A Vindication of the Seventh-Day Sabbath and the Commandments of God Part 3

Out of the great ma.s.s of advent believers in '44, I do not believe you knew of twenty that did not think the days were ended in '44. We will try to show, by-and-by, who have followed sound reason; and who have got "the plain word of G.o.d." You say you "know enough of the effect of that theory that teaches the 2300 days are ended." Allow me to tell you that you do not know so much about it as you think you do, or as you will wish you had. You are as much afloat here as you are on the subject of the Sabbath and commandments. That portion who abandoned the idea of the days being ended, of which you boast, are of those that organized and entered the state of the Laodocean church, "neither hot nor cold;" neither in one position nor yet in another; "always learning and never coming to the knowledge of (the present) truth." The ending of the 2300 days was the great burden of the advent teaching in '43 and '44; "then the sanctuary shall be cleansed." You will have it that this cannot be before the coming of the Lord, and you see he may come at any time; yes, now, by the first of January, as your Bible Advocate states. You have now heard something of the character of this J. Weston. He would have us believe that he was so full of the spirit of the Lord, that G.o.d had revealed to him that Jesus would come the 24th of December, or by the 1st of January. All good-we will publish it! What about the 2300 days, Br. W.? Oh, no matter, Jesus is coming now. H. H. Gross has refuted this time, but look at _him_ last spring; the 1335 days must end the 18th day of April, and the resurrection, or they would not end under forty-five years. Well, he confessed that he was wrong in ever believing that they had ended in '44.

Come, then, where will they end here? Oh, somewhere a little while before the 1335 days end in the spring of 1847. Well, time has pa.s.sed on; out he comes again and says the Lord will come in the spring of 1848. Where will the 2300 and 1335 days end, friend Gross? Can't say-that is, he don't say-neither does J. Weston, and he does not correct him for this; it is only because the advent cannot be until spring. And here I will ask an opinion-that there is not a man in the whole advent ranks-(it seems to me that I will not even except you)-that can show that the Lord will come this winter or next spring. H. H. Gross is just as much mistaken in his calculation this coming spring, as he was the last. Now you may go on and call us what it seems to you good, we are confident that you have not got the present truth, neither have you had it since you have followed any thing but "_the word of G.o.d and sound reason_." And this is the main reason why you cannot answer brother Fuller's important questions on THE OPEN BOOK OF REV. x: 2. It requires some one that has followed the truth, the present truth, nearer than you have, to reply to such questions, and _they_ as surely involve the days as a cry at midnight brought us to the end of them. Do you not see how you are first blowing hot and then blowing cold? Six weeks ago, you said you knew enough of the effect of that theory that the _days_ are ended. You say "all will see by reading the article, what are Br. F.'s views." That is, he is one that we have no fellowship for. But, you say, we hope that he and many others may be benefitted by a careful and prayerful investigation of some of the many questions he has asked. &c. &c. Now this is the right and only way to investigate. But if some one undertakes to follow your advice by the scripture, it would not amount to much, for we should expect to see you right out against them, for those that have rejected plain scripture, connected with experience, as you have, and ridiculed those who had faith in it, have but little hope now, since you have become an editor. We deeply lamented that you should have taken such a course; but we have seen since, that it required something more than common moral courage, for a shepherd to remain with the tried and tempted flock, when he sees that _all_ his fellow shepherds were deserting them. The warnings you have had, have no doubt brought many solemn convictions to yours and their minds, or else we should not find you in this lukewarm state. Yes, you have been faithfully warned by your old, firm friends, not to come out with your Advocate; you have heard their voice, that two were enough to give the light on the doctrine of the advent, and they had hard work to get along. But no, your paper was going to take different ground, in some things! In one respect, it has shown pretty clearly, as the scriptures fully demonstrate, that "the dead know not any thing;" and allow me here to tell you, if you go on with your no-law-of-G.o.d and no-commandment system, and continue to reject the clear fulfillment of prophecy, in our past experience, you will as clearly prove that you know but a very _little_ more. But after all you have said and done, you are following hard on in the track-the same old deep-cut rut, made by your predecessors. Pharaoh's host like, the ruts so deep you can neither back nor turn out; but on you drive after them, thinking, no doubt, that you are going to accomplish something for G.o.d and his cause.

The only way that I can see for you to do that, will be, either to abandon your load, or shift the tongue of your chariot on the opposite end, drive back with all speed, and get into the highway of the Waymarks and high heaps, that you so wilfully abandoned more than three years ago.

The Saviour's admonition to the Philadelphia state of the church, which was forming in '43 and '44, was to hold fast that which we had-and he would "write upon us his new name." This is what we are endeavoring to do; and when we see you doing the opposite, we know you are wrong. You quote Paul to the Hebrews, viii: 10, "Saith the Lord I will put my laws into their mind and write them in their hearts." Whose hearts? Answer-the house of Israel; of course, all of G.o.d's people. What is this done for?

Answer-that he may be our G.o.d and we may know him and be his people. Can you tell your no-law no-commandment readers which law of G.o.d Paul meant?

