forth in a disreputable light one whom the Lord esteemed. (See Ezek. 14:14,20.) The fact is that the conditions after the flood were so different from those which preceded it that Noah was probably ignorant of the fact that the changed atmospheric conditions produced a ferment in the grape juice, giving to the liquor alcoholic and intoxicating qualities. We have not the space here to consider the wonderful change in climate, etc., which occurred at the time of the flood; but everything connected with the narrative supports our conclusion that Noah drank of the fruit of his vineyard in ignorance of its stupefying qualities. See our issue of Nov. 15, 1899.
(5) Question. – When Jude says, "Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core" (Jude 11), has it any bearing on this negro question?
Answer. – It has no bearing upon this question in the interest of the theory which we are opposing; but it has decided force in opposition to it. The Apostle Jude (Thaddeus – Matt. 10:3) mentions Cain, Balaam, and Core. The sin of Cain was hatred of his brother – murder; the error of Balaam was love of reward, so that he was willing to do evil to obtain it; the gainsaying of Core was his rebellion against divinely instituted arrangements. The Lord's people are to note all of these wrong courses and to avoid them all.
We trust that we have answered the questions satisfactorily, and have thoroughly disproven the theory under examination. We will, however, notice a few other points made in the pamphlet: for instance, the negro is blamed with being peaceable and submissive, and his white brother is credited with being of a higher order, because he is unsubmissive and warlike. [R3044 : page 217] Is it not a fact that in these particulars, if true, the colored man resembles Abel, and the white man Cain? – that the colored man resembles Jesus, and the white man Nero? – that the colored man resembles Moses, and the white man Pharaoh? If the negro is more peaceable by nature, he is that much by nature nearer to the standard which the Christian, as a new creature, is to copy. But we dispute the proposition entirely.
It is argued further that in Jonah 3:8, the word "beast" refers to the negro because it says that both "man and beast" were commanded to wear sackcloth as the sign of humiliation before God, and that it would be inappropriate for cattle and sheep. But this argument loses any little force it at first seemed to have, when we read in the preceding verse that "herds and flocks" were to participate in this fast before God.
The argument drawn from Exodus 19:13, that the beasts referred to had hands is easily answered by showing that the Hebrews used the word hand for beasts as well as for man. The Hebrew word rendered hand in the citation is yad; and the same word is used in I Sam. 17:37, where it is rendered "paw" – "The paw of the lion and the paw of the bear."
The writer makes a point of the use of the word "beast" in contradiction to the word "cattle." But if we refer to Young's Concordance under the head of "beast" we find the word behemah, which, while the general word for cattle, is rendered beast more frequently than cattle. The distinctive word for beast, not rendered cattle, is (Hebrew) chai, and its signification is "living creature." Chai is used in Ps. 104:20, and the description of verses 21,22, shows that it refers, not to man-eating negroes, but to lions, and such wild beasts. The lack of candor on the part of the author of the pamphlet criticized, is shown by the fact that in one place he accuses the negro of being too peaceable, while in another place, to suit his theory, he makes of him the man-eating wild beast of the Old Testament.
The first of these commandments taught the Jew the sacredness of the family relationship – that the children should honor the parents, which implies that the parents should not only so instruct their children, but that, so far as possible, they should strive to live before them such lives as would reasonably call forth such respect, obedience, honor. A promise of long life is attached to this commandment. We may esteem on general principles that children obedient to their parents would be the more inclined to be obedient to the laws of their country and to the laws of their Creator, and that such obedience would be favorable to old age. But we are not certain that there was not more than this intended. The words, "That thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee," would seem to connect this promise with Israel's possession of the land of promise. And if we have reasoned logically that obedience to parents would lead to obedience to God, we may reason reversely that Israel's disobedience to God which resulted in their various captivities, taking them out of the land of promise, and finally in their [R3045 : page 218] complete banishment from that land, means that this lesson of obedience to parents was not well learned, and that this reward of continuing in their own land was therefore taken from them.
