|
EXPERIENCES
Of A
PIONEER EVANGELIST
Of The
NORTHWEST
-------------
By ELDER W. B. HILL
-------------
Published By The Author
1902
Chapters 4 and 5
{p. 93}
CHAPTER 4
WORK IN WISCONSIN AND IN KANDIYOHI COUNTY,
MINNESOTA.
On July 4, 1877, I started from Dassel, and reached St. Paul that
evening. I reached Prescott, Wis., where Brother Olive lived, about
noon, July 5. Brother Olive took the tent with his team to Ellsworth
that afternoon, a distance of eighteen miles. The next day we
pitched the tent, and held meeting in the evening. I was invited by a
prominent Spiritualist to make my home with him. I thought
perhaps I could do him some good, and so accepted his kind offer.
In the evening, as I was preparing for our first meeting, a
gentleman, lady, and a little boy came to the door. It struck me in a
minute that the gentleman was a Spiritualist lecturer, and so he
proved to be. He sailed under the title Dr. J. K. Bailey, of New York.
Here we were, Adventist minister and Spiritualist lecturer, met in
the same place, And both desirous to occupy the time. He proposed
to hold a joint discussion in the tent, and charge an admission fee.
He said we need not hurt each other, and that we could make a nice
lot of money out of it. We told him we were not there to make a lot
of money, but to do good. Charging a fee to hear the truth was
altogether out of our line. Freely ye received, freely give, is the plan
of the Great Teacher. Well, then he would hold meetings in the
courthouse, and thus divide the interest. We finally compromised
the matter by giving him the tent for three meetings. He held one
meeting and preached Spiritualism from our pulpit. A sister Green,
of Maiden Rock, came that evening, expecting to hear some
wholesome Advent preaching. She was amazed to hear a man in the
Adventist tent promulgating the vagaries of Spiritualism.
The next day he came to the tent with flaming posters, announcing
lectures in the courthouse, by Dr. J. K. Bailey, of New York. He was
going to have an organ, a grand choir, {p. 94} and carry on things
on a big scale. Spiritualism was quite popular in the town. Our
organist was the daughter of a Spiritualist, and she left us, with her
organ, to play at the courthouse. The outlook was rather dark; but
he was making such great preparations, he would not be ready for a
couple of days; so we announced as a subject for the next
evening.
"THE NATURE AND TENDENCY OF MODERN SPIRITUALISM."
trusting that God would help us. The people came in crowds. The
tent would not nearly hold them. Our Spiritualist came also. He sat
by the tent pole, bobbed up and down so vigorously while the
nature and tendency of Spiritualism was pointed out, that it would
not have been surprising to see him climbing it next. The evening he
lectured in the tent, he distributed papers among the people,
entitled, "The Voice of Angels," a copy of which he gave to me. In the
course of my remarks, I held up the paper, and said, "The
gentleman will not repudiate what is found in his own paper, which
he so assiduously scatters among the people." He cried out, "I do
not indorse any man's teachings." "Ah, my friend, this is not the
voice of a man, it is the voice of angels. See the angels hovering
around the medium, showing him what to write. Now, my friend,
you won't go back on the angels, will you? What do these angels
say? 'All things justify themselves in the end.' Then, if a man steals,
it is justifiable. If he lies, it is justifiable. If he imbrues his hands in
the blood of his neighbor, these angel spirits teach that it is
justifiable. If he robs the blooming maiden of innocence and virtue,
and causes the hot tears of shame and sorrow to furrow her cheeks
all the days of her life, it is justifiable. For ALL THINGS, say these
spirits, justify themselves in the end; and this gentleman is around
scattering such doctrine among the multitude, telling them, 'It is
the voice of angels.' Surely, Paul was right when he said, 'The Spirit
speaketh expressly that in the latter times some shall depart from
the faith ( teaching of the Bible), giving heed to seducing spirits and
doctrines of devils.' 1Tim. 4: 1. These are the seducing spirits
foretold, and such doctrines as they teach come from his Satanic
majesty straight. This gentleman before us is engaged with many
others, in teaching these Satanic doctrines; and he, and all the
millions {p. 95} who with him are giving heed to the spirits, are
fulfilling this prophecy today before our eyes. When did Paul say
they should give heed to seducing spirits?---In the latter times. Then
where are we today?---In the latter times foretold, and we are in the
midst of the strong delusions that should come in the last
days."
The impression upon the people was powerful; so much so, that our
Spiritualist's meetings were a failure, and he left for a more
favorable field.
Some think that Spiritualism is about dead, but that is a grave
mistake. It has only wrapped itself in a moral, religious cloak, in
order the more effectually to deceive. A letter published in the
PROGRESSIVE THINKER, says there are at least sixty thousand
Spiritualists in San Francisco, or people who lean in that direction.
The writer says, "In addition to our mediums' meetings, we have a
very successful children's progressive lyceum, conducted every
Sunday forenoon. From one hundred to one hundred fifty young
children and middle-aged ladies and gentlemen participate in its
exercises. There are a great many private circles held every night in
the week, in different portions of the city, all of which are largely
attended. The greatest work now being done is in the churches.
Spiritism is shaking the sacred edifices to their very foundations,"---
ABRIDGED FROM THE SIGNS OF THE TIMES, DEC. 28, 1891,
OAKLAND, CAL.
Many other cities are much the same, but the last fact stated, that
Spiritualism is doing its greatest work now among the churches, is
of the greatest significance. The false prophets will yet do their
signs and wonders in the name of Christ and among his professed
people. Matt. 24: 5, 23, 24. Take heed lest any man deceive you by
any means. We had a good interest at Ellsworth, and also at
Beldenville. Although the enemy entered in, and did us damage, yet
some precious souls rejoice unto this day in the truth they learned
in those meetings. May the Lord keep them unto His heavenly
kingdom.
In September, I once more started for home. As I stepped off the
train at Dassel, I was surprised to see my little boys, with shining
eyes, looking for papa. My little wife had taken the horse and buggy,
and driven the whole family nine miles {p. 96} to Dassel, and while
the boys were at the train, she stood in the hotel door, with baby
Ella in her arms, smiling a hearty welcome to the returning
wanderer. Of all the joy of this world, there is no joy like home joy.
When, beaten and bruised in life's battle, the husband and father
comes home, and the good wife smiles upon him, and the little
ones, with eyes beaming with joy, climb upon his knee, and put
their little, loving arms about his neck, the warm, bright sunbeams
of love drive away his gloom. His troubles vanish, and peace and joy
fill his heart once more.
THE NEXT FALL AND WINTER
I labored mostly in Atwater and vicinity, in Kandiyohi County, Minn.,
in connection with brethren Babcock and Pullen. We met great
opposition at the different points where we held meetings. At
Harrison schoolhouse we had large audiences. One evening two
ministers came to oppose the work. The house was crowded to
excess. They both preached opposition discourses, after which
Elder Higgins, the M. E. minister, said he wished now to hear
Brother Hill. He had made light of us and our work. He said he
loved Brothers Hill and Babcock, but he looked upon us as Jew
brethren. He had us sail in imagination around the world, one going
east and the other west. The one gaining a day and the other losing
a day, thus being two days apart when we arrived at our starting
point; then, of course, went to quarreling over which day was the
right Sabbath. In reply to this point I said, "We will suppose Brother
Higgins and I are twins, and we sail round the world, one going east
and the other west. The one gains a day, and the other loses a day,
and when we get around, we are two days apart in our reckoning.
We are twins when we started, exactly of the same age; but now,
according to Brother Higgins, one is two days older than the other.
Brother Higgins, please inform us which is the older of the two."
Much to the amusement of the audience, he could not tell. It is
evident that neither of us in reality gained or lost a moment of time.
I cannot speak for Brother Higgins, but I do know that Seventh-day
Adventists can circumnavigate the globe, and not get muddled up
in any such way. As I showed the utter weakness of their arguments
{p. 97} for Sunday observance (and, gentle reader, it was very easy
to do) the ministers became very uneasy, and began interrupting
me--thought I was taking too much time, etc. Elder Higgins said,
"This is our meeting.' " "I thought I was holding meetings in the
schoolhouse." "Yes, but you gave way for us to speak tonight." "Yes,
sir, and then whose meeting was it?" "It was our meeting." "Yes, sir,
and then you gave way for me; and now whose meeting is it?"
(Laughter.) They said: "Tell the people you are a Jew! Tell them you
are a Jew!" "Yes, I will tell the people I am a Jew. Paul says, 'He is
not a Jew that is one outwardly, but he is a Jew that is one
inwardly.' Rom. 2: 28, 29. That is the kind of Jew I am. Christ was a
Jew, the prophets and apostles were all Jews, and Christ said to the
woman at the well, 'Salvation is of the Jews' (John 4: 22); and,
Brother Higgins, if ever you are saved, you must be a spiritual Jew
yourself." They continued their interruptions until Mr. Tibbits, a
worldly man, arose, and said, "Gentlemen. Elder Hill listened to you
quietly, and now please keep quiet, and let him speak."
As I showed that the Sabbath was changed into Sunday by the
papacy, and that the true Sabbath would be restored just prior to
the second coming of Christ, a deep seriousness pervaded the
people. As I finished, the Congregationalist minister cried out, "You
did not say anything about 'One man esteems one day above
another, another man esteems every day alike. Let every man be
fully persuaded in his own mind.' " I said, "Oh, yes, I forgot that
point. I am only too happy to explain it. Our friends are inconsistent
in using this scripture as they do, for they esteem one day above
another. They esteem Sunday high above all other days, and claim
it is a great sin not to do so. In applying it to the weekly Sabbath
they have put a sword into the hands of the Sabbath breaker to slay
the Sabbath keeper. For instance: On next Sunday, when they come
to the schoolhouse to celebrate divine service, suppose they should
find a farmer out here plowing in his field; they would feel very
badly about it, and begin to say, 'What has come over Mr. Smith,
that he should thus desecrate the Christian Sabbath? It hurts our
feelings to see him set such a bad example to the whole
community; besides his own soul is in danger of eternal {p. 98}
flames for thus profaning the Lord's day. We must go talk to him
immediately.' They go, and begin their lecture, when Mr. Smith
replies, 'Reverend gentlemen, you know I was always a strict Sunday
keeper until I heard you speak on the Sabbath question the other
evening; since then I do not esteem one day above another. You
have fully persuaded me that all days are alike, so now I don't keep
Sunday any more. Gee, Buck! Go 'long, Bright! I must be doing my
plowing.' And our friends could say nothing against it; they could
only say, 'Behold what mischief we have wrought.' I will try and help
them out of the unfortunate position in which they have unwittingly
placed themselves. The term 'every day' does not include the
Sabbath. I say, 'I am about my everyday affairs,' or ' I have my
everyday clothes on.' In either case the term 'every day' does not
include the Sabbath, as everybody knows.
"JUST SO IN THE SCRIPTURE.
"In Ex. 16: 4, the people were told to go out, and gather a certain
rate of manna every day; yet when some of the people went out to
gather on the Sabbath, they found none; and God said, 'How long
refuse ye to keep my commandments, my statutes, and my laws?'
Exodus 16. Thus we see, when God said 'every day,' he excepted the
Sabbath. So when Paul uses the term 'every day,' he has no
reference to the Sabbath. We sincerely hope our friends will not fall
into such an error again. But if the blind lead the blind, the
consequences will be disastrous to both." One evening, after the
discourse, a gentleman of Teutonic extractions arose, and said, "You
come to my house some day, and I will show you many things in my
bible contrary to your doctrine." "Tomorrow morning you may
expect us." When we came, we found several of his friends
assembled with him. They said they had been searching the
scriptures all night. "Well, my friends, what did you find?" "One thing
we notice. You always bait your hook for that Sabbath." "Well, the
Sabbath is a testing truth for this time. Only a desire to please God
will lead a man to keep the seventh day, and thus cut himself off
from the world and worldly ambition; while, on the other hand,
when a man is convinced that the {p. 99} seventh day is the
Sabbath, and won't keep it, it is evident he loves the world more
than he loves God." "You teach that we all ought to keep the ten
commandments, and it is impossible for any one to do so." "It is
true that we cannot keep God's holy law without divine aid; but God
will give us grace to do His will, if we seek Him with our whole
heart." "No man ever lived who kept the commandments of God." "I
think you are mistaken about that. Let us read Gen. 26: 5; 'For
Abraham obeyed my voice, kept my commandments, my statutes,
and my laws.' " "Oh, yes; but that was in Old Testament times, and
we have nothing to do with that." "The Old Testament and the New
Testament agree. 'Zacharia; and his wife Elizabeth walked in all the
commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.' Luke 1: 6.
In the Old Testament we found one, and in the New Testament we
have found at least two persons obedient to God's commandments."
"But that was before the birth of Christ, so that is nothing to us."
"Well, we will try again: 'Here is the patience of the saints; here are
they that keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.'
Rev. 14: 12. Here is brought to view a whole class of Christians
keeping the commandments of God." "Oh, that is in Revelations, and
I don't care for that." "Once more. I will read 1 John 2: 4: 'He that
saith, I know Him, and keepeth not His commandments is a liar,
and the truth is not in him.' " Our friend was cornered at last. He
could only get away from the commandments of God by repudiating
the Bible altogether. I was informed afterward that he would get
angry, and swear at his family, and do many other bad things; yet
he was deluding himself with the hope he would be saved because it
was impossible to keep the commandments. Only believe in Christ,
and all would be well, even if he continued in sin.
