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

    February 10, 1887

    “Things We Should Know.—No. 2” The Signs of the Times, 13, 6.

    E. J. Waggoner

    “Rejoice, O young man, in thy youth; and let thy heart cheer thee in the days of thy youth, and walk in the ways of thine heart, and in the sight of thine eyes; but know thou, that for all these things God will bring thee into judgment.” Ecclesiastes 11:9.SITI February 10, 1887, page 86.1

    Here is another thing we must know. The knowledge of this naturally follows from the knowledge of the existence of God. He is our Creator, and therefore has a right to claim that we shall do his will; but if this is so, it necessarily follows that judgment must be passed upon us, to see if we have done his will. The text is addressed to young men; but since God is no respecter of persons, we must conclude that all classes of people will alike be brought into judgment.SITI February 10, 1887, page 86.2

    That all the world will be brought into judgment, is positively stated in the Bible. In his sermon on Mars Hill, Paul said that God “now commandeth all men every where 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; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.” Acts 17:30, 31.SITI February 10, 1887, page 86.3

    What shall be the standard of the final judgment? If we are to know that for certain things God will bring us into judgment, it must be that we can know what to do in order to secure a favorable decision. We have already learned that, being wholly dependent on God, we are bound to conform to his will in every particular; therefore we must conclude that God’s will is to be the standard of judgment. This conclusion is supported by the words in the Lord’s prayer, which indicate that when God’s kingdom comes his will will be done by all.SITI February 10, 1887, page 86.4

    What then is the will of God, by which we are to be judged? Paul gives the answer in the following words: “Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God, And knowest his will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the law.” Romans 2:17, 18. How was it that those whom Paul addressed knew the will of God? Because they were instructed out of the law. Then it must be that the law of God contains the will of God. This is still further shown by the words which David uttered prophetically in behalf of Christ: “Then said I, Lo, I come; in the volume of the book it is written of me, I delight to do thy will, O my God; yea, thy law is within my heart.” Psalm 40:7, 8. It was Christ’s delight-more than his meat or drink-to do the will of God. He ever did the will of the Father. This was because the law of God was in his heart, so that all his actions were spontaneously in harmony with it. But acting in harmony with the law of God, was doing the will of God; therefore the law of God is identical with his will.SITI February 10, 1887, page 86.5

    Once more: When the young man came to Jesus and asked what he should do that he might inherit eternal life, Jesus answered: “If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.” Matthew 19:17. In his sermon on the mount, he said: “Not everyone that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of Heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in Heaven.” Matthew 7:21. Therefore keeping the commandments of God is equivalent to doing the will of God.SITI February 10, 1887, page 86.6

    The law of God, then, is to be the standard by which all men shall be judged. This is incidentally shown in the passage already quoted from Romans: Thou “knowest his will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the law.” According to the marginal reading it is, Thou “triest the things that differ, being instructed out of the law.” The law of God is that by which we try things that differ, by which we decide what things are honest and just and pure and lovely and of good report, and what are not. This, we say, is incidental proof that we are to be judged by the law of God, the ten commandments; for it is manifest that we must judge our actions by the same rule by which God will judge them.SITI February 10, 1887, page 86.7

    In the text quoted at the beginning of this article, Solomon tells the young man to have his own way if he will, to walk in the ways of his heart, and in the sight of his eyes, but to know that for “all these things” God will bring him into judgment. Then we are to know not only that there will be a judgment, but that the judgment will take into account our thoughts; for the ways of a person’s heart are the ways which his heart devises or thinks upon. This is plainly stated in the next chapter: “For God shall bring ever work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.” Ecclesiastes 12:14. This agrees with the words of Paul, that when the Lord comes he will “bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts.” 1 Corinthians 4:5.SITI February 10, 1887, page 86.8

    We have seen that the judgment is to be in accordance with the law of God; and since every secret thought is to be brought into judgment, it follows that the law of God takes account of even the thoughts of the heart. Read now Ecclesiastes 12:13, 14: “Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter; fear God, and keep his. For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.” Here we see that the fact that God will bring every secret thing into judgment, is given as a reason why we should keep the commandments of God. This shows again that the law is so spiritual as to detect the slightest deviation from it even in thought.SITI February 10, 1887, page 86.9

