The Watchtower, March 15, 1910

Download: PDF — The Watchtower, March 15, 1910

SEMI-MONTHLY

VOL. XXXI MARCH 15 No. 6

A.D. 1910--A.M. 6038

CONTENTS

A Layman on the "New Theology".................... 99

The Shepherd and His Flock........................100

Money Changes All Things..........................101

Verging on Danger.................................101

"All Deceivableness of Unrighteousness"...........102

Is the Mediator an Advocate?......................104

When God Covenanted with Abraham..............105

"He is Not a Jew--Outwardly"......................106

Note Further Misinterpretation................106

Sin and Sickness Related..........................107

Our Easter Lesson.................................108

Faith, the Channel of Blessing....................108

Re Berean Studies in the Scriptures...............110

Re Fifth-Sunday Local Conventions.................110

Some Interesting Letters..........................111

PUBLISHED BY

WATCH TOWER BIBLE & TRACT SOCIETY

CHARLES T. RUSSELL, PRESIDENT

"BROOKLYN TABERNACLE," 13-17 HICKS ST.,

BROOKLYN, N.Y., U.S.A.

Foreign Agencies:--British Branch: 24 Eversholt St., London, N.W. German Branch: Unterdorner Str., 76, Barmen. Australasian Branch: Equitable Building, Collins St., Melbourne.

ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION PRICE, $1.00 (4s.) IN ADVANCE. SEND MONEY BY EXPRESS, BANK DRAFT, POSTAL ORDER, OR REGISTERED. FROM FOREIGN COUNTRIES BY FOREIGN MONEY ORDERS, ONLY.

Terms to the Lord's Poor as Follows:--All Bible Students who, by reason of old age, or other infirmity or adversity, are unable to pay for this Journal, will be supplied Free if they send a Postal Card each May stating their case and requesting its continuance. We are not only willing, but anxious, that all such be on our list continually and in touch with the Studies, etc.

ALSO FRENCH, GERMAN, SWEDISH AND DANISH EDITIONS. SAMPLE COPIES FREE.

ENTERED AS SECOND-CLASS MAIL MATTER AT BROOKLYN, N.Y., POSTOFFICE ENTERED AS SECOND-CLASS MATTER AT THE POSTOFFICE DEPT., OTTAWA, CANADA

BROTHER RUSSELL IN EUROPE AND AFRICA

Brother Russell proposes a very hasty European tour. Incidentally, at the instance of the newspaper people connected with the publication of his sermons, he will extend the journey to Jerusalem and the Great Pyramid in Egypt. A brief outline of his journey follows:

Leave New York April 5, arrive Cherbourg (France), April 11; Paris, April 12; Basle (Switzerland), April 13. (Here an all-day meeting with French and Swiss brethren is proposed.) Rome, April 14; Naples, April 15; Alexandria (Egypt), April 18; Cairo (and Pyramids), April 19; Port Said, April 20; Jaffa, April 21; Jerusalem and vicinity, April 21-24.

Return same route to Rome, April 30; Venice (Italy), May 1; Vienna (Austria), May 2; Warsaw (Russia), May 3, arriving 7:42 a.m., leaving midnight. (An all-day meeting is proposed.) Berlin, May 4, arriving 11:25 a.m., leaving 10 p.m., May 5. Here we hope to meet many German friends as well as representatives from Norway, Sweden and Denmark. May 6, Barmen-Elberfeld; London, arriving Charing Cross Station, 5:12 p.m., May 7.

London meetings, May 8, 15 and 21. The intermediate dates are open for the various cities of England, Ireland and Scotland as reports may be received at our London branch office.

1910--SUMMER CONVENTIONS--1910

Louisville, Ky., June 17-19.--Brother Russell will be present on the 19th and be the principal speaker.

Chicago, Ill., June 24-26.--Brother Russell will be present on the 26th and be the principal speaker.

Lake Chautauqua (Celeron Auditorium), July 30th to Aug. 7.--This will be the chief or General Convention of the year. Specially favorable excursion rates have been secured. The cheapest rate will be for those who will start their journey July 29. On that date tickets should be bought to Chautauqua for one fare plus $2. Another date will be announced later at one and one-half fare for the round trip. Full particulars then. We merely announce the dates now that all desiring to attend may make timely arrangements. The location is ideal. Specially low rates of board for the nine days or less will be secured at cottages and hotels on the lake shore at $1.00 per day and up. Numerous little steamers plying the lake will afford easy communication with the Auditorium.

ONE-DAY CONVENTIONS TO BE ADDRESSED

BY THE EDITOR OF THIS JOURNAL:

WASHINGTON, D. C., MARCH 13

Morning and evening sessions, Masonic Temple, Ninth and F streets, N.W., 10:30 a.m. Praise, Prayer and Testimony meeting. 7:30 p.m. Brother Russell will address the friends. Discourse for the Public, New National Theater, at 3 p.m. Subject, "The Overthrow of Satan's Empire." Visiting friends will be heartily welcomed.

ALLENTOWN, PA., MARCH 20

All meetings in Lyric Theater, 25 North Sixth street. Praise, Prayer and Testimony meeting at 10 a.m. Address for the interested at 11 a.m. Afternoon service for the Public at 3 p.m. Subject, "Man's Past, Present and Future." Visiting friends will be warmly welcomed.

BOSTON, MASS., MARCH 27

Praise, Prayer and Testimony Meeting at 10:30 a.m. Evening meeting for the interested at 7:30. Morning and evening meetings at Franklin Union Hall, Berkeley street, near junction of Tremont street. Afternoon session for the Public at 3 p.m. in Tremont Temple, Tremont street, between School and Broomfield streets. Subject, "Man's Past, Present and Future." Visiting friends will be heartily welcomed.

BROOKLYN, N.Y., APRIL 3

Morning services at 10:30 o'clock in the Brooklyn Tabernacle, 13-17 Hicks street, two blocks from P.R.R. Annex Ferry and five minutes' walk from Brooklyn Bridge entrance. Question meeting in the same building at 8 o'clock, preceded by a half hour's song service. Discourse for the Public at 3 p.m. in Brooklyn Academy of Music, on Lafayette avenue, St. Felix street, and Ashland place. Subject, "Overthrow of Satan's Empire." Visiting friends will be warmly welcomed.