If we would seek a higher meaning for this commandment, under the law of love, its first meaning to the Lord's people would be that they should honor their Father in heaven, and the Abrahamic Covenant under which they have been begotten to the new nature. (Gal. 4:22-31); and such honor to God and such respect for their covenant with him are certainly the terms upon which they may hope for a share in the heavenly Canaan with its eternal life. And in proportion as God's people reverence him and honor him in word and in deed the influence of such lives upon their children should be weighty, and should call forth their respect. They should seek to rule their own homes in love, remembering, nevertheless, the Lord's admonition, "A man's foes shall be they of his own household." They need not be surprised if, despite their every effort to do good and properly to inculcate duty, the influences of the world and its false views of matters, should make their homes very different from what they would prefer.
"Thou shalt do no murder" – the Revised Version rendering – is much to be preferred to the Common Version, "Thou shalt not kill." Murder is always wrong; killing is sometimes right, sometimes duty. The life of the lower animals was given to man according to his necessities (Gen. 9:3), but we deprecate that which is misnamed sport – the destruction of birds and beasts and fishes wantonly – for no good purpose, but merely to gratify a savage desire to take life. That this command was not intended to prohibit the taking of human life under certain circumstances is evident from the fact that the same law made provision for the killing of murderers.
To the Church, the new creatures in Christ, a still higher law governs on this subject. Our law of Love, the New Command, covers it completely. He who loves his neighbor will surely not murder him. But our Teacher gave a still higher thought respecting this feature of the law, and the way in which we, his followers, should view it, when he declared that for one brother to have hatred toward another was to have the murder spirit – the spirit which, under certain conditions, might lead to murder. According to this definition the person who angrily wishes that another were dead commits murder in his heart. On the contrary, the spirit of love wishes well to the neighbor – yea, even tho he be an enemy, desires that he may come into harmony with the Lord, and ultimately attain life everlasting, and so desires these things as to seek by word and act to render him any assistance possible.
The third of these commands, "Thou shalt not commit adultery," was greatly magnified by our Lord's declaration to the effect that evil desires, tho not accomplished for lack of opportunity, were as really violations of this commandment as tho the act had been committed. How the magnifying glass of the Law of Love enlarges and intensifies the words, the acts, the thoughts, of life! There is in this a lesson of purity of thought which should be profitable to all the Lord's people; for altho we are not in the flesh but in the spirit, as new creatures, and in our trial or judgment, nevertheless, the new mind deals with and operates through the mortal body, and must continually strive to bring it into the fullest subjection possible. Hence, it is valuable for us to know just how the Lord esteems such matters, that we may put the greater guard upon the very thoughts and intentions of our hearts. We may be sure that it was not of accident that the Apostle wrote respecting the wisdom from above, "first pure." Our own purity, in the sense of our justification by faith, comes before we can have any standing or relationship with the Lord or be begotten into his family; and this same purity which is made the foundation of the new life, and given to us reckonedly, must be appreciated by us and lived up to as closely as possible. And the clearer view we get as to what constitutes impurity in the Lord's sight, the better will we be able so to regulate and govern our mortal bodies, our acts, our words, our very thoughts, as to bring them into as close conformity to the will of God as possible.
Another thought in connection with this command, is given to us as new creatures. We have been betrothed to our Lord, and to him as our Bridegroom we owe full allegiance – whether we regard this from the standpoint of the Church as a whole, or from the standpoint of each individual united with the Lord. From this standpoint, as the Lord's betrothed we are to be uncontaminated, unadulterated – separate from the world. "Ye are not of the world, even as I am not of the world;" "I have chosen you out of the world."
The fourth of these commands, "Thou shalt not steal," is of much greater depth and breadth than many are inclined to suppose. In the light of the New Covenant and its law of love, stealing may properly be understood to apply to the defrauding of a neighbor, friend or enemy, in any manner – depriving him of his rights or liberties as well as of his money or property. It would apply also to the stealing of a good name from another, as Shakespeare has pointed out. This command would be infracted, in the light of the Law of Love, by any transaction in which a neighbor would be worsted in a bargain, provided anything had been secreted or any deception calculated to warp his judgment in the making of the bargain had been practiced. From this standpoint there is a great deal of "respectable" stealing done today; – not only by misrepresentation of the goods by shopkeepers and by untruthful advertisements, but also amongst dealers of stock exchanges who, directly or indirectly, throw out wrong information to mislead, and by others in fraudulent organizations whose financial standing, etc., is often grossly misrepresented to enable the organizers to steal from those who become the purchasers of the stock at more than its real value.
