Table of Contents

The Signs of the Times, Vol. 27 (1901)

March 6, 1901

"'How Shall We?'" The Signs of the Times 27, 10 , p. 3 .

May 22, 1901

"The Two Sides in the Great Controversy. Self-Sacrifice or Self-Defense" The Signs of the Times 27, 21 , p. 2 .

July 3, 1901

"This World's History" The Signs of the Times 27, 27 , p. 2 .

July 10, 1901

"Ancient History Which Is Also Modern. From Republic to Empire" The Signs of the Times 27, 28 , p. 3 .

FROM REPUBLIC TO EMPIRE.

July 17, 1901

"Ancient History Which Is Also Modern. Abandonment of the Constitution" The Signs of the Times 27, 29 , p. 3 .

July 24, 1901

"Ancient History Which Is Also Modern. Abandonment of the Constitution.–Concluded" The Signs of the Times 27, 30 , p. 11 .

July 31, 1901

"Ancient History Which Is Also Modern. From Republic to Monarchy" The Signs of the Times 27, 31 , p. 3 .

August 7, 1901

"Ancient History Which Is Also Modern. From Degeneracy to Religious Despotism" The Signs of the Times 27, 32 , pp. 4, 5 .

August 14, 1901

"Ancient History Which Is Also Modern. The Monarchical Principle Established" The Signs of the Times 27, 33 , p. 5 .

August 21, 1901

"Ancient History Which Is Also Modern. The Adoption of 'Christianity' as the National Religion" The Signs of the Times 27, 34 , pp. 4, 5 .

March 12, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. Causes of the Captivity" The Signs of the Times 28, 11 , p. 2, 3 .

March 19, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. The Release from Captivity" The Signs of the Times 28, 12 , p. 1, 2 .

March 26, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. Troublous Times" The Signs of the Times 28, 13 , p. 3, 4 .

April 2, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. The Success of the Samaritans" The Signs of the Times 28, 14 , p. 3 .

April 9, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. The Work of Haggai and Zechariah" The Signs of the Times 28, 15 , p. 3, 4 .

April 16, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. The Samaritans Compelled to Help" The Signs of the Times 28, 16 , p. 5 .

April 23, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. Satan's Master-Stroke" The Signs of the Times 28, 17 , p. 3, 4 .

April 30, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. 'The Hand upon the Throne of the Lord'" The Signs of the Times 28, 18 , p. 3, 4 .

May 7, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. The Second Return" The Signs of the Times 28, 19 , p. 3, 4 .

May 14, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. The Third Return" The Signs of the Times 28, 20 , p. 4, 5 .

Nehemiah Permitted to Go.

The Royal Grants.

The "Troubles Times."

May 21, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. The Fear of God against Unbrotherliness" The Signs of the Times 28, 21 , p. 4, 5 .

May 28, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. The Wall Finished, and the Full Temple Service Restored" The Signs of the Times 28, 22 , p. 3, 4 .

The Worst Trouble of All.

Restoring the Worship.

The Feast of Tabernacles.

June 4, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. The Wall of Jerusalem Dedicated; the Rival Worship of Samaria Established" The Signs of the Times 28, 23 , p. 3, 4 .

Enemies Cast Out

The Lord Robbed of Means and Time

Mixed Marriages

Smaritan [sic.] Worship Established

June 18, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. Backsliding to Confirmed Apostasy" The Signs of the Times 28, 25 , p. 5 .

The Course and Cause of Backsliding

Spirituality Waning.

The Final Coming-out and Apostasy.

The Depth of Backsliding.

Dead Formality.

June 25, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. From Religious to Political" The Signs of the Times 28, 26 , p. 4, 5 .

July 2, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. The Scepter Departs from Judah" The Signs of the Times 28, 27 , p. 4, 5 .

Under the Roman Power.

The Decree of the Roman Senate

Troubles of Herod.

April 1, 1903

"What Do These Things Mean?" The Signs of the Times 29, 13 , p. 2 .

The Spirit of Combine.

April 8, 1903

"What Do These Things Mean?" The Signs of the Times 29, 14 , p. 2, 3 .

II.

April 15, 1903

"What Do These Things Mean?" The Signs of the Times 29, 15 , p. 2, 3 .

III.

The School Question

July 1, 1903

"Free from the Service of Sin" The Signs of the Times 29, 26 , p. 5 .

December 23, 1903

"The First Commandment" The Signs of the Times 29, 51 , pp. 4, 5 .

Monopoly, Its Result.

Idolatry in Giving.

The Value of Gifts.

God Will Righteously Adjust Matters.

January 6, 1904

"History of Government. I. Eternal and Foundation Principles" The Signs of the Times 30, 1 , p. 2.

Individuality

Equality

True Self-Government

January 13, 1904

"History of Government. Two Kinds of Government" The Signs of the Times 30, 2 , pp. 3, 4 .

Man's Choice is Evil

Two Classes.

Man in Place of God

What Idols Are

Facts of History.

January 20, 1904

"History of Government. III. The History of Government" The Signs of the Times 30, 3 , p. 3 .

The First Arbitrary Ruler among Men

Distinction between Kingship and Imperialism

January 27, 1904

"History of Government. IV. The Establishing of Imperialism" The Signs of the Times 30, 4 , pp. 3, 4 .

IV. THE ESTABLISHING OF IMPERIALISM.

Egyptian Imitators.

An Empire of Peace and By Peace.

The Subject of the Peoples.

February 3, 1904

"History of Government. V. The Perpetuation of Imperialism" The Signs of the Times 30, 5 , pp. 4, 5 .

V. THE PERPETUATION OF IMPERIALISM.

God's Truth versus Human Ambition.

The Medo-Persian Regions.

The Succession of Greece.

Roman Dominion.

February 10, 1904

"History of Government. VI. Character of Earthly Monarchy" The Signs of the Times 30, 6 , pp. 4, 5 .

VI. CHARACTER OF EARTHLY MONARCHY.

In Babylon and Later Empires.

February 17, 1904

"History of Government. Self-Government in Rome" The Signs of the Times 30, 7 , pp. 4, 5 .

SELF-GOVERNMENT IN ROME.

Degeneracy and the Cause.

A Harvest of Greed and Corruption.

Past Reformation.

February 24, 1904

"History of Government. VIII. The Decline of Self-government in Rome" The Signs of the Times 30, 8 , pp. 4, 5 .

VIII. THE DECLINE OF SELF-GOVERNMENT IN ROME

Assuming to Govern Other People.

The Failure of Socialism.

Conflicts between Capital and Labor.

Despotism.

Extra-constitutional Power

A Triumvirate,

Government of the People Gone,

March 2, 1904

"History of Government. IX. Ecclesiastical Government of Rome" The Signs of the Times 30, 9 , pp. 4, 5 .

IX. ECCLESIASTICAL GOVERNMENT OF ROME

Sustained by Forgery.

Speculation in Crime.

March 9, 1904

"History of Government. Departure from True Principle" The Signs of the Times 30, 10 , p. 4, 5 .

DEPARTURE FROM TRUE PRINCIPLE.

"A New Order of Things."

Not Self-Governing.

History Repeats Itself.

March 16, 1904

"History of Government. Departure from Principle. (Concluded.)" The Signs of the Times 30, 11 , p. 4, 5 .

DEPARTURE FROM PRINCIPLE

A Triumvirate

Her Reign Will Be Short,

March 23, 1904

"History of Government. The End of Earthly Human Government. (Concluded.)" The Signs of the Times 30, 12 , p. 4, 5 .

THE END OF EARTHLY HUMAN GOVERNMENT.

The Failure of Individual Self-government

The Manifestation on Earth of True Government

Jesus, the True King

The Coming Kingdom.

November 16, 1904

"Christ Revealed in the Sabbath" The Signs of the Times 30, 46 , p. 6 .

What There Is in the Sabbath.

Christ in the Sabbath.

God's Promises to the Believer.

October 25, 1905

"The Great Apostate Powers. Revelation, Chapters Twelve and Thirteen" Signs of the Times 31, 43 , pp. 8, 13 .

How Satan Works

Against the Church

A Beast

Another Instrument of Satan

A Warning Message

Wrath of Satan

Victory of God's People

The Great Apostate Powers

Footnotes

The Signs of the Times, Vol. 27 (1901)

March 6, 1901

"'How Shall We?'" The Signs of the Times 27, 10 , p. 3 .

"HOW shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?"

How shall we? Can you tell?

Can a man live in what he dies of? When any person dies of any disease, can he live any longer in it?–No; that is why he died–he could not live any longer in it.

Having died of that disease, were he even brought back from the dead into that very disease, could he live any longer in it?–No; he would certainly and immediately die again. A person simply can not live any longer in the thing of which he has died. This is perfectly plain to everybody.

Very well, then, have you died to sin? Have you grown so sick of sin that you died of it? Have you grown so sick of it that you could live no longer in it, and so died to it?

If you have, do not be afraid; you can not live any longer therein. Were you even taken back from that death, and put once more in the presence of sin, you would certainly and immediately die again. You could not live any longer in it, when you were there before; and because you could not live any longer in it, you died; and if you were brought back to it again, you could not live any longer in it any more than you did before.

Remember, this is being sick unto death, of sin; not sick of a few or even many particular sins, while at the same time you choose others because they are pleasing to you, and become fat and flourishing on them. In this way you can live in sin forever, and then die in it, and then die the second death for it.

No; it is not sins, so that we can die to one and live to another, that are contemplated in the Scripture; it is sin,–sin in the essence,–so that when you die to it, it is death indeed to sin, in every phase and of every sort. Then, being thus dead to sin, you simply can not live any longer therein. The very presence of the thing, the very suggestion of it, is death to you.

And being thus dead to sin, the Lord intends that we shall not live any longer in it. And intending that we shall not live any longer in it, He intends that we shall live ever longer without sinning.

There is power in Jesus Christ to keep the believer from sinning. There is virtue in the grace of God to hold back the believer in Jesus from serving the sinful propensities and passions that dwell in the human flesh. Praise His holy name forever and ever.

"Where sin abounded, grace did much more abound; that as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign thru righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord."

Are you dead to sin? Then how shall you live any longer therein?

A. T. JONES.

May 22, 1901

"The Two Sides in the Great Controversy. Self-Sacrifice or Self-Defense" The Signs of the Times 27, 21 , p. 2 .

"SELF-PRESERVATION is the first law of nature."

But self-sacrifice is the first law of grace.

In order to self-preservation, self-defense is essential.

In order to self-sacrifice, self-surrender is essential.

In self-defense, the only thing that can be employed is force.

In self-surrender, the only thing that can be employed is love.

In self-preservation, by self-defense, thru the employment of force, force meets force, and this means only war.

In self-sacrifice, by self-surrender, thru love, force is met by love, and this means only peace.

Self-preservation, then, means only war; while self-sacrifice means only peace.

But war means only death. Self-preservation, then, meaning only war, means only death; while self-sacrifice, meaning only peace, means only life.

Self-preservation being the first law of nature, nature then means only death; while self-sacrifice being the first law of grace, grace means only life.

But death only is the wages of sin; nature, then, meaning only death, it is so only because nature means sin; while life, being only the reward of righteousness; grace, meaning only life, it is so only because grace means righteousness.

Sin and righteousness, nature and grace, are directly opposite and antagonistic elements. They occupy realms absolutely distinct. Nature, self-preservation, self-defense, force, war, and death, occupy only the realm of sin; grace, self-sacrifice, self-surrender, love, peace, and life occupy only the realm of righteousness.

The realm of sin is the realm of Satan. The realm of grace is the realm of God. All the power of the domain of grace is devoted to saving men from the dominion of sin. This in order that, "as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign, thru righteousness, unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord."

On which side do you stand in this great controversy?

A. T. JONES.

July 3, 1901

"This World's History" The Signs of the Times 27, 27 , p. 2 .

NIMROD was the first man who wore a kingly crown. By him there was established among men the principle of human sovereignty. By him was begun kingship among men in this world; the rulership of man over man, and subjection of man to man; instead of the rulership of man over himself,–self-government,–and subjection of man to God only.

Nor was it only kingship that was by Nimrod begun; not merely kingship or sovereignty over a single city or territory, but kingship over kings, sovereignty over separate peoples and territories. For tho "the beginning of his kingdom" was the important cities and territories of "Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar," his ambition of kingly rule was not satisfied with these; but "out of that land he went forth into Assyria, and builded Nineveh, and Rehoboth-Ir, and Calah, and Resen between Nineveh and Calah." Thus it was not only kingship, but kingship expanded into empire, that was begun by Nimrod in the world.

Thru a long period of ages, Nimrod's example was followed, thru the rise and expansion into empire of Elam, Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Grecia. Then there arose a people who threw off and utterly repudiated all kingship and all idea of kingship; and established a republic–the republic of Rome–a government of the people, by the people, for the people.

This government of the people likewise expanded into empire, degenerated into monarchy and imperial despotism, then to such utter corruption that in terrible ruin it was swept totally from the earth.

From the tribes of barbarians who accomplished the destruction of Rome, there were established ten distinct kingdoms in the territory that had been Roman. Thus there was again established the principle of distinct kingship in government in the world.

Then again thru a period of ages, kingship expanded into empire in a succession of rises and falls, when in 1776 there arose another people who threw off and utterly repudiated all kingship and all idea of kingship; and established another republic–the republic of the United States–a government of the people, by the people, for the people.

And now this second great republic, which arose upon the repudiation of kingship, and upon the establishment of government of the people, has also expanded into empire.

Thus the whole history of this world from Nimrod's day unto this year 1901 is expressed in two series of kingships expanding into empire, each followed by the total repudiation of kingship in the establishment of a republic–a government of the people, by the people, for the people–and each of these itself expanding into empire; the first, expanding into empire and irretrievable ruin; the second, expanding into empire and –– what?

This is an interesting parallel. It is more than interesting; it is intensely suggestive, because the parallel stands, not only in the fact that twice in the world's history has a long period of kingship been followed by the utter repudiation of kingship in the establishment of a republic, but the parallel likewise stand sin the careers of these two republics–even to close details.

For this reason it is not only interesting but exceedingly important that the people of this republic of the United States should know the parallel, and how close it is, between these two republics; to know how far this parallel extends already, and to know how far it is likely yet to extend.

To this study the readers of the SIGNS OF THE TIMES and all who can be induced to become readers are invited, thru four or five numbers of the paper. Come; it will thoroly [sic.] pay.

ALONZO T. JONES.

July 10, 1901

"Ancient History Which Is Also Modern. From Republic to Empire" The Signs of the Times 27, 28 , p. 3 .

FROM REPUBLIC TO EMPIRE.

WE Have seen that the history of this world, from the day of Nimrod until now, is expressed in a succession of kingships expanding into empire, until Rome's total repudiation of kingship, and the establishment of a republic–a government of the people, by the people, and for the people–which itself expanded into empire and went to ruin; to be followed by establishments of kingships expanding into empire, until the total repudiation of kingship by the thirteen British colonies of America, and their establishment of the republic of the Untied States–a government of the people, by the people, and for the people–which itself has now expanded into empire.

And now every consideration of the subject forces the question, What shall be the result of this second expansion of republic into empire? Everybody knows that the republic of Rome went that road only to ruin; the question now is, How can the republic of the United States follow that same road without the same result?

This question is the more forcibly suggested by the fairly startling truth, that the course of the republic of Rome is being followed step by step by the republic of the United States; these steps being followed so closely as to be veritably identical. The likeness between the two is so manifest that it is difficult to write the course of the republic of Rome, without incurring the charge of "coloring it" from the course of the republic of the United States; tho the standard histories of Rome, long ago written, are a sufficient defense against the justice of any such charge. The likeness is not in the "coloring," but in the very texture and substance of the fabric.

Rome established herself upon the then entirely new principle, that men are capable of governing themselves by themselves, and need not kings to lord it over them; that, upon principle, men are of themselves free and as capable of governing themselves as kings are capable of governing themselves; and much more capable of governing themselves than kings can be capable of governing them.

Since all the nations were governed by kings, this new principle, from the beginning, made Rome a mark of attention to the world. And Rome was willing to be a mark of attention to the world; for of her attitude she was justly proud. Thus Rome looked upon herself, and was looked upon by other nations, and especially by oppressed peoples, as the example and conservator of liberty for the world.

When by her valuable and native faculty of self-government Rome had filled her proper home territory, and commanded the respect of the mightiest kings, she considered it to be her high prerogative to extend to neighboring peoples who were struggling against the oppressions of kings, the blessings of liberty. The first of these were the Greek States, who were ever tenacious of liberty, but who, from the example of Rome, were now tenacious of republican liberty. They were struggling peristently [sic.], and even desperately, against Philip V. of Macedon to wreak his kingly power over them.

In her native love of liberty, Rome generously espoused the cause of the struggling States of Greece, that she might extend to them, and that they might know and enjoy, the blessings of republican liberty.

Of her own free will, and wholly at her own expense, Rome sent across the seas her armies and her navies to fight the battles of the Greeks, and to deliver them from the oppression of kingships, and assure to them the great boon of liberty and the blessings of self-government.

In this Rome succeeded wonderfully. In brief campaigns she defeated Philip and the Macedonians, and forced a peace which severed from Philip's power seven of the States of Greece. And in announcing the peace, Rome made the following glowing proclamation of liberty and self-government to the Greek States:–

The Senate and people of Rome, and Titus Quintius, their general, having overcome Philip and the Macedonians, do set at liberty from all garrisons, imposts, and taxes, the Corinthians, the Locrians, the Phocians, the Phthihat-Acheans, the Magnesians, the Thessalians, and the Perrhúbians; declare them free and ordain that they shall be governed by their respective laws and usages.

All this was wonderfully pleasing to the Greeks. In the excess of their gratitude and joy they went fairly wild. But just as soon as they began to take steps to use the liberty and self-government thus so generously proclaimed, they found themselves balked by temporizings, reservations, and interpretations on the part of Rome. Rome entered the plea that since it was to her the Greek States owed their freedom, they were thereby bound to recognize the sovereignty of Rome in all their affairs.

The Greeks pointed to the plain words of the published proclamation. But Rome would not admit the plea; she would not stand by the obvious meaning of her own published words. By her subtle explanations and interpretations she reduced the proclamation to a mere platitude and a sheer pretense from the beginning. The Grecians appealed to the manifest justice of the case, and to the former acknowledged character of Rome as the example of liberty and justice to the world. But all in vain. They finally appealed to Rome direct: "Put yourself in our place, and decide how you would like it for yourself."

We hear one of the chief magistrates in the republic of the Acheans inveighed strongly, in a public assembly, against this unjust usurpation and ask by what title the Romans were empowered to assume so haughty an ascendant over them; whether their republic was not as free and independent as that of Rome, by what right the latter pretended to force the Acheans to account for their conduct; whether they would be pleased should the Acheans, in their former officiousness pretend to inquire into their affairs; and whether matters ought not to be on the same footing on both sides.

All these reflections were very reasonable, just, and unanswerable, and the Romans had no advantage in the question but force.–Rollin.

No man can deny that so far, this is a faithful sketch of the course of the republic of Rome; and no man can deny that, even to the closest detail, that course has so far been repeated, item by item, by this republic of the United States.

What, then, is the meaning of all this? Shall it be said that this is all nothing? Think on these things.

And there is more to follow.

ALONZO T. JONES.

July 17, 1901

"Ancient History Which Is Also Modern. Abandonment of the Constitution" The Signs of the Times 27, 29 , p. 3 .

WE have seen thru an article last week that with a grand flourish and promise of the extension of the blessings of republican liberty, the republic of Rome sent her armies and navies across the sea to fight the battles of peoples who were struggling for liberty against the oppressions of kingships.

We have seen her shortly and triumphantly deliver these struggling peoples from the oppressive power of kingships, and publish a proclamation promising to these peoples, liberty, self-government, and freedom from taxation–in once word independence.

And we have seen her so evade her published promise as in every sense to disregard it, and compel from those peoples an acknowledgment of the universal and perpetual sovereignty of the republic of Rome.

When the republic of Rome had gone thus far, it became essential that she should decide as to what should be done with these new territories and peoples. Since she had refused to them the self-government and independence which she had publicly promised, she was compelled, by the very necessities of the case, to decide how she herself would govern them. And this forced the question as to whether she would govern them according to the Roman constitution, or according to a new order of procedure adapted to the new circumstances; whether she should govern them with the constitution or without it.

The earlier State law of Rome knew nothing of tributary subjects. The conquered communities [in the home territory if Italy] were either sold into slavery, or merged in the Roman commonwealth, or admitted to an alliance which secured to them at least communal independence and freedom from taxation."–Mommsen. But since these people "had paid tithe and tribute to their former masters, it was, in the judgment of the shortsighted, the most judicious, and, if Rome was desirous of retaining these possessions at all, undoubtedly the most convenient, course to manage the new territories entirely in accordance with the rules" to which they had been subject under their former masters. Accordingly the Romans did not extend to the new possessions the Roman constitution, but continued there the original systems under Roman governorship. But "it was the shirt of Nessus which they inherited from the enemy."–Mommsen.

This expression "the shirt of Nessus" is a mythological reference; in the myth a shirt of Hercules was secretly tinged with the blood of the dying Nessus, which, when Hercules again put it on, caused his ruin. The thought of the historian is that when Rome would not extend to her new possessions her own constitution and the privileges of her own government, but held them as tributary subjects ruled by foreign laws, in that she took upon herself what corresponds in the myth to "the shirt of Nessus." And as in the myth that shirt proved the ruin of him who wore it, so this abandonment of her constitution and the inauguration of this colonial system, proved the ruin of the republic or Rome.

It is true that "at first the Roman government, in imposing taxes on their subjects, intended not strictly to enrich themselves, but only to cover the cost of administration and defense. . . . The fact, however, that they still maintained moderation in the imposition of burdens was of little consequence as compared with the conversion of their sovereignty into a profitable privilege at all; the FALL WAS THE SAME, whether a SINGLE APPEL WAS TAKEN or the TREE WAS PLUNDERED."–Mommsen. The historian was writing on the all of the Roman republic, not the fall of her new possessions; and he says that the Roman empire fell when she refused to extend to her new possessions and peoples her own constitution, and made those peoples tributary subjects, even tho the taxes levied were to be spent upon and within the new possessions themselves. And he declares that when that was done, the fall of the republic of Rome "was the same, whether a single apple was taken or the tree plundered;" whether the tax imposed were a single sesterce or whole talents, a single cent or millions of dollars.

Nor did the abandonment of her constitution by the republic of Rome stop with her refusal to extend it to the new possessions. Those who in that step conducted the government affairs thought to keep the constitution, and the government under it, intact at home, while refusing it to the new peoples abroad. But that step involved yet other issues, which forced the taking of yet other steps in abandonment of the constitution, in which those who were in power in the State "not only usurped in substance the government, but also remodeled the constitution according to their own views," tho "they changed not the letter but merely the practice of the existing constitution."–Mommsen.

Such was the course followed by the republic of Rome, and onward to ruin; and all the people of the United States and of the whole world have seen the same course repeated so far, step by step and item by item, in the past three years and up to date, in the course of the republic of the United States.

The course of the republic of Rome did not stop at this point; will the course of the republic of the United States stop at this point?

As a matter of already accomplished fact, the course of the republic of the United States has not even paused at this point, but has passed yet further onward in the identical course of descent of the republic of Rome.

This will be followed further next week.

ALONZO T. JONES.

July 24, 1901

"Ancient History Which Is Also Modern. Abandonment of the Constitution.–Concluded" The Signs of the Times 27, 30 , p. 11 .

WE have seen the republic of Rome deny to the peoples of her new and foreign possessions the privileges of her constitution, and make of them tributary subjects governed entirely without the constitution. We have seen that it was the thought of the responsible governmental party, that this should be done while retaining intact the constitution at home; but that the first step involved other issues which forced yet other steps in which those in power remodeled the constitution–"changing not the letter, but merely the practise of the existing constitution."

And still "punishment followed in the steps of wrong. The new provincial system NECESSITATED the appointment of governors whose position was absolutely incompatible . . . with the Roman constitution."–Mommsen.

The principle of the Roman constitution was that of self-government–government from the people themselves, by themselves; that men were capable of governing themselves, without any such thing as kingships. The theory upon which Rome's new foreign possessions were held under Roman sovereignty, and their peoples held as tributary subjects of Rome, was that those peoples were not capable of self-government. Therefore when Roman governors were appointed to those peoples, it was upon the assumption that the people could not govern themselves, and must be governed. Accordingly, was the Roman communities in the provinces took the place of the former rulers of the land, so the governor appeared there in the position of a king."–Mommsen.

Nor was it only in the theory that the Roman governors "appeared there in the position of a king."

Those peoples had been ruled by kings. Their immediate governors had been the official representatives of kings. These governors had dwelt in kingly palaces and maintained the state of kings. And now, since the whole theory of this Roman governorship was that those peoples were incapable of self-government, in order for the Roman governor to maintain the theory it become essential that he should actually hold toward the new subject peoples exactly the attitude, as well as the position, of a king. And this is why it was that "the new provincial system necessitated the appointment of governors, whose position was absolutely incompatible, not only with the welfare of the provinces, but with the Roman constitution."–Mommsen.

And up to this point followed the course of the republic of Rome has been followed by the republic of the United States. To the new possessions of the republic of the United States, governors have been appointed precisely upon the theory, and under precisely the local conditions, that the republic of Rome appointed her new governors. And how certainly the position of these new governors is not only absolutely incompatible, but is also recognized by the government to be absolutely incompatible with the United States Constitution, is made plain by the legislation of Congress respecting the government of the Philippine Islands.

February 27, 1901, there was before the Senate of the republic of the United States, for consideration and enactment, the following provision for the governing of the Philippine Islands:–

All military, civil, and judicial powers necessary to govern the Philippine Islands acquired from Spain by the treaties concluded at Paris on the tenth day of December, 1898, and at Washington on the seventh day of November, 1900, shall, until otherwise provided by Congress, be vested in such person and persons, and shall be exercised in such manner, as the President of the United States shall direct for the establishment of civil government and for maintaining and protecting the inhabitants of such islands in the free enjoyment of their liberty, property, and toleration: Provided, That all franchises granted under the authority hereof shall contain a reservation of the right to alter, amend, or repeal the same.

This provision at once merges in one "person" all governmental powers in the Philippine Islands. A fundamental principle not only of the United States Constitution but of the genius of Anglo-Saxon government is that all governmental powers shall not be vested in one person, but shall be distributed–the legislative, the judicial, and the executive powers–in departments. This principle is that absolutism in government–all governmental power lodged in one man or one set of men–is not good; and that therefore not more than one portion of governmental power shall ever be exercised by one person or set of persons, so that each department shall be a check upon the others, in the interests of liberty and the protection of the people.

Upon this principle the government of the United States consists of three co-ordinate branches–the legislative, the judicial, and the executive; and Section I of Article I of the Constitution declares:–

All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

And Section I of Article III of the Constitution says:–

The judicial power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.

It is therefore easily seen that the proposal respecting the government of the Philippine Islands is "absolutely incompatible with the" United States Constitution. For to make effective the new order of government for the new possessions, it was found necessary for the responsible power in the governments of the United States, while retaining the letter, to change the practise, of the existing Constitution. For when the Constitution definitely confines to Congress "all legislative powers" granted, and to a supreme court, and such inferior courts as may from time to time be provided, all judicial powers; and then Congress passes over to, and vests in, "such person and persons . . . as the President of the United States shall direct," all civil and judicial powers necessary to govern territory of the United States, that is nothing less than for Congress so far to abdicate its own power, and so far to take away from the courts their powers. It is also a clear abandonment of the Constitution of the United States, so far as the Philippine Islands are concerned, and, in principle, so far as any place is concerned.

Not only is this true in principle, but in the Senate, and by the Senate, it was seen to be true; and action was taken accordingly. First, an amendment was proposed to the Philippine section as follows:–

SEC.–That the Constitution of the United States is hereby extended over, and declared to be in force in, the Philippine Islands, so far as the same or any provision thereof may be applicable.

This was rejected by a vote of thirty-nine to twenty-three; not voting, twenty-six.

Afterward there was offered the following amendment:–

And provided further, That no judgment, order, nor act by any of said officials so appointed shall conflict with the Constitution and laws of the United States.

This was rejected by a vote of forty-five to twenty-five; not voting, eighteen.

After this an amendment was offered requiring that–

Every person in whom authority is vested under this grant of power shall take an oath to support the Constitution of the United States.

This also was rejected, by a vote of forty-one to twenty-five; not voting, twenty-two.

When the Constitution itself had been thus definitely excluded and abandoned in the government of the Philippine Islands, there was offered an amendment embodying, and extending to the people of the islands, the substance of the Bill of Rights contained in the first few amendments to the Constitution, as follows:–

All persons shall be bailable unless for capital offenses where the proof shall be evident or the presumption great. All fines shall be moderate, and no cruel or unusual punishment shall be inflicted. No man shall be deprived of his life, liberty, or property, but by the judgment of his peers and the law of the land. If the public exigencies make it necessary for the common preservation, to take the property of any person, or to demand his particular services, full compensation shall be made for the same. No ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, shall be made. No law shall be made which shall lay any person under restraint, burden, or ability on account of his religious opinions, provisions, or mode of worship, in all of which he to be free to maintain his own, and not burdened to those of another.

This, too, was rejected, by a vote of forty-one to twenty-three; not voting, twenty-four.

When, thus, it had been voted, over and over again, to bestow unlimited power upon such persons as the President shall name to govern the Philippine Islands, then attempt was made to limit the time and the exercise of this power. Accordingly, an amendment was offered limiting this time to March 4, 1903. But this was rejected by a vote of forty-three to twenty-six; not voting, nineteen.

When it had been so positively decided that no limited power should be given to these men,–for unlimited time,–an attempt was made to give the Filipinos a part in the government of themselves. Accordingly, an amendment was offered, as follows:–

And secure to them such participation in the affairs of the civil government so to be established as shall be consistent with the safety of the government.

But this was rejected by a vote of thirty-nine to twenty-three; not voting, twenty-six.

When it had thus been explicitly and confirmedly settled that the powers of such men as the President shall appoint to govern the Philippines, shall be so limited for all time, and shall be absolute over all people of the islands, attempt was made to save at least a vestige of constitutional liberty, as follows:–

Mr. Hoar: Mr. President there is one principle of constitutional liberty not yet slain, and I desire to give it a little chance for its life. I move the amendment which I send to the desk, to be inserted at the end of the bill.

The Presiding Officer: The Senator from Massachusetts submits an amendment, which will be stated.

The Secretary: It is proposed to add as a new section the following:–

"In the government of the Philippine Islands the person vested with legislative power shall even exercise the executive or judicial powers, or either of them; no person vested with executive powers shall ever exercise the legislative or judicial power, nor either of them; no person vested with judicial powers shall ever exercise the legislative or executive powers, or either of them; to the end there may be a government of laws and not of men.

The Presiding Officer: The question is on the amendment of the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. Hoar] to the amendment of the committee.

Mr. Jones, of Arkansas, and Mr. Pettus called for the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered, and the Secretary proceeded to call the roll.

And even this last principle of constitutional liberty was slain. It was rejected by a vote of forty-three to twenty-six; not voting, nineteen.

See the whole account in Congressional Record, dated Wednesday, Feb. 27, 1901.

As already stated, the next day but one–Friday, March 1–the House of Representatives passed the legislation as it came from the Senate, without any change whatever. And since it was all done at the demand of the executive, of course it was all proved by him when it came before him to be signed. And Monday, May 27, 1901, the Supreme Court of the United States rendered a decision likewise abandoning the Constitution and recognizing "an unrestrained possession of power on the part of Congress" with respect to the new possession.

Thus, and up to date, the republic of the United States has repeated the course of the republic of Rome, step by step and item by item, in the apostasy from government of the people to government by few or by one; from Constitutional government of absolutism; from the principle of a republic to one of monarchy.

The republic of Rome did not stop at that point. Will the republic of the United States stop at this point? Can she stop at this point?

Further consideration next week.

ALONZO T. JONES.

July 31, 1901

"Ancient History Which Is Also Modern. From Republic to Monarchy" The Signs of the Times 27, 31 , p. 3 .

WE have seen that in the abandonment of her constitution by the republic of Rome in the government of her new foreign possessions, her new system "necesitated [sic.] the appointment of governors, whose position was absolutely incompatible . . . with the Roman constitution." And all people have seen this course identically followed to date in the course of the republic of the United States.

We have seen that under the new systems adopted by the republic of Rome in the government of her new possessions and tributary subjects, the Roman "governor appeared there in the position of a "king;" and that in maintenance of the theory and the new system adopted, it was essential that the governor should in practise "actually hold toward the new subject peoples exactly the attitude, as well as the position, of a king." And tho the governing party in the State thought to keep the constitution intact at home while abandoning it abroad, they and all soon found that the constitution at home was giving way in their hands; and that as certainly as the new systems were continued, the constitution must be abandoned at home as well as abroad. And the new system was continued,–with "not the letter, but the practise of the existing constitution" wholly changed; a few men in power in the State, "usurping in substance the government, and remodeling the constitution according to their own views."

The process through which this all occurred in the republic of Rome is interesting; and, in view of the fact that Rome's course up to the point of open repudiation of her constitution and fundamental principle has already been covered in the "progress" of the republic of the United States, is also vastly important.

When the Roman appointee went out from home to the place of his governorship, he went as a republican–the representative of the republic; but when he reached the place of his governorship, "he appeared there in the position of a king;" and he maintained there the air and circumstance of king. This he was obliged to do, under the theory, and according to the system, adopted for the government of the new possessions and tributary subjects. "But it was not practicable for any length of time to be at once REPUBLICAN and KING."–Mommsen.

And, since it was not practicable for any length of time to be at once republican and king; and since in that place he appeared, and according to the theory and system under which he was there, he must appear there "in the position of a king;" it was inevitable that the republican must vanish, and only the king remain. Accordingly the governors ruled virtually as sovereign. . . . This emancipation of the supreme administrative officials from the central authority was more than HAZARDOUS. The Roman governor, placed at the head of the armies of the State, and in possession of considerable financial resources; subject to but a lax judicial control, and practically independent of the supreme administration; and impelled by a sort of necessity to separate the interests of himself and of the people whom he governed, from those of the Roman community, and to treat them as conflicting; far more resembled a Persian satrap than one of the commissioners of the Roman Senate at the time of the Samnite wars."–Mommsen.

As another inevitable consequence, this occupying the position, and playing the part of "satrap," of "sovereign," of "king," "demoralized the Roman ruling class with fearful rapidity. Haughtiness and arrogance toward the provincials were so natural in the circumstances as scarcely to form matter of reproach against the individual magistrate."–Mommsen. It actually developed in them, as their abiding character, the very spirit and disposition of "satra," "sovereign," and "king."

This would have been bad enough in its results upon the governors themselves, and the tributary subjects whom they governed, if the colonies had been the only field of the exercise of it, and if only the governors had remained permanently in those fields. But when, as was the fact, the term of the governors was short, and the rotation in the office was comparatively rapid; and when these governors returned home, and, as was also the fact, carried with them this same haughtiness and arrogance, this same spirit and disposition of "satrap," "sovereign," and "king;" then the evil was even far worse, for thus it was extended to the government and people at home. He who had developed the abiding spirit and disposition of "satra," "sovereign," and "king" abroad, remained in spirit and disposition, in haughtiness and arrogance, "satra," "sovereign," and "king," at home when he returned home. When he returned to Italy, he held toward the people of the home government the same attitude of superiority, and the same air of sovereignty, that he had held toward the tributary subjects abroad. For "the man who had just conducted a legalized military tyranny abroad, could with difficulty find his way back to the common civic level which distinguished between those who commanded and those who obeyed, but not between masters and slaves."–Mommsen.

Thus the refusal of the republic of Rome to extend her constitution abroad, destroyed the constitution at home; her refusal to extend republican principles to peoples abroad, subverted republican principles at home; her adoption of the principle of monarchy abroad, dragged her into monarchy at home. Thus it was that "punishment followed in the steps of wrong," that the "demoralization of the Roman ruling class" followed "with fearful rapidity," and the government which they themselves were conducting gave way in their own hands. And they saw that the government was giving way under their own hands; and they tried various schemes to save it. These attempts "very clearly evince the anxiety felt by the more far-seeing of the Roman statesmen as to the fruits of the seed sown. But diagnosis is not cure." All their remedies were merely aimed at results, while the great cause was left untouched. Therefore, "the internal government of the nobility continued to follow the direction once given to it; and the decay of the administration and of the financial system–the precursor of future revolutions and usurpations–steadily pursued its course, if not unnoticed, yet unchecked."–Mommsen.

They themselves finally recognized that the government was going fatally wrong; but then the tide had become too strong; they could not stem it. When they had taken the first step, they would not turn back; and now they had taken so many further steps that they could not turn back. They then consoled themselves that "destiny" was upon them, resigned to "destiny" their own intelligent responsibility, and dully allowed the government to drift on to what all the world knows was the greatest civil despotism that the world ever saw; this next, through a union with the apostate church, developing a religious despotism; and next the Roman government finding herself engulfed in the greatest ruin that ever befell an empire.

Such was the course of the republic of Rome from the point–the appointment of governors whose position was absolutely incompatible with the constitution, and who appeared in the position of a king–to which, in less than four swift years, the republic of the United States has step by step followed her.

Will this republic now turn back? Will the republic of the United States, even now, learn the "one lesson which history clearly teaches–that free nations can not govern subject provinces; if they are unable to unwilling to admit their dependencies to share their own constitution, the constitution itself will fall in pieces from mere incompetence for its duties"?

Will the republic of the United States learn this lesson and turn back? or will she too resign to "destiny" intelligent responsibility, and inevitably drift steadily downward to civil despotism, and religious despotism, and awful ruin?

Daily events are daily answering these questions, and are loudly declaring that the course of the republic of Rome, having been already followed so far and so exactly, will be followed to the end by the republic of the United States.

"For these reasons the fall of the Roman republic is exceptionally instructive to us." Will the people of the American republic be instructed?

ALONZO T. JONES.

August 7, 1901

"Ancient History Which Is Also Modern. From Degeneracy to Religious Despotism" The Signs of the Times 27, 32 , pp. 4, 5 .

WE have seen that the republic of Rome governed her foreign possessions and tributary subjects by a system that was "absolutely incompatible with the Roman constitution;" and that her constitution was abandoned, and its principles repudiated, in order that this should be done. We have seen the republic of the United States do precisely these same things; by direct legislative acts specifically and repeatedly refusing to allow any provision of her Constitution of her foreign possessions and tributary subjects.

All see that this has been done by the republic of the United States, since it has been openly done before the eyes of all; but not all see the real meaning and the true bearing of it. Most observers think that in doing this the United States has reverted to the British system of colonial government. But this is not so; indeed, if it were so, it would be complete apostasy from her own fundamental principles; for it was in absolute repudiation of the British system of colonial government that the thirteen American-British colonies founded their existence as thirteen American independent States.

But this action of the United States is not a reversion to the British system, nor to the British principles; it is a sheer abandonment of all principles of Anglo-Saxon government–a clear leap back beyond all Anglo-Saxon, all constitutional government, beyond all government even of law; even beyond Magna Charta itself.

Look at it: John Lackland was king of England. He was ruling without law, by his own will alone. This was what had been done for hundreds of years in England, since the pope had assumed the over-lordship. The king was subject only to the pope. The government was Roman with the pope supreme.

In John Lackland, the evils of that system culminated. With the support of the pope, King John declared that he would be "for the first time king and lord of England." But "the time was come when no man should be 'kind and lord in England' with a total disregard of the rights of other men; a time when a king should rule in England by law, instead of by force, or rule not at all."–Knight.

Magna Charta was drawn up and demanded of the king. "It preserved all the proper attributes of the kingly power, while it guarded against the king being a tyrant." In it the king was required to declare the great principle of the supremacy of the law of the realm, in the words: "No freeman shall be taken, or imprisoned, or disseized, or outlawed, or banished, or any otherwise destroyed; nor will we pass upon him, nor send upon him, unless by the legal judgment of his peers, or by the law of the land. To no man will we sell, to no man will we deny or delay, right or justice." He was also required to agree that if the king or any of his officers violated any of the provisions of the Charter, there might be petition for redress of grievance; and if the grievance were not redressed in forty days, the barons, "together with the community of the whole kingdom, shall distrain and distress us all the ways possible; namely, by seizing our castles, lands, possessions, and in any other way they can, till grievance is redressed according to their pleasure; saving harmless our own person, and those of our queen and children; and when it is redressed, they shall obey us as before."

Of course this was all fought by both King John and the pope–the pope excommunicating the barons, and annulling Magna Charta. But since it is always the disposition of a king to do anything rather than not be king, John surrendered; and since the pope's real power always lies in possessing kings, his opposition fell powerless with the king's surrender. And thus there was first fixed in a written constitution the Anglo-Saxon principle of government by virtue of written law, instead of by mere force and caprice of human will; the principle that government is by consent of the governed, and not by absolutism of a superior set arrogating to themselves "divine right" to rule wrong.

John's son, King Henry III., in league with the pope, also resisted the governed and rejected Magna Charta. He declared: "Whensoever, and wheresoever, and as often as it may be our pleasure, we may declare, interpret, enlarge, or diminish the aforesaid statutes, and their several parts, by our own free will, and as to us shall seem expedient for the security of us and our land." But he, as John, was firmly met by the kingdom's insistence upon the right of the people and the supremacy of the law.

In answer to King Henry's pronunciamento, the English judge Bracton set the voice of English law. "The king must not be subject to any man, but to God and the law; for the law makes him king. Let the king, therefore, give to the law what the law gives to him–dominion and power; for there is no king where will, and not law, bears rule. The king can do nothing on earth, being the minister of God, but what he can do by law. So that if the king were without a bridle–that is, the law–they ought to put a bridle upon him.

That is the principle of Anglo-Saxon government, of free government–government by consent of the governed–everywhere. That is the principle of Anglo-Saxon government, of free government–government by consent of the governed–against that principle of the apostate republic of Rome perpetuated in the Papacy, and then adopted by the apostate republic of the United States in her following the course of the apostate republic of Rome. For compare with the principle of Anglo-Saxon government, as expressed in Magna Charta and the voice of English law, and in the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution,–compare with this the principle repeatedly expressed and postively [sic.] fixed in the legislation of Congress regarding the Philippines, as already given in these articles–SIGNS of July 17, 24, 31, 1901. There see how that, when every other principle of constitutional liberty had been repudiated, and when, to prevent the slaughter of this last principle of constitutional liberty a senator offered an amendment expressly providing that "it may be a government of laws and not of men," even this was repudiated.

And this repudiation of the primary principle of Anglo-Saxon government–the principle of Magna Charta–was seen, and was deliberately sanctioned, by the United States Supreme Court in its latest decision–its decision on this great subject. Read the words of that decision:–

If those possession are inhabited by alien races, differing from us in religion, customs, laws, methods of taxation, and modes of thought, the administration of government and justice according to Anglo-Saxon principles MAY for a time BE IMPOSSIBLE; and the question at once arises whether large concessions ought not to be made for a time, that, ultimately, our own theories may be carried out and the blessings of free government under the Constitution be extended to them. We decline to hold that there is anything in the Constitution to forbid such action.

Therefore, as to principle of government, where stand the government of the United States to-day?–No longer upon the true ground of Anglo-Saxon principle; but upon the despotic ground of Roman principle only. Not upon the free principle of Magna Charta and English law, the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution; but upon the despotic principle of Rome as perpetuated in the Papacy and maintained by the popes. For back of Magna Charta there is nothing but Rome as perpetuated in the Papacy.

And by this wild plunge of the United States from her own native, and from all Anglo-Saxon, principles of government, down the declivity, and sheer into the gulf to the principles of Rome as perpetuated in the Papacy and maintained by the popes, Leo XIII. sees opened the way to the fulfilment of his declared purpose that "what the church has done for other nations, she will not do for the United States." There is no doubt that she will, for what is to hinder? Cuba, Porto Rico, and the Philippines are the peculiar ground of the new activities of the United States upon her newly chosen principles of Rome. Cuba, Porto Rico, and the Philippines are solidly Catholic, and subject to the Papacy in the Latest appointed apostolic delegate, Archbishop Chapelle. Here, the Papacy in full possession, and the United States inextricably in her net, and indeed do for this nation now what she has done for other nations. The public of Rome which had apostatized into imperial despotism, she inveigled and sunk in the abyss of eternal ruin. the barbarians who were the instruments of the divine wrath in sweeping away the corrupted Roman Empire, these also she corrupted, and filled Europe with her own anarchy throughout her own Dark Ages. And now the republic of the United States, which has so fast and so far followed the course of the republic of Rome to imperial despotism, will also sink in the abyss of eternal ruin; and through this, and at the same time, she will fall with her anarchy to the same annihilation, all the other nations.