A LAYMAN ON THE "NEW THEOLOGY"

[A STRIKING AND ABLE REVIEW OF DR. ELIOT'S VIEWS.]

THE following from The Religious Herald contains considerable truth and is well worth the reading as bearing on matters seen from THE WATCH TOWER:--

"You have probably seen in the papers references to the definition of the new theology given by Dr. Eliot, president emeritus of Harvard College, and for thirty-five years the first citizen of Massachusetts, if not of New England. But second-hand newspaper accounts are apt to be inaccurate; I thought you might like to see the original, and accordingly am enclosing a copy of the Harvard Theological Review, under separate cover, containing his lecture.

"Dr. Eliot has been much criticized, but for my part I admire his courage and honesty. Now, as always, he speaks the truth as he sees it, without fear or favor. Too many of the advocates of the new theology pursue the policy which a Methodist minister in a neighboring parish explained to me; they express their views freely at ministers' meetings, but have a tacit understanding not to mention them to the pews. And this respect for the tender feelings of the superstitious ones (!) who occupy the pews is, after all, not impolitic; for if the new theology were understood by the average layman, he would find it so hard to distinguish from the old atheism that, according to his temper, he would stay at home and save his money, or would try to get a new pastor installed.

"The Methodist clergyman I mention tells me that a great majority of the younger ministers of that Church, in this part of the country, are believers in the new theology. A majority of the Protestant ministers that I know hereabouts adhere to it, including most of the younger men.

"You will see that Dr. Eliot's lecture consists of two parts. The first, which is negative, is practically undistinguishable, so far as I can see, from ancient atheism. In fact, the new theology, as I understand it, in its advanced form, has less belief in a God (considered as a personality, with conscience and will), who created the universe and the living creatures in it, than David Hume, Edward Gibbon, Thomas Payne, Voltaire, and J. J. Rousseau had.

"As to the positive part of the new theology--well, I shall wish to know what you think of it.

"It is easy for me to understand this state of mind of the atheist, agnostic, or materialist, and in this age so many of the foremost intellects, especially on the Continent, deny all evidence of the existence of God, that I am not surprised to learn that any man holds such views. But to deny positively, on the one hand, all those conceptions of the Creator that seem natural to man, and then, without adhering to the logic of atheism, agnosticism, or materialism, to set up the hazy, and, to my mind, illogical view of God which is presented in this new theology, hardly seems normal, nor does it seem as if it could ever acquire many earnest followers among the common people. It seems to me to bear strong internal evidence of its origin in the study of the skeptical professor of theology, and to have, if I may use the expression, a perhaps unconscious but yet hypocritical origin. Of course, when I say this, I do not at all refer to Dr. Eliot.

"But let us put ourselves for a moment in the place of the man who has been ordained to the Christian ministry, who has lost faith and lacks the courage to turn his back on his calling and his friends, to confess himself a failure, and to begin life anew. To such a one the new theology appeals strongly; it saves his consistency; it saves his salary; it saves him from the humiliation that open apostasy would involve. Skeptics commonly feel more or less dislike of an ex-priest; the faithful consider him an apostate. But by embracing the so-called new theology, he holds his pastorate or lectureship and wins reputation as being learned, liberal and progressive.

"Whatever the cause may be, the so-called new theology seems to be dominant in most Protestant theological seminaries in Germany, England and the northern part of the United States, or where not dominant, to be rapidly increasing its influence.

"You will note in Dr. Eliot's lecture that in denying the existence of a conscious personal God (as distinguished from the God who is the sum of all living souls, human and brute, good, bad and indifferent alike), he denies all hope of a future life.

"How curious, also, the misunderstanding of the mission of pain on pages 399 and 400. The most ordinary intellect ought to see that if there were no pain in the world, a baby would chew off its own fingers; a cat, or even a child, would walk into the fire before intellect had taught him his danger; and so on to the end of the chapter.

"Perhaps one might think that because this lecture was delivered at Harvard it is too extreme a statement of the New Theology. But the New Theology is world-wide. For many of its disciples it has no God (except as the soul of the universe may be a God, if one can grasp that idea), no inspired Bible, no heaven-sent Savior of the world; its fundamental principle, if I have been able to make it out, is the absolute and positive negation of any supernatural

power whatever in the past, present or future, with all that that implies. And as far as its professors and votaries have come under my observation, it is, in this fundamental principle, pretty much the same at Harvard, Union, Yale, Chicago; very much the same among Episcopalians, Methodists and Baptists as it is among Unitarians and Congregationalists; and it seems to have won a large majority of the young clergy of the Protestant Churches in this section. There are minor differences, of course; Dr. Eliot's position is the advanced logical position, towards which all the others are tending, but which not all have yet reached. Some men, moreover, are entirely subject to the influence of the new theology; others are influenced partly by the new and partly by the old in all stages of progress, but in general acquiring a little more of the new leaven and losing a little more of the old each year.

"Well, this is rather a long letter on theology from one who is not a theologian. My interest is not wholly, perhaps not chiefly, theological; it is rather practical and sociological. I have long been convinced that the Church could not adopt Darwinism without being killed by it, and the New Theology is largely the effect of Darwinism on the Church.

"We all know that there is a sort of elective affinity between unbridled democracy and atheistic socialism. By unbridled democracy, I mean the kind which gives to the Sea Island negro the same political weight as to his former master; which gives to the half-pauper, half-vicious denizens of the slum districts of our great cities the same voting power as the independent householder or business man possesses; aye, which gives them more, since as they are more numerous, they who pay no direct taxes are allowed, in effect, to levy them on those who do, by electing aldermen and other officers as worthless as themselves --the sort of democracy which really believes the old maxim, "Vox populi, vox Dei." This may seem like political heresy to many, but when the new theology shall have destroyed the common man's belief in God, the feeling of moral obligation to him and to our fellows, as his children (as it will do if it is not vigorously opposed), and when the Marxian missionaries shall have made as much progress in teaching their gospel of robbery to the negroes of the South and the poorer classes of our cities as they have already made on the Continent, and are making in London, we shall begin to appreciate what sort of a Vox Dei the Vox populi of a godless people can be. This affinity between extreme democracy and atheistic socialism has long been strikingly manifest on the Continent; it begins to be seen in England and America. The North of Germany, I am told, is so far won by atheistic and Marxian socialism--the so-called Social Democracy-- that the existing order is chiefly maintained in the German Empire by the Catholic South, the country districts, and the well-drilled bayonet.