FATAL DELUSION,
infolding many thousands in its soothing embrace. Christ does not
save us in our sins, but FROM our sins. Matt. 1: 21. Out of Christ
we are at enmity against God, are not subject to the law of God,
neither, indeed, can be (Rom. 8: 7); but in Christ we are new
creatures, 'old things are passed away, behold, all things become
new (2 Cor. 5: 17); and we rejoice {p. 100} in the law of God after
the inward man. Rom. 7: 20. If a man's religion does not lead him
to rejoice in the holy principles of the divine law and fulfill its
righteousness, there is something wrong with his religion. Rom. 8:
4.
We decided to hold meetings in an adjoining schoolhouse. At our
first meeting, Mr. Maddox, an old lumberman, said to us, "I have
some flour in a sack and some pork in a barrel; you preach and I
will feed you." There was no school in the house that winter. It was
not banked, and many panes of glass were broken. We banked the
house, put shingles in the windows where glass were wanting,
picked up wood here and there, carried it on our shoulders, and cut
it up ourselves. The attendance was very small at first, often only
five or six being present. The outlook was very discouraging, but we
labored on, hoping, trusting, praying. at last we determined to
organize a Sabbath school, which proved a grand success. In a little
while it contained about forty members. Prejudice began to give
way, and in two months we had a nice company of believers, and a
Sabbath school of about forty members. One day Mr. Maddox met
Elder Higgins in town, and said to him. "Elder, them advents are
getting all your people over our way. I advise you to get your basket,
and come down and gather up the fragments that remain, or soon
you will have nothing left." We had many precious seasons with the
dear friends at Irving.
The next camp meeting was also held at Hutchinson. Elders
Canright and Stone attended from abroad. We had a good camp
meeting in many respects, although many thought Elder Canright
did not manifest a Christian spirit at all times. One hundred thirty-
three were baptized. After camp meeting, Brother Moore and
myself were sent to Maine Prairie, Stearns County, Minn. We
pitched our tent on the bank of a lovely lake. Brethren Meade, Hall,
and myself had family tents on the ground. Multitudes came to hear
of the near coming of the kingdom of Christ, and the preparation
necessary to meet our returning Lord with joy. An Elder Shoemaker
thought he must do something to hinder those who were entering
into the ways of truth, so he challenged us publicly to a discussion,
which we declined, wishing to avoid strife. Interested ones came to
us afterwards and said, "We are {p. 101} almost persuaded to keep
Sabbath, but Elder Shoemaker tells us if he could only have a
discussion, we would see that the seventh-day Sabbath could not
stand. Before we turn over, we want everything to be done for
Sunday that can be done for it. We therefore think you had better
accept his proposition." After careful consideration, it was thought
best to do so.
"Do the Scriptures teach that the seventh-day Sabbath is binding on
Christians?" was affirmed by me and denied by him. The discussion
continued four evenings. Probably six hundred people or more
attended it. In the busy time of haying, people came for miles. It
was a remarkable sight to see them in carriages and wagons, on
horseback and on foot, streaming toward the tent. The elder was a
veteran debater, the hero of I don't know how many battles. We
each spoke four times alternately, each evening, and it was lively
time. He took the position that the law of God, Sabbath and all, was
abolished. He, however, in his opening speech the last evening of
the discussion said he did not teach the abolition of the law at
all.
We were very thankful our brother had been led to see the error of
his ways. He had held that the law was the ministration of death,
which was abolished; while I had all the while contended that the
law of Jehovah was as immutable and unchangeable as the throne
of God. Now, the last evening of the discussion, he abandoned his
position, and came over to ours. We were glad to know the
discussion had given us at last one convert to the true faith. In his
last and summing-up speech, he endeavered to show that during
the discussion he had proved the law was dead, and done away.
Thus do men run into absurdities and contradictions' when they
oppose the truth. It is impossible for error to run in a straight line.
After the last speech, we sang, "Blessed Are They That Do," after
which we asked all to rise who believed the ten commandments
ought to be kept. A goodly number arose. Then we said, "all who by
the grace of God will keep them, please remain standing; and those
who will not keep them, please sit down." Some sat down, while
others remained standing, among whom were some of Brother
Shoemaker's prominent church members. The audience was {p.
102} immense, and the excitement at fever heat. When it was seen
that a goodly number were determined to keep the Sabbath, the
wrath of many arose to a great height. Threats were made, and we
did not know what minute an attempt would be made to throw us,
tents and all, into the lake. We kept lights burning and a sharp
lookout all night.
A lady, while riding home in a wagon, got to disputing with her
husband, she contending the Adventists were wrong, and he that
they were right. All at once she seemed to be seized with a frenzy,
sprang from the wagon, and ran with great swiftness, crying, "It is
not! It is the devil!" She ran a long way before she could be secured.
When she was again taken into the wagon, she was completely
exhausted.
A REMARKABLE THING.
There were a number of orthodox ministers present when we invited
those to arise and believed the ten commandments should be kept,
not one of whom arose, thus virtually saying to all the people that
they did not believe they ought to be kept. When religious leaders
take such a course, what can be expected of the people led by
them. We have heard ministers say to the people, "The ten
commandments are a yoke of bondage; They are dead and
abolished," etc. Surely, we have reached the time when this
scripture has its application: "It is time for thee, Lord, to work, for
they have made void thy law." Ps. 119: 126.
The next winter, 1878-79, I taught school about three miles from
home. Elder Moore held meetings at Dassel, nine miles distant. I
used to go three miles, and build my fires at the schoolhouse in the
morning, return in the evening, and do up the chores at home, then
drive nine miles to Dassel, preach a sermon, and return the same
evening. When I reached home, I would sometimes be so numb with
cold that I could scarcely unhitch my horse. I did this several
evenings a week during the winter, besides preaching in other
places. In the spring we moved to Dassel, where a number had
embraced the last message of mercy, among whom were the
Castles, Phelans, Bogars, Brickeys, and others. They had meetings
and Sabbath school, and were prospering in the ways of God.
William Brickey was an infidel. His naturally bright mind and talents
{p. 103} were surrendered to the prince of darkness. He went to
meetings to scoff at the ministers' sayings, and he ridiculed religion
and its professors generally. When he heard of the Adventist
meetings, he thought to go and make sport as usual (and he was
gifted in that direction). But as he listened to the prophecies
concerning Christ, that he came at the very time foretold by the
prophets, was born at the very place, lived the life, died the death,
in fact, fulfilled every specification of the prophecies concerning
Himself, his logical mind began to reason. "How can these things be
so, if there be no Christ? Could an imposter fulfill all these
conditions?" As the prophecies were still further unfolded, he saw
that the rise and fall of the great empires of the world had been
accurately foretold and described by the prophets of God, and also
that the condition of the world at the present time, physically,
politically, and religiously, was unerringly portrayed in the
Scriptures of truth; all doubts of the divine inspirations of the Bible
were removed from his mind. He had found solid foundation upon
which to base his faith. With the Bible he accepted Christ as his
only Saviour, and life through Him as his only salvation. He
immediately took his stand on the Lord's side, erected the family
altar, and rejoiced in God with all his house. He enjoyed religion,
became a worker in the Sabbath school, and has at times
successfully and acceptably preached the word of God. But the
enemy of all righteousness could not let the good work of salvation
go on without making an effort to hinder and destroy.
A certain Elder Allen was called to come and oppose the work,
which he did on the condition that he should receive one dollar per
day and board.
He held meetings every evening, and the opposition were having a
high time listening to his denunciations of our people and
work.
We attended to our own affairs, and let him severely alone. He and
his friends were very anxious for a discussion, thinking thereby to
annihilate Adventism in that community. The excitement rose to
such a height that Elder Grant, at that time president of the
conference, thought that if the other side would pay for the use of
the hall, I had better meet him, and hold up the truth the best I
could.
{p. 104}
That they were only too willing to do. The next evening, I attended
their meeting for the first time. I found the elder expatiating on the
wickedness of Mrs. E. G. White. He had two of her books, in one of
which she had written more on a certain subject than she had
another. With great energy he exclaimed, "Did Isaiah or Jeremiah
ever write anything and then add something thereto?" I replied, "Yes,
sir." He said, "I never knew of such a thing." "It is a fact all the
same," which the reader can see by comparing Jer. 36: 27, 28, 32.
If the elder did not know this, it was so much the worse for the
elder. It was arranged we should have a discussion over the three
messages of Rev. 14: 6- 12, continuing six evenings, two evenings
to each message. I required our positions should be reduced to
writing before our discussion should begin. To this he objected, but
finally yielded. My position was as follows: "The three messages are
a threefold warning to the world, just prior to the second coming of
Christ, to prepare the people for the event. The first and second
messages were given by William Miller and his co-laborers, closing
in 1844. The third message is now being carried by the Seventh-day
Adventists. The mark of the beast, against the reception of which
the third angel utters his warning, will be Sunday keeping, when it
will be enforced by the death penalty." Rev. 13: 15.
His position was: "Christ was the first angel, and proclaimed the
first message at His first advent. The second and third messages
were given by the apostles. What the mark of the beast is, is not
definitely known." The discussion began in good earnest. Friend and
foe, saint and sinner, were out in force. The opposition were sure
that Adventism would speedily go down under the elder's
destructive fire. I will give the briefest outline of my argument in the
discussion. Evidently the first thing to do was to show the elder was
wrong in teaching that Christ was the first angel, and gave the first
message at His first advent. First--
CHRIST SAID:
"I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." Matt.
15: 24. Second, When He sent forth his disciples to preach, He
strictly charged them: "Go not into the way of {p. 105} the Gentiles,
and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not; but go ye rather to
the lost sheep of the house of Israel." Matt. 10: 5, 6. The first angel
proclaimed his message to every nation, tongue, and people. Rev.
14: 6. Whereas Christ confined His message to the Jewish people at
his first advent, and whereas the first angel proclaims his message
to every nation, tongue, and people, it is evident to every one that
Christ did not proclaim the first message at his first advent. It is
equally evident the elder was mistaken when he said He did. This
was so evident that the elder publicly abandoned his position, which
had a very depressing effect upon those who were paying him to
demolish the Adventists.
We further showed that the apostles did not proclaim the first
message, that the hour of God's judgment is come; for they taught
that the judgment was yet future in their day. For instance, Paul
said to the men of Athens, as he stood on Mars Hill, "For God hath
appointed a day in which He WILL judge the world." Acts 17: 31. He
also reasoned before Felix, of righteousness, temperance, and a
judgment to come (yet future). He wrote to the Thessalonian
brethren that the day of Christ (judgment) was not at hand 2Thess.
2: 2, 3. Therefore it is evident that he did not proclaim to every
nation, tongue, and people that the hour of God's judgment IS
COME. Why not? ---- Evidently the time for that message had not yet
arrived. The coming of Christ immediately follows the giving of the
three messages (Rev. 14: 14); therefore they are not due until the
second coming. Christ is nigh at hand. Did "Fear God and give glory
to Him, for the hour of His judgment is come," ever go to the
world?---Yes; such a message was carried to earth's remotest
bounds in 1843- 44. In every judgment there are two parts, the
investigative and executive. First investigate a man's case, then
execute the judgment rendered. "The righteous dead come up in the
first resurrection and the rest of the dead live not again for a
thousand years afterward.'' Rev. 20: 5, 6. It is evident that it must
be determined beforehand who are righteous, and have right to
come up in the first resurrection; therefore the cases of the
righteous dead must be investigated before the first resurrection,
which takes place at the coming of Christ. Also the righteous living
will be changed from mortal to immortality in {p. 106} the twinkling
of an eye, at the last trump. 1Cor. 15: 51, 53. We will not be made
immortal, and then judged; therefore it is evident that the cases of
the righteous living will be investigated before the last trump shall
sound. The investigative judgment began in 1844. How appropriate
that a message announcing that fact should go to the world. The
message has gone; the judgment is here. May we all be prepared to
pass the solemn test. For a full explanation of the judgment, see
"The Sanctuary and Its Cleansing," by U. Smith. Address Review and
Herald, Battle Creek, Mich.
THE SECOND ANGEL
proclaims the fall of Babylon. Rev. 14: 8. The elder says, "Babylon is
fallen" means Jerusalem is fallen, or destroyed. It may be trying to
his feelings to show that he is entirely wrong; but we will do it as
kindly as possible, and so effectually that he will see it himself.
First, We all know Jerusalem is destroyed, and a message telling us
what we already know, would be useless. Second, In Rev. 18: 1, 2,
We learn that after the fall of Babylon she fills up with, or becomes
the hold of, every foul spirit and the cage of every unclean and
hateful bird. It is, therefore plain that it is a moral fall Babylon
meets with, and in consequence of which fall her destruction
cometh. Rev. 18: 8. Third, Babylon is represented by a woman. Rev.
17: 4, 5. "The ten kings shall hate her and burn her with fire." These
ten kings (ten divisions of the Roman empire) had no existence until
long after Jerusalem was destroyed, and the elder admits this fact.
Therefore his position that Jerusalem was the Babylon referred to,
is a mistake. Again, "Babylon is that great city, that reigneth over
the kings of the earth." Rev. 17: 18. But Paul said, "Jerusalem that
now is, is in bondage with her children." Gal. 4: 26. It is certain that
Jerusalem that is in bondage cannot be that Babylon, that great city
that reigneth over the kings of the earth. It is equally certain that
the elder is wrong when he says it is. The term Babylon is derived
from Babel, which means confusion. Babylon located; God says,
"Come out of her my people." Rev. 18: 4. God's people must be in
Babylon, or they would not be called upon to come out of her. But
where are God's people today? You answer, "In the {p. 107} different
churches." Then those churches where God's people are, are
Babylon. There are hundreds of different sects, all claiming to get
their teachings from the bible. Let only one representative from
each of these jarring sects meet to set forth their peculiar views,
and you will agree with me that it would be confusion worse
confounded. It would be Babylon indeed. Then, "Babylon is fallen"
means the churches are fallen MORALLY. This may seem harsh to
some good people, and we are also sorry that it is so. But I ask you
the question, "Are the churches more proud and worldly than they
used to be?" You say, "Yes, they are." Then are they not fallen?