And this dire work of Rome is made the more speedily certain from the fact that professed Protestantism in the United States and the whole world has completely espoused papal principles, stands so fully upon papal ground, and is so entirely friendly and at one with the Papacy. It has abandoned the principle of the Gospel, and puts its dependence only upon law. It has repudiated the principle of freedom of choice in the divine government–government by consent of the

501

governed–and has espoused only the principle of force. As a consequence "all that dwell upon the earth" must be compelled to worship the beast and his image, whose names are not written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. Revelation 13.

And thus "Babylon the great"–mother and daughters–"is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird;" and the "voice from heaven" sounds, "Come out of her, My people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues." She has "made all nations drunk with the wine of the wrath of her fornication;" and "by her sorceries were all nations corrupted."

ALONZO T. JONES.

August 14, 1901

"Ancient History Which Is Also Modern. The Monarchical Principle Established" The Signs of the Times 27, 33 , p. 5 .

WE have seen that the late decision of the Supreme Court of the United States on the subject of the new possessions, recognized "an unrestrained possession of power on the part of Congress." We have seen that it even connects and declares that "the administration of government and justice according to Anglo-Saxon principles, may for a time be impossible."

We have seen that the court thus abandons not only the American, but even the Anglo-Saxon, principle of government; and places the United States upon the Roman, absolute, and monarchical principle solely.

And yet this is not a new position on the part of that court; nor is this principle new in decisions of the court. Nearly eleven years before this decision was rendered, the same court rendered a decision in which it took the same position and declared substantially the same principles.

May 19, 1890, the Supreme Court of the United States rendered a decision in which "the unrestrained possession of power on the part of Congress"–the absolute power of Congress–"was recognized, approved, and established. It declared the "full and perfect right" of Congress to repeal a charter, dissolve a corporation, and confiscate the property of such corporation, of its own free will and of its own nation, "independent" of any limitation of law set even by Congress itself, or of any violation of law or charter by the corporation. The exact words of the court are as follows:–

Congress, for good and sufficient reasons of its own, independent of that limitation [a previous act of Congress] and of any violation of it [by the corporation], had a full and perfect right to repeal its [the corporation's] charter and abrogate its corporate existence, which of course depended upon its charter.

Than that, how could any power be more completely absolute? And that at the time the decision was recognized as establishing the power of Congress as absolute, is proved by the words of the Chief Justice in a dissenting opinion, as follows:–

In my opinion, Congress is restrained, not merely by the limitation expressed in the Constitution, but also by the absence of any grant of power, expressed or implied, in that instrument. And no such power as that involved in the act of Congress under consideration is conferred by the Constitution, nor in any clause pointed out as its legitimate source. I regard it of vital consequence that absolute power shall never be awarded as belonging, under our form of government, to any one of its departments.

Thus in 1890, by Supreme Court decision, was the independent and absolute power of Congress declared. Is it at all strange that, in 1901, by the same court, that independent and absolute power should have been confirmed and established?

In 1890 the right of Congress under this independent and absolute power to confiscate the property of a corporation, even without any violation of its charter by the corporation, was settled by the court's making Congress "the sovereign authority" and "parens patrie"–parent of the country, or father of the people–corresponding to "the king" in Britain and other European countries, and to the emperor in Rome, upon the principles "found embedded in the civil law of Rome, in the laws of the European nations, and especially in the laws of that nation from which our institutions are derived"–Britain.

This at one stroke set aside the people as sovereign, and set up Congress as sovereign, as king, and as emperor, in place of the people. It swept away government of the people, and made government to be of a "royal" and absolute authority, as parens patrie, only lodged in "the legislature" instead of a sole royal person. The words of the court, stating this monarchical principle as the principle of the government of the United States, are as follows:–

It may be contended that, in this country, there is no royal person to act as parens patrie, and to give direction for the application of charities which can not be administered by the court. It is true we have no such chief magistrate. But here the legislative is the parens patrie, and unless restrained by Constitutional limitations, the legislature possesses all the powers in this regard which the sovereign possesses in England.

In reply to this, the words of the Chief Justice, in his dissenting opinion, concurred in by Justices Field and Lamar, are as follows:–

Nor is there here any counterpart in Congressional power to the exercise royal prerogative in the disposition of a charity. If this property was accumulated for purposes declared illegal, that does not justify its arbitrary disposition by judicial legislation. In my judgment, its diversion under this act of Congress is in contravention of specific limitations in the Constitution: unauthorized, expressly or by implication, by any of its provisions; and in disregard of the fundamental principle that the legislative power of the United States as exercised by the agents of the people of the republic is delegated and not inherent.

In reviewing that Supreme Court decision of May 19, 1890, the writer of this present article wrote of it, May 7, 1891, the following words:–

If this doctrine shall be maintained, so that it becomes a principle of American law, and shall become established as a principle of Government here, then the revolution backwards is complete; government of the people is gone; and that of a sovereign parent of the people is put in its place. Then the doctrine of the Declaration of Independence and of the Constitution of the United States is subverted and the doctrine of sovereignty, absolutism, and paternalism, is established in its stead. Then also Bancroft's history in the place above cited, [Is it asked, Who is the sovereign of the United States?–The words "sovereign" and "subjects" are unknown to the Constitution] will need to be revised so that it shall read as follows: "Is it asked, Who is the sovereign of the United States? The Legislature is the sovereign and the people are subjects."

And now experience has demonstrated that the doctrine and principle of that Supreme Court decision of May 19, 1890, has been maintained by both the court and the government, and has become in practise the established principle of the government; the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution have been deliberately repudiated; the Supreme Court, in 1901, has reiterated the principles of its monarchical decision of 1890; and, finally, the legislature of this republic of the United States has, in the year 1901, repeated, for the new possessions and tributary subjects, the action of the Legislature of the republic of Rome in B. C. 46-44 and 31 B. C.- 23 A. D., for the whole empire-republic–it has lodged in one man "all military, civil, and judicial powers."

Thus the sovereign power which in May, 1890, the Supreme Court transferred from the people to "the legislature," was in February and March, 1901, transferred by that "legislature-sovereign" from itself to one man; for only a limited part of the jurisdiction of the United States, it is true, just now; but the principle and procedure once established, how long before it will be extended to more, and finally to all of this empire-republic? And thus a one-man power in the republic of the United States looms up apace, in exact repetition of the court of the republic of Rome; and that one-man power unrestrained, absolute; and this all made strictly legal by official acts and decisions of the legislative and judicial branches of the government itself.

Thus steadily as the march of time itself, and as swiftly as the rush of these hurrying times, is the republic of the United States marching over the course of the republic of Rome, even to the last item.

And the late decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, as well as the governmental course which it confirmed, is but the confirmation and logical continuation of the identical scheme of monarchical absolutism announced May 19, 1901, by that same court. There is nothing new in it.

These studies will be concluded next week, in the notice of another and kindred decision of the Supreme Court of the United States.

A. T. JONES.

August 21, 1901

"Ancient History Which Is Also Modern. The Adoption of 'Christianity' as the National Religion" The Signs of the Times 27, 34 , pp. 4, 5 .

FROM a government of the people according to constitutional principles, the republic of Rome degenerated to a monarchical absolutism, according to the wilful and vicious caprice of the one man who had the ill fate to be the monarch.

After that the next distinct governmental departure was the formation of a union with the apostate church and the adoption of that "Christianity" as the national religion.

We have seen that the Supreme Court of the United States in decision of May 19, 1890, confirmed by decision of May 27, 1901, established the doctrine of monarchical absolutism as a recognized governmental principle of the republic of the United States; and that that monarchical absolutism has already begun to be merged in one man who is to govern, not according to constitution or law, but according to will only.

And that decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, May 19, 1890, was followed Feb. 29, 1892, by a decision of the same Supreme Court establishing "Christianity, general Christianity," as the national religion, and accordingly declaring that "this is a Christian nation."

And as the principle of monarchical absolutism of the Supreme Court decision of May 19, 1890, has been followed in national action to the very brink of imperial absolutism; so the principle of established "Christianity" of the Supreme Court decision of Feb. 29, 1892, has also been followed in national action to the point of tantamount declaration of independence of the government of God, and to the very brink of an imperial "Christian" absolutism, passing itself off for God"–its will as the will of God, its voice as the voice of God, its power as the power of God.

And as the principle of monarchical absolutism, espoused by the Supreme Court May 19, 1890, and followed in national action unto 1901, was confirmed by decision of the same Supreme Court May 27, 1901; so the principle of imperial "Christian" absolutism espoused by the Supreme Court Feb. 29, 1892, and followed in national action even to the very fulness of the government's actually passing itself off for God–its will as the will of God, its voice as the voice of God, its power as the power of God–will, if ever brought to the test, assuredly be confirmed by the same Supreme Court.

Yet, in order for the government to go to this full length in the practise of imperial "Christian" absolutism, it is not really necessary that the matter should be tested and confirmed by further decision of the Supreme Court, for all this was fully sanctioned by the court in its argument and citations in its decision of Feb. 29, 1892, which declared that "this is a Christian nation." For by that decision "the Christian religion," "Christianity, general Christianity," is legally recognized and declared to be the established religion of the United States, and that consequently "this is a Christian nation." Also by that decision, "in language more or less emphatic," there is justified, and all as the "meaning" of the Constitution of the United States, (1) the maintenance of the discipline of the churches by the civil power; (2) the requirement of the religious oath; (3) the requirement of the religious test oath as a qualification for office; (4) public taxation for the support of religion and religious teachers; (5) the requirement of a belief in the Trinity and the inspiration of "the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments;" (6) the guilt of blasphemy upon every one who speaks or acts in contempt of the established religion; and (7) laws for the observance of Sunday as the Sabbath, with the general cessation of all "secular business."

Thus that decision of Feb. 29, 1892, completely justifies beforehand the veriest imperial "Christian" absolutism that could ever be exercised or devised. Consequently it is not at all necessary that there should be a confirming decision to make effective such national action; yet, if the matter shall be brought to test, there can be no doubt whatever that a confirming decision will be rendered of the principles of imperial "Christian" absolutism of the decision of Feb. 29, 1892, as has been rendered confirmatory of the principles of monarchical absolutism of the decision of May 19, 1890. And this identical thing is even foreshadowed in the decision of May 27, 1901. For therein are written the following words:–

There is a clear distinction between prohibitions [of the Constitution] as go to the very root of the power of Congress to act at all, irrespective of time or place, and such as are operative only "throughout the United States, or among the several States.

Thus, when the Constitution declares that "no bill of attainder of ex post facto law" shall be passed; and that "no title of nobility shall be granted to the United States;" it goes to the competency of Congress to pass a bill of that description. Perhaps the same remark may apply to the first amendment that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Etc.

"Perhaps"! Note the wide possibilities opened by that "Perhaps." Only "perhaps" Congress is incompetent to make laws respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. This statement is in itself almost an open confirmation of and is in exact harmony with, the decision of Feb. 29, 1892, making "Christianity, general Christianity," the national religion and therefore this "a Christian nation."

Thus by the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States May 19, 1890, and Feb. 29, 1892, the government of the United States was committed, and delivered over to the principles of monarchical absolutism both civil and religious. And nothing that has since occurred in national action in the manifestation of monarchical absolutism, either civil or religious, has been in principle new; and nothing that shall or can ever occur in the manifestation of monarchical absolutism, either civil or religious, will or can be in principle new. It all has been, and it all will be, but the plain manifestation in action, the simple logical expression, of the principles espoused as the fundamental principles of the nation by the Supreme Court of the nation in the decisions of May 19, 1890, and Feb. 29, 1892.

And even the decision of Feb. 29, 1892, making the United States "a Christian nation," was hardly new; for the decision of May 19, 1890, establishing the principles of monarchical absolutism, was made to receive its inspiration from "the spirit of Christianity." So that the decision of Feb. 29, 1892, was itself more of a confirmation of "the spirit of Christianity" in monarchical absolutism of the decision of May 19, 1890, than it was in itself a new and original decision of May 19, 1890, that in writing upon the subject in June, 1891, the writer of this present article said: "But no religious despotism can ever be established over a free people. It were literally impossible to establish a religious despotism over the royal freemen who made the Declaration of Independence and the American Constitution. This gradual but steady perversion and subversion of the genuine principles of the government as established by our forefathers, this steady inculcating of the principles of paternalism, is but sowing the seeds of a despotism–whether of the many, of the few, or of the one, it matters not–which at the opportune moment will be joined by the political preachers, and out of the alliance thus formed there will come the religious despotism in the perfect likeness of the one before it,–in Rome. And in less than a year the Supreme Court itself put forth its decision–Feb. 29, 1892–establishing "Christianity, general Christianity," as the national religion, and declaring this "a Christian nation," and thus opened the door which the political preachers immediately entered, and demanded and secured governmental action, in behalf of church institutions and observances.

It is notable also that in all these decisions–May 19, 1890, Feb. 29, 1892, and May 27, 1901–Rome, both civil and religious; Rome, both Pagan and Papal, is the original of the principles espoused,–in the first two by definite citation, and in the last by inevitable, historical fact. And now that the principle of imperial "Christian" absolutism, after the example of Rome, has been thus established as the principle of the government of the United States, the only thing that remains to complete the active course of Rome is for the government of the United States to make practical provision for Papal–Rome's,–falsehood and delusions.

The effect of the establishment of that imperial "Christian" absolutism in the Roman empire was so to fill the empire with hypocritical Pharisaic iniquity, as speedily to sink it in awful and utter ruin. And since in the United States this course of Rome has been followed, and Rome's history, in principle and in practise, has been repeated unto the very last item, civil and religious, will this nation, can this nation now escape the repetition of that last item, and through it the result in ruin that came to Rome because of that item?

Therefore, sixteen years ago, in 1885, it was published that "when our government shall repudiate every principle of its Constitution as a Protestant and republican government, and shall make provision for the propagation of papal falsehoods and delusions, we may know that the time of the marvelous working of Satan is at hand, and that the end is near." And this "national apostasy will mean national ruin." It can not mean anything else. That is the one only thing that is

553

meant to the republic of Rome, degenerated to monarchical absolutism and imperial "Christian" despotism; that is the one only thing that it can mean to the republic of the United States, traveling precisely the same course unto the brink of the last step that precedes ruin.

And all this is shown in the Scriptures. In the Scriptures, Rome from beginning to end–Rome Pagan and Papal–is "the Beast." Dan. 7:7, 11; Rev.13:1-8; 19:19, 20. And in the last days, in the time of the end, there arises "another beast," that develops "an image of the Beast,"–that is, an image of Rome. The only thing out of which can come an image of Rome is a republic degenerating into empire, monarchical absolutism and imperial "Christian" despotism; then sinking in utter ruin. That is only what Rome was; and over that same course, unto the verge of the very last step that precedes ruin, this republic of the United States has already traveled in the perfect-likeness of the course of the republic of Rome. Rome was the Beast; this is, and will continue to be, the very Image of the Beast. Rev. 13:11-18.

Accordingly, just now there is due to the world the message of God, proclaimed with a mighty voice. "If any man worship the Beast and his Image, and receive his mark in his forehead or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of His indignation. . . . Here is the patience of the saints; here are they that keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus. . . . And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of man, having on His head a golden crown, and in His hand a sharp sickle. And another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to Him that sat on the cloud, Thrust in Thy sickle, and reap; for the time is come for Thee to reap; for the harvest of the earth is ripe. And He that sat on the cloud thrust in His sickle on the earth, and the earth was reaped." Rev. 14:9-16.

"And the Beast was taken, and with him the false prophet [the Image of the Beast] that wrought miracles before him; . . . these both were cast alive into a lake of fire, burning with brimstone," both so together are consumed "with the spirit of His mouth," and destroyed with "the brightness of His coming."

The course of the republic of Rome has been repeated by the republic of the United States unto the brink of the last downward plunge that preceded Rome's ruin. That last step of the course of the republic of Rome will be repeated by the republic of the United States. And then utter ruin will be the inevitable consequence to the republic of the United States, as it was to the republic of Rome.

"Get ready, get ready, get ready!"

ALONZO T. JONES.

The Signs of the Times, Vol. 28 (1902)

March 12, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. Causes of the Captivity" The Signs of the Times 28, 11 , p. 2, 3 .

BY ALONZO TREVIER JONE

THERE is hardly any portion of the Bible story that receives less attention than that relating to the period of the restoration of Israel to their own land, from the captivity to Babylon. And yet there is hardly any portion of the Bible story that is more full of the very life and movement of God in human affairs; hardly any portion more full of valuable lessons. Indeed, there is no portion of the Bible story so full as is this of striking illustrations of how, how promptly and how triumphantly, God can interpose with kings and powers in behalf of His cause and His people in the earth.

For this reason the SIGNS OF THE TIMES will publish, beginning with this article, a series of studies of that interesting and important part of the Bible story. The books of the Bible especially embraced in this are, Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. The period of the world covered in the narrative is about from B. C. 536 to the crucifixion.

God had brought Israel out of Egypt, and, separated from all the nations, had placed them in the land of Canaan, "the glory of all lands," to be the light of the world. The chief reason why He placed them in the land of Canaan–Palestine–is that then, and for ages afterward, that little country was the pivot of the world. Between Egypt and the eastern and northern nations there was then, and for ages afterward, constant intercourse, practically all of which necessarily passed through Palestine. Yet later, when the weight of empire passed to the west, still Palestine was the center around which swirled the grand sweep of the world's affairs.

At that center of the world's great currents God set His people to be His light to all the nations, whose people by thus constantly passing and repassing through that land, should behold that blessed people and glorious land, and be led to say, "Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people" (Deut. 4:6); and thus be led to inquire for the source of this wisdom and understanding, this prosperity and glory, and so find the true God, and turn form idolatry to the worship of Him. God intended that by His splendid presence abiding with them, His people should thus influence all the nations for good; and thus to carry on His fulfilment of His promise to Abraham, "In thee shall all nations of be blessed."

Therefore, of Israel God had said, "Lo, the people shall dwell alone, and shall not be reckoned among the nations." Num. 23:9. But the people would not have it so. They exclaimed and insisted, "Make us a king," "that we may be like all the nations." 1 Sam. 8:4-20. They had their way, they rejected God, and not only became "like all the nations," but did "worse than the heathen" round them. And then, as they became like the nations that were in that land before them, likewise as with those nations the land could no longer endure them, and so must spew them out, as it had spewed out the nations before them. They were carried captive to Babylon, and the land was left desolate that it might have rest from the sickening iniquities with which it had been afflicted.

The special sins that brought the captivity of Israel and the desolation of the land were:–

1. Oppression and injustice. "O house of David, thus saith the Lord, Execute judgment in the morning, and deliver him that is spoiled out of the hand of the oppressor, lest My fury go out like fire, and burn that none can quench it, because of the evil of your doings." Jer. 21:12. "Thus saith the Lord, Execute ye judgment and righteousness, and delvier the spoiled out of the hand of the oppressor; and do no wrong, do no violence to the stranger, the fatherless, nor the widow, neither shed innocent blood in this place," "then will I cause you to dwell in this place." Jer. 22:3; 7:5-7.

2. Oppressing and defrauding the laborer in his wages, while they in their wealth reveled in luxury. "Woe unto him that buildeth his house by unrighteousness, and his chambers by wrong; that useth his neighbor's service without wages, and giveth him not for his work; that saith, I will build me a wide house and large chamgers, and cutteth him out windows; and it is ceiled with cedar, and painted with vermillion." Jer. 22:13, 14.

3. Neglect of the poor. "Shalt thou reign, because thou closest thyself in cedar? did not thy father eat and drink, and do judgment and justice, and then it was well with him? He judged the cause of the poor and needy; then it was well with him: was not this to know Me? saith the Lord. But thine eyes and thine heart are not but for thy covetousness." Jer. 22:15-17.

4. Disregard of the Sabbath. Jer. 17:21-27.

5. The worship of the sun, with all the abominations that go with it. Eze. 8:3-18.

6. Rejection of the word and message of the Lord in reproof, counsel, and warning. Jer. 26:1-23; 36:22, 23; 37:1-21; 38:1-25.

But the very crowning abomination of all was:–

7. Their making the temple of God, and the forms of worship of the Lord, their confidence of salvation, while practising all those other iniquities and abominations their holding God to a strict accountability for His promises, while they ran perfect riot against every princept upon which those promises could possibly rest; their making capital of God's temple, and ordinances, and services designed to put away sin, as security in their corruptible abandon in the indulgence of sin: "Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, Amend your ways and your doings, and I will cause you to dwell in this place. Trust ye not to lying words, saying, The temple of the Lord. The temple of the Lord. The temple of the Lord, are these." [Luther's translation: "Here is the Lord's temple. Here is the Lord's temple. Here is the Lord's temple."] Jer. 7:3, 4. "Hear this, I pray you, ye heads of the house of Jacob, and princes of the house of Israel, that abhor judgment, and pervert all equity. They build up Zion with blood, and Jerusalem with iniquity. The heads thereof judge for reward, and the priests thereof teach for hire, and the prophets thereof divine for money: yet will they lean upon the Lord, and

163

say, Is not the Lord among us? none evil can come upon us." Micah 3:9-12. "Behold, ye trust in lying words, that cannot profit. Will ye steal, murder, and commit adultery, and swear falsely, and burn incense unto Baal, and walk after other gods whom ye know not; and come and stand before me in this house, which is called by My name, and say, We are delivered to do all these abominations? ["There is no danger to us, tho, or as long as, we do such abominations."–Luther's Translation.] Is this house, which is called by My name, become a den of robbers [den of murderers, a resort of cut throats–German] in your eyes? Behold, even I have seen it, saith the Lord." Jer. 7:8-11.

"Therefore shall Zion for your sake be plowed as a field, and Jerusalem shall become heaps, and the mountain of the house [of the Lord] as the high places of the forest." Micah 3:12. "G go ye now unto my place which [was] in Shiloh, where I set my name at the first, and see what I did to it for the wickedness of my people Israel. And now, because ye have done all these works, saith the Lord, and I spake unto you, rising up early and speaking, but ye heard not; and I called you, but ye answered not; therefore will I do unto this house, which is called by My name, wherein ye trust, and unto the place which I gave to you and to your fathers, as I have done to Shiloh. And I will cast you out of My sight, as I have cast out all your brethren, even the whole seed of Ephraim. Therefore pray not thou for this people, neither lift up cry nor prayer for them, neither make intercession to Me: for I will not hear thee." Jer. 7:12-16.

Because of that deplorable, even desperate, condition of things in Jerusalem, the Lord of Jerusalem was compelled to liken her to Sodom, declaring that she and Sodom were sisters; and further: "As I live, saith the Lord God, Sodom thy sister hath not done, she nor her daughters, as thou hast done, thou and thy daughters. Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good." Eze. 16:48-50. And consequently Ezekiel saw in a vision a man with a writer's ink horn by his side, passing throughout Jerusalem, setting a mark upon the foreheads of the men who were sighing and crying for all the abominations that were done therein. Following him were six other men, each with a slaughter-weapon in his hand, to "slay utterly" all to whom they should come, except that they were to "come near any man upon whom is the mark." Eze. 9:1-7.

Now this whole narrative has its parallel in the last days, even in our own time. General wickedness prevails (Matt. 24:12; 2 Tim. 3:1-3), oppression, injustice, defrauding the laborer in his wages to increase the overloaded coffers of the rich, who revel in luxury–all this is indulged (James 5:1-8); in the midst of this abundance to boundless millions there is such neglect of the poor that God is obliged to turn His attention especially to them (Luke 14:21-23); the Sabbath is disregarded (Isa. 56:1, 2; 58:13, 14); the sun–in the Sunday–is honored (Dan. 7:25; Rev. 14:9-12); the Word of God in counsel and warning, concerning all the evil and impending destruction, is rejected (2 Peter 3:3-7, 10-14; Matt. 24:37-39); and, also there prevails the same chief abomination of all–the indulgence of a whole catalog of iniquities under the form and profession of godliness (2 Tim. 3:1-5);–so that, looking again upon it all, God is compelled to liken it also to Sodom, because the last days of the world are as the last days of Sodom. "Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot . . . even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed." "The same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all. Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed." Luke 17:28, 29, 30.

And while this destruction and desolation is impending, the heavenly messenger (Rev. 7:2, 3) passes through the world, setting the royal seal–the heavenly mark–upon the servants of God, who are sighing and crying for all the abominations that are done in the land; and after him pass the messengers of judgment, slaying utterly all upon whom is not found the mark. Rev. 14:9, 10; 15:1; 16:1-21.

Thus certainly and thus fully does the period which culminated in the destruction of Jerusalem and the desolation of that land, contain lessons of deep meaning to the people of God of all times, and especially of the last days.

[The next article of the series is entitled, "The Release from Captivity."]

March 19, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. The Release from Captivity" The Signs of the Times 28, 12 , p. 1, 2 .

BY ALONZO TREVIER JONE

ISRAEL had frustrated God's purpose to enlighten all the nations by them in the land where He had planted them; yet He would fulfil His purpose and His promise to Abraham, and enlighten all the nations through them in the lands where He had scattered them.

By unbelief and iniquity Israel, when planted in their own land, had lost the power to arrest and command the attention of all the nations, that the nations might consider God and His wonderful works and ways with the children of man, for now, as they are scattered among the nations, God would use them to enlighten those who had acquired the power to arrest and command the attention of all the nations, and thus through them would still cuase all nations to consider the wonderful works and ways of God with the children of men.

Through Daniel and his three brethren in captivity, God enlightened king Nebuchadnezzar who was ruler over all the nations, and by king Nebuchadnezzar twice distinctly proclaimed to all people, nations, and languages His kindness, His justice, His power, His glory, and His kingdom and dominion. Dan. 3:29; 4:1-3, 34-37.

Nebuchadnezzar and his empire, and even the last vestige of his kingdom, passed away. Another kingdom and empire took the dominion of the world. "Darius the Median took the kingdom." Dan. 5:31. As the result of a conspiracy, Daniel was cast to the hungry lions in their den. But God shut the lions' mouths that they did him no hurt; because innocency was found in him, and because he believed in his God. this so fixed upon God as the only true and living God, the heart of king Darius the Mede, who was now king of all the nations, that he also "wrote unto all people, nations, and languages, that dwell in all the earth," proclaiming that "the God of Daniel" "is the living God, and steadfast forever, and His kingdom that which shall not be destroyed, and His dominion shall be even unto the end. He delivereth and rescueth, and He worketh signs and wonders in heaven and in earth." Dan. 6:25-27.

"In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, of the seed of the Medes, which was made king over the realm of the Chaldeans; in the first year of his reign I Daniel understood by books the number of the years, whereof the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem." Dan. 9:1, 2. One thing that had caused Daniel to be most deeply interested in this subject was the word of Palmoni, the wonderful numberer in the vision of Daniel 8, given to him in the third year of Belshazzar, saying, "Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed." Dan. 8:14.

This two thousand and three hundred days to the cleansing of the sanctuary caused Daniel great anxiety. He could not understand it. The temple at Jerusalem was a ruin, and had so lain for more than fifty years. Was it possible that it should so lie for yet two thousand and three hundred years, before the ruins should be cleared away and the temple restored? To this the book of Jeremiah answered, No: "After seventy years be accomplished at Babylon I will visit you, and perform My good word toward you, in causing you to return to this place." Jer. 29:10. Could it be possible, then, that they should return, and yet the temple be not restored for so long? To this the book of Isaiah answered, No for therein God had declared to Jerusalem, "Thou shal be built; and to the temple, Thy foundation shall be laid?" and that this should be in the time of Cyrus, and Cyrus was now living and sixty years old.

What, then, could mean that word, "Unto two thousand and three hundred days, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed? Was there any connection between that and the return from captivity and the rebuilding of the city and temple? This problem was beyond solution by human thought. Therefore–

"I set my face unto the Lord God, to seek by prayer and supplications, with fasting; and sackcloth, and ashes . . . [and] whiles I was speaking in prayer, even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning [Dan. 8:16], being caused to fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation." Dan. 9:3, 21.

"And he informed me, and talked with me, and said, O Daniel, I am now come forth to give thee skill and understanding. At the beginning of thy supplications the commandment came forth, and I am come to show thee; for thou art greatly beloved: therefore understand the matter, and consider the vision. Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

"Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the

175

street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for Himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. And He shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week He shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations He shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate." Dan. 9:22-27.

Within two years, in 536, died Darius the Mede, and was immediately succeeded by Cyrus the Persian, of the same united and universal kingdom of the Medes and Persians. Cyrus had been the commander of the Medo-Persian armies in the destruction of the empire and kingdom of Babylon. At that time he was an idolater. Yet long before that, even one hundred and fourteen years before he was born, the God of Israel had called him by name; and had recorded a message addressed to him personally. And this is the message: "Thus saith the Lord to His anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him; and I will loose the loins of kings, to open before him the two leaved gates; and the gates shall not be shut; I will go before thee, and make the crooked places straight: I will break in pieces the gates of brass, and cut in sunder the bars of iron: and I will give thee the treasures of darkness, and hidden riches of secret places, that thou mayest know that I, the Lord, which call thee by thy name, am the God of Israel. For Jacob My servant's sake, and Israel Mine elect, I have even called thee by thy name: I have surnamed thee, tho thou hast not known me." Isa. 45:1-4.

Thus the Lord revealed Himself to Cyrus as the God of Israel. But since Cyrus was an idolater, God must further reveal Himself to him as the only true and living God. This He did in the further word, "I am the Lord, and there is none else, there is no God beside Me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known Me: that they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside Me. I am the Lord, and there is none else." Verses 5, 6.

God thus revealed Himself to Cyrus as the God of Israel, and as the only true God; it remained to reveal to Cyrus that He, the God of Israel, and the only true God, was distinct from and above the gods that Cyrus had worshiped. Therefore the Lord revealed Himself yet further, "I form the light, and create darkness. I make peace, and create evil." Verse 7. The point in this is–

1. The Persians, in their religious system, recognized two original principles–good and evil. Their conception of good and evil, however, did not rise to the height of moral and spiritual good and evil, or righteousness and sin, as is revealed by the Lord, rather as men naturally conceive of good and evil as manifested in prosperity and adversity, tranquillity and disturbance. Therefore when the Lord would show to Cyrus that He is over all, He said, "I make peace, and create evil." That is, "I make tranquillity and create disturbance; I give prosperity and send adversity."

2. The Persians held that their principle of good was represented in light; and the principle of evil in darkness. Therefore when the Lord would reveal to Cyrus the Persian that He is alone all, He said, "I form the light, and create darkness."

The night that the city of Babylon was captured and Belshazzar slain, before the capture king Belshazzar had made Daniel the first man of the empire after the two kings, Belshazzar and his father. Then when the city was taken, Belshazzar slain, and his father a captive, this left Daniel the first man of the kingdom, Darius and Cyrus, the new rulers, found Daniel in his royal robe of scarlet with his insignia of office, the "chain of gold about his neck." They found him so intelligent in all the affairs of the vanished kingdom that they immediately took him into their council, and gave to him the chief place in their organization of the kingdom.

And when Cyrus thus met Daniel, Daniel showed to him the word of the Lord, written to him by Isaiah one hundred and seventy-four years before. The message was so direct and so personal, and the revelation so plain and indisputable, that Cyrus accepted and acknowledged God as "the Lord God of heaven," and declared, "He is the God."

There was also read to Cyrus the further word of the Lord by Isaiah to him, "That saith of Cyrus, He is My shepherd, and shall perform all My pleasure. . . . I have raised him in righteousness, and I will direct all his ways; he shall build My city, and he shall let go My captives, not for price nor reward, saith the Lord of hosts." Isa. 44:28; 45:13. This message, too, Cyrus accepted from the Lord; and in 536, when Cyrus came to the throne of the empire, that very year expired the seventy years' captivity, and in that very year Cyrus issued the decree and proclamation throughout the whole empire, releasing from captivity all the people of Israel, and calling them to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the city, and especially the house of the Lord.

And here is a copy of that decree:–

"Thus saith Cyrus king of Persia, The Lord God of heaven hath given me all the kingdoms of the earth; and He hath charged me to build Him an house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Who is there among you of all his people? his God be with him, and let him go up to Jerusalem, which is in Judah, and build the house of the Lord God of Israel, He is the God, which is in Jerusalem. And whosoever remaineth in any place where he sojourneth, let the men of his place help him with silver, and with gold, and with goods, and with beasts, beside the freewill offering for the house of God that is in Jerusalem."

"Let the house be builded, the place where they offered sacrifices, and let the foundations thereof be strongly laid; the height thereof threescore cubits, and the breadth thereof threescore cubits; with three rows of great stones, and a row of new timber: and let the expenses be given out of the king's house: and also let the golden and silver vessels of the house of God, which Nebuchadnezzar took forth out of the temple which is at Jerusalem, and brought unto Babylon, be restored, and brought again unto the temple which is at Jerusalem, every one to his place, and place them in the house of God." Ezra 1:2-4; 6:3-5.

That decree was published by "proclamation throughout all his kingdom," and was put "also in writings;" and was deposited among the archives of the kingdom in the palace at Ectutana, the Median capital of the empire. "Then rose up the chief of the fathers of Judah and Benjamin, and the priests, and the Levites, with all them whose spirit God had raised, to go up to build the house of the Lord which is in Jerusalem. And all they that were about them strengthened their hands with vessels of silver, with gold, with goods, and with beasts, and with precious things, beside all that was willingly offered."

"Also Cyrus the king brought forth the vessels of the house of the Lord, which Nebuchadnezzar had brought forth out of Jerusalem, and had put them in the house of his gods; even those did Cyrus king of Persia bring forth by the hand of Mithredath the treasurer, and numbered them unto Sheshbazzar, the prince of Judah. . . . All the vessels of gold and of silver were five thousand and four hundred. All these did Sheshbazzar bring up with them of the captivity that were brought up from Babylon unto Jerusalem." Ezra 1:7-11.

And of the people who returned to Jerusalem:–

"The whole congregation together was forty and two thousand three hundred and threescore, beside their servants and their maids, of whom there were seven thousand three hundred thirty and seven: and there were among them two hundred singing men and singing women. . . . And some of the chief of the fathers, when they came to the house of the Lord which is at Jerusalem, offered freely for the house of God to set it up in his place: they gave after their ability unto the treasure of the work threescore and one thousand drams of gold, and five thousand pound of silver, and one hundred priests' garments. So the priests, and the Levites, and some of the people, and the singers, and the porters, and the Nethinims, dwelt in their cities, and all Israel in their cities." Ezra 2:64-70.

The restoration of Israel had begun.

March 26, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. Troublous Times" The Signs of the Times 28, 13 , p. 3, 4 .

BY ALONZO TREVIER JONE

IT seems to have been about midsummer, or late in the summer of B. C. 536, when the returned of isarel arrived in their own country, and had taken up their abode and dwelt in their cities; for their first assembly at Jerusalem for worship was at the regular annual feast of the memorial of blowing of trumpets on the first day of the seventh month.

On that day "the people gathered themselves together as one man to Jerusalem;" and under the direction of Joshua, the high priest, and Zerubbabel, and their brethren, they "builded the altar of the God of Israel, to offer burnt offerings thereon, as it is written in the law of Moses the man of God. And they set the altar upon his bases; for fear was upon them because of the people of those countries: and they offered burnt offerings thereon unto the Lord, even burnt offerings morning and evening." Ezra 3:1-3.

They could not celebrate the day of atonement–the tenth day of the seventh month–in that order, because there was not temple of house yet built; but they kept the Feast of Tabernacles (the fifteenth to the twenty-second of the seventh month), as it is written, and offered the daily burnt-offerings by number, according to the custom, as the duty of every day required; and afterward offered the continual burnt-offering, both of the new moons, and of all the set feasts of the Lord that were consecrated, and of every one that willingly offered a free-will offering unto the Lord. From the first day of the seventh month began they to offer burnt-offerings unto the Lord.

"But the foundation of the temple of the Lord was not yet laid." However, preparations were immediately begun for the building of the temple. Masons and carpenters were regularly employed, and set to work to prepare the stones and timber. They also established with Tyre and Zidon trade of provisions–food, drink, and oil–for cedar trees for the temple, to be brought from Lebanon by sea and delivered at Joppa, "according to the grant that they had of Cyrus king of Persia."

This work of preparation continued till "the second month" of the "second year of their coming unto the house of God at Jerusalem," when they actually began work in building the temple.

"And when the builders laid the foundation of the temple of the Lord, they set the priests in their apparel with trumpets, and the Levites the sons of Asaph with cymbals, to praise the Lord, after the ordinance of David king of Israel. And they sang together by course in praising and giving thanks unto the Lord; because he is good, for his mercy endureth for ever toward Israel.

"And all the people shouted with a great shout, when they praised the Lord, because the foundation of the house of the Lord was laid. But many of the priests and Levites and chief of the fathers, who were ancient men, that had seen the first house, when the foundation of this house was laid before their eyes, wept with a loud voice; and many shouted aloud for joy: so that the people could not discern the noise of the shout of joy from the noise of the weeping of the people: for the people shouted with a loud shout, and the noise was heard afar off."

In Gabriel's explanation of the two thousand and three hundred days, he had said to Daniel of the rebuilding of Jerusalem, that "the street shall be built again and the wall, even in troublous times." And now those troublous times began. Satan was determined to hinder, in every way that he possibly could, the establishment of the work of God in Jerusalem. He found ready instruments, in the mixed people and religion of Samaria, that had resulted form the successive transportations by Sargon, Esar-haddon, and Asshur bani-pal, kings of Assyria, before 625 B. C. As soon as the Jews had begun to build, these mixed peoples of the land of Samaria devised a scheme so to turn to their own advantage the rebuilding of Jerusalem that, by alliance with the Jews, they could fix their power in Jerusalem and the land of Judah, as in Samaria, execute a successful revolt, set up an independent kingdom there, and dominate all the territory between the Euphrates and the Mediterranean Sea, as had been done in old time.

Accordingly when they had "heard that the children of the captivity builded the temple unto the Lord God of Israel; then they came to Zerubbabel, and to the chief of the fathers, and said unto them, Let us build with you: for we seek your God, as ye do; and we do sacrifice unto him since the days of Esarhaddon king of Assur, which brought us up hither. But Zerubbabel, and Jeshua, and the rest of the chief of the fathers of Israel, said unto them, Ye have nothing to do with us to build an house unto our God; but we ourselves together will build unto the Lord God of Israel, as king Cyrus the king of Persia hath commanded us."

Then the Samaritans revealed their real spirit from the beginning, and showed that their interest in the God of Israel, and their "kind" offer to help in building the temple and city, was a sheer pretense to hide their rebellious intent; they "weakened the hands of the people of Judah, and troubled them in building, and hired counsellors against them [at the court of the Persian kingdom], to frustrate their purpose, all the days of Cyrus king of Persia, even until the reign of Darius king of Persia," a period of fourteen years.

The situation was this: The Jews and the decree of Cyrus to sustain them in all that they were doing. The Samaritans knew that it was vain to try to get that decree reversed while Cyrus lived. But the funds for the building work must all pass through the imperial treasury. Those hired counselors were officials of the court and council of Cyrus, who accepted from the Samaritans bribes to be on the watch for the affairs concerning Jerusalem, and block every procedure possible. They could hold back the supply of funds; they could delay the official applications for funds; by empty technicalities they could force tedious correspondence and delay in reports; they could prevent correspondence and even messengers from reaching Cyrus, of even Daniel–in a thousand ways they could frustrate the purpose of the builders at Jerusalem.

Daniel was still prime minister at the court of Persia, and it was not a great while before he discovered that the work in Jerusalem was being hindered, and his own efforts hampered in the court of Cyrus, by influences and actions so subtle that it was impossible definitely to expose of successfully to check them. This caused him again great and anxious concern for the work of God. Yet he spent no time in attempting to arrange, or to carry on any counter-intrigue; he appealed direct to God.

By those hired counselors, the Samaritans had got their schemes to working at the court of Cyrus in the latter part of the second year of Cyrus. On the third day of the first month of the third year of Cyrus, Daniel began his appeal to God in fasting and mourning and prayer. This he continued three full weeks, before he was positively informed that his appeal was heard. Yet his appeal was heard, the very first day. but the adverse influences at the Persian court were so strong that Gabriel dared not leave the presence of the king. and those adverse influences were just then so determined and so persistent that every possible thing was done, every conceivable device was employed, and every moment of the time was occupied, during the whole of that three weeks, in the endeavor to turn Cyrus from his true course and to frustrate the purpose of God concerning Jerusalem. To defeat the subtle devices and continued efforts of the enemy, Gabriel must be ever watchful. He continued thus three full weeks. Daniel continued his earnest praying. Still the angel could not leave the presence of the king. Yet Daniel's prayer must be answered by Gabriel in person. It was a crisis in the cause of God in the earth. then Michael, the first of the heavenly princes, came to help him. This secured victory, the enemy's siege was broken, and Gabriel went to Daniel by the river Tigris.

His own words in explanation of the three weeks delay are these: "Fear not, Daniel: for from the first day that thou didst set thine heart to understand, and to chasten thyself before thy God, thy words were heard, and I am come for thy words. But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia. Now I am come to make thee understand what shall befall thy people in the latter days: for yet the vision is for many days. . . . Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia. . . . But I will show thee that which is noted in the Scripture of truth: and there is none that holdeth with me in these things, but Michael your prince." Dan. 10:2-4, 12, 13, 20, 21. Verse 12, margin and Luther's Translation.

Thus, through prayer and faithfulness to God, Daniel and his people were victorious against all the machinations of Satan and his instrumentalities. And so shall it ever be. The heavenly agencies are always ready to co-operate with the faithful ones of earth to-day, as in the days of Daniel, Joshua, Zerubbabel, and their companions. Prayer to God, that obtains the co-operation of heavenly messengers, is even to-day worth infinitely more in securing the co-operation or restraint of the powers of earth, than could be all the political wire-pulling and lobbying that could ever be employed. The hearts of kings are in the hand of the Lord, and only He can move them right.

Daniel must have died shortly after this vision, for in the vision the last words of the angel are, "Thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days." Cyrus lived five years longer. But tho the Samaritans and their hired counselors continued all this time their work of weakening the hands of the Jews of hindering them and frustrating their purpose in building, they never succeeded in stopping the work. The "victory" of Daniel and the heavenly ones still "kept" with Cyrus the king of Persia, tho the work went on still in "troublous times."

[The next paper in this series is, "The Success of the Samaritans."]

April 2, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. The Success of the Samaritans" The Signs of the Times 28, 14 , p. 3 .

BY ALONZO TREVIER JONE

AT the death of Cyrus king of Persia, Cambyses his son, the Ahasuerus of Ezra 4:6, immediately succeeded to the throne of the empire. The Samaritans who had so persistently carried on their work of obstruction by hired counselors and otherwise "all the days of Cyrus," continued it all the days of Cambyses–about seven years.

At the very beginning of his reign, in addition to the work of their hired counsellors, the Samaritans took the bold step of presenting to Cambyses, the son of Cyrus, a formal and written accusation against the Jews: "In the reign of Ahasuerus, in the beginning of his reign, wrote they unto him an accusation against the inhabitants of Judah and Jerusalem." Ezra 4:6.

There is no known record that any notice at all was taken of their accusation. Even if any notice was taken of it, it is certain that their efforts were still in vain. The victory gained over them in the three weeks' contest at the Persian court in the first month of the third year of Cyrus, still held all the days of his son Cambyses. This shows that there was real meaning in Gabriel's words that at the end of the three weeks' contest at the court of Persia he held the victory with not only the king, singular, but plural,–with the kings of Persia. From this it is plain that Cambyses, the heir apparent to the throne, was in that council through that three weeks' contest, and therefore when the contest was ended and the victory was kept, it was victory not only as respected Cyrus and the time being, but also respecting Cambyses and the years to come. The victory was kept with the kings of Persia.

There was a second son of Cyrus, named Smerdis; but Cambyses caused him to be secretly murdered. Indeed, this was accomplished with so much secrecy that the great body of the people believed that he was still alive. This gave opportunity for conspiracy and the rise of a usurper, whose real name was Gomates, but who claimed before the people to be Smerdia, the son of Cyrus. This occurred at the capital of Persia while Cambyses was absent on his expedition in the conquest of Egypt. The original account runs thus:–

Cambyses the son of Cyrus was king. . . . This Cambyses had a brother, named Smerdis (Bardiga); they had the same mother and the same father. Afterward, this Cambyses killed Smerids. When Cambyses killed Smerdis, the people did not know that Smerdis was killed. Then Cambyses went to Egypt. The people became bad; and many falsehoods grew up in the provinces, as well as in Persia, as in Media, as in the other lands. And then a man, a Magian, named Gomates, from Pasargade, near the mount named Arakadris, there he arose. On the 14th day of the month Vlyakhna, thus arose: To the people he told lies, and said, "I am Smerids, the son of Cyrus, the brother of Cambyses." Then all the people revolted from Cambyses, went over to him, and the Persians, and the Medes, and the other nations. He seized the kingdom. On the ninth day of the month Garmapada he took the royalty from Cambyses. . . . Gomates the Magian deprived Cambyses as well of the Persians, as of the Medians, as of the other nations; he did according to his own will, and seized the royalty over them.–Darius, in "Records of the Past," Old Series, vol. VII., pp. 89, 90.

