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

    November 3, 1887

    “Who Shall Be Able to Stand?” The Signs of the Times 13, 42, pp. 663, 664.

    THE prophet Joel in speaking of the day of the Lord says, “The day of the Lord is great and very terrible;” and then inquires, “Who can abide it?” Joel 2:11. Balaam, away in his distant day, speaking of the time when “Out of Jacob shall come he that shall have dominion, and shall destroy him that remaineth of the city,” exclaims, “Alas, who shall live when God doeth this?” Numbers 24:23. Malachi also wonderingly asks, “Who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth?” Malachi 3:2. And when at last that terrible day shall have come, the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, the bondmen and the free, hide themselves in the dens, and the rocks of the mountains, and cry to the mountains and rocks to fall on them, and hide from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb, because the great day of his wrath is come; and in terror they too inquire, “Who shall be able to stand”? Revelation 6:15-17.SITI November 3, 1887, page 663.1

    The connection in which these questions are asked shows that they are questions of no slight importance. Who can abide the day of the coming of the Lord? Who shall stand when he appeareth? Job in viewing that dreadful time exclaimed, “O that thou wouldest hide me in the grave, that thou wouldest keep me secret, until thy wrath be past.” Job 14:13. And Habakkuk, beholding it in vision, said, “When I heard, my belly trembled; my lips quivered at the voice: rottenness entered into my bones, and I trembled in myself, that I might rest in the day of trouble.” Habakkuk 3:16. This is the time of which Daniel said “There shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time.” Daniel 12:1. Yet for all this there will be those who may abide the day of his coming; there will be those who shall stand when he appeareth. Jesus speaks of them, and to them, and exhorts them, saying, “Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.” Luke 21:36.SITI November 3, 1887, page 663.2

    John also speaks to these, saying, “And now, little children, abide in him; that, when he shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before him at his coming.”1 John 2:28. Isaiah speaks of the same company, and says, “It shall be said in that day, Lo, this is our God; we have waited for him, and he will save us; this is the Lord; we have waited for him, we will be glad and rejoice in his salvation.” Isaiah 25:9. And Paul gives a point more in regard to the same ones: “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 4:16, 17.SITI November 3, 1887, page 663.3

    But, although it is certain that there will be a company who will abide the day of his coming, and although from other texts we know that the number will be one hundred and forty-four thousand, the question still remains, “Who shall abide the day of his coming?” “Who shall stand, when he appeareth?” More than this, the time of trouble, and of the wrath of God, is a longer period than just the short time in which the blaze of Christ’s glory shall burst upon the earth, and his people shall be delivered. The wrath of God, the pouring out of which creates the time of trouble such as never was since there was a nation, and which culminates in the personal coming of Christ to take vengeance on the wicked,—this wrath of God will be poured out in the seven last plagues.SITI November 3, 1887, page 663.4

    The first manifestation of this wrath will be a dreadful pestilence,—a noisome and grievous sore,—which falls upon them that have the mark of the beast, and upon them which worship his image. The second will be seen in the waters of the sea being turned to a pestilential mass, as the blood of a dead man. The third will be seen in the rivers and fountains of water becoming blood. The fourth will be manifested in the increased heat of the sun, to such a degree that even men will be scorched with it. The fifth will be a dreadful pall of darkness overhanging the greater part of the earth. The sixth will be such a manifestation of Spiritualism as will deceive everybody but the very elect. And with the seventh there comes the great voice out of the temple of Heaven from the throne, saying, “It is done.” And then there are voices and thunderings and lightnings and a great earthquake such as was not since men were upon the earth so mighty an earthquake and so great; the cities of the nations fall; every island flees away, and the mountains will not be found; and there will fall upon men a great hail out of heaven, every stone about the weight of a talent. And these plagues are cumulative—the terrors of each one being added to those which have gone before. (See Revelation 16.) Well indeed may all the prophets lament the dreadful day. Well indeed may all men anxiously inquire, Who shall be able to stand?SITI November 3, 1887, page 663.5