ALL PROTESTANTS AGREE
that the women called "Babylon the great, the mother of harlots," in
Rev. 17: 5, represents the Romish church, which is the truth. If the
Romish church is the mother, who are the harlot daughters but the
churches that have come out of her? What constitutes a church a
harlot?--Love of the world. "If any man love the world, the love of the
Father is not in him." 1 John 2: 15. "Ye adulterers and adulteresses,
know ye not that the friendship (love) of the world is enmity with
God?" James 4: 4. Hear we learn that those who profess to love
God, and yet love the world, are called adulterers and adulteresses,
or harlots. It is only too painfully evident that pride, love of pre-
eminence, money, fashion, display, in fact, everything the world
loves, finds as ardent, devoted worshippers in the churches as can
be found anywhere. No wonder the cry goes forth, "Babylon is
fallen...Come out of her, my people."
One evening, Elder Allen asked me if he might ask me a few
questions. I said, "Yes, sir." "Do you believe this discussion is
helping on the cause of the truth?" "Yes, sir." "If the cause of truth is
being strengthened, and good is being done, don't you think you
and your people ought to help pay for the use of the hall?" "I would
like to speak to that proposition for a moment. We came to this
town last winter and occupied the schoolhouse for a while. When
that was closed against us, we hired the hall, night after night, week
in and week out. We paid our own expenses, and asked no man for
a cent, feeling richly repaid by seeing precious souls coming {p.
108} out of darkness into light. We felt we had solemn, sacred truth
for this day and generation, and we were willing to sacrifice
something in order to give the bread of life to the people.
"Some opposing our work, sent for Elder Allen to tear it down. He
came, and said, "Gentlemen, I have great light for you; I can tear
down Adventism easy enough, but you must pay me a dollar per
day and board. If you do that, I will cause the true light to shine
forth; if not, I pass on, and leave you in your darkness.' You see,
gentlemen, he loves you at the rate of one dollar per day and board.
He has been overthrowing Adventism for a number of evenings, and
is having a hard time of it, and wants help. The kind friends who are
defraying his expenses do not think they are getting their money's
worth, and so he asks us to help him tear down what we are
building up. We beg to be excused." We thought best to let them
hear their own burdens.
We now come to the third and last message. Rev. 14: 9-12. It
threatens the unmingled wine of the wrath of God against the beast
worshipers and receivers of the mark. Any one can see that this is a
last-day message. First, it is immediately followed by the coming of
Christ on the white cloud to reap the harvest of the earth. verse 14.
Second, "The wrath of God poured out without mixture into the cup
of His indignation," must be pure wrath without any mercy mingled
with it, which can never be until mercy is no longer offered to
sinners. So long as Jesus pleads for poor sinners before the throne,
the unmingled wine of the wrath of God cannot come. So this
message is to prepare men for the closing up of the gospel, and the
day of wrath that follows. It is the most solemn, the most awful
warning found in the book of God. We are treading here on solemn
ground. Let us walk carefully, reverently. All agree that this
message must go to the world before the coming of Christ; all agree
that it can go to the world only once, and all agree that today the
cry is being raised everywhere, "If any man worship the beast or his
image, or receive his mark on his forehead or in his hands, the
same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured
out without mixture into the cup of His indignation." Rev. 14: 9-12.
Who are giving the cry?--- The Adventists, {p. 109} and they alone.
What can the mark of the beast (the papacy) be? The elder says he
don't know. Of course, the, he will not have much to say; for it is not
well to set ourselves up as teachers of something about which we
know nothing. Somebody must know what it is, for it unreasonable
that the warning could be given and no one know anything about it.
Again, in Rev. 15: 2 we read, "And I saw a sea of glass mingled with
fire: and them that had gotten the victory over the beast, and over
his image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name,
stand on the sea of glass." what would be our surprise if we were to
inquire of these victors over the beast and his mark, "What is the
mark of the beast?" and they should say, "We had a great conflict
with the beast and his mark, and gained a great victory; but we
didn't know anything at all about the beast or his image; we left that
for some fanatical students of the prophecies to inquire into. We
just joined a popular church, heard very nice, smooth preaching,
our choir rendered the most charming music, and we had the most
enjoyable time attending church picnics, fairs, festivals, and glided
smoothly and gracefully onto the sea of glass mingled with fire, and
immediately began to celebrate our victory over the beast and his
mark; but after all, we never knew there was any beast, and were
not troubled in that direction at all."
Without doubt, those who give the warning, gain the victory over the
beast and his mark, will know what these things are. Yes, they will
know. Again, if nobody can know what the mark of the beast is, do
the best we can, we may ignorantly receive it, and as a consequence
drink of the unmingled wine of the wrath of God. We cannot any of
us believe such a thing possible, so we must believe that God's
people will know what the mark of the beast is, and warn the world
against its reception. What can it be? We will first inquire, What is
God's mark? For God's people will also receive a mark, sign, or seal
in their foreheads. In Ezek. 9: 1-6 there is brought to view a time of
utter destruction; "Slay utterly, both old and young. Let not your eye
spare, neither have ye pity." Why not spare or show pity?--- because
it is the time of the pouring out of God's wrath without mercy,
against which the people are warned by the third angel. God says,
"Set a mark {p. 110} upon the foreheads of them that sigh and cry
for the abominations done in the midst thereof." Ezek. 9: 4. Why set
a mark on them?--That they might be preserved from the awful
destruction about to fall upon the wicked; for it says, "Slay utterly,
old and young, both maids and little children, and women, but
come not near any man upon whom is the mark." Verse 6.
Those who receive the mark of the beast drink of the wine of the
wrath of God. Rev. 14: 9. Those who receive God's mark are
preserved the same as those were preserved from the destroying
angel who in the days of Moses sprinkled blood on the door posts.
Ex. 12: 13. It was necessary for God's people then to sprinkle the
blood. So in the last days, when the destroying angels will pour out
of the seven last plagues (Rev. 15: 1), it will be necessary for God's
people to have His mark upon their foreheads. What is it? No one
believes it will be a literal mark on the forehead, but it will be a
religious characteristic that will mark those who receive it as a
peculiar and distinct people; will separate them from the world and
the popular professors of religion around them. We believe it is the
true Sabbath that God's people will accept, just before the coming
of the Lord. Why believe so?
a. The Sabbath is a mark. Let a man begin the observance of the
seventh-day Sabbath in any community in this Christian land, and
he will be a marked character at once. He will be reported and
commented upon far and wide.
b. The mark separates him from the world. No matter how brilliant
the worldly prospects may be for honor and position, all must be
abandoned as soon as he begins the observance of the
Sabbath.
c. It separates him from popular religion. No matter how pleasant
his church relationship may be, he will be cut off and excluded,
when he accepts the Sabbath.
d. The mark is so plain, it is known and recognized wherever he
goes.
When traveling I have inquired for my brethren by name and could
gain no information. Then I asked, "Do you know anybody in this
vicinity who keeps Saturday for Sunday?" "Oh, yes; a few miles
southwest of here lives {p. 111} such a man his name I don't know."
So we see a person is recognized farther by this mark than by his
own name. Yes, God has a mark for His sheep in these last days,
and that mark is the Sabbath. Again, in Rev. 7: 1-3 the same work
is brought to view as in Ezek. 9: 1- 6, where the mark is called the
seal of God. How do we know it is the same work?---Because it is
performed at the same time and for the same purpose. In Ezek. 9:
1- 6 the people receive God's mark just before the time of utter
destruction of old and young without pity. In Rev. 7: 3 the angel
says, "Hurt not the earth, nor the sea, nor the trees, until we have
sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads." Why seal God's
servants just before the hurting should begin? Evidently to preserve
them from that hurting or destruction, the same as God's people
are preserved from the avenging sword by receiving the mark of
God in the forehead, in Ezek. 9: 1- 6. As the mark and seal are
received in the same place--- in the forehead; the marking and
sealing are upon the same people--- the servants of God; at the
same time---- just before the time of trouble; and for the same
purpose-- to preserve the people of God from the destruction that
comes upon the wicked, it must be that the sealing and marking
are the same work.
Then if we can learn what the seal is, we can certainly know what
the mark is; for they are one and the same thing. The 8th chapter of
Isaiah has its fulfillment just before the coming of the Lord. The
17th verse reads, "And I will wait upon the Lord that hideth His face
from the house of Jacob, and I will look for him," which shows the
scripture applies when God's true people will be looking for His
coming. Verses 21 and 22 point out the day of trouble for the
wicked in these remarkable words, "And they shall pass through it
hardly bestead and hungry. And it shall come to pass that when
they shall be hungry, they shall fret themselves, and curse their
king and their god, and look upward. And they shall look unto the
earth, and behold trouble and darkness, dimness of anguish, and
they shall be driven to darkness." Who can fail to see that this
scripture applies right down in the end of time? In the 10th verse
God says, "Bind up the testimony, seal the law among my disciples."
This is to be done when God's {p. 112} people are looking for the
Lord to come. The seal of God is found in his law. A seal gives
authenticity to a legal document; shows who the lawgiver is, the
extent of his territory, and his right to reign, or demand obedience.
The fourth commandment is the only thing in God's law that does
that. It gives authenticity to the law by showing the Lawgiver to be
the true God, the Creator of the heavens and the earth; it shows the
extent of God's territory, the heavens and the earth and the sea; it
shows God has a right to rule and reign over us, because He is our
Maker---He made the heavens, earth, sea, and all that is therein.
Thus we see the fourth commandment is a perfect seal to God's
law, and nothing else is. Has it been removed?---Yes. Has a
counterfeit Sabbath been put in its place?---Yes, so far as such a
thing could be done. Does God require us to restore this seal (the
true Sabbath) just before the second coming of Christ?---Yes: "Bind
up the testimony, SEAL the LAW among my disciples (followers of
Christ), and I will wait upon the Lord that hideth His face from the
house of Jacob, and I will LOOK for Him." Isa. 8: 16, 17. "Hurt not
the earth nor the sea nor the trees until we have SEALED the
servants of our God in their foreheads." Rev. 7: 3. "Set a MARK on
the foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry for all the
abominations that be done in the midst thereof." Ezek. 9: 4. Does
God set forth the Sabbath as the sign, mark, or symbol of His
power?---Yes: "Moreover, I gave them my Sabbath to be a SIGN
between me and them that they might know that I am the Lord that
do sanctify them." Ezek. 20: 12." And hallow my Sabbaths and they
shall be a SIGN between me and you (why?), that ye may KNOW
that I am the Lord your God." Ezek. 20: 20. Thus it is beyond doubt
that God sets the Sabbath forth as the sign, symbol, or mark
whereby we may know God as the Maker and Creator of all
things.
If the Sabbath is God's sign, seal, or mark, what is the mark of the
beast (the papacy)? We naturally conclude it would be a counterfeit
Sabbath. God does not require two weekly Sabbaths, so either the
Sunday Sabbath or the seventh-day Sabbath must be counterfeit.
Dare any man say the seventh-day Sabbath must be counterfeit?
God rested on it, God blessed it, and sanctified it, and commanded
it to be kept holy. He spake it with His own voice, and wrote it with
His own finger on the {p. 113} tables of stone, in the midst of nine
other moral precepts as immutable as the throne of God. The
seventh-day Sabbath comes to us bearing the superscription and
signature of the Almighty God. Is it genuine?---Yes. Can anyone of
these things be said of the Sunday Sabbath---No. Did God rest on
the first day?---No. Did he bless them?---No. Did God sanctify it, or
promise to bless anyone if he would keep it?---No. Did He ever
threaten to punish any man if he would not keep it holy?---No. Did
Christ or the apostles ever observe it as the Sabbath?---No, not a
single instance can be found. The Sunday institution comes to us
without any divine support of any kind whatever. It bears only the
earmarks of the papacy, the man of sin.
We will now give the third angel's message entire: "And the third
angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship
the beast and his image, and receive his mark in the forehead, or in
his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God,
which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation,
and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence
of the holy angels, and in the presence of the lamb: and the smoke
of their torment ascendeth up forever and ever; and they have no
rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and
whosoever receiveth the mark of his name. Here is the patience of
the saints; here are they that keep the commandments of God, and
the faith of Jesus." Rev. 14: 9-12. In this message are brought to
view two classes, beast worshipers, and the keepers of the
commandments of God. Mark it well. If we keep the
commandments of God, we will not worship the beast or receive his
mark; therefore the mark of the beast is something in opposition to
the commandments of God. What can it be but the Sunday
Sabbath, which is contrary to the fourth commandment? The mark
of the beast is to be universally enforced upon high and low, rich
and poor, bond and free. Rev. 13: 16. No institution can be so
universally enforced as Sunday. The papacy was to think to change
the times and laws of the Most High. Proof: "And he shall speak
great words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of
the Most High, and shall {p. 114} think to change times and laws (of
the Most High); and they (saints and laws) shall be given into his
hand until a time and times and the dividing of time." Dan. 7: 25.
Has the papacy spoken great words against the Most High?---Yes.