Whether it was the one you say he abolished in Col., Gal., Cor. and Romans, or was it another code of laws which he had made for our purpose, and then hid them from us. If you know in what book, or chapter, or verse they are in the bible, I beseech you to let us know immediately, for I see by John's visions in the Rev. that in the last days there certainly will be a company keeping them, and the Devil will persecute them for it; but they will eventually be saved, and enter the city. Rev. xii: 17; xiv: 12; xxii: 14. And finally, if you cannot find any others than those which G.o.d gave by his own mouth and wrote with his own finger on Mount Sinai, more than 3300 years since, the same which Jesus confirmed to us more than 1800 years ago with his Gospel, won't you make that known by publicly confessing that it is impossible for you to tell what other object G.o.d had in view than our keeping these same laws; and that you had, contrary to the direct teachings of G.o.d, derided both his law and his willing, obedient children. Don't tell us that this law is the "_law_ of _Christ_ or the _law_ of _grace_," or any other name unless you can show us how many commandments they contain, because James has told us "if we fail in one we are guilty of the whole." Jesus never gave but one commandment.

P. S. As I predicted on your second page, J. Turner's piece has come. The _child_ is fairly born, and you have fallen in love with it. Now brethren, just haul down all your other colors, J. Turner has got the very thing!

The first day of the week is the seventh-day Sabbath! We have always been right, but we never knew it till now! Thanks to J. Turner for confounding the whole world, and now no more about this much vexed question! "We shall fill our paper mostly with other matter for the future." The wind has favored us and we have made a first rate tack to windward, and now we can breathe much freer seeing our enemies are under our lee. Hear what he says? "We supposed and still do suppose that Barnabas had reference to a cla.s.s well known to the adventists in Connecticut and Ma.s.sachusetts, who went into the shut door, and staid in, and almost every other door but the true one into the sheepfold, and _many_ of which became great sticklers for the seventh day." &c. Now he goes on and speaks in high praise of those who have been writing for the Sabbath-_they_ are consistent Christians, &c. And now, says he, "we must all be _exceedingly_ careful how we _write_ and _speak_; the enemy seeks to devour us, and one of his most artful wiles is to divide the saints by _dark insinuations_, _evil speaking_, and _jealousies_," &c.-See Bible Advocate, Dec. 30th, p. 160.

Why this caution after the above unsparing epithets; are you afraid that some of these misguided, mistaken people will get into your open door? If they should happen to, and confess that they were wrong in believing in the shut door, no matter how many others they had been guilty of entering into what you call almost every door, they would immediately become consistent Christians! Out of hundreds who have crawled into your open door and made such confessions, causing the hypocrites and unbelievers to rejoice, and the hearts of the righteous to be sad, &c., I will just name a few: J. and C. Pearsons, F. G. Brown, of wonderful memory; and now a few Sabbath keepers: W. M. Ingham, John Howell, of vascillating memory, and J.

Turner, your fellow laborer. Well, you are not so far to windward as you think for; here comes another head flaw, that will drive you down on that lee sh.o.r.e again, where you may see the awful havoc you have made of those who are following in your wake. See them dashing there upon the rocks and into those overwhelming breakers! Your whirlwind of doctrine has utterly dismantled them, and their cry for help is unavailing! and unless you put forth some more strenuous efforts to avoid these dangerous seas, you will never get off from this lee sh.o.r.e, while under these deceitful and flattering winds of doctrine.

Again he says-"We take the liberty to add, that Br. T.'s article is IRREFUTABLE, and that we are now observing the Sabbath of the Lord our G.o.d, and not the Jewish, nor a Pagan Sabbath." Where is he now? Does he mean that J. T.'s Sabbath is "the Sabbath of the Lord our G.o.d?" He has always insisted, in his former articles, that "the Sabbath of the Lord our G.o.d," _was_ the Jewish Sabbath. There is but one named in the bible. If this what he calls "the plain word of the Lord," I doubt whether any one will understand him.