The Law of Love is very difficult to apply to business under present conditions; but it always insists upon absolute fairness and truthfulness in respect to all statements made. It is not incumbent upon us, however, after making known the facts in any matter, [R3045 : page 219] to either directly or indirectly force upon others our opinions or judgment in respect to the value of the facts explained. We may safely allow other men to use their judgment, while we use ours, when we have told them frankly the truth in regard to any matter.
The fifth of these commands, altho it does not directly prohibit false statements, does necessarily prohibit any statement which would mislead a neighbor to his injury, and herein we see a superior wisdom in the light of this command. I might make a declaration that at a certain hour I will do a certain thing. I am at full liberty to change my mind and not to do that thing, provided my conduct in this shall not injure my neighbor in any sense or degree. To whatever extent our testimony on any subject would be inclined to lead friends or neighbors or anyone to take any course which would be injurious to themselves or others, and which they would not otherwise have taken, to that extent we are bound under the Law of Love. We may do all the good we please to a neighbor, but we may do him no injury. This is the spirit of the Apostle's injunction that we say, "If the Lord will" we will do thus and so. We are to consider the Lord's will in all we undertake, and his will in brief, is that we honor him and do good, not evil to fellow men.
False witness applies to the telling of lies, but it goes deeper than this and applies to any misrepresentation, whether it be by direct statement or indirectly by such a statement as would permit a wrong inference to be drawn. Indeed, amongst refined people this subterfuge, by which they palliate their consciences, and at the same time gratify their spiteful hearts, is very common. One may even bear false witness by the nod of his head, by the shrugging of his shoulder, or by silence – if a misstatement be made in such a connection that silence might be understood to mean consent. If a Jew, a member of the house of servants under Moses, the Mediator of the Law Covenant, was required to be particular upon this point, how much more particular should all be who essay to be members of the house of sons, under the New Covenant and the New Mediator! Does not the New Covenant Law of Love go still deeper on this point? It surely does. It prohibits in specific terms, not only the speaking of untruths in respect to a neighbor, but the speaking of anything concerning him that would be to his discredit, even tho it were true – unless under certain circumstances which Love could fully endorse – if the testimony were required by a court of law, or if the testimony were necessary for the protection of another from injury. And even in such cases as little of derogatory truth as possible should be uttered, and it only in love. The Apostle's word on this subject is, "Speak evil of no man."
There is no point, or feature, of the entire Law of Love, as it bears upon our relationship to fellow-creatures, that needs more of our attention than this point. It seems difficult for Christians to learn thoroughly the Master's lessons, that, if they have anything unpleasant to say respecting a brother or sister, any criticism of the private life or affairs to offer, it should be offered to him or her alone and not to others.
Perhaps on no other score does the Adversary succeed so well in doing mischief amongst the Lord's people – in planting roots of bitterness, producing misunderstanding, anger, malice, hatred, strife and other works of the devil. Let us permit love to do her perfect work in this relationship to our fellows.
A difference is to be observed in respect to criticisms of doctrines publicly uttered. The criticism of an error should be as publicly made as the error was publicly set forth, if it be of importance. The thing then to determine would be our liberties and responsibilities, and we might have neither. But if we possessed both our criticisms should be only in love, not in boastfulness but in humility; desiring only to serve the truth and the brethren. Humility will suggest, too, that we be sure we are right before proceeding to criticize. Even then some points of truth can generally be approved while the points of error are being criticized.