Cambyses, returning with his army from Egypt, went as far as Syria, and was there met by one of the many heralds whom Gomates had sent into all the empire publishing the "proclamation to the troops that henceforth they were to obey Smerdis, the son of Cyrus, and not Cambyses." Cambyses, believing now that his secret murderers of Smerdis had really played him false; and that thus Smerdis was really alive and reigning in the capital, immediately killed himself (Darius): "having reigned, in all, seven years and five months, and left no issue behind him, male or female."–Herodotus. This was the end of July, 522 B.C.

As before stated, Gomates, this false Smerdis, was a Magian. His usurpation was a part of the conspiracy of the Magian priests to make predominate the Median element in the mixed national religion of Media and Persia. And though Gomates the Magian reigned as Smerdis the Persians, yet he was but the tool of the Magians to swing back the predominant element in the imperial religion from the Persian to the original Median. The difference was more sectarian and merely priestly, than fundamental and popular; but it furnished an opportunity that was instantly seized by the Samaritans and their hired counselors to make effective their determination to stop the work on the temple at Jerusalem.

Accordingly, no sooner was it known in Palestine that the new king reigned, than the Samaritans wrote to him a new and extended accusation against the Jews. For this Gomates, the false Smerdis, was the Artaxerxes of Ezra 4:7-23.

"In the days of Artaxerxes wrote Bishlam, Mithredath, Tabeel, and the rest of their companions, unto Artaxerxes king of Persia; and the writing of the letter was written in the Syrian tongue, and interpreted in the Syrian tongue. Rehum the chancellor and Shimshai the scribe wrote a letter against Jerusalem to Artaxerxes the king in this sort:–

"Then wrote Rehum the chancellor, and Shimshai the scribe, and the rest of their companions; the Dinaites, the Apharsathchites, the Tarpelites, the Apharsites, the Archevites, the Babylonians, the Susanchites, the Dehavites, and the Elamites, and the rest of the nations whom the great and noble Asnapper brought over, and set in the cities of Samaria, and the rest that are on this side the river, and at such a time. . . . Thy servants the men on this side the river, and at such a time. Be it known unto the king, that the Jews which came up from thee to us are come unto Jerusalem, building the rebellious and the bad city, and have set up the walls thereof, and joined the foundations. Be it known now unto the king, that, if this city be builded, and the walls set up again, then will they not pay toll, tribute, and custom, and so thou shalt endamage the revenue of the kings. Now because we have maintenance from the king's palace, and it was not meet for us to see the king's dishonor, therefore have we sent and certified the king; that search may be made in the book of the records of thy fathers: so shalt thou find in the book of the records, and know that this city is a rebellious city, and hurtful unto kings and provinces, and that they have moved sedition within the same of old time; for which cause was this city destroyed. We certify the king that, if this city be builded again, and the walls thereof set up, by this means thou shalt have no portion on this side the river."

That letter is a most subtle and deceptive mixture of truth and falsehood. It was true that the city of Jerusalem had in old time been rebellious and seditious to the eastern kings, and that because of that, the city was destroyed. It was true that the imperial records at Babylon would confirm all this. But it was not in any sense true that such was the intention in now rebuilding the city, or that such would be the result of its rebuilding. This attributed intention of the Jews, and this surmised result of the rebuilding of the city, was nothing else than the revealing of their own secret purpose, when at the very first they offered to join the Jews and help in the building of that very city; and which they would have carried out to the full as soon as the city should have been finished, as certainly as they had been allowed to join in the building of the city.

Such a subtle mixture of lies and truth would have been well calculated to deceive any new king; and when it came to the false Smerdis, the tool of the reactionary priests, it only the more readily had its intended effect. "Then sent the king an answer unto Rehum the chancellor, and to Shimshai the scribe, and to the rest of their companions that dwell in Samaria, and unto the rest beyond the river:–

"Peace, and at such a time. The letter which ye sent unto us hath been plainly read before me. And I commanded, and search hath been made, and it is found that this city of old time hath made insurrection against kings, and that rebellion and sedition have been made therein. There have been mighty kings also over Jerusalem, which have ruled over all countries beyond the river; and toll, tribute, and custom, was paid unto them. Give ye now commandment to cause these men to cease, and that this city be not builded, until another commandment shall be given from me. Take heed now that ye fail not to do this: why should damage grow to the hurt of the kings?"

This letter was of course exceedingly gratifying to the rebellious, seditious, and officious Samaritans. Accordingly, "when the copy of king Artaxerxes' letter was read before Rehum, and Shimshai the scribe, and their companions, they went up in haste to Jerusalem unto the Jews, and made them to cease by force and power."

"Then ceased the work of the house of God which is at Jerusalem." Then the Samaritans laughed, and congratulated one another, and strutted, and rode around among the Jews, asserting their power. But even in the most exalted moments they never dreamed of what it really was over which they were so gleeful and so perfectly satisfied. They had no idea of what it was in reality into which they had so persistently, and at last so triumphantly, pushed themselves. In about six months there was another turn in imperial affairs. In the eighth month of his reign the false Smerdis, Gomates the Magian, was slain by Darius the Persian and six companions, and Darius the Persian, of ancient kingly race and descent, reigned in the Medo-Persian Empire. The Magian scheme was annihilated; the Persian element was once more predominant; the tide turned again in favor of the Jews, the rebuilding of the temple and the city went on, and by the power which they had invoked the Samaritans were compelled to help in the good work. This was exceedingly galling to them; but they had persistently pushed themselves into it, and there they must stay; they had been exceedingly glad when the power which they had invoked worked altogether their way; they could not fairly complain when that same power worked altogether the other way.

(The next article is "The Work of Haggai and Zechariah.")

April 9, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. The Work of Haggai and Zechariah" The Signs of the Times 28, 15 , p. 3, 4 .

BY ALONZO TREVIER JONE

EARLY in the year 521 B. C. Darius, the son of Hystaspes, of ancient Persian line, took the Medo-Persian throne by killing the false Smerdis and his chief adherents. Yet it was nearly a year and a half before work was resumed upon the temple of God in Jerusalem.

The people of God in Jerusalem and Judea had lost faith in God. They knew that the decree of the false Smerdis stopping the work, was secured by false representations; and they knew that the decree was illegal in itself, because of the fundamental principle of Medo-Persian law that no law of the Medes and Persians could be changed. Yet tho they knew that the usurper was dead, and tho they had in their hands the original decree of Cyrus which could not be lawfully reversed by any other Medo-Persian decree, still they did not have the faith to take up the work again. In their lack of faith they had imbibed the notion that the work was really dependent upon kings and their decrees, instead of upon God; that the Lord's part in the work was really secondary to that of kings and powers; that the kings' motions and decrees must come first, and then the Lord co-operate; instead of the Lord and His work being first, and then the king's co-operate.

Also as a consequence of their lack of faith, and so their neglect of the cause and work of God, there had come hard times in the land; the seasons were unfavorable; there was drought in the land, the crops of all kinds were short; what money was received went such a little way that it seemed more as if it had been lost than as if it had really been spent; what was bought with the money seemed to do so little good, that, whether it were food or clothing, it seemed almost as tho they had not had it at all.

In view of all these things, which were only the consequences of their loss of faith in God, in His cause, and in His present work in the world; and in the face of all that God had done, not only before their very eyes, but by their very selves; they actually reached and expressed in words the astonishing conclusion that, "The time is not come, the time that the Lord's house should be built"!!

To correct these utterly mistaken thoughts, reasonings, and conclusions, the Lord sent to them the prophets Haggai and Zechariah to revive their faith in God; thus to open their eyes, that they might see things in their true light.

Haggai spoke first: The first day of the sixth month, in the second year of Darius–520 B. C.–the word of the Lord came to Zerubbabel the governor, and Joshua the high priest, saying, "Thus speaketh the Lord of hosts, saying, This people say, The time is not come, the time that the Lord's house should be built. Is it time for you, O ye, to dwell in your ceiled houses, and this house lie waste? . . .

"Now therefore thus saith the Lord of hosts: Consider your ways. Ye have sown much, and bring in little; ye eat, but ye have not enough; ye drink, but ye are not filled with drink; ye clothe you, but there is none warm; and he that earneth wages earneth wages to put it into a bag with holes.

"Thus saith the Lord of hosts: Consider your ways. Go up to the mountain, and bring wood, and build the house; and I will take pleasure in it, and I will be glorified, saith the Lord. Ye looked for much, and, lo, it came to little; and when ye brought it home, I did blow upon it. Why? saith the Lord of hosts. Because of mine house that is waste, and ye run every man unto his own house. Therefore the heaven over you is stayed from dew, and the earth is stayed from her fruit. And I called for a drought upon the land, and upon the mountains, and upon the corn, and upon the new wine, and upon the oil, and upon that which the ground bringeth forth, and upon men, and upon cattle, and upon all the labor of the hands." Haggai I.

This message of the Lord by His prophet was promptly received by all to whom it came. Zerubbabel the governor and Joshua the high priest, "with all the remnant of the people, obeyed the voice of the Lord their God, and the words of Haggai the prophet, as the Lord their God had sent him; and the people did fear before the Lord.

"Then spake Haggai the Lord's messenger in the Lord's message unto the people, saying, I am with you, saith the Lord. And the Lord stirred up the spirit of Zerubbabel the son of Shealtiel, governor of Judah, and the spirit of Joshua the son of Josedech, the high priest, and the spirit of all the remnant of the people; and they came and did work in the house of the Lord of hosts, their God, in the four and twentieth day of the sixth month, in the second year of Darius the king."

In the following month, "in the seventh month," in the twenty-first day of the month, came again the word of the Lord by Haggai to Zerubbabel, and Joshua, and all the remnant of the people, saying:–

"Who is left among you that saw this house in her first glory? and how do ye see it now? is it not in your eyes in comparison of it as nothing? Yet now be strong, O Zerubbabel, saith the Lord; and be strong, O Joshua, son of Josedech, the high priest; and be strong, all ye people of the land, saith the Lord, and work: for I am with you, saith the Lord of hosts: according to the word that I covenanted with you when ye came out of Egypt, so my spirit remaineth among you: fear ye not. For thus saith the Lord of hosts: Yet once, it is a little while, and I will shake the heavens, and the earth, and the sea, and the dry land; and I will shake all nations, and the Desire of all nations shall come: and I will fill this house with glory, saith the Lord of hosts. The silver is mine, and the gold is mine, saith the Lord of hosts. The glory of this latter house shall be greater than of the former, saith the Lord of hosts: and in this place will I give peace, saith the Lord of hosts." Hag. 2:3-9

In the next month, "the eighth month in the second year of Darius," the message of the Lord came to them by the prophet Zechariah, saying:–

"The Lord hath been sore displeased with your fathers. Therefore say thou unto them, Thus saith the Lord of hosts; Turn ye unto me, saith the Lord of hosts, and I will turn unto you, saith the Lord of hosts. Be ye not as your fathers, unto whom the former prophets have cried, saying, Thus saith the Lord of hosts; Turn ye now from your evil ways, and from your evil doings: but they did not hear, nor hearken unto me, saith the Lord. Your fathers, where are they? and the prophets, do they live for ever? But my words and my statutes, which I commanded my servants the prophets, did they not take hold of your fathers? and they returned and said, Like as the Lord of hosts thought to do unto us, according to our ways, and according to our doings, so hath he dealt with us." Zech. 1:2-6.

In the next month, "the ninth month," the twenty-fourth day of the month, the message of the Lord came again by the prophet Haggai in which He said:–

"Consider from this day and upward, from before a stone was laid upon a stone in the temple of the Lord: Since those days were, when one came to an heap of twenty measures, there were but ten: when one came to the pressfat for to draw out fifty vessels out of the press, there were but twenty. I smote you with blasting and with mildew and with hail in all the labors of your hands; yet ye turned not to me, saith the Lord. Consider now from this day and upward, from the four and twentieth day of the ninth month, even from the day that the foundation of the Lord's temple was laid, consider it. Is the seed yet in the barn? yea, as yet the vine, and the fig tree, and the pomegranate, and the olive tree, hath not brought forth: from this day will I bless you." Hag. 2:15-19.

In the eleventh month and the twenty-fourth day of the month of that same year, the word of the Lord came again to the prophet Zechariah. He saw in a vision a man riding a bay horse, followed by bay, speckled, and white horses. They stood among myrtle trees in a valley. Zechariah asked what were these. The angel answered, "These are they whom the Lord hath sent to walk to and fro through the earth." And they reported to the angel, in the hearing of the prophet, "We have walked to and fro through the earth, and, behold, all the earth sitteth still, and is at reat." Then the angel said, "O Lord of hosts, how long wilt Thou not have mercy on Jerusalem and on the cities of Judah, against which Thou hast had indignation, these threescore and ten years?"

Then the angel spoke to Zechariah, saying:–

"Cry thou, saying, Thus saith the Lord of hosts; I am jealous for Jerusalem and for Zion with a great jealousy. And I am very sore displeased with the heathen that are at ease: for I was but a little displeased, and they helped forward the affliction. Therefore thus saith the Lord; I am returned to Jerusalem with mercies: my house shall be built in it, saith the Lord of hosts, and a line shall be stretched forth upon Jerusalem. Cry yet, saying, Thus saith the Lord of hosts; My cities through prosperity shall yet be spread abroad; and the Lord shall yet comfort Zion, and shall yet choose Jerusalem."

Next in the vision the prophet saw the four horns–powers–that had scattered Judah, Israel, and Jerusalem, and also four carpenters come to repair these desolations. And the angels said:–

"These are the horns which have scattered Judah, Israel, and Jerusalem. And the Lord showed me four carpenters. Then said I, What come these to do? And he spake, saying, These are the horns which have scattered Judah, so that no man did lift up his head: but these are come to fray them, to cast out the horns of the Gentiles, which lifted up their horn over the land of Judah to scatter it." Zech. 1:19-21.

Next in the vision he saw a man with a measuring line in his hand "to measure Jerusalem, to see what is the breadth thereof, and what is the length thereof." Then the angel who talked with the prophet went forth and was met by another angel who said to him:–

"Run, speak to this young man, saying, Jerusalem shall be inhabited as towns without walls for the multitude of men and cattle therein: for I, saith the Lord, will be unto her a wall of fire round about, and will be the glory in the midst of her.

"Ho, ho, come forth, and flee from the land of the north, saith the Lord: for I have spread you abroad as the four winds of the heaven, saith the Lord. Deliver thyself, O Zion, that dwellest with the daughter of Babylon. For thus saith the Lord of hosts; After the glory hath he sent me unto the nations which spoiled you: for he that toucheth you toucheth the apple of his eye. For, behold, I will shake mine hand upon them, and they shall be a spoil to their servants: and ye shall know that the Lord of hosts hath sent me.

"Sing and rejoice, O daughter of Zion: for, lo, I come, and I will dwell in the midst of thee, saith the

228

Lord. And many nations shall be joined to the Lord in that day, and shall be my people: and I will dwell in the midst of thee, and thou shalt know that the Lord of hosts hath sent me unto thee. And the Lord shall inherit Judah his portion in the holy land, and shall choose Jerusalem again. Be silent, O all flesh, before the Lord: for he is raised up out of his holy habitation." Chapter 2.

Next Zechariah saw in the vision "Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the Lord, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist him. And the Lord said unto Satan, The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan; even the Lord that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?"

Joshua was clothed with filthy garments, and stood before the angel. The angel said to others who stood by, "Take away the filthy garments from him. And unto him he said, Behold, I have caused thine iniquity to pass from thee, and I will clothe thee with change of raiment." And Zechariah said, "Let them set a fair miter upon his head." So they set a fair miter on his head, and clothed him with the beautiful garments. Then said the angel to Joshua:–

"If thou wilt walk in my ways, and if thou wilt keep my charge, then thou shalt also judge my house, and shalt also keep my courts, and I will give thee places to walk among these that stand by. Hear now, O Joshua the high priest, thou, and thy fellows that sit before thee: for they are men wondered at [a sign]: for, behold, I will bring forth my servant the BRANCH. For behold the stone that I have laid before Joshua; upon one stone shall be seven eyes: behold, I will engrave the graving thereof, saith the Lord of hosts, and I will remove the iniquity of that land in one day. In that day, saith the Lord of hosts, shall ye call every man his neighbor under the vine and under the fig tree." Chapter 3.

Next in the vision there was shown to the prophet a candlestick all of gold, with a bowl upon the top of it, and seven lamps upon it, and seven pipes to the seven lamps; and an olive tree on each side of the bowl; this signifying to Zerubbabel that the building of the house of the Lord was "not by might, nor by power, but by My Spirit, saith the Lord of hosts. Who art thou, O great mountain? Before Zerubbabel thou shalt become a plain: and he shall bring forth the headstone thereof with shoutings, crying, Grace, grace unto it." And in the vision the word of the Lord was spoken:–

"The hands of Zerubbabel have laid the foundation of this house; his hands shall also finish it; and thou shalt know that the Lord of hosts hath sent me unto you. For who hath despised the day of small things? for they shall rejoice, and shall see the plummet in the hand of Zerubbabel with those seven; they are the eyes of the Lord, which run to and fro through the whole earth." Chapter 4.

Next in the vision the prophet saw a flying roll of the law of God; the length twenty cubits, and the breadth ten cubits; revealing the curse, because of the sins, that goeth forth over the face of the whole earth. after that the prophet saw go forth two women, having between them in an ephah "Wickedness," "to build it an house in the land of Shinar; and it shall be established, and set there upon her own base." Chapter 5.

Next in the vision the prophet saw going forth four chariots, each with horses; two toward the north, one toward the south, and the remaining one to and fro through the earth. and last he was instructed to take certain men by name, and have them make crowns of silver and gold, and set them upon the head of Joshua the high priest, and say:–

"Thus speaketh the Lord of hosts, saying, Behold the man whose name is the BRANCH; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the Lord: even he shall build the temple of the Lord; and he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between them both." Zech. 6:12, 13.

Then the crowns were to be for a memorial in the temple of the Lord.

And the vision closed with the words of confirming promise upon all: "And this shall come to pass, if ye will diligently obey the voice of the Lord your God." Chapter 6.

[The next article in the series is "The Samaritans Compelled to Help."]

April 16, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. The Samaritans Compelled to Help" The Signs of the Times 28, 16 , p. 5 .

BY the presence and the messages of the prophets Haggai and Zechariah, the Jews were encouraged to take up again the work of building the temple of God and the wall of Jerusalem. Faith once more found her place in the hearts of the people; the land and people were blessed with prosperity and good cheer; and the work was begun and carried on with a spirit and an alacrity that meant success certainly and speedily. Yet it was not all peace.

News of this soon reached the Samaritans, and of course set them all astir again. However, among the changes that had come in the imperial government by the death of the false Smerdis and the accession of Darius, was the change of the governor and other officials of Samaria. Rehum the chancellor and Shimshai the secretary had been displaced by Tatnai as governor and Shethar-Boznai as secretary. These men, of themselves, were fair-minded men; but there was about them the same officious Samaritan party as "companions." These urged on Tatnai and Shethar-Boznai to go up to Jerusalem, and again call a halt upon the work there. They did so, but, being fair-minded men, they did it in a perfectly fair way.

They asked, "Who hath commanded you to build this house, and to make up this wall?" and, "What are the names of the men that make this building?" The Jews told them that the temple had been built there many years before by a great king; that it had been destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar; and that Cyrus had issued a decree for the rebuilding of it, and had sent back from Babylon the gold and silver vessels that belonged in the house. Yet the Samaritans tried to have them stop the work; but they would not stop. Besides, "the eye of their God was upon the elders of the Jews, that they could not cause them to cease, till the matter came to Darius." Ezra 5:5.

Since they could not stop the work, the Samaritans had Tatnai and Shethar-boznai, write to Darius. They did so, but not as did Rehum and Shimshai in their deceptive mixture of truth and falsehood; they stated the case with fairness; exactly as the Jews had stated it to them. They wrote as follows:–

"Unto Darius the king, all peace. Be it known unto the king, that we went into the province of Judea, to the house of the great God, which is builded with great stones, and timber is laid in the walls, and this work goeth fast on, and prospereth in their hands. Then asked we those elders, and said unto them thus, Who commanded you to build this house, and to make up these walls? We asked their names also, to certify thee, that we might write the names of the men that were the chief of them. And thus they returned us answer, saying:–

"We are the servants of the God of heaven and earth, and build the house that was builded these many years ago, which a great king of Israel builded and set up. But after that our fathers had provoked the God of heaven unto wrath, he gave them into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, the Chaldean, who destroyed this house, and carried the people away into Babylon. But in the first year of Cyrus the king of Babylon the same king Cyrus made a decree to build this house of God. And the vessels also of gold and silver of the house of God, which Nebuchadnezzar took out of the temple that was in Jerusalem, and brought them into the temple of Babylon, those did Cyrus the king take out of the temple of Babylon, and they were delivered unto one, whose name was Sheshbazzar, whom he had made governor; and said unto him, Take these vessels, go, carry them into the temple that is in Jerusalem, and let the house of God be builded in his place. Then came the same Sheshbazzar, and laid the foundation of the house of God which is in Jerusalem; and since that time even until now hath it been in building, and yet it is not finished.

"Now therefore, if it seem good to the king, let there be search made in the king's treasure house, which is there at Babylon, whether it be so, that a decree was made of Cyrus the king to build this house of God at Jerusalem, and let the king send his pleasure to us concerning this matter."

When this letter reached Darius, he went about the matter in the thoroughly business-like way that characterized his whole reign and administration; he "made a decree" that search should be made for the records mentioned. First "search was made in the house of the books, where the treasures were laid up in Babylon." It was not found there, nor anywhere in Babylon. The search was continued in the other capitals; "and there was found at Ecbatana, in the palace that is in the province of the Medes, a roll, and therein was a record thus written:–

"In the first year of Cyrus the king the same Cyrus the king made a decree concerning the house of God at Jerusalem, Let the house be builded, the place where they offered sacrifices, and let the foundations thereof be strongly laid; the height thereof threescore cubits, and the breadth thereof threescore cubits; with three rows of great stones, and a row of new timber: and let the expenses be given out of the king's house; and also let the golden and silver vessels of the house of God, which Nebuchadnezzar took forth out of the temple which is at Jerusalem, and brought unto Babylon, be restored, and brought again unto the temple which is at Jerusalem, every one to his place, and place them in the house of God."

This being found, Darius wrote to Tatnai and Shethar-boznai and the Samaritans as follows:–

"Now therefore, Tatnai, governor beyond the river, Shetharboznai, and your companions the Apharsachites, which are beyond the river, be ye far from thence: let the work of this house of God alone; let the governor of the Jews and the elders of the Jews build this house of God in his place.

"Moreover I make a decree what ye shall do to the elders of these Jews for the building of this house of God; that of the king's goods, even of the tribute beyond the river, forthwith expenses be given unto these men, that they be not hindered. And that which they have need of, both young bullocks, and rams, and lambs, for the burnt offerings of the God of heaven, wheat, salt, wine, and oil, according to the appointment of the priests which are at Jerusalem, let it be given them day by day without fail; that they may offer sacrifices of sweet savors unto the God of heaven, and pray for the life of the king, and of his sons.

"Also I have made a decree, that whosoever shall alter this word, let timber be pulled down from his house, and being set up, let him be hanged thereon; and let his house be made a dunghill for this. And the God that hath caused his name to dwell there destroy all kings and people, that shall put to their hand to alter and to destroy this house of God which is at Jerusalem.

"I Darius have made a decree; let it be done with speed." Ezra 6:1-12.

That settled the question for ever. Therefore Tatnai, and Shethar-boznai, and their companions, "according to that which Darius the king had sent, so they did speedily. And the elders of the Jews builded, and they prospered through the prophesying of Haggai the prophet and Zechariah the son of Iddo. And they builded, and finished it, according to the commandment of the God of Israel, and according to the commandment of Cyrus and Darius. . . . And this house was finished on the third day of the month Adar [the twelfth month], which was in the sixth year of the reign of Darius the king"–517 B.C. Ezra 6:13-15.

And as soon as the house was finished, it was dedicated; and the children of Israel "kept the dedication of the house of God with joy," and offered sacrifices "according to the number of the tribes of Israel." And "they kept the Passover upon the fourteenth day of the first month;" "and kept the feast of unleavened bread seven days with joy; for the Lord had made them joyful, and turned the heart of the king of Assyria unto them, to strengthen their hands in the work of the house of God, the God of Israel." Ezra 6:16-22.

The temple and worship of God was restored. Against all opposition the cause of God had triumphed so far. However, the battle was not yet over; the wall was not yet built; and this was yet to be built "even in troublous times."

[The next article is, "Satan's Maser Stroke."]

April 23, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. Satan's Master-Stroke" The Signs of the Times 28, 17 , p. 3, 4 .

BY ALONZO TREVIER JONE

IN a previous study we read that in vision there was shown to the prophet Zechariah, Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the Lord, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist him. That is the key to the vicissitudes of this whole history.

The time was come when the cause of God must be restored, and His work done in the earth. In the nature of things, this must be done through human instrumentalities. Joshua, the high priest, was the chief of these human instrumentalities; and therefore stood in the vision as the representative of God and His work in the earth. On the other hand, Satan is the great adversary of God and His work everywhere, whether in the earth or in heaven. And when the time came for the cause and work of God to be revived and restored in the earth, Satan, as the great adversary of all that is of God, was prompt to create every kind of opposition. Accordingly he was seen standing at the right hand of Joshua–in the very place of opportunity and helpfulness–to resist him.

Satan had been actively engaged in this from the very first day that the work was begun in Jerusalem. It was his spirit and energy that actuated the Samaritan meddlers and their hired counselors at the court of Cyrus, Cambyses, and the false Smerdis. It was the personal presence of Satan in that three weeks' contest at the court of Cyrus, that made the unbroken presence of the angel Gabriel essential there the three full weeks, and finally demanded even the presence and help of Michael to make victory certain.

But in spite of all Satan's resistance the temple of God was finished and dedicated, and the full worship and service of God was there established. Yet he slacked not his plotting of resistance. He failed to accomplish anything of his purpose during the reign of Darius; but in the reign of the successor to Darius he played a master-stroke, and arranged a most stupendous plot–nothing less than the sweeping away, in one day, all the Jews in the empire; the complete blotting out at one stroke of the whole worship, and even the whole people of God. Of course it was a plot worthy only of Satan; but that even he should think that he could make such a plot succeed, would be astonishing, were it not for the peculiar train of circumstances that had developed the special instrumentality that he could use for his enormous purpose.

Darius died in B. C. 485, having reigned thirty-six years, and was succeeded by his son Xerxes, who was the Ahasuerus of the book of Esther. For the Hebrew Ahashuerosh is the natural equivalent of the old Persian Khshayersha, the true name of the monarch called by the Greeks Xerxes, as now read in his inscriptions. "The name of him whom the Greeks called Xerxes, as left by himself in his own inscriptions is Khshayersha, which proves to be identical with the Ahasuerus of Holy Scriptures."–Oppert. And it is not strange that in the endeavor to pronounce such a name, the tongue of a Greek would reduce it to Xerxes. Thus Xerxes being truly the Ahasuerus of the book of Esther, this causes the book of Esther to stand chronologically in the Scriptures between the sixth and seventh chapters of the book of Ezra. Xerxes, the king of Persia, was the son of Darius of Ezra 6, and the father of Artaxerxes of Ezra 7.

Political conditions, as developed by Darius in his last years, and left by his death, were such that, in order for Xerxes to complete the plans of Darius, he must "stir up all against the realm of Grecia;" as it had been stated by the angel to Daniel that Xerxes would do. Dan. 11:2. In furtherance of this enterprise, "Xerxes, being about to take in hand the expedition against Athens, called together an assembly of the noblest Persians, to learn their opinions, and to lay before them his own designs."–Herodotus. This was in the third year of the reign of Xerxes; and this assembly was the one that is referred to in Esther 1:1-4:–

"In those days, when the king Ahasuerus sat on the throne of his kingdom, which was in Shushan the palace, in the third year of his reign, he made a feast unto all his princes and his servants; the power of Persia and Media, the nobles and princes of the provinces; being before him: when he showed the riches of his glorious kingdom and the honor of his excellent majesty many days, even an hundred and fourscore days."

That was the day of Persia's greatest glory, and at the end of the six months' council of preparation for the invasion of Greece, Xerxes made a grand feast for a whole week to the whole company of imperial officials:–

"The king made a feast unto all the people that were present in Shushan the palace, both unto great and small, seven days, in the court of the garden of the king's palace; where were white, green, and blue, hangings, fastened with cords of fine linen and purple to silver rings and pillars of marble: the beds were of gold and silver, upon a pavement of red, and blue, and white, and black, marble. And they gave them drink in vessels of gold, (the vessels being diverse one from another,) and royal wine in abundance, according to the state of the king. And the drinking was according to the law; none did compel: for so the king had appointed to all the officers of his house, that they should do according to every man's pleasure. Also Vashti the queen made a feast for the women in the royal house which belonged to King Ahasuerus." Esther 1:5-9.

And because Vashti declined to make a display of herself to the drunken crowd, she was deposed from the position of queen.

Xerxes led into Greece a force, land and naval, amounting to 5,283,220 men. But in the successive defeats of Theromopyle, Salamis, Plateu, and Mycale, B. C. 480-79, his whole force was annihilated, and he returned to Shushan with only a body-guard. Shortly after his return, he issued his directions for the gathering together of the most beautiful maidens of the empire, that he might select a queen in the place of the deposed Vashti. Among these was Esther, the cousin and adopted daughter of Mordecai, a Benjamite who was an attendant in the king's palace in Shushan. Esther was chosen.

"So Esther was taken unto king Ahasuerus into his house royal in the tenth month, which is the month Tebeth, in the seventh year of his reign. And the king loved Esther above all the women, and she obtained grace and favor in his sight more than all the virgins; so that he set the royal crown upon her head, and made her queen instead of Vashti." Esther 2:16, 17.

About this same time two of the king's chamberlains laid a plot to kill him. The plot was discovered by Mordecai. He told it to Esther, Esther told it to Xerxes, investigation was made, the thing was proved, and the two men were hanged. Then a record of the whole affair was made in the official chronicles of the kingdom, in which was included the name of Mordecai and the part that he had taken in exposing the plot, and so saving the life of the king.

Not long after that, a certain prince whose name was Haman was promoted by king Xerxes, who thus "advanced him, and set his seat above all the princes that were with him." Thus Haman was not only prime minister of the empire, but also the special favorite of the king; so that the king commanded all the servants "that were in the king's gate" to bow to Haman and reverence him. Now Mordecai the Jew sat in the king's gate; and he would not bow nor do reverence to Haman. His fellow-servants noticed this, and asked him, "Why transgressest thou the king's commandment?" When they had for several days in succession called Mordecai's attention to this, and still he would not bow nor do reverence to Haman, they told it to Haman, and also told him that this Mordecai who had thus refused to do him reverence was a Jew.

And just there is where Satan found his grand opportunity to make his master-stroke against the whole nation of Israel at once. Therefore "when Haman saw that Mordecai bowed not, nor did him reverence, then was Haman full of wrath." But "he thought scorn to lay hands on Mordecai alone; for they had showed him the people of Mordecai; wherefore Haman sought to destroy all the Jews that were throughout the whole kingdom of Ahasuerus, even the people of Mordecai." Esther 3:5, 6.

But why was this? What was the secret spring that Satan could touch there, to urge on one man thus to plan the destruction of a whole people? The answer is easy. Haman was "the Agagite." That is, he was a direct descendant from king Agag, the king of the Amalekites whom Saul captured when he destroyed the Amalekites, and whom the prophet Samuel slew after Saul had brought him to Gilgal alive. And Mordecai was a Benjamite; of the very tribe of that Saul, king of Israel, who had destroyed the nation of the Amalekites. Here, then, was the chance for the remaining Amalekite and Agagite to visit vengeance upon this people, and destroy this whole nation, as this people had destroyed his nation so long before.

Possibly some one will say, "Well, was not that even justice, and fair enough?" The answer is, "No; it was but the continuation of the original treacherous and destructive purpose of the Amalekites who initiated the war shortly after Israel left Egypt, and before they came to Sinai. In Rephidim, between the wilderness of Sin and the wilderness of Sinai, the Amalekites laid an ambush for the children of Israel as they marched, and cruelly smote the hindmost; even all that were feeble, and when they were faint and weary. 1 Sam. 15:2; Deut. 25:17, 18. And it was for this that Saul had destroyed the Amalekites. Ex. 17:8-14; Deut. 25:19; 1 Sam. 15. And now it was in perpetuation of original and native Amalekite treachery and cruelty that Haman the Amalekite must scheme to blot out the whole people, simply because one of their number failed to bow and do him reverence.

And Haman proceeded to put into effect his Amalekitish scheme. First he cast lots in the the [sic.] selection of the month in which the mas-

260

sacre should be. It was in the first month that the lots were cast, and the lot fell on the twelfth month–in the twelfth year of Xerxes, B. C. 473–and the day fixed, was the thirteenth day of the twelfth month.

Having this preliminary arranged, Haman approached the king for the royal authority to execute his murderous plot. He–

"said unto king Ahasuerus, There is a certain people scattered abroad and dispersed among the people in all the provinces of thy kingdom; and their laws are diverse from all people; neither keep they the king's laws: therefore it is not for the king's profit to suffer them. If it please the king, let it be written that they may be destroyed: and I will pay ten thousand talents [about six millions of dollars] of silver to the hands of those that have the charge of the business, to bring it into the king's treasuries." Esther 3:8, 9.

Then Xerxes gave to Haman his imperial ring, and said, "The silver is given to thee, the people also, to do with them as it seemeth good to thee." Then Haman caused the imperial secretaries to issue his murderous commandment to–

"the king's lieutenants, and to the governors that were over every province, and to the rulers of every people of every province according to the writing thereof, and to every people after their language; in the name of king Ahasuerus was it written, and sealed with the king's ring." Esther 3:12.

Then the letters were sent by the imperial post-riders "into all the king's provinces, to destroy, to kill, and to cause to perish, all Jews, both young and old, little children and women, in one day, even upon the thirteenth day of the twelfth month, which is the month Adar, and to take the spoil of them for a prey." The letters also commanded all the people to be "ready against that day." So "the posts went out, being hastened by the king's commandment, and the decree was given in Shushan the palace. And the king and Haman sat down to drink; but the city Shushan was perplexed." Esther 3:7-15.

It may be thought strange that Xerxes should so readily fall in with Haman's scheme, and apparently so thoughtlessly give over a whole people thus to sheer massacre. And yet when it is remembered that the very flower of the defensive strength of the empire had only lately been swept away in the campaign against Greece, it is not difficult to understand that, from the way in which the matter was presented to him by Haman, he might fear that this "lawless" people would take advantage of the weakness of the kingdom, and attempt a revolution. Thus he could easily convince himself that it was only for the safety of his kingdom that they should be forestalled.

The imperial decree had gone forth for the massacre of all the Jews in every province on the thirteenth day of the twelfth month. The king had commanded all the people to be ready against that day, to execute the decree. The time was fixed, and each passing day brought the devoted people only a step nearer to the fearful goal; and the law, being a law of the Persians and Medes, could not be changed.

[The next article is a striking one, entitle, "The Hand upon the Throne of the Lord."]

April 30, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. 'The Hand upon the Throne of the Lord'" The Signs of the Times 28, 18 , p. 3, 4 .

BY ALONZO TREVIER JONE

WITH every soul of them devoted to massacre on a day already fixed, and fixed by a law that could not be changed, the Jews throughout the whole empire of the Persians and Medes were in great distress. "In every province, whithersoever the king's commandment and his decree came, there was great mourning among the Jews, and fasting, and weeping, and wailing; and many had on sackcloth and ashes." And "Mordecai rent his clothes, and put on sackcloth with ashes, and went out into the midst of the city, and cried with a loud and a bitter cry; and came even before the king's gate." Esther 4:1, 2.

Yet these expressions of distress and grief were not merely such, as tho they were hopeless lamentations. The living God was still their God. In their history there had been crises as desperate as was this; and when appealed to and trusted, He had never failed to work deliverance. They could surely trust that He would deliver them now. And because the examples of God's wonderful deliverances in their history in their history, which they had as encouragements to their faith, they had the direct word of the Lord with respect to any such occasion as this that might ever arise in which the Amalekites were to have a part.

When Amalek played his treacherous part, and attacked the weak, the feeble, the faint, and the weary, even the hindmost, in Rephidim, tho he was defeated, when the battle was over the Lord commanded Moses to write "for a memorial in a book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua," that "I will utterly blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven." Yet that matter did not end with only writing it for a memorial in a book. For Moses built there an altar unto the Lord, "and called the name of it Jehovah-nisai"–"The Lord my banner." This was also a memorial of the affair of Amalek's, that the Lord Jehovah would ever be His people's banner against Amalek. For said Moses in the name of the Lord–

"Because the hand of Amalek is against the throne of the Lord, therefore the hand upon the throne of the Lord hath sworn that the Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation." Ex. 17:16, margin.

And now in this latest generation of Amalek, in this Haman the Agagite the hand of Amalek was still against the throne of the Lord. And now also the oath of the hand upon the throne of the Lord, was still good, the Lord Jehovah was still the banner of His people in the war with Amalek.

And this is why it was that the distress, the mourning, the fasting, and the cry of His devoted people, was not hopeless. Indeed, it was not only not hopeless, but was full of faith; for the memorial and the oath of God, written in the Book, still stood as the door of faith, and therefore of victory. And this was their confidence. Therefore they expected victory and deliverance by that blessed hand that is upon the throne of the Lord. It is certain that they expected only victory and deliverance, for when Mordecai got word to Esther of the true state of their affairs, urging her to go to the king and make supplication and request for her people, and she pleaded the danger of death when she went without being called, Mordecai assured her that if she failed to do her part, then should "relief and deliverance arise to the Jews from another place."

God would not fail them. Esther was in a position to be an instrumentality in God's working the deliverance that was certain to come. How could she know but that she was in that position for just such an occasion as this? and if, for any reason, even the certain risk of her own life, she should fail to rise to the occasion and do her part, still life and deliverance would certainly come, only it would come by other instrumentality; it would arise from another place. This was the faith of Mordecai and of his people. It was true faith in the word of God; it rested upon the word of God, and the oath of Him whose hand is upon the throne of the Lord. All that remained for them to do was to prove themselves appreciative of that word by separating themselves from all sin, and everything that was unbecoming to their Banner, so that the certain victory of the Hand upon the throne of the Lord should include very individual; and that they might see that Hand moving victoriously in this final war with Amalek.

Esther did rise nobly to the occasion; she proved indeed to be the queen that her position implied that she was. She sent word to Mordecai to gather together all the Jews that were in Shushan, and fast for her "three days" night and day; "I also and my maidens will fast likewise; and so will I go in unto the king, which is not according to the law; and if I perish, I perish." And God began just then to work their glorious deliverance.

On the third day Esther made her trembling venture into the king's presence. The king graciously received her; and told her to ask anything she chose, even to the half of the kingdom, and it should be granted her. She simply asked that the king and Haman come that day to a banquet which she had prepared. The king caused Haman to be informed; and "so the king and Haman came to the banquet that Esther had prepared." At the banquet the king said again to Esther, "What is thy petition? and it shall be granted to the half of the kingdom it shall be performed." Esther most respectfully requested that the king and Haman come again on the morrow to a banquet which she would prepare; stating also that on the morrow she would present her petition and request that the king desired to know.

Thus twice in immediate succession had Haman been shown the high honor of an exclusive banquet with the king and queen; and this upon the special invitation of the queen herself. This was honor and distinction surpassing all. He was correspondingly elated, and "went forth that day joyful and with a glad heart." Yet there was one element that detracted from the perfection of his happy state: as he went forth from the royal banquet, he saw Mordecai in the king's gate, who still "stood not up, nor moved for him." This, and at such a time, was an ignominy too great to be borne, and filled him "full of indignation against Mordecai." Nevertheless, in view of what he had prepared for Mordecai and all his people, "Haman refrained himself."

"And when he came home, he sent and called for his friends, and Zeresh his wife. And Haman told them of the glory of his riches, and the multitude of his children, and all the things wherein the king had promoted him, and how he had advanced him above the princes and servants of the king. Haman said moreover, Yea, Esther the queen did let no man come in with the king unto the banquet that she had prepared but myself; and to morrow am I invited unto her also with the king. Yet all this availeth me nothing, so long as I see Mordecai the Jew sitting at the king's gate."

To Haman's wife and his friends his affliction from the presence of Mordecai was exceedingly proper and reasonable, and a thing from which he ought to be speedily relieved. Therefore "said Zeresh his wife and all his friends unto him, Let a gallows be made of fifty cubits [seventy-five feet] high, and to-morrow speak thou unto the king that Mordecai may be hanged thereon; then go thou in merrily with the king unto the banquet."

"And the thing pleased Haman; and he caused the gallows to be made," and went to sleep perfectly satisfied with all his arrangements and fair prospects for the morrow.

But He that keepeth Israel neither slumbers nor sleeps. He whose hand is upon the throne of the Lord had other arrangements for both Mordecai and Haman on the morrow. Therefore that night, for some reason, king Xerxes found it impossible to sleep. In order to occupy the sleepless hours, the king caused the book of the chronicles of the kingdom to be brought and read to him, and the place where the reader read in the book happened to be the very place of the record of the late plot to assassinate the king, and of Mordecai exposure of the plot in time to save the king.

When this had been read, the king asked, "What honor and dignity hath been done to Mordecai for this?" The king's attendants answered, "There is nothing done for him." The king inquired, "Who is in the court?" It was now morning, and Haman had come early to get the king's order to hang Mordecai on that seventy-five-foot gallows that was waiting, so that Haman could go merrily to the coming banquet. Thus at so early an hour Haman was in the court, and was the only man in the court. So when the king's attendants looked into the court, they saw Haman, and in answer to the king's question said, "Behold, Haman standeth in the court." The king said, "Let him come in." The word was passed; anmd "so Haman came in."

But before Haman had a chance to present his request for the hanging of Mordecai, the king asked him, "What shall be done unto the man whom the king delighteth to honor?" Haman, having flattered himself beyond all judgment or reason, instantly thought, That man is myself. For "to whom would the king delight to do honor more than to myself?" The king designs some new honor for me, so that I can go to that banquet to-day in a style befitting my nobility and dignity: and he has even done me the honor of letting me name it myself. The only honor that remains, that could be really becoming to me, is that I should occupy the very place of the king.

Therefore Haman answered:–

"For the man whom the king delighteth to honor.

"Let the royal apparel be brought which the king useth to wear.

"And the horse that the king rideth upon;

"And the crown royal which is set upon his head;

"And let this apparel and horse be delivered to the hand of one of the king's most noble princes,

276

"That they may array the man withal whom the king delighteth to honor,

"And bring him on horseback through the street of the city,

"And proclaim before him

"That shall it be done to the man whom the king delighteth to honor."

Then said Xerxes to Haman:–

"Make haste,

"And take the apparel and the hose,

"As thou hast said,

"And do even so to Mordecai the Jew,

"That sitteth at the king's gate;

"Let nothing fail of all that thou hast spoken."

For Haman, this was a terrific come-down. Yet there was no escaping it; he had fixed the whole matter himself. Therefore "took Haman the apparel and the horse, and arrayed Mordecai, and brought him on horseback through the street of the city, and proclaimed before him: Thus shall it be done unto the man whom the king delighteth to honor."

"And Mordecai came again to the king's gate. But Haman hasted to his house mourning, and having his head covered. And Haman told Zeresh his wife and all his friends every thing that had befallen him. Then said his wise men and Zeresh his wife unto him, If Mordecai be of the seed of the Jews, before whom thou hast begun to fall, thou shalt not prevail against him, but shalt surely fall before him."

All this had occurred early in the day, and before the time of the banquet of the queen. And just now, even while Zeresh and Haman's wise men were talking with him of what he should expect from this beginning, "came the king's chamberlains, and hasted to bring Haman unto the banquet that Esther had prepared. So the king and Haman came to banquet with Esther the queen." But Haman did not go to the banquet as "merrily" as had been planned by himself, and wife, and friends the evening before.