    God spake by Ezekiel of this time of trouble, saying: “If I send a pestilence into that land, and pour out my fury upon it in blood, to cut off from it man and beast; though Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, as I live, saith the Lord God, they shall deliver neither son nor daughter; they shall but deliver their own souls by their righteousness.” Ezekiel 14:19, 20. Noah, the one man only whom the Lord found righteous in the generation before the flood; Daniel, whom God twice called “greatly beloved;” and Job, the one chief example of suffering affliction and of patience—though these three God-chosen men were in this land in this fast-hastening day, no man could be supported by their righteousness or their faithfulness; no man can then be delivered but by the righteousness which he himself possesses, nor be sustained in the time of trial, of trouble, of temptation, and of opposition, except by the connection which he himself sustains with God, and by the confidence which is begotten of personal and thorough conviction of the truth of God fixed in the very soul, and witnessed, as it will ever be, by the Spirit of God through an abiding faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.SITI November 3, 1887, page 663.6

    We know not how we can better illustrate this than by giving two instances from the Bible—one from the Old Testament and one from the New. Jeremiah had spoken to all the people in Jerusalem the message of the Lord, that they should be carried captive to Babylon and there remain seventy years. Many of them had already been taken to Babylon, Jeconiah the king among them, and Jeremiah had said that Jeconiah should see his native land no more, but should die in Babylonia. One day there was a great assembly of all the people and the priests at the house of the Lord. Jeremiah was there among them, and he had on his neck a wooden yoke which he had been wearing for some time as a sign to the peolpe of their doomed servitude to Babylon. A false prophet, Hananiah by name, spoke to Jeremiah directly, “in the presence of the priests and of all the people, saying, Thus speaketh the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, saying, I have broken the yoke of the king of Babylon. Within two full years will I bring again into this place all the vessels of the Lord’s house, that Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon took away from this place, and carried them to Babylon; and I will bring again to this place Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah, with all the captives of Judah, that went into Babylon, saith the Lord; for I will break the yoke of the king of Babylon.”SITI November 3, 1887, page 663.7

    Jeremiah answered in substance that he would be glad if it could be so, and that he would be glad if the Lord would but do it, “Nevertheless, hear thou now this word that I speak in thine ears, and in the ears of all the people.... The prophet which prophesieth of peace, when the word of the prophet shall come to pass, then shall the prophet be known, that the Lord hath truly sent him.” This only roused up Hananiah to greater boldness, and he deliberately walked up to Jeremiah and “took the yoke from off the prophet Jeremiah’s neck, and brake it. And Hananiah spake in the presence of all the people, saying, Thus saith the Lord: Even so will I break the yoke of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon from the neck of all nations within the space of two full years.” And then the record is, “And the prophet Jeremiah went his way.” He had nothing more to say just then, and so silently walked away.SITI November 3, 1887, page 664.1

    Now when it is understood that all the people were already dead set against Jeremiah, it may be imagined what effect this public and palpable defeat, as they regarded it, of him whom they already hated would have upon the populace. We can fairly hear the scoffs, and hoots, and jeers, and groans, that followed Jeremiah as he edged his way through the crowd. Cries of, “Ah-h-h, you’re beat, you’re beat, you’re beat,” “Prophesy again, won’t you?” “Put another yoke on him,” etc., etc., would fairly split the air. But what did it all amount to, to Jeremiah? Just nothing at all. He was right, and they were all wrong, the whole crowd of them, and though not a person in the whole nation should believe him made not a particle of difference to him so far as the truth or his conviction of it was concerned.SITI November 3, 1887, page 664.2