The sixth of these commandments, and the last of the whole, deals with covetousness. As the last it stands in an important place, and when fully appreciated [R3046 : page 219] is seen to have a bearing upon all the other commandments. Covetousness implies discontent. It, therefore, generally lies at the bottom of slander, false witness, theft, adultery, murder, and disobedience to parents. Indeed, in some respects we may suppose that it lies at the bottom of any disloyalty to God also. Was it not covetousness on the part of Satan which first led him to disloyalty and sin?
In becoming new creatures in Christ we are supposed to eradicate from our hearts everything that could in any sense of the word develop into covetousness – by the consecration of our wills, our hearts, to the Lord, by the acceptance of his will as instead of our own. From this standpoint, as the Apostle declares, "Godliness with contentment [absence of covetousness] is great gain." Indeed, viewed from the proper standpoint of the new creature, we have nothing to covet, because in becoming the Lord's we have become joint-heirs with our Redeemer to all the riches of divine grace, so that the Apostle could say, "All things are yours...and ye are Christ's, and Christ is God's."
But let us as new creatures, remember that covetousness can come into a heart otherwise pure, and defile the whole, as we see illustrated in the case of Satan, so that of all the things which we need to guard against most carefully this is one of the chief. All the graces of the spirit are opposed to covetousness – meekness, gentleness, brotherly kindness, love, all forbid that we should covet the things of our brethren or the things of the world. Rather, thankfulness should so fill our hearts – gratitude for the manifold mercies and blessings already received, that there will be no room for a covetous thought. True, the Apostle, in our Common Version, is made to say, "Covert earnestly the best gifts" (I Cor. 12:31), but it would be a great mistake to suppose that the Apostle taught that the Lord's people were to covet positions of influence in the Church. We are indeed to desire [R3046 : page 220] to have, to enjoy and to use in the Lord's service, as many talents and gifts as possible, but we find the very reverse of the Apostle's thought and teaching that we should covet the honors or possessions of one another. This seems to be a danger point with many, and when we remember that it has proven to be the wreck-rock for many, it behooves us to be extremely careful to covet merely the Lord's favor and the gifts and talents by which we can best serve one another and not ourselves.
"These many years! What lessons they unfold
Of grace and guidance through the wilderness,
From the same God that Israel of old
In the Shekinah glory did possess.
How faithful he, through all my griefs and fears
And constant murmurings, these many years!
"God of the Covenant! From first to last,
From when I stood within that sprinkled door
And o'er my guilt the avenging angel passed,
Thy better angel has gone on before;
And naught but goodness all the way appears,
Unmerited and free, these many years!
"Thy presence wrought a pathway through the sea;
Thy presence made the bitter water sweet;
And daily have thy hands prepared for me
Sweet, precious morsels – lying at my feet.
'Twas but to stoop and taste the grace that cheers,
And start refreshed, through all these many years!
"What time I thirsted and earth's streams were dry,
What time I wandered and my hope was gone,
Thy hand has brought a pure and full supply,
And, by a loving pressure, lured me on.
How oft that hand hath wiped away my tears
And written 'Pardoned!' all these many years!
"And what of discipline thy love ordained
Fell ever gently on this heart of mine;
Around its briers was my spirit trained
To bring forth fruits of righteousness divine;
Wisdom in every check, and love appears
In every stroke throughout these many years!
"Lord, what I might have been my spirit knows –
Rebellious, petulant, and apt to stray:
Lord, what I am, in spite of flesh and foes,
I owe to grace that kept me in the way.
Thine be the glory! Merit disappears
As back I look upon these many years.
"Thine be the glory! Thou shalt have the praise
For all thy dealings, to my latest breath;
A daily Ebenezer will I raise,
And sing Salvation through the vale of death –
To where the palm, the golden harp appears,
There to rehearse thy love through endless years."
It was after this solemn and significant ceremony, that by the Lord's direction Moses went up into the mountain as the people's representative – for communion with the Lord, and to receive from him the Decalogue written on tables of stone, which the Jews traditionally claim were of sapphire. His mission lasted forty days.