"And to me, one of the most interesting things in connection with the so-called new theology is the fact that so many of its disciples are showing about as much affinity for militant socialism as the atheism of the Continent shows, and for the same reasons. This, of course, is not true of all its disciples or teachers--is emphatically not true of Dr. Eliot--but it seems to me to be a tendency of the system.

"Christianity teaches that man is inclined to sin; that his natural impulses are often bad; that he needs human government as well as Divine guidance; "the powers that be are ordained of God." The majority of the followers of Marx and many of the professors of the New Theology alike deny the existence of God (in the sense in which the Church has heretofore understood that existence), and the tendency of man to sin; they say that man's natural impulses are good and for the most part teach that salvation lies in the destruction of poverty and misery. Christianity teaches brotherly love, but forbids robbery and even covetousness. Marxian socialism pretends to advance brotherly love, but its maxim is the appropriation

of all the means of production (farm and factory alike) to the use of the State, without compensation; and the majority of its apostles, knowing well that it can never succeed where Christianity prevails, wage constant and bitter warfare on the Church. And it is from their camp that the attacks on the doctrine of a future life, as tending to make contented slaves of men in this world, most frequently come. That rather astounding doctrine has to my knowledge resounded from at least three or four of the pulpits of this country within the last year, without exciting remark or answer, so far as I have heard.

"The inter-relations or inter-actions between Darwinism, the New Theology (or its equivalent, for most practical purposes, the old skepticism) and Marxian socialism are interesting and in a way important, but much too large for a friendly letter."

THE SHEPHERD AND HIS FLOCK

VOGUE, a secular journal, may not have keen spiritual vision, but it surely sees some earthly things rationally, as the following extract clearly proves:--

"Although the masculine non-church goer has for a long time attracted the disapproving attention of Church writers as well as of a large number of the clergy, who have sternly rebuked him from the pulpit, he stubbornly continues to pursue the even tenor of his way. And worse than this, whereas in days gone by he alone was to any great extent open to the charge of backsliding in such respect, of late years his wife and daughter in increasing numbers have taken to omitting regular church attendance, and that without the least loss of caste, except, perhaps, in small, conservative communities.

"Why is it that men and women who not only lead respectable lives, but who devote much of the time they can spare from the most pressing personal claims to what are incontestably good works, are today so frequently to be counted among those who habitually absent themselves from divine service? This is the question over which many good parsons are in despair, and it is but natural that they should be, for between their concern for the souls of their communities, and the prospect of being left without employment, they have much to worry them. It is also the question that is perplexing church councils, which are at their wit's end to devise methods of persuading (coercion being no longer permissible in the Protestant communion, at least) people to come back into the fold. But in spite of all the perturbation and efforts at reform on the part of the religious agencies of the age, the number of the non-church goers keeps on increasing at a rate alarming to those who regard Sunday observation, according to ecclesiastical formula, as the only test of character, and the only hope of salvation.

"Perceiving the trouble churches are in over the drifting

away of their congregations, ex-President Eliot, of Harvard, not long ago submitted to an interested world his plan of a new religion, but although it was cordially received by the public, the ecclesiastics would have none of it. The projected system failed to provide for any phase of current ecclesiasticism, including the ministerial office, mysticism and the like, and, therefore it is not surprising that they frowned upon it, and refused to permit it Christian sanction. But whether the Protestant leaders like it or not, the only hope of winning the majority of those who have forsaken the Church back to affiliation with religious groups is the reduction of Church system, as nearly as practicable, to the two principles--Love Thy God With All Thy Heart and Thy Neighbor As Thyself. In spite of ecclesiasticism the more enlightened classes are already engaged in conjuring out in a myriad practical ways the command of neighborly love, and it is only by a convincing presentation of the claim of God upon the loyalty of the race, that the majority of the unchurched can be made to include that also in their creed of life.

"The right of private judgment--fought for and won centuries ago--is what is now being exercised by the non-church-goer, and what he asks of the ethical leader is not high-priced choirs to discourse glorious harmonies, or sacerdotal vaudeville of any kind. These aids to crowd-drawing do not touch the core of the matter. His demands are more serious and fundamental, for he believes that the hour has come when the Church must go back to the Master, and seek from him a new interpretation that shall fit the requirements of this age."

MONEY CHANGES ALL THINGS

ASSUREDLY the public prints assist in keeping the world straight--sometimes by sarcastic allusions like the following from the Easton Call. Undoubtedly the intelligence and freedom of the press should be credited with much of the advantage of our day over that termed "the dark ages." We quote:--

"One of the most amusing phases of the sacerdotal vaudeville this country is witnessing, is the way schools and colleges of the denominational kind are trying to shake off their religious connections in their greed to get hold of some of Mr. Carnegie's money. It is a well-known fact that Mr. Carnegie has no gifts for institutions ruled by church boards and trustees. To comply with this condition, Dickinson College, always regarded as a Methodist institution, has been turning all kinds of somersaults. The trustees of that college met in Philadelphia recently and passed resolutions, denying that the Methodist Church had any control over Dickinson College whatever, and forbidding the journals of that Church from publishing any such statement. The president of the college was also instructed to report his college as "nonsectarian" in the future. So that the reforms that once caused men to be tortured and burned at the stake, now come voluntarily to the tune of the Carnegie funds.

"Soon we may expect to see Lafayette College saying good-bye to the Presbyterian fathers and falling in line for something more substantial than the dope handed down by John Calvin.

