Larger font
Smaller font
  • Results
  • Related
  • Featured
No results found for: "".
  • Weighted Relevancy
  • Content Sequence
  • Relevancy
  • Earliest First
  • Latest First
    Larger font
    Smaller font

    November 18, 1886

    “The Ten Kingdoms in the Dark Ages. The Franks. (Continued.)” The Signs of the Times 12, 44, p. 692.


    THE defeat of the Burgundians followed in A.D. 499, and is thus told:—SITI November 18, 1886, page 692.1

    “The kingdom of the Burgundians, which was defined by the course of two Gallic rivers, the Saone and the Rhone, extended from the forest of Vosges to the Alps and the sea of Marscilles. The scepter was in the hands of Gundobald. That valiant and ambitious prince had reduced the number of royal candidates by the death of two brothers, one of whom was the father of Clotilda; but his imperfect prudence still permitted Godegesil, the youngest of his brothers, to possess the dependent principality of Geneva. The Arian monarch was justly alarmed by the satisfaction, and the hopes, which seemed to animate his clergy and people after the conversion of Clovis; and Gundobald convened at Lyons an assembly of his bishops, to reconcile, if it were possible, their religious and political discontents.SITI November 18, 1886, page 692.2

    “A vain conference was agitated between the two factions. The Arians upbraided the Catholics with the worship of three Gods; the Catholics defended their cause by theological distinctions; and the usual arguments, objections, and replies were reverberated with obstinate clamor; till the king revealed his secret apprehensions, by an abrupt but decisive question, which he addressed to the orthodox bishops. ‘If you truly profess the Christian religion, why do you not restrain the king of the Franks? He has declared war against me, and forms alliances with my enemies for my destruction. A sanguinary and covetous mind is not the symptom of a sincere conversion: let him show his faith by his works.’ The answer of Avitus, bishop of Vienna, who spoke in the name of his brethren, was delivered with the voice and countenance of an angel. ‘We are ignorant of the motives and intentions of the king of the Franks; but we are taught by Scripture, that the kingdoms which abandon the divine law are frequently subverted; and that enemies will arise on every side against those who have made God their enemy. Return, with thy people, to the law of God, and he will give peace and security to thy dominions.’ The king of Burgundy, who was not prepared to accept the condition which the Catholics considered as essential to the treaty, delayed and dismissed the ecclesiastical conference; after reproaching his bishops, that Clovis, their friend and proselyte, had privately tempted the allegiance of his brother.SITI November 18, 1886, page 692.3

    “The allegiance of his brother was already seduced; and the obedience of Godegesil, who joined the royal standard with the troops of Geneva, more effectually promoted the success of the conspiracy. While the Franks and Burgundians contended with equal valor, his seasonable desertion decided the event of the battle; and as Gundobald was faintly supported by the disaffected Gauls, he yielded to the arms of Clovis, and hastily retreated from the field, which appears to have been situate between Langres and Dijon. He distrusted the strength of Dijon, a quadrangular fortress, encompassed by two rivers, and by a wall thirty feet high, and fifteen thick, with four gates, and thirty-three towers; he abandoned to the pursuit of Clovis the important cities of Lyons and Vienna; and Gundobald still fled with precipitation, till he had reached Avignon, at the distance of two hundred and fifty miles from the field of battle. A long siege and an artful negotiation, admonished the king of the Franks of the danger and difficulty of his enterprise. He imposed a tribute on the Burgundian prince, compelled him to pardon and reward his brother’s treachery, and proudly returned to his own dominions, with the spoils and captives of the southern provinces.SITI November 18, 1886, page 692.4

    “This splendid triumph was soon clouded by the intelligence, that Gundobald had violated his recent obligations, and that the unfortunate Godegesil, who was left at Vienna with a garrison of five thousand Franks, had been besieged, surprised, and massacred by his inhuman brother. Such an outrage might have exasperated the patience of the most peaceful sovereign; yet the conqueror of Gaul dissembled the injury, released the tribute, and accepted the alliance, and military service, of the king of Burgundy. Clovis no longer possessed those advantages which had assured the success of the preceding war; and his rival, instructed by adversity, had found new resources in the affections of his people. The Gauls or Romans applauded the mild and impartial laws of Gundobald, which almost raised them to the same level with their conquerors. The bishops were reconciled, and flattered, by the hopes, which he artfully suggested, of his approaching conversion; and though he eluded their accomplishment to the last moment of his life, his moderation secured the peace, and suspended the ruin, of the kingdom of Burgundy.”—Dec. and Fall, chap. 38, par. 8, 9.SITI November 18, 1886, page 692.5