This absence of their leader, in whom they reposed great confidence, might have resulted in great blessing to the Israelites had they been in a proper condition of heart. Altho, under the circumstances, forty days – nearly six weeks – would seem to be quite a considerable absence, without communication, it might have had the effect of impressing upon the minds of the people the fact that, after all, not Moses but God was their leader, and that he had merely used Moses thus far as his servant, and that if anything had befallen this servant the Lord, who had begun the good work of their deliverance, in fulfilment of the promises made to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, was abundantly able to provide them another leader, and that nothing could have happened to Moses aside from divine foreknowledge and ability to prevent. This would have been a great lesson of faith and patience, beneficial to them for the remainder of life. But, instead, they had "an evil heart of unbelief," which quickly forgot the Lord's deliverance from the Egyptians, his leading through the Red Sea, the destruction of the hosts of Pharaoh in pursuit of them, the Covenant promise which he had just executed with them, and the manna which they were gathering daily; all these mercies of God were evidently underestimated – not fully and rightly appreciated, and their measurable unthankfulness and ingratitude became the basis of their fall into sin and idolatry, in gross violation of the covenant they had just made.
Ingratitude toward God would naturally mean ingratitude toward the servant whom he had used for their deliverance; hence the disrespectful language in which they referred to their great deliverer as "this [R3046 : page 221] Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt" – the man who was to lead us into the land of promise, and who now has gotten lost himself in the mountain. The wide difference between the character and disposition of Moses and that of the majority of the Israelites is shown by the fact that at this very time, while they were thus speaking lightly of him, Moses was importuning the Lord for them. The Lord made known to Moses in the mountain that Israel had gotten into serious sin, and by way of testing his fidelity as their appointed mediator, whose blood had typically sprinkled the people and thus pledged itself on their behalf, the Lord proposed to him the blotting out of the entire nation of Israel, and the taking of Moses as the seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and the head of a new nation. But faithfully Moses had plead for those whom he represented. He thus showed himself a worthy type of the great Mediator of the New Covenant, Christ Jesus our Lord, who has made mediation for the sins of the people – reconciliation through his blood.
The conduct of the Israelites in this matter shows up the weaknesses of the fallen human nature. They wanted to worship, and they desired to gratify this natural inclination in connection with fallen tendencies. They would worship God, but they would have an outward emblem or sign representing him – additionally, no doubt, they craved some gratification of lewdness and licentiousness, which were marked elements of the idolatrous worship of Egypt, with which for a long time they had been in contact. They appealed to Aaron, Moses' brother, as second in command of the host – telling him of their religious sentiments, their desires for worship, their need of some external sign or representation of God, and that this was the more necessary in view of the long absence of Moses and the possibility that he would never return to the leadership, and that the people must have something upon which to center their attention, either a living man representing God, or an idol, an image, representing him, etc., etc. The weakness of Aaron, in contrast with the strength of his brother Moses, is very markedly shown in this incident, and clearly exemplifies the wisdom of God in the choice of Moses to be the leader of the people, even tho at the outset the latter in meekness ignored his own abilities and suggested to the Lord his brother Aaron for the leader.
Whether Aaron really entered into the spirit of the people, and concluded with the leaders who appealed to him that it would be the wisest thing to make the image, or whether he did it as an expedient to hold the people in check until Moses' return, by conceding the demands which he really did not approve, we are unable to determine. It is possible that his course in calling for the earrings, etc., was first of all with a view to dissuading the people from the course suggested, by making it cost them considerable sacrifice in the way of their personal adornments. It may be, too, that he trusted that during the time necessary to the engraving of the moulds, the melting of the jewels, and the moulding of the calf, Moses would appear and re-assume the leadership and command the people. However, whatever were his thoughts and motives, he displayed a weakness of character far from commendable, one [R3047 : page 221] which should teach all who providentially come into places of influence and power amongst God's people, that there is but one right way to do; namely, not to participate in sin – not to become a participator in wrong, but meekly yet firmly to stand up for principle, for righteousness, at any cost – leaving the results with the Lord without fear, knowing that he is the real Leader of the people, and that attempts to compromise with wrong would be at the expense of divine approval, and therefore too costly to be considered for a moment.