He says he is Christ's vicegerent on the earth. He calls himself Lord,
God the Pope, and we have heard him declare, "I am infallible; I am
like the great God, I cannot err." Surely he has spoken the great
words. He has worn out the saints of the Most High?---Yes. Let the
voice of the blood of the slaughtered millions answer. The papacy is
drunken with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. Rev. 17: 5, 6. Has
the papacy thought to change the laws of God?---Yes. He has taught
to change the Sabbath into Sunday. Out of his own mouth we will
judge him.
QUESTION---"What warrant have you for keeping the Sunday
preferable to the ancient Sabbath, which was the Saturday?"
ANSWER---"We have for its the authority of the Catholic Church and
apostolic tradition.--CATHOLIC CHRISTIAN INSTRUCTED.
Does the papacy set forth the change of the Sabbath into Sunday as
a sign or mark of its power?---Yes.
QUESTION---"How prove you that the church has power to ordain
feast days and holy days?
ANSWER---"By the very act of changing the Sabbath into Sunday."---
ABRIDGMENT OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE.
God sets forth the Sabbath as the sign or mark of His power, and
the papacy sets forth the Sunday as the sign or mark of its power.
Therefore it is certain that the Sabbath is God's sign or mark, and
the Sunday institution is the sign or mark of the papacy. And when
the issue is plainly set before the people, and they deliberately
choose to honor and worship the beast (the papacy) by keeping his
institution, and persecute by oppressive laws those who obey God
and keep His commandments, the vials of God's wrath will soon be
poured out upon the persecutors, and the Lord will come, and take
His tried and tested people to the mansions He has gone to prepare
for them. The conflict is already here. All over the land the cry is
raised for more stringent Sunday laws, and soon legislators will
yield to the pressure, and the mark will {p. 115} be enforced, and
none but the true hearted will be able to stand.
THE DISCUSSION FAILED
to destroy the good work began at Dassel. Truth is mighty, and
must prevail.
If there were strong indications in 1879, the time of the discussion
of the Sunday law movement, how much stronger are they today,
1892? It is very difficult for some people to believe that Sunday is
an institution of popery, and for the benefit of such I will insert here
an article in the REVIEW and HERALD, from the pen of Elder E. E.
Franke:---
"Sunday--- Are we justified in keeping this day in preference to God's
ancient and time-honored memorial of creation, the seventh day
(Saturday)? There is only one source to which the consistent
Protestant can go for a reply, and that is God's Word. Dr. Dowling
truly said. 'The Bible, and the Bible only, is the religion of
Protestants. Nor is it of any account in the estimation of a genuine
Protestant HOW EARLY a doctrine originated, if it is not found in the
inspired word.' Hence, if a doctrine be propounded for his
acceptance, he asks, ' is it found in the Bible? Was it taught by the
Lord Jesus Christ or His apostles?' If they knew nothing of it, no
matter to him whether it be discovered in the musty folio of some
ancient visionary of the third or fourth century, or whether it springs
from the fertile brain of some modern visionary of the nineteenth. If
it is not found in the sacred Scriptures, it presents no valid claim to
be received as an article of religious creed. The prevailing idea is
that Christ or his apostles changed the day. But we find the Bible
silent on this point. We find that Christ himself kept the seventh-day
Sabbath. Luke 23: 56. Paul preached to Jews and Gentiles on the
Sabbath day. Acts. 17: 4; 13: 42. We searched in vain for one
passage in the Scriptures which sanctions Sunday or the first day of
the week observance. The greatest obstacle in the way of the
Sunday institution is the law of ten commandments. Sunday cannot
be supported by that law, the fourth precept of which says the
seventh day is the Sabbath, and to abolish the law would be to
abolish the {p. 116} very foundation of the government of God. The
leading Protestant denominations agree that the ten
commandments are now in force. The Methodist Discipline, article
6, says, 'No Christian whatever is free from obedience of the
commandments which are called moral.' The Baptist Manual,
article 12, says, 'We believe that the moral law of God is the eternal
and unchangeable rule of his moral government.' The Presbyterian
confession of Faith, article 5, says, 'The moral law doth forever bind
all, as well justified persons as others, to the obedience
thereof...Neither does Christ in the Gospel in any way dissolve, but
much strengthens, this obligation.' Dwight's Theology, a
Presbyterian work, Vol. 4, page 120 says, 'The law of God is and
must be unchangeable and eternal. Thus we find the great
denominations of Protestantism agree that God's law of ten
commandments is unchangeable, and yet by their practice of
keeping Sunday, they virtually admit it has been changed. For
surely a change of the Sabbath would involve a change of the law of
the Sabbath.
"Hear these words of Bishop Mallaliew, of the Methodist Church,
when addressing a class of young men about to enter the ministry:
'Perfection involves the idea of good works and obedience to the ten
commandments, emphatically the ten commandments. You will
never get a perfection, unless it is the devil's perfection, that will
admit you to preach anything that is not found in these.'---
REPORTED in OIL CITY BLIZZARD, SEPT. 13, 1890. We know
Sunday is not found in the ten commandments. Let the reader draw
his own conclusion from the bishop's words.
"Having found that the Bible sustains no change of the Sabbath, we
turn in vain to history and the leading authorities of these great
denominations for Sunday sacredness. Buck's Theological
Dictionary, a Methodist work, says, 'Sabbath in the Hebrew
language signifies rest, and is the seventh day of the week,...and it
must be confessed that there is no law in the New Testament
concerning the first day.' The WATCHMAN, a Baptist paper, says in
reply to a correspondent, 'The Scripture nowhere calls the first day
of the week the Sabbath...There is no scriptural authority for so
doing, nor, of course, any scriptural obligation.' Dwight's Theology,
Vol. 4, {p. 117} page 401, says, 'The Christian Sabbath (Sunday) is
not in the Scripture, and was not by the primitive church called the
Sabbath.'
Rev. George Hodges, who preaches for one of the largest churches
in Pittsburg, Pa., writing for the PITTSBURG DISPATCH, says, 'The
seventh day, the commandment says, is the Sabbath of the Lord
thy God. No kind of arithmetic, no kind of almanac, can make seven
equal to one, nor the seventh mean the first, nor Saturday mean
Sunday. It is evident that Sunday cannot in any manner be
identified with God's holy and sanctified rest day of the fourth
commandment, and is therefore only a man-made institution.'
"Now to history. Neander, who is admitted by all to be the greatest
and most reliable church historians, says' The festival of Sunday,
like all other festivals, was always only a human ordinance, and it
was far from the intention of the apostles to establish a divine
command in this respect, far from them and from the early
apostolic church to transfer the laws of the Sabbath to Sunday.'---
ROSE'S NEANDER, page 186. 'But the question is asked, 'Who
changed the Sabbath?' In Dan. 7: 25, we read of a power which all
Protestant commentators claim is the papacy, or Roman Catholic
power. We read in the verse named, 'He shall think to change times
and laws,' meaning the times and laws of God; and it is this power
that has been tampering with God's holy Sabbath, the only times in
His law, and they flaunt it in the face of Protestants as a token or
mark of their authority in other traditional matters. The following
letters are from Cardinal gibbons, of Baltimore, the highest
authority of the Catholic church in this country:---
Cardinal's Residence
Baltimore, Md. Feb. 25, 1892.
John R. Ashley, Esq.
Dear sir: In answer to your first question, directed by the cardinal to
reply to your letter, I will say: (1) Who changed the Sabbath? Ans.---
The holy Catholic Church. (2) Are Protestants following the Bible or
the holy Catholic Church in keeping Sunday? Ans.---The Protestants
are following the custom introduced by the holy Catholic Church.
(3) Protestants do contradict themselves by keeping Sunday, and at
the same time profess to be guided by the Bible only.
I am faithfully yours,
C. F. Thomas, Chancellor.
{p. 118}
"John R. Ashley, to whom the above letter was written, lives at Rock
Hall, Md.
"Some time since the writer saw a printed sermon by Father
Enright, a Catholic priest who has charge of Redemptorist College,
Kansas City, Mo., offering $1000 for Bible proof for Sunday
keeping. The writer took the liberty to write him, and received the
following letter over his signature;---
Lock box 75,
Kansas City, Mo., Jan. 11, 1892.
Dear Friend, Your letter reached me only a few days ago. The paper
you speak of I have not seen. My words were, I have repeatedly
offered $1000 to any one who can prove to me by the Bible alone
that I am bound to keep Sunday holy. There is no such law in the
Bible. It is a law of the holy Catholic Church alone. The Bible says,
Remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath day. THE CATHOLIC
CHURCH says, "No! By my divine power I abolish the Sabbath day,
and command you to keep holy the first day of the week." And lo!
the entire civilized world bows down in reverent obedience to the
command of the holy Catholic Church. Excuse delay in
answering.
Yours respectfully,
T. Enright, Css. R.
"The writer wrote to Archbishop Ryan, stating Father Enright's
position, and received the following reply:---
Mr. E. E. Franke,
Of course Father Enright is correct. There is not a word in the New
Testament about Christ's changing the day. On the contrary, he
always observed the Sabbath, the seventh day. Consult any Catholic
work that has a chapter on tradition, and you will find what you
need. The church alone is authority for the transfer from Saturday
to Sunday.
Truly yours,
I. Hoostman, Chancellor.
"The foregoing testimony is from the highest authority of the
Catholic church in this country. Some, however, are not willing to
receive Catholic admissions; for such we will give two good
Protestant testimonies, Dr. N. Summerbell, in his 'History of the
church from the Time of Christ to A.D. 1871,' says: In 321
Constantine made a law that Sunday should be kept in all cities and
towns. But the country people were allowed to work, and not till
538 A.D. was country labor prohibited by the third council of
Orleans, which called it the new Sabbath. This was a Roman
Catholic council.'
{p. 119}
"Rev. John Snyder, in an article in the ST. LOUIS GLOBE
DEMOCRAT of April 3, 1887, said: Every instructed man knows that
there is no New Testament authority for the change of the day of
rest from the seventh to the first day of the week. Every instructed
man knows that the Catholic Church gave to the Christian world the
Sunday, and determined the manner in which it should be used.
And when Protestantism threw off the authority of the Catholic
church it abandoned the only ecclesiastical ground upon which it
can logically rest.'
"The above testimony comes from a man who is himself a Sunday
keeper. Now we appeal to every honest Protestant to choose whom
he will serve. 'Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves
servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey?' Are you
obeying God and keeping His day, or are you obeying the Catholic
Church and keeping Sunday? We cannot serve two masters. It is
plain to every one, from the above statements of Catholic prelates,
that they claim to have changed the law of the living God."
--------------------------
That same spring I was stationed on the Mankato district, which
included southwestern Minnesota and a portion of northwestern
Iowa. It was considered a hard field. After the camp meeting, which
was held that year at Minneapolis, I took my family to Mankato, a
city of about 8000 inhabitants at that time, and situated on the
Minnesota River in a very fine agricultural district. The soil is of the
richest quality and timber and water are abundant. We traveled with
horse and buggy. One evening we called at a nice-looking
farmhouse, and asked for lodgings. The lady made some objections,
and finally said: "We cannot keep you, because we have the
smallpox here. I well knew it was only an Irish ruse, and said no
more, but went and got some straw to put under the buggy, fixed
some blankets around it for curtains and prepared to lodge by the
roadside.
The old lady came out and looked at the preparations awhile, and
said, as she saw the wife and baby: "You ought to come into the
house and not be slapin' in the road all night." "Oh, no; we would not
do that for anything, as you have smallpox in the house, you know."
She blushed and went her way, evidently ashamed of the lie she had
told.
{p. 120}
That summer Brother Ellis and myself held meetings in Mankato
City. The work went slowly, but some took their stand to obey God.
One day, while visiting, I had a very interesting conversation with a
marble worker. He was very certain that the New Testament taught
the sacredness of Sunday. I told him I never discovered it, but if he
had any light upon it, I hoped he would be kind enough to point it
out to me. He impressed me as an honest, sincere man, and I
greatly desired a more extended interview with him, to which he
seemed perfectly willing. So he agreed to come to the tent the next
Sunday afternoon to point out to me New Testament proof for
Sunday keeping. He came, according to appointment, and we began
our investigation. He did not claim any command for Sunday
keeping, but founded it upon the example of Christ and the
apostles. But Paul says: "Where no law is, there is no transgression."
Rom. 4: 15. "If there is no law requiring Sunday observance, then
there is no sin in not observing it. But never mind, let us have the
example." "Well, in John 20: 19, we find the disciples were met
together on the first day of the week and Jesus met with them. I
take it that the disciples were assembled in honor of the
resurrection, and that Christians have met on that day ever since,
even until now." "Let us see: Mark 16: 14 speaks of the same
meeting, and says, 'Jesus appeared unto the eleven as they sat at
meat (while they were taking their supper) and so far from being
assembled in honor of the resurrection, they did not even believe he
had risen from the dead. Rather a slim foundation, is it not? Again,
to follow the example of Christ, we must needs do as Christ did; but
the first thing Christ did on the first day of the week was to rise
from the dead. Do you think it incumbent on us to follow His
example in respect, and to arise from the dead every first day
morning?" "Oh, no; of course not." "Well, let us investigate His
example a little further. In Luke 24: 13- 33, we have a very
interesting account of two disciples going to Emmaus and returning
again to Jerusalem, a distance of fifteen miles, on that eventful first
day of the week, which shows they did not regard it as a day of
sacred rest. What is still more remarkable, Jesus himself went with
them, showing that he did not regard it as a day of sacred rest
either."