He says further-"If Friday was the sixth day-every transaction on the day of our Lord's crucifixion is involved in utter confusion-and the law of types in a like failure, and makes it an impossibility for the Sabbath of the Lord our G.o.d to be kept the next day, for this [_wise_] reason, that it was a feast day"! and quotes John xix: 31, again and again, for positive proof. I wonder if he can tell how, and when, and where the Jews lost that day, since the crucifixion, and where is the history to show that they did really pa.s.s over the seventh-day Sabbath and keep the first day for the Sabbath? I have already answered this in J. Turner's article; there you will see the reason why John called this "an high day." Now, as he has spoken of the law of types, I ask where is the chapter and verse in the bible in which the Jews were ever forbidden to hold a feast, when it fell on the seventh-day Sabbath? for, as I before stated, this always did occur every year. Besides this Jewish feast was an holy convocation; no servile work was to be done on this day. This was always continued seven days, and the last day was like the first. Lev. xxiii: 6-8. Now then, all that they did on these feast Sabbaths, was to worship G.o.d by their offerings. You see that on G.o.d's holy seventh-day Sabbath, [see J. T.'s article,] they always offered four lambs; therefore, whenever the other Sabbaths, or holy convocations fell on the seventh day, they were equally observed, as is positively proved by the direction of G.o.d in the 37th and 38th verses of this same chapter, "every thing upon his day besides the Sabbaths of the Lord," &c. Now see-here are seven holy convocations, Sabbath feasts named in this chapter, which the Jews were required to keep besides the weekly seventh-day Sabbath, and when their feasts fell on the holy Sabbath of the Lord, all the extra labor was in offering to G.o.d the extra bullocks, lambs &c. Do let me entreat you, before you further expose yourself, to read in connection with this, the twenty-eighth and twenty-ninth chapter of Numbers, for here you will find every identical thing specified: therefore, when one of these seven holy convocation days of every year came on the weekly Sabbath, it was of more importance, inasmuch that they had more offerings to make to G.o.d, and hence John or any one else, might call it "an high day;" but none the less holy, any more than for us, instead of a.s.sembling together on the Sabbath, in our several places for worship, to have a general conference meeting in Boston, to continue over the Sabbath.

But J. Turner, instead of overthrowing history, as he promised he should, is exulting, and says, "unless I utterly misapprehend the technical veracity of Christ and his apostles, _I have the argument_ by their concurrent testimony." In his Note 3, he says, "But if the day that followed the crucifixion was the seventh-day Sabbath, it could not be said that the Sabbath drew on, for it was even then _began_. It commenced at evening, at the same time the pascal lamb was slain in the law, at which time according to the record, Jesus expired."

Now, I say, this is not true, and he or the editor who published it, knows it to be so. I presume that both of them have stated in their preaching, again and again, that Jesus expired on the cross at the ninth hour, as the Evangelists testify, which was at three o'clock in the afternoon, and three hours before the Sabbath commenced. If he can a.s.sert such positive falsehoods as these, and others which I have stated, to prove what never has, nor never will take place, and at the same time have mult.i.tudes crying "amen!" "that's true!" &c., it is no wonder he can "set _as calm as heaven_!"

But I have one other proof to offer, which will destroy their whole foundation. I had overlooked it in the mult.i.tude of texts that had come up here, but G.o.d in answer to our prayers, both in our closet and at meetings, for wisdom to guide us in giving the _present truth_ to the little flock in this work, at this important crisis, has so directed that I may have it in time to put into this Postscript, just as it is going to press. [I could not see before why it was that the printer could not get his promised help, in order to proceed faster with this work. I see it now-it is all in G.o.d's own wise way. He was not willing, (as it now appears to me,) that my work should come out to check or disturb you, until you began to settle somewhere on this subject.] The proof then, I transcribe from a letter received from Br. JAMES WHITE, dated Topsham, Me.

January 2d, 1848. Here it is:

"The plain, simple truth in regard to the holy Sabbath flows out from the blessed bible in one clear, strait channel; while erroneous views are fated to run crooked and devour themselves. I think that those who are not fully settled as to what day of the week is the seventh or Sabbath, would do well to refer to the type, in Lev. xxii: 5-21. Here are three types which were fulfilled at the time of the first advent. Every adventist in the land once believed that these types were exactly fulfilled as to time. The paschal lamb was slain on the 14th day of the first month. So was Jesus crucified on the 14th day of the first month.

The handful of the first fruits of the harvest was waved before the Lord on the 16th of the first month; so was Jesus the first fruits of the resurrection, raised from the tomb the 16th of the first month. [See 1st Cor. xv: 20.] Now if the resurrection day, which was the first day of the week, was the 16th of the first month, then it follows that the 14th of the first month when Jesus was crucified, which was Friday, was the sixth day of the week; Sat.u.r.day, the seventh day or Sabbath, and Sunday, the first day of the week.

"St. Paul preached that Christ would rise the third day, according to the scriptures. He certainly could refer to no other scripture but the type. Our Lord, while preaching the resurrection to the two, on their way to Emmeas, began at Moses. So we are not on forbidden ground when we go there also, to prove that he arose on the third day.-See Luke xxiv: 27, 44-46. Jesus came not to break, but to fulfill every jot and t.i.ttle of the law-therefore he arose Sunday, the 16th day of the first month, which harmonizes with the joint testimony of the Apostles and Christ himself, that he arose on the third day."