    With this agree the words of Paul: “For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.” Hebrews 4:12. As showing how the law discerns the thoughts and intents of the heart, we refer to the words of Christ in Matthew 5:18-22, 27, 28, where we find that a single hateful thought or lustful look is accounted a violation of the sixth or the seventh commandment.SITI February 10, 1887, page 86.10

    There is an intimate connection between Ecclesiastes 11:9 and Ecclesiastes 12:13, 14. The latter text is an exhortation to keep the commandments of God, based on the truth that by those commandments God will bring “every work into judgment, with every secret thing.” The former text is an emphatic command to those who seem bent on having their own way, to know that “for all these things” God will bring them into judgment. And since that judgment is to be based on the commandments of God, and is to take into account every secret thought, it follows that Ecclesiastes 11:9 is virtually a command for us to know that the ten commandments cover every possible deed or thought, and demand perfect obedience. It is a command for us to study the law, and to meditate in it day and night. If we are ever at a loss to know how perfect the law requires us to be, we have only to consider the life and character of Jesus. He “did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth.” This was simply because the law was in his heart. Any one who models his life in accordance with the law of God, will be just like Christ, and the law will be satisfied with nothing less.SITI February 10, 1887, page 86.11

    This righteousness cannot be attained by our own individual effort. Of ourselves we can do nothing: but Christ, who knew no sin, was made to be sin for us, in order “that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.” And so the command to know that God will bring us into judgment for every secret thing, includes the command not only to know that the law of God is to be the standard of that judgment, but also that through Christ alone can we attain to that perfect righteousness which the law demands. If Christ dwells in our hearts by faith, then we can exhibit in our actions the righteousness of the law, for if we have Christ in the heart we must have the law there also. And having lived thus, when we are brought before the judgment seat, and God fixes upon us his piercing gaze, he will see, not us, but the image of Christ, and because he lives we shall live also. W.SITI February 10, 1887, page 86.12

    “‘Barkis Is Willin’” The Signs of the Times, 13, 6.

    E. J. Waggoner

    There is a movement on foot in California to secure a law exempting from taxation private and denominational schools and churches of all faiths. Dr. Stratton, of the University of the Pacific (Methodist), is doing all in his power to secure influence in favor of such a law. In pursuance of that object, he called upon the Catholic Archbishop Riordan. To his evident surprise he found that the archbishop expressed not only a willingness but a desire to co-operate with him and others in securing such legislation. We could have told him without going to inquire, that the Catholics would be in favor of having church property exempted from taxation. There are more than four times as many Catholics in California, as there are of Protestants of all denominations; and it is certainly not far out of the way to say that the Catholic Church owns at least twice as much property as do all the Protestant denominations combined. President Stratton may rest assured that he can count on Catholic co-operation in any scheme tending toward the support of the church by the State. Such a law would be a good deal in the nature of special legislation in behalf of the Catholic Church.SITI February 10, 1887, page 87.1

    For our part, we have no hesitation in expressing our disapproval of such a law, leaving the Catholic Church out of the question. The church is not, or should not be, a pauper. Let Christians support the churches. It would certainly be an act of injustice to tax infidels and other non-professors, to support something in which they have no interest, or to which they are decidedly opposed. When Christianity has not enough strength to stand alone, but must lean on the State, it has not enough vitality to carry on aggressive evangelical work, and is not worth supporting.SITI February 10, 1887, page 87.2

    But Dr. Stratton found out something else when he called on the archbishop. He says in a letter to the Advocate:-SITI February 10, 1887, page 87.3

    “Among other subjects of conversation were the questions of temperance, and Sabbath [Sunday] observance, and he expressed a desire to co-operate with all Christian people, or others, in promoting these causes.”SITI February 10, 1887, page 87.4

    Will not a mother care for her own child? Here again we could have told Mr. Stratton that he would find the Catholic Church more than ready to co-operate with Christians, “or others.” Sunday is a child of the Papacy, and professed Protestants may depend upon it that she will not disown her offspring. The Doctor’s interview with the archbishop convinced him that the Catholics have been misrepresented. “The Church,” is a pretty good thing after all, and will aid greatly in matters of “reform.” Strange that intelligent Protestants can be so blind! But this only serves to show how professed Protestants are preparing the way for the triumph of Roman Catholic principles in this country. Meanwhile the wily prelates of the Catholic Church are chuckling over the situation. They well know that if they were to take the initiative in attempting to secure State patronage and Sunday legislation, there would be an outcry which would work disaster to their projects; but they are perfectly willing to “co-operate” with Protestants. True Protestantism, however, will never lend itself to become a catspaw for Catholicism. W.SITI February 10, 1887, page 87.5

    “A Weighty and Timely Utterance” The Signs of the Times, 13, 6.