"Of course, the ecclesiastical gentlemen are making a stubborn fight to preserve the special privileges of the clergy. They say that if you take away the religious foundation, the colleges will go to pieces. This reminds us of a story: Some years ago a large manufacturing plant at High Bridge, New Jersey, was discovered on fire at night. A message was sent to Phillipsburg for aid and one of the local companies loaded its engine on a car and went to High Bridge, but arrived after the buildings had burned. Early the next morning an Irishman arrived in Phillipsburg from High Bridge. 'Well, Pat,' asked some one, 'how did our boys make out last night at the fire?' 'Sure, and they did nobly well,' answered Pat; 'after strinuous ifforts, they succeeded in savin' ivery bit of the ground on which the great buildings were built.'"

VERGING ON DANGER

THE following from the Censor shows how the people, as represented by their spokesmen, are thinking. Our admonition to our readers is, "Seek ye first the Kingdom"! "Be content with such things as ye have"! While seeing the strife and trouble coming on the world take no part in it. "Wait ye upon me, saith the Lord"! In his own time and way our God will right every wrong and Messiah's Kingdom shall bless all the nations of the earth. We quote:--

"While it is a pitiful confession of their own abject weakness, when the people do without food as the only means of protecting themselves from robber monopolies, a vast amount of good may flow from the present food strike, nevertheless. While to do without meat can be nothing more than a temporary expedient, for the Beef Trust, as one paper says, can save until next month the meat you refuse to eat this month, at which time it can restore old prices, with a little something by way of interest, the movement, as a most forcible agitation, is bound to result in something, although we may feel sure that the 'passes' now being made by politicians in office will never result in much.

"Surely this general blind uprising of the people should carry a warning to Pierpont Morgan and those under him at Washington and elsewhere. The strike is a mild but distinct danger sign, and if Mr. Morgan had ever had time to read history a little bit he would see it. The extortionate price of food is not Hunger, but it verges on Hunger. Our masters should know that it is dangerous to fool with the popular stomach. So undeveloped is the average man, that the stomach is still lord of life. To get food is still the main incident of existence. Our masters, if they are wise, would know that it is possible to oppress the people to any extent that pleases them, so that they but have the sense to stop short of hunger. The average American can be deluded, abused and robbed to an extent that is amazing, just as long as those who spoil him leave him enough to eat to keep him from starvation. He has no ambition, to speak of, beyond filling his stomach, and he will tolerate conditions that give him less than that. Leave him enough to eat to keep him from positive starvation, and he will do little more than murmur. But don't go beyond that point. That tyrants, oppressors and robbers have occasionally overstepped that limit has caused results which have made history. They will tell you that the French Revolution was a great protest against

feudalism and a great uprising for democracy. Stuff! The French Revolution was a hunger strike pure and simple. "How long present conditions persist in this country, depends on how soon our masters force us to the hunger point. Revolutions and reforms are not results of reasoning of the popular brain, but of feeling of the popular stomach. The people in the mass have small power of reason, and have never had much. Our degree of progress is the amount of increased nervous sensitiveness in the human stomach. Until we reach the hunger point there will be no reform in this country. The plunderers of privilege will continue to ride our necks until the insistent call of our stomachs forces us to assert our torpid manhood.

"The food strike is a thing the Censor foresaw years ago. Who knows but it is the beginning of that revolution which we must have to restore our liberties? For it is a matter of history that all oppressors are blinded by their own success and keep going until they go too far--past the danger point of hunger. Thus I feel certain that while there may be breaks in the system of despoiling the people, seasons of temporary relief, this matter may be considered as merely in its incipiency. The present discrepancy between wages and prices is not a new thing; it is not of today or yesterday or last year. This conspiracy is nearly fifty years old. Ever since the Civil War the conspirators have been toiling to secure control of the government, and organize their little game. It is within the last five years only that they have perfected the vast scheme of plundering the people through monopoly of all sources of distribution. Will they quit now or be satisfied? It is not to be expected."

"ALL DECEIVABLENESS OF UNRIGHTEOUSNESS"

"The energy of the Adversary, with all powers and signs and wonders of falsehood, and with every deception of iniquity to those who are perishing, because they admitted not the love of the Truth, in order that they might be saved. On this account God will send an energy of delusion to their believing the falsehood."--`2 Thess. 2:9-11`--(Diaglott).

DO WE forget that the Apostle's solemn words apply particularly in this harvest time, and specially to the closing years of the harvest? We are now in the time above all others when we may expect strong delusions, not only upon nominal Christendom, but upon those who have been specially favored with the light of Truth now shining. Should we not expect that the next five years of the harvest would clearly demonstrate the truthfulness of this prophecy by St. Paul?

Some of the strong delusions are apparent enough-- Spiritism, Theosophy, Christian Science, Church Federation, the Adversary's means of distracting the hearts and heads of some who otherwise would be Bible students. So far as we understand the prophecies of the Bible, these delusions will have wonderful power upon the world of mankind and especially in Christendom, which will gain power during the next few years. As the Apostle expresses it, these delusions will have their power largely because God's people have not been sufficiently awake to the privileges of Bible study--they have reverenced creeds rather than the Word of the Lord. They have worshipped and served and sought to be in accord with Churchianity rather than with the Truth. Hence, they are unfortified; they are without the Christian armor which St. Paul urged, saying, "Put on (therefore) the whole armor of God, that ye may be able to stand...in the evil day, and, having done all, to stand."--`Eph. 6:11-13`.

But our special thought properly centers upon ourselves and those who, with us, have been favored of the Lord with the illumination of this harvest time. Will all of those who have heard the harvest message and rejoiced in it be safe in this "evil day," or will there be some strong delusions for them also--for their testing, their sifting?

Other Scriptures assure us that the great hour of trial coming upon the whole world must begin with the Church --"with the house of God"--with those professing to be saints. St. Peter implies this when he says, "If it begin first at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the Gospel of God?" (`I Pet. 4:17`.) St. Paul gives the same thought, saying of the Church, "Every man's work shall be made manifest; for the day shall declare it; because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is." (`I Cor. 3:13`.) The intimation is that the severity of the testing will come first to the saints. In whatever proportion our doctrines include fallacies, errors, in that same proportion will be the severity of our testing. Those whose faith structure contains little of wood, hay and stubble will suffer least; while those who have more of these combustibles will suffer the more.