Other brethren, (in reference to J. Turner's article,) from Canandaigua, N. Y. and Dorchester, Ma.s.s. have also, about this same time, referred us to this strong hold, for which we thank them and praise the Lord for this light, that forever settles the question. A most striking proof of the _unity_ of the saints in their patience, (Rev. xiv: 12,) no matter where located, though hundreds and thousands of miles apart, they are one on this question. This is as we now understand the Sabbath of the Lord our G.o.d, to be the rallying point of all those who are truly looking for the speedy coming of Jesus. Whosoever, therefore, shall attempt to destroy or _displace_ G.o.d's holy Sabbath, will have to pa.s.s the examination of the host. Paul to the Corinthians, 5th chapter and seventh verse, says, "For even Christ our pa.s.sover is sacrificed for us." How? Answer-expired on Friday, the 14th day of the first month, at 3 o'clock, P. M., in exact fulfillment of the type by Moses, in Exo. xii: 6, 11-14, continued for 1670 years. He rested from _all_ his works only one twenty-four hour day, and that was G.o.d's holy day. Paul tells the Romans that "he was raised again for our justification." iv: 25; and the Corinthians "that he is risen and become the first fruits of them that slept." 1st Cor. xv: 20; and Col. i: 18, "first born from the dead." Again, "should be the _first_ that should rise from the dead." Acts xxvi: 23. John says, "The first begotten of the dead." He arose on Sunday morning, the first day of the week, before sunrise-say about 5 A. M.-having been dead about thirty-eight hours. Thus he fulfilled the type in Lev. xxiii: 10-11 verses-the first fruits of the harvest, the handful of barley, called the wafe sheaf, which was waved by the priest, with the offering of a lamb, [emblem of Christ,]

as first fruits of the resurrection, on the morrow after the Sabbath-the 16th of the first month-the Sabbath, or feast day, always being on the 15th of the same month. Then, from the 14th, at 3 P. M. to the 16th, at about 6 P. M. is but thirty-eight hours, _two_ whole nights, (not three,) one whole day, a part of Friday and a part of Sunday. "Thus it behoved Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the _third day_." This is his own testimony a few hours after his resurrection; also a few hours after the offering of the wafe sheaf. If this can be overthrown then can also the time of his crucifixion. The chaotic confusion that you would make about this great feast day which always followed the pa.s.sover, is answered here. It so happened in the order of time to come on G.o.d's holy Sabbath; and that G.o.d so ordered it that Christ should rest from all his works on his holy day, was without doubt, to fulfill some glorious event yet to come.

Now, friend Timothy, if you will not reverence G.o.d's holy Sabbath and commandments according to the clear precept, do you let them alone, if you do not want a worse thing to befal you, for just so sure as you fight against them they will destroy you. This beating the air, is some like daubing with untempered mortar; you cannot make any of it stay put. If I were in your place, I should a great deal rather have been fast asleep than to be caught in such heaven-daring business-fighting against G.o.d!

This looks like "_following anything but _'the word of G.o.d and sound reason.'"

During '43 and '44, Dowling, Stewart, Colver, Chase, Bush and others, took their stand against William Miller and his brethren, to demolish Daniel's vision of the 2300 days. You remember that no two of these agreed, but each started upon a theory of his own; but G.o.d's children were united and on the one point, and therefore triumphed over them all. Now you leading men are acting the drama over again, with regard to the Sabbath and commandments of G.o.d. See how it looks; William Miller believes the first day is the Sabbath; J. V. Himes believes in selecting any day, just as you are persuaded, but still _calls the first the Sabbath_; Joseph Marsh is not particular, don't believe there is either law, Sabbath or commandments-says we are under the law of grace; but still he will have it, that Sunday is the Sabbath! you say the first day is the seventh of the Lord our G.o.d, but it is not the Jewish Sabbath,-that is; the one which is in the decalogue. It is something new-I don't understand you; don't think you can make your brethren understand it, either. J. Turner says the first day is the true seventh-day Sabbath! D. B. Wait says the commandments are right, but the first day is the true seventh-day.

Barnabas says "the Jews were right in killing our Lord for a notorious Sabbath breaker, if he did not abolish all the law when he commenced his ministry," three years before he abolished Moses' law. Up starts another mighty man, G. Needham, and says G.o.d told him that the commandments were all abolished in 2d Corinthians, chapter 3d. And a great portion of your flattering readers are flying like Mother Cary's Chickens(2) to get into your WAKE to pick up the crumbs! Don't smile, gentle reader, the picture is not overdrawn. These are some of the princ.i.p.al leaders in the second advent; they will tell you to your face that they have renounced all sectarian creeds and formulas, and believe every word of G.o.d. Now the "_great sticklers for the seventh day_," are all united on the Sabbath and commandments; they believe G.o.d, if they keep his Sabbath, that they shall be sanctified and ride upon the high places of the earth.-Ezekiel and Isaiah. They believe Jesus, that the law and the prophets hang upon the commandments, and that the keeping of them will give eternal life and great esteem in the reign of heaven. This carries them beyond the Jewish, Gospel, and all other dispensations. See also Rev. xxii: 14. They believe the holy Apostles, Paul, John and James-that "the law is holy, and the commandments holy, just and good." "Here are they [Jan. 1848] that keep the commandments of G.o.d and the faith of Jesus." Rev. xiv: 12. "If we keep the whole law and yet offend in one point, we are guilty of all." They feel perfectly secure in following such leaders, and they understand that though you be ever so moral in regard to the nine commandments, you fail in the fourth, the Sabbath. They believe this to be the "plain word of the Lord," and on this Sabbath question they will all be united, waiting for Jesus. And just so sure as the first cla.s.s of expositors were overthrown by rejecting the sure word, just so sure you will be overwhelmed in utter confusion that oppose G.o.d's holy Sabbath and commandments, and your case is now hanging in awful suspense. O Lord, let the clear light shine.