    E. J. Waggoner


    The next “weighty utterance” that we find is the following:-SITI February 10, 1887, page 87.6

    “We have no account of their meeting again until a week later, after eight days according to the Jewish reckoning. No meeting is mentioned on the old Jewish seventh day; but on the first day of the next week, their second Lord’s day, they met again and Thomas was with them, and again he said, ‘Peace be unto you.’”SITI February 10, 1887, page 87.7

    We never before heard that Thomas said to the disciples, “Peace be unto you,” and perhaps Dr. Bailey did not mean to say so; but if he had positively declared that it was Thomas instead of the Lord that said, “Peace be unto you,” he would have been no further out of the way than he is in saying that the second time Jesus met with the disciples was on the first day of the week. The assurance with which he says, “We have no account of their meeting again until a week later,” would lead a novice to suppose that John plainly states that it was just one week later, and that the “after eight days,” which the Doctor repeats in an “aside,” is simply his own explanation of the Bible term. What John really says is this: “And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them; then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst and said, Peace be unto you.” John 20:26. Dr. Bailey tells us that “after eight days” is the Jewish expression for one week. It would have been more satisfactory to the inquiring reader if he had given a few examples of such use of the expression, in proof of his statement. Since he did not, we will quote a few instances of similar expressions, which will plainly show that “after eight days” does not mean just one week.SITI February 10, 1887, page 87.8

    In Hosea 6:2 we read: “After two days will he revive us; in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight.” If “after eight days” means just seven days, then “after two days” ought to mean just one day, and the prophet should have said, To-morrow he will raise us up. But the prophet evidently said just what he meant, namely, that after two days is the third day. This is the Jewish as well as the common-sense mode of reckoning, and according to it “after eight days” would be the ninth day. Therefore if we begin our count with the day on which they first met, the earliest that we can place this second meeting would be the next Monday evening.SITI February 10, 1887, page 87.9

    But some one will say that the Jews were not always exact in their reckoning of time. Very true, and we will give an instance of this inexactness. In his account of the transfiguration, Marks says: “And after six days Jesus taketh with him Peter, and James, and John, and leadeth them up into a high mountain apart by themselves.” Mark 9:2. Luke, in relating the same event, says “And it came to pass about an eight days after these saying he took Peter and John and James, and went up into a mountain to pray.” Luke 9:28. From these two accounts we find that “after six days” may mean “about an eight days after;” therefore if it is claimed that John did not mean to express the exact time, we must admit that “after eight days” means at least about ten days after, and this would bring the meeting to the middle of the next week. But by no possible conclusion can the meeting recorded in John 20:26 be placed earlier in the week than Monday evening. How, then, must we regard the statement which the Doctor makes immediately following, that this meeting is “specifically mentioned as on the first day of the week.” We are unwilling to believe that he would willfully tell an untruth in order to deceive those who might be ignorant of the exact wording of the text, and we are therefore obliged to suppose that when he wrote his article he did not look at the Bible, but simply quoted from a too treacherous memory. Whichever way it is, it shows the desperate straits in which a man is placed when he attempts to maintain Sunday sacredness.SITI February 10, 1887, page 87.10