    Paul stood before the embodiment of worldly power, the Emperor Nero, to answer for his life and especially for his faith. There also, to oppose him and to blind and confuse men’s minds to the truth, stood an apostate from the faith, Alexander the coppersmith; and his opposition was so successful that Paul himself tells us, “At my first answer no man stood with me, but all men forsook me.” 2 Timothy 4:16. Added to this all his brethren in Asia were turned away from him—those at Antioch for whom he had labored so earnestly; those at Iconium, and Lystra, and Derbe for whom he had labored and suffered; those at Troas from whom he was so loth to take his farewell; those of Ephesus for whose good he had labored three long years, whom he had not ceased to warn night and day with tears, with whom he had talked, and prayed, and wept so tenderly at their final parting; those of Galatia, Phrygia, Pisidia, and Pamphylia, all—“all they which be in Asia are turned away from me.” And then, as though that could not tell all the greatness of his cause for sorrow, he adds, “of whom are Phygellus and Hermogenes.” And yet more, added to all this there was his own fellow-laborer, of whom he was compelled to write, “Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world.”SITI November 3, 1887, page 664.3

    For all this, though his life was in the balance, and though no man stood with him, yet he never faltered, but calmly stood forth alone, saying, “Notwithstanding the Lord stood with me, and strengthened me.” There was the source of his strength. It depended not upon any influence of the world, of men, or of the church—not even upon the moral influence and support of his own intimate brethren—it sprung solely from his own personal, living connection with the Lord Jesus Christ. That alone it was which sustained him in all his trials and afflictions; in all his contradiction and opposition of unbelievers and apostates; and in all the desertions of brethren and fellow-laborers in the faith. And that alone it is which will sustain any man in the time of trouble, and in the day of the coming of Christ; that alone it is which will enable anyone to stand when he appears. Paul was able to stand unmoved amidst all earth’s vicissitudes because he was able to say from the heart, “I know whom I have believed.” Not as is too often misquoted, I know in whom I have believed, but, “I know whom I have believed;” and he used the word “know” in its real, proper sense too. The following from a late number of the Sunday School Times will give an idea of what Paul meant by this use of the word “know:”—SITI November 3, 1887, page 664.4

    “‘To know’ primarily means to have the ability to create or produce; hence it properly includes the idea of a perfect understanding of the innermost nature, or the most intricate parts, of the subject of knowledge.”SITI November 3, 1887, page 664.5

    This is the sense in which Paul used the word “know.” It was a living experience with him. As he expressed it in other words, “I am crucified with Christ; nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.” Such as these shall abide the day of Christ’s coming; they shall stand when he appeareth. And none others can. Are you looking and waiting for that day? Do you know whom you believe? It was written in the prophecy, of those upon whom should come the great tribulation, that “the people that do know their God shall be strong, and do exploits.” Daniel 11:32. Only the people who do know God and the Lord Jesus Christ shall be able to stand in the day of his wrath; only these may abide the day of his coming; only these shall stand when he appeareth.SITI November 3, 1887, page 664.6

    J.

    “The Fifth Commandment. No. 4” The Signs of the Times 13, 42, pp. 664, 665.

    LAST week’s article closed with the Scripture quotation, “Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him,” and stated that “the rod of correction” is the only remedy that the Bible gives for this universal defect. Of course it is not meant that children shall be ruled by the rod, nor that it is to be wielded so promiscuously and indiscriminately that they shall live in constant dread of it. That would be tyranny. But children must be held accountable for their actions. Strict obedience must be required; and transgression and disobedience must be visited with inevitable penalty. Nor does it follow that every act of disobedience or transgression must be visited with the same invariable penalty of the rod. Yet it is emphatically true that there are times in the life of every child when nothing but a good whipping will meet the requirements of the case; there are times when in no other way can a parent do justice either to himself or to his child.SITI November 3, 1887, page 664.1