Be it noticed that all the creeds handed down to us contain many errors and that the test of our loyalty to the Truth was our willingness to renounce these and to replace them with the gold, silver and precious stones of the Divine Word. For one reason or another this matter of confessing error and relinquishing it is a severe trial to many. It tests loyalty to God and his Word. It tests humility of heart. It tests willingness to confess our errors. It tests love for the brethren. However trifling the mistake it requires an overcoming courage to declare it, to renounce it. This has been the procedure for the past three hundred years, as God's people have emerged more and more from the smoke of the "dark ages." Because of these difficulties and tests the progress out of darkness into the full, clear light has been slow. At every step of the journey Light and Truth have been slandered, opposed, vilified, persecuted, and the advocates of Truth have been pilloried and roasted either figuratively or literally.

Our Adversary, intent upon maintaining his hold upon the minds of God's people, has fought every inch of Truth for the past four centuries. He has made it hot for those whom the Lord has by his grace been leading step by step into the clear light of the knowledge of the glory of God and of his wonderful Plan of Salvation. Shall we wonder if our Adversary still pursues the same course and with still greater vigor than ever--with still more "energy" than ever? By no means! We accept his present opposition as the fulfillment of Scripture and we expect no cessation, but rather a further aggressiveness on his part to the end of the harvest.

It is not necessary for us to assume that only the devilish are used by Satan. Satan uses as his agents in opposing the light, in persecuting those who go on in the path of the just, which shines more and more, the very best people he can get hold of. The pathway of the Church shows from the first that the Adversary has succeeded in using good as well as bad men in the accomplishment of his purposes --and undoubtedly the better the man the more acceptable would he be as Satan's servant and the more influential. Note the case of Saul of Tarsus, instigator and assistant

in the murder of St. Stephen; note the fact that St. Paul tells us that he acted in all good conscience, and verily thought he did service to God and not to Satan, who blinded his eyes. Note the case of John Calvin, who, with many noble traits of Christian character, was so led astray by the Adversary, so blinded, that he used his high office in Geneva to burn a fellow-Christian at the stake. Doubtless he also thought that he did God service. Note also that scribes, priests and Pharisees were responsible for the death of our Lord and thought that they did God service. Of them St. Peter says that they did it ignorantly, for had they known they would not have crucified the Prince of Life. And so, doubtless, it is today, and will be until near the close; some, loyal of heart, may be amongst our enemies--slanderers, murderers. Like St. Stephen, let us pray for them.

But we cannot hope thus of all--especially now when the light of Truth is shining so much more brightly and when the Lord is especially testing the loyalty or disloyalty of those professing his name, with a view to their separation and to the determining of their eternal destinies. No doubt some who will be of the "Great Company" will be more or less deceived of the Adversary by the strong delusions of this hour. Such in their blindness and deception may set forth darkness for light and light for darkness. They may do it with great positiveness, but scarcely, we think, with bitterness--anger, malice, envy, hatred, strife --works of the flesh and of the devil.

Is it inquired, why? since this Saul of Tarsus was so bitter? We reply that that great persecutor of the Church had not yet received the begetting of the holy Spirit. He could not, therefore, sin against it and "grieve the holy Spirit of promise." On the contrary, those who will constitute the "Great Company" will all be of the consecrated and spirit-begotten class. All so begotten of the holy Spirit must have the Spirit of Christ. If it be lost the result

would not only mean loss of the illumination and going into outer darkness, but also a total loss--the extinguishing of the Spirit of begetting--the Second Death. Let us not forget that the Spirit of God is the Spirit of love-- meekness, gentleness, patience, long-suffering, brotherly kindness, love.

Some one has said, "It is but one step from the sublime to the ridiculous," because of the facility of human imagination. Similarly it might be said that right and wrong, Truth and untruth, may be so viewed as to change the sentiment almost instantly. Hypnotists act upon this power and so do attorneys. As the case may be, the client will be pictured by the one attorney as the representative of every grace and virtue, and by the opposing counsel the same traits, acts and words may be distorted and a beautiful character be represented as hideous, mean of motive, puerile and false of conduct. Thus the Apostle wrote, "Unto the pure all things are pure; but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure."--`Titus 1:15`.

Your great Adversary's endeavor, therefore, is to poison our minds, to introduce thereinto impurity, anger, malice, envy, hatred and other works of the flesh and of the Adversary. To the extent that he succeeds in poisoning our hearts he alienates us from the Lord and from all those who are in accord with him; and this is his object. He succeeds best through human instrumentalities. We all know that if one dog becomes affected by hydrophobia every other animal is more or less in danger of becoming mad through even slight association--and infection. Thus Satan's "strong delusion" spreads from one to another until many be defiled by the root of bitterness. And to the mind, the heart, once embittered and out of alignment with the Divine view of things, everything takes on different colors and the end of the matter is far-reaching; as the Apostle intimates, "Lest thereby many be defiled."

The embittered or impure heart sees things from its own standpoint. The evil tongue once started may "set on fire the course of nature," as St. James declares; and that evil tongue is itself ignited from Gehenna--the Second Death. (`James 3:6`.) That is to say, the evil, malicious, baneful, slanderous, back-biter is already himself bitten by the Adversary, and, unless cured, his would surely be a case of Second Death. And the same rule would apply to all bitten by him. The Scriptures, therefore, continually urge God's people to observe the Golden Rule--to do, to say, to think of others as they would be thought of, spoken of and dealt with. They continually urge upon us the putting away of bitterness, evil-speaking, busy-bodying, that we may the more fully and the more completely put on Christ and be more fully under the control of his holy Spirit of love, meekness, patience, long-suffering and kindness.

"If ye know these things, happy are ye if ye do them" (`John 13:17`), is the Lord's message. The Lord is not now speaking to those who need to be forced and pounded into proper shape, in accord with the Divine character. He will deal with that class during the Millennium under the New Covenant, when his Mediatorial Kingdom will bring them into subjection forcibly. Now the Lord is speaking to another class of an entirely different disposition: He seeketh such to worship him as worship him in Spirit and in Truth--such as love him and love his righteous requirements of the Golden Rule, and beyond this, the high standard of the New Commandment--to love one another to the sacrificing point, as he loved the Church and gave himself for the Church.

