It is the only thing set before anybody by Jesus; for he said, “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.” Matthew 5:48.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.2

Therefore, the divine exhortation to every believer in Jesus is, “Let us go on unto perfection.” And the only response to this, that is given for Christians, and the only response any Christian can give, is, “This will we do, if God permit.” Hebrews 6:1, 3.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.3

But nobody can attain to perfection without the gifts of the Holy Ghost; for these are given “for the perfecting of the saints,” and “till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ.” Ephesians 4:11-13.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.4

And nobody can have the gifts of the Holy Ghost, who has not first received the gift of the Holy Ghost.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.5

Therefore, without the gift of the Holy Ghost, no believer in Jesus can reach the only goal that is set before him by the Lord.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.6

Therefore, every believer in Jesus must receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. Accordingly, it is the all-important question for every minister to ask every believer, “Have you received the Holy Ghost since ye believed?” Acts 19:2.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.7

“Ask, and it shall be given you.” “Receive ye the Holy Ghost.” “Be filled with the Spirit.” “Covet earnestly the best gifts.” And “go on unto perfection.”ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.8

“Editorial Note” The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 75, 44, p. 698.

BECAUSE of unfaithfulness, Israel missed all that God had prepared for them when they came out of Egypt.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.1

But what had God prepared for them? Where did he want to take them when he took them out of Egypt?ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.2

Read it in the song of their triumphant faith at the Red Sea,—the song of Moses, the servant of God:—ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.3

(a) “Thou in thy mercy hast led forth the people which thou hast redeemed: thou hast guided them in thy strength unto thy holy habitation.” Exodus 15:13.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.4

(b) “Thou shalt bring them in, and plant them in the mountain of thine inheritance.”ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.5

(d) “In thy sanctuary, O Lord, which thy hands have established.” Verse 17.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.7

What sanctuary is it which the Lord’s hands have established?—Answer: “We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; a minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.” Hebrews 8:1, 2.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.8

Our High Priest, the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus, is at the right hand of the throne in heaven. In that place, in heaven, he is a minister. He is there a minister of the sanctuary. This sanctuary in heaven, of which Christ is minister, “the Lord pitched.” This, then, is the sanctuary, and the only one, which his “hands have established.”ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.9

And he designed to bring Israel unto the sanctuary which his “hands have established.” But the only sanctuary which his hands have established is the one in heaven. Therefore, it is perfectly plain that the Lord designed to bring Israel unto the place of the sanctuary in heaven, the only one which his hands have established.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.10

Again: he was to bring them to the place he has made for himself to dwell in, to the mountain of his INHERITANCE, to his holy habitation. And it was Christ who was their Leader. Where, then, is the place of his inheritance?—Answer: “Unto the angels hath he not put in subjection the world to come, whereof we speak. But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? ... Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honor, and didst set him over the works of thy hands: thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet; ... but now we see not all things put under him. But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels.” Hebrews 2:5-9.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.11

That is to say, God has not put the world to come in subjection to the angels, but he has put it in subjection to man; and Jesus Christ is the Man. Therefore, “the world to come,” this world made new,—this is the inheritance of Christ. He is the Seed to whom the promise of the inheritance was made. This is the place of his holy habitation. This is the place which he has made for him to dwell in; for when the new earth is seen, it is said, “Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them.” Revelation 21:1-3.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.12

This, then, is the place to which God designed to bring Israel when he brought them out of Egypt. This is what Israel missed by their unfaithfulness. This is what they lost by their unbelief.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.13

“Wherefore, take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God,” for this same thing is set before you. “But exhort one another daily, while it is called Today; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.” Hebrews 3:12, 13.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.14

When the word of the Lord came to the children of Israel to forsake Egypt, they obeyed: but at the Red Sea, at the waters of Marah, and at many other places it is easy to see that while they were bodily out of Egypt, their hearts were still there. So to-day, the Lord has called you and me out from the world. Nominally, we have obeyed this call; but the hearts of many are right where they were. Just as surely as the longing of the Israelites for the “leeks and onions” and “flesh-pots” of Egypt was the cause of their destruction in the wilderness, so now, unless all is surrendered,—unless we forsake everything, cut loose from every earthly entanglement, and place ourselves and all that we are, body, soul, and spirit, on God’s side,—we shall never enter the promised land, which is just before us.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.15

“Which Moral Science Shall Be Taught?” The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 75, 44, pp. 698, 699.