    Let us now look at the text itself a moment, and see how simple the narrative is. Remember that we have already shown that the disciples had one common dwelling-place at this time. On the evening of the resurrection, Jesus had come into the room while they were eating supper, to convince them that he had actually risen. For some cause not stated, Thomas was not in when Jesus came. Although they all lived at one place, it is not to be supposed that they never stirred from the house. But after eight days (whether nine or ten or more, there is no means of knowing) they were all “within.” And then Jesus appeared to them again. Whether they were eating supper at this time or not is not stated. But knowing the facts as they are stated, how foolish seems the following question: “What higher sanction could Jesus give to this meeting for worship on the first day of the week, this change from the seventh day to the Lord’s day?” The Doctor’s method of argument seems to be something like this: Assume that certain things were done at a certain time; if this assumption happens to be contrary to the Scripture, then change the assumption into an emphatic declaration, so as to make people think it must be so, even though the Bible says it is not; and then from these erroneous assumptions and declarations draw a conclusion with such an air of confidence that people will think that it must be so.SITI February 10, 1887, page 87.11

    The next “argument” is the following:-SITI February 10, 1887, page 87.12

    “We have no account of the disciples meeting for worship on any seventh-day Sabbath from the resurrection of Christ to the day of Pentecost, which was also on the first day of the week.”SITI February 10, 1887, page 87.13

    Inasmuch as the day of the week on which Pentecost came that year is not mentioned, it seems rather a lame thing from which to build an argument for Sunday sacredness. It is about equal to the argument on John 20:26. If the pouring out of the Spirit upon the disciples upon the day of Pentecost were intended as a sanction for Sunday observance, it certainly would not be too much to expect that something should have been said about Sunday. On the contrary, however, no hint is given as to the day of the week, and some of the ablest commentators do not pretend to know what day it was, one among whom is Dr. Hackett, a Baptist commentator; he holds that Pentecost came that year on the seventh day of the week, while there are some who hold that it fell on Monday. This shows that they are of the same opinion as Dr. Barnes, who says that it is a matter of no importance what day of the week it was. And that is exactly true. If there were any significance as to the day of the week, the day would certainly have been mentioned. We could easily show from the Scriptures that that Pentecost was on the seventh day of the week, but we shall not take the time, because it would not add a particle of strength to the Sabbath argument. Even if it were plainly stated that that wonderful outpouring of the Spirit was on the seventh day of the week, we should not think of quoting that as an argument in favor of the Sabbath. At the close of creation God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, and no subsequent act could add to the sacredness there put upon it.SITI February 10, 1887, page 87.14

    And here we will say that even if the statements which Dr. Bailey has made concerning meetings for worship on the first day of the week were true, they lack the essential element to make them of any force in favor of the Sunday; namely, a Bible statement that any sacredness was ever imparted to Sunday. If the mere being together on a certain day were proof of the sacredness of that day, then we would have, according to John 20:26, either Monday, or Tuesday, or Wednesday as a sacred day, for it was on one of these days, we do not know which, that Jesus met with his disciples the week after the resurrection. The day of the ascension of Christ, forty days after his resurrection (see Acts 1:3), was on Thursday, and on that day the disciples all met together with Jesus, and he blessed them, and they worshiped him. See Luke 24:50-52. If Dr. Bailey has any confidence in his method of argument, he ought to keep Thursday. The fact that he does not keep Thursday as sacred, even though Jesus met with and blessed his disciples on that day, shows that he does not really believe that Christ’s meeting with and blessing his disciples on the evening of the resurrection imparted any sacredness to that day. Yet that is all the argument he as in favor of Sunday. So far as the Bible is concerned, there is just as much authority for keeping Thursday as there is for keeping Sunday. The Doctor continues:-SITI February 10, 1887, page 88.1

    “Was this new order of Sabbaths or meetings on the first day of the week kept up by the apostles and by the churches which they established under the guidance of the Holy Spirit? They bade the churches ‘not to forsake the assembling of themselves together.’ On what day did they meet to break bread, and worship? When Paul was at Troas, where a Christian church had been previously formed, we are told in Acts 20:7: ‘And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, and continued his speech until midnight.’ Here again is specifically recorded their customs of assembling on the first day of the week, led by an inspired apostle. Were they right or wrong in this?”SITI February 10, 1887, page 88.2

    Notice how adroitly everything is turned in behalf of the Sunday. The apostle says to the Hebrews: “Let us consider one another to provoke unto love and good works; not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together;” and behold, it is quoted as an argument for Sunday! Because he tells the disciples to meet together for exhortation, it is taken for granted that he must mean for them to meet on Sunday. We are a little surprised that the Doctor did not say that we are here specifically commanded to meet on the first day of the week. We have heard Hebrews 10:25 quoted thus: “Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together on the first day of the week.” Dr. Bailey here neglected a rare opportunity to make another “weighty utterance” in behalf of Sunday.SITI February 10, 1887, page 88.3