As they sat at the banquet, the king again said to Esther, "What is thy petition, queen Esther? and it shall be granted thee; and what is thy request? and it shall be performed, even to the half of the kingdom." Esther now, to the king and in the very presence of Haman, presented her petition and her request:–

"If I have found favor in thy sight, O king, and if it please the king, let my life be given me at my petition, and my people at my request. For we are sold, I and my people, to be destroyed, to be slain, and to perish. But if we had been sold for bondmen and bondwomen, I had held my tongue, altho the enemy could not countervail the king's damage."

In blank astonishment the king asked, "Who is he, and where is he, that durst presume in his heart to do so?" Esther answered, and Haman sitting there, "The adversary and enemy is this wicked Haman." This revelation was more than the king could bear, and sit still. Therefore "in his wrath" he arose from the banquet and stepped into the palace garden. Haman, well knowing what the king's wrathful astonishment must mean to him, arose from his seat to plead with Esther for his life. In his anxiety and fear in his pleading he fell upon the divan where queen Esther was sitting. Just then the king returned to the banquet room, and discovered Haman in that attitude. Instantly there flashed across the mind of the king a suspicion that in that murderous scheme Haman had a design to seize the kingdom: and he exclaimed, "Will he force the queen also before me in the house?"

As the word "went out of the king's mouth," the chamberlains ran in and "covered Haman's face. And Harbonah, one of the chamberlains, said before the king, Behold also the gallows fifty cubits high, which Haman had made for Mordecai, who had spoken good for the king, standeth in the house of Haman." And the king said, "Hang him thereon. So they hanged Haman on the gallows that he had prepared for Mordecai. Then was the king's wrath pacified."

The same day Esther told king Xerxes what Mordecai was to her; and "the king took off his ring, which he had taken from Haman, and gave it unto Mordecai. And Esther set Mordecai over the house of Haman;" for the king had given "the house of Haman the Jews' enemy unto Esther the queen." And again Esther put her life at stake in approaching the king without being called. She came "before the king, and fell down at his feet, and besought him with tears to put away the mischief of Haman the Agagite, and his device that he had devised against the Jews.

The king held out to Esther his golden scepter, and she arose and stood, and pleaded that letters be written and sent to every province, reversing the letters sent by Haman to destroy the Jews. In response the king directed that Esther and Mordecai should write as they liked in the king's name, and to seal it with the king's ring; "for the writing which is written in the king's name, and sealed with the king's ring, may no man reverse."

But already were the letters out in the king's name, and sealed with the king's ring, commanding that all the Jews should be destroyed. This could not be reversed by writing letters saying that the Jews should not be destroyed, or forbidding anybody to attack them. But letters were written to all the officials and all the people in all provinces of the empire, granting to the Jews full right and power to defend themselves against all who should attack them. This being published everywhere, and the favor of the king thus known toward the Jews, plainly it could be only the most desperate and murderous characters that would attempt to execute the first decree; and if, in so doing, they should fall, it would be only a benefit to the empire and to mankind.

"And Mordecai went out from the presence of the king in royal apparel of blue and white, and with a great crown of gold, and with a garment of fine linen and purple: and the city of Shushan rejoiced and was glad. The Jews had light, and gladness, and joy, and honor. And in every province, and in every city, whithersoever the king's commandment and his decree came, the Jews had joy and gladness, a feast and a good day. And many of the people of the land became Jews; for the fear of the Jews fell upon them."

These letters were sent out on the twenty-third day of the third month. Thus there were yet nearly nine months before the day fixed in Haman's decree for the massacre. And when that day came, there were found in all parts of the empire the number of seventy-five thousand who were so set in their hatred of the Jews as to attack them under Haman's decree. But "all the rulers of the provinces, and the lieutenants, and the deputies, and officers of the king, helped the Jews; because the fear of Mordecai fell upon them."

Among those who attacked the Jews were the ten sons of Haman the Agagite. These were all slain; the last remnant of the race of the Amalekites. And so ended the war of Amalek against the hand that is upon the throne of the Lord. And so also ended Satan's master-stroke against the cause, and work, and people of God in the earth.

[The next article is "The Second Return."]

May 7, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. The Second Return" The Signs of the Times 28, 19 , p. 3, 4 .

BY ALONZO TREVIER JONE

FROM the time of Satan's master-stroke by Haman the Amalekite against the people and the work of God in the earth, unto the next recorded event in their history, was fifteen years–from the twelfth year of Xerxes to the seventh year of Artaxerxes Longimanus, Esther 3:17; Ezra 7:1-7. Yet it must not be supposed that in all these years Satan had been idle or had in any wise slacked his efforts; he only changed his tactics, and plied his efforts in another and more insidious way. He insinuated himself, his spirit, and his ways, into the individual life of the Jews in Palestine.

When the people of Israel came up first from the captivity, the Samaritans and other people of the land sought alliance with them. By the faithfulness of Zerubbabel and Joshua, that proposed alliance was rejected and prevented. By the faithfulness of these devoted men, and by their noble example, the people were held in faithfulness and devotion to God, and so to the rejection of all form of alliance with the mixed peoples around them. But when these devoted men had passed away, they were not succeeded by men of equal devotion. As a consequence the people, not having before them a good example in the men in chief responsibility, drifted into looseness of life: faithfulness and integrity were forgotten; and the alliance which the mixed peoples sought with them was secured, and by that Satan accomplished his purpose of putting a stop to the work of God in the rebuilding of Jerusalem.

The alliance of the mixed peoples with Israel was accomplished by the new leaders in Israel forgetting their integrity and true responsibility, and intermarrying with the mixed peoples around them. "The people of Israel, and the priests, and the Levites," and "the princes and rulers," did not keep themselves separate "from the people of the lands;" but did "according to their abominations, even of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites." For they took "of their daughters for themselves, and for their sons: so that the holy seed mingled themselves with the people of those lands: yea, the hand of the princes and rulers hath been chief in this trespass." Ezra 9:1, 2.

As a natural and very easy consequence the work of rebuilding the city, the streets, and the walls of Jerusalem was neglected, and finally was left off entirely, and even the temple that had been built and dedicated was neglected, and allowed to fall into decay. But thank the Lord, in captivity down in Babylon there were yet some faithful ones whose hearts were seeking the law of the Lord to do it. Of these Ezra was the chief; for "Ezra had prepared his heart to seek the law of the Lord to do it, and to teach in Israel statutes and judgments." Ezra 7:10. This right spirit and true example drew others to the right way; and in the seventh year of Artaxerxes Longimanus, B. C. 457, a decree was issued by that king of Persia in favor of Ezra and whosoever was minded to go with him, for the building of the city and wall of Jersualem, and the repair of the house of God; and commanding all the people beyond the Euphrates to pay toll, tribute, and custom for the work of the Lord in Jerusalem. This decree is recorded in Ezra 7:12-26.

In gratitude for this blessed favor, Ezra wrote:–

"Blessed be the Lord God of our fathers, which hath put such a thing as this in the king's heart, to beautify the house of the Lord which is in Jerusalem: and hath extended mercy unto me before the king, and his counselors, and before all the king's mighty princes. And I was strengthened as the hand of the Lord my God was upon me, and I gathered together out of Israel chief men to go up with me." Ezra 7:27, 28.

The number of those who went up from Babylon with Ezra was about six thousand, as enumerated in the Scriptures. On the first day of the first month in the year 457 B. C., they started from Babylon. When they had reached the river of Ahava, about a day's journey from Babylon, Ezra reviewed the people, and found that in all the company there was not a single Levite. As the Levites were essential to the ministry of the house of God when they should reach Jerusalem. Ezra was obliged to send messengers back to the Jewish colony at Babylon to find some Levites who would come with them to Jerusalem. In response to Ezra's call, there came two hundred and fifty-eight men. When those had arrived, "then," says Ezra,–

"Then I proclaimed a fast there, at the river of Ahava, that we might afflict ourselves before our God, to seek of him a right way for us, and for our little ones, and for all our substance. For I was ashamed to require of the king a band of soldiers and horsemen to help us against the enemy in the way: because we had spoken unto the king, saying, The hand of our God [is] upon all them for good that seek him; but his power and his wrath [is] against all them that forsake him. So we fasted and besought our God for this: and he was entreated of us." Ezra 8:21-23.

This reviewing of the people, the sending back to Babylon for the Levites, and the time of fasting and prayer, occupied eleven days. "Then we departed from the river of Ahava on the twelfth day of the first month, to go unto Jerusalem: and the hand of our God was upon us, and he delivered us from the hand of the enemy, and of such as lay in wait by the way." And "on the first day of the fifth month" they arrived safely at Jerusalem, "according to the good hand of God" upon them. On the fourth day after their arrival at Jerusalem, the gold and silver and the vessels for the house of God which they had brought as offerings, were weighed into the house of God and entered in writing; they offered burnt-offerings according to the twelve tribes of Israel; "and they delivered the king's commissions unto the king's lieutenants, and to the governors on this side the river; and they furthered the people, and the house of God." The temple was immediately repaired, and beautified, and caused once more to stand worthy of the divine purpose to which it was devoted, and to which it had been dedicated. Ezra 6:14, last clause.

This work of repairing and building the temple occupied about eight months. When that work was all done, and Ezra turned his attention to restoring and organizing the full worship and service of God in the temple, there was made the discovery of the mixed marriages and other abominations into which had entered the Jews who had first returned from Babylon.

292

The princes who had come with Ezra, and who were his assistants, discovered this deplorable condition, and came to Ezra, saying:–

"The people of Israel, and the priests, and the Levites, have not separated themselves from the people of the lands, doing according to their abominations, even of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites. For they have taken of their daughters for themselves, and for their sons: so that the holy seed have mingled themselves with the people of those lands: yea, the hand of the princes and rulers hath been chief in this trespass."

This was so fully true that no fewer than four of the very sons of Joshua the son of Jozadak "had taken strange wives."

When the full truth of the dismal situation burst upon the devoted Ezra, he was so overcome that he was utterly speechless all the remaining part of the day.

"When I heard this thing, I rent my garment and my mantle, and plucked off the hair of my head and of my beard, and sat down astonied [like stone, petrified]. Then were assembled unto me every one that trembled at the words of the God of Israel, because of the transgression of those that had been carried away; and I sat astonied until the evening sacrifice. And at the evening sacrifice I arose up from my heaviness; and having rent my garment and my mantle, I fell upon my knees, and spread out my hands unto the Lord my God, and said:–

"O my God, I am ashamed and blush to lift up my face to thee, my God: for our iniquities are increased over our head, and our trespass is grown up unto the heavens. Since the days of our fathers have we been in a great trespass unto this day; and for our iniquities have we, our kings, and our priests, been delivered into the hand of the kings of the lands, to the sword, to captivity, and to a spoil, and to confusion of face, as it is this day. And now for a little space grace hath been showed from the Lord our God, to leave us a remnant to escape, and to give us a nail in his holy place, that our God may lighten our eyes, and give us a little reviving in our bondage. For we were bondmen; yet our God hath not forsaken us in our bondage, but hath extended mercy unto us in the sight of the kings of Persia, to give us a reviving, to set up the house of our God, and to repair the desolations thereof, and to give us a wall in Judah and in Jerusalem. And now, O our God, what shall we say after this? for we have forsaken thy commandments, which thou hast commanded by thy servants the prophets, saying, The land, unto which ye go to possess it, is an unclean land with the filthiness of the people of the lands, with their abominations, which have filled it from one end to another with their uncleanness. Now therefore give not your daughters unto their sons, neither take their daughters unto your sons, nor seek their peace or their wealth for ever: that ye may be strong, and eat the good of the land, and leave it for an inheritance to your children for ever. And after all that is come upon us for our evil deeds, and for our great trespass, seeing that thou our God hast punished us less than our iniquities deserve, and hast given us such deliverance as this; should we again break thy commandments, and join in affinity with the people of these abominations? wouldest not thou be angry with us till thou hadst consumed us, so that there should be no remnant nor escaping? O Lord God of Israel, thou art righteous: for we remain yet escaped, as it is this day: behold, we are before thee in our trespasses: for we cannot stand before thee because of this.

"Now when Ezra had prayed, and when he had confessed, weeping and casting himself down before the house of God, there assembled unto him out of Israel a very great congregation of men and women and children: for the people wept very sore."

Then spoke one for all,–

"We have trespassed against our God, and have taken strange wives of the people of the land: yet now there is hope in Israel concerning this thing. Now therefore let us make a covenant with our God to put away all the wives, and such as are born of them, according to the counsel of my lord, and of those that tremble at the commandment of our God; and let it be done according to the law. Arise: for this matter belongeth unto thee: we also will be with thee: be of good courage, and do it."

This proposal was accepted by all. Then Ezra arose up from before the house of God, and went into one of the chambers of the priests, but "he did eat no bread, nor drink water; for he mourned because of the transgression of them that had been carried away." Then a call was sent throughout Jerusalem and all the land, that all should assemble at Jerusalem; "and that whosever would not come within three days, according to the counsel of the princes and the elders, all his substance should be forfeited, and himself separated from the congregation."

Within the three days all were assembled in Jerusalem. "It was the ninth month, on the twentieth day of the month; and all the people sat in the street of the house of God, trembling because of this matter, and for the great rain." Ezra addressed them:–

"Ye have transgressed, and have taken strange wives, to increase the trespass of Israel. Now therefore make confession unto the Lord God of your fathers, and do his pleasure: and separate yourselves from the people of the land, and from the strange wives."

The people answered, "As thou hast said, so must we do." But since the people were many, and it was a time of much rain, and they were not able to stand without, neither was this "a work of one day or two; for we are many that have transgressed in this thing," they advised that portions of the people come respectively at appointed times, until all who were in the transgression had cleared themselves. This suggestion was adopted. And the time required to accomplish the work was two whole months–from the first day of the tenth month until the first day of the first month.

By this record there is made plain at least one very important lesson. Looseness in the individual life of the people of God gives to Satan advantage and victory over the people and cause of God, which it is impossible for him, by any possible power or machination, to gain, while they maintain integrity and true devotion to God. In the day of the false Smerdis, all that Satan, in possession of imperial power, could do against the work and people of God was, in reality, to produce a condition which only the more helped it forward. In the day of Haman the Amalekite, all that Satan, in possession of the very supremacy of worldly power, could do against the work and people of God, was only to demonstrate the absolute impotence of it all. And all this, simply because the people of God were walking in singleness of heart before Him, in true faith and integrity. But when they neglected all this, and so gave place to Satan in the individual life, then Satan gained the victory for which he had so long striven, and which, with all the power of earth in his hands, he had utterly failed to gain.

Individual faithfulness is the victory of the people of God; individual unfaithfulness if the victory of Satan over the people of God.

[The next article is "The Third Return."]

May 14, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. The Third Return" The Signs of the Times 28, 20 , p. 4, 5 .

BY ALONZO TREVIER JONE

FROM the time of the arrival of Ezra at Jerusalem and his reformatory work done there, as recorded in Ezra, 7-10, unto the next recorded event in the history–Neh. 1:1–was thirteen years; from the seventh year of Artaxerxes Longimanus to the twentieth year of the same king.

It seems that the efforts of Ezra were confined to moral and ecclesiastical reforms; and that in all these thirteen years nothing was done toward rebuilding the wall and city of Jerusalem; for it was the news that that place was still a ruin that stirred up Nehemiah to the determination to go himself to Jerusalem. As he wrote:–

"It came to pass in the month Chisleu, in the twentieth year, as I was in Shushan the palace, that Hanani, one of my brethren, came, he and certain men of Judah; and I asked them concerning the Jews that had escaped, which were left of the captivity, and concerning Jerusalem. And they said unto me, The remnant that are left of the captivity there in the province are in great affliction and reproach: the wall of Jerusalem also [is] broken down, and the gates thereof are burned with fire.

"And it came to pass, when I heard these words, that I sat down and wept, and mourned certain days, and fasted, and prayed before the God of heaven, and said:–

"I beseech thee, O Lord God of heaven, the great and terrible God, that keepeth covenant and mercy for them that love Him and observe His commandments: let Thine ear now be attentive, and Thine eyes open, that Thou mayest hear the prayer of thy servant, which I pray before Thee now, day and night, for the children of Israel thy servants, and confess the sins of the children of Israel, which we have sinned against thee: both I and my father's house have sinned. We have dealt very corruptly against thee, and have not kept the commandments, nor the statutes, nor the judgments, which Thou commandedst Thy servant Moses. Remember, I beseech Thee, the word that Thou commandedst Thy servant Moses, saying, If ye transgress, I will scatter you abroad among the nations: but if ye turn unto Me, and keep My commandments, and do them; though there were of you cast out unto the uttermost part of the heaven, yet will I gather them from thence, and will bring them unto the place that I have chosen to set My name there. Now these are Thy servants and Thy people, whom Thou hast redeemed by Thy great power, and by Thy strong hand. O Lord, I beseech Thee, let now Thine ear be attentive to the prayer of Thy servant, and to the prayer of Thy servants, who desire to fear Thy name: and prosper, I pray Thee, Thy servant this day, and grant him mercy in the sight of this man."–

Artaxerxes Longimanus, king of Persia.

Nehemiah Permitted to Go.

Nehemiah was cupbearer to king Artaxerxes Longimanus; and at this time was with the king in the royal palace in Susa, the capital of the province of Elam. He spent about four months–from the month Chisleu, the ninth month, till "in the month Nisan," the first month–in praying, and fasting, and mourning, before he received open evidence of mercy and favor "in the sight of this man," the king Artaxerxes Longimanus. By this time his true sorrow for the desolations of Jerusalem and the consequent retarding of the work of God, so showed itself upon him that it could be noticed. And as he fulfilled his office of cupbearer to the king, and "took up the wine, and gave it unto the king," his sadness was noticed by the king.

Then the king asked him, "Why is thy countenance sad, seeing thou art not sick? this is nothing but sorrow of heart." Nehemiah answered, "Let the king live forever: why should not my countenance be sad, when the city, the place of my fathers' sepulchers, lieth waste, and the gates thereof are consumed with fire?"

Then said the king, "For what dost thou make request?" And Nehemiah, standing in the presence of the king, and in the very act of bearing the cup to the king–even standing there–"prayed to the God of heaven." And having darted up his prayer to God, he said to the king, "If it please the king, and if thy servant have found favor in thy sight, that thou wouldst send me unto Judah, unto the city of my fathers' sepulchers, that I may build it." The king said "(the queen also sitting by him), For how long shall thy journey be? and when wilt thou return? So it pleased the king to send me; and I set him a time."

The Royal Grants.

"Moreover I said unto the king, If it please the king, let letters be given me to the governors beyond the river, that they may convey me over till I come into Judah; and a letter unto Asaph the keeper of the king's forest, that he may give me timber to make beams for the gates of the palace which appertained to the house, and for the wall of the city, and for the house that I shall enter into. And the king granted me, according to the good hand of my God upon me."

Yet more than this, the king appointed Nehemiah governor of the province of Judah; and sent with him captains and troops of the imperial army to escort him to Jerusalem. The Samaritans were still as envious, and as much opposed to the work of God in Jerusalem as at the first return from the captivity. The principal men of the Samaritans now were Sanballat the Horonite, Tobiah the Ammonite, and Geshem or Gashmu the Arabian. When these men heart that Nehemiah the Jew had come, with the commission, the honor, and the support of the king of Persia, they were greatly perplexed; "it grieved them exceedingly that there was come a man to seek the welfare of the children of Israel."

When Nehemiah had come to Jerusalem, and had been there three days, he spent a night in viewing the condition of ruin in which the city still lay. Then he had the priests, and the nobles, and the rulers, and others, assemble; and to them he said, "Ye see the distress that we are in, how Jerusalem lieth waste, and the gates thereof are burned with fire; come, and let us build up the wall of Jerusalem, that we be no more a reproach." He also told them of the hand of God that was good upon him; and also of the words which Artaxerxes had spoken to him. And they answered heartily, "Let us rise up and build." And so "they strengthened their hands for this good work."

The "Troubles Times."

As soon as Sanballat, and Tobiah, and Geshem heard that the Jews had begun again to build, they laughed them to scorn, and despised them, and said, "What is this thing that ye do? will ye rebel against the king?" And Nehemiah answered as did Zerubbabel and Joshua at the first restoration: "The God of heaven, He will prosper us; therefore we His servants will arise and build; but ye have no portion, nor right, nor memorial, in Jerusalem."

The people were divided into forty-two companies. These companies were distributed round the city the whole length of the compass of the wall, each company to build a portion of the wall. The work was entered upon so heartily that even the women were engaged, tho certain of the nobles of the Tekoites "put not their necks to the work of their Lord."

When Sanballat heard that the work of building the wall went busily on, "he was wroth, and took great indignation, and mocked the Jews. And he spake before his brethren and the army of Samaria, and said, What do these feeble Jews? will they fortify themselves? will they sacrifice? will they make an end in a day? will they revive the stones out of the heaps of the rubbish which are burned?" Tobiah the Ammonite was standing by when Sanballat snapped forth these ironical inquiries, and Tobiah answered in kind: "Even that which they build, if a fox go up, he shall even break down their stone wall." But the work went on so prosperously that soon the whole wall was built and was joined together, to half the height unto which it was to be built.

Sanballat and his Samaritans, finding that their prognostications were a mistake, and that a good solid wall was actually going up, "were very wroth, and conspired all of them together to come and to fight against Jerusalem, and to hinder it. Nevertheless we made our prayer unto our God, and set a watch against them day and night, because of them." The courage of some began to wane, and they said, "The strength of the bearers of burdens is decayed, and there is much rubbish; so that we are not able to build the wall." And the adversaries, the Samaritans, said, "They shall not know, neither see, till we come in the midst among them, and slay them, and cause the work to cease." And even among the Jews in the country there were sympathizers with the Samaritans. These came ten times to Nehemiah and the workers on the wall, with the evil advice, "From all place ye must return to us, for they [the Samaritans] will be upon you."

Since a surprise by secret and sudden attack was thus planned by the Samaritans, Nehemiah armed all the people, men, women, and children, wit swords, and spears, and bows, and stood constantly on such watchfulness that the enemies found that their plot was known, and they could not execute their planned surprise, and that "God had brought their counsel to naught." Being thus delivered from the immediate danger, the people returned all of them "to the wall, every one unto his work." And from that time forth half of the governor's imperial guard wrought in the work, and the other half held the spears, shields, bows, and breast-plates of both. And of those who built on the wall, and carried the material, "every one with one of his hands wrought in the work, and with the other hand held a weapon." And the builders "every one had his sword girded by his side, and so builded."

Nehemiah had the trumpeter stand constantly by his side, to sound the alarm; and he said to all the people:–

"The work is great and large, and we are separated upon the wall, one far from another. In what place therefore ye hear the sound of the trumpet, resort ye thither unto us: our God shall fight for us. So we labored in the work: and half of them held the spears from the rising of the morning till the stars appeared. Likewise at the same time said I unto

308

the people, Let every one with his servant lodge within Jerusalem, that in the night they may be a guard to us, and labor on the day. So neither I, nor my brethren, nor my servants, nor the men of the guard which followed me, none of us put off our clothes, saving that every one put them off for washing."

Thus the work of building the city and the wall went steadily onward, tho truly, as the angel had said to Daniel, "even in troublous times."

[The next article is called "The Year of God against Unbrotherliness."]

May 21, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. The Fear of God against Unbrotherliness" The Signs of the Times 28, 21 , p. 4, 5 .

BY ALONZO TREVIER JONE

THE time spent in the building of the wall of Jerusalem after the coming of Nehemiah, noted in the preceding study, was so far only about a month. Nehemiah's attention had been so engaged in the work of pushing forward the work on the wall, and in warding off the schemes of the enemies, that he had not had time or opportunity to look into the individual and social conduct and condition of the people. And now there came to his knowledge that which was almost as surprising to him as was to Ezra the knowledge of the mixed marriages.

In the thirteen years that had elapsed between the coming of Ezra and that of Nehemiah to Jerusalem, tho the evil of the mixed marriages had been largely corrected, other wrong and weakening things had been indulged. And Nehemiah was surprised and greatly offended by "a great cry of the people and of their wives against their brethren the Jews. for there were that said, We, our sons, and our daughters, are many; therefore we take up corn for them, that we may eat and live." That is, they had put to pledge the honor of their children, for the grain which, in food, they and their children must eat. "Some also there were that said, We have mortgaged our lands, vineyards, and houses, that we might buy corn, because of the dearth. There were also that said, We have borrowed money for the king's tribute [the State taxes], and that upon our lands and vineyards. Yet now our flesh is as the flesh of our brethren, our children as their children: and, lo, we bring into bondage our sons and our daughters to be servants, and [some] of our daughters are brought unto bondage [already]: neither [is it] in our power [to redeem them]; for other men have our lands and vineyards."

Thus on the part of many there was the spirit and practise of speculating on the necessities of their brethren; for this money was not simply loaned, but loaned at interest and profit. This spirit, in the nature of things, only increased the natural selfishness of the heart, and cultivated hardness and oppressiveness of brother to brother. It really destroyed all true brotherliness, and supplanted it with the spirit of sordid gain; the whole thought became not, How can I do most to help my brother? but, How can I make most off of him? not, What can I do most to help him? but, What can I do most to help myself through his necessities?

For these reasons, this that they were doing was plainly forbidden by the Lord; and in it all they were going directly contrary to the Scriptures which they professed to obey. In the Word of the Lord it was plainly written to all: "If thy brother be waxen poor, and fallen in decay with thee, then thou shalt relieve him; yea, tho he be a stranger, or a sojourner; that he may live with thee. Take thou no money[1]1 of him for increase; but fear thy God; that thy brother may live with thee. Thou shalt not give him thy money upon money, nor lend him thy victuals for increase. I am the Lord your God, which brought you forth out of the land of Egypt, to give you the land of Canaan, and to be your God. And if thy brother that dwelleth by thee be waxen poor, and be sold unto thee, thou shalt not compel him to serve as a bondservant; but as a hired servant, and as a sojourner, he shall be with thee." Lev. 25:35-40. "Thou shall not lend upon usury to thy brother; usury of money, usury of victuals, usury of anything that is lent upon usury. Unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury; but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon usury; that the Lord thy God may bless thee in all that thou settest thine hand to in the land whither thou goest to possess it." Deut. 23:19, 20. "If thou lend money to any of My people that is poor by thee, thou shalt not be to him as an usurer, neither shalt thou lay upon him usury." Ex. 22:25. "Lord, who shall abide in Thy tabernacle? who shall dwell in Thy holy hill?–He that walketh uprightly, and worketh righteousness, and speaketh the truth in his heart. . . . He that putteth not out his money to usury, nor taketh reward against the innocent." Ps. 15:1, 2, 5. "If a man be just, and do that which is lawful and right. . . . and hath not oppressed any, but hath restored to the debtor his pledge, hath spoiled none by violence, hath given his bread to the hungry, and hath covered the naked with a garment; he that hath not given forth upon usury, neither hath taken any increase, that hath withdrawn his hand from iniquity, hath executed true judgment between man and man, hath walked in My statutes, and hath kept My judgments, to deal truly; he is just, he shall surely live, saith the Lord." Eze. 18:1-9, 12, 13, 16, 17. And among the "abominations" that had destroyed "the bloody city," Jerusalem, and taken the people captive to Babylon, was this: "In thee have they taken gifts to shed blood; thou hast taken usury and increase, and thou hast greedily gained of thy neighbors by extortion, and hast forgotten Me, saith the Lord." Eze. 22:2, 12.

All this was written in the Scriptures which these very people professed to believe, and in which they even boasted; and yet they disregarded it all, and made the poverty and necessity of their brethren only opportunity for traffic in loaning money and victuals for usury and increase! No wonder that the righteous Nehemiah declares, "I was very angry when I heard their cry and these words." And, "Then I consulted with myself, and I rebuked the nobles, and the rulers, and said unto them, Ye exact usury, every one of his brother. And I set a great assembly against them. And I said unto them, We after our ability have redeemed our brethren the Jews, which were sold unto the heathen; and will ye even sell your brethren? or shall they be sold unto us? Then held they their peace, and found nothing to answer."

"Also I said, It is not good that ye do: ought ye not to walk in the fear of our God because of the reproach of the heathen our enemies? I likewise, and my brethren, and my servants, might exact of them money and corn: I pray you, let us leave off this usury. Restore, I pray you, to them, even this day, their lands, their vineyards, their oliveyards, and their houses, also the hundredth part of the money, and of the corn, the wine, and the oil, that ye exact of them. Then said they, We will restore them, and will require nothing of them; so will we do as thou sayest.

"Then I called the priests, and took an oath of them, that they should do according to this promise. Also I shook my lap, and said, So God shake out every man from his house, and from his labor, that performeth not this promise, even thus be he shaken out, and emptied. And all the congregation said, Amen, and praised the Lord. And the people did according to this promise."

Nehemiah could safely and consistently appeal to all the people upon this issue; for, tho he was an exceedingly rich man, and had the best of opportunities to lend money at big interest, and make gain of the people, he not only did nothing of the kind as a speculator, but he did not use nor even collect what was his due as governor. For twelve years he supported himself and his whole household and retinue as governor, also a hundred and fifty Jews and rulers, besides others, at his own expense from his own personal funds. And he says: "From the time that I was appointed to be their governor in the land of Judah, from the twentieth year even unto the two and thirtieth year of Artaxerxes the king, that is, twelve years, I and my brethren have not eaten the bread of the governor. But the former governors that had been before me were chargeable unto the people, and had taken of them bread and wine, beside forty shekels of silver; yea, even their servants bare rule over the people: but so did not I, because of the fear of God. Yea, also I continued in the work of this wall, neither bought we any land: and all my servants were gathered thither unto the work. Moreover there were at my table an hundred and fifty of the Jews and rulers, beside those that came unto us from among the heathen that are about us. Now that which was prepared for me daily was one ox and six choice sheep; also fowls were prepared for me, and once in ten days store of all sorts of wine: yet for all this required not I the bread of the governor, because the bondage was heavy upon this people."

With such an example as this of mercy and brotherly kindness ever before them, those who had been trading upon the bondage and necessities of the people were enabled to keep their promise to quit it all, and to deal with their brethren as tho they were brethren indeed. This reform was a success. Nehemiah, because of the fear of God, had from the heart manifested the very spirit and essence of the divine principle. "All thing whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them." Also in the same fear of God he could pray, "Think upon me, my God, for good, according to all that I have done for this people." And that prayer . . . and will be certainly answered to the soul, because it is also a divine principle that "with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."

325

And now, as then, let all the people say, "Amen."

["The Wall Finished, and the Full Temple Service Restored," is the title of the next article of this series.]

May 28, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. The Wall Finished, and the Full Temple Service Restored" The Signs of the Times 28, 22 , p. 3, 4 .

BY ALONZO TREVIER JONE

AT last the wall of Jerusalem was finished. So diligently had the work been pursued, that the wall was finished in fifty-two days from the day that Nehemiah began the work. However, the gates were not yet set up. But even tho the wall was finished, the "troublous times" did not cease; for says Nehemiah:–

"When Sanballat, and Tobiah, and Geshem the Arabian, and the rest of our enemies, heard that I had builded the wall, and that there was no breach left therein; . . . Sanballat and Geshem sent unto me, saying, Come, let us meet together in some on of the villages in the plan of Ono."

This was a part of a plan of theirs and of the master adversary, to get Nehemiah into their power, and to slay him, and then cause to cease the work of building the city. But Nehemiah knew that the work in which he was engaged was one in which those men could have no part nor lot, nor any true interest, and to the extent of a parley; therefore he "sent messengers unto then, saying, I am doing a great work, so that I can not come down; why should the work cease, whilst I leave it, and come down to you?"

Yet they were so persistent that they sent to Nehemiah "four times after this sort," and every time he "answered them after the same manner." And even yet they did not cease. In encouragements to the people in the work of that restoration of the city and people of God, Nehemiah, with his faithful fellow laborers, constantly cited the promises of God that the Messiah, the Son of David, the official King of Judah, would come. He assured them that the work which was then being done, and the time upon which they were engaged, would end only in the coming of the Messiah, the rightful King. Rumors of this constantly reached the adversaries, the Samaritans. Their dull minds could frame only the conception of an earthly king; only Nehemiah himself could be such king; this could mean only rebellion as soon as the city should be finished, therefore Nehemiah could be working so diligently only for his own aggrandizement.

"Accordingly Sanballat sent his servant even the fifth time:" this time "with an open letter in his hand," wherein was written:–

"It is reported among the heathen, and Gashmu saith it, that thou and the Jews think to rebel: for which cause thou buildest the wall, that thou mayest be their king, according to these words. And thou hast also appointed prophets to preach of thee at Jerusalem, saying, There is a king in Judah: and now shall it be reported to the king according to these words. Come now therefore, and let us take counsel together."

The Worst Trouble of All.

Nehemiah answered truly, "There are no such things done as thou sayest, but thou feignest them out of thine own heart." And of them he says, "For they all made us afraid, saying, Their hands shall be weakened from the work, that it be not done." And against all he appealed to God, "Now therefore, O God, strengthen my hands."

Yet the worst feature of the situation was not the scheming of Sanballat, and Tobiah, and Geshem; it was the traitorous fellowship; of Jews in Jerusalem who in heart were united with Sanballat, and Tobiah, amnd Geshem, and constantly played into their hands and aided their schemes. When the trick of Sanballat, and Tobiah, and Geshem to get Nehemiah into their power, outside the city, had failed, these false brethren attempted to make that scheme effective inside the city. So as Nehemiah came one day to the house of Shemaiah, the son of Delaiah, the son of Mehetabeel, who was shut up, Shemaiah said to him, "Let us meet together in the house of God, within the temple, and let us shut the doors of the temple; for they wilt come to slay thee; yea, in the night will they come to slay thee." But, said noble Nehemiah, "Should such a man as I flee? and who is there, that, being as I am, would go into the temple to save his life? I will not go in."

Yet more, and the worst, was to come. Here is the record:–

"And, lo, I perceived that God had not sent him; but that he pronounced this prophecy against me: for Tobiah and Sanballat had hired him. Therefore was he hired, that I should be afraid, and do so, and sin, and that they might have matter for an evil report, that they might reproach me. My God, think thou upon Tobiah and Sanballat according to these their works, and on the prophetess Noadiah, and the rest of the prophets, that would have put me in fear. . . . Moreover in those days the nobles of Judah sent many letters unto Tobiah, and the letters of Tobiah came unto them. For there were many in Judah sworn unto him, because he [Tobiah] was the son in law of Shechaniah the son of Arah; and his [Tobiah's] son Johanan had taken the daughter of Meshullam the son of Berechiah. Also they reported his good deeds before me, and uttered my words to him. And Tobiah sent letters to put me in fear."

Yet, for all this, there was no halt in the work. The gates were set up, and thus the wall was finished in all its parts completely round the city. And "when all our enemies heard thereof, and all the heathen that were about us saw these things, they were much cast down in their own eyes: for they perceived that this work was wrought of our God." As the danger from the enemies was still great, Nehemiah commanded, "Let not the gates of Jerusalem be opened until the sun be hot; and while they stand by, let them shut the doors, and bar them: and appoint watches of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, every one in his watch, and every one to be over against his house. Now the city was large and great: but the people were few therein, and the houses were not builded."

Restoring the Worship.

Being able thus to dwell in comparative safety, the restoration of the worship of God according to the Scriptures was systematically entered upon. On the first day of the seventh month "all the people gathered themselves together as one man, into the street that was before the water gate," and the people spake unto "Ezra the scribe to bring the book of the law of Moses, which the Lord commanded to Israel." Ezra brought forth the book, and stood upon a pulpit of wood which they had made for the purpose, and "opened the book in the sight of all the people (for he was above all the the people;) and when he opened it, all the people stood up: and Ezra blessed the Lord, the great God. And all the people answered, Amen, Amen, with lifting up their hands: and they bowed their heads, and worshiped the Lord with their faces to the ground."

Certain chosen ones "caused the people to understand the law; and the people stood in their place. So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading." This was so especially necessary, because,–owing to the scattered condition of the people in the captivity, and especially owing to the mixed marriages in which the people had indulged since their return–the language of the people had so changed that many of them could not well understand the pure Hebrew in which the Scriptures were written, and now read by Ezra. And when they did understand the reading, as now distinctly presented to them in its plain sense, it presented before them a manner of life so distinct from that which they had been living, so much purer and more elevated and noble, that "all the people wept when they heard the words of the law."

But Nehemiah and Ezra and the interpreters comforted all the people, saying, "This day is holy unto the Lord your God; mourn not, nor weep. . . . Go your way, eat the fat, and drink the sweet, and send portions unto them for whom nothing is prepared; for this day is holy unto our Lord. Neither be ye sorry; for the joy of the Lord is your strength. . . . Hold your peace, for the day is holy; neither be ye grieved. And all the people went their way to eat, and to drink, and to send portions, and to make great mirth, because they had understood the words that were declared unto them."

The Feast of Tabernacles.

On the second day, as they were all gathered to the reading, it was also the second day of the seventh month, in the portion that was read was what is now Leviticus 23. In this they found that it was commanded "that the children of Israel should dwell in booths in the feast of the seventh month; and that they should publish and proclaim in all their cities, and in Jerusalem, saying, Go forth into the mount, and fetch olive branches, and pine branches, and myrtle branches, and palm branches, and branches of thick trees, to make booths, as it is written." This had stood in the book all the ages since the children of Israel had been in the wilderness, after their coming out of Egypt; yet "since the days of Joshua the son of Nun unto that day had not the children of Israel done so." Nevertheless as soon as it was now read, the people received it as it is the word of God, and promptly went forth, and brought the branches, "and made themselves booths, every one upon the roof of his house, and in their courts, and in the courts of the house of God, and in the street of the water gate, and in the street of the gate of Ephraim. And all the congregation of them that were come again out of the captivity made booths, and sat under the booths. . . . And there was very great gladness."

When the booths were prepared, and the people dwelt in them, on the first day of the Feast of Tabernacles the reading of the Scriptures was taken up again, and was continued day by day throughout the whole seven days of the feast. And on the eighth day, the twenty-third day of the seventh month, "was a solemn assembly according to the manner." And on the twenty-fourth day of this same month the people "assembled with fasting, and with sackclothes, and earth upon them. And the seed of Israel separated themselves from all

340

strangers, and stood and confessed their sins, and the iniquities of their fathers. And they stood up in their place, and read in the book of the law of the Lord their God one fourth part of the day; and another fourth part they confessed, and worshiped the Lord their God."

One of these blessed and thorough confessions is recorded in full in Nehemiah 9 as an example for God's people in all time. It is well worth a careful reading in detail by every one of God's people to-day. there is not anywhere in it any suggestion that either they or their fathers had been infallibly right, and had done infallibly right, all the time, so that it should be accounted akin to sacrilege for anybody to think, and akin to blasphemy for anybody to say, that there was a better way. This confession was written out, and Nehemiah and eighty-three others of the princes, priests, and Levites signed it in behalf of themselves and all the people, who "clave to their brethren, their nobles, and entered into a curse, and into an oath, to walk in God's law, which was given by Moses the servant of God, and to observe and do all the commandments of the Lord our Lord, and his judgments and his statutes; and that we would not give our daughters unto the people of the land, nor take their daughters for our sons: and if the people of the land bring ware or any victuals on the Sabbath day to sell, that we would not buy it of them on the Sabbath, or on the holy day: and that we would leave the seventh year, and the exaction of every debt."

At the same time the ordinances, and the courses of the priests, Levites, porters, and singers, etc., were restored, in the service of God in the temple.

[The next article is "The Wall Dedicated, the Rival Worship of Samaria Established."]

June 4, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. The Wall of Jerusalem Dedicated; the Rival Worship of Samaria Established" The Signs of the Times 28, 23 , p. 3, 4 .

BY ALONZO TREVIER JONE

SOME time after the events related in the preceding article, Nehemiah made a journey to the court of the king of Persia, where he stayed several months, and then returned to Jerusalem.

As soon as he returned, he began to arrange for a great celebration in the dedication of the wall that had at last, through such "troublous times," been triumphantly finished. He gathered from the cities, the villages, and the . . . country of Judah, priests, Levites, and . . . in great numbers to bear a leading part in the dedication with gladness, both with thanksgivings, and with singing, with cymbals, . . . , and with harps. And the sons of the singers gathered themselves together, both out of the plain country round about Jerusalem, and from the villages of Netophathi; also from the house of Gilgal, and out of the fields of Geba and Azmaveth: for the singers had builded them villages round about Jerusalem. And the priests and the Levites purified themselves, and purified the people, and the gates, and the wall."

When all had thus been "purified," and so prepared, the day of the dedication came. There were formed two great processions of . . . , priests, singers, and people who ascended the wall at opposite points, and . . . round upon the top of the wall till the two processions were joined at both ends of . . . forming now one continuous procession round the whole city upon the top of the wall. Then the whole united procession stood still and "gave thanks," and "the singers sang loud, with Jezrahiah their overseer. Also that day they offered great sacrifices, and rejoiced: for God had made them rejoice with great joy: the wives also and the children rejoiced: so that the joy of Jerusalem was heard even afar off."

Enemies Cast Out

During Nehemiah's absence, the Samaritans, the enemies of the work of God, through their . . . among the princes and priests in Judah and Jerusalem, had secured a foothold in Jerusalem. Eliashib the priest had allowed one of his daughters to marry that chief and persistent enemy, Tobiah the Ammonite! Not only this, . . . Eliashib had actually emptied of its proper . . . one of the great chambers of the temple, had fitted it up as a residence, and had . . . there his new son-in-law, Tobiah the Ammonite.

Now amid the services of the festival days of the dedication, in reading the Scriptures in the book of the law "they read in the book of Moses to the audience of the people; and therein was found written, that the Ammonite and the Moabite should not come into the congregation of God forever. . . . Now it came to pass, when they had heard the law, that they separated from Israel all the mixed multitude."

Thus there came to the attention of Nehemiah the crooked and brazen course of Eliashib the priest in his alliance with Tobiah the Ammonite, and "in preparing him a chamber in the courts of the house of God." "And," he says, "it grieved me sore; therefore I cast forth all the household stuff of Tobiah out of the chamber. Then I commanded, and they cleansed the chambers; and thither brought I again the vessels of the house of God, with the meat offering and the frankincense."

The Lord Robbed of Means and Time

Also during Nehemiah's absence there had been a falling away from faithfulness in bringing the tithes into the storehouse. "I perceived that the portions of the Levites had not been given them; for the Levites and the singers, that did the work, were fled everyone to his field. Then contended I with the rulers and said, Why is the house of God forsaken? And I gathered them together, and set them in their place. Then brought all Judah the tithe of the corn and the new wine and the oil into the treasuries."

There had been also a falling away from the proper observance of the Sabbath; indeed, with many, from any observance of the Sabbath at all; for–

"In those days saw I in Judah some treading winepresses on the Sabbath, and bringing in sheaves, and lading asses; as also wine, grapes, and figs, and all manner of burdens, which they brought into Jerusalem on the Sabbath day; and I testified against them in the day wherein they sold victuals. There dwelt men of Tyre also therein, which brought fish, and all manner of ware, and sold on the Sabbath unto the children of Judah, and in Jerusalem. Then I contended with the nobles of Judah, and said unto them, What evil thing is this that ye do, and profane the Sabbath day? Did not your fathers thus, and did not our God bring all this evil upon us, and upon this city? yet ye bring more wrath upon Israel by profaning the Sabbath.

"And it came to pass, that, when the gates of Jerusalem began to be dark before the Sabbath, I commanded that the gates should be shut, and charged that they should not be opened till after the Sabbath: and some of my servants set I at the gates, that there should no burden be brought in on the Sabbath day. So the merchants and sellers of all kind of ware lodged without Jerusalem once or twice. Then I testified against them, and said unto them, Why lodge ye about the wall? if ye do so again, I will lay hands on you. From that time forth came they no more on the Sabbath."

Mixed Marriages

Encouraged by the example of the priests and others, many of the people had again fallen away to mixed marriage:–

"In those days also saw I Jews that had married wives of Ashdod, of Ammon, and of Moab; and their children spake half in the speech of Ashdod, and could not speak in the Jews' language; but according to the language of each people. And I contended with them, and cursed them, and smote certain of them, and plucked off their hair, and made them swear by God, saying, Ye shall not give your daughters unto their sons, nor take their daughters unto your sons, or for yourselves. Did not Solomon king of Israel sin by these things? yet among many nations was there no king like him, who was beloved of his God, and God made him king over all Israel: nevertheless even him did outlandish women cause to sin. Shall we then hearken unto you to do all this great evil, to transgress against our God in marrying strange wives?"