    We know that in many quarters this idea is considered too old-fogyish for the enlightened progressiveness of this age; and we know likewise that because it is so considered is the very reason of the so widespread defiance of law and discipline of this age in the home, in the school, in the church, and in the State. There is a good deal being said just now about “progressive theology” that is in fact a theology that has progressed, or is fast progressing, beyond the theology of the Bible. Yet just as much might be said, and with a good deal more propriety, of this progressive system of parental discipline, which has “progressed” beyond that laid down in the word of God. In that Bible hand-book of every-day life, the book of Proverbs, there is a good deal said directly upon this subject; and the two sides of the subject are so clearly and forcibly presented that we shall here reproduce them in full.SITI November 3, 1887, page 664.2

    “He that spareth his rod hatheth his son; but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.” Proverbs 13:24. “Betimes” means early. “He that loveth him chasteneth him early,” is the real meaning of this phrase. The reason why it should be done early is explained in the next passage: “Chasten thy son while there is hope, and let not thy soul spare for his crying.” Chap. 19:18. Chasten him early, while there is hope,—before he becomes confirmed in the wrong way, for then the habit will be stronger than the impression that will be made by the correction, and more than this, the wrong habit will then be strengthened by a will confirmed in perverseness. Let the principle of obedience and respect for authority be the first that is rooted in the heart of the child, and do not leave him to follow his own way till it is too late to do him any good. Chasten him early, while there is hope. The reason why you are not to “spare for his crying” is manifest,—if you do, it will be but a little while till he will make “his crying” take the place of the correction every time. Let him know that when correction is deserved he will receive what he deserves with no allowance for crying, and your task is half done.SITI November 3, 1887, page 664.3

    “Withhold not correction from the child; for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.” Chap. 23:13, 14. “Correct thy son, and he shall give thee rest; yea, he shall give delight unto thy soul.” Chap. 29:17.SITI November 3, 1887, page 664.4

    The good and sufficient reason for all these directions is given in the following: “The rod and reproof give wisdom; but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame.” Chap. 29:15. Yet, evidently true as this is, there are to-day many parents who leave their children to themselves, and the inevitable consequence follows—the parents are brought to shame. Nor is it alone that many children are left to themselves, but we have seen parents who would actually advocate the principle of so doing, some pleading that they could not bear to punish “the dear little things,” and others who seemingly expected to fulfill with the rod the whole course of training, saying that whipping did no good, and both classes saying, “Just let the child alone till he gets older, and then he will know better and do better of his own choice.” So they leave the child to himself, and he brings his mother to shame. How can it be otherwise? How shall the child know better when he grows older if he is not taught better now? No; such ways will never do. The Scripture is right in its direction to “chasten thy son while there is hope.”SITI November 3, 1887, page 664.5

    But one of the worst features about the ways of such parents is that they think they love their children, when in fact they hate them. This is the fat, for the Lord says: “He that spareth his rod hatheth his son; but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.” Yet, although the Lord says it, many parents cannot see how they can punish their children and at the same time love them. They cannot as long as they mistake for love the puling sentimentalism which now too often passes for love. But the truth is that no child should ever be punished from any other motive than that of love. Nor should it be alone love to the child, but love to God as well.SITI November 3, 1887, page 664.6

    No child should ever be punished in anger, because anger begets anger. Anger in the parent will only tend to provoke anger in the child; and this is directly forbidden by the word of God: “Fathers, provoke not your children to anger,” and the all-important reason is given, “lest they be discouraged.” Colossians 3:21. Whose case is more deplorable than that of the man who is discouraged? He is totally unmanned. He can do nothing for himself, and all efforts of others to get him to do are lost on him. It is not only a cruel but a dreadful thing to discourage a child. But for parents to provoke their children to anger will discourage them, and to punish them in anger will provoke them to anger. The Lord is careful to guard both extremes—leave not the child to himself, but chasten him early while there is hope, lest he bring his mother to shame; provoke him not to anger, lest he be discouraged. Another scripture to the same point is: “Ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath; but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.” Ephesians 6:4.SITI November 3, 1887, page 664.7

    But some may ask, “Does the nurture and admonition of the Lord allow chastisement? does it allow the use of the rod?” It certainly does, or the Lord never would have commanded it at all, much less as often as he has. Yet we are not left to even this necessary conclusion: we have the plain word of God to the effect that this is allowable in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. Here is the whole subject set forth both in the precept and in the principle, and in such a way that it might be woven into the very texture of the life of all Christians under God, and of all parents over their children. “Ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him; for whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence; shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous; nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.” Hebrews 12:5-11. And the Faithful and True Witness says: “As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten.” Revelation 3:19. Therefore, fathers, provoke not your children to wrath, but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.SITI November 3, 1887, page 664.8

    J.

