universe, is the One who claims, and who, from his position, has a right to claim, our supreme regard in preference to every other object.  The commandment which makes known these facts is therefore the very one we might suppose that power would undertake to change, which designed to exalt itself above God.  God gave the Sabbath as a memorial of himself, a weekly reminder to the sons of men, of his work in creating the heavens and the earth, a great barrier against atheism and idolatry.  It is the signature and seal of the law.  This the papacy has torn from its place, and erected in its stead, on its own authority, an institution designed to serve another purpose.

This change of the fourth commandment must therefore be the change to which the prophecy points; and Sunday-keeping must be the mark of the beast!  Some who have long been taught to regard this institution with reverence will perhaps start back with little less than feelings of horror at this conclusion.  We have not space, nor is this perhaps the place, to enter into an extended argument on the Sabbath question, and an exposition of the origin and nature of the observance of the first day of the week.  Let us submit this one proposition:  If the seventh day is still the Sabbath enjoined in the fourth commandment; if the observance of the first day of the week has no foundation whatever in the Scriptures; if this observance has been brought in as a Christian institution and designedly put in place of the Sabbath of the decalogue, by that power which is symbolized by the beast, and placed there as a badge and token of its power to legislate for the church, is it not inevitably the mark of the beast?  The answer must be in the affirmative.  But all these hypotheses can easily be shown to be certainties, See History of the Sabbath, and other works on the subject, published at the Review Office.  To these we can only refer the reader, in passing.

It will be said again, then all Sunday-keepers have the mark of the beast; then all the good of past ages who kept this day had the mark of the beast; then Luther, Whitefield, the Wesleys, and all who have done a good and noble work of reformation, had the mark of the beast; then all the blessings that have been poured upon the reformed churches have been poured upon those who had the mark of the beast.  We answer, No!  And we are sorry to say that some professedly religious teachers, though many times corrected, persist in misrepresenting us on this point.  We have never so held; we have never so taught.  Our premises lead to no such conclusions.  Give ear:  The mark and worship of the beast are enforced by the two-horned beast.  The receiving of the mark of the beast is a specific act which the two-horned beast is to cause to be done.  The third message of Rev. 14, is a warning mercifully sent out in advance to prepare the people for the coming danger.  There can therefore be no worship of the beast, nor reception of his mark, such as is contemplated in