The Lord is now seeking merely the class called--the "little flock" who possess the Lord's Spirit or disposition, and love the brethren to the self-sacrificing point. It is incumbent, therefore, that all who would be recognized of the Father as possessing the character-likeness of the Lord Jesus should resist and put away, mortify, deaden, every unholy, unloving, unjust sentiment, as they would avoid the virus of hydrophobia or of a contagious disease. In a word, while we still urge as always growth in knowledge, we also admonish as always that growth in grace must be proportionate, if we would be pleasing to the Lord and accepted as joint-heirs with Jesus in his Kingdom. Whoever unkindly, untruthfully, slanderously, wickedly, underhandedly, insinuatingly with others may speak or act towards us, we must not dare to render evil for evil, nor railing for railing, but "be kind and gentle towards all."

In fact, we must not even entertain an unkind thought respecting those who oppose us, but, as Michael would not speak evil of Satan, but said, "The Lord rebuke thee!" so must it be with us. And here notice the slanders of Satan. His own mind, full of ambition, accredited the Almighty with the same and told Mother Eve that God had forbidden her eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil because he desired to keep his human children in ignorance and under mental slavery. He even declared that the Almighty had falsified when he declared that the wage or penalty of disobedience in the matter would be death. As Satan could and did speak evil of the highest dignities, so his followers, misguided by his Spirit, speak slanderously of us. But as Michael dare not bring against Satan an accusation of railing, so let us beware that we do not retaliate upon those who speak evil of us and say all manner of evil against us falsely, because of our faithfulness to the Lord and his Word. A little while and the faithful will all be rewarded.

IS THE MEDIATOR AN ADVOCATE?

SOME speak of "The New Covenant Advocate." Is such an expression true respecting our Lord Jesus? Is he the Advocate of the New Covenant? We answer, No. Our Lord is the Mediator of the New Covenant, but not its Advocate. He is its Mediator in the sense that he is referred to in the prophecies as the one who will fulfill his Office. He began his work at his consecration and continued it faithfully to Calvary. By that consecration and faithfulness unto death he became the surety of the New Covenant--the assurance or guarantee to us that the Covenant will ultimately go into effect, and that he will be the one through whom it will be made effective. He is the Mediator of the New Covenant since he ascended up on high, in that he is co-operating with the Father in the carrying out of the Divine purpose of the selection of the Church as members of his Body--sharers in the sufferings of Christ and in the glory that shall follow. Soon the Mediator will have received to himself every member of his Body, all whose names are written in the Lamb's Book of Life. Then the Mediator complete will begin his work officially. The merit of the Mediator's sacrifice, now loaned or imputed to us, the Church, for our justification and sanctification, he will then, as Mediator between God and men, apply on behalf of Israel and all who may become Israelites under the New Covenant provisions, which will immediately go into effect. For a thousand years the great Mediator will stand between God and man--because God cannot accept or deal with the sinful of heart. These during the Mediatorial Kingdom will receive full enlightenment and instruction and assistance, to the intent that they may be lifted out of their sin and death condition up to perfection and everlasting life. Not until they shall have reached actual perfection at the end of the Millennium will the Mediator step out of his Office and thus bring together God and restored mankind--all the children of Adam except the Church, the "great company," and those who die the Second Death. As soon as the Mediator thus steps from between God and men, mankind will become responsible directly to God, and Justice without mercy will prevail. None will need or deserve mercy, because, having enjoyed God's mercy for a thousand years and having been perfected thereunder, they will be fully able to maintain their standing on the plane of Justice, if their hearts be loyal and true.

It can be readily seen that the world thus under the Mediator during the Millennium will need no Advocate, because they will have no dealings with the Father, but merely with Christ, the Mediator.

Note the difference between the above and the Church's attitude to the Father and the Son during this Gospel Age. We are introduced to the Father at once, because our hearts are in the right condition--desirous of knowing and doing of God's will to the extent of our ability and trusting in the merit of Christ's sacrifice already applied on our behalf. When we consecrate our lives after the example of our Redeemer--"to suffer with him," "to be dead with him," that we may live and reign with him--the Redeemer, according to the Father's Plan, becomes our Advocate, endorses our petition, applies his merit on our behalf and becomes guarantor for us, that we may be loyal to God, or die the Second Death. As our Advocate, our Lord does not stand between the Father and us, but stands with us as our Elder Brother, as Chief Priest over his own House of Priests. "For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified, are all of one; for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren; saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren; in the midst of the Church will I sing praise unto thee."-- `Heb. 2:11,12`.

The Redeemer purposes no mediatorial work in behalf of the Church. He is not styled our Mediator, but our Advocate. "We have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the Righteous." (`I John 2:1`.) Instead of standing between the Father and us, as during the Millennium he will stand between the Father and the world, he introduces us immediately to the Father, and the Father, on receiving

us, immediately begets us of the holy Spirit. Our Lord's words are, "No man cometh unto the Father but by me" --the Advocate of the Church.

As sinners we had no relationship to God. When we believed and turned from sin we had a justification by faith tentatively imputed to us, permitting us to draw nigh to God and to hear his message through Christ-- speaking peace to us and informing us of the High Calling and assuring us that "Now is the acceptable time"; that during this Gospel Age he is willing to accept us as living sacrifices through the merit of Jesus and to beget us of the holy Spirit to the divine nature. The moment we accepted those terms our Redeemer became our Advocate and immediately the entire contract was closed and we were begotten of the holy Spirit. We were no longer in the flesh, but in the spirit--no longer in the Court, but in the Holy.

The New Creature being without sin needed no Mediator to come between it and God. On the contrary, the New Creature sings:--

"Sun of my soul, my Father dear,

I know no night when thou art near.

O! may no earth-born cloud arise

To hide thee from thy servant's eyes."