We have seen that a daughter of Eliashib had been given in marriage to one of the chief enemies of the cause of God–Tobiah the Ammonite. In addition to that, one of his grandsons had married the daughter of the very chief enemy himself–Sanballat the Horonite. When it was demanded that he separate from this heathenish connection, he was so far gone in apostasy that he refused. And as the consequence, says Nehemiah, "One of the sons of Joiada, the son of Eliashib the high priest, was son-in-law to Sanballat the Horonite; therefore I chased him from me."

Smaritan [sic.] Worship Established

The chasing away of this young man–his name was Manasseh–brought curious historical results. The mixture of Samaritans and Jews was now as follows: Sanballat's daughter was married to this young Jew, Manasseh. Tobiah was married to at least one, if not two of the Jewesses. Tobiah's son, Johanan, was also married to a Jewess. And now this company, including young Manasseh, finding themselves permanently excluded from Jerusalem and the temple and worship there, conceived a design to have a temple and worship of their own. However, so long as Artaxerxes Longimanus lived, they could do nothing, because of his fixed favor toward the temple and worship in Jerusalem. But in 425 B. C. Artaxerxes died. He was succeeded by Xerxes II., who, after forty-five days, was murdered and succeeded by his half half-brother, Sogilianus; and he in turn, after six months and fifteen days, was murdered and succeeded by his half-brother, Ochus, who reigned as Darius Nothus. To Darius Nothus Sanballat made personal application, and was successful in obtaining from him a grant to build on Mount Gerizim, near Samaria, a temple like that at Jerusalem, and to make Manasseh, his son-in-law, high priest of it.

Sanballat having built this temple, and made Manasseh high priest of it, Samaria thenceforth became the common refuge and asylum of the refractory Jews; so that, if any among them were found guilty of violating the law, ad in eating forbidden meats, the breach of the Sabbath, or the like, and were called to an account for it, they fled to the Samaritans, and there found reception; by which means it came to pass that, after some time, the greatest part of that people were made up of apostate Jews and their descendants. . . . The mixing of so many Jews among them soon made a change in their religion. For whereas they had hitherto worshiped the God of Israel only in conjunction with their other gods,–that is, the gods of those nations of the East from whence they came,–after a temple was built among them, in which the daily service was constantly performed in the same manner as at Jerusalem, and the book of the law of Moses was brought to Samaria, and there publicly read to them, they soon left off worshiping their false gods, and conformed themselves wholly to the worship of the true God, according to the rule which was in that book prescribed to them.

However, the Jews, looking on them as apostates, hated them above all the nations of the earth, so as to avoid all manner of converse and communication with them. This hatred first began from the opposition which the Samaritans made against them on their return from the Babylonish captivity, both in their rebuilding of the temple, and their repairing of the walls of Jerusalem, of which an account hath been above given; and it was afterward much increased by this apostasy of Manasseh and those who

356

joined with him in it, and by their erecting . . . an altar and a temple in opposition to theirs at Jerusalem. And all others who, at any time after fled from Jerusalem for the violation of the law, always finding reception among them, this continually further added to the fancor which the Jews had entertained against them, till at length it grew to that length that the Jews published a curse and an anathema against them, the bitterest that ever was denounced against any people. For thereby they forbade all manner of communication with them, declared all the fruits and products of their land, and everything else of theirs which was either eaten or drunk among them, to be as swine's flesh; and prohibited all of their nation ever to taste thereof, and also excluded all of that people from ever being received as proselytes to their religion.–Prideaux.

This is why the woman of Samaria was so surprised when Jesus asked her to give him a drink of water: and she replied, "How is it that Thou, being a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria? for the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans." It also illustrates the force of that expression of the Jews to the Saviour. "Thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil," as in their estimation to be a Samaritan and to have a devil–be possessed–were the same thing.

["Backsliding to Confirmed Apostasy" is the title of the instructive article to appear next week.]

June 18, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. Backsliding to Confirmed Apostasy" The Signs of the Times 28, 25 , p. 5 .

BY ALONZO TREVIER JONE

IN the history of the restoration from the captivity to Babylon there is one notable thought that runs like a thread through the whole, that until now it could not be considered in its full strength of meaning. That thought–that truth–is that after the first coming-out of Babylon, the real strength and hope of the cause of God lay in the other comings-out of Babylon, and not at all in any development or growth from within, of those who were not of Babylon and in the Lord's land, and possessed there of the full light of His Word, His prophets, and all the opportunities and blessings of His true worship.

The Course and Cause of Backsliding

The first coming-out of Babylon was a glorious deliverance; a wonderful manifestation of God's power and grace, both through the powers of the world and upon His people. The most perfect freedom in work and worship in the world, was theirs. Heaven and earth were united in their favor. But instead of being absolutely swallowed up in pure devotion out of gratitude for all this wondrous favor of God, they soon began to drift into formality and worldliness; they neglected the cause and work of God and thought of worldly gain; they so slighted the truth of God, so lost true love for it, that they neglected to instruct their own children, the children, therefore, easily swung into the ways of the heathen, into essential sympathy with the heathen, so that they could readily choose the heathen in marriage; and the parents were themselves so in essential sympathy with heathenism in principle, that they could readily assent to their children's marriage with the heathen, not seeing "but that the children were about as well off as marrying the heathen as in marrying among their own people." And this was true, because by the general neglect of the parents among their own people, the young of their own people had grown up within the heathen that any vital difference was difficult to see. And yet in the presence of all the essential confusion, these people were willing to pride themselves on being "out of Babylon." "We have the truth." "God speaks to us by prophets."

And when down in Babylon devout souls, seeking the full truth, longing for light and freedom and for deliverance from the confusion and darkness and redemption around them, really found deliverance and came "out of Babylon" indeed, glad even to know that God was really speaking by living prophets to His people who were out of Babylon,–when these dear souls came, all expectant, up to Jerusalem to the people of God, as to the very gate of heaven, they were so disappointed and pained at the low and loose condition of the people in worship, in morals, and in mixing with the world, that they were made ashamed and to blush to lift up their faces to God in view of the iniquities that had increased over their heads, and trespasses that were grown up unto the heavens.

Spirituality Waning.

Nevertheless by this second coming-out of Babylon–that under Ezra–there was a great revival sought, and the backslidden people were again separated from corruptness and worldliness, and united once more to God.

But soon the power of the revival was allowed to wane; again the people drifted into the former condition of worldliness, of money-getting, of neglect of the cause and work of God, and of marriage with the heathen.

The Final Coming-out and Apostasy.

And still there were in Babylon devout souls, loving God, and longing to see His cause rise in its true dignity and power, and move prosperously, in the world; souls longing for deliverance from the corruption of Babylon, into the light and freedom and place of God's own land, among God's people who were out of Babylon. And again these were disappointed and groaned at the low and loose conditions of the people whom they thought to be out of Babylon; grieved at the neglect of the cause and work of God which those people professed, and grieved at the deplorable unity of heart and mixture of marriage between them and the open enemies of God and His cause and work in the world.

Nevertheless, again as the consequence of these comings-out of Babylon, there was a great revival, and a cleansing and a separating from the heathen, among the backslidden ones also professed to be "out of Babylon."

And still again, but now for the last time, the power and blessedness of the revival was allowed to wane, the people drifted into formalism, worldliness, love of money, neglect of the cause and work of God, and now–even worse than the confusion of marriages with the heathen–a confusion of relationships among themselves by the use and multiplying of divorce.

The backsliding was now so great that there was a total separation of their own interests from the cause and work of God, so much so that if they did for the cause so little a thing as the shutting of the doors of the house of God, or the kindling of a fire on His altar, they considered that they ought to be paid for it; because that was "not their work," but the work of those whose time was devoted to that and who consequently were paid for it. When they made offerings to the Lord, instead of making them from the first and the first and the best, it was from what was left after they had consumed upon themselves the first and the best–from the refuse, that would be unfit to offer to their human governor. Yes, and even when the first and best was still in their possession unconsumed–instead of making offerings from that, they would actually pick out that which was inferior, and make that their offering to the Lord. And all this as a professed expression of their faith that God had given for their salvation and redemption of His First and Best! But in truth it was the expression of their unbelief in God's having made, or that He would make, any true offering at all, but only the refuse, if any.

The Depth of Backsliding.

The backsliding was now such that the priests, the ministers and teachers to the people, "departed out of the way," and actually caused the people to stumble at the very law that they were set to teach. They forgot the fear of God, and of course feared the people. Then they would not declare the clear and plain Word of God, for fear that the people would resent it and they would lose their place; for tho the office of priest was of God, as a consequence of such example the people, seeing that the priests had become political and were afraid of them, became themselves political and unruly, and would turn out of office even a priest who did not please them. Thus the priests did not keep the straight way of the truth, but practised partiality in the law of the Lord, and so made the Lord "contemptible and base before all the people."

The men dealt treacherously, committed abomination, and profaned the holiness of the Lord and the covenant of fatherhood, in dealing treacherously against the wife of their youth by divorcing her for another, and especially for a younger. "For the Lord, the God of Israel, saith that He hateth putting away; for one covereth violence with his garment, saith the Lord of hosts; therefore take heed to your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously."

They were so far backslidden from God that they would keep the tithe, paying it not at all; thus robbing God. they were so far in the dark that they actually drew comparisons between themselves and the wicked, to the advantage of the wicked. And when in their darkness and discontent with God, because of their own perverseness, they concluded that the wicked were having a better time than themselves were, they declared, "It is vain to serve God," and there is no profit in trying to do right and walking mournfully before the Lord; for while we are doing this and having a hard and cheerless time of it, the proud are happy, the wicked are prospered, and they that actually go so far as to tempt God, are even delivered.

Dead Formality.

And with all this looseness of life, this darkness of spirit, this corruption of morals, they would go to meeting on the Sabbath, and go through the forms of worship, and pray, and weep; and they counted themselves very religious because of all this. But the Lord rebuked this with the rest of their iniquity, and declared that it was this formalism. This was the cause of His rejecting their offerings. "This have ye done again, covering the altar of the Lord with tears, with weeping, and with crying out, insomuch that He regardeth not the offering any more, or receiveth it with good will of your hand."

But amidst this dark and dismal mass there were still a few, a little flock, who feared the Lord. These "spake often one to another" of the goodness of the Lord, of the joy of serving Him, and the wealth of happiness found in the loving-kindness of the Lord. "And the Lord hearkened and heard it, and a book of remembrance was written before Him for them that feared the Lord, and that thought upon His name. And they shall be Mine, saith the Lord, of hosts in that day when I make up My jewels; and I will spare them, as a man spareth His own son that serveth Him."

Thus was it with the few; but as for the people themselves, the nation, they were gone. They had neglected the light and joy and blessing of the three messages of God calling out of Babylon; they had worn out the Lord's good Spirit of reviving; they had confirmed themselves in backsliding. All that is left for the Lord to do is by His prophet to testify to the real condition of things and the end thereof, close up His revelation, cease to speak; and let them reap what they had so persistently sown–the rejection of God when He came in the person of His Son to offer Himself finally for them; and then appeal directly to the heathen to whom they had persistently allied themselves, and whose salvation they had so long hindered by so allying themselves to them.

It was a wonderful thing to be delivered from Babylon, and brought to the freedom, and light, and joy, and blessing, of the Lord in His own chosen land. It was a wonderful thing to have God enlist in their favor all power of earth as well as of heaven. It was a wonderful thing that God should speak to them by living prophets. And it was a most deplorable thing that they should allow the love of the world and fellowship of the heathen to frustrate and make utterly vain, so far as they were concerned, this whole tide of heaven which had been made to flow upon earth. O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate."

["From Religious to Political" is the title of the next article.]

June 25, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. From Religious to Political" The Signs of the Times 28, 26 , p. 4, 5 .

BY ALONZO TREVIER JONE

AFTER the time of Malachi, there is, strictly speaking, no such thing as a religious history of the Jews. God had closed His revelation, His voice was stilled. He spoke no more by prophets. The people had got entirely beyond the hearing of His voice. They were already political in their religion; and it was not long before their religion itself became political, so that henceforth their history is simply political, tending steadily more and more to that dreadful hour in which they openly renounced every principle of religion, and openly proclaimed themselves political solely–in their savage exclamation, that awful night, to Pilate and to the universe, "We have no king but Cesar."

Nevertheless, God bore with them until that hour, and even beyond. He still abode with them, in spite of their sad misrepresentation of Him, in spite of their putting Him to an open shame. For the sake of His promise to their fathers from ancient time, that from them the deliverer should come, He remained through all their unfaithfulness the Faithful One. Yet their history from Malachi onward is but a part, rather an incident, of the general history of empire in the East. And in this general history of empire, God continued to reveal Himself to fulfil His Word, and to shape all things to the accomplishment of His eternal purpose.

God had revealed Himself to Nebuchadnezzar, and had been accepted by him as the one true God and the everlasting King. And Nebuchadnezzar proclaimed Him as such to all peoples, nations, and languages. God revealed Himself to Darius the Mede, and was also accepted and proclaimed by him to all peoples, nations, and languages. God next revealed Himself to Cyrus, and by him likewise God weas accepted and proclaimed to all nations as "the God." As we have seen, the influence of Cyrus for this God and for His worship in the earth, continued to shape the course of his successors, Cambyses, Darius, Xerxes, and Artaxerxes.

We have seen that in the days of Cyrus the angel Gabriel abode at the Persian court; and he said that he would continue there till the time of the coming of the prince of Grecia, of which the angel had already spoken to Daniel. Dan. 8:21; 10:20. And the Persian court was becoming worse and worse, and more and more unbearable. We have seen that Darius Nothus came to the throne by the murder of his predecessor, who had obtained the same throne by the murder of his predecessor. This Darius was succeeded by his son Artaxerxes without murder on his part, but not without his brother's attempting to murder him. Artaxerxes was succeeded by his son Ochus, "the most cruel and wicked of all the princes of his race, as his actions soon evinced. In a very short time the palace and the whole empire were filled with his murders." He was poisoned by one of his ministers, Bagoas by name, who also slew all the king's sons but the youngest, whom he made king; but whom in two years he murdered. Bagoas then placed upon the throne Darius Colomannus. Him also he shortly attempted to poison; but was detected, and was required to drink his own prepared poisoned drink to prove his innocence. In such a desperately corrupt place as the court of Persia had now become, the angel could no longer stay. Corruption had reached its height. Gabriel left the horrible place, lo! the prince of Grecia came, and the Persian empire sank.

Alexander, "the prince of Grecia," in his siege of Tyre, had demanded assistance from the Jews. The Jews pleaded that they were lawful subjects of the Persian king who was yet reigning; that all that they were, as a nation, they owed, under God, to the favor of the Persian kings; and that therefore they could not consent to oppose the Persian king. This made Alexander very angry, and he declared against the Jews and Jerusalem vengeance in destruction and desolation. He started toward Jerusalem to execute his wrath. The people were greatly troubled. The high priest proclaimed a fast, and that supplications be made to God. God accepted their appeal, and instructed the high priest in a dream to go forth with his assistant priests, arrayed in their priestly garments, and all the other people clothed in white, to meet the coming king, as he should approach the city.

The procession extended a long distance outside the city. When Alexander "saw the multitude at a distance, in white garments, while the priests stood clothed in fine linen, and the high priest in purple and scarlet clothing, with his miter on his head, having the golden plate whereon the name of God was engraved, he approached by himself and adored that name, and first saluted the high priest. The Jews also did all together with one voice salute Alexander, and encompassed him about. Whereupon the king of Syria and the rest were surprised at what Alexander had done, and supposed him disordered in his mind.

"However, Parmenio alone went up to him and asked him how it came to pass that when all others adored him, he should adore the high priest of the Jews? To whom he replied, 'I did not adore him, but that God who hath honored him with His high priesthood. I saw this very person in a dream, in this very habit, when I was at Dios in Macedonia; who, when I was considering with myself how I might obtain the dominion of Asia, exhorted me to make no delay, for that He would conduct my army, and would give me the dominion over the Persians; whence it is that having seen no other in that habit, and now seeing this person in it, and remembering that vision, and the exhortation which I had in my dream, I believe that I bring this army under the Divine conduct, and shall therewith conquer Darius, and destroy the power of the Persians, and that all things will succeed according to what is in my mind."

Alexander then placed the high priest at his right hand, and walked at the head of the procession, that was now joined by his army, into the city, and up to the temple, where "he offered sacrifice to God according to the high priest's direction." There also the high priest read to him, from the book of Daniel, the prophecy concerning him; and Alexander acknowledged that he was the one referred to in the prophecy. O that Alexander had yielded himself to this call from God, as did Cyrus to him!

When Alexander's career had ended, and his dominion was broken up, the Jews submitted to whatever king happened to hold Palestine, as part of his dominion, tho it happened that for the most part they fell under the power of the kings of Syria–the Seleucids. One of them, Seleucus Philopater, sent his chief officer to ask the people at Jerusalem of its treasures. The priests and people of the whole city threw themselves down before God, imploring Him to defend His holy house. as the officer had entered the temple court, and was about to break open the treasury, "the Spirit of the Almighty revealed Himself by the most sensible marks; insomuch that all those who had dared to obey Heliodorus were struck down by a divine power, and seized with a terror which bereaved them of all their faculties. For there appeared to them a horse richly caparisoned which, rushing at once upon Heliodorus, struck him several times with his forefeet. The one who sat on this horse had a terrible aspect, and his arms seemed of gold. At the same time there were seen two young men, whose beauty dazzled the eye, and who, standing on each side of Heliodorus, scourged him instantly, and in the most violent manner. . . . By the same power he was cast to the ground speechless."

That was the last time, however, that the temple was so protected and defended, tho it was more than once entered and robbed by heathen. A few years afterward king Antiochus Epiphanes captured the city by storm, and gave it up to plunder and slaughter for three days, in which about eighty thousand were slain, forty thousand were made prisoners, and forty thousand were sold as slaves. The king himself entered the temple, and even into the most holy place, and robbed the temple of its golden furniture and all the treasure therein. But before all this, there had gone out of Israel "wicked men who persuaded many, saying, Let us go and make a covenant with the heathen that are round about us; for since we departed from them we have had much sorrow. So this device pleased them well. Then certain of the people were so forward herein that they went to the king, who gave them licenses to do after the ordinances of the heathen; whereupon they built a place of exercise at Jerusalem according to the customs of the heathen." And the sack, slaughter, slavery, and the robbery of the temple were their reward.

Next Antiochus Epiphanes issued an edict, commanding that all the people of his dominion should be of one and the same heathen religion, and all recognize only heathen laws; and this under penalty of death. This, of course, was aimed directly at the Jews. Many of them obeyed the edict of the king, and persecuted those of their own people who would not obey it. The king also filled Jerusalem with idol altars, upon which he sacrificed abominable things; he also put to death those who would circumcise their children, or who refused to eat swines' flesh and other abominable things.

Driven to desperation by these horrible things practiced upon his people, a certain Mattathias, a ruler and a great and honorable man in the city of Modin, revolted, and with his five sons fled to the mountains. They were joined by all who rejected the king's throne. Not long afterward Mattathias died; but before his death he solemnly enjoined upon his sons that they stand true to the laws of Israel and to fight against the king. he commanded them to let his son Judas be their captain.

405

this Judas was surnamed Maccabeus. Thus came the Maccabean wars, and what is called "the Maccabean Revival." The origin of this Maccabean Revival was religious, but it shortly became political. The Maccabees were wonderfully successful in their wars; but firmly to fix forever their power and standing, they sought an alliance with the Romans, B. C. 161. And that their motive in this was absolutely political is clear from their own record of it, which runs as follows:–

"Now Judas had heard of the fame of the Romans, that they were mighty and valiant men; and such as would lovingly accept all that joined themselves unto them, and make a league of amity with all that came unto them; and that they were men of great valor. It was told him also of their wars and noble acts which they had done among the Galatians [the Gauls], and how they had conquered them, and brought them under tribute; and what they had done in the country of Spain, for the winning of the mines of the silver and gold which is there; and that by their policy and patience they had conquered all the place, though it were very far from them; and the kings also that came against them from the uttermost part of the earth, till they had discomfited them, and given them a great overthrow, so that the rest did give them tribute every year.

"Beside this, how they had discomfited in battle Philip, and Perseus, king of the Citims [Macedonians], with others that lifted up themselves against them, and had overcome them: how also Antiochus [Magnus] the great king of Asia, that came against them in battle, having an hundred and twenty elephants, with horsemen, and chariots, and a very great army, was discomfited by them; and how they took him alive, and covenanted that he and such as reigned after him should pay a great tribute, and give hostages, and that which was agreed upon, and the country of India, and Media and Lydia and of the goodliest countries, which they took of him, and gave to king Eumenes.

"Moreover how the Grecians had determined to come and destroy them; and that they, having knowledge thereof sent against them a certain captain, and fighting with them slew many of them, and carried away captives their wives and their children, and spoiled them, and took possession of their lands, and pulled down their strong holds, and brought them to be their servants unto this day.

"It was told him besides, how they destroyed and brought under their dominion all other kingdoms and isles that at any time resisted them; but with their friends and such as relied upon them they kept amity: and that they had conquered kingdoms both far and nigh, insomuch as all that heard of their name were afraid of them: also that, whom they would help to a kingdom, those reign; and whom again they would, they displace: finally, that they were greatly exalted: yet for all this none of them wore a crown or was clothed in purple, to be magnified thereby.

"Moreover how they had made for themselves a senate house, wherein three hundred and twenty men sat in council daily, consulting alway for the people, to the end they might be well ordered: and that they committed their government to one man every year, who ruled over all their country, and that all were obedient to that one, and that there was neither envy nor emulation among them.

"In consideration of these things, Judas chose Eupolemus the son of John, the son of Accos, and Jason the son of Eleazar, and sent them to Rome, to make a league of amity and confederacy with them, and to intreat them that they would take the yoke from them; for they saw that the kingdom of the Grecians did oppress Israel with servitude. They went therefore to Rome, which was a very great journey, and came into the senate, where they spake and said:–

"Judas Maccabeus with his brethren, and the people of the Jews, have sent us unto you, to make a confederacy and peace with you, and that we might be registered your confederates and friends.

"So that matter pleased the Romans well. And this is the copy of the epistle which the senate wrote back again in tables of brass, and sent to Jerusalem, that there they might have by them a memorial of peace and confederacy:–

"Good success be to the Romans, and to the people of the Jews, by sea and by land for ever: the sword also and enemy be far from them, if there come first any war upon the Romans or any of their confederates throughout all their dominion, the people of the Jews shall help them, as the time shall be appointed, with all their heart; neither shall they give any thing unto them that make war upon them, or aid them with victuals, weapons, money, or ships, as it hath seemed good unto the Romans; but they shall keep their covenants without taking any thing therefore.

"'In the same manner also, if war come first upon the nation of the Jews, the Romans shall help them with all their heart, according as the time shall be appointed them: neither shall victuals be given to them that take part against them, or weapons, or money, or ships, as it hath seemed good to the Romans; but they shall keep their covenants, and that without deceit.

"According to these articles did the Romans make a covenant with the people of the Jews. Howbeit if hereafter the one party or the other shall think to meet to add or diminish any thing, they may do it at their pleasures, and whatsoever they shall add or take away shall be ratified. And as touching the evils that Demetrius doeth to the Jews, we have written unto him, saying, Wherefore thou made thy yoke heavy upon our friends and confederates the Jews? If therefore they complain any more against thee, we will do them justice, and fight with thee by sea and by land." 1 Maccabees 8.

Thus was solicited and obtained, by the Jews, that connection with the Romans which brought the utter ruin of the Jewish nation, and the desolation of their land, by the power of the Romans.

[The next and last article of this vitally instructive series is entitled "The Scepter Departs from Judah.]

July 2, 1902

"Restoration from Babylon. The Scepter Departs from Judah" The Signs of the Times 28, 27 , p. 4, 5 .

BY ALONZO TREVIER JONE

IN the year 130 B. C., the king of Syria was slain in a battle with the Parthians. Then John Hyrcanus, the high priest of the Jews, "took the advantage of the disturbances and divisions that thenceforth ensued . . . to make himself absolute and wholly independent. For after this, neither he nor any of his descendants owned any further dependence on the kings of Syria; but thenceforth wholly freed themselves from all manner of homage, servitude, or subjection to them."–Prideaux. And thus the government of the new independent country of Judea was merged in the high priests in succession, the high priest being the head of both religion and the State.

In the year 129 B. C., this same high priest conquered the Idumeans,–Edomites,–and "reduced them to this necessity, either to embrace the Jewish religion or else to leave the country, and seek new dwellings elsewhere." They chose to adopt the Jewish religion rather then be driven from their country. But under such circumstances they were as much Idumeans as before, except only in the forms of worship. About the year 128 B. C., Hyrcanus sent an embassy to Rome "to renew the league of friendship they had with the Romans." "And when the Senate had received their epistle, they made a league of friendship with them," and "decreed" "to renew their league of friendship and mutual assistance with these good men, and who were sent by a good and friendly people."–Josephus.

In the year 106 B. C., Aristobulus, the eldest son of John Hyracanus, regularly succeeded to the high-priesthood, and, being also the head of the State, resolved "to change the government into a kingdom," and "first of all put a diadem on his head, four hundred and eighty-one years and three months after the people had been delivered from Babylonish slavery, and were returned to their own country again."–Josephus. This piece of worldly ambition opened among the Jews the flood-gates of jealousy, strife, assassination, and domestic war, which evils were, if possible, more indulged than among the nations around.

After Aristobulus, Alexander Janneus reigned; and after him his widow, Alexandra. While Alexandra was queen, Hyrcanus, the eldest son of Janneus, was high priest. At the court there was a shrewd and ambitious Idumean, Antipater by name. He studiously gained the ascendant over Hyrcanus. This he did in the hope that when Hyrcanus should become king at the death of his mother, he himself would virtually rule the kingdom. However, when the time actually came, Antipater saw all his plans upset by the revolt of Aristobulus II., the brother of Hyrcanus. For Hyrcanus was defeated in a battle, and was obliged to resign to Artistobulus the office of high priest and king. Yet Antipater did not despair; he immediately set on foot, and persistently wrought an intrigue to replace Hyrcanus upon the throne.

Under the Roman Power.

Such was the condition of affairs in Judea when Pompey came into Syria of Damascus. To Pompey at Damascus came ambassadors from both Hyrcanus and Aristobulus–Antipater the Idumaean on behalf of Hyrcanus, and more for himself. Also there came ambassadors from the people to make representations against both Hyrcanus and Aristobulus, and to plead that the kingship be abolished and the governorship be only in the high priest as such. Pompey heard them all; but deferred the decision until he should arrive in Judea. By the time that Pompey reached Judea, Aristobulus had taken a course greatly to offend him. But Pompey coming to Jerusalem, Aristobulus repented and went out to meet him, and offered to receive him into the city and give him money. But the partisans of Aristobulus would not accept this arrangement. They stationed themselves at the temple and prepared for a siege.

The siege of the temple was promptly begun by Pompey; but he was obliged to spend three months of hard work and fierce fighting before it was taken. However, when the temple was finally taken, Pompey refrained from plundering it of its wealth or of anything, though he passed into the most holy place within the veil. Judea was now held in subjection, and laid under tribute, to the Roman power, from which she never escaped except by annihilation.

"Now the occasions of this misery which came upon Jerusalem were Hyrcanus and Aristobulus, by raising a sedition one against the other; for now we lost our liberty, and became subject to the Romans, and were deprived of that country which we had gained by our arms from the Syrians, and were compelled to restore it to the Syrians. Moreover the Romans exacted of us, in a little time, above ten thousand talents [about $12,000,000]; and the royal authority, which was a dignity formerly bestowed on those that were high priests by the right of their family, became the property of private men."–Josephus.

"Pompey committed Coele-Syria, as far as the river Euphrates and Egypt, to Scaurus with two Roman legions, and then went away to Cilicia, and made haste to Rome." Joppa, Gaza, and other coast towns were added to the province of Syria, which was the cause of that province's reaching to Egypt. Thus the Euphrates was made by Pompey the eastern boundary of the Roman Empire.

As the cause of Hyrcanus had been represented throughout by Antipater the Idumaean, he succeeded in so gaining the favor of Pompey and the Romans that he sustained confidential relations with them and with Pompey's successor in the East, Gabinius, who "settled the affairs which belonged to the city of Jerusalem, as was agreeable to Antipater's inclination."–Josephus.

When Gabinius "came from Rome to Syria as commander of the Roman forces," there was in his army a young officer named Mark Antony. In Judea young Alexander, the son of Aristobulus, had "suddenly got together ten thousand armed footmen and fifteen hundred horsemen, and fortified Alexandrium, a fortress near Coreae, and Macherus, near the mountains of Arabia." In subduing the revolt of Alexander, Antony and Antipater were brought into such relationship that a firm friendship was established between them, and which in after years, out of a curious combination of events wholly undreamed of now by either of them, had a positive bearing upon one of the most significant occurrences in the world's history.

In the Roman civil war, 49-47 B. C., Cesar was obliged to follow Pompey to Egypt, and to war in Egypt and the East. While Cesar was in Egypt, Antipater the Idumean became of great service to him; for he and Mithridates, king of Pergamus, were chiefly instrumental in bringing Egypt into complete subjection to Cesar. And when they had taken . . . , and in a severe engagement had subdued "the whole Delta," "Mithridates sent an . . . of this battle to Cesar, and openly declared that Antipater was the author of this . . . and of his own preservation, insomuch that Cesar commended Antipater then, and made use of him all the rest of that war in the most hazardous undertakings; he also happened to be wounded in one of these engagements. However, when Cesar, after some time, had finished that war and was sailed away from Syria, he honored Antipater greatly, and confirmed Hyracanus in the high-priesthood, and bestowed on Antipater the privilege of . . . of Rome, and freedom from taxes everywhere."–Josephus.

The Decree of the Roman Senate

And when one came to Cesar with accusations against Hyrcanus and Antipater, hoping to have himself put in their places, again "Cesar appointed Hyrcanus to be high priest, and gave Antipater what principality he himself should choose, leaving the determinations himself; so he made him procurator of Judea. He also gave Hyrcanus leave to raise up the walls of his own city, upon his asking that favor of him; for they had been demolished by Pompey. And this grant he sent to the consuls of Rome, to be engraven in the capitol. The decree of the Senate was this that follows:–

"Caius Cesar, consul the fifth time, hath decreed: That the Jews shall possess Jerusalem, and may compass that city with walls; and that Hyrcanus, the son of Alexander, the high priest and ethnarch of the Jews, retain it, in the manner he himself pleases; and the Jews be allowed to deduct out of their tribute, every second year the land is let (in the sabbatic period), a corus of that tribute; and that the tribute they pay be not let to farm, nor that they pay always the same tribute."

Antipater the Idumaean "was in great repute with the Idumaeans also; out of which nation he married a wife, who was the daughter of one of their eminent men, and her name was Cypros, by whom he had four sons–Phasael, and Herod, who was afterward made king, and Joseph, and Pheroras, and a daughter named Salome."

Antipater made Phasaelus, his eldest son, governor of Jerusalem and the places that were about it, but committed Galilee to Herod, his next son, who was then a very young man; for he was but twenty-five years of age. But as he was a youth of great mind, he presently met with an opportunity of signalizing his courage. For, finding there was one Hezekiah, a captain of a band of robbers, who overran the neighboring parts of Syria with a great troop of them, he seized him and slew him, as well as a great number of the other robbers that were with him, for which action he was greatly beloved by the Syrians. For when they were very desirous to have their country freed from this nest of robbers, he purged it of them; so they sung songs in his commendation in their villages and cities, as having pro-

421

cured them peace and the secure enjoyment of their possessions. And on this account it was that he became known to Sextus Cesar, who was a relative of the great Cesar, and was now president of Syria."

Cesar spent the time till the autumn of 47 setting things in order in Egypt and the East, then he returned to Rome, where, in 44, he was murdered. Then within two years Octavius Cesar and Mark Antony held the world under their power; and to Antony there fell the task of gathering from the wealth of Asia the enormous sum of $170,000,000 for the payment of the troops.

This need and greed of Antony for money stood Herod of Judea in good stead. For when ambassadors from all parts met Antony in Bithynia, among them "the principal men of the Jews came to accuse" Herod and his brother Phasaelus, and to charge that tho "Hyrcanus had indeed the appearance of reigning, these men had all the power. But Antony paid great respect to Herod, who was come to him to make his defense against his accusers, on which account his adversaries could not so much as obtain a hearing, which favor Herod had gained of Antony by money."–Josephus.

The Antony in Cilicia there came again "a hundred of the most potent of the Jews to accuse Herod and those about him, and set the men of the greatest eloquence among them to speak." But "when Antony had heard both sides at Daphne, he asked Hyrcanus who they were that governed the nation best. Hyrcanus replied, 'Herod and his friends.' Hereupon Antony, by reason of the old hospitable friendship he had made with his father [Antipater], . . . made both Herod and Phasaelus tetrarchs, and committed the public affairs of the Jews to them, and wrote letters to that purpose."–Josephus.

Antony went with Cleopatra to Alexandria, B. C. 41. Fulvia, his wife, died in the spring of 40. Antony's giddy infatuation with the voluptuous queen of Egypt was fast estranging him from Octavius and the Roman people. The matter was patched up for a little while by the marriage of Antony and Octavia, the sister of Octavius, B. C. 40; and "the triumvirs returned to Rome to celebrate this union."–Duruy.

Troubles of Herod.

In the same year, at the instance of a certain Antigonus, the Parthians made an incursion into Judea, gained possession of Jerusalem, and captured Hyrcanus and Phasaelus, with many of their friends. But Herod with his betrothed, with some of his family and a number of his friends, accompanied by a strong guard, all escaped and made their way to Petra in Idumaea. Thus by means of the Parthians, Antigonus obtained the power in Judea. He cut off the ears of Hyrcanus so that, being maimed, he could not, according to the law, hold the high-priesthood. Phasaelus being imprisoned, and knowing he was devoted to death, "since he had not his hands at liberty,–for the bands he was in prevented him from killing himself thereby,–he dashed his head against a great stone, and thereby took away his own life."

Herod shortly went from Idumaea to the king of Arabia, and from there to Egypt, stopping first at Pelusium. There the captains of the ships befriended him and took him to Alexandria, where Cleopatra received him and entertained him; "yet was she not able to prevail with him to stay there, because he was making haste to Rome, even though the weather was stormy, and he was informed that the affairs of Italy were very tumultuous and in great disorder."

Having through violent storms, severe reverses, and much expense, reached Rome, "he first related to Antony what had befallen him in Judea," and how "that he had sailed through a storm, and contemned all these terrible dangers, in order to come, as soon as possible, to him who was his hope and only succor at this time."

This account made Antony commiserate the change that had happened in Herod's condition. And, reasoning with himself that this was a common case among those that were placed in such great dignities, and that they are liable to the mutations that come from fortune, he was very ready to give him the assistance that he desired; and this because he called to mind the friendship he had had with Antipater; because Herod offered him money to make him king, as he had formerly given it to him to make him tetrarch; and chiefly because of his hatred to Antigonus, for he took him to be a seditious person and an enemy to the Romans.

Cesar [Octavius] was also the forwarder to raise Herod's dignity, and to give him his assistance in what he desired, on account of the toils of war which he had himself undergone with Antipater his father in Egypt, and of the hospitality he had treated him withal, and the kindness he had always shown him, as also to gratify Antony, who was very zealous for Herod.

So the Senate was convocated; and Messala first and then Atratinus, introduced Herod into it, and enlarged upon the benefits they had received from his father, and put them in mind of the goodwill he had borne to the Romans. At the same time they accused Antigonus, and declared him an enemy, not only because of his former opposition to them, but that he had now overlooked the Romans, and taken the government from the Parthians. Upon this the Senate was irritated; and Antony informed them further that it was for their advantage in the Parthian War that Herod should be king. This seemed good to all the senators, and so they made a decree accordingly.

When the Senate was dissolved, Antony and Cesar went out of the Senate house with Herod between them, and with the consuls and other magistrates before them, in order to offer sacrifices, and to lay up their decrees in the capital. Antony also feasted Herod the first day of his reign. And thus did this man receive the kingdom, having obtained it on the one hundred and eighty-fourth Olympiad [July, 40 B. C], when Cneius Domitius Calvinus was consul the second time, and Caius Asinius Pollio the first time."–Josephus.

And thus when Herod, a full-blooded Idumaean, had become king of Judea, the scepter had departed from Judah, and a lawgiver from between his feet; and the time was at hand when Shiloh should come, to whom the gathering of the people should be.

[The End.]

The Signs of the Times, Vol. 29 (1903)

April 1, 1903

"What Do These Things Mean?" The Signs of the Times 29, 13 , p. 2 .

The Spirit of Combine.

TO-DAY many remarkable things are occurring, so openly before the eyes of all, that every thoughtful person is compelled to query, What do these things mean? One, among the most remarkable of these remarkable things of to-day, may be best defined as the universal spirit of combine. Everywhere, among all classes, and in all lines of effort, there prevails this spirit of combine.

This spirit of combine is not merely an expansion of the sound principle of co-operation of unity of action of individuals acting effectively toward a common purpose. It is not, in any sense, the principle of co-operation or unity of action of individuals acting as such, collectively toward a common purpose. It is instead the principle of one mind, of one intellect, dominating all others possible, and using all them to the one purpose of that one mind as individual.

This truth and this domination is demonstrated in the universally-known fact that the first effort of this spirit is to deny, to execute, and to crush out, all right and all freedom of the individual; is instanced in the trust, whether it be the Standard Oil Trust, the Steel Trust, or a fruit trust. Whatever business it may be that is comprehended in the trust, no individual is allowed to do anything in that line of work, except as the servant of the trust, and absolutely subject to the dictation of the trust. If the "combine" takes the form, not of the trust as such, but of the labor union, then no individual is allowed to work, except as the servant of the union and under the absolute dictation of the union.

The second effect of this spirit, wherever entertained, is to destroy all individuality of the individual himself; so that he can not do the simplest and easiest thing, a thing the virtue of which consists entirely in its being individually done, unless a combine, a club, or a society, is first created, and he do that simple and easy individual thing in the name and by the power of the combine. If, for instance, a person wants to rest one day in the week, he insists that he can not rest unless everybody else rests at the same time; and so a combine must be formed, requiring everybody to rest when he rests to, so that he can rest because they do. A member of the church knows that it is only plain, simple Christianity to visit and help the afflicted, the poor, and the needy; and he knows that this is what the church is for; yet he can not do this simple, Christian thing as an individual Christian; but must first form within the church a combine, called a "band" or of "society," for the purpose, and then do it in the name of this combine, and because the combine requires it.

Another effect, and the direct logic of the combine, is a one-man power. This is to-day manifest on every hand; the head of the trust can dictate daily what the whole people shall pay for their sugar, their kerosene, their nails, etc; the head of the union can dictate just what the employer shall do, and how he shall conduct is business, or whether he shall conduct it at all. In the railroad strike of 1894, that reached from Buffalo to San Francisco. It occurred that two governors of sovereign states could not travel on official business within their own respective states without permission of the one-man head of the strike combine, who dominated from Chicago the greater part of the whole country of the United States.

The logic of a one-man power is always a despotism. This is certain, because of the nature of man himself. And it has proved so universally true that it is universally understood. Indeed, it was the character of the rule of the man who held the innocent office of despot that gave to that word its terrible meaning.

The logic of a one-man power is a despotism, and it is a despotism in all relations, religious as well as other. This, too, is inevitable, because, as we have already seen, the spirit of the combine is the spirit that leads one mind to usurp the place and power of God over the minds, the rights, the persons, and the property of others, and by force compel them to his one purpose. And as it is certain that a man in the place of God will always act unlike God, it is also certain that his power will always be exerted in compelling that his power will always be exerted in compelling them to do things contrary to the righteousness of God. This has been the unvarying history of it from the mighty despotism of Nimrod, the first that arose since the Flood, to be partly but growing ones of to-day. For Nimrod was not only a mighty hunter of beasts, but of men, also. He pursued and compelled men to recognize his authority in all things; they must worship as he dictated, and his example has been invariably followed. It was followed by Pharaoh, by Nebuchadnezzar, by Darius, by the Cesars, and by the popes.

It never has failed, and it never will fail, that a one-man power develops a despotism, and a despotism in religion as well as other affairs of life. And those who disregarded the spirit of the combine and maintained their individual integrity, have always been in the right, and are the true heroes of the ages. Abraham disregarded the spirit and power of the combine established by Nimrod, and maintained his individual integrity with God; and God vindicated him, called him out of it unto an eternal reward, and made him an example unto all men, "the father of all them that be of faith," and "the friend of God." Moses did it in Egypt. God maintained his cause, delivered him and his whole people from it, made him the greatest legislator of all times, and took him to an eternal reward. In the face of a blazing furnace of sevenfold heat the three Hebrews did it in the presence of Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon. God vindicated their course, preserved them in the midst of the fire, brought them forth unscathed, changed the king's word, and made the circumstance a lesson to all kings and all combines forever. Daniel did it individually alone in the presence of the Medo-Persian combine and the den of hungry lions. God vindicated him, because of his "innocency" in the matter, and again made the individual an example to all men, and the circumstance a lesson to all one-man powers and combines, forever. John the Baptist did it, Jesus Christ did it, Stephen did it, all the apostles and early Christians did it, not in a "combine," but wholly as individuals, each for himself alone, in disregard of the greatest one-man power, and so the greatest despotism, of all ancient times. John Wycliffe, John Huss, and Martin Luther did it against the greatest one-man power, and so the greatest despotism, of all time, ancient or modern. These are the ones who have kept alive liberty and the rights of mankind through the ages, and have saved the world from being engulfed long ago in the vortex of unmitigated despotisms.

ALONZO T. JONES.

April 8, 1903

"What Do These Things Mean?" The Signs of the Times 29, 14 , p. 2, 3 .

II.

WHEN from Nimrod onward the despotism, the combine, of a one-man power, had afflicted the world for a long series of ages, there arose a people who renounced all that as akin to it, and established a government of the people. They threw off all kingship, and declared that they needed no such figment to govern them, but that they were capable of governing themselves, and so established a government of the people, by the people, and for the people–individual self-government, the republic of Rome. They were right. The principle was sound, and the government was a grand success–while the people really governed themselves. But the grandeur of the their success brought results which caused the Roman people to lose the faculty of governing themselves; and the government fell to cliques, coteries, and combines. These presently merged in the first triumvirate–government by a special three.

And who were these three?–One of them was the chief capitalist, the head of the trusts, the combines of capital, of the empire; another was the pride of the populace, and the combines of the unions and of the envious crowd; and the third was the pride of the army;–Crassus, Cesar, and Pompey. These three men sat down together and agreed that nothing should be done in the Roman State but by their consent. This held for awhile, but Crassus was killed in a battle. Pompey was afterward killed, and Cesar alone was the government–a one-man power. But a one-man power was dreaded. Cesar was murdered to escape it. But immediately a new triumvirate was formed: Antony, Octavius, and Lepidus. Lepidus was soon shelved; Antony and Octavius fought the battle of Actium; Antony was defeated and shortly afterward committed suicide; and Octavius was the government–a one-man power which permanently remained and which became the most terrible despotism ever till then known. This one-man power, its despotism, and its empire sank in annihilating ruin by the floods of barbarians from the forests of Germany, and upon that ruin was built the one-man power of the Papacy, the completed combine and the greatest despotism ever known on earth.

The Barbarians established kingdoms in Western Europe. And again there was a long series of kingships expanding into empire, with their consequent tyranny, though these tyrannies were so far overtopped by the one greatest of all tyrannies–the Papacy–that they were but slightly felt in comparison. Then after that series of ages of kingships and imperialism there arose another people who cast off all kingship and established a government of the people. They declared that men are capable of governing themselves, and that, therefore, governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. Accordingly, they established a government of the people, by the people, for the people–individual self-government, the republic of the United States. These men were right. These principles are sound. The government was a grand success so long as the people governed themselves.

But how many of the people of the United States to-day are self-governing? And it must not be forgotten that the majority is, in effect, the government. In a government of the people, when a majority fail to govern themselves, the government is gone. In the world of business and traffic in the United States to-day, how many of the people are governing themselves in their own business?–The vast majority are governed by the trusts. In the world of labor to-day, how many of the people govern themselves?–The vast majority are governed by the unions. In the realm of government itself in the United States, in politics, how many of the people govern themselves?–Almost the whole body of them are governed by "the party," by "the machine," by "the boss," and according to "the state."