    “A Generous Proposition” The Signs of the Times 13, 42, p. 665.

    THE Knights of Labor at their late convention at Minneapolis, adopted a report approving a bill to be submitted to Congress “providing that settlers under the Homestead Act may borrow $500 from the Government, secured by the land at three per cent.” Now a settler under the Homestead Act must reside upon and cultivate his land for five years before he can get a title to it. Does this bill of the Knights of Labor propose that the Government shall loan the settler the $500 when he first makes his entry and settles upon the land? That is assuredly the time when he most needs the money. He needs the money then more than at any other time, so that he may have the use of it in opening up his claim until the land itself can be made to render a return. But if they mean that he shall receive the money then, how is it to be “secured by the land”? for the land will not be his for five years. That is only to propose that the Government shall loan the settler, under the Homestead Act, $500 at three per cent., without any security at all. In other words, this action proposes that the Government shall give to every homestead settler one hundred and sixty acres of land, and then give him $500 for taking it. But why not propose that the Government shall give every one of these settlers $500 outright and keep the land? and why confine it to the Homestead settler? Why confine it to settlers at all? Why not give it to every person that wants it? Oh! such a proposition as that would be rather too raw, to make it outright; the Socialism of such a proposition as that would be patent upon its very face; so it must be veiled under the pretense of helping the Homestead settler. The pretense is entirely too thin.SITI November 3, 1887, page 665.1

    There is, however, an alternative to the settler under the Homestead Act by which he can secure title to his claim in less than five years. After dwelling upon and cultivating his claim a certain prescribed time—eighteen months we think—he may secure title by paying $200. Is it then that the Knights propose that the Government shall loan him the $500, so that he may pay for his land and get his title, in order that he may render the land as security for the money? If it is, then the proposition is that the Government shall give the land and $200, so that it may in return get a mortgage on the land as security for the other $300. But that brings us to the same point as before, and to the same question, Why shall not the Government give the $300 outright to every man that wants it? for that is what it amounts to in the end.SITI November 3, 1887, page 665.2

    Why didn’t the Knights ask that the Government should give outright to every man that would ask for it, one hundred and sixty acres of land without any consideration at all in return? Aye, there is the rub. It is not land that they want, it is the ready cash. If they had the land it would require labor to put it in a condition in which they might readily sell it for $500, and that is not what these Knights of Labor want; they want the ready $500, without labor. This is proved by the fact that while we write this, there are 3,000 men in New York on strike to secure the half of Saturday in which to do nothing, while their employers shall pay the regular wages for it. But why set the sum at $500? Why not make it $500,000 at once? for $500,000 can be secured to the Government by one hundred and sixty acres of land that already belongs to the Government, just as well as can $500. There would be a double advantage in this too: (1) It would stop the labored cries of the Knights of Labor; and (2) then the Knight, receiving his $500,000 at three per cent., could loan the money to the oppressive capitalist at six per cent., which would enable the Knight to pay his annual interest to the Government, and then he would have $15,000 of his own upon which to labor while the bloated capitalist was loafing on the $500,000 which he had borrowed from the poor laboring Knight.SITI November 3, 1887, page 665.3

    The truth of the matter is, and there is no use in trying to dodge it, that all these so-called labor movements are, in the last analysis, Socialism. And Socialism, in the last analysis, is Anarchism. J.SITI November 3, 1887, page 665.4

    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents