Why You Should Be a Seventh-day Adventist
AN ANSWER
To the false charges and unscriptural teachings of E. B. Jones
By
MILTON E. KERN
REVIEW AND HERALD PUBLISHING ASSOCIATION Takoma Park, Washington, D.C,
PRINTED IN U.S.A.
COPYRIGHT, 1945,
BY THE
REVIEW AND HERALD PUBLISHING ASSOCIATION
CONTENTS
Preface
PREFACE
WHILE Seventh-day Adventists do not court religious controversy, the circulation of a pamphlet by E. B. Jones, entitled Forty Bible-supported Reasons Why You Should Not Be a Seventh-day Adventist, seems to demand a reply. We certainly welcome the privilege of giving Bible evidences for our faith. It will be necessary, also, to show that in many cases Adventist teachings have been misrepresented by false statements and garbled quotations.
Inasmuch as Mr. Jones announces himself as a former Seventh-day Adventist worker, it is fitting that we should give some of the facts regarding his experiences in connection with the Adventist Church.
While one who has been a member of an organization might naturally be considered well qualified to point out its mistakes, it would be well to remember that the circumstances of the separation of such an individual from the organization may have engendered such bitterness as to make it difficult for him to be a fair critic. If the ideals and integrity of your home were at stake, you would doubtless feel that a disgruntled member who had been separated from the family would not be a good witness regarding the character of your home. Doubtless you would at least feel that the happy and loyal members of your household should be heard.
In the year 1914 the writer conducted evangelistic meetings in the Adventist church at Battle Creek, Michigan. At that time Mr. and Mrs. Jones, both worldly young people, professed conversion, were baptized, and united with the church. Imagine my surprise to read from Mr. Jones that his decision to serve God was "not made in a revival meeting" but on a street corner, and that he "had not attended a religious meeting for years," but that due to the influence of his early training "it was, of course, the natural thing for me to look up a Seventh-day Adventist church and make arrangements for baptism and induction into the membership of that body!' We grant that his decision may have been made on a street corner, but he was attending my meetings night after night, and it was not at all necessary for him "to look up a Seventh-day Adventist church."
Being a printer, Mr. Jones was accepted as type room foreman in one of our American publishing houses. Later he was sent to India as manager of the denominational publishing house in that field. There he manifested such a critical and non-cooperative attitude that it became impossible to continue him in the work, and he was recalled.
Returning to America, Mr. Jones again united with the Adventist church in Battle Creek, where he had found employment as a printer. Still critical, but avowing absolute loyalty to all the teachings of the church, he gathered about him a group of fellow church members who, under his guidance, set for themselves the task of reforming the church. Some months later he united with a small group of people who had withdrawn from the Adventist Church in Germany and had established an office in America. He became the editor of their paper. This connection, however, did not last long. Mr. Jones went into business in Chicago. There he was re-baptized and became once more a member of the Adventist Church.
But again he became disaffected, gathered about him a few sympathizers, and finally declared himself out of harmony with some of the teachings of the church, and by his own request was dis-fellowshipped. Even after this, however, he continued to keep the seventh-day Sabbath for six years, or until about the time of the first edition of the pamphlet under review.
In the light of such a record of criticism, vacillation, and endeavors to lead dissent in the church, his present position is better understood. In order to hold our answer to the limits of this pamphlet and still give positive Biblical proofs of our positions, and to avoid repetitions, we have grouped his "reasons" rather than answer each one separately. The figures given after each chapter heading in the table of contents indicate the numbers of the "reasons" dealt with in that chapter.
Some may have tacitly accepted statements by the author of this pamphlet without checking on their accuracy. In the interest of fair play we appeal to those who have read the pamphlet to carefully consider our defense. We sincerely hope that the reader will follow the example of the noble Bereans who "searched the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so." Acts 17:11. God's Word is our only guide.
"It is the chart and compass That o'er life's surging sea,
'Mid mists and rocks and quick sands,
Still guides, 0 Christ, to Thee."
In his efforts to discredit Seventh-day Adventists, Mr. Jones sets forth a charge of heresy regarding a most vital doctrine of Christianity-the nature of Christ.
Who Conceived the Plan of Redemption?
Mr. Jones' first complaint (No. 1) is that "Seventh-day Adventists teach that it was Christ, not the Father, who conceived the plan of redemption." He quotes Mrs. Ellen G. White to the effect that Jesus "offered to give His life a ransom, to take the sentence of death upon Himself." This, declares Mr. Jones, is contrary to the Bible, which teaches that "God gave His only begotten Son"; that He "sent" Him, and that it was "by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God" that Jesus was "delivered" to be "crucified and slain." (John 3:16; 1 John 4:9; Acts 2:22, 23.)
Mr. Jones, however, fails to quote another scripture, which is very similar to the statement of Mrs. White to which he takes exception, that Christ "through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to Gad." Heb. 9:14. There is no contradiction between this passage and those quoted above. They are complementary. Jesus said:
"Therefore does My Father love Me, because I lay down My life, that I might take it again. No man takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. 1 have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have 1 received of My Father." John 10:17, 18.
The unity of the Father and Son in the plan of redemption is well expressed by Mrs. Ellen G. White as follows:
"This great sacrifice was not made in order to create in the Father's heart a love for man, not to make Him willing to save. No, no! 'God so loved the world, that He gave His only-begotten Son.' The Father loves us, not because of the great propitiation, but He provided the propitiation because He loves us. Christ was the medium through which He could pour out His infinite love upon a fallen world. 'God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself.' God suffered with His Son. In the agony of Gethsemane, the death of Calvary, the heart of Infinite Love paid the price of our redemption. Jesus said, `Therefore does My Father love Me, because 1 lay down My life, that 1 might take it again.' That is, 'My Father bath so loved you that He even loves Me more for giving My life to redeem you.' "-Steps to Christ, p. 15 (chap. "God's Love for Man.")
"I and My Father are one," declared Jesus. John 10:30. And who with finite mind will venture to define exactly the respective parts taken by them in those councils of old, "before the foundation of the world," when the plan of salvation was first laid? And why should any Christian shrink from accepting a view that clearly magnifies equally the Son in offering Himself with the Father who gave that Son for a lost world?
When the Plan Was Laid
In full recognition of God's sovereignty and prescience, Seventh-day Adventists agree fully with the Scriptural teaching that Christ was "foreordained before the foundation of the world" to die for fallen humanity. Since M~. Jones has chosen to quote largely from Mrs. Ellen G. White, let us quote also from one of her widely circulated books.
"The plan for our redemption was not an afterthought, a plan formulated after the fall of Adam. It was a revelation of 'the mystery which hath been kept in silence through times eternal.' Rom. 16:25, R.V... . God did not foreordain that sin should exist, but He foresaw its existence, and made provision to meet the terrible emergency."- The Desire of Ages, p. 22. Concerning scenes in heaven after man had sinned, she wrote:
"The Son of God, heaven's glorious Commander, was touched with pity for the fallen race. His heart was moved with infinite compassion as the woes of the lost world rose up before Him. But divine love had conceived a plan whereby man might be redeemed.... Before the Father He pleaded in the sinner's http://www.ThreeAngels.com.aubehalf, while the host of heaven awaited the result with an intensity of interest that words cannot express. Long continued was that mysterious communing,-'the counsel of peace' (Zech. 6:13) for the fallen sons of men. The plan of salvation had been laid before the creation of the earth; for Christ is 'the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world' (Rev. 13~8); yet it was a struggle, even with the King of the universe, to yield up His Son to die for the guilty race." - Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 63.
In the face of such clear statements Mr. Jones, 'who for many years was a student of Mrs. White's writings, declares that "Seventh-day Adventists teach that. . . the plan of redemption was formed after, not before, man's temptation and fall." And what is the basis for this false charge? He cites a passage in which Mrs. White described a council between the Father and the Son, after the fall of man, following which He announced the decision to the angels of heaven. She does not say that this was the first time the plan was considered by them; but Mr. Jones unequivocally asserts that Seventh-day Adventists teach that the plan of redemption was formed after the fall of man. The clear statements which we have quoted prove his assertion false.
The Virgin Birth of Christ
Perhaps one of the most flagrant misrepresentations brought by this critic in his attack against his former brethren is the implication that they teach that Christ was not Mary's first-born son. (No. 2.) It is based on a statement by Mrs. White to the effect that Jesus' brothers were older than He. This is declared to imply "that He was not Mary's first-born Son, also lending support to the destructive denial that His virgin birth was but a myth." But on the very page from which he begins to quote from Mrs. White occurs the sentence, "His brothers, as the sons of Joseph were called, sided with the rabbis."-Ibid., pp. 86, 87. Could anyone read these pages and honestly say that Mrs. White teaches that Christ "was not Mary's first-born son"?
It is not necessary, in this connection, to enter into discussion regarding the three views held by eminent theologians, of various church affiliations, whether (a) the brethren of Jesus were sons of Joseph by a former marriage; (b) cousins, sons of Cleopas or (c) later sons of Joseph and Mary. All three views are held and advocated by those who fully accept the Biblical record that Jesus was born of a virgin, and that He was Mary's first-born son. (Matt. 1:25.) Regarding the merits of these respective views, a well-known writer, Dean Frederick W. Farrar, D.D., has said:
"Whole volumes have been written on this controversy. . . . The evidence is so evenly balanced, the difficulties of each opinion are so clear, that to insist very dogmatically on any positive solution of the problem would be uncandid and contentious." - The Life of Christ, Vol. 1, p. 96.