    But now what about this meeting at Troas? The apostle and his companions had been with the church there an entire week. Acts 20:6. If anyone thinks that Paul spent seven days with the church in Troas, and did not hold a meeting until just before he started away, he has read the life of Paul to little purpose. If Paul did not hold a meeting every day he was there, he did differently from his ordinary custom. See Acts 19:8-10. We have, however, the record of only one meeting with the church at Troas, and when did that take place? The record says, “On the first day of the week.” But on what part of the first day of the week was it? It was in the night, because they had “many lights,” and it is plainly stated that the meeting lasted all night. But according to Scripture reckoning, the day begins and ends at sunset. See John 1:5, 8, 13, etc.; Deuteronomy 16:6; Leviticus 23:32. The first day of the week, then, begins at sunset Saturday evening, and ends at sunset of the following evening. Therefore a night meeting on the first day of the week must be held on Saturday evening, and that is just when the meeting was held which is recorded in Acts 20:7-11. Then having held this meeting in the night of the first day of the week, what did Paul do in the day-time? Luke tells that he departed when it was light, and traveled on foot to Assos. That this is the view that must necessarily be taken even by Sunday-keepers, when they are not specially set to uphold that institution at all hazards, will be seen by the following extract from Conybeare and Howson’s “Life and Epistles of the Apostle Paul:-SITI February 10, 1887, page 88.4

    “The labors of the early days of the week that was spent at Troas are not related to us, but concerning the last day we have a narrative which enters into details with all the minuteness of one of the gospel histories. It was the evening which succeeded the Jewish Sabbath. On Sunday morning the vessel was about to sail. The Christians of Troas were gathered together at this solemn time to celebrate that feast of love which the last commandment of Christ has enjoined on all his followers.”-Chap. 20, par. 9.SITI February 10, 1887, page 88.5

    After describing the meeting, the departure of the ship with Paul’s companions, and Paul’s departure on foot, the same writers says:-SITI February 10, 1887, page 88.6

    “Strength and peace were surely sought and obtained by the apostle from the Redeemer as he pursued his lonely road that Sunday afternoon in spring among the oak woods and the streams of Ida.”-Par. 11.SITI February 10, 1887, page 88.7

    So much for Paul’s sanction for Sunday worship. Perhaps, however, some may insist that the meeting was held in the night following Sunday, and that Paul’s journey was on Monday; then according to their assumption that Paul tarried there a week in order to be with them at their regular time of meeting, they must necessarily claim that he passed over the whole of the first day of the week without having any meeting, and did not meet with them until the setting of the sun and the gathering darkness showed that the first day had passed. Whichever way they fix it, the record of this meeting gives no aid or comfort to the advocates of Sunday observance.SITI February 10, 1887, page 88.8

    Now one word about apostolic example, for that is the stronghold of Sunday advocates. If apostolic example has to be followed at all, it must be followed closely. It will not do to discriminate and say that we must follow certain apostolic practices, but may neglect others. Therefore our friends who are such sticklers for apostolic example, must hold their meetings in the dark part of the first day of the week, and never in the day-time on Sunday, for the entire Bible contains no account of a religious meeting on Sunday in the day-time. And the meeting at Troas is the only recorded instance of a meeting on the first day of the week, even in the night. W.SITI February 10, 1887, page 88.9

    “Holiness of Angels” The Signs of the Times, 13, 6.

    E. J. Waggoner

    When Christ spoke of the condition of the righteous after the resurrection he said, “Neither can they die any more; for they are equal unto the angels.” Luke 20:36. Thus the angels in Heaven are immortal. But there is another feature in which the saints will resemble the angels, and that is in their holiness. This quality is a characteristic of the angels. This is so well known that an angel is almost a symbol of purity. When they are mentioned in the Bible the adjective “holy” is often applied to them. The servants of Cornelius told Peter that their master had been “warned from God by an holy angel.” Acts 10:22. In Matthew 25:31 Christ himself applied the term to all the angels of Heaven. He said: “When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory.” Without these direct statements as to their character, we would know that they are holy, for Christ says of these “ministering spirits,” they “do always behold the face of my Father which is in Heaven.” Matthew 18:10. And only the pure and holy in heart can see God. Matthew 5:8; Hebrews 12:14.SITI February 10, 1887, page 90.1