But the New Creature needs an Advocate. Even though it is in full relationship with the Father, and even though as a New Creature it has no sin--the sins cancelled at Calvary were those of the old creature only. Is it asked why the New Creature, begotten of God, sinless, needs an Advocate? We reply that it is because he has the treasure of the new mind in an earthen vessel that is very imperfect through the fall. The sins of his mortal body were all cancelled through the imputation of the Advocate's merit and at that moment the old nature died and ceased its responsibility. He that is dead "hath ceased from sin." (`I Pet. 4:1`.) The New Creature, which at that moment was begotten and as a new mind or new will took possession of the mortal body reckoned dead, is held responsible for its conduct in exactly the same manner that the owner of a dog is responsible for him. Whatever violence the dog may do, the owner is responsible, because he should have chained him up. So we, as New Creatures, are responsible for our hands, our feet, our eyes, our tongues, in what they may do. If the tongue slander another through weakness, force of habit, etc., the New Creature is responsible and must give an account. If other wrongdoings be committed, there is a similar responsibility in every case.

The New Creature cannot claim that the merit of Christ has cancelled these imperfections of his flesh in advance. He can merely claim in the Apostle's words, "The forgiveness of sins which are past, through the forbearance of God." (`Rom. 3:25`.) What, then, must he do in respect to these daily deflections--trespasses of omission and commission due to the imperfections of his flesh? The Apostle's answer is, "If any man (in the Church) sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the Righteous." (`I John 2:1`.) "Having such an high priest

over the house of God (the antitypical priests and Levites) let us draw nigh to God in full assurance of faith, that we may obtain mercy and find help in time of need." We thus pray, "Our father which art in heaven...forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us." If as New Creatures our Lord and Advocate sees that we are cultivating his Spirit of mercy towards others, he will at once advocate our plea and secure for us Divine cancellation of the errors of our flesh, to which we, as New Creatures, were not a party and did not consent. If as New Creatures we gave partial consent to the wrong course, we would be liable in that proportion to some kind of stripes or punishment. And if any sin wilfully --heartily assented to sin knowingly and intentionally and without protest--it would prove that such was no longer a New Creature, but "twice dead, plucked up by the roots."

Our Lord will continue to be the Church's Advocate with the Father down to the moment when the last member of his Body and of the Great Company shall have finished his course and passed beyond the veil to be a member of the "Church of the First-born, whose names are enrolled in heaven." Then they will no longer need an Advocate, because their resurrection change will make them perfect and the good intentions of their wills as New Creatures will find no impediment in their new bodies. They will be like their Lord, partakers of the divine nature and sharers of his glory and of his work. Then, as members of the great Prophet, Priest, Mediator, Judge and King, they will assist in dispensing the Divine blessings to the world of mankind for a thousand years. Then our Lord's office of Advocate will terminate with the glorification of the Church, and his office of Mediator between God and the world will be ready to begin.

WHEN GOD COVENANTED WITH ABRAHAM

Gradually those who went out from us because they were "not of us" are going into darkness on all subjects. This was to be expected. A root of bitterness developing in the heart affects the sight. Light becomes darkness; darkness becomes light. New things pass away. All things become old again in the wrong sense.

These friends, not content with urging unscripturally that they need a Mediator between them and God, become very angry with us because we point out to them the truth on the subject--that the Mediator is between God and men and not between God and the New Creature. They seem to want to have a different view, and, of course, find plenty of opportunity for it. People usually find what they look for. Infidels who are in a wrong attitude of mind and desirous of finding fault with the Bible succeed in convincing themselves of its inconsistencies, contradictions, etc. Sometimes they succeed in deceiving others whose intentions are good, but who are lacking in spiritual discernment. We suggest that our proper attitude towards these erstwhile friends is to let them alone --to allow God to deal with them. Such of them as he sees to be honest-hearted and of right spirit he will guide in judgment and lead back again into the Truth; such as he cannot approve for any part of his work, he has a perfect right to cast aside. We may not murmur, but rather be glad that our eyes are open to see the wisdom and the justice of the Divine decree, "The wages of sin is death." If, then, those who were once with us and "of us" have not been influenced by all the Lord's leadings in the past and the presentations of the present, what more can we do for them but leave them in the hand of him who is too wise to err and too just to be unkind?

These erstwhile friends, busy seeing what they can object to, are step by step walking into darkness. One of their recent claims of finding new light and proof that THE WATCH TOWER teachings are erroneous is that there was no Abrahamic Covenant at all; that what God said to Abraham was merely a proposition to make a Covenant and that the New Covenant is the promised one. They think that it began somewhere about the time of our Lord's First Advent, but they do not know when and can find no Scripture on the subject, and are afraid to make a guess, lest it be shown to be fallacious. The reason back of this endeavor to cast out the original Covenant with Abraham, and to declare that it was merely a promise that the New Covenant would be made in due time, is evident. They perceive that the Church cannot properly be under two Covenants, or two "mothers," and are determined that they are the children of the New Covenant; hence they strive to show that there was no Covenant, except the Law Covenant, until Christ came. They are put to great perplexity when some one quotes the Apostle's words that the "Law was added because of transgressions (added, of course, to the Abrahamic Covenant) until the Seed (specified by the Abrahamic Covenant) should come." (`Gal. 3:19`.) Another Scripture which gives them trouble is St. Paul's statement that the Law Covenant was 430 years after the Abrahamic Covenant. They know not how to explain this in harmony with their theory that the Law Covenant was made 1600 years before the time they claim the New Covenant began.

After worrying themselves as above, some of them have taken up a new line--anything to be different--anything to prove that the DAWN-STUDIES are incorrect, blind guides. The later claim is, "Yes, there must have been some kind of Covenant made with Abraham, but it was made fifty years later than the DAWN-STUDIES say. It was made after Abraham had typically offered Isaac in sacrifice." There, they tell us, God said to Abraham, "By myself have I sworn, saith the Lord; because thou hast done this thing and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son; that in blessing, I will bless thee, and in multiplying, I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven, and as the sand which is upon the seashore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice."--`Gen. 22:16-18`.

See, they say, THE WATCH TOWER and DAWN-STUDIES have erred in saying that God made the Covenant with Abraham when first he came into the land of Canaan; whereas he merely promised it then but did not actually make the Covenant until fifty years afterward--when Isaac was twenty-five years old, and after Abraham had offered him as a sacrifice in a figure.