Mr. Jones cannot support his charge that even by implication Mrs. White or Seventh-day Adventists teach that Christ was not Mary's first-born son. Indeed, in the very book from which he quotes the supposed heresy, allegedly denying the "virgin birth," Mrs. White speaks of "the sweet, childlike faith of Mary, the maiden ["An unmarried woman, especially one who is young; one who is still a virgin."-FUNK AND WAGNALLS, New Standard Dictionary] of Nazareth, whose answer to the angel's wonderful announcement was, 'Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word.' "-The Desire of Ages, p. 98. Thus "Reason No. 2" is based on what Seventh-day Adventists do not teach, and falls to the ground.
Our Divine-Human Savior
Objection is made to statements in Seventh-day Adventist books which recognize that in His incarnation Jesus took "our nature," and that "on His human side, Christ inherited just what every child of Adam inherits,-a sinful nature." (No. 3.) It is asserted that this "could only mean His heart, too, was 'deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked.'"
Such a shocking conclusion could be reached only by ignoring the fact that Seventh-day Adventists, in common with other Christian evangelicals, recognize the divine as well as the human in the mystery of the babe of Bethlehem, with a human mother, but divinely begotten by the power of the Holy Spirit. We are amazed to note that Mr. Jones recognizes no human element in Christ, but insists that "Christ possessed the nature of holiness because He was procreated, not of man, but of the Spirit of God." He quotes the following, with approval, from some unnamed source: "In the inherent elements of His being, the http://www.ThreeAngels.com.auSon of God differs from all others, both men and angels, not only in degree but in kind. (See Heb. 1:1-9.) As for men, all, save Christ, have possessed the nature of evil, for all have been the offspring of their father, Adam."
But is it not true that through His mother, Jesus, also, like all mankind, was the offspring of Adam? Does not Luke trace His genealogy back to our common father? (Luke 3:23-38.) While the writer of the book of Hebrews, in the first chapter, cited above, sets forth the deity of Christ, in the second chapter he emphasizes the equally essential doctrine that "as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, He also Himself likewise took part of the same"; that "verily He took not on Him the nature of angels; but He took on Him the seed of Abraham"; and as a climax, says:
"Wherefore in all things it behooved Him to be made like unto His brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that He Himself hath suffered being tempted, He is able to succor them that are tempted." Heb. 2:17, 18.
Through sin the human family has come under the condemnation of the law. The very heart of the plan of salvation is the fact that only by becoming one with us could Christ act as our high priest and be qualified to pay the sacrificial penalty for our sins. So Paul declares:
"When the fullness of time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons." Gal. 4A, 5.
"God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us." Rom. 8:3, 4.
'We hath made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin." 2 Cor. 5:21.
In contradiction to these scriptures, Mr. Jones declares that "in His nature He was more than human. He was divine; and, perforce, was immune to sin."
In his arraignment of Seventh-day Adventists, and their teachings regarding the incarnation, Mr. Jones equally condemns practically every evangelical denomination.
The eminent English theologian H. P. Liddon, LL.D., who was made canon of St. Paul's Cathedral, London, said:
"When our Lord says that authority was given Him to execute judgment because He is the Son of man, it is plain that the point of the reason lies, not in His being Messiah, but in His being human. He displays a genuine humanity which could deem nothing human strange and could be touched with the feeling of the infirmities of the race which He was to judge. (John 5:27; Heb. 4:15.) . . . As the Son of man, then, our Lord is the Messiah; He is a true member of our human race."-The Divinity of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, pp. 8, 9.
We also quote from a recognized Presbyterian authority, William N. Clark, D.D.:
"The unique person [Christ] was united to God and to humanity by the ties of life. With both, Christ was vitally one; by living naturally He lived in perfect unity with both, and from neither could IFIe be separated. Hence there was no need of any special arrangement or appointment to bring Him into closest relationship with God or with men. By 1Iis very nature He had community of life with both-a community of life that was not imaginary but actual, not arbitrary but natural. Born into the human race, He shared in its life, while yet He had a solitary and unique community of life with God. He literally linked God and humanity. Between the two He was the living link. These relations are represented by the two titles, Son of God and Son of man."- An Outline of Christian Theology, pp. 305, 306. (Italics mine.)
It would seem that Jesus preferred the title "Son of man." While in the Gospels He speaks of Himself as the "Son of God" less than a half dozen times, it is significant that, as Philip Schaff, D.D., points out, He "asserts His humanity and calls Himself, about eighty times in the Gospels, the Son of man."-The Person of Christ, p. 79
Mr. Jones quotes the Bible correctly, and we do not object to the emphasis he places upon His divinity in the phrases, "God with us"; "God [was] manifest in the flesh." But it is no perversion of the Scriptures to transfer the emphasis, to read, "God with us," and "God was manifest in the flesh." Matt. 1:23; 1 Tim. 3:16. Seventh-day Adventists hold that Christ's divinity and humanity are essential to bridge the gulf between man and his God. If this teaching is a reason why you should not be a Seventh-day Adventist, it is also a reason why you should not be a member of other evangelical denominations.
Was There a Risk?
Mr. Jones claims that the prophetic assurance that He "would not fail nor be discouraged" and other predictions of "the' successful fulfillment of God's plan of salvation," mean that Christ "ran no risks as to the final outcome of His earthly mission." On this ground he objects in "Reason No. 4" to the following statement by Mrs. White:
"Into the world where Satan claimed dominion God permitted His Son to come, a helpless babe, subject to the weakness of humanity. He permitted Him to meet life's peril in common with every human soul, to fight the battle as every child of humanity must fight it, at the risk of failure and eternal loss."-The Desire of Ages, p. 49.
The seeming discrepancy between this statement and the prophetic assurance that Jesus would triumph over sin and death, involves a problem similar to that age-long controversy regarding the relation of God's omniscient foreknowledge and the freedom of the human will.
To give an illustration in the realm of human experience: About ninety years ago a Mr. Blondin made several trips across the gorge below Niagara Falls on a tightrope, once pushing a wheelbarrow, once carrying another man across on his back, and again making and eating an omelette while poised on the rope more than one hundred and sixty feet, above the racing waters. Of course, in His omniscience God knew that Mr. Blondin would not fall. Suppose that he had revealed this to man. Would anyone be justified, because of this omniscience, to say that Blondin ran no risks as to the final outcome" of his acrobatic stunt? God's foreknowledge surely did not eliminate the peril of the undertaking.
Much ink has flowed in controversy as to whether it was possible for Jesus to sin. In declaring (with emphasis) that 'We could not fail," Mr. Jones arrays himself against such theologians as F. W. Farrar, Philip Schaff, and many others whose works are accepted by devout men of all faiths.
In perfect agreement with Mrs. White's statement, and in utter disagreement with Mr. Jones, Philip Schaff says:
"Had He been endowed from the start with absolute impeccability, or with the impossibility of sinning, He could not be a true man, nor our model for imitation: His holiness, instead of being His own self-acquired act and inherent merit, would be an accidental or outward gift, and His temptation an unreal show. As a true man, Christ must have been a free man and responsible human agent: freedom implies the power of choice between good and evil, and the power of disobedience as well as obedience to the law of God."-The Person of Christ, pp. 35, 36.
Alexander B. Bruce, D.D., said by the New International Encyclopedia to be among the most distinguished Biblical scholars of his time, wrote:
"If the truth. . . that the force of temptation was strong enough to create the consciousness of a struggle be overlooked, then the whole curriculum of moral trial through which Jesus passed on earth degenerates at once into a mere stage performance. . . . In modern times this Doketic view finds no acceptance; theologians of all schools being agreed that the forces of evil, with which the Son of man fought so noble a fight, were not shadows, but substantial and formidable foes."-The Humiliation of Christ, pp. 269, 270.
Of those who, like Mr. Jones, insist that Jesus "could not fail," or could not sin, Dean F. W. Farrar has well said:
"Some, in a zeal at once intemperate and ignorant, have claimed for Him not only actual sinlessness but a nature to which sin was divinely and miraculously impossible. What then? If His great conflict were a mere deceptive phantasmagoria, how can the narrative of it profit us? If we have to fight the battle clad in that armor of human free-will. . . . what comfort is it to us if our great Captain fought not only victoriously, but without real danger; not only uninjured, but without even a possibility of a wound.
"Let us beware of contradicting the express teaching of the Scriptures. .. . by a supposition that He was not liable to real temptation." - The Life of Christ, Vol. I, pp. 123, 124.
We wonder whether the "many alert Christians, including pastors, Bible teachers, missionaries," and others, who Mr. Jones asserts are "lending their earnest support" to the distribution of this tirade against Seventh-day Adventists, have really given careful study to the theological errors they are thus supporting.
Did Jesus See Through the Portals of the Tomb?
"Reason No. 5" needs but a brief statement to reveal the absolutely unfair representation of Seventh-day Adventist teachings by Mr. Jones. In dealing with that portion of the crucifixion scene when http://www.ThreeAngels.com.audarkness surrounded the cross, and Jesus cried out in despair, "My God, My God, why has Thou forsaken Me?" Mrs. White says, "The Savior could not see through the portals of the tomb. Hope did not present to Him His coming forth from the grave a conqueror." - The Desire of Ages, p. 753. Mr. Jones appears to be shocked by such a statement and concludes that "He had no fear that, as He commended His spirit to the Father, 'their separation was to be eternal.'"
By what rule of common honesty did Mr. Jones withhold the fact that Mrs. White, in continuing the narrative of the crucifixion in the same connection, made it clear that Christ triumphed over the darkness which temporarily oppressed Him? She said: "Suddenly the gloom lifted from the cross, and in clear, trumpet like tones, that seemed to resound throughout creation, Jesus cried, 'It is finished.' 'Father, into Thy hands I commend My Spirit.' A light encircled the cross, and the face of the Savior shone with a glory like the sun. He then bowed His head upon His breast, and died.... As in submission He committed Himself to God, the sense of the loss of His Father's favor was withdrawn. By faith, Christ was victor. "-Ibid., pp. 755,756.
If any doubt the temporary darkness and despair that wrung from the heart of Jesus that awful cry of agony, let them read the first part of psalm 22, generally recognized as a Messianic prophecy. The first sentence only was uttered audibly, but His thoughts are expressed in verses 2 to 20. Verses 21 to 31 set forth the triumph of faith as His cry to God was heard and answered.
It does seem strange that Mr. Jones, who came into the Adventist Church under the preaching of righteousness by faith, and who for years has studied our literature, should accuse us of advocating "not the gospel of pure grace" but "the gospel of dead works." (Nos. 15, 17.) Surely he has had abundant opportunity to know that the blessed doctrine of salvation through the merits of Christ alone, by faith in His name, has been the burden of our evangelistic message through the years. A few brief excerpts from leading Seventh-day Adventist writers will suffice to show this to be true.
What, Adventist Leaders Teach
"In some way the love of God shining from the cross of Calvary reaches that man's heart. He yields, repents, confesses, and by faith claims Christ as His Savior. The instant that is done, he is accepted as a child of God. His sins are all forgiven, his guilt is canceled, he is accounted righteous, and stands approved, justified, before the divine law. And this amazing, miraculous change may take place in one short hour. This is righteousness by faith."-A. G. DANIELLS, former president of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, in Christ, Our Righteousness, p. 23. (This book is an exposition of the precious truth of righteousness by faith, and was at one time a favorite with Mr. Jones; so he is not ignorant regarding Adventist teaching on this subject.)
"He [Paul] also makes clear that a man, upon repentance and faith in Christ, pleading the Savior's blood for the remission of his sins, and before he has wrought a single act of obedience to the law, is justified by his faith.... This righteousness is a gift. We cannot earn it. We cannot claim it by any natural right that we have, but, thank God, we can accept it in all its blessed fullness by faith in the atoning blood of Jesus."-C. H. WATSON, another former president of the General Conference, in The Atoning Work of Christ, pp. 46, 48.
"Service for others is not a means of salvation, but the fruit of it. It is not service, but faith, that brings salvation to men. We are not asked to try to win salvation by some effort on our part but to accept it as a gift from God. We are not saved by anything we may do for God but by what He does for us."WILL1AM H. BRANSON, vice-president of the General Conference, in How Men Are Saved, p. 27.
A Garbled Quotation
An attempt is made to prove that Seventh-day Adventists are legalists by quoting a few brief, disconnected phrases from the writings of Mrs. Ellen G. White; yet Mrs. White herself was converted and accepted righteousness by faith when a girl in the Methodist Church. Her writings on Christian experience are recognized by thousands outside the Adventist communion as most helpful. One of Mr. Jones' excerpts is taken from her book Steps to Christ, which is very well known, millions of copies of which have been circulated in more than fifty languages. Perhaps the best way to enable the reader to judge of the merits of the criticism is first to quote his brief, disconnected extract and then quote a larger selection, including his extract, which will be printed in bold type.
"The . . . dangerous error is, that belief in Christ releases men from keeping the law of God; that since by faith alone we become partakers of the grace of Christ, our works have nothing to do with our redemption.. . . The condition of eternal life is now just what it always has been, perfect obedience to the law of God!'
The fuller excerpt is as follows, with the portions quoted by Mr. Jones in bold type.
"There are two errors against which the children of God particularly those who have just come to trust in His grace-especially need to guard. The first, already dwelt upon, is that of looking to their own works, trusting to anything they can do, to bring themselves into harmony with God. He who is trying to become holy by his own works in keeping the law, is attempting an impossibility. All that man can do without Christ is polluted with selfishness and sin. It is the grace of Christ alone, through faith, that can make us holy.
"The opposite and no less dangerous error is, that belief in Christ releases men from keeping the law of God: that since by faith alone we become partakers of the grace of Christ, our works have nothing to do with out redemption.
"But notice here that obedience is not a mere outward compliance, but the service of love., The law of God is an expression of His very nature; it is an embodiment of the great principle of love, and hence is the http://www.ThreeAngels.com.aufoundation of His government in heaven and earth. If our hearts are renewed in the likeness of God, if the divine love is implanted in the soul, will not the law of God be carried out in the life? When the principle of love is implanted in the heart, when man is renewed after the image of Him that created him, the new covenant promise is fulfilled. 'I will put My laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them.' Heb. 10:16. And if the law is written in the heart, will it not shape the life? Obedience-the service and allegiance of love-is the true sign of discipleship. Thus the Scripture says, 'This is the love of God, that we keep His commandments.' 'He that says, I know Him, and keeps not His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.' 1 John 5:3; 2:4. Instead of releasing man from obedience, it is faith, and faith only, that makes us partakers of the grace of Christ, which enables us to render obedience.
"We do not earn salvation by our obedience; for salvation is the free gift of God, to be received by faith. But obedience is the fruit of faith. 'You know that He was manifested to take away our sins; and in Him is no sin. Whosoever abides in Him sins not: whosoever sins hath not seen Him, neither known Him.' 1 John 3:5, 6. Here is the true test. If we abide in Christ, if the love of God dwells in us, our feelings, our thoughts, our actions, will be in harmony with the will of God as expressed in the precepts of His holy law. 'Little children, let no man deceive you: he that does righteousness is righteous, even as He is righteous.' 1 John 3:7. Righteousness is defined by the standard of God's holy law, as expressed in the ten precepts given on Sinai.
"That so-called faith in Christ which professes to release men from the obligation of obedience to God, is not faith, but presumption. 'By grace are ye saved through faith.' But 'faith, if it hath not works, is dead.' Eph. 2:8; James 2:17. Jesus said of Himself before He came to earth, 'I delight to do Thy will, 0 My God; yea, Thy law is within My heart.' Ps. 40:8. And just before He ascended again to heaven He declared, 'I have kept My Father's commandments, and abide in His love.' John 15:10. The Scripture says, 'Hereby do we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. . . . He that says he abides in Him ought himself also so to walk, even as He walked.' 1 John 2:3-6. 'Because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps.' 1 Peter 2:21.
'The condition of eternal life is now just what it always has been, just what it was in Paradise before the fall of our first parents, perfect obedience to the law of God, perfect righteousness. If eternal life were granted on any condition short of this, then the happiness of the whole universe would be imperiled. The way would be open for sin, with all its train of woe and misery, to be immortalized." - Steps to Christ, pp. 64-67 (chap. "The Test of Discipleship").
Here again is clearly set forth Seventh-day Adventist teaching regarding righteousness "by faith alone" through "the grace of Christ alone," with a clear statement that "our works have nothing to do with our redemption," and that "obedience is the fruit of faith." If such teaching is good reason for not being a Seventh-day Adventist, it would likewise disqualify one from becoming a member of most of our evangelical churches. And it is difficult for us to believe that ministers of other churches who have endorsed Mr. Jones' pamphlet would have done so if they had really known of such glaring misrepresentations of Adventist teachings as demonstrated above.
As further evidence of the inconsistency of this tirade against Adventists, let it be said parenthetically that while here Mr. Jones accuses Mrs. White of teaching the doctrine of righteousness by works, under "Reason No. 32' he quotes her as saying that the message which the Adventists have to give is the doctrine of justification by faith.
Righteousness Witnessed by the Law
We are condemned by Mr. Jones for teaching that the "condition of eternal life is ... perfect obedience to the law of God." (No. 17.) Yet we are told, in the same connection, that Jesus rendered that perfect obedience. That is right. He says, "I have kept My Father's commandments." John 15:10. And Jesus' practice was in harmony with His teaching. We read, "One came and said unto Him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?" What was Jesus' answer? 'If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments." On being asked which, Jesus quoted five of the Ten Commandments. (Matt. 19: 16-19.) Again a lawyer came asking, "What shall I do to inherit eternal life?" The lawyer quoted the two commandments that sum up the whole Decalogue, and Jesus replied, "Thou has answered right: this do and thou shall live." (Luke 10:25-28.) The instruction given by Jesus to such inquiry was different from that given by our critic, who declares, "There is, indeed, no law -no keeping of the law required as a means of salvation," because now we are "under grace."http://www.ThreeAngels.com.au
Paul, the great exponent of righteousness by faith, plainly shows the fallacy of such a theory of salvation. He said, "By the law is the knowledge of sin" (Rom. 3:20), and, "I had not however known sin, but by the law (Rom. 7:7). Having found, that he could not of himself obey the law, which is holy and just and good (verse 12), he accepted from God the blessed gift of righteousness, a righteousness that was "witnessed by the law and the prophets." (Rom. 3:21.) And as the beloved John beheld in vision the glorious inheritance of the saints, he said, "Blessed are they that do His commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city." Rev. 22:14.
Christians on Probation
We are even condemned for teaching that Christians are placed here on probation," and' that those who "prove ' worthy" will have eternal life. (No. 15.) It really seems superfluous to answer such a charge. Jesus spoke of those who should be "accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead” (Luke 20:35), and Paul frequently charges his readers to "walk worthy" (Eph. 4:1; Col. 1:10). The Scriptures clearly teach that it is possible for Christians to fail and be lost. (See next chapter.)