    In what does the holiness of the angels consist? What is it that makes them holy? It must be in that they do the will of God. That the will of God is done in Heaven, is evident from Matthew 6:10; and since there are none in Heaven except the angels who do the will of God, it is a necessary consequence that they are the ones to whom Christ refers. God is holy, and the doing of his will would make one like him, holy. From Romans 2:17, 18 we learn that God’s law is his will; and that this is the will which the angels perform, and which constitutes their holiness, is plainly stated in Psalm 103:20: “Bless the Lord, ye his angels, that excel in strength, that do his commandments, hearkening unto the voice of his word.” The perfection of the angels, then, is due to the fact that they keep the perfect law of God.SITI February 10, 1887, page 90.2

    Christ taught his disciples to pray, “Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in Heaven.” Matthew 6:10. This shows that a time will come when the commandments of God will be kept on earth even as the angels now keep them in Heaven. This will be in the new earth, wherein righteousness shall dwell. 2 Peter 3:13. But although the change of the earth from old to new will be quickly effected, and although man’s change from mortal to immortal will be brought about in the twinkling of an eye, the change to holiness is a gradual work. “Heaven is not reached at a single bound.” The work of sanctification is a progressive work. Therefore the fact that the commandments of God will some day be kept by men on earth even as they now are by the angels in Heaven, shows that they who hope to be among the equals of the angels must now be keeping the commandments of God.SITI February 10, 1887, page 90.3


    We read in 2 Peter 2:4 that “For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment.” This shows conclusively that the angels were once on probation as Adam was in the garden of Eden, and that those who are now called the holy angels have had their characters tested, so that they are now placed beyond the reach of temptation. It shows also that the angels who sinned can have no hope of a restoration to the favor of God. Peter says that God “delivered them into chains of darkness.” We can understand what this means by comparing a few texts. From 2 Peter 2:19; Fal. 3:22, 23; Romans 7:14 we learn that sin is bondage. The person who is in the darkness of error is in a state of bondage. Moreover, we learn from 2 Thessalonians 2:9-12 that those who persist in rejecting light will finally be given up to believe a lie. The same thing is taught in Romans 1:28. That is, those who persistently sin in the face of great light, will finally be left in the bondage of sin without hope of escape. This is what is doubtless meant by the angels that sinned being delivered into chains of darkness. They had light and knowledge greater than man had, as they were a higher order of creatures than he was. In the face of this light, and in defiance of the love and mercy of God, they deliberately chose the way of darkness. Having once chosen the bondage of sin, their choice was irrevocable. They were in “chains of darkness” that could not be broken. And so until the Judgment day ends their miserable careers, they are in darkness. They are darkness itself. Darkness and error are inseparable from them. Wherever they are, their presence contaminates; and their sole aim is to perpetrate lying wonders which shall lure men away from the truth into the same chains of darkness with themselves. Let us never forget to pray, “Deliver us from evil.”SITI February 10, 1887, page 90.4


    But if “the rulers of the darkness of this world” are actively engaged in trying to overthrow us, and drag us down to eternal ruin, we have the assurance that “angels that excel in strength” are “ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation.” Hebrews 1:14. Every “little one,” every child of God, has one for his especial guardian. Matthew 18:10; Acts 12:15. Not only so, but all the heavenly host are intensely interested in the whole human race, and anxious for the conversion of each sinner. Says Christ: “I say unto you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth.” Luke 15:10. When Jesus was born in Bethelehem of Judea, there was joy in Heaven. It was not sufficient to send a single angel to announce his birth, but a multitude of the heavenly host must accompany him to sing their joy at the good tidings which should be to all people. So great was the joy among the angels over the fact that fallen man’s Redeemer had actually come, that it would seem that they could not remain quiet in Heaven. They must flock to witness the joy of the humble shepherds, and to proclaim their own.SITI February 10, 1887, page 90.5

    Seeing then that “God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16); that “God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 5:8); that Christ is at the right hand of God making intercession for us (Romans 8:34); and that all the holy and mighty angels of God are interested and loving messengers of light and strength to those who are striving against sin, may we not even in the face of Satan’s hosts say: “In all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us. For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.” Romans 8:37-39. W.SITI February 10, 1887, page 91.1

    “Back Page” The Signs of the Times, 13, 6.

