Nicotiana
This plant will seed itself each year and share your garden with all the other things you plant.
This flower sometimes has a hard time looking at the sun as most flowers turn to the sunrays, but as the shadows of evening start to come they lift up their heads a bit more.
"The conversation took place between two professors of religion. One or both of them I think were ministers. Circumstances brought them together. The smoker was using his pipe. After some conversation the writer says:
"I inquired, Do you chew as well as smoke tobacco? He answered, Yes. Then followed a dialogue in substance as follows:
"H. Bro. G., do you think tobacco does you any good?
"G. Why no, I don't know as it does.
"H. Well, do you think it does you any hurt?
"G. Why yes, I think likely it does.
"H. If it does you hurt, don't you think it will shorten your life?
"G. Yes, I suppose it will.
"H. How many years do you think?
"G. I don't know; several, perhaps.
"H. How much does your tobacco cost you annually?
"G. Well, perhaps --- dollars.
"H. You say the use of tobacco will probably shorten your life several years, and that it will cost several dollars yearly. How dare you use the Lord's time in such a way, and his money for such a vile purpose?
"G. I dare not any longer.
"H. Take a piece of tobacco and place it in your hand. You are accustomed, as a christian, to ask the blessing of God upon all you do; now, dare you ask the blessing of God upon the use of that tobacco?
"G. No, I dare not, and will abandon its use forever.
"This anecdote I have related a great many times, and with good effect upon tobacco users who had not become completely besotted with their unnatural and filthy habit, and others have heard it with a sneer and a jest, affecting to pity my simplicity, in supposing that an appeal to conscience and christian obligation had anything to do with a matter of such trivial importance!"
Are not the above questions worthy of the consideration of the few Sabbath-keepers who use tobacco? Was not the above decision to "abandon its use forever" worthy of imitation?"
A. S. HUTCHINS.
Charlestown, Mass.
August 4, 1859 UrSe, ARSH 85
"What articles are supposed to afford nourishment to every part of the body?
Milk to the nursing child, and wheat and apples to those of more advanced life. Yet neither of these yield to chemical analysis all the elements of the human body.
How do you account for this, if it is essential to build up every part of the body, that these elements should exist in the food?
It is supposed that the vital economy of the body has a power of transmuting its substances, and as it combines and commingles them, produces substances which could not previously be detected in the food.
What seems to be the most natural food for man?
If we reason from the law of adaptation, man was, in his creation, adapted to a diet of fruits, grains, and vegetables. When the Lord had placed man upon the earth, he said to him, "Behold I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat." 1 His nature must have been adapted to a diet of this kind. Man's perverted appetites may lead him to clamor, as did the Israelites, for the flesh-pots of Egypt; yet his constitutional nature is best fitted to a vegetable diet.
What is one of the principal arguments advanced in favor of flesh as food?
The argument is that flesh contains nitrogen, and that this is needed to build up the body. It is true that flesh-meat contains about fifteen per cent of nitrogen, while, wheat, rye, oats, barley, corn, rice, peas, and beans, contain only from two to five per cent of nitrogen; yet these articles are about three times as nutritious as flesh-meat. It is therefore apparent that something besides nitrogen is needed to build up the body.
Is it necessary to eat the flesh of animals to obtain any of the elements of our bodies?
It is not.
1868 JNL, HBH 181