Again Mr. Jones quotes from Mrs. White and leaves out a phrase that would have unmasked his efforts to deceive his readers. From Counsels to Teachers (page 366) he quotes: "Man is no passive being, to be saved in indolence. He is called upon to strain every muscle and exercise every faculty in the struggle for immortality." The remainder of the sentence which he now fails to quote is, "Yet it is God that supplies the efficiency."
It so happens that in a pamphlet which Mr. Jones published, on his own, when he was an Adventist, he approvingly used this same quotation, including the phrase which he now omits. And he spoke of the "unspeakably glorious" truth of righteousness by faith thus taught by Mrs. White. Is it not crystal clear that our critic, by his omission of the part of the sentence in bold type above, is deliberately endeavoring to deceive his readers regarding the teachings of Seventh-day Adventists? Regretfully, but in all sincerity, we ask, Is this kind of deceptive manipulation the fruit of "the gospel of pure grace"?
Health Reform and Tithing
Mr. Jones charges that Adventists endeavor to win immortality through health reform. (No. 20.) We do believe in the admonition to "glorify God in your body" (1 Cor. 6:20), and endeavor to heed the warning that "if any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple you are" (1 Cor. 3:17). But anyone who has been a guest at an Adventist sanitarium or who has considered our health teachings, knows that we teach the subject of health from the standpoint of scientific research and not on the basis of Levitical law. We do, however, emphasize the fact that God wills that we should "be in health." (3 John 2.)
Our critic infers that to teach the payment of tithes as an obligation is to trust in works for salvation. (No. 19.) While tithe paying is not made a test of fellowship in the Seventh-day Adventist Church, we do believe and teach that we should render to God the tenth of our income for the support of the gospel.
Tithing is older than the Mosaic system. Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek, king of Salem. (Gen. 14:20.) And when the Lord appeared to Jacob at Bethel in a dream and renewed to him the Messianic promises which had been given to Abraham and Isaac, Jacob there made a solemn vow to serve God, and he said, "Of all that Thou shall give me 1 will surely give the tenth unto Thee." Gen. 28:22.
It would seem that tithing was an understood obligation in the patriarchal times long before it was written into the laws of the Jewish economy that the tithe "is the Lord's." (Lev. 27:30.) It was not one of the typical services that would naturally pass away at the cross, but was based on the principle of the recognition of God's ownership, a principle as important in one dispensation as another. Jesus said this "ought you to have done." Luke 11:42. The tithing system is beautiful in its simplicity and equality, and is not a yoke of bondage. We do not pay tithes in order to be saved, but because we have dedicated our lives to the furtherance of the gospel. In the same chapter in Testimonies for the Church from which Mr. Jones quotes, it is said: "Systematic benevolence should not be made systematic compulsion. It is freewill offerings that are acceptable to God." Volume 3, p. 396. Of course "the tree is known by his fruit" (Matt. 12:33), and the support of God's work is indeed one of the fruits by which our love and faithfulness are manifested. Many Christians aside from Seventh-day Adventists can testify to the spiritual blessings that come through this regular and systematic plan of sustaining the cause of God.
The claim is set forth by our critic that we do not believe in present salvation, that we are teaching a false gospel, and that we are therefore "under the anathema of God." (No. 14.) But the accusation for which he would bring down the curse of God upon the denomination is not true, and the quotations from Mrs. White on which he bases the accusation are garbled; this makes it appear that she teaches what she does not. To show this to be a fact, a larger excerpt will be given which includes his quotations with the parts he quoted in bold type. In the book Christ's Object Lessons, page 155, the author is drawing a lesson from the fall of Peter when he denied his Lord. She says: "Never can we safely put confidence in self, or feel, this side of heaven, that we are secure against temptation. Those who accept the Savior, however sincere their conversion, should never be taught to say or to feel that they are saved. This is misleading. Everyone should be taught to cherish hope and faith; but even when we give ourselves to Christ and know that He accepts us, we are not beyond the reach of temptation. God's Word declares, 'Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried.' Dan. 12:10. Only he who endures the trial will receive the crown of life. (James 1:12.) Those who accept Christ, and in their first confidence say, 1 am saved, are in danger of trusting to themselves. They lose sight of their own weakness and their constant need of divine strength. They are unprepared for Satan's devices, and under temptation many, like Peter, fall into the very depths of sin. We are admonished, 'Let him that thinks he stands, take heed lest he fall.' 1 Cor. 10:12. Our only safety is in constant distrust of self, and dependence on Christ."
Is it not perfectly clear that Mrs. White is warning Christians against that boastful confidence which Peter had? Even though we have given ourselves to God and "know that He accepts us," we should not deceive ourselves by regarding our salvation in the kingdom of God as an absolute certainty and thus fail to be diligent to make our "calling and election sure." (2 Peter 1:10.) Would Mr. Jones condemn Jesus because He said to His chosen disciples in the Garden of Gethsemane, "Watch you and pray, lest you enter into temptation"? Mark 14:38.
Great stress is laid upon the fact that God has given to us eternal life. (1 John. 5:11.) We believe that. It is repeated over and over in the New Testament. The book Christ's Object Lessons (page 38), commenting on John 5:24, says, "He who by faith receives the word is receiving the very life and character of God!' But does this mean that one who receives this life cannot lose it? No, indeed. The "crown of life" is for those who are "faithful unto death!' We are admonished, "Hold that fast which thou has, that no man take thy crown!' Rev. 2:10; 3:11.
Jesus says, "And this is the will of Him that sent Me, that everyone which sees the Son, and believes on Him, may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day!' "Who eats My flesh, and drinks My blood, hath eternal life; and 1 will raise him up at the last day." John 6:40, 54. Mrs. White, commenting on 1 John 5:11, says:
"Christ became one flesh with us, in order that we might become one spirit with Him. It is by virtue of this union that we are to come forth from the grave.... Those who see Christ in His true character, and receive Him into the heart, have everlasting life. It is through the Spirit that Christ dwells in us; and the Spirit of God, received into the heart by faith, is the beginning of the life eternal." - The Desire of Ages, p. 388. (Italics mine.)
A very fine statement on this question of present and future salvation, with which we heartily agree, appears in What Is the Gospel? (pages 51, 42), by C. G. Trumbull, a book highly recommended by Mr. Jones. "Our salvation is complete, yet our salvation is not complete. Our salvation from the penalty of sin is unimprovably perfect and complete, finished and past. Our salvation from the power of sin is complete moment by moment as we trust moment by moment in the sufficiency of Christ for this. Yet we still have the possibility of sinning; we are still living in sin-injured bodies, subject to sin, disease, and death. IS there no salvation from this? Yes, praise God; we have a future salvation, which is to be ours at the coming of Christ. That is the 'hope' part of our salvation, the forward look, the 'blessed hope.'"
Eight of Mr. Jones' forty "reasons" pertain to the teaching of the Adventists regarding the atonement. (Nos. 6-13.) While some of his statements are very misleading, it is true that the Adventist doctrine of the atonement is, in some features, somewhat different from that held by other evangelical bodies. Far be it from us, however, to condemn as heretical any who believe as we do in the substitutionary death of Christ, simply because they do not understand just as we do the exact method of the atonement or the process by which all sin is finally eradicated from the universe. Our attitude in this matter has been well expressed by one of our writers as follows:
"Christ as 'the Lamb of God, which takes away the sin of the world'; Christ as the divine Son of God; Christ as the Incarnate God, virgin-born; Christ as the great teacher and example; Christ as the miracle worker; Christ in His substitutionary, propitiatory death. Christ in His miraculous resurrection and ascension-are all well known and fully accepted by loyal Bible Christians. But the priesthood of Christ, His mediation in the heavens. His intercession with the Father. His ministry in the sanctuary above, His dealing with the sins confessed to Him, the application of His shed blood to remove sin from the sinner. And His final disposition of sin, and His salvation of the sinner-these have been left in the realm of misty speculation. They have not been clearly comprehended by the people of God." - CARLYLE B. HAYNES, The Hour of God's Judgment, pp. 7-9.
These important truths can be clearly understood, we believe, by a careful study of the sanctuary service of the Old Testament as interpreted in the New Testament, especially in the book of Hebrews, and by a study of the prophecies pertaining to the closing work of the gospel..
The word "atonement" is found but once in our Authorized Version of the New Testament (Rom. 5:11), and not at all in either the English or American Revised Version, though, of course, the idea of the atonement, the forgiveness and blotting out of sin, is clearly taught. The word is found many times in -the Old Testament.
When Adam and Eve disobeyed their Creator and brought sorrow and death to the human race, God announced to them a plan whereby they might still be saved from eternal death by a Savior to be born of woman, who would eventually triumph over evil. (Gen. 3:15.) And so we find their son, Abel, bringing to God an acceptable offering of the firstlings of his flock, a bloody sacrifice pointing forward to the promised Redeemer-the Lamb of God who was (in the promise) "slain from the foundation of the world!' Rev. 13:8.
All down through the tragic years of sin and sorrow until He came, those who served God expressed their sorrow for sin and their faith in the coming Redeemer by sacrificing innocent victims, with the blood of which atonement was made for their sins. And when Jesus came He was announced as "the Lamb of God, which takes away the sin of the world." John 1:29. Type had met its antitype..