The golden calf having been made, the next thing in order, of course, would be an altar for sacrificing to it, which accordingly was made, and then the program of a "feast to Jehovah." This shows that the idolatry here started was not different from the kind practiced today in Christian churches, where images, pictures, crucifixes, etc., are worshiped. Those who use these assure us that they do not worship the crucifixes, statues, etc., but merely use these as symbols or emblems of the Lord, and that their worship is to him. So evidently the Israelites were not worshiping the golden calf as being their god, but as merely to represent God; for the program which drew them together to the worship distinctly specified that it was a feast unto Jehovah – altho Jehovah did not acknowledge their feast nor accept the worship connected therewith, because it was in violation of the principles and regulations which he had enjoined.
Full of religious fervor, the people arose early on the morning of the feast, offering to the Lord burnt offerings which he could not accept, and peace offerings under conditions upon which he could not be at peace. The burnt offerings were entirely consumed, but the peace offerings were eaten by the people, and constituted their feast. The day was given up to revelry; they sat down to eat and to drink, and rose up to play – dances and supposedly lewd conduct, after the manner of heathen, – professedly to the honor of God. It was at this juncture, at the close of the forty days, that Moses reappeared in their midst, and soon caused consternation by his proper and emphatic denunciation of the proceedings and of all who were instrumental in their inauguration. As he came down from the mountain he heard the shouts of the people, but discerned that they did not indicate either victory or dispute in warfare, but rather that they were voices of singing and revelry, and as he came in sight of the golden calf and the idolatrous worship, and realized how quickly and grossly the people had violated the divine command on the subject, he dashed the tables of the Law upon the rocks and broke them in fragments – symbolically thus intimating an illustration of the failure of Israel to keep the Law, and ultimately the complete failure of the Law Covenant, as we know it did fail in respect to Israel in general at our Lord's first advent.
The revelers were disquieted by the appearance of the great commander and his indignant rebuke of [R3047 : page 222] their irreligious fervor. Aaron came in for his share of this, but promptly acknowledged his error, pleading as an excuse the demands of the people, his own weakness in the matter being too evident to require pleading. The one man stood up against a nation of two millions of people, denounced their sin, announced himself as being on the side of the Lord and thoroughly opposed to such infractions of his Law, and called upon such of the people as were on the Lord's side to desist from sin and come to his side in opposition to it. Altho overmastered and cowed in the presence of their God-appointed leader, the chief men of all the tribes except one seem to have resented Moses' reproofs. That one tribe was the tribe of Levi, typical of the household of faith from which the royal priesthood is now being selected. This tribe, altho to some extent led astray with the rest, and to some extent leaders, through Aaron, in the wrong course, was at heart on the Lord's side; and when the rebuke came and the Lord's will and way were clearly set before them through the Mediator, they promptly came to the side of the Lord on the question. The leaders of the other tribes were not ready to admit that their course was a wrong one, not willing to submit themselves promptly, and the result was the destruction of about three thousand of the leaders in the wrong way, and the full return of the remainder of Israel into harmony with the Lord and with acknowledgement of their transgression. On the next day after this punishment of the leaders Moses more fully explained to the people the enormity of their sin, and went up again into the mountain, for them, as their representative, to make an atonement for them with the Lord.