Then where is self-government in the United States to-day? Where is government of the people in this "government of the people" to-day–It is absolutely gone; gone to the combines–to the business combines, the labor combines, and the political combines. And do not forget that the logic of the combine, of whatever sort, is a one-man power. And how far are we form this even now?–The condition of things in this nation to-day is such that in a crisis any day the head of the trust, the head of the unions, and the chief of the national, political machine, can form a triumvirate as quietly and as absolute as was that of Crassus, Cesar, and Pompey. And of such a triumvirate the only outcome that there can be is a one-man power.

And even for this outcome the way is already blazed. The great coal strike in the summer of 1892 brought the nation to the brink of such danger as could not possibly be risked. As a government the state of Pennsylvania failed. There

3

was no way by which the national government could constitutionally reach the case. Then he, who is the head of the national government, intervened–not as head of the government, but only as "a private citizen." And when he intervened only as "a private citizen," his intervention was promptly accepted and every suggestion was respected–not because he was a private citizen, but wholly because he is head of the national government. If he had been indeed only a private citizen, he would not then been listened to for a moment; any more than were the many other private citizens, who had offered suggestions. Therefore, here is an instance of the head of the national government, in a case of a national danger, acting only as a private citizen, yet with all the prestige of the head of the government; an instance in which official and constitutional government is left behind by the head of the government, yet that same head of the government, acting as a private citizen with all the prestige of official and constitutional head of the government. This is nothing else than in principle the direct intimation of a one-man power.

This is not to say nor in any way to intimate that this has been in any way intended, nor that President Roosevelt would intentionally do such a thing to any extent. It is not in any way to criticize what he did. It is only a study of the principle that is in what has been done. And this is the principle. And these great strikes, with their consequent complications, are not by any means over with. Indeed, things have now only fairly begun. A victory has been gained that will be pushed to the utmost limit. Other such strikes with their perplexing complications will certainly arise. Other men will occupy the place of head of the national government. They too, will act "as private citizens," yet with the prestige of head of the government. They, too, will act "pas private citizens," yet with the prestige of head of the government, but with the important difference that over the course where President Roosevelt cautiously, and, as it were, tremblingly, felt for the way for his feet, the other man will, on horseback and in fully panoply, ride rough shod.

And what a fearful pass it is to which this nation has already come, when the only escape from a ruinous danger is the taking of a course that carries in its train ruinous danger; in other words, when the only escape from ruinous danger is a mere temporary palliative?

As in this consequence of the coal strike there has already been blazed the way to a one-man power, so also in it there has appeared even in sight the religious despotism that attaches to the one-man power. In the choosing of the commission to settle the coal strike, it was stipulated that the commission should consist of five men, each chosen from a certain calling that would make him in a sense an expert. However, when the five had been chosen, the President went beyond this, and added a sixth member. This sixth member was added "as a commission to the strikers." It is Bishop Spaulding, of the Catholic Church, for the reason that he "should be an imminent Roman Catholic prelate, nearly all of the miners being adherents of the Catholic Church." In addition to this, the President appointed a recorder to the commission. And this recorder was a man who "freely admits his admiration for the magnificent organization of the Roman Church and his appreciation of its strong and elevating influence upon artisans and wage-earners," and who "has been for many years an active teacher in the economic department of the great Catholic university at Washington." In addition to all this, the President appointed two assistant recorders, and one of the two "is professor of political economy at the Catholic university, located near Washington."

And yet even this does not exhaust the list of Catholic influences connected with the commission, so that it is safe to say that the Catholic Church held the dominating influence in connection with that commission which originally was to consist of five men chosen from specific callings. Under the circumstances, with "nearly all the miners being adherents of the Catholic Church," and they being one of the principals in the controversy; and with the large Catholic influence attached to the commission; it was in no small degree simply the Catholic Church arbitrating her own cause and settling her own case. And when thus stands her power and her influence at the very outset, in the very nature of things her power in these things will grow as these troubles grow upon the government, and when from it all there is developed the inevitable one-man power, there will she be close beside him, the same perpetual Papacy. This is not to say that the Papacy herself will be the one-man power. It is only to say that she will be the inspiration and the directing voice of that which, apart from her personally, will be the one-man power.

Yet this power and influence which she has gained and will hold in connection with the strikes, combines, and complications is only a part of the true standing of the Papacy in connection with the United States Government of to-day.

ALONZO T. JONES.

April 15, 1903

"What Do These Things Mean?" The Signs of the Times 29, 15 , p. 2, 3 .

III.

IN closing the previous article we said that the power and influence which the Papacy had already gained in the national government, in connection with the coal-strike and labor combines, is only a part of the new standing of the Papacy in connection with the United States Government to-day.

The opening of the Spanish-American War presented to the Papacy a grand opportunity, which she instantly seized, and which she has been working to the utmost at every stage of proceedings since. The entanglement of the question of the friars in the Philippines she so worked as to draw the national government one official communication with the papal government in Rome. She secured a commission from the United States Government to be sent to Rome to deal with the Papacy on her own ground in the Vatican. This commission consisted of three persons,–Governor Taft, of the Philippine Islands; Bishop O'Gorman, of the Catholic Church; and Attorney James F. Smith, a Roman Catholic and associate justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines. That is to say, the United States Government and the Papacy are two parties to a controversy or negotiation. The United States Government sends a commission of three to represent the United States, and two of the three are themselves Papists. This, then, was nothing else than another instance in which the Papacy is professedly dealing for the United States Government simply deals with herself. For is there anybody in the world so obtuse as not to be able to discern that the papal two-thirds of that commission sent to deal with the Papacy would inevitably work for the interests of the Papacy first of all? that they would represent the Papacy instead of the United State?

This two-thirds papal commission went duly to Rome, and entered upon negotiations with the Papacy; with the result that the question in controversy was relegated to Manila as the place of the further consideration of it, and Governor Taft and the papal apostolic delegate, Mgr. Guido, as the persons to conduct the further negotiations, with "the Philippine Government expressly recognizing the official character of Mgr. Guido, and has pledged itself, over Mr. Taft's signature, to treat with him as a duly-accredited representative of the Holy See." And this is but the recognition of the papal government by the United States Government in her Philippine possessions and jurisdiction.

In the negotiations Governor Taft proposed four articles as a basis of procedure and settlement. One of these articles proposed a tribunal of arbitration composed of five members, two to be appointed by the pope, two by the Philippine Government, and the fifth to be chosen by "an indifferent person, like the governor-general of India." By the Papacy these four articles were expanded to twelve; and this particular one was so changed as to have that arbitration board composed thus: "Two shall be named by the Holy See, two by the Philippine Government, and the fifth by the common accord of the same four; and if such accord can not be reached, his holiness the pope and the President of the United States shall come to an understanding as to the choice of said fifth member." Negotiations were at this point abruptly broken off, so that the matter went no further. But this one item shows plainly enough how ready is the Papacy to set traps by which she shall involve the United States Government in such a way that it shall be caused to work hand in hand with the Papacy in behalf of the Papacy. If that proposition had been accepted, can anybody believe that the four would ever have agreed upon the fifth members, when the alternative was that the pope and the President of the United States should work together in the matter, thus becoming a union of the United States and the Papacy?

The School Question

Another item in this papal entanglement is the school question in the Philippines. The Papacy claims the sole right of controlling and conducting education in the Philippines; and at the same time here the schools supported from the public treasury; in other words, to have the Papacy, a union of the Church and the State, supported by the United States. Governor Taft claims the right of the American principle of separation to prevail in the Philippines and not in the school matter there. The papal plea is represented in the following documents:–

Cincinnati, July 10, 1902.

Rev. Dear Father:–

Should you be willing to do so, kindly sign your name to the enclosed memorial and return it as soon as possible to the Chancery, stating at the same time the number of Catholics under your care. The document has already been signed by the Rt. Rev. Bishop of Hartford, and the 282 priests of his diocese, and probably by many others.

Wm. Henry Elder, Archbishop of Cincinnati.

Cincinnati, July 10, 1904.

To His Excellency, Theodore Roosevelt, President of the United States:–

The undersigned, the clergy of the diocese of Cincinnati, in their own name, and in the name of 200,000 Catholics of the diocese, would respectfully beg to lay

3

before your excellency the following memorial bearing upon the Philippine schools:–

Your excellency is aware that the Filipino people, in so far as they are Christians at all, are members of our communion. For three hundred years they have committed the education of their children to the care of religious teachers. To the training thus imparted the natives owe their present status as a civilized and Christian people. We respectfully submit that, in our judgment, the abrupt and complete breaking away from this system of education, and the adopting of another entirely devoid of religious coloring, coupled with the violent disruption of venerable traditions which must necessarily ensue, would be a grave hindrance to their progress in civilization, and impede unnecessarily our peaceful and successful government of the archipelago.

We respectfully submit that the clause of the Constitution which requires the absolute separation of Church and State was intended by the framers of the document to meet the conditions in the United States of America, and not those which obtain in the Orient and among a people unanimously of one form of religious belief.

And the Catholic paper from which these documents are copied, the Church Progress, of St. Louis, enforces the plea of the documents with the following editorial endorsement:–

While our government has been far from doing the right thing by way of recognizing American Catholics in the Philippines, we believe justice will eventually prevail. For that the demand of fifteen million American Catholics is somewhat of a guarantee. It is one which no administration dare ignore.

Against Governor Taft's holding to the American principle of separation of Church and State, the Papacy sets up the argument: "The Constitution of the United States does not apply in the Philippines." And since that is exactly what the Supreme Court has decided, who can deny the legality of the papal contention? And since the Papacy has the highest possible legal basis for her claim that the Constitution does not apply in the Philippines, she holds distinct vantage ground in her claim that the system that has prevailed there for three hundred years shall continue; and that is the papal system, with the splendid addition that the authority of the United States Government is now included in the papal system. And that this shall be firmly secured, she proposes to swing, in the United States itself, the political power.

In addition to "this demand of fifteen million of American Catholics," "which no administration dare ignore;" and as a further strong security that her system and conniving will and shall prevail in the Philippine school matter; is the significant fact that that Hon. James F. Smith, who was half of that two-thirds papal commission of the United States to the Vatican, was, upon his return from that commission, appointed by the President of the United States a "member of the Philippine commission and Secretary of Public Instruction in the Government of the Philippine Islands." And this simply puts into her hands the whole control of the school question in the Philippines. And what possible prospect can there be of Governor Taft alone stemming that papal tide in the Philippines, when that tide is so industriously fed, not only from Rome, but from Washington itself?

No, that tide will surely engulf not only the Philippines, but the United States. Eleven years ago the Papacy published in the United States that "what the Church has done for others, she will now do for the United States." Ten years ago she gave by Satolli her official commission to the Catholics of the United States to bring their country into immediate contact with the papal church. And by every possible means this is being done; and her success in the scheme is remarkable. And through the success of this scheme she proposes to lift herself again to supremacy in Europe and the world, and so dominate "all humanity."

And she will succeed in that world scheme so certainly as she is succeeding in her scheme to dominate the United States as the preliminary to that world scheme. And so it is written in the Scriptures: "These kings are of one mind in surrendering their power and authority to the beast." "For God put it into their minds to carry our His purpose, in carrying out their common purpose and surrendering their kingdom to the beast, until God's decrees should be executed." Rev. 17:14, 17 (Twentieth Century New Testament).

And when she gets again world-power and supremacy, what will she do with it? How will she use it?–She will do with it just what she did before. She will use it just as she did before,–to compel "all humanity" to do her bidding, and whoever will not do it will incur her wrath in persecution, boycott, and inquisition, unto death. And the one thing in which has always centered her will to be conformed to by all people, without distinction, is the recognition of Sunday as the day of rest for all. This she will enforce upon all the world by all the power of the world. And every movement of any sort in behalf of Sunday as the rest day is a direct play into the hands of the Papacy; it is a direct helping forward of the papal domination of the world.

And this is the religious despotism of the one-man power that is the logic and the culmination of the universal spirit of combine that prevails to-day. And when she finds herself once more at the head of the world, she exultingly congratulates herself: "I sit here a queen; no widow am I; I shall never know misery." But her exultation will be short-lived this time, thank the Lord. For the Lord's own response to her note of triumph is, "Therefore in one day shall these curses befall her–death, misery, and famine, and she shall be utterly destroyed by fire." And the kings of the earth that surrendered their power and authority to her, hoping that she should be the means of bringing to their kingdoms help and peace from the confusion and anarchy that her own elements had caused–these same kings, in their infinite disappointment and vain humiliation, "will all hate the prostitute, and cause her to become deserted and strip her bare; they will eat her very flesh and destroy her with fire."

Then, in the midst of the anarchy and destruction that is the result of all this, the Lord Jesus appears in the clouds of heaven with true power and infinite glory. And in their blindness and anarchistic confusion the beast and all the kings of the earth turn to make war even against Him. "They will fight with the Lamb, but the Lamb will conquer them, for He is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those who are on His side . . . will share His victory."

And so the meaning of the things that are ocurrent to-day, and the outcome of the combines that are prevalent everywhere, and in all things, is the religious despotism of a one-man power of the Papacy restored to a short-lived supremacy, and then hurled down to eternal destruction and perdition. While for those who, with the other heroes of the ages, in their individual integrity, refuse all that, and stand in their individual integrity with God in Jesus Christ, the sure outcome is the rising to be with God in everlasting victory and eternal glory. For "those who are on His side . . . will share His victory." "Who is on the Lord's side?"

ALONZO T. JONES.

July 1, 1903

"Free from the Service of Sin" The Signs of the Times 29, 26  , p. 5 .

"KNOWING this, that our old man is crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin."

Plainly, therefore, the Lord intends that we shall not serve sin, and, accordingly, has made provision that this intention shall be fulfilled.

"The body of sin" must be "destroyed," in order that henceforth we shall "not serve sin." If the body of sin is not destroyed, if sin is not taken up by the root, we shall certainly still serve sin, whatever our profession or desire.

Indeed, if I desire not to serve sin, if I desire to live without sinning, and yet do not desire it enough to have the body of sin destroyed, to have sin completely uprooted, whatever the cost, or however painful the process, then my desire is not sincere, and can not possibly be realized. I am simply tickling my fancy with a mirage.

No, the body of sin must be destroyed,–nothing short of destruction will do,–in order that we shall not serve sin. See, too, what "destroy" means, "To pull down; unbuild; demolish, to overthrow; lay waste; ruin; make desolate; to kill; slay; extirpate; to bring to naught; put an end to; annihilate; obliterate entirely; cause to cease, or cease to be."

The Lord has made full provision for this destruction of the body of sin; it must be accomplished by crucifixion. "Our old man is crucified," "that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin." That is the straight, sure course to freedom from the service of sin.

But, thank the Lord, we do not have to go this way alone. "Our old man is crucified with Him." He was made "in the likeness of sinful flesh" for us. He was in all things made "like unto His brethren." He "was in all points tempted like as we are." "The Lord hath laid on Him the iniquity of us all." And He was crucified. He was crucified for us. He was crucified as we. He was "the last Adam." He was humanity. And in Him the old Adam–the old, sinful humanity–was crucified. And "our old man is crucified with Him" in order "that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin."

Are you indeed crucified with Him? Have you given up yourself to crucifixion, do you give yourself up to destruction, that you may be delivered from the service of sin? Is your desire to be free from sinning so sincere that you freely give yourself up to crucifixion–that you abandon yourself to destruction? If it is, then you can easily know the triumph that there is in knowing that the body of sin is destroyed, and that henceforth you shall not serve sin.

Why is this verse of scripture written, if it is not intended that you shall not serve sin? And when it is written to show you this, the Lord's intention, then what good is that to you, what good can it ever be to you, if that intention is not fulfilled in you, and you are not kept from the service of sin?–A. T. Jones.

December 23, 1903

"The First Commandment" The Signs of the Times 29, 51 , pp. 4, 5 .

BY ALONZO TREVIER JONE

I AM Jehovah thy God. . . . Thou shalt have no other gods before Me." Ex. 20:2, 3.

To have Jehovah alone as God is to love Him with all the heart and soul and mind and strength. It therefore plainly follows that anything by which any part of the heart or the soul or the mind or the strength is turned from God, is devoted to anything other than to God, is in itself to have another God than Jehovah. And this is what is forbidden in the First Commandment, "Thou shalt have no other gods before Me."

One of the chief gods which it is natural for men to have before the Lord is "the god of this world," "the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience."

One prominent phase of the worship of "the god of this world," is the worship of Mammon, or riches. And this is not by any means least, tho it is the last one in the list; for is it not written, "The love of money is the root of all evil"?

This is so wrapped up with the phase of "the pride of life,"–ambition, self-exaltation, self-aggrandizement, glorious–that it is, in great measure, inseparable from it. For there is nothing which gives worldly glory so quickly, so easily, and so abundantly as money; and there is nothing that gives power so quickly and so easily as does money. All this, simply because mankind is naturally so worshipful of Mammon. And yet it is all idolatry; it is all a denial of the true God; it is a breaking of the First Commandment, which says, "Thou shalt have no other gods before Me." For, says Jesus: "Ye can not,"–not, Ye ought not; not, Ye shall not; but,–"Ye can not serve God and Mammon."

Since the true worship of God is to love God with all the heart, and all the soul, and all the mind, and all the strength; and anything that draws away either the heart, soul, mind, or strength to it, and comes between man and the true worship of God, is another god; so the allowing of money, the desire for money, the love of money, to come between a man and his true service to God, is the worship of Mammon. And to allow the desire for money, the love of money, to separate a man from true Christian thoughtfulness, and care of mankind temporarily and eternally, is the worship of Mammon; it is to have another god than the Lord, it is to break the First Commandment.

The distinction may be clearly drawn by saying that the keeping of the First Commandment is the being right, and doing right, with no thought whatever, at any time, as to what it will cost. No amount of money can ever have any consideration whatever in any question of serving God; in any question of loving God with all the heart, or our neighbor as ourself. And yet everybody knows that "What will it cost?" does have a positive bearing with the vast majority, even of professed Christian people, upon the exercise of their love to God with all the heart, and their neighbor as themselves.

But to allow this question to have any bearing whatever is the worldly way. It "is not of the Father, but of the world." For with the world the first question is always, "What will it cost?" "How much can I make?" In all the dealing, all the traffic of business relationship in the world, the way of the world, and the inquiry of the world, is only, "How much can I make?" And if more can be made by oppressing the neighbor, the oppression takes precedence of the love of the neighbor, and the neighbor is deliberately robbed.

Monopoly, Its Result.

If a neighbor begins business of the same order as that of a man who has already begun, he is deliberately underbidden, undersold, that, if possible, he may be crushed completely out of business, in order that the first one may be left alone, to have all, in order that he alone may be rich, and have the worldly glory of his little kingdom of the crossroads. And those that have succeeded most fully at this form gigantic combinations to crush out, or absorb, all lesser ones, until there remains but one vast combination drawing tribute from all the people in the nation, and even of the whole world.

But God has written of it all that "he is a proud man" "who enlargeth his desire as hell, and is as death, and can not be satisfied, but gathereth unto him all nations, and heapeth unto him all people," "that coveteth an evil covetousness to his house, that he may set his nest on high, that he may be delivered from the power of evil." But "shall not all these take up a parable against him, and a taunting proverb against him, and say, Woe to him that increaseth that which is not his! how long?" "Shall they not rise up suddenly that shall bite thee, and awake that shall vex thee, and thou shalt be for booties unto them? Because thou hast spoiled many nations, all the remnant of the people shall spoil thee." See Hab. 2:5-9.

This is all "the pride of life," which "is not of the Father, but of the world." It is all Mammon-worship. And since the literal, original meaning of the word "mammon" is "that in which one trusts," it is particularly appropriate that these various combinations, which crush out all individuality and demand tribute of all peoples, should be called "trusts."

Yet the most gigantic of the "trusts" is but the extreme of that trick of trade held by the individual by which, to get the trade, he undersells and crowds out the man across the way.

The most gigantic "trust" is but the extreme of that trick in trade by which the individual or the little partnership or corporation asks more for a thing when there is no competition than would be asked if there were competiton. Whomsoever, without competition, demands a greater price than he knows that he would take if there were competition, is an exactor of unjust gain. And "he that by usury and unjust gain increaseth his substance, he shall gather it for him that will pity the poor." Prov. 28:8.

The most gigantic "trust" is but the extreme of that trick in trade on the part of the individual by which, through his beating down, or "jewing," he tries his best to get a thing for less than he knows that it is worth. "It is naught, it is naught, saith the buyer; but when he is gone his way, then he boasteth." Prov. 20:14.

The organizer of the president of the "trust" who boasts in his enormous gain is no more an idolater and a sinner in this thing than is the individual who, in his degree, and to the extent of his power, does the same thing precisely. If he had the ability, or the power, of the organizer or the president of the "trust," he would be doing precisely the same things that he is doing now, only in the larger measure that would be his, as the head of a mighty corporation. And so certainly is it true, as written, "In the world, the god of traffic is the god of fraud."

All such is but the worship of Mammon, it is idolatry; it is to have another god before the Lord; it is not of the Father, but is of the world; it is neither loving God with all the heart nor the neighbor as the self. "If I have made gold my hope, or have said to the fine gold, Thou art my confidence; if I rejoiced because my wealth was great, and because mine hand had gotten much. . . . this also were an iniquity to be punished by the judge; for I should have denied the God that is above." Job 31:24-28. And this equally and as really as if I were a worshiper of the sun and the moon.

There if a better way; it is the way of the keeping of the commandment of God. "Thou shalt have no other gods before Me." It is the way of Christianity: "All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them." You know that you do not like to have a man work a scheme upon you, by which he requires you to pay for a thing more than he would take for it if there were competition. You know that you would not like to have people "jew" you down to take for a thing less than you know that it is worth. Put yourself in the other man's place–and stay there. Look at things from his side, and continue to do so. "Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others." This is Christianity; it is the keeping of the First Commandment. Yea, it is the keeping of all "the law and the prophets."

Nor is it hard to do this. It is the easiest thing in the world for him who has the heart to do it. And God gives the heart to do it; as it is written: "A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you."

Idolatry in Giving.

A further method of manifesting idolatry in the worship of Mammon is in giving away the money that has been so obtained. There is just as much idolatry in giving away money that is obtained by idolatry, as there is in getting it by idolatry. Not all Mammon-worshipers are misers; only a very few of them. Many of them are abundant givers, and these have just as much satisfaction in giving away the money as they had in getting it, because it is further indulgence of the same idolatry.

The poor man is oppressed and robbed in the increased prices; small dealers are oppressed and robbed entirely out of business in order that a few in the great combinations may draw to themselves the tribute of all the people. And where that is done, gifts of millions will be made to colleges and universities, hundreds of thousands to business, thousands to churches, etc., etc. and the givers further pride themselves upon the world's idolatry of that "great benevolence." But there is not a particle of benevolence in any gift that is thus made, it is sheer idolatry.

The Value of Gifts.

We say it with emphasis, for it is applicable to people who are not millionaires, as truly as to those who are: All the value of our giving as measured by the Lord, in perfect justice and righteousness, rests altogether upon the basis upon which we make or obtain our money. If my money is not made honestly, not a cent that I ever give away will stand to my credit, in righteousness, and in justice it can not. I robbed another man to get it; it is his still, and when I give it away, it is his money that I give away.

And this is another reason why the two mites of the poor widow, that day when she gave it, was more than all that the wealthy put in of their abundance. We know that the Mammon-worshipers in Christ's day were like the Mammon-worshipers in this day. They would crowd down in the dealing when the people were selling to them; and they would round up on the price when people were to buy of them, and thus at both ends they increased their fain.

Then they would put great offerings into the temple treasury of the Lord, and take credit to themselves because they gave "so much to the cause." But that poor widow, who, because of these men who devoured widow's houses and for a pretense made long prayers, was reduced to substance honestly gotten, but by the hardest,–the widow, who, out of her love to the Lord, gave what little she had left after she had passed through the devouring hands of these men–when she came into the temple of the Lord, giving the little that she had, she gave more than all the others together, every particle of it was honest. Every particle of it came from honest effort. And that was a gift that measured according to righteousness in the sight of God. there is such a thing as honest dealing, and it can be practised in this world. And whatever means is not acquired in that way, how much soever of it may be given, it can not be counted as the gift of him who gave it. It will be counted to those widows and the poor whom he has ground down to

809

get it, to the laborers whose wages he ground down to the lowest notch to increase or to preserve his great gains.

God Will Righteously Adjust Matters.

That is why God says to the laborers, be patient unto the coming of the Lord. The husbandman waiteth for the precious fruits of the earth, and hath long patience for it. Be ye also patient; your labor is not in vain. God knows the just wages that you earn, and of just how much of it you are robbed. And in the day of reckoning He will return it to you in full justice and righteousness.

Be ye patient. Serve God. "Obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God: and whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men; knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ."

In that day God will distribute justly all the rewards of labor. He is the righteous God. The Christian can cheerfully bear to be ground down, robbed, and oppressed; he can wait for the day of great distribution in righteousness; for he knows that in that day he will receive all that his honest toil every earned, and he shall have the eternal glory of it. Even tho in this world some Mammon-worshiper absorbed it, and made a great gift of it, and got the worldly, fleeting glory of it; yet since from the beginning it belonged in righteousness to him who was defrauded of it, in righteousness it, with all the fruits of it, will be reckoned to him to whom in righteousness from the beginning it belonged.

This is the word and the message of God to the robbed, oppressed, and defrauded workingmen everywhere to-day, who are clamoring for a more equitable distribution of the fruits of their labor: "Fear God, and keep His commandments." No righteous distribution can be made by force and violence. In that way, an iniquitous and bad condition can only be made more iniquitous and worse. "Sanctify the Lord of Hosts Himself, and let Him be your fear, and let Him be your dread." "Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts, for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh." Then shall every man receive his own reward according to his own labor.

"I am the Lord thy God. Thou shalt have no other gods before Me."

The Signs of the Times 30 (1904)

January 6, 1904

"History of Government. I. Eternal and Foundation Principles" The Signs of the Times 30, 1 , p. 2.

I. ETERNAL AND FOUNDATION PRINCIPLES

Individuality

GOVERNMENT exists in the very nature of the existence of intelligent creatures. For, the very term "creature" implies the Creator, and as certain as any intelligent creature is, he owes to the Creator all that he is. And, in recognition of this fact, he owes to the Creator honor and devotion supreme. This, in turn, and in the nature of things, implies subjection and obedience on the part of the creature; and is the principle of government.

Each intelligent creature owes to the Creator all that he is. Accordingly, the first principle of government is, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength." This is pronounced by the Lord to be the first of all the commandments. It is not the first of all the commandments because it was the first one that was ever given; but simply because it exists in the very nature and existence of every intelligent creature, and so inheres in the nature of things as soon as a single intelligent creature exists. It is, therefore, the first of all the commandments, simply because it is but the expression of the inherent obligation in the first relationship which can possibly exist between creature and Creator. It is the first in the nature, the circumstances, and the existence of created intelligences. It is the first of all commandments in the supreme and most absolute sense. It inheres in the nature and relationship of the first intelligent creature, and stands as complete in the case of that one alone as though there were millions; and stands as complete in the case of each one in the succession of future millions as in the case of the first intelligent creature, as he stood absolutely alone in the universe. No expansion, no multiplication, of the number of the creatures beyond the original one, can ever in any sense limit the scope or meaning of that first of all commandments. It stands absolutely alone and eternally complete, as the first obligation of every intelligent creature that can ever be. And this eternal truth distinguishes individuality as an eternal principle.

Equality

However, just as soon as a second intelligent creature is given existence, an additional relationship exists. There is now not only the primary and original relationship of each to the Creator, for both owe equally their existence to the Creator, but also an additional and secondary relationship of each to the other. This secondary relationship is one of absolute equality. And in the subjection and devotion of each to the Creator, in the first of all possible relationships, each of these honors the other. Therefore, in the nature of things, in the existence of two intelligent creatures, there inheres the second governmental principle, mutuality of all the subjects as equals.

And this principle is expressed in the second of all the commandments, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." This is the second of all the commandments, for the like reason that the first is the first of all the commandments: it exists and inheres in the nature of things and of intelligences just as soon as a second intelligent creature exists. And also, like the first, this is complete and absolute the moment that two intelligent creatures exist, and it never can be expanded nor can it be modified by the existence of the universe full of other intelligent creatures.

Each, himself alone, in his own individuality, is completely subject and devoted first of all to the Creator; because to Him he owes all. And in this subjection and devotion to the Creator first of all, each honors every other intelligent creature as his equal: as equally with himself occupying his place in the design of the Creator, and responsible individually and only to the Creator for the fulfillment of that design. Therefore, out of respect to the Creator, to his neighbor, and to himself, he loves his neighbor as himself. And this second eternal truth, equally with the first distinguishes individuality as an eternal principle.

True Self-Government

This is original government. It is also ultimate government; because these are first principles complete and absolute; and because they eternally inhere in the nature and relationships of intelligent creatures. And this government, which is at once original and ultimate, is simply self-government–self-government in reason and in God. For it is only the plainest, simplest dictate of reason that the intelligent creature should recognize that to the Creator he owes all; and that, therefore, subjection and honor are the reasonable dues from him to the Creator. It is likewise a simple dictate of reason that, since his neighbor equally with himself owes all to the Creator, his neighbor must be respected and honored in all this as he himself would desire to be respected and honored in it.

It is also the simple dictate of reason that, since these have all been created, and in their existence owe all to the Creator, this existence with all its accompaniments in the exercise of abilities and powers should be ever held strictly in accordance with the will and design of the Creator; because it is still further the simple dictate of reason that the Creator could never have designed that the existence, the faculties, or the powers of any creature should be exercised contrary to His will or outside of His design. Therefore it is the simplest, plainest dictate of reason that this original and ultimate government, which is self-government, is self-government under God, with God, and in God. And this is truly the truest self-government.

God has created all intelligences absolutely free. He made man, equally with other intelligences, to be moral. Freedom of choice is essential to morals. To have made an intelligence unable to chose would have been to make it incapable of freedom. Therefore, He made man, equally with other intelligences, free to choose; and He ever respects that of which He is the Author, the freedom of choice. And when, in the exercise of this freedom of choice, an intelligence chooses that his existence, with its consequent faculties and powers, shall be spent strictly subject to the will and within the design of the Creator, and so, indeed, with the Creator and in the Creator, this is in the truest sense strictly and truly self-government.

This truth is illustrated for us on both sides. First, in heaven Lucifer, the most exalted creature, standing in such a height of perfection that he could unerringly pronounce upon perfection–this perfect and most exalted creature chose to exercise his existence, with its faculties and powers, contrary to the will, and outside the design of God. The consequence was that he instantly became the prince of evil itself, the author of all the long train of evil and wo that is in this world and that the universe will ever know.

Then to counteract this whole train of evil and to redeem this world from wo, the Son of God, by whom were all things created, became man, was made flesh, and, as man, walked this earth to reveal to man the true way. And when this most exalted One thus humbled Himself and came to show the way. He came saying to God, His Father, "I am thy servant forever." "I delight to do Thy will, O My God; yea, Thy law is within my heart." "I can of Mine Own Self do nothing;" "the Father that dwelleth in Me, He doeth the works." "My doctrine is not Mine, but His that sent Me." "He gave Me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak." "I came . . . not to do Mine own will, but the will of Him that sent Me," "and to finish His work." "Not My will, but Thine, be done." This He did all of His own free, eternal choice. And that He not only showed the way, but He is eternally "the Way."

Thus, original and ultimate government is self-government, under God, with God, and in God. And upon this earth, only in Christianity, as Christianity is in Christ, is found this true self-government, this original and ultimate government.

January 13, 1904

"History of Government. Two Kinds of Government" The Signs of the Times 30, 2 , pp. 3, 4 .

TWO KINDS OF GOVERNMENT

Man's Choice is Evil

THIS earth was formed to be inhabited. When it had been created, God created man upon it and appointed him to have, under God, "dominion" over the beast of the field and the fowl of the air and the fishes of the sea and over every creeping thing that moves upon the earth.

The government of man himself was self-government under God, with God, and in God; and he was created thus to remain forever. But he chose to abandon this and to take a course contrary to the will, and outside the design, of God. by this choice he fell under the power of the chief opponent of all government, and the author of anarchy. But to this usurper of the dominion of the earth and man, God said, "I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed." Thus God broke up the absolutism of the dominion of Satan over man; and opened the way for man to return to allegiance to God, and so to true government.

Of the first two sons of the first man, one chose the way of true government–self-government according to the will, and within the design, of God; the other chose the way of Satan–the way of lawlessness, the way of anarchy. And in strict accordance with the principle of that way, and in manifestation of the true spirit of the originator of that way, and the hater of the principle of government, he killed his brother.

Two Classes.

Another son was born who chose the way of true government–self-government according to the will and within the design, of God. this man was allowed to live, and he was succeeded by others of his way. The other was succeeded by others of his way. The two classes continued, and so did the controversy between the true and false government upon the earth; between self-government according to the will and within the design of God on the one side; and on the other the dominion of the evil ones in lawlessness resulting in anarchy. The lawless elements multiplied till "the earth was filled with violence." This anarchy became so universal that to quench it, there were required the waters of the universal Flood. And true government–self-government according to the will and within the design of God in the eight persons who, of all the earth's inhabitants, recognized it, in the ark which they had prepared–was preserved by the waters of the same Flood that quenched the opposing anarchy. Thus was man preserved alive upon the earth and the race was perpetuated. And so the second time the Creator started man upon the earth, and with him the principle of true government–self-government according to the will and within the design of God. but in spite of the demonstration of the fearful results of taking the other way, it was but a short time before that false way was again chosen; again the two classes were developed; and again the controversy arose and continued between those who on the earth were espoused to true government, and those who were not.

Man in Place of God

This refusal to recognize true government, this refusal of the individual to hold himself subject to the will and within the design of God, not only continued, but continued to increase. Idolatry was substituted for the recognition of God, for "when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise they became fools, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things." And in just the degree in which the knowledge of God was disregarded, the absence of true government was manifested, and confusion and lawlessness prevailed. And in the nature of things, amongst the idolatrous ones, the strongest prevailed. And when the strong had prevailed they held the power which in the contest they had gained; and, in the true spirit of the false government, having abandoned self-government according to the will and within the purpose of God, they asserted dominion over others according to their own will, and in furtherance of their own design. And such is the origin of monarchy–the assertion of man in the place of God–upon earth.

What Idols Are

And it is curious as well as important to notice how idolatry aided in this bad development.

First, they did know God, but they rejected Him. They chose not to glorify him as God, nor to be thankful, nor even to recognize Him. Then idols were put in His place. But these idols were but the creation of their own perverse imagination. The idols were only the imagining of their own false conceptions, and so were but the representations of themselves. and when they had put these idols in the place of God, the idols being but the representations of themselves, it was perfectly easy and also perfectly natural and logical that they should presently put themselves in the places of the idols, as the agents of the idol and the executors of its will which from the beginning was but their own will cast for the occasion upon the idol.

For, strictly and truly speaking, literally the idol was nothing. All that it could possibly be was what its creators and worshipers conceived it to be. This conception was altogether their own. Then, whatever will, character, or purpose, the idol could possibly have was but the will, character, or purpose of the one who made it or worshiped it. And the idol being helpless to execute this will or to manifest either character or purpose, it fell inevitably to the maker or worshiper of the idol, himself to make this manifest. And since the idol had been put in the place of God, and since all that the idol could ever possibly be was simply what its maker and worshiper himself was, this was simply to put the man, the worshiper of the idol, in the

20

place of God. And when apostasy had reached this point, confusion and turbulence had reached the point at which it was only the power of force that could prevail; and the force which prevailed most, maintained its place and power by the assertion of dominion over others according to the will and purpose of the one man who exerted it. Thus arose monarchy in the world. In the nature of the case, the monarch was in the place of God.

Facts of History.

Nor is this mere theory; nor yet is it merely philosophy. It is fact–fact according to the records of the times in which this bad development occurred. For in the earliest records of the race, in totally and widely-separated places, such is the record. In earliest records in the plain of Shinar, the cradle of the race after the Flood, in every instance the ruler bears not the title of king, but of "viceroy" of the idol god, which is held to be truly king. These records reveal clearly that there had been a time when these same people recognized God as the only King and the true Ruler. These records also reveal the fact that these people had not yet gone so far in apostasy that the one in authority, the one who exercised rulership, could dare to assume positively the title of king. But the idol which had been put in the place of God could be made to bear God's title of King and true Ruler; and then the man who would usurp the place and prerogative of God over men, could deftly insinuate himself as viceroy, vicegerent, or substitute, of the idol god who, in the figment of men, still bore the dignity and title of king.

Such also is the record in earliest Assyria, in earliest Egypt, and even among our own ancient Anglo-Saxon progenitors. The persistence of the principle is illustrated in the conception of king in our own English language; for "among the English, at least, the kingly houses all claimed descent from the blood of the gods. Every king was a son of Woden."

Thus, by these widely separated and independent records, it is demonstrated that the concept of kingship in the human race was originally recognized as belonging only to God. And this so exclusively that when idols were put in the place of God (which idols were themselves nothing, but were in fact the reflection of the maker of the idols), this title must abide exclusively with the figment, which stood in the place of God.

But as apostasy continued and the asserters of dominion and power over others became more bold, there came Nimrod, the one, and the first one, who was so bold as to take to himself from the idols the title and the prerogative of king, which by the makers of the idols had been taken from God and placed upon the idol. Because of this his impious boldness, the name of Nimrod signifies "rebellion, supercilious contempt," and is equivalent to "the extremely impious rebel."

This is not to say that there should be no governments, nor is it to say that there should be no monarchy on earth. It is only to say that without such apostasy there never could have been monarchy. But when such apostasy had come, and consequent turbulence and violence prevailed, it was better that there should be even monarchy such as that of Nimrod, than that there should be no government at all, but only anarchy. It were better that there should be such government as that of Nimrod or of Nero, than that there should be none on earth. But apostasy must of necessity go a long way from true and original government–self-government with God–before there could be required such government as that of Nimrod or of Nero.

January 20, 1904

"History of Government. III. The History of Government" The Signs of the Times 30, 3 , p. 3 .

III. THE HISTORY OF GOVERNMENT

The First Arbitrary Ruler among Men

NIMROD was the first "mighty one in the earth." He was the first one of men to assert power and force, unrestrained, upon men; the first man to assert the absolutism of authority over men. This is evident from the fact, as we have seen, that those before him had not the boldness to assume openly and decidedly the title and prerogative of king, which they knew belonged, by right, only to God. this unwillingness to assume the title of king, and the willingness to assert authority only as viceroy of the king, even though their own idols were held to be the king, shows the recognition of the restraint of a superior authority, and the recognition of that authority above them to which they were responsible and under which they acted only as agent; or viceroy. But with Nimrod, all this was thrown off. He himself would be supreme. He would recognize no superior. He alone would be king. The title and prerogatives of king should merge in him. And this position was taken by him in view of the fact that before this, the title and prerogatives of king merged only in God. This was at once and openly the putting of himself in the place of God. He was assuming the title, the prerogatives, and the absolute authority that belonged only to God; which only God can exercise in righteousness; and which can be exercised by man only in a cruel, wicked despotism.

And all this, which in principle lay in Nimrod's assumption of the title of king, is demonstrated in his career. For, though Babel was the city in which, and over the people of which, he began the assertion of this absolute authority and power, yet he was not content with the assertion of this over Babel alone and leaving it for others to follow his example in their own particular cities; but with Babel he at once grasped by this his kingly authority "Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar." Thus he asserted his absolute dominion over the whole of the land of Shinar.

Nor was he content even with this. It was not enough for him to be king–supreme, unrestrained monarch; but he must extend his authority to the farthest limits. For "out of that land he went forth into Assyria, and builded Nineveh, and Rehoboth-Ir, and Calah, and Resen between Nineveh and Calab." He was not content with a kingdom only; but he must expand kingdom into empire, and so assert his authority to the widest possible limit, to be indeed supreme and absolute everywhere.

With the setting up of Nimrod's kingdom, the entire ancient world entered a new historical plane. The original tradition which makes that warrior the first man who wore a kingly crown, points to a fact more significant than the assumption of a new ornament of dress, of even the conquest of a province. His reign introduced to the world a new system of relations between the governor and the governed. The authority of former rulers had rested upon the telling of kindred, and the ascendancy of the chief was an image of parental control. Nimrod, on the contrary, was a sovereign of territory, and of men just as far as they were its inhabitants, and irrespective of personal ties. Hitherto there had been tribes–enlarged families–society; now there was a nation, a political community–the State. The political and social history of the world henceforth are distinct, if not divergent.

Distinction between Kingship and Imperialism

It is notable, as above remarked, that a peculiar characteristic of this impartial sovereignty was the assertion of it primarily over territory, and, accordingly, over people as they might be inhabitants of the territory. Herein lies the essential distinction between kingship and imperialism.

Nimrod's bold example in assuming the title and prerogative of king in the place of God was promptly imitated everywhere, but only as king of a tribe, or associated tribes, or of a city. But plainly, in such an association there was necessarily involved the idea or the consent or voice of the people of the tribe or city concerned. But when the authority and power of king thus asserted over a community or a city was extended over territory, without respect to the tribes or peoples who might be inhabitants of the territory, and was asserted over these simply as a consequence of their being within the territorial limits claimed, this at a stroke swept away all idea or possibility of the people's having any choice or voice in the matter. And that was but the assertion of the completest possible absolutism. In the first there might be room for some lingering thought of limitation upon the monarchy, but in the latter, all this was completely eliminated. This was absolutism complete.

And even in this its ultimate phase, Nimrod's bold example has been diligently followed ever since. The history of the world, yea, even the history of government and of governments, is a history only of kingdoms expanding into empires; kingships by the voice of the people, expanding into imperialism to the exclusion of all possibility or thought of the voice of the people; limited monarchy expanding into absolute monarchical despotism.

Kudar-Nanhandi, king of Elam, was the first one of record to imitate Nimrod's imperialism, tho his success was small. Urkh, king of Ur, was the next to imitate Nimrod's imperialism, and he succeeded in establishing his imperial supremacy over the whole Babylonian plain. The next one was another king of Elam, Kudur-lagamer–the Chedorlaomer of Genesis 14–who surpassed even his exemplar; for he succeeded in establishing his imperial authority not only over the whole of the Mesopotamian plain, but over all the territory westward to the Mediterranean Sea, and almost to the border of Egypt, and kept it all in subjection for twelve years.

And so has proceeded the course of imperialism from Nimrod until now. But having discovered the principle and essential character of imperialism, the history and the practise of it will be discussed in other studies.

January 27, 1904

"History of Government. IV. The Establishing of Imperialism" The Signs of the Times 30, 4 , pp. 3, 4 .

IV. THE ESTABLISHING OF IMPERIALISM.

IT took 1,700 years for imperialism to establish itself in a position of recognized authority. While the heads of the tribes, or collections of tribes, were all ready to follow the example of Nimrod in assuming the title and asserting the power of king; and while the tribes, or collection of tribes, were willing to recognize this claim of the king; yet no tribe, no collection of tribes, nor any king, was willing for a moment to consent to the claim of any one to the title, prerogatives, and power of king of kings–imperial absolutism. And this persistent refusal on the part of both the kings and the people to submit to any such power or authority as that of king of kings, kept the imitators of Nimrod busy for 1,700 years.

The single Bible sentence touching Chedolaomer's empire and experience–"Twelve years they served Chedolaomer, and in the thirteenth year they rebelled"–is the story of the peoples and kings, and is the experience of every would-be king of kings, from Nimrod forward for 1,700 years. Each would-be king of kings was compelled to conquer his way to imperial dominion; and, after having acquired it, was compelled to exercise constant watchfulness and activity to maintain himself in the power which he had gained, against the ever-ready and persistent disposition of kings and people to break the yoke and enjoy their native freedom. He was also in constant danger of being swept aside, and his empire possessed, by some other aspirant to empire.

Egyptian Imitators.

The most notable of the far-ancient imitators of Nimrod and Chedolaomer, was King Thothmes III., of Egypt. He succeeded in establishing his power over all the people and tribes and nations of the East as far eastward as to the borders of India. Indeed, the empire of Egypt was as truly universal in that day as was that of Alexander or Rome in their later days. This power was maintained, and people were held in subjection, through the reigns of his three immediate successors; but in the reign of the fourth the whole structure went absolutely to pieces. Every king and every tribe, however petty, broke loose from Egyptian power and asserted the independence of their native freedom; and it was not until the time of the third of this king's successors that imperial power was against gained by Egypt. Then Seti I. succeeded in establishing the power of Egypt over the same extended territory as had Thothmes III.; but at his death, revolt occurred in Ethiopia, and Egypt's claim of empire was disputed by the Hittites, the outcome of which dispute was, that the king of Egypt was compelled to enter into a treaty with the king of the Hittites, recognizing that nation on an equality with Egypt. And no sooner had this king passed away than the Egyptian empire went finally to pieces before invading powers, who founded dynasties in all parts of the country, sacked and burned the cities, and compelled the Egyptian people "to bow the neck to kings of foreign rulers."