The Daily Levitical Ritual
After the children of Israel had been delivered from Egyptian bondage under the leadership of Moses, the Lord came down on Mount Sinai and with His own voice gave them His holy law, the Ten Commandments, and wrote it for them on tables of stone. There the children of Israel were organized as a nation and given statutes and judgments for the development of their national life. They were to be His own peculiar people, to preserve the true worship of Jehovah in the midst of the surrounding heathen nations. The Lord gave them a system of worship centering in the tabernacle, or sanctuary, where the Ten Commandments were deposited.
Specific directions were given to Moses for the building of the tabernacle, its furniture, and its instruments of service. "Let them make Me a sanctuary," said God; "that I may dwell among them. According to all that I show thee, after the pattern of the tabernacle, and the pattern of all the instruments thereof, even so shall you make it." Ex. 25:8, 9.
The tabernacle was surrounded by the court of the sanctuary, wherein was the altar of burnt offering and a laver for the washing and purification of the priests engaged in the service of the sanctuary. The tabernacle consisted of two apartments-the holy place, in which was the table of show bread, the candlestick, and the altar of incense; and the most holy place, with its one article of furniture, the ark of the covenant, in which were deposited the tables of stone on which were written the Ten Commandments. The covering of the ark was the mercy seat, with its two golden cherubim, or angels, with spreading wings, between which shone a mysterious light, the Shekinah, a symbol of God's presence among His people. The http://www.ThreeAngels.com.audoor to the holy place was a hanging, or veil, and the holy place was separated from the most holy by a second veil.
Specific and minute directions were given concerning the priesthood, the sacrifices, and all the services to be conducted in the sanctuary. "This is the law of the burnt offering, of the meat offering, and of the sin offering, and of the trespass offering, and of the consecrations, and of the sacrifice of the peace offerings; which the Lord commanded Moses in Mount Sinai, in the day that He commanded the children of Israel to offer their oblations unto the Lord, in the wilderness of Sinai!' Lev. 7:37,38.
As there were two separate and distinct apartments in the sanctuary, so there were two distinct types of service: the daily and the yearly service. Each day there were the morning and evening sacrifices, the offering of sweet incense on the golden altar before the second veil, and the special offerings for the removal of guilt from those who had disobeyed the moral law, the transgression of which is sin. (1 John 3:4.)
The rules governing sin offerings varied somewhat, but in each case the sinner who by his sin had merited death, provided himself an offering as a substitute, brought it to the door of the tabernacle, laid his hand upon it-thus in type transferring his sin to the innocent victim-and then killed it. The disposition of the blood was somewhat different in different cases, but in every case the objective was the same, to transfer to the sanctuary in symbol, the record of the sin that had been laid on the victim and for which it had died.
In some cases the priest was to "dip his finger in the blood, and sprinkle of the blood seven times before the Lord, before the veil of the sanctuary," and also put "some of the blood upon the horns of the altar of sweet incense before the Lord, which is in the tabernacle of the congregation," and pour all the blood "at the bottom of the altar of the burnt offering, which is at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation." Lev. 4:6, 7. In other cases the priest was to "take of the blood of the sin offering with his finger, and put it upon the horns of the altar of burnt offering" and "pour out his blood at the bottom of the altar of burnt offering." Verse 25. So in this case the blood was not sprinkled before the veil in the sanctuary.
When the blood was not taken into the sanctuary, the flesh was to be eaten: "The priest that offers it for sin shall eat it: in the holy place shall it be eaten, in the court of the tabernacle of the congregation." Lev. 6:26. This distinction was made.
"No sin offering, whereof any of the blood is brought into the tabernacle of the congregation to reconcile withal in the holy place, shall be eaten: it shall be burnt in the fire." Lev. 6:30. Moses, in speaking of the sin offering that was to be eaten, told the priests that "God bath given it you to bear the iniquity of the congregation, to make atonement for them before the Lord!' Lev. 10:17.
The typical transfer of sin is clearly taught. Again and again, with reference to the work of the priest after the sinner laid his hand on his offering and killed it, the statement is made, as in Leviticus 4:31, "the priest shall make an atonement for him, and it shall be forgiven him." The sin had been transferred in type to the animal, which paid the penalty by its death. The record of this forgiven sin was carried by the blood to the horns of the altar of incense. In the cases in which the flesh was eaten, we are distinctly told that God had given it to the priests to "bear the iniquity!' Lev. 10:17. When priests who thus bore iniquity made offerings for themselves, the record for those forgiven sins was likewise transferred to the sanctuary.
The sins of the repentant sinner who brought his offering were forgiven. Atonement was made by the sprinkled blood or the eating of the flesh, and he was free. But the sins had not yet been blotted out and finally disposed of. The record had been transferred in type to the sanctuary, which was cleansed from all defilement once a year on the Day of Atonement. The Bible statements regarding the Day of Atonement make that very clear.
The Day of Atonement
The tenth day of the seventh month, the Day of Atonement, was the climax of the Jewish religious year. It is spoken of by all Jewish authorities as a day of judgment. (See Jewish Encyclopedia, Vol. II, p. 284.) And such it really was, for on that solemn holy day he who did not afflict his soul was "cut off from among his people!' Lev. 23:29. First of all, the high priest killed a bullock as a sin offering for himself, for he who officiates in this solemn work must be holy and undefiled. But before administering the blood of the bullock he went into the tabernacle, entered the most holy place and deposited a censer of burning incense on the mercy scat, "that the cloud of the incense may cover the mercy seat that is upon the testimony, that he die not!' Lev. 16:13. Then he went out, received the blood of the bullock from the priest, again entered the http://www.ThreeAngels.com.aumost holy place, sprinkled the blood "upon the mercy seat eastward; and before the mercy seat shall he sprinkle of the blood with his finger seven times" (verse 14), thus making "atonement for himself, and for his house" (verse 11).
The high light of this solemn service of the Day of Atonement was the disposition of the two goats furnished by the congregation. These goats were presented "before the Lord at the door of the tabernacle," and lots were cast upon them, "One lot for the Lord, and the other lot for the scapegoat [Hebrew Azazel]." Verses 7, 8. The Lord's goat was offered "for a sin offering," but the other was "presented alive before the Lord, to make an atonement with him, and to let him go for a scapegoat into the wilderness." Verses 9, 10.
After the ceremony of administering the blood of the bullock for himself and for his house, the high priest came out, took the Lord's goat, and killed it. During the daily services throughout the year, the sinner who came with his sin offering always killed his sacrifice, but on the Day of Atonement the high priest, as the representative of all the people, slew the victim. Again he entered the sanctuary and sprinkled the blood of the people's sin offering on the mercy seat and before the mercy seat. (Verse 15.) In doing this he made "atonement for the holy place, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins." Returning to the first apartment, or holy place, which is also- called the tabernacle of the congregation, he did the same thing there "for the tabernacle of the congregation, that remains among them in the midst of their uncleanness." Verse 16. Then having made atonement for the sanctuary, he went to the altar of burnt offering and put some of the blood of both the bullock and the goat upon the horns of the altar, and sprinkled the altar with his finger seven times, to cleanse it, and hallow it from the uncleanness of the children of Israel." Verse 19.
Thus was the sanctuary cleansed, not because of any inherent sin in it, but because of the "uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions." Verse 16. It was ceremonially and typically unclean because during the entire year sin-laden blood, the blood of victims over which sin had been confessed, had been brought into it. The work of cleansing the sanctuary was now finished. "And when he hath made an end of reconciling the holy place, and the tabernacle of the congregation, and the altar, he shall bring the live goat.... and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness: and the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited: and he shall let go the goat in the wilderness." Lev. 16:20-22. The sanctuary was cleansed, and all the confessed sins of the year were not only forgiven but entirely separated from the camp of Israel.
The high priest then washed himself and changed his garments; the man who led away the scapegoat into the wilderness had to wash himself and his garments before returning to camp, and likewise the man who disposed of the carcass of the bullock. With the evening sacrifice this momentous day came to an end. The summary of the day's ceremonies is given in these words: "He shall make an atonement for the holy sanctuary, and he shall make an atonement for the tabernacle of the congregation, and for the altar, and he shall make an atonement for the priests, and for all the people of the congregation." Lev. 16:33. The sins of all who, during the year, had brought their substitutionary sacrifices and thus obtained forgiveness, and who had maintained their attitude of repentance through the day of final reckoning, now had all the sins of the year blotted out; all of which was "a figure for the time then present." Heb. 9:9.
Meaning of the Sanctuary Service
The foregoing is a very brief description of the tabernacle which was built in the wilderness under God's direction, and a mere outline of the principal features of a rather elaborate priestly ritual, which was revealed to Moses and which is described in detail in the books of Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers. Then we have in the New Testament, in the book of Hebrews, an inspired commentary on this sanctuary service and its meaning. This system of sacrificial service was no idle ceremonialism but an integral part of the great truths concerning the plan of human redemption. It was a temporary arrangement which was "a figure for the time then present," and consisted of "ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation"-that is, until the gospel dispensation. (Heb. 9:9, 10.) For centuries this system was a visual witness to the fact that God had provided a substitute who would die for sinners, and that atonement for sin would be made through the death of the promised seed, the Lamb of God. This ritual service also provided the means by which men could show their faith in the provision which God had made for their salvation.
When Jesus died on the cross, the veil of the temple was rent in twain-an indication that the typical system, "handwriting of ordinances" (Col. 2:14), had come to its end.