A word more-as your wonderful prototype has also threatened to unsettle the world with respect to the history of the seventh-day Sabbath. If he proceeds with it as he has with the unerring word of G.o.d, our minds will have to be remodelled, to believe with him. If any of the little flock feel desirous of spending an hour in looking into this subject, I would recommend them to send to the New York Sabbath Tract Society, and purchase Sabbath tract No. 4, vol. 1, 48 pages. This will save the labor of poring over Roman and English history, or of following the sophistical arguments of the blind leading the blind. Much reliance is placed upon the history of the "early fathers," so called, who succeeded the Apostles, to settle the question. We ought to remember that these were uninspired men, and we do not know even so much about their characters, as we do of the uninspired fathers of the last century, whose teaching led us all into Babylon. If the true history of the advent doctrine from 1842 to the autumn of 1844, had, with the subsequent events in our history up to 1848, been published 1800 years ago from the Advent Heralds, and their conductors had been called the fathers-it would have puzzled all the wise heads in Christendom, in this age, to have expounded their meaning; for we see it requires all the energies of the human mind to trace their crooked tracks, even when right before us. For this reason, I have said but little about history; my whole and entire reliance being upon the inspired word of the living G.o.d. This, we are told, will make us "_perfect_ and _entire_-_wanting nothing_."-2d Tim. iii: 17.

If what I have and may here present in this work will not stand the test of what we have seen and felt ourselves-fulfilling the clear word of G.o.d in these last days, then I shall fail in my object of comforting and strengthening the flock of G.o.d. I fully believe in history, when all deductions are fully allowed.

PAST AND PRESENT EXPERIENCE.

TO WILLIAM MILLER,

_Dear Sir_,-The time was, when all second advent believers were dear to you, and they called you father and brother Miller. Alas, how changed the scene is now! Jesus says "whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother and sister and mother." They can't believe that you are doing the will of G.o.d, as you once was, though they cannot help loving and venerating your name for the great light which you have given-because you are wounding their feelings by calling them Fanatics, Door-Shutters, and almost any thing but honest people, to destroy all their reputation and christian fellowship, and make them feel if possible, that they are worse than the heathen. In this way you have weaned their affection from you, and when you give them an exposition of G.o.d's word now, they doubt: say they, he first gave us the light, and we rallied to his standard, because it agreed with the scriptures-but when we were come to the most trying and toilsome part of our journey then he forsook us and joined in with the shepherds and those of like faith, to berate us. But we soon learnt from the prophets that there would be a people in the last days, answering this description, that G.o.d had promised to save, called _Outcasts_!-Jer. x.x.x: 17; Psl. cxlvii: 2. Now you are encouraging these same deniers of our faith to be _peaceable_; for-say you-we shall soon get into the kingdom of G.o.d. Methinks if we should all meet there under existing circ.u.mstances, there would be a great deal of confessing before we could be reconciled to listen to each other's joys.

But it will not be so; if you and your brethren, and the _outcasts_ too, are saved, then I predict that we shall have to stay here until a perfect reconciliation takes place. When that will be, I cannot tell, for in my judgment the gulf between us has been widening for the last three years.

Now, I prefer to remain on that side of it with the _Outcasts_, for they have the promise that they shall be gathered. When we made our sacrifice during a cry at midnight, we considered and were fully persuaded that we were doing our last work, and surely that would _be done the best of any work_. Then of course we had no right whatever to take back the sacrifices we then made, and rob G.o.d. We were fully aware that our disappointments would not change our course, for if we were ever saved it must be by our onward course. But those with whom you were a.s.sociated sounded the retreat, and all that did not follow in their train have been subject to your unsparing epithets.

If you knew as much about this afflicted and torn people, (whom you have been the instrument in leading out into the Philadelphia state of the church, and then leaving and driving them from you,) as I do, you would shudder to appear before Him who has promised to be a Father to them and keep them. The princ.i.p.al cause of many offences which they committed were from bad teachers and teaching. You have a sample here in this work. (We have no wish, _neither do we uphold_ any one who does not follow the teachings of the sure word.) I think you have listened too much to them.

If I could just take you with me to some of the stopping places of these people, and show you their scanty wood piles at this inclement season of the year, and then to the barrels which once held their beef, pork and flour, together with the scanty subsistence they now have, and with no earthly prospect of another supply, only as their trust is in the living G.o.d, in whom they had committed their all, because of their honest sacrifice and anxious waiting for their coming Lord; turned out of their former employment and reproached for keeping G.o.d's holy Sabbath day; whipped by cruel, unmerciful men for shouting the praises of their G.o.d and king, and still persevering in their faith, &c. And then, for a contrast, to step on board the cars and be rolled away to your own comfortable and commodious house, with well stocked barn and granaries, beef and pork barrels-the produce of your own valuable farm-with all things that heart could wish for, and set down by your comfortable fire with your family, (all believers with you in the coming of Jesus,) and recount to them the strange scenes you had witnessed among an afflicted people, who once listened with anxiety and delight to every word you had to say about the second coming of Jesus, and they were so delighted with this, to them, joyful news, that they wanted to hear about it all the time. We may imagine your conversation to proceed somewhat in the following strain:

"You remember how elder Himes used to insist on my going with him from city to city, and from state to state, because of the people's anxiety to hear me preach about the coming of Christ in 1843 and '44."