    E. J. Waggoner

    Last Wednesday, February 2, Brother W. I. H. Baker and Sister Josie Baker sailed on the steamer Australia for Honolulu, whence, after a stay of ten days, they will sail on the Mariposa for Australia. Brother and Sister Baker have been faithful laborers in the office of the SIGNS OF THE TIMES, and we shall miss them both here and in the Sabbath-school. Many prayers and good wishes will follow them on their journey, and to their new field of labor.SITI February 10, 1887, page 96.1

    The American Sentinel for 1886, bound either in paper or I cloth, can now be furnished in any quantity. In either style it is very convenient for carrying, and can thus be used for reference by ministers who are traveling from place to place. Nowhere else can so many facts and arguments be found on the vital subject of “National Reform.” No one who wishes to be intelligent in regard to this matter should fail to procure a bound volume of the Sentinel. Price, in paper, sixty cents; in cloth, one dollar. Address American Sentinel, Oakland Cal.SITI February 10, 1887, page 96.2

    An Eastern paper says: “The Jews are talking of changing their Sabbath to our Sabbath, beginning with the year 1900.” We do not see how this thing can be done; the Jews might easily abandon the ancient Sabbath and go to keeping another day; but to change “their Sabbath”-by which we suppose is meant the seventh day, “the Sabbath of the Lord”-to “our Sabbath”-which, we take it, means Sunday-is just as impossible as to change Monday to Thursday, or 12 o’clock noon to 12 o’clock midnight. God has spoken, and said, “The seventh day is the Sabbath,” and though “hand join in hand,” and both Jew and Papist think to change the times and laws of the Most High, all his commandments will still be sure, they will stand fast forever and ever.SITI February 10, 1887, page 96.3

    The World’s Advanced Thought thus patronizingly notices the progress of a prominent “divine:”-SITI February 10, 1887, page 96.4

    “The Christian Union, called by the Rev. Lyman Abbott, repudiates the doctrine of the resurrection of the body as ‘inconsistent with Scripture, antagonistic to science, and a product of a Pagan and materialistic habit of thought.’ If the Reverend Abbott would get hold of a file of the paper edited by Andrew Jackson Davis twenty-five or thirty years ago, he could pick up a good many such views that were held by the last generation of spiritual Spiritualists, and that the spiritual Spiritualists of the present consider too well established to be live subjects for discussion.”SITI February 10, 1887, page 96.5

    It must be encouraging to “the leaders of Christian thought” to be assured by the very “spiritual Spiritualists” that they are making advancement in the spiritualness of Spiritualism.SITI February 10, 1887, page 96.6

    It is stated that there were 3,247 arrests for gambling in Los Angeles last year, but that only twenty-two of the arrests were of white men. The others we suppose were Chinamen. It is touching to see the tender regard which the California policeman has for the morals of the benighted brethren who are among us. No one supposes for a moment that the number of Chinese gamblers exceeds the number of white men who indulge in the same vice; and the only reason we can give why the police do not arrest the white man as well as the Chinamen, is that they think the former were beyond reformation. Heathenism is not dependent on race or color, and we very much doubt if the Asiatic heathen could give any information in vice to those who are of American or European birth.SITI February 10, 1887, page 96.7

    When Peter speaks of the manner in which the prophecies were given, he says: “But there were false prophets also among the people.” Wherever you find anything of value, you will find a counterfeit. Those false prophets arose for the purpose of bringing the true prophets into disrepute. In like manner we might expect that when prophecies are interpreted by the word of God, there will be false and absurd interpretations, calculated to make sensible people disgusted, so that they will resolve to have nothing to do with any interpretations of prophecy. There are some professed Adventist journals which persist in setting a time for the coming of the Lord, although the Lord said, “But of that day and hour knoweth no man.” They have been at this work for years, and have set no less than a score of different times for the Lord to come. In order to make their computation seem to be correct, they manufacture history without any regard to fact. The time now fixed by these pseudo-Adventists is 1889. We earnestly protest against such tampering with prophecy and history; its effect is only to cause people to disbelieve that the Lord is coming at all. It is enough for us to know that the coming of the Lord is near, “even at the doors.” We are not required to understand the things which God has not revealed.SITI February 10, 1887, page 96.8

    The Papal Consistory has been postponed till the early part of March, when the new foreign cardinals will receive their hats.SITI February 10, 1887, page 96.9

    “No Sunday Law for California” The Signs of the Times, 13, 6.