Because Seventh-day Adventists teach that the scapegoat in the tabernacle services of the Day of Atonement represented Satan, we are accused of substituting Satan for Christ as a vicarious sufferer for sin. (No. 7.) We do not now teach, nor have we ever taught, that the devil is a sacrifice for sin. There has been much discussion among Bible scholars over the question of what the scapegoat symbolized, some taking the position that the two goats represented different phases of Christ's work, and others that "the Lord's goat" represented Christ and that the scapegoat (margin, "Azazel") is a personal, wicked, superhuman being. Why we should be accused of "pernicious heresy" and "shocking blasphemies" for standing with this second group of scholars is difficult to understand, unless like the presidents and princes in old Persia who "sought to find occasion against Daniel," our opponent is seeking to find something by which Seventh day Adventists may be discredited.
Meaning of "Azazel"
The Hebrew word for scapegoat is "Azazel," and is so transliterated in the English and American Revised Versions. The English word "scapegoat" was doubtless used in the common version because of the final disposition of the animal. - Dr. M. M. Kalisch, a learned Jewish scholar, speaks of Azazel as the "evil demon, or devil, Azazel, the author and originator of sin." Azazel is a noted character in Eastern legend-doubtless reflections of the story of Satan's fall from heaven. In commenting on Azazel's part in the services of the Day of Atonement, Kalisch says: "It would be too much to consider both [goats] virtually as one sin offering presented to God; the two worked out the desired object in a very different manner; one was a victim intended to atone for sins, the other carried away sins already atoned for; the one was dedicated to God, the other to a different power. (Lev. 16:8.) . . . They implied the acknowledgment of two opposite and opposing forces in the moral world, since Azazel, though passive in the ceremonial of the Day of Atonement, was considered to have been most active throughout the year as a tempter and instigator to sin."-Commentary on Leviticus (English or Abridged edition), Part 2, p. 209. Again he says: "The goat was no sacrifice presented to Azazel, no offering meant to appease his wrath; it was not slaughtered, but left in the desert.. . to its fate; it did not work the 9tonement of the people, which was effected solely by the blood of the second goat killed as a sin offering; it served, in fact, merely as a symbol of complete removal." - Ibid., p. 185.
Talbot W. Chambers, in The Presbyterian and Reformed Review for January, 1892, pages 22-34, speaking of the function of the two goats on the great Day of Atonement. Says that "the double offering [one for Jehovah and the other for Azazel typified not only the removing of the guilt of the people but its transfer to the odious and detestable being who was the first cause of its existence" - Satan.
In What Sense the Scapegoat Bore Sin.
Is it not self-evident that if one goat was "for the Lord" and the other "for Azazel," these two were antithetical? The scapegoat could in no sense be a part of the atonement, for it was not killed, and "without shedding of blood is no remission." Heb. 9:22. How could a live goat bearing all the sins of the people (Lev. 16:21), sent into the wilderness entirely separated from the people, represent Christ?
The Lord's goat was a "sin offering, that is for the people," the blood of which was brought within the second veil and sprinkled on the mercy peat. With this blood, atonement was made "for the holy place," "for the tabernacle, of the congregation," and for the altar of burnt offering, "because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins." Lev. 16:15, 16. Not until the high priest had "made an end of reconciling" ("atoning," A.R.V.), did the live goat have any part in the ceremony. (Verse 20.) After the atonement was finished and judgment passed, the high priest confessed over the scapegoat all the sins of the people, and it was sent away into an uninhabited wilderness, entirely separated from the camp of Israel. The scapegoat then atoned for sin only as a criminal atones for his crime.
A man who influences another to commit a crime is recognized as sharing the responsibility for it and is legally punished. Satan is the originator of sin. He is the direct instigator of all the sins that have cursed our world, and which caused the death of the Son of God. It is nothing but justice that Satan should suffer for all his own sins, and as the great tempter, for his part in the sins of God's children.
When the investigative judgment is finished and our Lord Himself descends from heaven with the trump of God to raise His sleeping saints, they, with the righteous living, will be caught up to meet their http://www.ThreeAngels.com.auLord. (1 Thess. 4:16, 17.) The wicked will be destroyed by the brightness of His coming (2 Thess. 2:8), and "shall not be lamented, neither gathered, nor buried" (Jer. 25: 33). They will not live again until after a thousand years. (Rev. 20:5.) The earth will be left a desolation, a land uninhabited (the bottomless pit) where Satan, the antitypical scapegoat, will have a thousand years in Which to contemplate the terrible havoc and suffering that sin has caused. (Rev. 20:1-3.) At the close of the thousand years the wicked dead will be raised to life, and the devil and all the wicked host will be utterly destroyed. (Rev. 20:5, 7-10, 14, 15.)
The beloved John saw a new heaven and new earth, and he saw the Holy City coming down from God, and "heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself shall be with them, and be their God. And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away." Rev. 21: 3, 4. The great controversy is ended. The blood-washed throng have received their inheritance. Sin and sinners are no more. The character of God has been vindicated.
Moses was directed to make the tabernacle "after the pattern" which was shown him in the mount. (Ex. 25:9.) This fact is referred to again and again in the book of Hebrews. We are told that "the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary!' Heb. 9:1. Bishop B. F. Westcott, D.D., D.C.L., a noted scholar, translates this: "Now even the first covenant had ordinances of divine service and its sanctuary, a sanctuary of this world." - The Epistle to the Hebrews, p. 242. Reference is made here to the new-covenant sanctuary mentioned in the previous chapter. "We have such an High Priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; a minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man." Heb. 8:1, 2. So the new covenant has a sanctuary, and "also" the old covenant had a sanctuary. The earthly sanctuary was "the patterns of things in the heavens." Heb. 9:23. "For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us." Verse 24. What was shown Moses, then, was not simply a sketch or blueprint but figures (Greek-Antitupa; "copy, image, effigy, form, or likeness") of the true (Greek- Alethinon, "that which is real"), "i. e., the original or heavenly sanctuary, of which the earthly one is a mere Copy."-MOSES STUART, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, p. 445.
It is significant that the word "true" here is plural in the Greek, as is "holy places." Dr. G. R. Berry, in his Interlinear Greek New Testament, translated the Greek thus: "For not into holies made by hands entered the Christ, figures of the true ones."
Two Chambers in the Heavenly Temple
We are criticized by Mr. Jones for teaching that there are two apartments in the heavenly sanctuary. (No. 9.) The Bible, we believe, clearly teaches that the glorious temple, or sanctuary, of God in heaven has two distinct divisions, representing the two phases of work for man's salvation to be done there; but our chief attention is focused not on the temple itself but on the work being accomplished. We recognize, of course, that the earthly sanctuary was only "a miniature representation of the heavenly temple" and "a dim reflection of the glories of the temple of God in heaven, the great center of the work for man's redemption" (ELLEN G. WHITE, Patriarchs and Prophets, pp. 343, 349). Where, in the time of the great judgment, thousand thousands will "minister unto Him, and ten thousand times ten thousand" stand before Him. Dan. 7:10.
It is easy to understand the absolute necessity of the two apartments in the earthly sanctuary in order that the two types of priestly service required might be carried on. It should also be observed that Solomon's temple had these two essential chambers and also Zerubbabel's and Herod's temples. And just as the. Lord revealed to Moses the pattern for the wilderness tabernacle, so "by the Spirit" He revealed to David the pattern for Solomon's temple. (1 Chron. 28:12.)
In view of this continual emphasis in the book of Hebrews on the fact that the earthly sanctuary and its service was a type, figure, copy, or likeness of the heavenly, does it really seem an unscriptural delusion to believe that the great temple in heaven, where our High Priest ministers for sinners, has two chambers? If the earthly sanctuary and its service was a "shadow of heavenly things" (Heb. 8:5), can there really be any doubt that these heavenly things are like the earthly in such essential features as this?
But we have even more direct evidence. The counterparts of the two apartments of the earthly sanctuary have been seen in heaven. In vision John was permitted to see the temple of God. He saw "seven lamps of fire burning before the throne," and he saw an angel who "stood at the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given unto him much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne." Rev. 4:5; 8:3. The golden candlestick with its seven lamps and the altar of incense were in the first apartment of the earthly sanctuary. (Ex. 25:31-37; 30:1-6.) And again, "The temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in His temple the ark of His testament." Rev. 11:19. The prototype of this was, of course, the sacred ark of the testimony in the most holy place, which contained the 14w of God. (Ex. 25:10, 16; 26:33.)
Meaning of the Veil
In his effort to prove there are not two divisions of the heavenly sanctuary, Mr. Jones makes the assertion that "the Bible teaches that no intervening 'veil' divides the 'temple of God . . . in heaven."' By http://www.ThreeAngels.com.auquoting this word and phrase from the Bible he evidently means to fortify his assertion that the "Bible says" this; but unfortunately for his theory there is no such statement in the Bible. He refers to Matthew 27:50, 51, where the statement is made that the veil in the temple at Jerusalem was rent when Jesus died. But far from teaching that the veil in heaven was removed, this indicated rather that the typical services on earth had come to an end, and that soon "by His own blood" our true High Priest was to enter "in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us." Heb. 9:12. The holy place (or "holy places"-Greek) into which He entered, we are told, was "heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us." Heb. 9:24. Soon after His resurrection Christ ascended to heaven, there to begin His work of mediation in the "true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man." Heb. 8:2. The other quotation by Mr. Jones-"the temple of God. . . in heaven"-is from Revelation 11:19, which is quoted above. There is nothing said here either about there being "no intervening veil." So this assertion falls for lack of Bible evidence.