"Yes, father, I remember it well-for when I was with you it seemed as though the people were hardly willing to let us come home and rest a little while."

"I know it, my son, and I used to think that G.o.d never would have sustained me in such continued and incessant labors as I was then called to perform, if it were not his cause. Why, when I saw the wonderful effect that it produced on backsliders and sinners, in bringing them to G.o.d, and the glow of joy that lit up in the countenances of G.o.d's honest, believing children, and how they hung upon every word; and then the contrary effect, when some of their learned ministers raised their objections-I said I know this is G.o.d's cause, and as it rolled on through that cry at midnight, down to its closing scene, you all remember with what joy and glory I was filled, and how I publicly declared my faith, and stated that 'I might be called a FANATIC, but, I said, call me what you please, Christ will come,'

&c. Well, these singular people are some of the very ones that used to hang on my words and others, who preached to them of this doctrine. And during this cry at midnight they made a sacrifice of all they had-(some of them were almost as well off as _we are_, and some were poor,)-but they offered what they had, and that was all that was required."

"Grandfather, what makes them poor now that had something then? You know the Saviour didn't come then, as you said he would, and that is more than three years ago."

"Well, they thought it would be contrary to scripture to take back their sacrifice, and so many of them have made no improvements on their farms, nor their buildings,-no, they have not even made _stone walls_! Some of them sold what they had, and have been trying to help the poorer ones, because they said they still believed that Christ was coming, and they would not need it. For instance, they believe what Luke has recorded in his xii: 33-'Sell your goods and give alms; lay not up treasure on the earth,'-they think this must be understood literally! and they have gone off into many strange notions, believing the door is shut, &c. &c."

"Well, how do they appear, father?"

"They do not seem to be, in the least, alarmed at poverty; they are expecting soon to be delivered and made heirs with Jesus, to an incorruptible inheritance that will abide forever. I could get along with many points in their faith, and believe them honest, if they did not make them tests for us; and because we do not believe in the great work that was wrought in the past, and the present truths that they advocate, they have no charity for us. They say we have backslidden and gone into a cold lukewarm Laodocean state of the church."

"Well, father, I believe there is a great deal of truth in their statements, for there certainly is a wonderful difference in our camp and conference meetings, to what there used to be, for if any one shouts glory to G.o.d, now, as they used to in '43 and '44, it seems as if the whole meeting was agitated, until it is ascertained that it is one of the deluded ones, it seems as though they hardly dare say amen, either because they do not believe what you say, or for fear they shall be called _fanatics_. You know how they tried you and how hard you talked to them about it in the conference in Boston, last spring. You thought it was because they had no religion. And then the camp meeting too, at Lake Champlain; I suppose the most of them thought that you were going to prove that the door was shut, and that the past was true; and a good many of them might still have thought so, if elder Marsh had not taken it up and called forth your explanation, in his paper of Sept 28th. For my part, I don't really understand all these things-that as soon as you begin to advocate the past truths in any of our meetings, these editors are either writing or visiting you to explain it more fully in their papers, and then neither party seems to be satisfied. If I were you, I would take a strait-forward course, and try to please G.o.d, if I could not any one else."

"Well, my son, you know that these two editors have stood by me ever since 1842, and as for elder Himes, he has stood by me and been my warm and fast friend all these last seven years of joy and trials, and I cannot separate from him. No, I have told him that I would sustain him and his paper if I had to carry down our '_potatoes to Boston_,' to raise the means. You see I must stand by him, and he and brother Marsh will defend and justify my course and views of bible doctrine; and defend my character from the aspersions of my enemies, and gladly publish any thing I have to say against the _Door Shutters_, &c."

"Yes, yes-I know all that, father, but some how or other, these things do not look right. You began with a strait-forward bible course, and it cut like a sword with two edges, and that is the reason why these door shutters, &c., as you call them, believed your testimony, and they think there is just as much edge to the sword now as there ever was. However, you have studied the bible much more than I have, therefore I shall not dispute you, but I cannot see that this people, whom you have been to visit, are so much out of the way for venturing to go forward, after _your clear directions to them_, soon after the cry at midnight."

But it may be said that these are what are termed the "No-work Folks." No sir, they do not belong to that cla.s.s, although their views are, in most all other respects, similar. You have been told-or, I have-by one of your traveling lecturers, that there were but twenty-five of them, all told. He said they were proclaiming that they were all that would be saved at the second advent. We have no such view. We believe, what I shall attempt to prove by-and-by, that there will be 144,000 saved at the coming of Jesus.