This incident well illustrates the general tendency, more or less, of fallen man to substitute something of his own creation, either as instead of the Lord or in addition to the Lord, as an object of worship. The worship of the golden calf symbolizes or pictures in a general and very forceful way the worship of the mammon of wealth, of earthly riches, honor, influence, etc. At our Lord's first advent he found Israel nominally worshiping Jehovah, nominally very zealous of his worship, but really worshipers of mammon, worshipers of riches and honor of men, of dignities and titles, of place and position. The Pharisees, who were confessedly as well as professedly the most religious class of Jews at that time, the holiness people, our Lord accused of "covetousness – which is idolatry" – and in the Emphatic Diaglott translation this statement, "for they were covetous," is rendered, "for they were money-lovers." (Luke 16:14; Col. 3:5.) It was to the whole nation in general, and to the Pharisees in particular, that our Lord declared, "Ye cannot serve God and Mammon" – thus implying that they were worshipers of the Mammon of wealth in its various forms. Referring to one form of Mammon he again said to them, "How can ye believe who receive honor one of another, and seek not that honor which cometh from God only?" He referred to another form of mammon-worship, and the prevalent but erroneous thought that it was compatible with the worship of God, when he said, "Ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretense make long prayers," and he denounced such religion and mammon-worship as hypocrisy. The antitypical Mediator, who fulfilled the Law on behalf of true Israelites, and who declared that, so far as that people were concerned, the tables of the Law and the Covenant based upon them were broken, – dashed to pieces, – fully explained that their difficulty consisted in worshiping the golden calf, worshiping mammon, bowing down to the opinions of men, traditions of the elders; their love of the praise of men and titles, and honor of man, and their love of wealth, had to do largely with their reprehensible course in the sight of the Lord and their inharmony with their Mediator when he appeared. As Moses, the typical mediator, called for those who were on the Lord's side to come to him, so Christ called for all the "Israelites indeed," the household of faith, the Royal Priesthood, to come to him; and as there was in the type a destruction of the leaders of the remainder, so there came a time of trouble upon the remainder of the house of Israel which resulted in the complete overthrow of their national polity, the destruction of their city, etc. And as the typical mediator then went up into the mountain to make reconciliation for their sins, so Christ as the High Priest ascended to make atonement for the sins of the people.
We may draw another lesson still closer to ourselves and in full harmony with the foregoing. We may remember that natural Israel and the first advent of our Lord were patterns of spiritual Israel and the second advent of Christ; that as he came to his own professed Israelites, yet found them unready to receive him, so at his second coming professed spiritual Israel, styled Christendom, will be equally unready to receive him; and that as he found only a remnant of the whole of natural Israel ready for the higher plane of the Gospel age, so in the end of this age he will find only a little flock in all ready for the higher plane of the Kingdom – ready for the change to glory, honor, immortality and joint-heirship with himself and participation in the Kingdom work. As this class was the stone of stumbling and rock of offense to literal Israel, that was but the foreshadowing of how the same class would be a stone of stumbling and rock of offense to spiritual Israel; as it is written, "He shall be for a stone of stumbling and rock of offense, to both the house of Israel." As the natural Israelites stumbled because they and their leaders were outwardly loyal to the Lord and his purposes, yet really were selfish and self-willed, and therefore not ready to receive him and to fall in line with his reproofs and corrections in righteousness, so likewise it will be with the leaders and the masses of nominal spiritual Israel at the second advent of the Lord; so that now, as with Israel, only a remnant will be found, only the Levites – on the side of the Lord; and the time of trouble which came upon natural Israel for its overthrow was typical of the great overthrow and great time of trouble, "such as was not since there was a nation," about to come on nominal Christendom for its complete overthrow as a social financial, political and religious institution. But following this trouble the antitype of Moses will have the full command, and will, indeed, lead the people through the wilderness, and altho during the Millennial age of their leading they will experience [R3048 : page 223] chastisements for their wrong-doing, these chastisements will be corrective rather than destructive, to the intent that they may learn well the lesson of our Golden Text, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me."
We have seen that one of the principal difficulties in the way of Israel at the first advent was the fact that they were mammon worshipers. Is this also illustrative of the condition of nominal spiritual Israel at the present time? Is it, or is it not, true that nominal Israel of to-day blends the worship of God and the worship of Mammon? Is it, or is it not, true that while nominally worshiping Jehovah the vast majority are bowing down to the golden calf of wealth, honor of men, dignity, titles, etc., etc.? We fear that it is only too true that there never was a time when money, influence, power, and honors of men were more exalted or worshiped or more striven for than at present. We are not making wholesale condemnations, nor suggesting that no excuse or allowance should be made in this matter. On the contrary, we would claim that it is true of many to-day, as it was true of Aaron, that they are led, yea, almost forced, into the positions which they occupy in respect to the worship of Mammon, in respect to their obedience and servility to the popular sentiment – to the general craze for the worship of the golden calf; the worship of great human institutions; the worship of wealth; the worship of titles and influence, and the tendency to be identified with these and in some measure to share in the glory, both by contributing to and by participation in their revels.