    When Clovis died, November 25, 511, his dominions were divided amongst his four sons, Theodoric, or Thierry I., his eldest son, had the northeastern portion, which lay on both sides of the Rhine, with his capital at Metz. Childebert, eldest son of Clothilda, held the central part, the country around Paris, with Paris as his capital. Clodomir, the third son, received western Gaul, along the Loire, and had his capital at Orleans. Clotaire, the youngest son, ruled in the northern part of Gaul, with his capital at Soissons. The Alemanni under the governorship of dukes, belonged with the eastern partition and were tributary to Theodoric. The Burgundians were still ruled by their own kings until 532, when the last Burgundian king was slain, and they, too, ruled by dukes, became subject to the sons of Clovis. This was accomplished under the reign of Sigismond, the son of Gundobold.SITI November 18, 1886, page 692.6

    “The Catholic Sigismond has acquired the honors of a saint and martyr; but the hands of the royal saint were stained with the blood of his innocent son, whom he inhumanly sacrificed to the pride and resentment of a step-mother. He soon discovered his error, and bewailed the irreparable loss. While Sigismond embraced the corpse of the unfortunate youth, he received a severe admonition from one of his attendants: ‘It is not his situation, O king! it is thine which deserves pity and lamentation.’ The reproaches of a guilty conscience were alleviated, however, by his liberal donations to the monastery of Agaunum, or St. Maurice, in Vallais; which he himself had founded in honor of the imaginary martyrs of the Thebaean legion. A full chorus of perpetual psalmody was instituted by the pious king; he assiduously practiced the austere devotion of the monks; and it was his humble prayer, that Heaven would inflict in this world the punishment of his sins.SITI November 18, 1886, page 692.7

    “His prayer was heard; the avengers were at hand; and the provinces of Burgundy were overwhelmed by an army of victorious Franks. After the event of an unsuccessful battle, Sigismond, who wished to protract his life that he might prolong his penance, concealed himself in the desert in a religious habit, till he was discovered and betrayed by his subjects, who solicited the favor of their new masters. The captive monarch, with his wife and two children, was transported to Orleans, and buried alive in a deep well, by the stern command of the sons of Clovis; whose cruelty might derive some excuse from the maxims and examples of their barbarous age. Their ambition, which urged them to achieve the conquest of Burgundy, was inflamed, or disguised, by filial piety; and Clotilda, whose sanctity did not consist in the forgiveness of injuries, pressed them to revenge her father’s death on the family of his assassin. The rebellious Burgundians, for they attempted to break their chains, were still permitted to enjoy their national laws under the obligation of tribute and military service; and the Merovingian princes peaceably reigned over a kingdom, whose glory and greatness had been first overthrown by the arms of Clovis.”—Id., par. 10.SITI November 18, 1886, page 692.8

    The quadruple division of the dominions of Clovis ended in 558, by being merged in the sole rule of Clotaire I., who held the power till his death in 561, when it was again divided into four parts among his four sons—Charlbert, king of Paris, Goutran, of Orleans, Sigebert, of Metz, and Chilperic, of Soissons. The Burgundians fell to the portion of Goutran, who left Orleans and fixed his capital in their country.SITI November 18, 1886, page 692.9

    “In 567 Charlbert, king of Paris, died, without children, and a new partition left only three kingdoms—Austrasia, Neustria, and Burgundy. Austrasia, in the east, extended over the two banks of the Rhine, and comprised, side by side with Roman towns and districts, populations that had remained Germanic. [The Alemanni—Suabians—belonged in this division.] Neustria, in the west, was essentially Gallo-Roman, though it comprised in the north the old territory of the Salian Franks, on the borders of the Scheldt. Burgundy, as the old kingdom of the Burgundians, enlarged in the north by some few counties.”—Guizot’s History of France, chap. 8, par. 1.SITI November 18, 1886, page 692.10


    (To be continued.)