Another effort to prove that "the two apartments on earth did not represent two apartments in heaven," is based on an interpretation of Hebrews 10:19, 20, that the veil represents the flesh of Christ. These verses read, "11aving therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way, which He hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, His flesh." It is difficult to see, even if this interpretation were accepted, how that would prove that there are not two chambers in the heavenly sanctuary. There are many Bible scholars who are not Seventh-day Adventists who dissent from this interpretation, believing that "His flesh" is the "new and living way" and not the "veil." The reading of both the English and American Revised Versions lends itself to this interpretation. Both Versions read, "By the way which He dedicated for us, a new and living way, through the veil, that is to say, His flesh."
"This interpretation," says W. H. G. Holmes, in his The Epistle to the Hebrews, page 368, "requires that the comma after 'way' be deleted." Punctuation marks, as all Bible students know, are not in the original and must be determined by the evident meaning of the words and grammatical construction. Holmes says further: "What is this way, which is new and living, by which we can pass through the veil? The answer is that it is His flesh. It is because the Word was made flesh that He has become the Way (St. John xiv. 6), that men may become His members, and 'in His blood' pass into the very presence of God. What is the veil through which they pass? The veil is all that keeps men from the true knowledge of God and shuts off access to Him. The Way is the Way of the Incarnation and the Sacrifice that it includes. It is new because though dedicated in eternity it is new in time, and remains ever fresh in efficacy. It is living, for He ever lives to impart life. To tread the ways of earth is to grow wearier each step; to walk in Christ, the Way, is continually to receive new supplies of life."
Bishop Westcott takes the same position. He suggests the following construction. "A way through the veil, that is, a way consisting in His flesh, His true human nature." "This construction," he says, "appears to be followed by our Early English translations," mentioning Tyndale, Coverdale, and others. He further says: "The Greek certainly admits this construction: ... And the sense agrees perfectly with the argument... . The thought which is thus expressed of a ' way consisting in Christ's flesh' falls in perfectly with the scope of the passage. It was by the 'way of His flesh,' by a way which lay in His humanity, that Christ entered through the veil after the offering of Himself as a High Priest able to sympathize with men. And it is by the 'way of His flesh,' as sharing in the virtue of His humanity, and sprinkled with His blood, that Christians come before God." The Epistle to the Hebrews, p. 320.
Yes, thank God, Christ, who "was made flesh" (John 1:14), is the way. He became the Son of man and He entered "within the veil," thereby making it possible for us to enter into heaven. (Heb. 4:14; 6:19, 20.)
"In the Presence of God"
If the plain teaching of the book of Hebrews is accepted, that both the. earthly sanctuary and its services foreshadowed the heavenly sanctuary and its services (Heb. 8:5), then the conclusion is inevitably that Christ, after His ascension entered upon His ministry in the heavenly sanctuary, and that a long period of ministry in the holy place will be followed by a short period of judgment-the antitypical day of atonement. Our critic complains that we are thus putting Christ in a `place' separated from the Father" (No. 10), but he seems to be guilty of confining God to a place, for inasmuch as Christ appeared "in the presence of God," he insists that such appearance must have been in the most holy place. However, in two of his proof texts, the plural is used in describing where Christ is with God. Ephesians 1:20 says that Christ is at http://www.ThreeAngels.com.authe right hand of God "in the heavenly places" (plural), as does Hebrews 9:24, already mentioned. The sanctuary is in heaven, but heaven is not the sanctuary.
It is true that the presence of God was manifested in the second apartment of the earthly sanctuary, the place where the sacred law was kept, and the place of final judgment at the end of the round of yearly services, but God's presence was also manifested elsewhere. (See Ex. 40:35; Ex. 33:9-11; Num. 12:5; Ex. 29:42.) In current phraseology, we do not limit the expression "on the throne" to refer to a particular seat or room. At his coronation the king of England is literally there, seated on a throne, which may be viewed in Westminster Abbey. Though there may be a special place, known as the throne room, the ruler may be anywhere and yet rightfully said to be "on the throne." So, in the heavenly sanctuary, the mercy seat on the ark of the covenant, overshadowed by the cherubim, may be, in one sense, God's dwelling place. Yet it would be childish to understand such expressions as "He sits between ["above," A.R.V.] the cherubim" (Ps. 99:1; 80:1) as teaching that God remains in one place.
It is argued that the expression "within the veil," where Christ entered (Heb. 6:19, 20), could only mean the most holy place. While the distinction of the two veils is not strictly preserved in the Septuagint (the ancient Greek translation of the Old Testament), in the Hebrew two distinct words are used. The word for the outer veil is masak, "hanging," and the word for the inner veil is pahrocheth, "veil." An exception to this is found in Numbers 18:7, where the word used for outer veil is pahrocheth. That it refers to the outer veil is clear from verse 5. And the expression here is the same as in Hebrews 6:19, "within the veil." It should be noted, too, that when the author of Hebrews refers to the inner veil, he calls it "the second veil." (Heb. 9:3.) So if a sanctuary veil is referred to in Hebrews 6:19, it must be the first veil. This is another evidence that Christ's priestly work began in the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary.
We are told in the beautiful prophecy of the "Branch" (Christ) in Zechariah 6:12, 13, that "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!' As priest, Christ is now sitting down with His Father on His Father's throne (Rev. 3:21), and the mediation in behalf of sinners goes on. When this work is completed, and sin and Satan are forever destroyed, "The Lord God shall give unto Him the throne of His father David," and "the Son of man shall sit in the throne of His glory!' (Luke 1:32; Matt. 19:28.)
Three objections have to do with. the interpretation of the twenty-three-hundred-day prophecy of Daniel 8:14. (Nos. 11-13.) While it is impossible within the compass of this pamphlet to go
into full explanation of this important prophecy, it will not be difficult to show the candid reader the weakness of the critic's position and to point the way to further study of this marvelous prophecy which foretold the very time that the Messiah would come and also the solemn events connected with the closing of the great controversy between Christ and Satan.
The Future Unfolded
Daniel, the youthful Hebrew captive in Babylon, had become a man of great influence in the service of the kingdom. He had been given the interpretation to Nebuchadnezzar's dream, as recorded in the second chapter of the book of Daniel, and also the vision of world powers recorded in chapter seven. Shortly before the overthrow of Babylon by Medo-Persia, Daniel was given the vision recorded in the eighth chapter, in which Medo-Persia and Grecia were represented by a ram and a he-goat respectively. And following Grecia, he saw another power symbolized by a little horn, a wicked power, "exceeding great," casting "down the truth to the ground," opposing even "the host of heaven" and also "the prince of the host," and treading underfoot "both the sanctuary and the host." After describing this reign of iniquity, the angel said to Daniel, "Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed." Dan. 8:14.
As Daniel sought to know the meaning of these things, he heard a voice commanding the angel Gabriel to make him understand the vision. After explaining the symbols of the ram and rough he-goat, Gabriel proceeded to describe this little horn as a terrible persecuting power. "His power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practice, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people. And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace [margin, "prosperity"] shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand." Dan. 8:24, 25.
A Long Prophetic Period
But not all of the vision was explained at this time. Regarding the time element, the angel said, "The vision of the evening and the morning [2300-day prophecy] which was told is true: wherefore shut-thou up the vision; for it shall be for many days." Verse 26. It seems evident that the prophet was overwhelmed by the thought of this devastating power. He says, "And 1 Daniel fainted, and was sick certain days; afterward I rose up, and did the king's business; and 1 was astonished at the vision, but none understood it!' Verse 27.
The symbols of the ram and the he-goat had been definitely explained to be Medo-Persia and Grecia, and this was easily understood. The exploits of this little horn, the power that followed Grecia, had been vividly described. The time period was declared by Gabriel to be true, but it was not explained. Daniel was evidently greatly troubled over that part of the vision which had not been explained. Surely Gabriel, who had been commanded to make Daniel understand the vision, would fulfill his commission. Inasmuch as the angel had spoken of the desecration and also the cleansing of the sanctuary, Daniel doubtless thought that this had some connection with the return of his people to their homeland and the restoration of the temple service. In his study of the prophecy of Jeremiah he had learned that the time of the desolation of Jerusalem was to be seventy years. Realizing that this time was nearly expired, he betook himself to prayer and fasting in behalf of his people, and while he was praying, the angel again appeared to him and said, "I am come to show thee; for thou art greatly beloved: therefore understand the matter, and consider the vision!' Dan. 9:23. He had come to finish the explanation of the vision of chapter eight, and he began where he had left off. "Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people."
It is agreed by all Hebrew scholars that the word here translated "determined" means "cut off!' In other words, seventy weeks, or four hundred and ninety days of the twenty-three hundred days, were allotted to the Jewish people. And for what purpose? "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!' Verse 24.http://www.ThreeAngels.com.au
Then the beginning of this prophetic period is given. "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 street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous .times." Verse 25. The seven weeks were evidently allotted to the restoration of Jerusalem, but this prophetic period reaches far beyond the restoration of Jerusalem and the temple service there. The word "Christ," which means "anointed," is the Greek word for "Messiah." So, from the decree to restore and build Jerusalem in 457 BC. to the anointing of Jesus as the Messiah was to be sixty-nine weeks. And what was to happen during that last week? "After threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for Himself. . . . 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." Verses 26,27.
Note these accomplishments: "make an end of sins .....make reconciliation for iniquity," "bring in everlasting righteousness," "anoint the most holy" (verse 24), "Messiah be cut off" (verse 26), "confirm the covenant with many for one week," and in the middle of that last week "cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease" (Verse 27). These words scarcely need explanation. Is there any question in the reader's mind but that the sixty-nine weeks of this prophecy reached to the anointing of our blessed Lord as the Christ, and that in the midst of that seventieth week, occurred the central event of all history-the crucifixion of Christ, not for Himself, but to make the great reconciliation for the iniquity of the whole world?