Furthermore, we believe that the same commandment which teaches us to keep the seventh-day Sabbath, also teaches that we may labor the other six days for just as much as we comfortably need; more than that would counteract the direction of Jesus, viz. "Lay not up for yourselves treasures on the earth," &c. This is all right, for our faith teaches us we do not need it.

If we h.o.a.rd up what we have got, it certainly is not selling and giving alms. My opinion is, that this is now to be made clear, and that G.o.d's people will be absolutely afraid to be found with a surplus treasure here, when Christ comes. As the keeping of the fourth commandment, in its true scriptural sense, carries us to the gates of the city, so our laboring honestly for what we immediately want, also carries us to that point. But we have no controversy with those who honestly and sincerely live to G.o.d without laboring; though they tell us that they have no charity for us, still we believe if they honestly live out their faith G.o.d will not condemn them for not working six days.

Your explanation respecting the time that Christ might, or has, began to reign, to prove that you had no connection or fellowship with "_door shutters_" or their views, is the most enigmatical of all your ideas, since 1845. I refer to your letter in the Advent Harbinger of Sept. 28th.

It is endorsed by the editor, and also by the Advent Herald, in justifying the ground you took-and grew out of a report that elder S. Hall of Bangor, made from your conversation and preaching at the Champlain camp meeting. I reported what I heard, and it was therefore stated that I was present.

This you could have contradicted, but the editor has since acknowledged his mis-statement. S. Hall is an entire stranger to me. I have written him two letters on the subject, without reply. But it is your own written statement that so puzzles me. You give from 1815 to 1847, thirty-two years, for Michael in Dan. xii: 1, to stand up to reign, and you further say it might have been at the end of the 2300 days. This is the first intimation I have had, since you took your stand against us, that you believed the days ended; but the forty-five years lat.i.tude for Christ to begin to reign, and your anathemas at those who believe the door is shut, is as incomprehensible to me as Swedenbourgenism-J. Marsh's explained exposition of Nov. 9th, to the contrary notwithstanding. As I have already given my views about the time when Christ began to reign, in _Way Marks_, page 35 and onward, I may not say much here. Have the 2300 days really ended then, and nothing to _mark_ their end? This was the burthen of your cry. It was also the prophets, and one of them said it should speak and not lie. Then, of course, it would not come silently; but the wise would understand when it did end. You reply, I suppose, according to the 11th chapter of Revelations, from which you was speaking, that the seventh trumpet had began to sound; but was there nothing else connected with the ending of the 2300 days? Yes-the third wo, because that belongs to the seventh trumpet; see viii: 13. Now the 10th chapter, 7th verse, shows us that when this seventh trumpet begins to sound, the Mystery of G.o.d should be finished. Oh, you say, that's the old story of 1845. Yes sir, and more than seventeen hundred years beyond that. Here is your trouble; but the most of your hearers, though they may listen with delight to you, yet they preach that the seventh trumpet does not sound until Christ comes to raise the dead. You ought to correct them here, for they are certainly in the dark; Christ is not the seventh messenger.

Besides, if Christ has began to reign as you say, over the nations, he has, according to your showing in Daniel xii: 1, changed his position. If so, how can he be in the mediatorial seat? His leaving that finishes the Mystery, and that forever _shuts the door_, unless you or some one else can prove that he leaves this work over the nations, and goes back again to finish what he left undone. Now, who is the fanatic here? You cannot make all this work in harmony-it is impossible; besides, you call us spiritualizers, because of our view of the Bridegroom. If we are, pray what are you? and how did you find out that Christ had changed his position, even twenty years ago? or when the 2300 days ended, somewhere since 1843? It really appears to me, that if _we_ had put forth such a view, that we should have been p.r.o.nounced crazy! and yet your two editors will patch it all up, and throw all the stigma upon us, forsooth, because they think we shall claim you as an _Outcast_! Their fears are unnecessary-we have no claim to such views; they would only disturb our ranks. We believe that the seventh trumpet began to sound on the first day of the seventh month. Then the Mystery was finished, and the third wo came. The virgins in the parable, were divided-some went after oil. On the tenth day of the seventh month is the day of atonement. At this point in 1841, in the order of the fulfillment of the types in Leviticus and New Testament testimony, (which we have referred to in the _Way Marks_) Jesus received his Bride and the kingdoms of this world, and entered the Holy of Holies as our Great High Priest, and commenced the cleansing of the Sanctuary. Why? Because here the 2300 days ended:-_The appointed time._ At this point too, commenced the trial of G.o.d's people. Surely you never can forget this, until the trial ends; and that cannot end in accordance with the type, until our Great High Priest and King has finished the cleansing of the Sanctuary, the New Jerusalem, and it is made holy; see Joel iii: 17. Now follow the type and Bible testimony, and it is positively clear that Jesus changes his position from the daily ministration to the most holy place, just as certainly as Aaron did. Here then, in short, is where we prove the Bridegroom come to the Marriage, and the door shut, in the parable of Matt. xxv, and in the types. If it does not prove this in our past history, and that we are now waiting for our coming king, then these types are superfluous. We do not believe that Michael stands up, as you have stated, until he has accomplished what is above stated. We cannot possibly see how he can begin to reign over the nations as king, while he is in the most holy place, cleansing the Sanctuary, and the saints being perfected for the blessing when he lays aside his priestly robes and takes the sickle, as in Rev. xiv: 14; and G.o.d speaks, as in Joel iii: 16. If what you have stated, had been even approbated in Oct. 1844, it would have thrown the whole harmony of the scriptures, in our past history, into confusion. As I have said, I will here repeat it, that unless you follow the Bible rule as I have stated here and in the _Way Marks_, you never can harmonize the scriptures with the _past_ nor _present_; and I think I shall make it plainer still, before I lay down my pen.