{p. 121}
"Well, Jesus met with His disciples eight days afterward (John 20:
26), which means he met with them the next first day of the week."
"Is that so? Is it really a fact that after eight days means just a
week? By comparing Matt. 17: 1 and Luke 9;28, we see that after
six days means about eight days. If after six days means about
eight days, after eight days is about how many days?" "Of course, no
one can tell, but I have always understood that Christ always met
with the disciples on the first day of the week, after the
resurrection." "That is a mistake, because all agree that one of the
most remarkable meetings of Christ with His disciples was on
Thursday, the day upon which he ascended into heaven. Acts 1: 1-
11. But suppose we grant that every time Christ met with His
disciples was on the first day of the week, what then? In John 21: 4
we find that Jesus met with them when they were fishing, and He
told them to cast their net on the right side, and they should find;
and they did so, and caught a multitude of fishes. Verse 6. If this
was on Sunday, it proves Sunday to be a good fishing day. If it was
not Sunday, then the claim that Christ always met with His disciples
on the first day of the week falls to the ground, does it not?" "I must
confess that it does." "You see, my brother, that this Sunday
argument breaks down at every point."
"What further proof have you that Sunday should be sacredly
observed?" "On the first day of the week the Spirit was poured out,
which is an evidence to my mind that it should be religiously
observed." "Let us see. It reads not when the first day of the week
had fully come, but when the day of Pentecost had fully come. Acts
2: 1. The first day of the week is not mentioned. Is this not a little
singular if God intended by the outpouring of the Spirit to make it
the sacred day of the new dispensation? Such proof is hardly
conclusive. It is nothing but supposition that the pouring out of the
Spirit would make any day sacred, and a very doubtful and
improbable supposition at that."
"I will now read Acts 20: 7, 'Now upon the first day of the week when
the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached to them
ready to depart on the morrow.' This, I consider, proves that it was
the custom for the apostles to meet for worship every first day of
the week."
"Does it say {p. 122} it was their custom to do so?" "No." "Does it say
they ever met on that day before?" "No." "Does it say they ever met
on it afterward?" "No." "How many years does the book of Acts
cover?" "About twenty, I believe." "Yes, and only one religious
meeting said to have occurred on that first day of the week in all
that time. Don't you think that is small evidence upon which to
build a Christian institution that does away with one of the
commandments of God, and requires obedience to it on pain of
eternal death? But again, this was an evening meeting, because
there were many lights burning, and Paul continued his speech until
midnight. See verses 7, 8." "Yes, no one can deny that, but I did not
notice that point before." "What were the disciples doing during the
light part of the day?" "Well, sir, I cannot say." "Then they may have
been about their usual avocations, for all we know. That looks just a
little bit weak, doesn't it?" "I must say it is not nearly so conclusive
proof as I thought it was."
"LET US LOOK AT IT A LITTLE FURTHER.
"When does the day begin, according to the Bible? The Bible says
the evening and the morning were the first day. Gen. 1: 5. The
evening comes first every time. In Lev. 23: 32, we read, 'From even
unto even shall ye celebrate your Sabbaths.' As the day, according
to the Bible, begins at evening, when did the first day begin?" "It
must have begun on our Saturday night." "Exactly. Then this
meeting was held on what we would call Saturday evening?" "Yes,
sir." "Rather slim proof for Sunday, is it not?" But what did Paul do
the following Sunday morning? --- Traveled on foot to Assos, a
distance of nearly twenty miles. See verses 11-14. Rather poor
example of Sunday sacredness, is it not? Well, brother, after we
have briefly analyzed this text, how much evidence for Sunday
keeping do you get out of it?" "Well, sir, I do not think the proof is
very powerful, that's a fact. But I have two more texts, and I am
done. 1Cor. 16: 1, 2 seems to teach that the early Christians met
for worship, and took up their collections on the first day of the
week." "Does the text say they should meet together on the first day
of the week?" "No." "Does it say anything at all about any {p. 123}
meeting of any kind?" "No." "Does it say 'lay by him in store'?" "Yes."
"Does the term 'lay by him' mean to put something into a common
treasury?" "No." "Then is there the slightest evidence here that it was
the custom of the early Christians to meet for worship on the first
day of the week?" 'I cannot say that there is." "But the text not only
says 'lay by him in store, ' which means to do this at home, but 'lay
by him in store as God has prospered him.' Many people in
business would only know how they had been prospered through
the week by an examination of their accounts. Reckon up their
income and their expenses. Subtract the one from the other, and
the difference would show how they had been prospered. Very good
work for a secular day, but not at all in keeping with a sacred day.
Paul had no idea of Sunday sacredness, or he would never have
given such instructions as that." "It does look that way to me now;
but I thought it was good proof until we scrutinized it more closely.
I have just one more text. In Rev. 1: 10, John says he was in the
Spirit on the Lord's day. I have always been taught that Sunday is
the Lord's day, and became rich at the resurrection." "Does the
Bible say so?" "No." "Did God ever bless Sunday?" "No." "Did He ever
sanctify it?" "No." "Did He ever call it the Lord's day?" "No." "Did He
ever apply any sacred title to it whatever?" "No." "Then why should
we call it the Lord's day, and apply sacred titles to it, if the Lord
never did? Did God ever bless the seventh day?" "Yes." "Did He
sanctify it?" "Yes." "Did He call it the Sabbath of the Lord, thy God?"
"Yes." "Did He call it 'My holy day'?" "Yes. Isa. 58: 13." "Did Christ say
He was its Lord?" " 'Yes. Matt. 12: 8." "Then what day is the Lord's
day" "It looks to me as if it were the Sabbath." "Yes; God gave six
days to man, and reserved the seventh for Himself. Consequently it
is the Lord's holy Sabbath day. You have been presenting to us
what you considered proof for Sunday sacredness, and we have not
been able to find any sacred title applied to it, nor any command for
its observance, nor any sanctification of it, nor any blessing
pronounced upon it. Neither have we found a single instance in
which Christ or the apostles observed it as a sacred day. We have
not been able to find a single divine reason {p. 124} for its
observance. To keep it because Christ arose on that day, is of man,
and not of God.
"Redemption is greater than creation, therefore, we should keep
Sunday, is declared by men, not by God. It is blessed, sanctified,
and commanded by man, but not by God; while on the other hand,
the seventh day is blessed, sanctified, and commanded by the God
of heaven. Observed by Christ, Luke 4: 16 ; kept by the holy women
after the resurrection, Luke 23: 56; kept by the apostles, Acts 13:
13, 14, 42, 44. It was Paul's manner to keep the Sabbath, Acts 17:
2, 13. He persuaded both the Jews and Greeks (Gentiles) every
Sabbath, Acts 18: 4. John calls it Lord's day in Rev. 1: 10, and all
flesh will observe it in the new earth. Isa. 66: 22, 23. My brother, in
the light of these facts, which day ought we to keep?"
The gentleman did not say he would keep the Sabbath, but he left
the tent in a very different state of mind to what he came. "To whom
ye yield yourselves servants to obey; his servants ye are to whom ye
obey."
Two ladies at Mankato believed the truth, and both desired
baptism, and both were opposed by their husbands. One husband
said, "This is something new, do not be too hasty; wait three
months, and if you still desire baptism, I will not object," and he
wept his grief before his wife, who finally consented to wait. When
the three months were up, he opposed her desire for baptism more
vehemently than ever. One yielding prepared the way for another,
until she gave up living out her convictions of duty altogether, and
as a consequence, her hope of eternal life fled, and her light went
out in darkness.
THE OTHER LADY
was at the tent the Sunday we were receiving candidates for
baptism. Her husband told her if she were baptized, he would not
live with her. She wanted to know what she had better do under the
circumstances. I said if she felt it her duty to God to be baptized,
her husband had no right to stand between her and her God. So she
decided to go forward, at which her husband was furious. They had
but one child, a little boy, who wished to remain with his mother;
but the father seized him by the arm and dragged the struggling,
crying {p. 125} child out of the tent, before all the people, giving his
wife to understand the separation was final.
This Christian heroine was baptized, and her husband compelled
her to walk home, a distance of six miles, he driving just ahead of
her all the way, but not suffering her to get into the wagon. After
reaching home, I was told, he threw all her Adventist publications
into the fire, and the poor woman had a hard time of it for awhile;
but she continued faithful, trusting in God, and He gave her the
victory. About three months afterward, as I entered the Mankato
Adventist church one Sabbath morning, I saw the gentleman and
his wife, sitting side by side, as cozy as could be. I said to him: "I
am very much surprised to see you here." "Well," he said, "I have
decided to go with my wife." If the other lady had been equally firm,
and true to her convictions, she too, might be rejoicing, with her
husband, in the blessed hope. How dost thou know, O wife, but thou
mayest gain thy husband; but no wife can gain her husband by
yielding her convictions of truth and duty. I held meetings the next
fall at Tenhassen, Martin County, in the same schoolhouse in which,
years before, I had taught school. I had quite an experience getting
there. Night overtook me, and it was very dark, and I lost my way
on the sparsely settled prairie. I kept driving on, sometimes in the
road and sometimes out of it, not knowing whither I was going. At
last I ran on to a house which proved to be Brother Wilson's. I was
made welcome, it was much more agreeable than wandering in the
cold and darkness. The next morning, while running behind the
buggy to get warm, my horses ran away. My trunk went bobbing up
and down, turned over on its side, and I expected every moment to
see it fly out; but it did not. Some men ahead of me, in a wagon,
stopped my horses before much damage was done. When I reached
the meeting, I found the brethren about ready to disperse. They had
waited so long they had become discouraged, and had given up
hopes of my coming. Our meetings at Tenhassen were well
attended, and some were convinced of the truth, and joined the
little company of believers.
One evening, after I had spoken with a good degree of freedom on
the Sabbath question, a gentleman went through the {p. 126}
audience shaking hands and talking about his heart. He kept
Sunday and his heart did not condemn him. While I was putting on
my overcoat, he came to me about his heart. I opened my Bible,
and requested him to read Prov. 28: 26, which he did, as follows:
"He that trusteth in his own heart is a fool; but whoso walketh wisely
shall be delivered." We heard but little more from him on the heart
subject that evening.
Is it not passing strange that professed followers of Christ will reject
the plain testimony of His word and follow the leadings of their own
hearts? Better do as David did. He said, "Thy word. O Lord, have I
hid in my heart that I might not sin against thee." Ps. 119: 11. Dear
reader, not our heart, but "thy word is a lamp unto my feet and a
light unto my path" to guide us in the way to heaven. Ps. 199:
105.
----------------------------------------
"The sunset burns across the sky;
Upon the air its warning cry
The curfew tolls from tower to tower;
O children, 'tis the last, last hour!
"The work that centuries might have done
Must crowd the hour of setting sun,
And though all lands the saving name
Ye must in fervent haste proclaim
"The fields are white to harvest, Weep
O tardy workers, as ye reap,
For wasted hours that might have won
Rich harvests ere the set of sun.
"We hear His footsteps an the way!
O work while it is called today
Constrained by love, endued with power,
O children in the last, last hour."
{p. 127}
CHAPTER 5
LABORS IN VARIOUS PLACES DURING THE WINTER OF 1879-
80
The winter of 1879-80 I held meetings in a schoolhouse about four
miles northwest of Blue Earth City. After my meetings closed a
Free-Will Baptist minister, Hardy by name, announced to speak on
the Sabbath question. I announced that after the meeting was over
I would speak the same evening on the same subject. I went early,
and took a chair with me. when I arrived, I could scarcely find room
to place my chair, and before meeting began the house was literally
packed. The people clambered upon desks and everywhere they
could get. It was so packed about the door it was nearly impossible
to get in or out, while others stood outside, and still others went
home.
Elder Hardy went through the usual program of making light of our
people and work, but brought little proof for Sunday. After his
sermon, I arose, and he motioned with his hand, and said, "sit
down, sir, sit down." I said, "Brother Hardy, may I have the privilege
of making an announcement?" "Oh, yes, " he said. "After Brother
Hardy has dismissed his meeting, I will immediately speak on the
other side of this question, and extend to him a cordial invitation to
remain, and all others who are not afraid to look at both sides of a
subject. All who are afraid to, of course, are excused." Brother
Hardy, his deacon, and a very few others left, but as they crowded
out, others crowded in. My old class leader of former years started
to go, but as he saw so few going he returned again. One lady who
went out spoke so loudly as to seriously interrupt the services
inside. I knew her voice, and cried out loud enough for her to hear;
"That's a Methodist lady that is making that great racket outside."
she soon left, and we had quiet.
{p. 128}
Everybody listened with great attention until I was through. Then
Mr. Wynne wanted to know how it could be that the Lord heard his
prayers, if he were not right in keeping Sunday. We replied
something as follows:--- "We know God heareth us 'because we keep
his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his
sight.' 1John 3: 22. Again, we may at one time be accepted of God,
and because of the rejection of truth be rejected of Him at another
time. In Hosea 4: 6, we read: 'My people are destroyed for lack of
knowledge; because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject
thee: ...seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also
forget thy children.' It is plain, according to this scripture, that
knowledge comes to the professed CHILDREN OF GOD concerning
His law, and they reject it and are, in consequence, themselves
rejected of God. We believe the scripture is being fulfilled now: First,
there is a special message going to the people in regard to the
commandments of God, especially the fourth precept, and many of
God's professed people are rejecting it. Second, that the scripture
refers especially to the last days is shown by the connection in
which it stands. The second verse reads: By swearing, and lying,
and killing, and stealing, and committing adultery, they break out,
and blood toucheth blood.' What faithful picture of our days! The
third verse say: 'therefore shall the land mourn, and everyone that
dwelleth therein shall lanquish, with the beasts of the field, and with
the fowls of heaven; yea, the fishes of the sea also shall be taken
away.' Have the fowls of heaven been taken away yet?---No; and will
not be until the pouring out of the second plague. 'And the second
angel poured out his vial upon the sea; and it became as the blood
of a dead man: and every living soul (fishes) died in the sea.' Rev.