    “Why Should Sunday Be Kept?” The Signs of the Times 12, 44, pp. 695, 696.

    WHAT reason does the Scripture present for the keeping of the first day of the week? Does the word of God present any reason at all for so doing? Does the Scripture say that anybody should keep it holy? Does the Scripture say that it ought to be so kept? Does the word of the Lord say of this thing, “Happy are ye if ye do it”? Does the Bible say any one of these things in regard to the first day of the week? Is there in the word of God a command or any direction that anybody should keep the first day of the week for any cause whatever? If there is any such command, it ought to be easy enough to point it out. If there be any reason given, it ought to be readily referred to.SITI November 18, 1886, page 695.1

    For keeping the seventh day, there is a plain, direct commandment from the Creator of all,—a commandment spoken with his own voice and written with his own finger. To that commandment the Lord attached a reason why the seventh day should be kept,—a reason that sanctions the obligation to keep the seventh day, and cannot be made to sanction the observance of any other day. The fourth commandment says, “Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy.” If any one should ask which day is the Sabbath, the commandment plainly answers the question: “The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God.” The commandment also says, “In it [the seventh day] thou shalt not do any work.” If any one should ask why, the commandment again, gives a complete answer: “For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day; wherefore [for this reason] the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it.” For the keeping of the seventh day as the Sabbath of the Lord, therefore, the Lord has not only given a plain, direct commandment, but he has also given a reason why the seventh day is the Sabbath, how it became the Sabbath, and why it should be kept so. That is, the Lord has not only given a reason for keeping the commandment, but he has given a reason for the existence of the commandment.SITI November 18, 1886, page 695.2

    Now can the first day of the week show any one of these things in behalf of the claim that it should be kept holy? Is there a commandment to keep it holy? Is it holy at all? If it is where is the record that God hallowed it? what reason has he given for hallowing it? Most assuredly, if the first day of the week lacks these things it lacks every element essential to its obligation, and there rests upon men no moral nor religious duty whatever to keep it. A proper question therefore is, What saith the Scripture about the first day of the week?SITI November 18, 1886, page 695.3

    1. “In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.” Matthew 28:1. Here all that is said is, that two women went to the sepulchre, on the first day of the week. Well, what reason for keeping the first day of the week lies in that fact? None at all.SITI November 18, 1886, page 695.4

    2. “And when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him. And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.” Mark 16:1, 2. Can anybody tell what there is about this text that shows that the first day of the week is the Sabbath? How can the first day of the week be the Sabbath, and yet the Sabbath be past before the first day of the week begins? For it matters not how early the first day of the week may begin, even “very early,” yet the Sabbath is past.”SITI November 18, 1886, page 695.5

    3. “Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them.” Luke 24:1.SITI November 18, 1886, page 695.6

    4. “The first [day] of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.” John 20:1.SITI November 18, 1886, page 695.7

    Notice that these four statements—one by each of the Gospel writers—are not four records of four distinct things, but four distinct records of the same thing, and of the same time, even the same hour. Each one tells what occurred in the morning of a certainly first day of the week, and the only fact stated in all four of the records, about the first day of the week, is that certain women came to the sepulchre very early in the morning. Then what is there in all this upon which to base any reason for keeping the first day of the week? Just nothing at all.SITI November 18, 1886, page 695.8

    In the Gospels there is mention made of the first day of the week, only twice more. These are in Mark and John. And the record in John and the close of the record in Mark again speak of the same time precisely, only it is in the evening, whereas the other was in the morning of that same first day of the week.SITI November 18, 1886, page 695.9

    5. Here is Mark’s record: “Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils. And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept. And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not. After that he appeared in another form unto two of them [Luke 24:13-48], as they walked, and went into the country. And they went and told it unto the residue; neither believed they them. Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.” Mark 16:9-14.SITI November 18, 1886, page 695.10

    .6. Of this same time John says: “Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. And when he had so said, he showed unto them his hands and his side. Then were the disciples glad, when they saw the Lord.” John 20:19, 20.SITI November 18, 1886, page 695.11