It is nearly nineteen centuries since the New Covenant was sealed with the precious blood of our Mediator, and he left his people and ascended up on high, – going up into the mountain, into the presence of God. His absence was longer protracted than had been expected, and meantime many of those who had trusted in him and waited for him and expected his coming again to lead his people into the land of promise, have ceased to expect him, and are claiming that he will not come again to lead and deliver them – are claiming that it is necessary that other leaders should take charge and deliver the people. The heads of the various parties in conference have decided, not that Mammon shall be to them instead of God, but that Mammon shall be the representative of God, to lead the people to success; that Mammon shall convert and civilize the world; that Mammon shall bring in for the groaning creation, in a natural way, the various blessings craved, and cause the earth to blossom as the rose. Meantime the leader whom God had appointed to bring the deliverance returns, is present. He is justly wroth and indignant at present conditions. He has set up his standard of truth and righteousness, and is even now standing at the gate of the camp, and is calling, as did Moses in the type, "Who is on the Lord's side? Let him come unto me! And all the sons of Levi gathered themselves unto him." (Exod. 32:26.) Let all who are truly the Lord's, however much they may have been entangled with the popular fallacies of our day, with its love of money and titles, its selfishness, love of honor of men, etc., – let all of the true-hearted be prompt to take their places on the Lord's side. Shortly the great time of trouble is to begin, which will mean the complete overthrow of all who uphold the worship of Mammon, however much they claim that it is really the worship and service of Jehovah.
Moses as a Mediator showed himself grandly as a man, and beautifully typified the faithfulness of our Lord and Redeemer. How pathetic is Moses' plea – "If thou wilt forgive their sins – ." He left the sentence incomplete, as tho it were beyond thinking that God could permit such an infraction of the Covenant he had just made. But Moses proceeds and expresses to the Lord his willingness, his preference, that if Israel's sin cannot be forgiven he also may be blotted out of the book of life. We exclaim, Noble man! Pure patriot! And we take to ourselves a lesson of unselfish devotion to others. But when we look from Moses the type, to Jesus the antitype we see the same lesson brought out in a still more pronounced form. The Mediator of the New Covenant realizing that it is impossible for God to forgive sin, to blot out sin, gave his own life as the redemption price for sinners. He actually did what Moses proffered to do and meant, for he gave not merely a prospect of life and a temporary existence such as Moses possessed, but he gave his all, with his rights to eternal life as a man, on our behalf. But tho the Father was pleased with his devotion – indeed, had foreseen it, and had made this arrangement for the cancelation of man's guilt and sentence of death, yet he purposed that the great Mediator of the Covenant, through whose blood – death – it was sealed, should not suffer everlasting extinction, but that on the contrary he would reward him for his nobility and devotion, both to men and to God's Law, by raising him from the dead to a still higher plane of life – to glory, honor and immortality. – Phil. 2:5-11.
And as the Lord said to Moses, "Go now; and lead the people unto the place" designated, so he has appointed that our Mediator who has actually given his life for us and has received the new life with superior power and glory, should be the leader and the commander of the people, and bring whosoever of them wills back into full accord with God, back to the Edenic conditions, the land of promise. But as the Lord said to Moses in respect to the people and their sin, so it will be with mankind; viz., "Their sins shall be visited upon them." They will receive stripes or chastisements in proportion as they participated willingly or knowingly in a course of sin. So it will be during the Millennial age; altho the Lord will forgive the original sin, and remit its penalty of death, nevertheless, to whatever extent men have sinned wilfully, on their own account, against light and knowledge and opportunity, in that same proportion they are personally responsible, and will be obliged to suffer stripes of chastisements even while being brought by the Redeemer back from the plane of death to the plane of perfection, harmony with God and everlasting life. And those who will not profit by the lessons, who will not obey that great Teacher and Leader, the antitype of Moses, shall be "cut off from amongst the people," as the Lord has declared. – Acts 3:23.