16: 3. As the rejection of knowledge in regard to God's law was to
take place in the last days, and is now being fulfilled, you see,
Brother Wynn, that before knowledge comes to you that you are
transgressing God's law, your prayer might be heard and answered;
while, when the light comes to you and you refuse to walk in it, both
you and your prayers will be rejected by God. 'He that turneth away
his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer shall be an
abomination.' Prov. 28: 9."
{p. 129}
After meeting was dismissed, a wilder class of people I never saw.
They crowded around me, and the uproar was tremendous. Really, I
did not know what would happen next. All at once, in the midst of
the tumult, a voice arose high and clear above all other sounds: "I
tell you, Mr. Hill is a Christian." It was the wife of a French
gentleman, that had spoken. In an instant every voice was hushed,
and there was a great calm. The spell was broken, and we all went
home. I believe it was the Lord's doing that she cried out as she
did. Toward spring I began meetings near Kasota, Le Sueur County.
Brother Small, of Eagle Lake, had been holding meetings there. He
was joined by an Elder Sweet, who claimed to be almost persuaded
to keep the Sabbath, but it turned out that he was only waiting to
see which way the people of the neighborhood would turn. He soon
discovered that they had no intention of keeping the Sabbath, and
he immediately became a very strong Sunday advocate, and worked
against Brother Small, who became a good deal discouraged. He
told me he had done all he could for the people, but they seemed
more and more determined to go the wrong way. He desired me to
go with him to an appointment he had at the schoolhouse for the
next Sunday.
We found a goodly number present, who listened attentively to the
word spoken. I was so favorably impressed with the outlook I began
a course of lectures. The house was filled; evening after evening the
people listened to the special truths for these last days, and a
goodly number decided to obey. Sabbath school and meetings were
established, which continue unto this day.
When the meetings were in full blast, Elder Sweet, who had been
absent a few days, returned. He immediately began going from
house to house, striving to turn the people away from the faith.
When I learned what he was doing, I publicly invited him to give the
people his reasons for keeping Sunday, in the schoolhouse, the next
evening. A crowd was out to hear him. After he had finished I
reviewed him briefly. The next morning he went away, and was
never seen in that neighborhood again. I felt sorry for him. Poor
man! Nearing the end of life's journey, striving against the truth of
God! He ought long ago to have learned that we can do nothing
against the truth, but for the truth.
{p. 130}
When we first went to Eagle Lake to hold meetings, we occupied the
Christian, or Disciple, church. Three or four young men with their
"best girls" made a practice of getting up in the midst of the service
and tramping out, making a good deal of disturbance. We endured
the annoyance patiently for a good while, hoping the nuisance
would abate of itself; but they seemed delighted to repeat the
offense against good order every evening, until one night they arose
and began their march to the door, the speaker cried out, "A small
jug is soon filled! As soon as you get full you may pass out." It
proved to be an effectual cure, as young and old remained to the
close of the meeting after that. While we were holding meetings in
the Disciple church, their State evangelist came along, and as it
was apparent that a goodly number were about convinced that we
were preaching the truth, it was decided that he should speak
against the law of God, the ten commandments. He was bright, but
young. After the discourse, he challenged any man to find where
Paul kept the Sabbath after he was converted. The Adventist
minister said, "Give me time, and I shall find it." "How much time do
you want?" "Five minutes." He took out his watch, and said, "Come
on." The house was full, and the interest high, as the defender of
truth took the stand. He answered about as follows: "Paul's
declaration of faith, 'believing all things written in the law and in the
prophets.' Acts 24: 14. Since he believed all things written in the
law, he believed that the seventh day is the Sabbath; for so it is
written in the law. Did he practice what he believed?---We think so."
For three Sabbath days in succession he reasoned out of the
scriptures. Acts 17: 2. On other days of the week, Sundays
included, he wrought at tent making; but reasoned ---preached the
gospel---every Sabbath. Acts 18: 1-4. Just the way any Sabbath-
keeping Christian would do. He declared that he had not offended
against the law of the Jews in anything at all. Acts 25: 8. It would be
a great offense to break the Sabbath. The only possible conclusion
is that Paul was a good Sabbath keeper. He testified that he had
committed nothing against the customs of his fathers. Acts 28: 17.
Was it a custom of his fathers to keep the Sabbath?--- Yes. Did he
commit anything against the customs of his {p. 131} fathers?--- He
says no. Then was he a Sabbath keeper?---Yes. Paul taught that the
law speaks to all the world. Rom. 3: 19. Then the law of God speaks
to my brother, to me, and to all of us saying, The seventh day is the
Sabbath. Let us all keep it."
It was rumored around town that the young gentleman felt so badly
over his conspicuous failure to overthrow the law of God, that he
went to his room, and found relief in a flood of tears. He who
thrusts himself against the rock of eternal truth can only get the
worst of the encounter. Don't do it.
At the conclusion of the evangelist's discourse, the pastor of the
church announced that on the next Sunday evening he would
preach a three-hour discourse in an hour and a half, and tell us why
he was not an Adventist. The house was packed, and he announced
that he would speak the next evening also, and then a minister from
Janesville would occupy the house.
We enquired when we could occupy the house again, and he said we
had had it long enough. He finally left it to the audience, and they
voted that we should have an hour to speak after he was through
the next evening. As a result, a goodly number, among whom were
some of the most worthy of his own church, accepted the precious
truth for our day and generation, of whom some remain unto this
day, and some have fallen asleep in the blessed hope. What a
reunion we will have when Jesus comes!
THE FIRST SUNDAY IN MAY, 1880,
we had a memorable discussion at Eagle Lake, on the Sabbath
question. Elder Kelley, of Janesville, Minn., was the opposing party.
There had been a good deal said about it in the papers beforehand,
and the people came for miles, many expecting that the seventh-
day Sabbath would now receive its death blow. Elder Kelley
depended a good deal on his wit to carry his point. He insisted on
having a board of three moderators, who should decide who had
presented the best argument. The board was composed of one
Sabbath keeper and two Sunday keepers, one of whom was Elder
Burges, a great opposer of our faith. He had sometime previously
{p. 132} preached what he called the funeral sermon of Seventh-day
Adventism. It looked a little dubious about the decision. We had a
great desire that the truth would triumph. We appointed an hour
before day at which the brethren arose and sought the Lord's
blessing on His own precious truth that day.
We went into the battle trusting in the almighty power of the God of
truth, and he did not fail us. The elder worked hard. He even got
down on his knees, and prayed to the ten commandments, but it
was all to no avail. After the discussion the committee retired to
consult together. In a few minutes they returned, having agreed that
Elder Kelley had lost his proposition. The next issue of the Mankato
FREE PRESS contained a brief account of the discussion, ending
with these words: "It was decided that Saturday is the right
Sunday."
The next day after the discussions I was very weary, and was resting
in Dr. Cordell's house. Suddenly I was impressed that I ought to go
immediately to the large sixty-foot tent wherein the discussion was
held. I did not wish to go, as I was very weary, but I could not shake
off the impression, so I went. I found it filled with children at play. I
told them to run away, and they ran in every direction; but none too
soon, for the large center pole fell over, taking the whole tent with
it. One little fellow did not get out until the tent was upon him. He
was not hurt, but was under the canvas. He was frightened nearly
out of his wits, and he did his best at making a loud noise.
HAD THE POLE FALLEN
when all the children were in the tent, a number of them would have
been killed, or very badly hurt. I was very thankful I had been led
there just in time to prevent such a sad result. Surely "The angel of
the Lord encampeth round about them that fear Him, and
delivereth them." Ps. 34: 7.
That same spring our people held an institute at Medford, Steele
County. Brother M. H. Gregory accompanied me in my buggy. We
had a profitable time at the institute, which was conducted by Elder
L. B. Whitney. On our return the roads were very muddy, and
wherever I could find a bit of sod I would drive on it, if possible.
Brother Gregory kept saying, "You will upset the whole thing if you
are not more careful." {p. 133} "Oh, don't be frightened; I never
upset a buggy in my life." Sure enough, as I hugged the hillside,
where there was grass, a little too close, we had to jump to save
ourselves, and our things fell out into the mud. "Now!" cried Brother
Gregory, "never say again you never upset a buggy in your life." "O,
Brother Gregory, this is hardly an upset; only a spill out, that's
all."
That summer Elder Dimmick, Brother Gregory, and myself held a
tent meeting at Alma City. As usual, opposition raised up against
the truth. One Elder D. Morgan for six meetings affirmed that the
first day of the week is the Sabbath. Before he began, he said he
was not fool enough to do away with the fourth commandment; but
he had not gone far before he said the whole ten were done away,
which showed he was ten times more of a fool than he thought for.
"The wise in heart will receive commandments: but a prating fool
(one that prates or speaks against the commandments) shall fall."
Prov. 10: 8. When it was shown that the Methodist church
authoritatively teaches that the ten commandments are the law of
God, binding upon all men, Elder Morgan replied, "I'm not preaching
Methodist doctrine now." "A house divided against itself cannot
stand." Mark 3: 25.
"Therefore as the fire devoureth the stubble, and the flame
consumeth the chaff, so their root shall be rottenness, and their
blossom shall go up as dust: because they have cast away the law
of the Lord of hosts and despised the word of the Holy One of
Israel." Isa. 5: 24. This terrible denunciation applies pointedly and
unmistakably to Elder Morgan. He has cast away the law of the Lord
of hosts, as far as it is possible for a man to do so. He says it is
dead, done away, and made void. He despises the only word God
ever spoke to man with His own voice, and wrote with His own
divine finger on the tables of stone. This word so highly honored of
God, he tramples in the dust, and calls it Jewish, death, bondage,
etc. Thus he despises the word of the Holy One of Israel. I warn him
as a friend, I exhort him, and those ministers who uphold him in
this great wickedness, to repent, and do works meet for repentance,
before it is too late. The law of God is all right, and will stand; but
those who are found in opposition to its principles of righteousness
will surely fall. {p. 134} "All His commandments are sure. They
stand fast forever and ever." Ps. 111: 7, 8.
Only a few embraced the truth at Alma City. The majority were
highly pleased with the idea that God's law is abolished, and with it
the Lord's Sabbath. What a sad awakening there will be, when they
discover that the law they despised and rejected will be the rule by
which they will be judged! Eccl. 12: 13, 14; James 2: 10- 12.
We were now living in Eagle Lake, Blue Earth County. Diphtheria
was raging through that part of the county. In the city of Mankato
its ravages were terrible. As I was returning from holding a general
meeting near Wells, in September, 1880, some of the neighbors
met me, and told me my eldest son, Frankie, was down with the
dread disease. For fifteen days and nights we watched over him,
and did what we could for him; but at last it became evident that
we must part with our first-born. Two or three days before he died
he said, "Papa, I am going to die." Darling boy, His eye brightened
as he spoke of the heavenly city. He said, "There will be no sorrow
there." How thankful we were for a religion so simple, so precious,
that a child of ten years old could be comforted and sustained by it,
even in the face of death. Even his young heart could trust in Jesus
in that trying hour.
AS THE END DREW NEAR
he wanted his papa to lie down with him, and then hold him in his
arms in a chair, and then lie down with him again. The physician
was present, and told me not to do so, as I might take the disease. I
said his dying request should be granted, regardless of
consequences. It was such a crushing blow to us. O, how our sad
hearts were wounded, and how lonely our house seemed, and still
the death angel was hovering over us. Our eldest little girl, Ella, was
sick with the same disease, and the night after Frankie was buried
she had a terrible fever. We wrung a large cloth out of cold water,
and laid it on the whole length of her body. In a few minutes it
would be steaming with heat, when we would repeat the process,
until finally the fever subsided. The next morning, as the doctor
came in, he said, "That little girl will get well," which she did. It
seemed we could not bear the strain of losing {p.135} another of
our dear children at the time; but our hearts were comforted with
the blessed hope that the Life Giver would soon come again and
restore our loved ones to us once more. The diphtheria still raged,
and in January, 1881, it came to our next door neighbors. As our
children had played with theirs, we were afraid that the diphtheria
would visit us again. Our worst fears were realized. Our only
remaining little boy, Gurden, five years old, and his little sister
Nellie, one year and a half old, were taken down with it.
THOSE WERE DARK DAYS,
It seemed as though my head would burst as I beheld the suffering
of the little ones. How it made our hearts long for the time to come
when there will be no more pain, neither sorrow nor crying, for the
former things have passed away. The little girl was saved, and she
has been sunshine to our hearts ever since, but little Gurden was
laid beside his brother, until the voice of the archangel will awake
the sleeping saints.
I did not enter a new field that winter, finding plenty to do in looking
after the churches of Kasota, Eagle Lake, Mankato, Alden, Wells,
Tenhassen, and Milford. The latter church was situated near Spirit
Lake, in northwestern Iowa.
The following April, in company with Elder Ellis, I visited the
churches of Tenhassen and Milford. It was a time of high water.