    Here, then, are all the instances in which the term “first day of the week” is used in the Gospels, and the manifest story is simply this: When the Sabbath was past, the women came to the sepulchre very early in the morning on the first day of the week, and found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre, and Jesus risen. Then Jesus appeared to Mary Magdalene, and she went and told the disciples that Jesus was risen, and they “believed not.” Then Jesus appeared to two of the disciples themselves as they went into the country, and they went and told it to the others, who yet believed not. Then Jesus appeared to all the company together and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart because they had not believed them which had seen him after he was risen, then showed them his hands and his side, and said, “Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself; handle me, and see.... Have ye here any meat? And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb. And he took it, and did eat before them.” Luke 24:39-43.SITI November 18, 1886, page 695.12

    Now take this whole narrative from beginning to end and where is there a word in it that conveys any idea that anybody ever kept the first day of the week, or that it ever should be kept as the Sabbath or for any other sacred or religious purpose whatever? Just nowhere at all. The Scriptures throughout show that the purpose of the repeated appearances of Jesus was not to institute a new Sabbath, for there is nothing at all said about it, but to convince his disciples that he really was risen, and was alive again, that they might be witnesses to the fact. The words above quoted show this, but Thomas was not there with the others, and he still did not believe, and so at another time, “after eight days,” Thomas was with them, and Jesus came again for the express purpose of convincing him, for he simply said to the company, “Peace unto you,” and then spoke directly to Thomas, saying: “Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side; and be not faithless, but believing.” John 20:24-27.SITI November 18, 1886, page 695.13

    This is made positive by the words of Peter: “Him God raised up the third day, and showed him openly; not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before of God, even to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead.” Acts 10:40, 41. “This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.” Acts 2:32. And that evening of the day of his resurrection, when he said to the eleven to handle him and see that it was he, and when he ate the piece of broiled fish and of an honeycomb, he said to them, “Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day; ... and ye are witnesses of these things.” Luke 24:46-48. Once more, Peter said, Ye “killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses.” Acts 3:15.SITI November 18, 1886, page 695.14

    They were witnesses that Christ was risen from the dead because a living Saviour, and faith in a living Saviour alone, could be practiced. How did they become such witnesses? Christ showed himself to them, and “did eat and drink with them after he rose from the dead.” Then what was the purpose of his appearances on this first day of the week mentioned in the four Gospels, and his appearance to Thomas afterward? To give them “infallible proofs” that he was “alive after his passion.” Acts 1:3. Then where does the first-day-of-the-week Sabbath come in? Nowhere. In these texts, in the four Gospels, which speak of the first day of the week, where is there conveyed any idea that that day shall be kept as the Sabbath? Nowhere. The other two places where the first day of the week is mentioned, will be noticed next week.SITI November 18, 1886, page 695.15


    “The Coming of the Lord Draweth Nigh” The Signs of the Times 12, 44, p. 696.

    THE elite of San Francisco is just now deeply engaged in the enjoyment of a carnival, the “paper carnival” it is called. Webster’s Unabridged gives us the definition of carnival, thus: “A festival celebrated with merriment and revelry in Roman Catholic countries during the week before Lent.” As Lent is the forty days before Easter, this carnival is considerably before the time, but in all other points, as best we can make out from the reports, the definition is quite fully met, for this is now virtually a Roman Catholic country, although this is not, in name at least, a Catholic carnival.SITI November 18, 1886, page 696.1

    The tamest definition that we can find of revelry is “noisy festivity” and the reports show that this definition exactly describes the proceedings. We read of the “grand march,” “dancing,” yes even of a certain minuet being “beautifully danced by people from St. Paul’s Church, who have a reputation in this direction.” We read of costumes “ranging from the primordial ape to the finest court costume of the queen of the English.” We read that “next to the grand march” “the booths are the great feature of the carnival.” One of these is “devoted to refreshments;” another is the “Mermaids’ Grotto” and “the army of young ladies who take part in the tableaux of Neptune and the Mermaids, are attached to this booth.” We read of “St. Luke’s booth,” devoted to ice-cream and cake and arranged with a “sole view for revenue.” We read that “St. John’s Church has an ice-cream booth” and does a “rushing business.” We read that “many of the younger men found their way to the gypsy camp to have the dusky maidens reveal the future to them through the medium of the cards.” All this and a great deal more we read, and that the revelers “generally gave themselves up to the full enjoyment of the occasion.”SITI November 18, 1886, page 696.2