MORAL science must be taught in every Seventh-day Adventist school. This is no less important than the teaching of mental science, though in the nature of things it is second in order to mental science, because it is only with the mind that is can be studied.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.1

Right morals can be discerned only with a right mind. Therefore true moral science can be understood only through true mental science. Thus, though in this sense moral science in second in order to mental science, it is not less in importance; indeed, the two are inseparably connected.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.2

However, though we speak of these as “moral science” and “mental science,” and treat them as the sciences which they truly are, let no one fall into the mistake of thinking that these sciences are abstruse things, obscured and confused under long sentences of high-sounding words, and beyond the reach of people of common understanding. It is not so. True science is always simple and easily understood. The nearer true, and the better understood, any science is, the simpler it is, and the easier understood by those who would know it.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.3

“Morals” is the popular, the common, name for virtue: so that moral science, or the science of morals, is the science of virtue. And virtue pertains to right, the good, the true, the pure. It relates to conduct, and conduct relates to character.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.4

In other words, moral science is character-science. And science is knowledge. Fully expressed in other words, then, as morals is character, and science is knowledge, moral science is character-knowledge; the science of morals is the knowledge of character.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.5

What shall be the field, then, for the study of moral science? What character shall be the basis and subject of this knowledge? Shall it be the human character, or the divine character? That is to say, Shall it be human science, or shall it be divine science, that shall be studied in our schools?ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.6

As these schools profess to be Christian, the only character-science that can there be consistently studied is Christian character-science. Christian character is the character of Jesus Christ, and the character of Christ is the character of God; therefore, the only character-science that can be consistently studied in any Seventh-day Adventist school is science of the character of God. And as science is knowledge, this is to say that the only knowledge of character that is fit to be inculcated in any Seventh-day Adventist school is knowledge of the character of God.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.7

Yet that which in the world, in popular systems of education, passes for moral science, is simply the human knowledge, or rather, human conceptions, of human character. But what is human character?—It is the character of men naturally, as they are; and that is thoroughly bad. What is the value of human conceptions of human character?—Nothing whatever; for these conceptions, springing from such a source, are utterly false.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.8

Yet even though these conceptions were entirely true, where could there be any value to anybody in studying that which is thoroughly bad? Out of that which is bad, only bad can come. The knowledge of the bad is only bad. Indeed, the knowledge of even good and bad is only bad. For it was simply by eating of the tree of good and evil that this world became evil, and has been evil ever since.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 698.9

Human moral science, therefore, is utterly false, corrupt, and corrupting. It is essentially and only pagan, which is worse. So entirely is this true, that we have never yet seen, and we do not believe that is in the world, a work on moral science, as such, which is not essentially pagan, where it is not essentially papal. Yet these books—books in which there is neither morals nor science—have been used as text-books on moral science in Seventh-day Adventist schools. We sincerely hope that there are none of them in any Seventh-day Adventist school now. And if by any possibility there should be any, we hope the students in such school will have sufficient respect for morals and science and Christianity to refuse to have anything to do with such books, or with any stuff which might be taught from such books as moral science.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 699.1

There is a true moral science, a true knowledge of true character. It is the knowledge of the character of God, as manifested in Christ Jesus our Lord. The character of God is supreme. There can be no higher; there can be no better. This is the only true basis of character-knowledge. And the knowledge of God, the revelation of God, is the only true knowledge on the subject of this supreme character. Therefore, the only true text-book of this moral science, this character-knowledge, is the word of God, the Bible.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 699.2

As there is human mental science and the human moral science are the science—the knowledge—only of evil, and are not true science at all, but are science falsely so-called. The tree of the knowledge—the science—of good and evil can produce nothing but evil, and that continually and continually increasing. This is human science.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 699.3

Both the divine mental science and the divine moral science are the science—the knowledge—only of good, and in the highest, broadest, deepest, and strictest sense, are true science.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 699.4

Which of these moral sciences shall be studied in our schools,—the human or the divine? Will teachers and students misspend time and effort in the study of human conceptions, which are false; of human character, which is only evil? Will they not rather devote all energy and every faculty to the study of the divine revelations of the divine character?ARSH November 1, 1898, page 699.5

“Who Are Meant?” The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 75, 44, p. 700.