Streams were swollen, bridges and houses were swept away by the
angry floods. As we got to Fairmont, Martin County, we found it
impossible to get to Brother Knowlton's, who lived four miles in the
country, by the wagon road. We followed the railroad track until we
crossed the outlet of the lake. Then we took across the prairie,
winding around the sloughs as best we could. We eventually
reached Brother Knowlton's, tired and weary, glad to find a resting
place. The next morning Brother Knowlton said the water was too
high and cold to drive his team to Tenhassen, eight or nine miles
distant. As we had an appointment for the next evening, I told
Brother Ellis I would try to get through on foot. If I could not get
through, I could come back again. I found I had a difficult journey
to perform. The country was afloat with ice-cold water. Sloughs I
could not get around I forded, and so made my way until I reached
Mr. De Wolf's, {p. 136} opposite Tenhassen; but between rolled rods
and rods of swift running water, and not a boat to be had. What was
to be done nest? So near to Tenhassen, and we must fail now?
"What do you think, Brother De Wolf; can you not take me to the
bridge with your team?" "Well, we might try. What do you say, Tom?"
speaking to his hired man. "we were the last to venture across on
the ice, suppose we be the first to try the water." "I don't care," said
Tom, so we started immediately. It was a risky piece of
business.
The water kept deepening until the horses began to swim. The
water came into the wagon box, and we stood upon the seat. As we
stood there, the water came half way to the tops of our boots. The
swift current twirled one of the end boards out of the wagon box,
and what would come next? It looked very much as if we would have
to swim in the cold water. Just then the water became shallower,
and soon the horses struck bottom, and we came out all right.
When we reached the long bridge across the outlet, we found a
large share of it had fallen flat upon the water, and there were rods
of water between the far end of it and the dry land. I met a man on
the bridge who said he had poled himself from the shore to the
bridge on a flat stick of timber. I took his pole and stick of timber
and was soon on terra firma. That evening a goodly number were
present, and we had a good meeting, and I was happy to be able to
fill my appointment, and speak an encouraging word to God's
children. After a few days I was joined by Brother Ellis, and we went
on to Milford. The distance was about thirty miles over a vast rolling
prairie. About midway between Tenhassen and Milford lived a
Brother Crumb. We invariably stopped there, going and coming, for
rest and refreshments. So his place was appropriately termed
Crumb Station. At Estherville, we found the bridge across the Des
Moines River carried away, and we crossed in a small boat. There
was a great hole in the mill. The water had thrust a great cake of ice
clear through it. The place looked desolate enough. In the new earth
there will be no such scenes of destruction. May the happy change
soon come! We held a series of meetings with the Milford church,
encouraged them what we could in the way of holiness unto the
Lord, had a baptism in the lake Okebogee, and started on foot for
Tenhassen. {p. 139} Thus, in weariness and painfulness, was the
cause built up in those early days.
The following summer Elder Ellis and myself held tent meetings in
St. Peter. The interest was not great; but some embraced the
present truth, and were baptized. One hot, sultry day, as I was
preparing to write letters, a couple of men entered the tent. I invited
them to be seated, and entered into conversation, as follows: "Do
you live in this vicinity?" "No, sir, we live more than fifteen hundred
miles from here," "Oh, you are from the East, I presume?" "No, sir,
we are from the West---from Utah. We are Mormon elders." "Is that
so? I never saw a Mormon elder before. Do you believe in a plurality
of wives?" "Ye, sir, we do." "Why do you believe such nonsense as
that?" "That is not nonsense; That is the Bible. Abraham was a good
man, and he had more than one wife." "You went a long way back for
an example. While you were going so far back, why did you not go
back to the beginning---to Adam? God made one man, and made
just one wife for him. God knew what was best for man. If two or
more wives had been for his highest good, God would not have
withheld them from him. One man and one woman was God's ideal
of marriage, and any deviation from the perfect pattern, whether by
Abraham, or Mormons, or anybody else, is a perversion of the
marriage institution." "Well, I say to you, sir, we are commanded in
the New Testament to have more than one wife." "You astonish me. I
supposed I had read every word in the New Testament several
times, but I never read anything like that." "We are told in the New
Testament that we should do the works of Abraham, and he had
more than one wife. If we don't, we will not do the works Abraham
did." "Well, let us see how that would work: Abraham married Sarah;
so, to do as Abraham did, we still have to marry Sarah, too.
Afterward we must marry Hagar, Sarah's maid: then trouble comes
into the family; in fact, domestic infelicity reaches such a height
that we will be compelled to give Hagar a loaf of bread and a bottle
of water, and send her and her son away into the wilderness. So we
would only have one wife at last. You see, gentlemen, you have
referred to a very poor example for the plurality of wives." {p. 140} I
wonder if Mormons do not often feel like Abraham, very sorry they
were foolish enough to enter upon a course fraught with so much
domestic unhappiness. They thought we ought to let them have our
tent in which to preach Mormonism; but, of course we could not do
so. I was informed that these same elders went into a house in
town, and told the lady that they were Latter-day Saints, and they
were made welcome; but in the course of a few minutes it was
discovered that they were also called Mormons, whereupon the
good wife seized the broom, and drove them from the house,
declaring the saints were all right, but that she had no use for
Mormons. Poor Fellows! Going up and down in the in the earth to
build up error and falsehood, supposing they are doing God service.
They endure cold, hunger, and ridicule cheerfully, believing they will
be rewarded in the kingdom of God.
There are, no doubt, rogues and deceivers among them, though
many of them are sincere men; but alas, sincerity does not remove
their ignorance and superstition. O, the power of Satan, that holds
men in such utter darkness when the true light shines all around
them! How thankful we ought to be for the light.
"Shall we, whose souls are lighted
With wisdom from on high;
Shall we to men benighted,
The lamp of life deny?"
I worked in the harvest that year for Brother Wm. Pettis, of Kasota.
It was hard work for me, but I stood it pretty well. The next fall I
held meetings in the Herrick schoolhouse, in northwestern Iowa. At
first we had a very small attendance. Those who did attend reported
excellent meetings, and soon we had a houseful.
THE LORD BLESSED THE WORK
to the salvation of some, who embraced the precious truths for the
days in which we live. The winter was quite open, and there was
much foggy weather. Sometimes the fog was so dense you could
not see a rod before you.
Mr. Murray's family were much interested in the meetings. The
gentleman was often away from home, and then it was {p. 141}
quite difficult for his wife and children to get to meeting, and I used
to either send someone with a team for them or go myself. One
evening I had Brother Herrick's team, taking them home from
meeting, and the fog was so dense that we lost our way on the
prairie. I felt very uneasy at the prospect of staying all night on the
prairie with the mother and five children, none of whom were any
too warmly clad. The larger children and I stretched out in every
direction from the wagon in hopes of finding some waymark by
which to determine our whereabouts. At last we ran on to an old
straw-stack. The children said. "We know where we are now; this
road that runs by the stack leads right up to our house." And so it
proved. It was a great relief to me to see them all safe at
home.
A CHAPTER OF DISASTERS.
The next spring we had baptism a mile or two from the schoolhouse
where the meetings were held. A nice company of young people
were baptized. How my heart swelled with gratitude to God, who
had turned their young hearts from the ways of sin to love God and
keep His commandments! After baptism I was going to take Sister
Murray and her children home in my buggy. After they were all in
the buggy there was very little room for me, so I said that Ralph,
the oldest child, might drive the horses, and I would ride with some
one else.
Sister Murray thought her boy could drive all right, and so they
started a little in advance of the rest. All at once there was a cry
raised, "Whose team is that running away?" I looked up and lo, there
was my team running, with the buggy turned upside down, with
nothing left of the box but the bottom.
With fear and trembling I ran up to where the family were dumped
out upon the ground in a heap. Sister Murray's shoulder was
dislocated, and was very painful. One little girl's nose was bleeding
profusely. As she wept, she wiped her face with her hands, the
blood from her nose fell on her hands, and she was covered with
blood---face, hands, everywhere. I thought she must be badly hurt,
but not a scratch could be found upon her. Poor Sister Murray
suffered severely.
{p. 142}
A while after this, in my journeyings I came to Brother Quinn's, with
a span of colts. One I was driving and the other was tied behind the
buggy. I was going to Eagle Lake, where Sister Quinn's daughter
Ella lived, and she wanted to make her a visit, and asked if she
might ride with me. O course she could, and we started. We had an
immense hill to go down, and when we got to it, Sister Quinn, who
was quite nervous, wanted to get out, and walk down; but I
encouraged her to remain in the buggy. Sure enough, the colt got to
going faster and faster, in spite of all I could do to hold him, until
we were winding around the bluff at a rapid rate. Sister Quinn
wished she had walked down the hill, and so did I. She kept saying,
"Why didn't you let me walk, Brother Hill?" and I wished I had. A
huge tree lay some distance from the road, straight down the bluff.
I knew the horse could not possibly get over it, so turned him
straight for it. When he got there he had to stop, and Sister Quinn
was glad, and so was I.
But our troubles did not end here. After we reached the foot of the
hill, the colt tied behind began to pull back. One horse pulling
forward and the other pulling backward made sad work of it; as a
husband and wife do when they pull different ways. To remedy this
difficulty, I tied the offending colt to the shaft beside the other one,
and we went along very well until the naughty colt made a great
jump to one side, and broke the shaft all to pieces. It took some
time and a little money to rig up again; but patience and
perseverance overcome all obstacles, and we eventually arrived at
our destination in safety. In our journey to the better land we often
meet with difficulties in the way, but with the help of God every
obstacle may be surmounted, and the weary pilgrim find sweet rest
in heaven at last.
The summer of 1882 I did not hold any tent meetings in new fields
being occupied in building up the work among the churches. In the
autumn we held a general meeting at Eagle Lake, at which Sister
Plum requested that a course of meetings be held at Good Thunder,
a town situated about thirteen miles south of Mankato, on the Wells
& Mankato branch of the C. & M. R. R.. It was decided I should go
and see what could be done. It was a German town, with
comparatively {p. 143} few American people in it. It was a great
place for drinking beer. The Catholics and Lutherans would flock to
church on Sunday morning; and after their meeting, the sisters
would sell their butter and eggs at the stores, while the brethren
would regale themselves with beer and tobacco in the saloons, not
having the remotest idea that they were not the best of Christians,
fully believing that St. Peter would immediately swing wide open the
pearly gate, and give them a royal welcome into the shining city as
soon as they should shuffle off this mortal coil, and leave this
mundane sphere. To intimate to them that their religion was not the
genuine article, was to incur their hot displeasure at once. Some
said, "If Brother Hill goes there, they will ride him out of town on a
rail." "Very well, I will have a ride then, for I am going." The Baptist
place of worship was secured in which to hold meetings, and we
began one Sunday evening in November, 1882. I drove a good
many miles through the cold, and arrived rather late. The house
was filled, and the Lord gave freedom in preaching His word. After
meeting, the Baptist brethren gathered around me, and expressed
themselves highly gratified with the service, and said, "Brother Hill,
as long as you preach Bible, we will stand by you." "Very well, then
you will stand by me always for I don't know how to preach anything
else but Bible."
The meetings increased in interest continually until the sound of
them went out into the country for miles around. People said no
such meetings were ever held in Good Thunder before.
A Mrs. Graf, wife of the hardware merchant, became much
interested in the meetings, but her husband did not seem inclined
to attend. He excused himself by saying, "I must attend to
business." But the wife prevailed upon him to go to meeting---Who
knows the power of a good wife---and he also became interested,
and finally gave his heart to God, and is today (1892) proclaiming
the closing message of salvation to the world.
While explaining the prophecies and the signs of the times, the
interest was intense. Saint and sinner, believer and unbeliever, were
full of the themes preached on in the meetings. In the post office,
stores, shops, and on the street corners, the meetings were the
subject of conversations and discussion.
{p. 144}
When we reached the Sabbath question, the interest deepened. As
the truth was presented on that subject, many were enabled to see
that the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord, and a goodly
number began its observance. Perhaps a sermon or two on the
Sabbath question will be of interest to the reader, showing how
people were led to forsake the traditions and institutions of men to
keep the commandments of the Lord.
"MY FRIENDS: This evening we have come together to consider the
Sabbath questions. There are two days before the people, claiming
to be the Sabbath of the Lord. They cannot both be genuine, for
God does not require two holy Sabbaths in every week. One must be
genuine, the other counterfeit. Which is genuine? which is
counterfeit? Is it hard to tell? The seventh-day Sabbath came from
God. 'See, for the Lord hath given you the Sabbath.' Ex. 16:29. Did
a counterfeit or a fraud come from God?---Hardly. God rested on the
seventh day; God blessed and sanctified it. Gen. 2: 1- 3. Not only
so, but God proclaimed with His own voice. 'The seventh day is the
Sabbath of the Lord thy God.' He did more. The Divine Being wrote
with His own finger on the table of stone. 'The seventh day is the
Sabbath of the Lord thy God.' Thus the seventh-day Sabbath bears
upon it the blessing, sanctification, and superscription of Almighty
God. You would be ashamed to ask for more proof of its
genuineness.