    By close attention to the long report of the first night’s revelry, we find that it is altogether a church affair. We find that “the authors” are “the Reverend and Mrs. John Gray;” that the carnival is given in the interest of the Rev. Mr. Gray’s church, that of the Advent; that “the Rev. Mr. Gray appeared upon the stage and announced that the carnival pavilion was now open,” and that after about a week’s run the Rev. Gray “was overjoyed with the sustained interest.”SITI November 18, 1886, page 696.3

    The object of the carnival is said to be “to raise enough money to cancel a debt of $15,000 on the property of the Church of the Advent.” In the same paragraph we read that “at a low estimate” “the dresses, costumes, etc.,” made specially for the carnival and good for nothing else, as they are made of paper and flowers, “represent a cost of about $10,000;” that “the carnival has been three months in preparation;” and that “over 800 persons take part in it.” These items are worthy of a little consideration. Let us make a brief calculation, and put everything at a low estimate. The time of the persons engaged we will count at twenty-five cents a day.SITI November 18, 1886, page 696.4

    Eight hundred persons at 25 cents per day is $200 a day. Counting but 75 working days in the three months engaged—75 days at $200 a day, is $15,000. To this add the $10,000 for costumes, etc., which gives a lot estimate $25,000. That is to say, these people have made an investment of $25,000 in order to get a return of $15,000. In other words, $10,000 is paid for revelry alone. Then what, but revelry, was the real object of the carnival? And all this no doubt is called helping the cause of God! Could anything better illustrate the scripture, “Lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof”?SITI November 18, 1886, page 696.5

    In such a connection the title “Church of the Advent” is exceedingly and fearfully suggestive, for it is just such practices as these that the Saviour declares will be the characteristic of the times which immediately precede his second advent to this world. The word of God declares abundantly that thus it will be in the last days: that those who have a form of godliness will be “lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof; from such turn away.” 2 Timothy 3:4, 5. It is time to turn away, for “revelings and such like” God classes with adultery, idolatry, murder, drunkenness, and the like, and declares “that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.” Galatians 5:19-21. “Babylon is fallen” indeed; “come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.” Revelation 18:4. J.SITI November 18, 1886, page 696.6

    “Bible Answers to Bible Questions Concerning Man.—No. 2” The Signs of the Times 12, 44, pp. 696, 697.

    ANOTHER important question concerning man, one which has, no doubt, been asked by every person that ever lived long enough to think at all upon the subject, is, When a man dies, where does he go? what is his condition? etc., etc. This question the Bible asks: “Man dieth, and wasteth away; yea, man giveth up the ghost, and where is he?” Job 14:10.SITI November 18, 1886, page 696.1

    Of course there have been many answers given to this question; and there are yet many, even in this land where Bibles are scattered everywhere. Some say that if he die wicked he is in hell; if he die righteous he is in Heaven. Others say that he is in neither hell nor Heaven, but in purgatory; and yet others that he is in none of these but has passed to the “spheres,” and still associates and communicates with those who still live. Of course all these answers cannot be the right ones; and as a matter of fact not one of them is the right one. The Bible alone is that which gives the right answer to this, its own question. And as it is alone the Bible answers to Bible questions that we are now studying, that alone shall be what we shall seek on this question of where is man when he has died.SITI November 18, 1886, page 696.2

    “Man dieth, and wasteth away; yea, man giveth up the ghost, and where is he?” Answer: “The heart of the sons of men is full of evil, and madness is in their heart while they live, and after that they go to the dead.” Ecclesiastes 9:3. To good king Josiah God said, “Thou shalt be gathered into thy grave in peace.” 2 Kings 22:20. Of the wicked he also says, “Yet shall he be brought to the grave, and shall remain in the tomb.” Job 21:32. Jacob said, “I will go down into the grave unto my son mourning.” Genesis 37:35. We shall not multiply texts on this point, but simply show that this is confirmed by the word of Christ. When he comes to give reward to his people, and when he calls for them, they, all that are dead, are found in the grave: “The hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.” John 5:28, 29. Therefore the Bible answer to this question is plainly that he is in the grave.SITI November 18, 1886, page 696.3

    But what is his condition there? Let us read a verse from Job again: “Man giveth up the ghost, and where is he? As the waters fail from the sea, and the flood decayeth and drieth up; so man lieth down, and riseth not; till the heavens be no more, they shall not awake, nor be raised out of their sleep.” Job 14:10-12. This shows that man, when he dieth, is asleep. Again Job says that if he had died when he was an infant, “now should I have lain still and been quiet, I should have slept; then had I been at rest, with kings and counselors of the earth.... There the wicked cease from troubling; and there the weary be at rest. There the prisoners rest together; they hear not the voice of the oppressor. The small and great are there; and the servant is free from his master.” Job 3:13-19.SITI November 18, 1886, page 696.4

    In the history of the kings of Israel and Judah, twenty-five times is the record made of their deaths, “He slept with his fathers.”SITI November 18, 1886, page 696.5

    Not to multiply texts we turn at once, again, to the word of Christ. Lazarus was sick. Jesus and his disciples were some distance away, and Lazarus died. Jesus said, “Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep. Then said the disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. Howbeit Jesus spake of his death; but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep. Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.” John 11:11-14. Here are the words of Christ: “Lazarus sleepeth;” “Lazarus is dead.” Therefore the plain word of Christ is that when a man is dead he is asleep.SITI November 18, 1886, page 696.6

    Paul says that, “David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption.” Acts 13:36. And Peters says of him, “David is not ascended into the heavens.” Acts 2:34. And the reason is, that “David slept with is fathers and was buried.” 1 Kings 2:10.SITI November 18, 1886, page 696.7

    Of Stephen it is recorded, “He kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep.” Acts 7:60. It is certain, therefore, that the Bible plainly teaches that when man dies he falls asleep. The word of God plainly teaches the sleep of the dead.SITI November 18, 1886, page 696.8

    And it is wholly an unconscious sleep, as, in the very nature of the case, it must be when the place of sleep is in the grave. But here is the proof: “The living know that they shall die; but the dead know not anything, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten. Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion forever in anything that is done under the sun.” “Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.” Ecclesiastes 9:5, 6, 10. “Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help. His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.” Psalm 146:3, 4. When men’s love, and hatred, and envy, and their very thoughts, have perished, and their memory is gone, there can be nothing else but unconsciousness. But that is precisely what death is, and that is the condition into which men go when they die—a long, silent, dreamless sleep.SITI November 18, 1886, page 696.9

    But the Bible story on this subject does not stop here. For “now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the first-fruits of them that slept.” 1 Corinthians 15:20. “And many bodies of the graves after his resurrection.” Matthew 27:52, 53. And as God “brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus,” so also “them which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him;” “For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from Heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God; and the dead in Christ shall rise first; then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air; and so shall we ever be with the Lord.” 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17. “We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump.”SITI November 18, 1886, page 696.10

    Then it is that, “many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake.” Daniel 12:2. Then is the time to which David looked when he fell asleep, and was laid unto his fathers: “As for me, I will behold thy face in righteousness; I shall be satisfied, when I awake, with thy likeness.” Psalm 17:15. This is the time to which Job looked when he said, “Till the heavens be no more, they shall not awake, nor be raised out of their sleep.” For it is at the coming of Christ and the resurrection of the dead that the heavens roll away. “The heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places,” and men cried “to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb; for the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?” Revelation 6:14, 16, 17.SITI November 18, 1886, page 697.1

    The Bible answers to the Bible question, When man giveth up the ghost where is he? is this, therefore; He is asleep in the grave until the trump of God awakes the dead, and the voice of the glorious Son of God calls and all that are in the graves hear his voice. For it is God who gives victory over death, through our Lord Jesus Christ. Reader, this is profitable teaching, for it is the teaching of the word of God, and “Thus saith the Lord, thy Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel; I am the Lord thy God which teacheth thee to profit, which leadeth thee by the way that thou shouldst go.” Isaiah 48:17. This is the way that the Lord Jesus leads us, will you follow?SITI November 18, 1886, page 697.2


    Larger font
    Smaller font