THE Missionary Review for November is out, and with considerable other interesting matter, it says: “The Seventh-day Baptists from Battle Creek, Mich., have representatives in Chile. They announce themselves as from London and San Francisco, which sounds better than from the former place. The peculiar ideas which they advance, and which form the staple of their preaching, make progress somewhat difficult. They give emphasis to feet-washing as a part of the rite of the Lord’s Supper. They hold to soul-sleeping, and follow the old Jadaistic practise of observing Saturday as the rest day, and insist on not eating pork. They also require immersion, and laymen are permitted to administer the rite.”ARSH November 1, 1898, page 700.1

The Seventh-day Baptists will hardly be thankful to the Missionary Review for such statements concerning them. For it is doubtful whether there is a single Seventh-day Baptist in Chile, and we do not know of more than one in Battle Creek. We are quite certain that with the Seventh-day Baptists, feet-washing is not part of the rite of the Lord’s Supper; nor do “they hold to soul-sleeping;” and we have never understood that they “insist on not eating pork.”ARSH November 1, 1898, page 700.2

Now the Seventh-day Adventists could be grateful to the Missionary Review for such an advertisement if only we certainly knew what it had said all this about us. For while it is not true, as is implied, that the Seventh-day Adventists are all “from Battle Creek, Mich.,” but are from San Francisco, and London, and all the way between, both ways, yet it is true that the Seventh-day Adventists “have representatives in Chile;” we do “give emphasis to feet-washing as a part of the rite of the Lord’s Supper,” because the Lord so established it: we do hold to the sleep of the dead, because Christ said it: we do observe “as the rest day” the day commonly called Saturday, because God says, “The seventh day is the Sabbath [the rest] of the Lord thy God:” we do “insist on not eating pork,“—thank the Lord!—because the Lord has said that the swine is “an abomination,“—such an abomination, too, that ye shall not “touch,” much less “eat,” “his dead carcass:” and we do “require immersion,” because the word of God requires it, though it is not true that “laymen are permitted to administer the rite.”ARSH November 1, 1898, page 700.3

It is possible that the Missionary Review did indeed intend to tell about Seventh-day Adventists, instead of Seventh-day Baptists. But since Seventh-day Adventists are distinctly a missionary people, and have chains of mission work in three phases,—spiritual, medical, and educational,—established twice around this whole world,—above the equator and below the equator; and since the Missionary Review professes to be what its full title says, The Missionary Review OF THE WORLD,—would it be unreasonable to suggest, or extravagant to expect, that the writers and editors of such a journal should know what people it is about whom they are really writing?ARSH November 1, 1898, page 700.4

“Editorial Bit” The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 75, 44, p. 701.

GOD has shown his unselfishness by freely giving, for the benefit of others, every atom of his universe, from the kernel of wheat, whose life is given for ours, to that of his Son, who died that we might live. The more we become like God, the easier it will be to give all we have for the benefit of others. We are not to give that we may become more like god, but to be transformed that it may be easy to give.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 701.1

“Back Page” The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 75, 44, p. 708.

THERE is evidently an awakening on the part of the advocates of Sunday enforcement. In a recent paper, one of them declares that “some three million American workingmen are compelled to work on Sunday”! Then the author goes on to suggest a remedy; it is to enforce existing Sunday laws, and make more stringent ones. No “American working man is compelled to work on Sunday,” any more than Seventh-day Adventists are compelled to work on Saturday. There are more than fifty thousand Seventh-day Adventists who refuse to work on the seventh day, and not one of them is ever compelled to work on that day. They may lose their positions, but that is another question. Let these Sunday-law advocates inculcate principle and cultivate conscience in the people, and they will not be bothered with anybody’s being “compelled to work on Sunday.” That cry of being compelled to work on Sunday is a double fraud: they are not compelled to work on Sunday; and there is no harm nor wrong in working on Sunday, anyhow.ARSH November 1, 1898, page 708.1

October 25, 1898

November 8, 1898