An Empire of Peace and By Peace.

The next universal empire after that of Egypt was the empire of Israel under Solomon. The conquests and empire of Solomon were no less extended than were those of Egypt; and the empire of Israel under Solomon was as truly universal in that day as were those of Egypt and Alexander in their respective days. Yet the conquests accomplished, and the empire established, by Solomon were altogether by peace. And the power exerted in these conquests and the government of this empire was only the power of the peace, the wisdom, and the righteousness of God. For "God gave Solomon wisdom and understanding exceeding much, and largeness of heart, even as the sand that is on the seashore. And Solomon's wisdom excelled the wisdom of all the children of the East country, and all the wisdom of Egypt. For he was wiser than all men; . . . and his fame was in all nations round about." And "all the kings of the earth sought the presence of Solomon, to hear his wisdom, that God had put in his heart."

All these kings came to him, not as mere curiosity seekers; but to recognize his supremacy and to do him honor in it. For "they brought every man his present, vessels of silver, and vessels of gold, and raiment, harness, and spices, horses, and mules, a rate year by year." The "presents" themselves were a recognition of sovereignty; and their bringing them as "a rate" and "year by year" shows that they were an annual tribute rendered to recognition of the sovereignty of Solomon and of the empire of Israel, by "all the kings of the earth." It is true, as already stated, that this conquest of all the kings was not by force of arms, and the carnage of battle; yet it was none the less a fact. For there is more power in the wisdom and righteousness of God manifested through sincere hearts of men than in all the governments, armies, and weapons of war that this world can ever know.

But this empire Solomon himself lost, by turning from the wisdom and righteousness of God, and adopting the ways of the heathen.

For immediately, upon Solomon's turning to the ways of the heathen, adversaries arose on every hand; and the empire of Israel went the way of all the empires that had been before it. But in this universal conquest and empire established by the peace, the wisdom, and the righteousness of God, God demonstrated to His own people what He would have done for the world by them, if they had been loyal to Him in peace, wisdom, and righteousness, and had not gone into idolatry and the evil ways of the heathen, and then rejected God and demanded a king "like all the nations." And in this God also gave witness to all the nations of the earth of what He was ready, willing, and anxious to do in all the earth, even in the great apostasy that brought kingships, if only those kings would recognize Him and serve Him in holiness of heart.

52

The Subject of the Peoples.

This peaceful empire of Israel under Solomon brought a respite to all the nations from the long succession of oppression of the despotic imitators of Nimrod. And this inspired them anew with a love of freedom and government of their own choice. This made it harder for the despotic, world-conquering kings of Assyria to again establish an empire of the Nimrod stripe. Yet, in spite of all difficulties, the kings of Assyria in straightforward succession for 400 years persistently asserted imperial power, and nothing short of universal conquest and empire. And their work was as tedious as it was persistent; for there was not a king who succeeded to the Assyrian throne who was not compelled on his own part to conquer all that his predecessors had conquered; and, in many instances, they were compelled to repeat their conquests year by year throughout their whole reign. Shalmaneser II., whose reign was one of the longest in the Assyrian annals, made thirty-three campaigns in the thirty-one years of his reign; and many of these were made into the same countires and against the same peoples that his father had conquered in his reign. And the work of these two was only the repetition of what their predecessors had done, and was what their successors were compelled to do during all the following 300 years, through the reigns of Tiglath-Pileser, Shalmaneser, Sargon, Sennacherib, Esar-Haddon, unto the pinnacle of Assyrian supremacy in the reign of Assur-bani-pal. Then Assyria was broken down, and the kingdom of Babylon under Nabopolassar and Nebuchadnezzar was expanded into empire by the same means by which the persistent power of former conquests had established the universal empire of Assyria.

And this perpetual hammering during the 400 years of Assyrian supremacy, which was immediately taken up and continued by Babylon, so broke the spirit of the peoples of the earth, that practically there was no further attempt of the conquered peoples to throw off the incubus of imperialism. They submitted to the inevitable, accepted imperial power as final, and left imperialism free to manifest itself fully in the world, and to show what it could do when it had its own way untrammeled and undisputed.

February 3, 1904

"History of Government. V. The Perpetuation of Imperialism" The Signs of the Times 30, 5 , pp. 4, 5 .

V. THE PERPETUATION OF IMPERIALISM.

WE have seen that by the time of the conquests and the establishment of empire by Nabopolassar and Nebuchadnezzar, of Babylon, the spirit of independence of the peoples had been so completely broken down that the despotism of empire had secured undisputed sway. This was so effectually accomplished by Babylon, that the Scripture plainly defines it as "the hammer of the whole earth." And, yet, Babylon had only perpetuated the hammering of the peoples which Assyria, with but a brief interval, had kept up for more than a thousand years. And this perpetual hammering, continued by Babylon, had effected at last what the ambitious of every imperialist, since Nimrod had ever hoped; the silent suffering and submission of all peoples to one predominant and absolute will.

This work of Babylon in perpetuating the destructive work of Assyria in this respect, is forcibly told in the expressive words of the Scripture concerning their dealings with the peoples: "First the king of Assyria hath devoured him; and last this Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon hath broken his bones." While Assyria, in its lust of empire, had fed itself on the substance of the peoples, Babylon completed the work by breaking their bones and sucking the very marrow. And tho a single king of Assyria, as Sennacherib, might compel the nations and peoples to such submission as that, like terror-stricken chickens, "none opened his mouth or peeped;" yet, when the direct assertion of personal power by that particular king was passed, all people were prompt to stand up again for freedom and independence; but when Babylon, "the hammer of the whole earth," had laid upon the nations and peoples her crushing strokes, the subjection of all was complete, and their submission final.

And now that the supremacy and absolutism of empire was attained in permanency, and the imperial spirit was absolutely free to demonstrate what it could and would do when entirely untrammeled and undisputed, this was demonstrated to the full, and that in such measure as to be a perpetual lesson to all peoples that should follow, even to the world's end. And in order that empire might be saved from what it would certainly do if left to itself, God foretold to all by giving to Nebuchadnezzar the first head of permanent empire, a vision in a notable dream. In this vision God showed to Nebuchadnezzar that his empire, tho universal and so great, would be succeeded by another, inferior; which would be succeeded by another, further inferior; and that, in turn, by another, yet further inferior, which would go all to pieces; and then even the pieces would be dashed so utterly to pieces that they would be "like the chaff of the summer threshing-floors;" and the wind, as with chaff, would hurl them lightly away, and no place be found for them.

But this could not be believed even from God, by one who stood as the proud possessor of permanent, worldly, imperial power; and he undertook to disprove it by setting up against it the imperial idea.

God's Truth versus Human Ambition.

To show the gradation and inferiority in the succession of empires, the Lord, in the vision, had presented the image of man composed of metals of inferior gradations from head to foot, the head only being of gold: this head of gold representing the empire of Babylon. But Nebuchadnezzar could not accept, as correct, any such representation as that. accordingly, he, too, presented a great image, but all of gold from head to feet; thus excluding all suggestion that there should be even any succession of empires, much less a gradation of inferiority in succession. This great image, all of gold, was but the king's assertion that the golden glory of his empire of Babylon should continue forever.

And this embodiment of his idea, King Nebuchadnezzar set up; and required, under the terrible penalty of a burning, fiery furnace, that all the peoples, nations, and languages should accept it. But amongst his subjects there were some servants of the Most High God, who had studied, and who understood, the truth as to empire. These being loyal to God, and, therefore, holding His idea to be the correct one, refused to accept the imperial idea. Therefore, they were cast into the burning, fiery furnace, heated to the highest possible degree. But God preserved them, and the came forth unscathed, and with not even the smell of fire upon them. And thus God not only vindicated their course as righteous, but continued the truth of His idea of empire and changed the king's word and also his idea of empire.

After this lesson, King Nebuchadnezzar was led of God; but when he had died the empire shortly demonstrated what it could and would do; that is, sink itself in everlasting ruin by intemperance. For when the abundant tribute of all nations flowed in an uninterrupted stream into the one treasury of Babylon; and the permanent submission of all nations and peoples had left the government in complete idleness so far as military expeditions were concerned; the imperial classes thus having an endowment of boundless wealth and abundance of idleness, intemperance of every sort grew to such a height that the empire sank in a night in the drunken, lascivious feast of Belshazzar, which he made "to a thousand of his lords, and drank wine before the thousand." And this perfection of ruin was accomplished in only twenty-three years from the death of Nebuchadnezzar.

The Medo-Persian Regions.

In that night of drunken lasciviousness "was Belshazzar the King of the Chaldeans slain;" the mighty empire of Babylon sank; and the succession of empire passed to the Medes and Persians.

The Medes and Persians were peoples who had grown up through self-discipline and hardships of natural surroundings; and so, both by circumstances and by choice, they were a strictly temperate people. This Temperance of the Persians, and the value of it, was so well known amongst the neighboring kingdoms, that when King Cúsus was contemplating war upon the Persians, one of his counsellors dissuaded him with the observation: "Thou art about, O king, to make war against men who wear leathern trousers, and have all their other garments of leather, and who feed not on what they like, but on what they can get from a soil that is sterile and unkindly; who do not indulge in wine, but drink water; who possess no figs nor anything else that is good to eat."

And the Medes and Persians knew of the intemperate course of Babylon that was surely working her undoing. And they understood the situation so well that they calculated upon the intemperance of Babylon as a capital element in their plans for empire. For when Cyprus, the leader of the Medo-Persian armies, addressed his troops at the beginning of his expedition against Babylon, he said: "Do you know the nature of the enemy you have to deal with?–They are soft, effeminate, and enervated men; men not able to bear either hunger or thirst; equally incapable of standing either the peril of war or the sight of danger; whereas, you that are inured from your infancy to a sober and hard way of living–to you, I say, hunger and thirst are but the sauce and the only sauce to your meals; fatigues are your pleasure; danger your delight."

It is further said of the Persians that "the only food allowed either the children or the young men, was bread, cresses, and water; for their design was to accustom them early to temperance and sobriety. Besides, they considered that a plain, frugal diet, without any mixture of sauces or ragouts would strengthen the body and lay such a foundation of health as

69

would enable them to endure the hardships and fatigues of war, to a good old age." And Herodotus declares that before their conquests "the Persians possessed none of the luxuries or delights of life."

This is the people who succeeded to the world empire in the placed of the idolatrous, luxurious, drunken, lascivious, imperial power of Babylon. But when Medo-Persia had succeeded to the imperial world-position and power of Babylon, again empire demonstrated precisely all that absolute empire in permanency could do. the invaluable experience and lessons of both the principle and practise of temperance were forgotten. The principles and the experience of temperance were all swept away; and that which was a new order of things to thenm, the untold wealth in the uninterrupted stream of tribute from all peoples and nations, governmental idleness by the submission of all nations, and the consequent intemperance, carried this empire over the same course that Babylon had gone to ruin.

Indeed, of them history records that "to such a height was their luxury grown, that they would have the same magnificence and enjoy the same pleasures and idleness in the army as in the king's courts, so that in their wars the kings marched accompanied by their wives, their concubines, and all their eunuchs. Their silver and gold plate, and all their rich furniture was carried after them in prodigious quantities; and, in short, all the equipage and utensils so voluptuous a life requires. . . . This luxury and extravagance rose in time to such an excess as to be little better than downright madness."

The Succession of Greece.

And to this excess of intemperance the Persian empire sank, so had Babylon before her. The Persian empire sank before another new people, accustomed to hardships, and tho not so strictly temperate as were the Medes and Persians in the day of their succession to empire, yet, so far more so than were the Persians at their last, that they could be called a temperate people. For when the Greeks first met the Persians at Marathon, and before as well as afterward, it is recorded of them that they were "well disciplined troops under skilful and experienced commanders; soldiers accustomed to temperance, whose bodies were inured to toil and labor, and rendered both robust and active by wrestling and other exercises practised in that country."

But the glory of wealth and luxury of empire that came to the Greeks, immediately robbed them equally of their power. Their mighty king, who won the world-empire before he was thirty-three, perished as the result of a drunken bout; the empire was broken to pieces, was held in four parts, then in two, but going the same course of empire–vast wealth, abundance of idleness, and consequent intemperance–till "the transgressors came in the full;" and again empire, having demonstrated precisely what alone empire was and will do when it can have its own way in undisputed sway, perished; and in its place there came empire by another new people, built up by hardships, self-discipline, and temperance.

Roman Dominion.

For at the time when the Romans were rapidly stepping to the very height of world-empire, three ambassadors were sent by the senate to the king of Egypt in his capitol. In their honor the king spread a banquet of "all the variety of the most assumptuous fare. Yet, they would touch nothing more of it than was useful, and that in the most temperate manner for the necessary support of nature, despising all the rest as that which corrupted the mind as well as the body, and bred vicious humours in both." Such was the moderation and temperance of the Romans at this time. And hereby it was that they at length advanced their State to so great a height. In this height would they have still continued could they have retained the same virtues. But when their prosperity and the great wealth attained thereby, became the occasion that they degenerated into luxury and corruption of manners, they drew decay and ruin as fast upon them as they had before victory and prosperity, till at length they were undone by it. Being so undone, the empire of the Romans sank in annihilating ruin as had the empires before it.

Such is the repeatedly demonstrated course of empire. And thus it is also repeatedly demonstrated that such is precisely and only what absolute empire in permanence can and will do.

February 10, 1904

"History of Government. VI. Character of Earthly Monarchy" The Signs of the Times 30, 6 , pp. 4, 5 .

VI. CHARACTER OF EARTHLY MONARCHY.

WE have studied the principles, the origin, and the essential nature of monarchy. Monarchy being the recognized system of government, it was in essence the same everywhere; yet there were varieties of form which, in practise, made the successive monarchies different, and in some things peculiar.

Since, in its very inception, the assertion of monarchy was the assumption of the title and prerogatives of God, it became necessary for the monarch, in supporting this pretension, to separate himself as far as possible from the people, and to surround himself with an atmosphere of exclusiveness and pseudo-divinity; and indeed, personally, to assert divinity. This was the case with Nimrod; and in this also he was imitated by the world-kings, as they also imitated him in the manifestation of the imperial spirit.

This is illustrated more fully in the kings of Egypt than in any other ancient nation. The sun was held to be the great god, and in Egypt the kings professed to be the very impersonation of the sun-god. They claimed identity with the sun-god, and must be addressed as "sun-god." For instance, Thothmes III., the founder of the Egyptian empire, inscribes himself as "Son of the Sun, Thothes III., Giver of Life, like the Sun forever." And, again, "Giver of Life like the Sun eternal." The governors must address the king of Egypt as "The king, my Lord, my Sun-God," and say, "At the feet of my Lord, my Sun-God, seven times seven I prostate myself." In the records of Egypt, letter after letter from governors to the king open with the words, for instance, "To the king, my Lord, my Sun-God, I speak, even I, Rib-Adda, thy servant; at the feet of my Lord, my Sun-God, seven times seven do I prostrate myself." And again, "To the great king, the king of the world, I, the servant of the mighty Lord, to the king, my Lord; at the feet of my Lord, the Sun-God, seven times seven I prostrate myself."

As he was the "giver of life," the people were supposed to receive from him "the breath of their nostrils." As, for instance, on a certain occasion it is recorded of the chiefs of a conquered country, making their submission, "Then the chiefs of that land came bringing the usual tribute, adoring the spirits of His Majesty, asking breath for their nostrils of the greatness of His power and the importance of His spirits."

Being so great, he must be beheld by the mass of the people afar off, and was approachable only by the inner ones of the gradation of royal circles. For instance, when one of the kings had decided to establish and build a temple, and wanted to convey to even the royal masons and the sacred sculptors his purpose, he must do it thus: "Then His Majesty ordered that orders should be given to the superintendent of the royal masons, who were with him, and the sacred sculptors." Here are plainly no less than two, or possibly three, gradations between the king and even the royal masons and sacred sculptors. What, then, must have been the distance between "His Majesty" and the daily toiling masses?

Not in every monarchical nation or world-empire did the king stand at this extreme of idolatrous "Majesty." But with Nimrod and the kings of Egypt it was so; and with the kings of Assyria it was hardly less than so. For, eleven hundred years before Christ, Tiglath-Pileser I., of Assyria, published himself as "the powerful king, the king of hosts who has no rivals, the king of the four zones, the king of all kinglets, the king of lords, the shepherd of princes, the king of kings, the exalted prophet. . . . The faithful shepherd, proclaimed lord over kinglets, the supreme governor whose weapons Assur has predestinated, and for the government of the four zones has proclaimed his name forever."

Two hundred years after this, another king of Assyria proclaimed himself "Assur-natsir-pal, the powerful king, the king of hosts, the king unrivaled, the king of all the four regions of the world, the Sun-God of multitudes of men. . . . who has overcome all the multitudes of men. . . . who has established empire over lands, . . . the supreme judge. . . . who has established empire over all the world, . . . mightiest among the gods am i."

His son and immediate successor, Shalmaneser II., proclaimed himself, "Shalmaneser, the king of the multitudes of men, high priest of Assur, the powerful king, the king of all the four regions, the Sun-God of the multitudes of mankind, who governs in all countries; the son of Assur-natsir-pal, the supreme priest, etc., etc."

In Babylon and Later Empires.

It does not appear that in the Babylon of Nebuchadnezzar this self-exalted "Majesty" was so boastingly proclaimed; but that the spirit of it was manifested there is shown by the scripture, in which king Nebuchadnezzar openly and positively set up his idea against the known idea of the God of heaven. It is further manifested in the instance in which, after king Nebuchadnezzar had completed the building of his great temples and his mighty works in Babylon, he again set himself against the God of heaven in the boast, "Is not this great Babylon, that I have built for the house of the kingdom by the mighty of my power and for the honor of my majesty?"

But Nebuchadnezzar had an experience which humbled his pride and annihilated his self-exaltation, and led him to recognize the true God in truth, and that "the Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever He will."

But this was all forgotten by the successors of Nebuchadnezzar; and blasphemous defiance of God reached its culminating point that last night of Babylon when there appeared the mystic fingers of a man's hand over against the candlestick upon the plaster of the wall: "God hath numbered thy kingdom, and finished it. . . . Thou art weighed in the balances, and art found wanting." And in that night of blasphemous defiance of God, Babylon sank forever.

There was in the kingdom of Babylon a feature that, of all the empires of ancient or modern times, is peculiar alone to Babylon; excepting only at the seat of the Babylon of modern times. The king of Babylon required of the subject kings of his world-empire that their thrones should be in Babylon, ranged with the throne of the king of Babylon, and in gradation according to the degree of their importance on their own part, and their favor in his sight.

In the kings of the empire of the Medes and Persians the pride and idolatrous self-exaltation of "His Majesty" was subdued in Darius, the Mede, and Cyrus, the Persian, by their recognition of the true God and their submission to Him. And this self-exaltation never did rise in Persia to anything like the height it had attained in Babylon, Assyria, Egypt, and Shinar. But when in the imperial succession we come to Greece, we find it again in full measure. It was Philip of Macedon who unified Greece and paved the way for Alexander's imperial succession. And both he and his wife aspired to divinity. She was a bacchanalian devotee, and indulged in the ceremonies of magic and incantation. And Philip was in the very act of celebrating his own divinity when he was slain by the hand of an assassin; for he was at that moment making a grand and majestic entrance into the great and crowded theater, having been preceded only shortly before by a procession of the twelve great gods, and immediately after them the statue of Philip himself as the thirteenth god.

Coming from such a parentage as this on both sides, it is not strange that there should be manifested in their son, Alexander the Great, that insatiable aspiration to be a god which characterized his whole public career.

The same thing was repeated in the monarch of the next world-empire, that of Rome. For when the Roman empire, which weas originally a government of the people, had fallen to a one-man power, the very first one was declared by the representatives of that people to be no more Caius Julius a man, but Divus Julius a god. And they voted that a temple should be built for the worship of him, and they named one of their party to be the priest who should conduct this worship. And then when they murdered him they continued the same thing to the man who succeeded him in the government and made permanent that world-monarchy.

Then when Rome fell and the barbarians of Germany established their ten kingdoms upon her ruin, these all traced the genealogy of their kings to their one great ancestor, the god Woden. The kingly houses all claimed descent from the blood of the gods.

And, when, beyond all this, upon the ruin of Rome and over the monarchies of the barbarian invasions and their final settlement, the bishop of Rome asserted kingship in the church and rose to imperialism in ecclesiastical power, in this also there was continued the old usurpation of the place and power, the title and prerogatives of God; the same persistent idolatrous claim and assertion of the attributes of divinity; and the same old self-exaltation. Only here beyond all heights that ever were before, the pride and self-exaltation of monarchy and imperialism was asserted above all that is called God or that is worshiped, declaring in the face of the avowed exclusive knowledge of the supreme God, that "He is God."

Such is the character and course of monarchy

85

on earth. And that the exercise of governmental prerogative by such power as this, from Nimrod to Pius X., must be a persistent succession of despotisms, was in the nature of things a certainty; and that despotism, so persistent and steady that to attempt a story of it would be but a constant repetition as steady as has been this brief story of the nature of monarchy, and far more wearisome.

February 17, 1904

"History of Government. Self-Government in Rome" The Signs of the Times 30, 7 , pp. 4, 5 .

SELF-GOVERNMENT IN ROME.

BY Nimrod and his imitators in Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Grecia, and earliest Rome, monarchy and imperialism had made themselves so obnoxious that mankind was completely tired of them, and, as a consequence, the people of Rome stood up and took the lead in behalf of all the people of the world in repudiating every principle of imperialism, monarchy, and kingship; and asserted, in behalf of the world, the principle of government of the people. They declared that the people were capable of governing themselves; they needed no man set over them to whom they must be in subjection, do obeisance, and pay tribute. The people of Rome did this in behalf of mankind. They espoused this principle for the good of themselves and the whole world. They stood as the conservators of liberty for mankind, and as the leaders of the nations to the blessings of liberty and true government.

The principle of government of the people asserted by Rome was intended as the true and ultimate principle of government. But in truth it fell far short of this, for, as we have seen, the true principle of government is self-government under God, with God, and in God. But the principle of self-government announced by Rome was that of self-government without God; self-government altogether of self; self-government wholly on the human basis. Yet, tho it was only this, and tho it was far short of the true principle, the government of Rome was far better than any human government that had been since the first apostasy to idolatry and monarchy.

In the first ages of their government of the people, the Romans understood the true principle of temperance, which literally is only self-control. And they practised accordingly, as we have seen illustrated in the instance of the ambassadors to the king of Egypt, who, at the royal banquet of all Egyptian luxury and dainties spread in their honor, chose only the plainest of what was before them, and partook of this in the most frugal manner, refusing all the rest as that which tended only to corrupt both mind and body, and to breed vicious humors in both. And because of adherence to these principles, it is deservedly recorded of the Romans that "they possessed the faculty of self-government beyond any people of whom we have historical knowledge," with the sole exception of the Anglo-Saxons.

Degeneracy and the Cause.

As a natural consequence, the government of Rome, being a government of the people, was the freest and the best human government of all ancient times, so long as they maintained the principle of self-government, even only on the human basis, but just as soon as they failed in the government of themselves, so soon the Roman government failed; because, of all forms of government, that form known as the government of the people or the republican form, depends most vitally upon the integrity of the individual in governing himself.

Because of faithfulness to principle, the government of Rome prospered and grew into the mightiest nation of all ancient times. And so she could have continued had the Roman people, who were truly the government, individually continued to govern themselves. But the Roman people were not content to govern only themselves. They took it upon themselves to govern other people, and in this they abandoned the principles of self-government. And when the other people, to whom the senate and people of Rome had professed to extent the blessings of liberty and self-government, chose to act upon the principle, and assumed the prerogatives of governing themselves, the Roman people, having announced to the world and having espoused, in behalf of the world, the principle of self-government, government of the people, absolutely refused to allow any of those people to govern themselves. the Roman people, committed to the principle of self-government, denied it to other people, and insisted upon governing them in spite of themselves, upon the principle that "they were not capable of self-government." The Roman people, who themselves were first governed by kings, and who had cast off kings and repudiated kingship, and had immediately established government of the people upon the principle that they were entirely capable of governing themselves, asserted dominion over other peoples, and refused even to allow them to attempt to govern themselves, when those other peoples, as the Roman people, and with the assistance of the Roman people, had cast off kings and repudiated kingships, upon Rome's own principle of their capability to govern themselves.

When the Roman people had thus completely repudiated the last essence of the principle of self-government, or government of the people, she was lost; there was absolutely nothing to hold her, nothing to keep her from following the identical course of all the imperial powers before her. For when Rome had spread her power over other peoples, and repudiated her own essential principle of government in refusing that principle to them, this was but to espouse and assert the same old imperialistic principle that had afflicted the world form Nimrod to her own day, and which she had repudiated in espousing the principle of self-government–government of the people.

A Harvest of Greed and Corruption.

When the Roman people collectively repudiated their own essential principle of government, they lost from themselves, individually, the benefits of the restraining power of that principle. And when from her many conquests, through their native habits of thrift and economy in self-support, the first consequence of self-government, "money poured in upon them in rolling streams of gold," the getting of money by any means, lawful or unlawful, became the universal passion. "Money was the one thought, from the highest senator to the poorest wretch who sold his vote in the Comitia." And, with the restraint of self-control annihilated in the repudiation of the principle of self-government, all this abundance of wealth was spent only in the indulgence of luxury of every kind. "Wealth poured in more and more, and luxury grew more unbounded. Palaces sprang up in the city, castles in the country, villas at pleasant places by the sea, and parks, and fish-ponds, and game-preserves, and gardens, and vast retinues of servants," everywhere.

All this indulgence of luxury inevitably resulted in a vast sea of idleness, depravity, and debauchery. And that people, committed originally to the principle of self-government in the world, and who originally possessed the faculty of self-government beyond all other people of ancient times, became the most abandoned to every kind of depravity and vice, and was sunken in intemperance the farthest from any thought of self-government. "No language can describe the state of that capital after the civil wars. The accumulation of power and wealth gave rise to universal depravity. Law ceased to be of any value. . . . The social fabric was a festering mass of rottenness, the people had become a populace, the aristocracy was demoniac, the city was a hell. No crime that the annals of human wickedness can show was left unperpetrated. The higher classes on all sides exhibited a total extinction of moral principle; the lower were practical atheists."

Past Reformation.

So complete and so universal was the depravity that the few who retained any sober thought on the subject "despairingly acknowledged that the system itself was utterly past cure."

It was truly past cure, or even amelioration, from any earthly or human source. And when the corruption had reached such a depth of depravity that from it men could conclude only that if there were a God, He must surely let loose His judgments and end it all, just then–instead of letting loose His judgments in annihilating ruin, He opened full and free the fountain of His love, and "gave His only-begotten Son," that whosoever would believe in Him, instead of deservedly perishing, should be saved from all his sins and from all evil, and should have eternal life. Jesus, the Son of God, came into the Roman world that was sunken in iniquity and corruption. He came into that Roman world which was dominated by that people who were so utterly apostate from their own original espousal of the principle of self-government. And He came to reveal to that people and to all mankind the true principle of self-government in very truth–self-government under God, with God, and in God.

And He did reveal it. He sent His apostles into all the world to preach it "to every creature"; and when one day one of His apostles stood face to face with a representative Roman who had sent for that apostle, to hear him concerning the faith in Christ, that apostle, in preaching to that representative Roman the truth of the true faith in Christ, "reasoned of righteousness, self-government, and judgment to come."

And as that apostle of Christ, talking to that representative Roman, to that man who was a chief representative of that government originally founded upon the principle of self-government, set forth in the spirit of truth the true principle of self-government, indeed, that representative Roman "trembled," as he saw not only how far short had that people come in their original conception of the principle of self-government, but how infinitely farther short was that people now come. As that representative Roman saw the heavenly beauty and infinite value of the true principle of self-government as it is in truth, and that in all consistency

117

he should espouse it, and that to do so meant the utter abandonment of all that Rome had soon become, this was also an element in his trembling.

And tho God so graciously sent, and Christ so kindly brought, and the apostles and early Christians so faithfully preached to the people of Rome the full reality and vital substance and the essential truth of the principle of government which the people of Rome had originally espoused, yet, instead of readily recognizing it and gladly accepting it, they absolutely repudiated it, and persecuted to the death the principle and all who espoused it.

But most deplorable of all was that there came an apostasy, "a falling away," even amongst those who espoused in the name of Christ this true principle of self-government. These unfaithful ones also held the principle only in the mere profession, and upon only the human basis. These also, instead of governing themselves, naturally enough manifested the ambition to govern others, asserting in this "a kind of sovereignty for themselves," and even beyond this, they extended their ambition to dominate the civil power.

They said, "Let the government, let the imperial power, espouse the Christian religion; let it ally itself with the church; let it receive through the church the true principle of government. Thus will it attain to true government indeed; and thus shall the kingdom of God come."

Their words were accepted. Their scheme was adopted. By political means the empire was made "Christian." The name, the forms, and the profession of Christianity were adopted as the way to salvation, and so became only a cloak to cover the original iniquity; so became only the form of godliness, under which to increase unto more ungodliness. Then and thus Roman apostasy and iniquity attained its ultimate; and the divine judgments of destruction did now fall in annihilating ruin "upon this nominally Christian, but essentially heathen world." Wave after wave of a mighty flood of the barbarians of the north swept out of existence the empire and people of Rome.

"Self-government" on the human basis, "self-government" without God, had demonstrated itself a complete failure.

February 24, 1904

"History of Government. VIII. The Decline of Self-government in Rome" The Signs of the Times 30, 8 , pp. 4, 5 .

VIII. THE DECLINE OF SELF-GOVERNMENT IN ROME

LAST week we studied the principle of government of the people, self-government, as illustrated in the government of Rome. In that study we found that government of the people was good, practical, and effectual, the best of all governments of ancient times, in all respects–so long as the people really governed themselves. Of all forms of government, that of government of the people depends most upon the integrity of the individual, upon the individual's loyalty to the principle of governing himself. And just as soon as the individuals fail in governing themselves, government of the people is lost, and must be succeeded by some other form.

This subject, as illustrated in the history of Rome, is worthy of further study, especially in the United States, because the United States was founded upon the principles of self-government, "government of the people, by the people, and for the people." And the study of government of the people, amongst the very people who "possessed the faculty of self-government beyond all people of whom we have historical knowledge, except only the Anglo-Saxons, must, in the nature of things, supply most valuable lessons for the people of this nation, whose government was founded as a government of the people.

Government of the people must, in the nature of things, be the best of all governments, when the people really govern themselves. Also, in the nature of things, government of the people must be the worst of all governments, when the people fail to govern themselves. For, when the government is of the people, and the people fail to govern, then there is practically no government; and the only alternative that then remains is: Either no government, indeed, which is anarchy; or else a government of such a character that will effectually govern a populace that will not govern themselves, which must be a despotism. It may be a despotism of the majority, it may be a despotism of the minority, it may be a despotism of a few, or even two or three, or it may be a despotism of only one; but whether of the majority, or the minority, of only two or three, or of only one, it must be, and it will inevitably be, a despotism. And through all these gradations the Roman Government of the people went in its degeneracy.

The first of all elements in self-government is self-denial. The exclusion of self-indulgence is temperance in all things. This we find as a characteristic in the earliest government of the people of Rome. The next vital element in self-government is self-support. Self-support, equally with self-denial, is inseparable from self-government. This also was a characteristic of the earliest Roman Government of the people. Individual industry and frugality, therefore, are the essential elements in any system of practical self-government. And, as we have seen, the Roman people held in faithfulness both these essential elements of self- government. Their self-government was the greatest success, in every respect, of all human governments before the rise of that only other government of the people, the republic of the United States.

In such a government of the people, a government where each governs himself, the formal government easily becomes of that sort which is acknowledged to be the best, and which has been most aptly described in the sentence, "The best government is the one which does the least governing." In such a case, the formal government exists, and is exercised solely for protection of the individual in his rights of life and property, while the individual governs and supports himself and the government. For, upon the principle that government is of the people, the formal government is a creation of the people. It is but a device, a piece of political machinery, framed and set up by the people, by which they would make themselves secure in the enjoyment of the inalienable rights which they all possessed as men capable of governing themselves, and exercising that capability in the actual government of themselves. So, with the system complete, it stands: Individual government, and collective protection. And since individual government, self-government, involves self-support, the complete system stands: Self-help and governmental protection.

Assuming to Govern Other People.

Such was the system of the Roman Government of the people at the first, and by virtue of which it was the freest government, therefore the best government, and by which it grew to be the greatest government, then in the world. But when that nation assumed the prerogative of governing other people than themselves, and, to do this, repudiated for itself its own original and vital principle; and when into the national treasury there came from conquered provinces and plundered peoples immense wealth in great, rolling streams of gold; and when the more fortunate individuals multiplied their wealth in boundless measure, and the positions, powers, and favors of the government were absorbed by these, as well as boundless luxury indulged by them,–when all this passed steadily before the eyes of all, the inevitable result was that the great mass of the less fortunate, the ones solely dependent upon their daily labor, and the poor–these followed the example of the rich and luxurious ones, and abandoned self-government, and with self-government abandoned self-help, and demanded governmental help. But when the government was a government of the people, the demand by the people for governmental support was merely the advocacy of Socialism.

There was however at the first a condition, under cover of which governmental support could be pleaded without itself appearing to be socialistic. That condition was that the vast wealth of the public treasury was not gathered from the people by taxation; but came as tribute and by plunder from conquered nations. The plea and the campaign for governmental support was successful; not at first in having money or even provisions given direct to the people, but in the expenditure of the public money for the distribution of land to the people. Vast sums were thus spent. Then great numbers of people were, free of expense to themselves, placed upon well-improved lands. But this failed; because, when they were upon the land, they must support themselves by their own efforts, and they had all by far followed the example of the rich and luxurious, that their own work on the lands that were given them would not supply the means which they required to keep up the rate of living which they must maintain. And, living beyond their means, they incurred debt, then had to borrow from the rich to pay their debt; and, in borrowing what they must have, they mortgaged their claim upon the land. Accordingly, it was but a comparatively short time before their lands were all gone, and they were again clamoring for governmental support. Then, in answer to these clamors, the same thing was done by the government again, and with the same result again. Then, again, the clamors arose; against the government did the same thing, with again the same result.

The Failure of Socialism.

When this had been followed in the same round several times, it became apparent to the public authority that such a course was practically useless. Also the beneficiaries were heartily tired of it, because it did not relieve them from the necessity of work with their hands in self-support. Therefore, the scheme was discontinued. But those who insisted upon governmental support did not cease the demands for governmental support. They next required that the government should establish public granaries from which the people should be supplied with grain at a merely nominal sum. It was argued that this would be in nowise different in principle from that which had already been done in the supplying of land. It could hardly be more expensive, and being much more direct, would be much less complicated. There were always plenty of demagogues to urge these claims of the populace, and so to lift themselves to popular favor and governmental place.

With the enthusiastic clapping of every pair of poor hand in Rome, a law was secured which decreed that public granaries should be established in Rome, to be filled and maintained at the cost of the State, and that from these the wheat should be sold to the poor citizens at a merely nominal price. This was practically governmental support of the populace, because the immediate "effect was to gather into the city a mob of needy, unemployed voters, living on the charity of the State, to crowd the circus, and to clamor at the elections, available, no doubt, immediately to strengthen the hands of the popular tribune, but certain, in the long run, to sell themselves to those who could bid highest for their voices." And each voter could sell his vote for a sum sufficient to keep him constantly well supplied with provisions form the public granaries. Then, as the populace existed in practical idleness, the next thing was that the State must supply games and spectacles to fill the time of the idle crowd sufficiently to prevent mischievous designs that would threaten the government.

As before remarked, the open practise of Socialism could be avoided, so long as the public treasury was supplied with money from conquered nations; but when all the nations had been conquered, and the supply was not sufficient, then it was found that the scheme was absolutely socialistic in practice, as in the beginning it was in principle. For when the supply of money in the public treasury from

133

conquered provinces proved insufficient, by public devices and decrees the needed sums were simply taken by confiscation from those who had money.

Conflicts between Capital and Labor.

But, while events were reaching this final point, other accompanying and strictly logical in which had gained a permanent hold upon the government, and, with this had carried it utterly away from government of the people. In the progress of this socialistic principle, there was a constant struggle between the rich and the poor, between capital and labor, between governmental order and anarchy. When the rich, or capital, held the power, the poor and laboring classes were oppressed. When the populace held the power, the rich were oppressed.

In this see-saw for the possession of power capital had the advantage, because the senate was always on the side of capital, and the senate was always in existence, and, therefore, in possession of power. Besides, owing to the fact that the elections were annual, the ascendancy of the people was but spasmodic at the best. When some leader, who could carry the multitude with him, arose, the people would arise, and carry everything before them. But when the particular occasion was passed, or the leader fallen, the people would drop back into the old, easy way. The elections were never without riot, but the senate would gradually regain all its former power, which it would use still more oppressively in revenge for the checks which had been put upon it, and the insults which it had received when the populace was in power.

Despotism.

Thus, when the populace was in power, it was a despotism of the majority; and when the senatorial party was in power, it was a despotism of the minority. Yet, it must in justice be observed that the despotism of the senatorial party, the party of property, was not so great as was the despotism of the majority. And in justice it must also be admitted that the violence and excesses in defiance of law and order, of the populace, whether in power or out, compelled despotism on the part of the government. For instance: The senate absolutely abolished the trades-union; but to this the senate was driven by the fact that, tho these unions had been originally formed only for mutual benefit, yet in the times which we are now considering they had become nothing but political clubs, and had become so dangerous to property and even to life, that, for the security of both property and life, it was essential that they should be absolutely abolished. And this but illustrates the truth that, tho the government was a despotism, whether the majority (the populace) or the minority (the senatorial party) was in power; yet, the despotism of the minority was, in a degree, less heavy than was that of the majority; for the majority, possessing nothing, had no kind of respect, or any consideration, whatever, for the rights of property. All that they cared for was to get what they could. With the populace the chief consideration was how to get more, and whatever means they could employ for this purpose was to them perfectly proper. On the other hand, the senatorial party was preeminently the party of property. Therefore, even their own instincts of self-preservation required of them that they should have respect to the rights of property. And this principle also acted as a check on the temper and despotism of that party. Yet, with this exception, the minority could no more be trusted than could the majority.

Extra-constitutional Power

Finally the contention between these two parties became so continuous and so violent that, for the very existence of society, there had to be created a power which would be a check on both; and, under the circumstances, upon the principle of government of the people, even extra-governmental. Under the circumstances of the alternate despotism of the majority and of the minority, it was essential that there should be organized a power which should be constantly active, and so balance the power of the senate, and hold in check its despotic tendencies, and also be able to hold in check the despotic sway of the majority. Already it had appeared more than once that this power lay in the veterans of the triumphant, but disbanded, armies; but it was impossible, at the first, to rule openly by the power of the army. And since this feature must be shaded, the logic of the situation was that a coalition should in some way be formed, representing the contending parties, with the understanding that it could depend upon the army for support. And the logic of the situation was met by the formation, B. C. 60, of

A Triumvirate,

representing both capital and labor, and including the army.

Cesar was the idol of the populace, and had the confidence of the trades-union, which, after having been abolished by the senate, were fully restored when, in the turn of the political wheel, the populace held governmental power. Crassus was the riches individual in the Roman world, and he represented the combinations of capital, the farmers of the taxes, and the moneyed class, generally, who were not of the nobility. Pompey, one of the mightiest leaders of her armies that Rome had yet known, was the idol of the soldiers, who, tho not at the moment organized in legions with arms in their hands, were, nevertheless, a mighty political power; and, if necessity should demand, could be made, in a day, a mighty military power.

These three men, representing labor, capital, and the soldiery, covenanted together "that no proceedings should be allowed to take place in the commonwealth without the consent of each of the three contracting parties. United, they constituted a power beyond all the resources of the commonwealth to cope with." Thus the first triumvirate became an accomplished fact. And, tho there were a few expiring struggles, the power of the Roman senate, and also of the Roman people, was at that moment virtually gone forever. Government of the people had been utterly wasted, and government was now merged in three individuals, with one controlling mind among the three, and that mind the mind of Julius Cesar.

But the government did not long remain in this form. Crassus, in an expedition against the Parthians, was slain, and, instead of the triumvirate being preserved by the selection of another in the place of Crassus, the two that remained, separated, and the only question and the contest was as to which of these two should alone be the government. The senate stood with Pompey, the populace supported Cesar, the army was divided, the more powerful part supporting Cesar. Civil war followed, in which Cesar was everywhere successful. Pompey was defeated and slain, and Cesar stood alone as head of the Roman world, himself alone the government. Not only was

Government of the People Gone,

not only was government of the classes gone, not only was government of a few gone–all government was gone but government by one.

The senate, seeing what had come, formed a conspiracy "to save the republic" in the destruction of the government by the assassination of him who, by the direct logic of affairs, was alone the government. For affairs had reached that point in the Roman State where a one-man power was inevitable. And, tho to avoid this the senate had killed the one man who was that power, and the one man who, of all the Roman nation, was most capable of exercising that power, the reality and permanency of a one-man power, and that by one worse than he, was only the more hastened by the very means which they had employed for the purpose of preventing it. This they themselves realized, as soon as they awoke from the dream in which they had done the desperate deed. Cicero exactly defined the situation, and gave a perfect outline of the whole history of the times, when, shortly after the time of the murder of Cesar, he bitterly exclaimed: "We have killed the king; but the kingdom is with us still. We have taken away the tyrant; the tyranny survives." That tyranny survived in the breast of every man in Rome; and the only question was, which one should be the tyrant to such a degree that he could dominate the tyranny of all the others.

This was very soon decided; for, immediately upon the murder of Cesar, a second triumvirate was formed–Mark Antony; Cesar's general of cavalry, who was at the head of his troops. This was, however, a mere shuffle on the part of the two principals, Antony and Octavius, to gain time and get their bearings. And as soon as this was done, Lepidus was eliminated, and the sole question and contest was repeated as to which of these two men should be the one man, who should be the Roman Government. Again there was war; Octavius was successful; Antony, with Cleopatra, committed suicide; and now, just thirteen and one-half years after the murder of Cesar, again, and this time in permanency, one man was the Roman Government, and that one man a man who could not govern himself; and that government a furious and crushing despotism, only a single degree removed from sheer anarchy. And such it remained, with only slight amelioration, until it sunk in annihilating ruin.

March 2, 1904

"History of Government. IX. Ecclesiastical Government of Rome" The Signs of the Times 30, 9 , pp. 4, 5 .

IX. ECCLESIASTICAL GOVERNMENT OF ROME

WHEN Rome perished every form of government and every device as to government had been tried, and had failed, all but one; that one form, that remaining device was government wholly by the church–ecclesiastical government. The last stage of the Roman Government had been a government in which the church was united with the State, in which the church worked hand in hand with the State, and traded church support for State favors. But the State, not the church; the emperor, not the bishop; was the ruling power.

The bishops had promised to the imperial power, and even to themselves, that that system should be the very kingdom of God come on earth. But that bow of promise was most rudely dispelled when it was found that ruin rode swiftly in very element, and from every direction. Yet, in the face of all this, the bishops would not acknowledge themselves mistaken, except in the matter of time and order. They still insisted that they were right as to the coming and the reign of the kingdom and city of God; but that there must be a cleansing and an overturning that would clearly give to the church alone full and undisputed sway. For this the church of Rome aspired and conspired to take to herself the power and the dominion over the earth, and demonstrate that the perfection of government on earth was the church of Rome. The ruling power in this church was the bishopric of Rome, and the only thing contemplated by Rome's prelates was that this new order of things, this new form of government in the world, would be, in substance and vital principle, only the government of Rome continued. Through Rome, cleansed by the divine judgments, ruined, revivified, and glorified by the divine presence, benediction would come to bless the earth with perfect peace. Thus would original Rome reach its true goal, and its original purpose in the world be truly fulfilled.

Leo the Great, Bishop of Rome (440-461), lived and exercised his bishopric in the very midst of the whirl of events that brought ruin to the Roman Empire. And it was he who conceived and prophesied this grand future for the church of Rome. He declared that the former Rome was but the promise of the latter Rome; that the glories of the former were to be reproduced in Catholic Rome; that Romulus and Remus were but the precursors of Peter and Paul, and the successors of Romulus, therefore the precursors of the successors of Peter, and that as the former Rome had ruled the world, so the latter, by the see of the holy blessed Peter, as head of the world, would dominate the earth.