One thing more: Much derision is made about those of our company that have joined the Shakers. I say it is a shame to them first, to have preached in clearly and distinctly the speedy coming of our Lord Jesus Christ _personally_ to gather his saints-and then to go and join the Shakers in their faith, that he (Jesus) came spiritually in their Mother, Ann Lee, more than seventy years ago. This, without doubt in my mind, is owing to their previous teaching and belief in a doctrine called the _trinity_. How can you find fault with their faith while you are teaching the very essence of that never-no never to be understood, doctrine? For their comfort and faith, and of course your own, you say "_Christ is G.o.d, and G.o.d is love._" As you have given no explanation, we take it to come from you as a literal exposition of the word; and although the editor of the Herald, of Dec 4th, endeavors to justify you in your published view of the Unity in 1842, and thinks he has made it clear that you have not changed your views on this subject, just as he is in the habit of doing without your knowledge, but still you have not confirmed it, and your having changed your views once at least since 1844, leaves us in doubt about the editor's remarks. We ask, then, where you find this pa.s.sage, and if ever love was seen; and if that is what we are looking for from heaven, to come the second time? If so, how will it look, and where is the scripture that describes it? It seems to me that the shakers have a better claim to you than we have.

We believe that Peter and his master settled this question beyond controversy, Matt. xvi: 13-19; and I cannot see why Daniel and John has not fully confirmed that Christ is the Son, and, not G.o.d the Father. How could Daniel explain his vision of the 7th chapter, if "Christ was G.o.d."

Here he sees one "like the Son (and it cannot be proved that it was any other person) of man, and there was given him Dominion, and Glory, and a kingdom;" by the ancient of days. Then John describes one seated on a throne with a book in his right hand, and he distinctly saw Jesus come up to the throne and take the book out of the hand of him that sat thereon.

Now if it is possible to make these two entirely different transactions appear in one person, then I could believe your text if I could believe that G.o.d died and was buried instead of Jesus, and that Paul was mistaken when he said. "Now the G.o.d of peace that _brought again_ from the _dead our Lord Jesus_ that great shepherd of the sheep" &c., and that Jesus also did not mean what he said when he a.s.serted that he came from G.o.d, and was going to G.o.d, &c. &c.; and much more, if necessary, to prove the utter absurdity of such a faith. Without going any further, we say that one of two things is certainly clear, that the doctrine of the second advent, which you, and your adherents promulgated down to Oct. 1844, was positively wrong, if you _now_ are right. We believe it was right and approved of G.o.d and therefore we fully believe that we are in the right road still, but we have nothing to boast of; our track has been made dark by your opposition, but still we have travelled on, believing that light is sown for the righteous, and we have realized it; to G.o.d be all the praise. If you and your adherents could have turned us into your course, you would. We rejoice that we are in the furnace. Our deluded course, as it is termed, arises from three things that we practice: First, we are called Judaizers, because we keep the Sabbath according to the commandment; our reasons for it, are with you. We say further that G.o.d set us the example, as he has the whole world. Jesus and the apostles followed, and so do we. Second, because we wash one another's feet, here we have the plain and positive teaching and example of Jesus: "If I, then, the master and the teacher, have washed your feet.-Happy are ye who know these things provided ye PRACTICE them."-[Camp. trans.]-John xiii. Third, that we practice kissing.-Here we have the teaching, of the great apostle to the Gentiles, to churches and households and every individual believer in Christ Jesus; see Rom. xvi: 3, 6, 12-16; 1st Thes. v: 26, "Greet all the brethren with a holy kiss;" Phil. iv: 21. "Salute every saint in Christ Jesus." Now I do not say but here is dangerous ground, and no doubt many have fallen, because they could not stand the test, as Paul's brethren could not the communion; but did Paul advise them to give it up because some had lost their lives for it? No! Well, then, the rule is the same with us, not to yield because some have spiritually died. It is a test of our fellowship for one another, and we may just as well be ashamed of the teachings of the bible as to be ashamed or afraid to practice what is clearly taught. Our course is onward; we leave you say what you please of us. We very clearly see if we persevere in this course, that it will lead us to immortality.