    E. J. Waggoner

    The readers of the SIGNS will remember the account that was given of a Sunday Law mass-meeting in San Francisco several weeks ago, and of the vigorous efforts that were being made by the clergy of California to induce this Legislature to enact a rigid Sunday Law. Petitions have been circulated in all parts of the State, and several have been presented to the Assembly. A few days ago an effort was made to create a boom by means of a mass-meeting in the Assembly Chamber, which was granted for the purpose. But although the meeting was presided over by the Speaker of the House, and eloquently addressed by several clergymen and one member of the Legislature, it did not seem to have the desired effect on the members generally. On Friday, February 4, the Committee on Public Morals reported back a petition in favor of a Sunday Law, with the recommendation that the Speaker appoint a committee of one to prepare and introduce a bill in accordance with the petition. The House refused to take the action recommended. It said that there were only four votes in favor of it. This settles the Sunday Law question for this session of the Legislature. We are glad that there is in our Legislature so clear a sense of justice and a perception of the fitness of things. We earnestly pray that the Legislators of other States where the Sunday conflict is raging, may be gifted with equal good sense. California has at present a Sunday law amply sufficient to meet the demands of good order; it is insufficient only to meet the demands of bigotry.SITI February 10, 1887, page 96.10

    “The Great Strike in New York” The Signs of the Times, 13, 6.

    E. J. Waggoner

    This is getting to be a good deal more than a local affair, and is assuming proportions that entitle it to more than the space of a news item. A dispatch of February 4 says:-SITI February 10, 1887, page 96.11

    “The only hope the strikers have of success is to so hamper business as to bring about a settlement by arbitration. There are now on the strike nearly 49,000 men, with perhaps half that number out of work through the stoppage of business incident to the strike.”SITI February 10, 1887, page 96.12

    Another dispatch of same date says:-SITI February 10, 1887, page 96.13

    “The Country General Committee of the United Labor party adopted the following resolution last night:-SITI February 10, 1887, page 96.14

    “That is, in the opinion of those now conducting the strike, it becomes necessary to call out on the strike, men of other branches of industry affiliated with our party, we recommend they obey the summons, even to the point of stopping all the wheels of industry, and in time they may learn how necessary to society producing workers are.”SITI February 10, 1887, page 96.15

    Still another says:-SITI February 10, 1887, page 96.16

    “The White Star steamship Republic and the Cunard Line steamship City of Chicago scheduled to sail to-day with the transatlantic mails, will not be able to get off because of the strike.”SITI February 10, 1887, page 96.17

    Another dispatch of February 5 says:-SITI February 10, 1887, page 96.18

    “The calkers and joiners at work repairing the Chyandotte, the steamer that was damaged by the explosion of an infernal machine, struck. They had no grievances, but struck out of sympathy with the freight-handlers. Their places will be filled to-day by non-union men. The coopers employed along the piers, with the mill-wrights, joined the strike to-day. The painters and mechanics on the Union Line also struck. The Italians who took the place of the strikers at the Hudson River depot quit work in the afternoon.”SITI February 10, 1887, page 96.19

    We are workingmen ourselves, and we have a strong sympathy for them when they are oppressed. But we cannot sympathize with them in lawless acts even when they are oppressed, and much less when they have no grievance. Those who first struck may have had a grievance; but for all other workmen to join them, and to deliberately plan to stop all industries, is simply barbarous selfishness. Thousands of poor people will suffer from cold and hunger because of this strike. We insist that there is no monopoly in this country so regardless of the rights of the poor as are the Labor Unions. This is emphatically an age when men are “lovers of their own selves.”SITI February 10, 1887, page 96.20

    Larger font
    Smaller font