This conception was never lost by the Papacy. And when, only fifteen years afterward, the Roman Empire had in itself perished, and only the Papacy survived the ruin and firmly held place and power in Rome, this conception was only the more strongly and with the more certitude held and asserted.

This conception was also intentionally and systematically developed. The Scriptures were industriously studied and ingeniously perverted to maintain it. By a perverse application of the Levitical system of the Old Testament, the authority and eternity of the Roman priesthood was established; and by perverse deductions "from the New Testament, the authority and eternity of Rome herself was established." First, taking the ground that she was the only true continuation of original Rome, upon that the Papacy took the ground that wherever the New Testament cited or referred to the authority of original Rome, she was meant, because she was the only true continuation of original Rome. Accordingly, where the New Testament enjoins submission to the powers that be, or obedience to governors, it means the Papacy, because the only power and the only governors that then were, were Roman. "Every passage was seized on where submission to the powers that be is enjoined; every instance cited where obedience had actually been rendered to the imperial officials; special emphasis being laid on the sanction which Christ Himself had given to Roman dominion by pacifying the world through Augustus, by being born at the time of the taxing, by paying tribute to Cesar, by saying to Pilate: 'Thou couldst have no power at all against Me except it were given thee from above.'"–Bryce. And since Christ had recognized the authority of Pilate, who was but the representative of Rome, who should dare to disregard the authority of the Papacy, the true continuation of that authority to which even the Lord from heaven had submitted?

Sustained by Forgery.

The power that was usurped by the church and her popes upon these perversions of Scrip-

149

ture, was finally confirmed by a specific and downright forgery. This "most stupendous of all the medieval forgeries" consisted of "The Imperial Edict of Donation," or "The Donation of Constantine." "Itself a portentous falsehood, it is the most unimpeachable evidence of the thoughts and beliefs of the priesthood which framed it." It proceeds to tell how that Constantine the Great, having been cured of leprosy by the prayers of Sylvester, bishop of Rome, resolved, as a reward of gratitude, that he would forsake Rome, and found a new capital, "lest the continuance of the secular government should cramp the freedom of the spiritual." It declares that "Constantine found Bishop Sylvester in one of the monasteries on Mount Soracte, and, having mounted him on a mule, he took hold of his bridle rein, and, walking all the way, the emperor conducted Sylvester to Rome, and placed him on the papal throne." Then the forgery makes Constantine decree as follows:–

We attribute to the see of Peter, all the dignity, all the glory, all the authority, of the imperial power. Furthermore, we give to Sylvester and to his successors our palace of the Lateran, which is incontestably the finest palace on earth; we give him our crown, our miter, our diadem, and all our imperial vestments; we transfer to him the imperial dignity. We bestow on the holy pontiff in free gift the city of Rome, and all the western cities in Italy. To cede precedence to him, we divest ourselves to our authority over all these provinces; and we withdraw from Rome, transferring the seat of our empire to Byzantium, inasmuch as it is not proper that an earthly emperor should preserve the least authority where God hath established the head of His religion.

It was strictly in the exercise of this power, exercised by Leo the Great, and systematized by his successors, that the Papacy exercised the prerogative of restoring and re-establishing the Roman Empire, in the proclaiming and crowning of Charlemagne as emperor, and Augustus; and then of asserting supreme power over emperor, empire, and all, and using this as the means by which she herself would attain to this supreme height of worldly ambition and priestly arrogance; where she herself would assure entirely to herself all the power and prerogative of that enormous assumption, and, "arrayed with sword and crown and scepter," in the sight of the assembled multitude, would shout, "There is no other Cesar, nor king, nor emperor, than I, the sovereign pontiff, and the successor of the apostles."

One of the bases of her claim of right to rule the world was that she was the sole embodiment on earth of the principles of the Prince of Peace, and that the bishop of Rome was the very vicegerent of the person of the Prince of Peace, and, therefore, she would assure the reign of peace to the full extent of her recognized dominion. But the fact proved that at every step of the way in her climbing to that pinnacle of world power, and in maintaining herself there, she kept kingdoms and nations, and even all Europe, and beyond, in a constant turmoil of war and anarchy. And in order to save their own kingdoms from sheer anarchy, and to preserve even society itself from annihilation by the anarchism of the Papacy, the heads of the nations of Europe, the secular powers, were compelled to assemble in a general council, specifically "for the reformation of the church in its head and members;" at which council they took her down from her high throne of universal supremacy, and seated her upon a stool of submission and subjection. In complete and horrible measure there had been demonstrated to all the world that the essence of the Papacy and the ultimate of her rule is only anarchy.

Such was the result to the nations of Europe, and to Europe as a whole, with respect to government itself. But the real dominion claimed by the Papacy is of the heart and life–the soul–of man. As essential to the proper demonstration of this dominion, she claims that the temporal power of the world must be absolutely subject to her will; that power she had surely gained, and the universality of her rule had been recognized, so that she had a fair, free, and open field to demonstrate exactly what she would do. And as respected the temporal power, and even her own power in government, the result was only anarchy.

Speculation in Crime.

And the result of her rule in her own peculiar claim of dominion over the soul of man, demonstrated universally in her dominion over those who were become her own, and who acknowledge themselves her own–in this dominion, the result was in nowise different from that in the other. Her whole power to the full extent of her recognized dominion was devoted to the seducing, and even the compelling, of mankind to sin. She actually speculated in human corruption. Pope John XXII., regularly listed, and set a tax upon, the sins of men. The list of taxes drawn up by John XXII., as levied upon the licentious practises of ecclesiastics, priests, nuns, and the laity; on murder and other enormities, as well as lesser crimes and breaches of monastic rules and church requirements; is sufficient to cover almost every sin that mankind could commit. Yet, all these sins were regularly taxed at a certain rate, down to the single "sou" (cent), and even to the "denier." So that it is literally true that no inconsiderable portion of the revenues of the Papacy were derived from a regularly assessed tax upon the sins of men. Well did the abbot of Usperg exclaim:–

O Vatican, rejoice now, all treasuries are open to thee; thou canst draw in with full hands! Rejoice in the crimes of the children of men, since thy wealth depends on their abandonment and iniquity! Urge on to debauchery, excite to rape, incest, even parricide; for, the greater the crime, the more gold will it bring thee. Rejoice thou! Shout forth songs of gladness! Now the human race is subjected to thy laws! Now thou reignest through depravity of morals and the inundation of ignoble thoughts. The children of men can now commit with impunity every crime, since they know that thou wilt absolve them for a little gold. Provided he brings thee gold, let him be soiled with blood and lust; thou wilt open the kingdom of heaven to debauchees, Sodomites, assassins, parricides. What do I say? Thou wilt sell God Himself for gold!

March 9, 1904

"History of Government. Departure from True Principle" The Signs of the Times 30, 10 , p. 4, 5 .

DEPARTURE FROM TRUE PRINCIPLE.

WHEN Rome had perished, every form of government had been tried but one–the Papacy; for the Roman Government was diverse from all that were before it. Dan. 7:19, 23. When the middle ages were past, every form, even that one, had been tried; for the papal government was diverse from all. Dan. 7:24. And that one not only failed, as had all before it, but proved itself a greater curse than had all before it.

Except in Britain alone, the new nations that planted themselves upon the ruin of the Roman Empire, being burdened with the incubus of the Papacy, never had fair chance to develop government upon the basis of their own native, free principles; but were borne down, perverted, and corrupted by the influence and power of the Papacy. The feudal system, the worst form of things ever established in civil affairs, was nothing else than the system of the Papal Church, adapted and applied apart from the actual machinery of the church.

In Britain every Roman influence was swept away before the Anglo-Saxon, who made Britain England. A hundred and fifty years after the Anglo-Saxons entered Britain, the Catholic Church was also planted there by the invasion of Augustine and his accompanying monks; but the papal system never gained a foothold in England, and was never recognized there except for the little moment when King John surrendered himself and the kingdom to the pope as supreme. And even this act of recognition of the papal system complete in England, only the more swiftly and the more certainly excluded it forever. For that surrender by John of England to the Papacy immediately drew forth Magna Charta and its long train of resultant free institutions, of which the Constitution of the United States was not by any means the least important development.

"A New Order of Things."

Through all these changes of all of these nations after the fall of Rome, kingdoms were invariably the form of government, and kingdoms expanded into empire, tho every kingdom or empire was in subjection to the Papacy. But when the American nation arose, kings and all principles of kingship were utterly repudiated; the freedom, the right, and the capability of the people to govern themselves was again asserted. And when government of the people was formally established in the adoption of the Constitution of the United States, it was in repudiation not only of kings and all principles of kingship, but also of popes and all principles of Papacy. The State was established as a government of self-government people; a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. It was such a government separated and held by the Constitution entirely apart from the church, or from any connection with the church, or any recognition of the church, or even of religion in the abstract.

The churches were left perfectly free to go their own way; to organize and govern themselves, and conduct their own affairs as they might choose. The State held to itself the principle of utter separation from any Church or religion, and upon that principle would conduct all the affairs of the State. These two bodies, the Church and the State, abiding by natural and essential principle in totally distinct realms, occupied each its distinctive realm. And so in this new and final nation, the system of the church was a church without a pope, and the system of State was the State without a king; the Church and the State each absolutely independent of the other, and each entirely separated from the other.

This was indeed "a new order of things," [2]1 and it was equally the correct and the divine order of things. And those who established it thus did so entirely out of respect to the divine order of things, as to the government of the church on earth. they did it out of respect entirely to the principles of "the Holy Author of our religion," and "upon the principles upon which the Gospel was first propagated, and the reformation from popery carried on." And so they established this new nation upon right principles for the State, that it should be a light and a guide to all the nations in the way of individual liberty and of free and happy government; and also upon the right principles for the Church leaving her free in her own realm to be joined only to her own true Lord, to Him alone as her true head and guide, that she should be indeed the light of the world.

Thus, at last, was attained the form of perfect earthly government. And all that was needed in order that this nation should forever lead the world was that the people composing the nation should hold themselves in practise, in strict allegiance to the principles upon which the nation was founded. And while this was done, this nation was distinctly the leading nation of the world; that is, the nation was truly leading the world toward right principles, away fom the corrupt and the corrupting influence of the Papacy. But in the latest years these principles have not been adhered to either by the Church or by the State in this nation. The churches, combining their strength and influence, have sought to unite themselves to the State; and in direct violation of the fundamental principles of the Reformation and of Christianity, it has sought "by force to enter into the office of another," to transfer worldly government, and "to prescribe laws to the magistrate touching the form of the State."

On the other hand, the people of the State have not been loyal to the principles of the State in the United States. The fundamental principle of State in this government is government of the people–self-government: the government deriving its just powers form the consent of the governed. The people have not continued to govern themselves; and the government has repudiated government by the consent of the governed, and has espoused government by the consent of "some of the governed," which, in principle, is merely government of the few, and in logic and in practise, presently, government by one, or a one-man power.

And with fundamental principles and original practise of this nation abandoned on the part of both the Church and the State, it is literally impossible that there can be any other result than that there shall be here repeated the history of that other degenerate government of the people which developed the one-man power in the Roman State; and that other apostate church which developed the one-man power in the church, dominating the world. And to-day this nation has gone so far in this direction, and the inevitable course further is so clearly defined, that all that any one needs to do to understand the subject even in detail, is merely to be acquainted with the history as it actually occurred in that degenerate Roman Government of the people, and of that apostate church, which drew life and supremacy from the destruction and ruin of that degenerate government of the people.

Not Self-Governing.

To-day, in the United States, the people are not a self-governing people. They do not govern themselves either in private or public life. Intemperance, absence of self-government in individual life, possesses and absolutely controls the individual life of the vast majority of the people of the United States, and is constantly increasing at a fearful rate. In the business or commercial life of the people of the United States the people do not govern themselves. They are absolutely governed either by the trusts or by the unions, or by both. In the field of labor and employment, the people of the United States of all people, do not govern themselves. Almost wholly, they are governed as to their employment, their wages, and almost in their very buying and selling, by the trades-union. In political life the people of the United States do not govern themselves, and the government is not of the people. The people are governed by "the party" and "the machine," and these, in turn, are controlled by the political "bosses."

165

History Repeats Itself.

Here is the same old desperate struggle between capital and labor; here also is the same old longing and grasping for governmental support, which, under whatever pretense it may be urged, is merely socialism. And, indeed, here it is advocated as socialism direct and by name. And just as the advocacy of governmental support means only socialism, so also the advocacy or socialism means only anarchy. In some instances here it is advocated under the would-be-saving title of "Christian socialism." And in the advocacy of it in all its phases, the words of Christ are readily grasped and enthusiastically rung in as an expression of the principles of socialism.

There are, however, a number of serious considerations which absolutely preclude this socialism from ever being in any sense Christianity. One is that the words and principles of Christ are absolutely meaningless in the mouths, the plans, or the devices, of those who do not believe at all in Jesus; and even tho there be some believers in Jesus who are mistakenly advocating socialism, yet, the overwhelming mass of those who advocate socialism are those who have no regard for the truth, or the faith, or the principles of Christ. And this fact alone absolutely vitiates all possibility of any virtue ever accruing to socialism from the words or principles of Jesus, tho they be quoted and advocated in every speech and on every page. The defect is not in the words or the principles of Jesus; the defect is in the people who quote these words and principles and urge them for a wrong purpose.

It is the same old story of Sinai: there God gave His own divine truths in words spoken direct from heaven. The people adopted them and declared that, "All that the Lord hath spoken will we do, and be obedient." But the people adopted them in the wrong way, and for wrong purposes: "Wherefore, finding fault with them, He saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah; not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, which My covenant they break." Heb. 8:8, 9; Jer. 31:31, 32. The fault was not on the part of the Lord, nor was it in the words or the principles announced in the covenant on His part; the fault was in the people. They went about it to do some great thing themselves and make a great change and reform in the world. They failed, as all others must fail, who attempt to use the divine principles without supreme guidance and control of the divine Spirit through the divine and abiding faith of Christ Jesus, the Saviour and Sanctifier of the soul. They failed, as all others must fail, who attempt to use the divine principles for worldly or selfish purposes, for any other than divine purposes, according to the divine will, under the supreme guidance and control of the divine spirit.

(To be continued.)

March 16, 1904

"History of Government. Departure from Principle. (Concluded.)" The Signs of the Times 30, 11 , p. 4, 5 .

DEPARTURE FROM PRINCIPLE

(Concluded).

IT is true that the people of the earliest church brought their belongings and put them into a common fund, and "had all things common." And this is cited by the advocates of socialism as the true example, and assurance that socialism is the true order in government and society on earth. But in this deduction in behalf of socialism, the most important elements, indeed the strictly vital elements, are all left out. It is true that at that time the church had all things in common, and no one said that aught that he had was his own. But that was the church, not the State, nor society, as such; and it was the church immediately after Pentecost, when "all were filled with the Holy Ghost." And not all who cite this in advocacy of socialism are thus filled with the Holy Ghost. Another item in that action of the early church is that the matter of having all things common was altogether and absolutely voluntary on the part of every one of those who were in it. While in the socialism proposed, it is intended to conduct a political campaign, and get a majority vote, and then have this majority compel by force all to have all things common. But the thing can never be accomplished by force, nor by any political or any other worldly scheme.

Another vital element, which in this socialism is ignored, is that the Holy Spirit reigned so completely there that those who were the leaders had, by that divine Spirit, the faculty of detecting those who would use the system for merely selfish purposes, as the means of sponging, while in the system of socialism, as now advocated for the United States, this power is entirely lacking. And without that element, every scheme of having all things common will surely fail; for it is perfectly certain that there never can be given perfect assurances that amongst these advocates of socialism there are, and ever will be, absolutely none actuated by the motives that characterized Ananias and Sapphira.

These items demonstrate that no scheme of having all things common, whether it be distinct socialism or what not, whether in the church or in the world, ever can be true, or ever can be successful; into which all composing it do not enter individually, of their own free choice; in which all who compose it are not entirely free from selfishness; in which every one in it is not filled with the Holy Ghost, as the consequence of having personal faith in Jesus Christ as the Saviour from sin; in which all are not absolutely subject to the control and guidance of the Holy Spirit; and in which the Holy Spirit does not preside to such a degree as absolutely to guard the community from all selfishness and all hypocrisy.

Nevertheless, there can be no doubt that this mistaken system of socialism will continue to be advocated; and will even be advocated as "Christian" socialism. It is also scarcely to be doubted that, at least to some extent, the scheme will be made effective in governmental affairs. But to whatever degree the thing shall be made effective, it will prove itself only that much of an element in the hastening of the anarchy, which is the only logic of the socialistic proposition from the beginning.

Government of the people, both in the individual life and in the public life, is so far gone that, in every phase of the public life, government is of a few. The contest between capital and labor has reach the point where it is truly a contest as to which shall control the formal governmental machinery to the disadvantage of the other. This contest is as certain to grow as that day and night continue. And as it grows, confusion and uncertainty will only the more grow, and expedients of government will certainly have to be resorted to as means of balancing issues and preserving order. And, at the rate that things have been going lately, it will be but a little while before

A Triumvirate

will be the surest expedient of the balancing of issues. For at the point at which things almost stand to-day, the chief representative of capital, and the chief representative of labor, and the chief political manager of whatever national party should be in power, by agreeing together, could decree that nothing should be done in the commonwealth without the consent of each of the three; and such a triumvirate would form a power as complete and beyond any other combinations to resist, as was that of the triumvirate of Pompey, Crassus, and Cesar.

And while events have reached this pass, and are fast hastening to a crisis. Of which some such expedient can be the only salvation,–while all this is occurrent on the part of the State, the religious power (and that the power of the Papacy, flattered and favored by apostate Protestantism) is striding at even greater pace to position of supremacy at Washington, and, from this, the supremacy of the world. For, of all the elements that are working to-day to exalt the Papacy once more to world supremacy, there are none so potent, none so sure, and none so rapid, as the influence of the United States. And with that supremacy there comes also the persecution and the anarchy that are the inevitable accompaniments of undisputed papal power. But this time, thank the Lord,

Her Reign Will Be Short,

for the Scriptures point out that the period allowed her in this thing is the shortest of all the prophetic periods named by inspiration–"one hour." Her power over the kingdoms of the earth is received for but "one hour," and in "one hour" her judgment comes. In "one hour" all her wealth and glory vanish. And then that mighty angel takes up a stone like a great millstone, and throws it into the sea, saying: "So shall Babylon, the great city, be violently overthrown, never more to be seen. No more shall the music of harpers, minstrels, fluteplayers, or trumpeters be heard in you; no more shall any worker, skilled in any art, be found in you; no more shall the sound of the mill be heard in you; no more shall the light of a lamp shine in you; no more shall the voices of bridegroom and bride be heard in you. Your merchants were the great men of the earth, for all the nations were deceived by your magical charms. Yes, and in her was to be found the blood of the prophets and of Christ's people, and of all who have been put to death upon earth." Rev. 18:21-24 (Twentieth Cent. Version).

And then there will be heard that loud voice of a great throng in heaven, saying: "Praise the Lord! To our God belongs salvation, glory, and power, for true and just are His judgments. For He passed judgment on the great prostitute, who was corrupting the earth by her licentiousness, and He took vengeance upon her for the blood of His servants." And again the voices cried, "Praise the Lord!"

Then when the earth shall have been cleansed with fire from on high, He who sits on the throne, says, "Behold, I make all things new," and, "It is done." Then comes the kingdom of God indeed, in all its beauty, glory, and power, "and the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominion shall serve and obey Him." "And the saints of the Most High shall take the kingdom, and possess the kingdom forever, even forever and ever."

NOTE.–After the foregoing article was written, the annual congress of the German Socialists was held at Dresden, Germany, Sept. 14, 1903. The following passage from the brief report of the proceedings the very first day and at only the second meeting of the congress is strongly illustrative and confirmatory of the points made in the article as it relates to that subject:–

Gaylor Wilshire, in the name of the societies of the United States, congratulated the Republican Social Democrats of Germany on their "marvelous organization, and still more marvelous electoral triumphs." Wilshire said the antagonism of capital and labor was assuming in the United States for us more acute than in Europe," owing mainly to the developments of the trusts." The crisis in the existing capitalistic system, he asserted, would be precipitated first in the great trans-Atlantic republic, and would spread thence to Europe, "leading to the universal dominion of Social Democracy."

A stormy discussion took place at the afternoon session of the congress, due to a resolution of the executive council, prohibiting the literary members of the socialist party from contributing articles to non-socialistic papers.

The resolution was mainly directed against the so-called academicians, who claim the place of honor in the party by virtue of their learning, while gaining their livelihood by writing for newpapers antagonistic to the socialistic movement.

Angry recriminations were indulged in, and at one time violent scenes appeared to be imminent.

"It is an untruth," shouted Herr Bebel in a frenzied rage, to Heinrich Braun, who was engaged in proving that even the classic leaders of Social Democracy were guilty of this.

Herr Singer, the president of the congress, stopped Herr Nenel, and asked the members to preserve their dignity and refrain from behaving like schoolboys. Herr Bebel, who was much excited, demanded to know whom the president meant.

Later there were lively passages at arms between Herr Babel and Herr Voltmar. Finally the debate was adjourned until to-morrow.

When such a crowd as that get governmental power and control of all property, their attempt to have "all things common" will be a good deal farther from peace and harmony than was this meeting of Sept. 1, 1903. To any sober-minded person the mere contemplation of the prospect thus presented is surely sufficient to demonstrate that socialism successful will develop nothing short of sheer anarchy.

A. T. J.

NOTE 2.–After the foregoing article was written, the American Bar Association held its annual session for 1903; and the report of its committee on trusts contains the remarkable forecast of a one-man power, of how near it may be, and what it can be when it comes:–

The modern combination's primary object is to control trade and commerce in plain articles of production and substitute a more or less perfect monopoly in place of a more or less free competition. It changes entirely the basic principle of commercial relation between man and man, and if they are to

165

continue to grow and develop in the future, as in the past, will render necessary most important changes on the principles of our commercial laws. Combination as an economic force, is fast coming to take the place of competition. The producers are combining, the transportation companies are containing, trades-union are combining; workmen, as well as employers, are combining; everything seems to be coming into some form of combination, and everybody seems to be a combiner. The competition that still remains is fast disappearing. Workmen are refusing to compete for jobs. Labor unions are enlarging the spheres of their activity and extending their operations.

The union of the employers is still stronger and more far-reaching than the union of workmen. We are now having combinations of combinations. The United States Steel Corporation is a combination of a dozen theretofore competing producers, who themselves were combinations of still other producers, and these, in turn, often combinations of still others. To have them back to their beginning is like discovering all the multitude of sources that go to make up the volume of the swollen Mississippi.

The ambition of the shipping trust, perhaps the pet project of the great American combiner, has been to control all the ships that sail the ocean. A hundred years ago there were hardly two ships owned by the same individual or corporation, and even fifty years ago there was scarcely a ship owner, individual or corporation, that owned a half dozen ships. No one knows but that within the next ten years a greater man than J. P. Morgan will arise, who will combine into one organization all the industries of the land, so that the workman who works for wages can find but one possible employer, and the purchaser of wares can find but one possible seller. The steps toward the formation of one universal industrial corporation, which shall crowd out all other corporations and assume to itself all the industries of the land have already been more than half taken. It is not so far to go from now to that end, as we had to go to reach the present condition.

And when that point shall have been reached, the event will bring the sure fulfilment of Rev. 13:16, 17. So true is it that the best view of the signs of the times is presented in the daily march of events.

A. T. J.

March 23, 1904

"History of Government. The End of Earthly Human Government. (Concluded.)" The Signs of the Times 30, 12 , p. 4, 5 .

THE END OF EARTHLY HUMAN GOVERNMENT.

(Concluded).

WE have now reviewed the history of government on earth. We have seen that every kind of government has been tried, and in every instance has developed unbearable despotism toward men, and blasphemous assumption toward God. In every instance also the government has failed and fallen to ruin–except the ones now existing on earth; and these, founded and considered upon the identical principles of these which have perished, must inevitably and shortly perish. And this the more shortly and more certainly by the fact that, whereas in every instance in former ages, when governments had reached the breaking point, there were new peoples to arise and perpetuate government in their places; now there are absolutely no new peoples anywhere on earth to take the places of these, and perpetuate government when the ones now existing shall have reached the inevitable breaking point, as have all before them. And this consideration alone makes it certain that when the governments now existing do reach that inevitable breaking point, the only result that there can be, will be the actual ending of all earthly human government. And that this inevitable breaking point is to-day very near, and is hastening greatly in the experience of the present governments of earth, is plain. This very consideration is perplexing the world's rulers to-day. And there can be no other end to these things than the end of all earthly human government.

But that will not be the end of government, thank the Lord! It will not be the end of even earthly government. It will be only, as expressed, the end of earthly human government. For God lives, and He is Governor amongst the nations. And when that crisis comes, which is now imminent, He will take to Himself His own great power, and will reign. Sin has almost finished its course upon earth; the solution of the problem of iniquity is in its last stage; and, presently, "in the days of these kings, shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed, and which shall not be left to other people, but which shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever."

The universal failure of all earthly human government is no proof at all of the failure of all government; for in this history of government on the earth, we have seen that the universal cause of the failure of government has been

The Failure of Individual Self-government

We have also found that the universal cause of the failure of individual self-government has been the attempt at self-government without God, and the universal and inevitable failure of every attempt at self-government without God lies simply in the fact of sin. It was sin in the first place that originated any such attempt; and it is sin which, ever since, has frustrated and will ever frustrate every such attempt.

Sin has enslaved every soul on earth. There is power in sin to enslave and to reign over man, and even against his wish, impelling him to wrong. And man, being thus enslaved to sin and reigned over in power by sin, simply can not possibly truly govern himself. The power of sin must be broken and the enslaved captive freed, before it is possible for him truly to govern himself.

And the power of sin can be broken. The enslaved captive can be freed. For Jesus Christ, the Lord, has met both sin and its author on their own territory, and in the very citadel of their own kingdom, has conquered and has completely broken their power; has openly triumphed over them; and leads in His triumphant train every soul who chooses this only true way of freedom.

And this whole story of the impossibility of human self-government, except by the breaking of the power and the reign of sin by and through Christ Jesus, the Lord, is told in a single passage and few words in the Scriptures. And here is the story:–

"For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good. Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. For the good that I would I do not; but the evil which I would not, that I do. Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me. For I delight in the law of God after the inward man; but I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. . . . Therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death." Rom. 7:14-25, 8:1, 2.

And this free man, the Christian free in Christ, free in God, which is the place and the way of the only true freedom, exercising self-government with God, and in God, is

The Manifestation on Earth of True Government

And that true government is not human; it is divine-human; for divinity is the only source of true self-government. The only person in the universe who, of Himself, can in all things truly and perfectly govern Himself, is God. Self-government, therefore, is in truth but an attribute of God. Therefore, divinity is the only source of self-government; and it is impossible for any creature in the universe to govern himself except as he is allied to divinity; except as he is made partaker of the divine nature. And he who is made partaker of the divine nature has escaped the corruption that is in the world, and is delivered unto the glorious liberty of the children of God.

And this is Christianity. This is the way, the true and living way, revealed by Christ in human flesh. And in this divine-human way, every human soul can walk in the manifestation of the principles and the glory of true government, which is true self-government.

And this manifestation of true government–the true government of self–is greater than is the government of all kingdoms and empire, and he who truly exercises it is greater than all kings and emperors that ever were on earth. "He that ruleth his spirit [is better] than he that taketh a city." Accordingly, this power of true government–self-government–is truly kingly power. Being from the divinity, it could be nothing else. And He who came into the world to make manifest in human flesh this true government, which is true self-government,–He, when challenged on the point with the words, "Art Thou a king then?" royally answered: "Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born; and for this cause came I into the world [and this in order], that I might bear witness unto the truth." And He who was born to the end, and who came into the world for this cause, that He should be King, He "hath loved us, and washed us from our sins in His own blood, and hath made us kings."

Every Christian is, therefore, by creation, and so by divine right, a king. The ambition that has so manifested itself in all ages to be king, has never been in itself a false or a wrong ambition. The ambition itself has been true and right; it is the course, the manifestation, and the aims of that ambition that have been false and wrong. As we have seen in this whole study of government, the manifestation and aims of the ambition of man on earth to be a king have been invariably to gain power and dominion over others, and to govern and exercise authority upon others; and to govern and exercise authority upon others; while the true ambition and aim to be king is to gain dominion, over self, and to govern and exercise authority upon self.

Jesus, the True King

has made this distinction plain in the following words to His disciples: "The princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them; but it shall not be so among you. For whoso ever will be great among you, let him be your minister; and whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant; even as the Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister; and to give His life, the ransom of many." Worldly, false kingship is always government of others and the service of others. With worldly, false kingship is always the ambition to conquer all nations, that they may serve Him; while with the Christian, true kingship, the ambition is always and only to surrender himself to all nations that he may serve them.

And it is the simple philosophy of Christian kingship that Christ is the greatest of all kings, yea, the very King of kings. Because He surrendered far more, to serve far more, than any other in the universe possibly could. And since true kingship is to surrender self to all, that he may serve all; in the manner of things he who surrenders most to serve most, is the greatest king. And since Christ made the greatest possible surrender in surrendering Himself, and He did it for the greatest possible number, that He might serve absolutely all; it is but the plain philosophy of Christian kingship that He is in very truth the greatest of all kings, the very King of kings. And all who in Him, in God, and with God, surrender themselves to all, that they may serve all, are true kings; and are of His kingdom.

181

The Coming Kingdom.

And this is the kingdom, this is the government which, upon earth, shall presently succeed all earthly human governments, and which shall stand forever; simply because it is the divinely true government. For in reference to the succession of all earthly human governments, it was declared long ago by the divine Spirit that "the saints of the Most High shall take the kingdom, and possess the kingdom forever, even forever and ever;" and "the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey Him." "And there shall be no more curse; for the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and His servants shall serve Him; and they shall see His face, and His name shall be in their foreheads. And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun, for the Almighty giveth them light; and they shall reign forever and ever."

They serve and they reign. They serve Him, they serve Him in serving others, and they reign over themselves. And such alone is true government, whether in heaven or on earth. And because it is true, such government abides eternally.

And such is Christianity in the truth of it. And unto Him, Christ, the Author and Finisher of Christianity–"Unto Him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in His own blood, and hath made us kings unto God and His Father; to Him be glory and dominion, forever and ever. Amen." And let all the people forever say, "Amen and amen."

November 16, 1904

"Christ Revealed in the Sabbath" The Signs of the Times 30, 46 , p. 6 .

BY ALONZO TREVIER JONE

IT is written: "Hallow My Sabbaths; and they shall be a sign between Me and you, that ye may know that I am the Lord YOUR God." There is, therefore, that about the Sabbath by which he who hallows it may know, not only that the Lord is God, but that the Lord is his God. But to know God is to know not only that He is, but also what He is, for His name is not simply "I AM," but "I AM THAT I AM,"–I am what I am, I am that which I am,–so that "he that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him,"–must believe not only that He is, but also what He is. Therefore as the Sabbath is a sign which God has set, by which those who hallow it may know that He is the Lord their God; it follows with perfect certainty that there is in the Sabbath that by which those who hallow it may find the knowledge of God.

What There Is in the Sabbath.

Let us, therefore, look at the Sabbath as God made it; and at what the Lord did in the making of it by which it became the Sabbath of the Lord. First, He created all things, then He ceased from His works and rested the seventh day; He then blessed the seventh day; He made it holy, and sanctified it. The Sabbath, therefore, is–

1. The reminder of God as Creator; it is the reminder of His creative power manifested; for it is a sign between Him and His people forever, because that "in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day He rested, and was refreshed." Ex. 31:17.

2. In the Sabbath is God's rest, "for He spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all His works. And in this place again [He spake of the seventh day on this wise], They shall not enter into My rest." Heb. 4:4, 5.

3. In the Sabbath is God's blessing; for He "blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it, because that in it He had rested from all His work which God created and made." Gen. 2:3.

4. In the Sabbath is God's holiness; for He "hallowed" (made holy) the Sabbath day. But it is only the presence of God which makes anything holy. When Moses, attracted by the curious sight of the bush burning with fire yet not consumed, turned aside and approached to behold, "God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses, Moses. And he said, Here am I. And He said, Draw not nigh thither; put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground." Ex. 3:4, 5. That place was made holy ground solely by the presence of "Him who dwelt in the bush."

And as it is the presence of the Lord which makes holy; that which made holy the seventh day, the Sabbath of the Lord, was the presence of Him who rested the seventh day from all His works.

5. The Sabbath has in it God's sanctification; because He not only blessed the seventh day, but sanctified it,–set it apart unto the holy use and service of the Lord,–that His presence might dwell therein; for it is not merely the transient presence, but the abiding presence, the special dwelling of God in a place, which sanctifies; for it is written: "Israel shall be sanctified by My glory," for "I will dwell among the children of Israel, and will be their God." Ex. 29:43 (margin), 45.

Thus connected with the Sabbath there is the creative power of God; the rest of God; the blessing of God, the presence of God which makes holy; and the continuing, dwelling, presence of God which sanctifies.

And all this is precisely, and in order, what is found in Christ by the believer in Jesus.

Christ in the Sabbath.

God's rest is in the seventh day; and God's rest is in Christ. It is impossible for God's rest to be in antagonistic places; for as with God "there is no variableness neither shadow of turning," God's rest is the same wherever it may be. Therefore, God's rest being ever the same, God's rest in the seventh day, and God's rest in Christ, is precisely the same rest. And this, being impossible to be in antagonism, is in perfect unity, and therefore demonstrates that the Sabbath is in Christ and CHRIST IS IN THE SABBATH.

God's Promises to the Believer.

The Sabbath, truly understood, means all of Christ; and Christ, truly understood, means all of the Sabbath. And neither can be truly understood without the other. The Sabbath is God's sign, and Christ is God's sign. Christ is God's sign spoken against, and the Sabbath is God's sign spoken against; and all, "that the thoughts of many hearts ay be revealed." Luke 2:34, 35. Yet ever He is indeed "the glorious Lord" (Isa. 33:21); and ever "His rest," His Sabbath, is indeed "glorious." Isa. 11:10.

"Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into His rest, any of you should seem to come short of it. . . . For we which have believed do enter into rest." "And hallor My Sabbaths, and they shall be a sign between Me and you, that ye may know that I am the Lord your God." "The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your GOD."

"Thus saith the Lord, Keep ye judgment, and do justice: for my salvation is near to come, and my righteousness to be revealed. Blessed is the man that doeth this, and the son of man that layeth hold on it; that keepeth the Sabbath from polluting it, and keepeth his hand from doing any evil." Isa. 56: 1, 2.

"If thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day; and call the Sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, honorable; and shalt honor Him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words: then shalt thou delight thyself in the Lord; and I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth, and feed thee with the heritage of Jacob thy father: for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it." Isa. 58:13, 14.

"For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the Lord, so shall your seed and your name remain. And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one Sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before Me, saith the Lord." Isa. 66:22, 23.

The Signs of the Times, Vol. 31 (1905)

October 25, 1905

"The Great Apostate Powers. Revelation, Chapters Twelve and Thirteen" Signs of the Times 31, 43 , pp. 8, 13 .

By Alonzo Trevier Jone

AT the opening of the twelfth chapter of Revelation there is seen a woman clothed with the sun, the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars," and "she brought forth a Man-child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron; and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne."

That "Man-child" is none other than the Lord Jesus (Ps. 2:9; Rev. 19:15, 16; Luke 24:50, 51; Mark 16:9; Acts 7:55; Heb. 8:1); and that "woman" is the church of God, in her beauty "fair as the moon" and "clear as the sun."

And there stood before the woman a great red dragon "to devour her child as soon as it was born." This "dragon" in his own proper person, is declared to be "that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan." Rev. 12:9. Satan, therefore, is really the one who was ready to destroy Christ as soon as He was born.

How Satan Works

But Satan in this world works through instrumentalities. These instrumentalities are men: and, chiefly combinations of men in world-powers.

What man, then, was it by whom Satan made his attempt to destroy Christ as soon as He was born?–Herod, in his decree for the slaughter of the babies of Bethlehem. But Herod was much more than merely a person; much more than only himself; he was a king of Judea. Indeed, he was more than only king of Judea; for he became king only by a decree of the Roman Senate upon the special advocacy of Octavius Cesar and Mark Antony–two of the Triumvirate who at that time ruled the Roman world.

Herod could not have been king for a day in Judea if he had not been supported by the mighty power of Rome. Therefore Herod, in his place of power, was only the creature and the representative of the Roman Government. Therefore, in an through the person of Herod, it was the Roman power in the world that was the instrumentality that Satan used to destroy Christ as soon as He was born.

In that attempt however, Satan failed of his purpose. Yet he never rested until he had so far as possible, and so far as himself and the power of this world could go, destroyed the Lord Jesus–until he had by the authority of Pilate the Roman governor crucified Him on a Roman cross, and buried Him out of sight in a tomb sealed with the Roman seal.

But even in this final effort, Satan failed. For, from death and the sealed Roman tomb, the Man-child "was caught up unto God, and to His throne." Yet, tho these attempts of Satan's were failures, as far as his purpose was concerned, the facts demonstrate beyond all question that the Roman power was the instrumentality of Satan in his aims to destroy Christ; and therefore that the Roman power, under Satan, is that which is symbolized in the "great red dragon having seven heads and ten horns."

Against the Church

After all Satan's efforts to destroy Christ had been defeated, and the Man-child "was caught up unto God, and to His throne," Satan next turned all his endeavors, still through his world-instrumentality, the Roman Empire, against "the woman," which is the church, and "persecuted the woman which brought forth the Man-child." "And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death."

This persecution Satan continued as long as the Roman power stood. But the Roman Empire fell, and there was a change–not a change in spirit, for it was still the same spirit of the same "old serpent," not a change in the persecution, for it was only intensified–it was a change in the power, the instrumentality, that Satan used in the persecution. When the Roman Empire, that had been such an excellent instrument of Satan's will, had fallen and perished forever, in the anarchy of the times, he was for the moment without any efficient power to make his wrath felt against the church and the saints of God. Therefore "he stood upon the sand of the sea," waiting. Rev. 13:1, R. V.

A Beast

But he had not long to wait; for presently "a beast" rose up "out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy." This beast was most gladly welcomed by Satan; for it was so exactly what he had been waiting for, that he immediately gave to it his own "power," his own "seat," which he had so long held in Rome and his own "great authority" or "a wide-spread dominion." Rev. 13:2, 4; 2:13.

The beast was well adapted to this great Satanic gift; and immediately it was all alive as the most thoroughly efficient instrumentality that had ever yet fallen to Satan's lost: "He opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, and His tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven." Indeed, it only opened its mouth to blaspheme God, to blaspheme God Himself and His tabernacle; that is, all who dwell in His tabernacle in heaven. "And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them; and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations." Rev. 13:5-7.

With such an agent as this ready to do his will, Satan was again all activity, and poured out a perfect flood of persecution against "the woman" "that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood." But "to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent." Also "the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon," "called the Devil, and Satan," "cast out of his mouth." This was the time when, for twelve hundred and sixty years, Satan, through the instrumentality of the Papacy, poured out his wrath against the church of Christ and upon the satins of God, "to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth," "by flame, by captivity, and by spoil;" even for "many days." Rev. 6:8; Dan. 11:33.

This "time, times, and an half," "forty and two months," twelve hundred and sixty years, in which "the beast," the Papacy, "was empowered to work its will," ended in A. D. 1798. At that time the beast was "as it were, wounded to death;" the power of the Papacy was broken, her dominion was taken away, she was left as a widow and sorrowful, and Satan's power was again crippled, and his wrath seriously hindered.

Another Instrument of Satan

But, lo! help was coming; for just then there was seen "another beast coming up out of the earth;" and tho "he had two horns like a lamb," yet "he spake as a dragon." And this one, tho strong on his own part, uses his power to revive and restore the power and working of the beast. For "he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men, and deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword and did live. And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand or in their foreheads, and that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name." Rev. 13:11-17.

A Warning Message

Thus this beast and the first beast unite in compelling all to worship the first beast. But against all this God sends a great threefold message of warning to all the people of the earth, pleading with them that they worship not the beast neither his image, and "if any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand he shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of His indignation." Instead of their worshiping the beast, God calls them to "worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters," and to "keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus." Rev. 14:7-12.

Through all the time of this later interval Satan's wrath had been against the church of God as much as before, but there was no power by which he could make if effective. Now, however, in this combination of the beast and his image he forms again the power that for a while he had lost; and again he is active as before. Now "the dragon" is not only "wroth with the woman," but, with his restored beast and his image, he goes forth anew "to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ." Rev. 12:17.

Wrath of Satan

In this his last war, his wrath is especially "great," because "he knoweth that he hath but a short time." Rev. 12:12. But still he does not prevail. Still they overcome him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony. But his wrath is so great, and, even tho he has all the allied powers of the beast and his image, his case becomes so desperate, that in very person he appears and takes command of his forces. But lo! presently heaven is opened, and there appears also in His very person. One "called Faithful and True," sitting upon "a white horse," and "the armies of heaven" follow Him, also "upon white horses," "and in righteousness He doth judge and make war."

Victory of God's People

"And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth and their armies, gathered together to make war against Him that sat on the horse, and against His army. And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had the mark of the beast, and them that worshiped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone." "And I saw as it were a sea of glass mingled with fire; and them that had gotten the victory over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name, stand on the sea of glass, having the harps of God." Rev. 19:11-20; 15:2.

The persecution is ceased. The conflict is ended.

(Continued on page 13.)

The Great Apostate Powers

(Continued from page 8.)

The war is over. The saints are triumphantly victorious.

Thus it is seen that at the birth of Christ, Satan entered upon a war that, with but two short intervals, he keeps up until the very world's end. There are employed as his instrumentalities in this war, three mighty world-powers: the dragon, the beast, and the false prophet, or the image of the beast. This war is in three great stages, according to the three mighty world-powers that are the earthly agents in it–Pagan Rome, to A. D. 476; Papal Rome, A. D. 538-1798; and apostate Protestantism allied with the revived Papacy, as the beast and his image, at the last and till the end.

These three stages are marked in the twelfth chapter of Revelation, in (1) the attempt to destroy the Lord Jesus, and the persecution of the woman immediately after the Lord's ascension to heaven; (2) in the flood of persecution poured out against the woman in "the wilderness;" and (3) in his wrath and war against the woman in "the remnant"–the very last of "her seed." In the first stage he used the dragon, or Pagan Rome, as his instrumentality. In the second stage he used the beast, or Papal Rome. And in the third and final stage he uses the image of the beast, or apostate Protestantism, in alliance with Papal Rome. This final stage is the most desperate, for he has the full use of his two mightiest powers.

But throughout the whole war, from the very beginning to the very end, there is victory to Christ and His people; for–

"Thy saints, in all this glorious war,

Shall conquer tho they die."

But in the final stage His saints obtain their triumphant victory without dying; for just as "the beast and the false prophet" go from this earth "alive into a lake of fire;" so in their victory over the beast and the false prophet, the saints of God go alive from this earth to the "sea of glass."

"O joy! O delight! Should we go without dying;

No sickness no sadness, no dread, and no crying;

Caught up through the clouds with our Lord into glory–

When Jesus receives His own."

[1] USURY.óFrom Latin niasóto use. A premium paid, or stipulated to be paid, for the use of money; interestóThe practise of taking interest."óWebster.

"USURY.óOriginally, any premium paid, or stipulated to be paid, for the use of money; interest. The practise of lending money at interest, or of taking interest for money lent."óCentury.

"USURY.óA using; benefit interest. Now usually exorbitant interests, in the A. V. [the Bible] interest of money at any rate."óSmith," Dictionary of the Bible."

"USURY.óIs used in . . . in the Old-English sense of interest for money loaned, and not necessarily in the odious and later signification, an unlawful contract for the loan of money."óMcClintock and Strong, "Biblical Cyclopedia."

"USURY.óThe practise of requiring, in repayment of money lent anything more than the amount lent, was formerly thought to be a great moral wrong; and the greater, the more was taken."óAmerican Cyclopedia.

"'Thou shalt not lend upon usury to thy brother, usury of money, usury of victuals, usury of anything thyat is lent upon usury. Unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury; but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon usury; that the Lord thy God may bless thee." Deut. 23:19, 20. In this sentence we find interest of all kinds blended together, and the natural economic tendencies directly counteracted by the moral and religious law."óEncyclopedia Britannica, "Usury."

[2] Inscription on the Great Seal of the United States.