We reply that our critics are in error. God called Abraham while he was yet in Haran, to come out into the Land of Canaan and that he would there make a Covenant with him. Abraham believed and, at the death of his father Terah, removed to Canaan. Thereupon the

Lord blessed him and consummated the Covenant with him. That Covenant was repeated in different forms from time to time and confirmed to Isaac and to Jacob long afterward. Even if the time of making oath to the Covenant were a matter of dispute it would not alter the fact that the Covenant itself was made directly after Abraham obeyed and removed to Canaan. The various statements respecting the matter are, "I have made a Covenant with thee," "I have sworn," etc. To suppose that these restatements of the Divine Purpose are either New Covenants or intimations that the Covenant had not been made is to suppose erroneously.

See where the argument of our friends would lead them chronologically. If the Abrahamic Covenant was not

made until after the figurative offering of Isaac it would add fifty years to the chronology at that point. We base our reckoning on St. Paul's words, "The Covenant, which was confirmed before of God in Christ, the Law, which was 430 years afterward, cannot disannul." (`Gal. 3:17`.) If, therefore, instead of counting the 430 years from the time Abraham entered Canaan we count it from a date fifty years later when he offered Isaac, we would be adding fifty years to our chronology. What would that mean? It would throw everything out of gear--the chronology itself and the harmony based upon it. For instance, add that fifty years and it would make the six thousand years end fifty years sooner than 1872, namely, in 1822, which would mean that the Millennium, the seventh-thousand year period, would begin in 1823. The absurdity of this need not be discussed. Another beautiful time feature would thus be spoiled--the one suggested by Brother Edgar--that the giving of the Covenant is exactly midway chronologically between the time of the fall and the sending of the Gospel to the Gentiles, Cornelius being the first one to receive it. However, as before intimated, we can expect anything, everything, in the way of misunderstanding and misrepresentation, bitterness and personalities from these erstwhile friends. "If the light that is in thee become darkness, how great is that darkness!" The darkness seems to affect people, not merely intellectually, but morally, blunting their sense of right and wrong, truth and falsehood, decency and honor. Let us beware of rendering evil for evil, slander for slander, or the cultivation in the slightest sense of roots of bitterness, hatred, envy, strife--works of the flesh and of the Adversary.

"HE IS NOT A JEW--OUTWARDLY"

"He is not a Jew who is one outwardly,...but he is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is that of the heart." `Romans 2:28,29`.

THOSE who argue that the Church is under the New Covenant, instead of under the Abrahamic Covenant, symbolized by Sarah, as the Apostle says, are perplexed with the plain prophecy of `Jeremiah 31:31-33`. It distinctly declares that New Covenant provision to be for the house of Israel and the house of Judah--the ten tribes and the two tribes of the Jewish nation. Perplexed, they answer that they are Jews; that all Christians are Jews, and that the New Covenant prophecy, therefore, applies to them and proves that it has already been established and that they are enjoying its provisions.

In reply, we ask them first of all to read the context from `verse 27` to the close of the chapter. It seems difficult to imagine a mind so twisted and blinded that it would be unable to see that the entire passage is for the Jew--natural Israel. There is not the slightest reference to Spiritual Israel or any spiritual experiences.

In desperation they quote the text at the head of this article in proof that they are Jews and therefore in New Covenant relationship with God. But, alas for them, they thus go from one misinterpretation to another! If they will look up the context of the above text they will find that it applies not to spiritual but to natural Israel. It is a portion of St. Paul's argument showing that the Jew was not justified by being under the Law Covenant; and that he could be justified only by accepting Christ as his Redeemer from the sentence of the Law Covenant incurred by his inherited imperfection. Note the argument --`verses 17-24`.

The culmination of the Apostle's argument is found in the next chapter (`3:9,10`) in the words: "What then? are we [Jews] better than they [Gentiles]? In no wise; for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin [condemnation]. As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one." See the further argument of `verses 19-29`.

St. Paul's constant argument was that it was not necessary for Gentiles to become Jews in order to become Christians, but that the Jew must become dead to the Law and the Gentile become dead to sin in order that both might become one in Christ Jesus--Christians.

NOTE FURTHER MISINTERPRETATION

Let us ask these bewildered brethren a few simple questions, that they and we may know just where they do stand on the question of their being Spiritual Jews.

Is it as "new creatures in Christ" that this claim to being Jews is put forth? Yes, they answer. We reply with the Apostle's words, "There is neither Jew nor Greek" in Christ. Besides, the New Covenant proposes restitution and applies to those whose stony hearts are to be changed to hearts of flesh. Where is there a spiritual promise to the Jew? And the New [Law] Covenant would condemn every imperfect person, as did the Old one. "Ye are not under the Law [Covenant], but under Grace."-- `Rom. 6:14`.

"Ah, yes," they answer, "We erred in stating that we are Jews and under the New Covenant as 'new creatures.' We will change that answer and say rather, that as Jews we were justified under the New Covenant and then became 'new creatures' and members of Christ under the Abrahamic Covenant."

You are making a bad argument worse, by a further confusing of the Scriptures. The natural Jew could get free from the condemnation of the Old Law Covenant only by renouncing it--dying to it and becoming alive toward God as a member of The Christ. What advantage would accrue to a Gentile, to get under another Law Covenant, new or old? None, surely!

Christ is the Mediator of the New [Law] Covenant to bring as many as possible of Adam's race back into full harmony with God. During the Gospel Age he is laying the foundation for his great work by first making satisfaction for their sins. Soon the antitypical Atonement Day will end and satisfaction for the sins of the world will be made. Forthwith the world will be turned over to him, and his mediatorial reign will begin.

His mediation will not be for each person individually, but for the world collectively. He will reign or mediate for a thousand years, and not until its close will he deliver over to the Father--Justice--those whom he will succeed in uplifting out of sin and death conditions. During all the time he mediates the world will have no direct dealing with the Father, but only with the Mediator of the New Covenant.

On the contrary, the Church of this age is justified and accepted by faith, as was Abraham, and is backed by "the blood of Christ." Then, upon consecration to be "dead with him," they at once come into relationship with God as "members of the Body of Christ." Thank God for our portion of blessing under the Abrahamic Covenant and our glorious Redeemer-Advocate! And praise God for the world's coming blessing under a Redeemer-Mediator!

…