"What about Sunday, the first day of the week? 'Sunday, so called,
because anciently it was dedicated to the sun, or its worship.' ---
Webster. The heathen worshiped a counterfeit god (sun) on a
counterfeit day (Sunday), while God's people worshiped the true
God on His true, holy Sabbath. Thus it is certain that anciently
Sunday was a counterfeit institution, and the seventh day was the
genuine Lord's day. Now you say the Lord has changed all this;
what was once the genuine has become the counterfeit, and what
was once the counterfeit has become the true Lord's day. We all
agree that at one time it was pleasing to God to keep the seventh
day and displeasing to Him to keep Sunday, because it was a
heathen festival instituted in honor of a false god. But now you say
it is displeasing to God to keep the seventh day, and {p.145} that it
is His will and pleasure that we keep Sunday holy; that is to say,
what God formerly blessed He condemns now, and what He
formerly condemned He blesses now. I cannot believe such a thing
is possible. It doesn't look just right, does it? But how did this great
change come about? Did God rest on Sunday?--- No one claims that
He did. Did He transfer His blessing and sanctification from the
seventh day to Sunday?---Not that anybody knows of. Did God ever
command anyone to keep it holy?---Such a commandment has
never yet been found; it does not exist. Did He ever call it the
Sabbath?---Never. Did He ever apply any sacred title to it whatever?
Every intelligent man and woman in this audience will say, 'No, He
never did.' Then do you not think Sunday sacredness rather
doubtful? Or do you still think we must observe Sunday sacredly or
be eternally lost? I think if Sunday had become the Lord's day, He
would have told us so in his holy Word. Don't you?
"Perhaps you still hold that Sunday is the Christian Sabbath and the
seventh day is the old Jewish Sabbath.
"Did you ever find the term 'Christian Sabbath' in the Bible?--- Of
course not. It is a fraudulent term, invented to apply to a fraudulent
institution. But why call the seventh day the old Jewish Sabbath?
Christ said it was made for man. Mark 2: 27. M-a-n does not spell J-
e-w. Since the Sabbath was made for man, and we are men,
therefore the Sabbath was made for us. The only escape from this
conclusion is to maintain that the Jews are the only men that ever
did or ever will exist. For my part I am not prepared to admit
that.
"Again, the Sabbath was made at creation. It took three things to
make the Sabbath. First, God rested on the seventh day; then it was
God's rest day. Secondly, God blessed the seventh day; then it was
God's blessed rest day. Thirdly, God sanctified it; thus it became
God's blessed, sanctified, rest or Sabbath day. Thus the Sabbath
was made God's holy day in the beginning, two thousand five
hundred years before there was a Jew in existence; yet people say,
'The seventh day is the old Jewish Sabbath.' My, friend, are you not
sincerely sorry you ever talked that way about the holy day of the
Lord? The commandment itself forever overthrows the idea that the
Sabbath is Jewish.
{p. 146}
"Let us read the commandment as our friends would have it read:
'Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou
labor and do all thy work, but the seventh day is the old Jewish
Sabbath. It doesn't read that way, does it? It does read, ' The
seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God.' Then the Sabbath
belongs to God, and not to the Jews. We won't call it the old Jewish
Sabbath any more, will we? It is a perversion of the truth. It is
wrong and wicked to do so.
"In Isaiah 58:13, we read, 'If thou turn away thy foot from the
Sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day, and shalt call the
Sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, honorable, and shall honor
Him,' etc. Here we are told to call the Sabbath a delight. Some of
you say your minister calls the Sabbath bondage, and the Lord calls
it a delight; which do you think tells the truth about it, the Lord or
your minister? and which will you mind, the minister or the Lord
your God? We are not only to call the Sabbath a delight, but the
holy of the Lord, honorable. Did you call it the old Jewish Sabbath
to honor it, or to dishonor it? No doubt you thought to cast odium
upon it; but that is directly opposite to what God's Spirit tells us to
do. Since God's Spirit directs us to call the Sabbath a delight, holy
of the Lord, honorable, are we led by the Lord's Spirit if we call it
Jewish, bondage, etc. and do what we can to make and make the
Sabbath base and contemptible in the sight of men? 'As many as
are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.' Rom. 8: 14.
If we are led by an opposite spirit, whose children are we? John 8:
44. Isa. 58: 13. not only tells us to call the Sabbath a delight, holy
of the Lord, honorable, but that by so doing we shall honor God. So
we see God's honor is involved in this matter. My fellow Christians,
you revere God: His honor is sacred in your eyes. But God plainly
teaches in His Word that when we honor the Sabbath, we honor
Him. Then it follows that if we dishonor the Sabbath, we dishonor
God. This is a serious matter, and we shall be careful no to speak
slightingly of the Sabbath anymore. We will no longer stigmatize it
as the old Jewish Sabbath, but call it the Lord's holy, honorable
day, as He has plainly taught us to do in His holy Word.
{p. 147}
" 'Yes, but,' I hear some friend say, 'that was all right in Old
Testament times; but now we live in New Testament times, and
have a new Sabbath, the first day of the week.' Well, my friends, I
have a proposition to make to you this evening. If the New
Testament teaches that the first day of the week is the Sabbath, I
will keep it with you. On the other hand, if the New Testament
teaches that the seventh day is the Sabbath, you will keep it with
me and we will have no division in this community on the Sabbath
question. Now, mind you, we are to settle it by the New Testament.
I take you to be good, honest people; and you will in nowise dodge
what the New Testament says on this important subject. We will
first read Matt. 28: 1: 'In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to
dawn toward the first day of the week.' etc. From this it is clear to
everyone that the Sabbath comes just before the first day of the
week. Mark bears the same testimony: 'And when the Sabbath was
past, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Salome, had
bought sweet spices that they might come to anoint Him. And very
early in the morning the first day of the week they came unto the
sepulcher at the rising of the sun.' Mark 16: 1, 2. No one can doubt
that Mark calls the seventh day the Sabbath, for he says the
Sabbath was past when the first day began. Thus Matthew and
Mark testify to the same fact. Although the holy women arose very
early in the morning on the first day of the week, they did not rise
early enough to find the Sabbath, because it was past. Then when
you and I arise very early in the morning on the first day of the
week, where is the Sabbath? It is not there; it is past. My friends, we
cannot rise early enough in the morning of the first day of the week
to find the Sabbath, according to the New Testament. Remember
that. Then if we call the first day of the week the Sabbath, do we tell
the truth? I would not like to be found perverting the New
Testament truth in regard to the Sabbath, would you?
"We will now read Luke 23:56, 'And they (the holy women) returned
and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the Sabbath day
according to the commandment.' Here it is expressly stated that
they kept the Sabbath according to the commandment.' Here it is
expressly stated that they kept the Sabbath according to the
commandment.
That is the way you and I want to keep it. {p. 148} In fact, if we do
not keep it according to the commandment, we do not keep it at all.
But which day did the holy women observe the Sabbath, the first or
the seventh day? The next verse tell us, 'Now upon the first day of
the week, very early in the morning, they came upon the sepulcher,
bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others
with them.' Luke 24: 1. You see, my friends, that the first day of the
week always comes along just after the Sabbath is past. It is always
one day too late to be the Sabbath according to the New
Testament. Again I ask, Does the Sabbath come just before the first
day of the week, according to the New Testament? In the light of the
testimony of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, which I have just read, you
must answer, Yes. But what day comes just before the first day of
the week? You answer, The seventh day, of course. Then what day
should you and I observe as the Sabbath according to the New
Testament? You must, in conscience, answer, The seventh day. Now
we will all keep it, won't we?
One point more. The holy women kept the Sabbath according to the
commandment by keeping the last or the seventh day of the week.
It follows that when we keep the seventh day, we keep the Sabbath
according to the commandment. Now, my Sunday-keeping friend,
let me ask you kindly, If we keep the Sabbath according to the
commandment by keeping the seventh day, do you not go contrary
to the commandment when you keep Sunday? Before we close
tonight, I wish to say to you, there is not the slightest shadow of
evidence for Sunday keeping in the Bible. The first day of the week
is only mentioned eight times in the New Testament. Now,
tomorrow please take your Bibles and concordances, and look up
every place where it is mentioned, and if you can find where it is
once called the Sabbath, or Lord's day, or a single instance in which
Christ or an apostle observed it as such, I will observe it also. You
will search the Scriptures to find the truth on this important
question. I would suggest that you get your ministers to help you,
and tomorrow evening you shall have opportunity to present your
Scripture proof for Sunday sacredness, tomorrow evening the
subject will be, 'who changed the Sabbath?' "
{p. 149}
"My Friends: In the good providence of God we are permitted to
assemble here once more to investigate a portion of His Word. The
subject before us is, ' Who Changed the Sabbath?' But before going
further I will inquire, How many have found where the first day is
called the Sabbath or Lord's day in the New Testament, or where
Christ or the apostles observed it as such in a single instance, or
any bible proof for it whatever? All such please hold up your hands.
Not a hand raised! Not one of you, with the aid of your ministers,
could find a particle of Bible proof for Sunday keeping? Well, it is
hard to find proof where there is none. Of course, if there were any
Bible proof for Sunday sacredness, you Christians, who have
listened to preaching, attended Sunday school, and studied your
Bibles all your lives, could certainly find it. So we all settle down on
this one fact, there is no Bible proof for Sunday sacredness. Upon
this point we all agree. We will now show who did not change the
Sabbath.
"God says, 'My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is
gone out of my lips.' Ps. 89: 34. You may say this does not
especially refer to the Sabbath. Perhaps not, but at least it states
the truth that God will not alter the thing that is gone out of His
lips. Did the Sabbath come out of his lips?---Yes. Will he alter it?---
No, for He says, 'I will not alter the thing that is gone out of my lips.'
Christ did not change the Sabbath. He says, 'Think not that I come
to destroy, but to fulfill; for verily I say unto you, til heaven and
earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law
till all be fulfilled.' ('Till all things are accomplished,'--SAWYER. 'Till
all things are ended.'---NORTON. 'Till all things are accomplished.'---
REVISED VERSION, Matt. 5:17-19.) Have heaven and earth passed
away?---No. Then has one word or letter passed away from the
Sabbath commandment? You must, in all candor, answer, No.
Christ taught His disciples to pray that their flight from Jerusalem,
nearly forty years after His resurrection, might not be on the
Sabbath day (Matt. 24:20), which does not look like abolishing or
changing the Sabbath, does it?
"At first all the Christians were Jews, and they were all zealous of
the law. Acts 21: 20 If they were zealous of the {p. 150} law, they
were zealous of the Sabbath also. The first Gentile convert to the
Christian faith was Cornelius, A. D. 41. Acts 10: 1- 48. Be it known
unto all people that until the year of our Lord 41 the many
thousands of Christians were all zealous Sabbath keepers, and
there was not a Sunday-keeping Christian in the whole world. The
apostles were Jews, and every believer and every preacher of the
gospel were all Jews for years after the resurrection. Were they all
zealous of the law?---Yes. Were they all zealous observers of the
seventh day?---Yes. Did one of them observe Sunday?--Not one. It is
not reasonable to suppose that they observed two Sabbaths every
week.
THE APOSTLES OBSERVED THE SABBATH
and held religious meetings on that day. They met with the Jews in
the synagogue on the Sabbath. Acts 13: 14. They met with the
Gentiles on that day. Acts 13: 42- 44. They met by the riverside.
Acts 16: 13. It was the only Sabbath known to the apostles: 'For
Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being
read in the synagogues every Sabbath day.' Acts 15: 21. All agree
that every Sabbath in which Moses was read in the synagogue was
the seventh-day Sabbath. If the seventh day was every Sabbath,
where could the first-day Sabbath be?--- It simply could not be at
all. The apostle James had no knowledge of any other weekly
Sabbath than the seventh-day Sabbath. Again: 'And he (Paul)
reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and persuaded both the
Jews and the Greeks (Gentiles).' Acts 18:4. Did he reason in the
synagogue on the Sunday-Sabbath?---No; but he reasoned every
Sabbath. Where then was the Sunday-Sabbath?---It was not born
yet. Paul worked on Sunday; 'And because he was of the same craft,
he abode with them, and wrought: for by their occupation they were
tentmakers. And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and
persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.' Acts 18: 3, 4. What did Paul
do on every Sabbath?---He reasoned in the synagogue. What did he
do on Sunday? The conclusion is irresistible that Paul worked at
tentmaking on Sunday.
Sunday sacredness came into the church later {p. 151} than Paul's
day. Dr. Smith in his Bible Dictionary, article 'Sabbath,' says that
the Lord's day gradually took the place of the Jewish Sabbath. Yes,
it was a gradual process, this bringing Sunday observance into the
Christian church, the same as all other errors were brought in.
" 'People's Encyclopedia,' page 1597, says, 'There has been no
period, since the time of Christ, when there was no Sabbath-
keeping Christians in the church. There is no positive evidence of
any form of Sunday observance by Christians previous to the middle
of the second century.'
"THE CHRISTIAN AT WORK says: 'The selection of Sunday, thus
changing the particular day designated in the fourth
commandment, was brought about by the gradual concurrence of
the early Christian church; and on this basis, and no other, does the
Christian Sabbath, the first day of the week, rightly rest. The exact
date of the substitution of the first day for the proper observance is
not known.' ---'Peoples Encyclopedia,' page 519.
"Thomas Scott, on Acts 20: 7, says: 'The change from the seventh to
the first day of the week seems to have been gradually and silently
introduced by example, rather than by express precept.'
" 'Chamber's Encyclopedia,' page 85, third edition, 1881, gives the
following: 'At what date the Sunday, or the first day of the week,
began to be generally used by Christians as a stated time for
religious meetings, we have no definite information, either in the
New Testament, or in the writings of the Fathers of the church.'
"Sir William Domville says, 'Centuries of the Christian era passed
away before the Sunday was observed by the Christian church as a
Sabbath examination of the six texts.'
"Much more might be given to the same import, but it is not
necessary. We have found that God did not change the Sabbath;
that Christ did not change it, and that the apostles had no such
mission or intention; that the change was gradual, and | |