"Each Day for a Year"
Did this happen within twenty-three hundred literal days, or about six and two-thirds years, after the decree went forth to restore and rebuild Jerusalem? No. But Jesus was baptized and anointed sixty-nine weeks of years (483 years) after the decree in 457 BC. He was baptized and anointed by the Holy Spirit in the autumn of AD. 27, and He was crucified three and a half years later in the spring of AD. 31.
We are told in the pamphlet under review that this year-for a-day theory is an unsound rule of interpretation. Some may consider it unsound, but it is the theory of interpretation adopted by the great prophetic students of the Protestant Reformation and many others. Dr. H. Grattan Guinness, a Church of England writer, in his book The Approaching End of the Age, page 302, used the seventy-week period to prove the year-day theory. In speaking of the prophetic periods of the prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation, he says, "The great answer to this important query [the meaning of "day" in prophecy] is found in the fact that one of these periods has been fulfilled, and therefore supplies the key to all the rest."
In these prophecies short-lived beasts are used as symbols of nations which lasted for centuries, and there is a certain propriety in using a short period of time to represent a longer period. In speaking of the prophecies regarding the Antichrist, Bishop Thomas Newton, D.D., in his Dissertations on the Prophecies, says, "It is impossible for all the things which are predicted of Antichrist to be fulfilled in so short a space of time; and neither is Antichrist, or the little horn [Daniel 71, a single man, but a kingdom. "Pages 246-247. (Revised edition, p. 221.)
But we have direct statements from the Bible regarding this matter. For instance, in Ezekiel 4:3-6 the prophet was instructed to lie on his side a certain number of days as "a sign to the house of Israel' These days represented an equal number of years of their iniquity. "I have appointed thee each day for a year."
While the seventy-week period, as Dr. Guinness says, is the key to all other time prophecies, it also verifies the whole twenty three-hundred-day period. The seventy weeks were "to seal up the vision and prophecy." Dan. 9:24. Being able to establish by unimpeachable evidence the fulfillment of the events to occur in the first four hundred and ninety years of this prophetic period, we know conclusively when the twenty-three hundred years ended.
The Cleansing of the Sanctuary
The seventy weeks, or four hundred and ninety years, ended in AD. 34, when the apostles definitely turned their attention to the evangelization of the Gentiles. ' (Acts 13:46.) The remaining eighteen hundred and ten years of this period bring us to AD. 1844. And through all these years an apostate power has "cast down the truth to the ground ... and prospered."
To every Bible believer who is following this discussion, it is surely apparent that the new covenant has a sanctuary "in the heavens," and that Christ, our High Priest, is the minister of that "greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands." Heb. 9:11. And while the magnitude and grandeur of heavenly things are beyond our comprehension, we know from the Inspired Word that the miniature http://www.ThreeAngels.com.autabernacle erected by Moses, and the services carried on in it,, were "the example and shadow of heavenly things!' Heb. 8:5. As W. H. G. Holmes says, "Christ's priestly ministry in the transcendent sanctuary is elucidated by a comparison with the ritual of the earthly tabernacle." -The Epistle to the Hebrews, p. 316.
If there is not a similar work of atonement and cleansing from sin carried on in this heavenly sanctuary, then these statements in the book of Hebrews are meaningless. This view of the ministry of Christ in heaven gives a larger conception of the glorious plan of salvation and of the work of Christ as our mediator. As the earthly sanctuary was cleansed once a year on the great Day of Atonement (Lev. 16:19, 20), so the heavenly sanctuary is to be "purified" with "better sacrifices" by "His own blood" (Heb. 9:23, 12) on the antitypical day of atonement. It seems a shocking thing to our critic that the heavenly sanctuary needs cleansing. It "is not a place of defilement," says he; yet on the same page he quotes an author as saying, "The atoning sacrifice of Christ ... so glorified God that the heavens were cleansed forthwith from that scandal and offense." If we accept the second of these contradictory statements, the only difference between us, after all, is merely the time of cleansing and not the fact.
There is nothing strange or incongruous in the thought that God fully and freely forgives sins when they are confessed, and yet keeps a record of these sins (and also their forgiveness) until life's record is complete or until the day of final judgment. The Lord has used strong statements to assure us of His love, and forgiveness. "If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness!' 1 John 1:9. "I, even I, am He that blots out thy transgressions for Mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins!' Isa. 43:25. Doubtless in such promises the Lord means to assure us not only of full and free forgiveness but also of His eternal purpose to utterly obliterate sin. Such statements do not contradict other plain statements to the effect that it is possible for those who are forgiven to turn back and be lost. "When I shall say to the righteous, that he shall surely live; if he trust to his own righteousness, and commit iniquity, all his righteousness shall not be remembered; but for his iniquity that he hath committed, he shall die for it!' Eze. 33:13. Jesus told the parable of a king who forgave a servant of an enormous debt, but when that servant refused to forgive a fellow servant of a small amount, "his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him." (Matt. 18:21-34.)
True, Christ has "purged our sins" (Heb. 1:3), but unfortunately, some forget that they were "purged," and hence, Christians are urged to make their "calling and- election sure" (2 Peter 1:10). There is even danger that those who were "enlightened" and "made partakers of the Holy Ghost" and tasted "the powers of the world to come" shall fall away and be lost. (Heb. 6:4-6.) We are admonished to "hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering." Heb. 10:23.
And yet our critic assures us that the cases of the believing children of God were settled on Calvary. By this he doubtless means that there can be no falling away, or once in grace always in grace. The reader can judge the truth of this in the light of the above scriptures.
In an effort to prove that there is no judgment for the righteous, some statements are made which must appear strange to Bible students. For instance, John 5:24 is quoted from the Revised Version, where the word "judgment" is used instead of "condemnation" as in the common version. "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that hears My word, and believes on Him that sent Me, bath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation ["judgment," A.R.V.1; but is passed from death unto life." But the Bible teaches that all will be judged. "We must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he bath done,, whether it be good or bad." 2 Cor. 5:10. For the "saved," says Mr. Jones, this appearance is for an appraisal of their "service" and "not their sins"; but the text says that it concerns what has been done "whether it be good or bad." Bad doing is surely sin.
In comparing these two texts let no one jump at the conclusion that the Bible contradicts itself. This inspired statement as well as many others that foretell the future judgment of all mankind, does not contradict statements such as John 5:24, in which evidently the thought is that those who accept Christ and hold fast their profession will not be condemned in the final judgment. There surely is no contradiction between the words of Jesus that "God sent not His Son into the world to condemn ["judge," A.R.V.] the world" (John 3:17), and the statement of Peter that Jesus is "ordained of God to be the Judge of the living and the dead" (Acts 10:42, A.R.V.).
Reference has already been made to Daniel's vision of the judgment scene and the presence of millions of heavenly beings when "the books were opened." Dan. 7:9, 10. John on Patmos likewise had a view of the judgment. "I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works." Rev. 20:12. In that book of life are recorded the names of all who have accepted Christ. (Phil. 4:3.) The names of those who hold fast their profession and are over comers will be retained in that book, while others will be blotted out. (Rev. 3:5.) Dear reader, is your name written there? "Be thou faithful unto death," and God 'I will give thee a crown of life." Rev. 2:10.
The Bible clearly teaches that God appointed a specific future time for the judgment. "He hath appointed a day, in the which He will judge the world in righteousness." Acts 17:31. The beginning of that great day of judgment was at the end of the twenty-three hundred years, in AD. 1844. At that time a special message began to go to the world: "Fear God, and give glory to Him; for the hour of His judgment is pome." And just after this judgment-hour message, in the moving picture of future events, John beheld the Son of man coming to reap the harvest of the earth. (Rev. 14:6-16.)
A Seventh-day Adventist writer is quoted as saying that a complete work of atoning for sin was not wrought upon the cross (No. 6), and it is said that this is "a most destructive denial of the gospel."
Mr. Jones is well acquainted with the fact that Seventh-day Adventists believe and teach that man's only possible hope of salvation is in the atoning blood of Christ, and that we believe in the complete salvation of repentant sinners and the final and total eradication of sin from the universe. On the next page of C. H. Watson's book, from which he quoted, it is stated:
"The teaching of both Old and New Testaments is that atonement is not made alone by the shedding of the blood of the sacrifice, but rather by the shedding of the atoning blood and the ministration of the shed blood in behalf of penitent sinners by the priest." - The Atoning Work of Christ, p. 96.
The one text in the New Testament in which is found the word "atonement" is our critic's chief reliance to prove that the atonement has been completed.
"For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received, the atonement." Rom. 5:10, 11.
Sacrifice and Atonement
The first "reconciled" in this text is from the Greek verb katellagemen, and the second is a participial form of the same word. The word in verse 11 translated "atonement" in the Authorized Version (with "reconciliation" in the margin) is a noun and is identically the same root word, which all Greek scholars agree should be "reconciliation!'
The Hebrew word "atonement" in the Old Testament is kaphar and means "cover" with the idea of expiation, blotting out, etc. Seventh-day Adventists use this word in the sense of complete cancellation, or blotting out, of sin. It is confusing, we think, to use "sacrifice" and "atonement" synonymously, as many do. We believe this confusion tends to lead into either one or the other of two very serious errors. As it is plainly taught in the Scriptures that Christ died for all, the conclusion is easily reached by many that He has atoned for the sins of all and hence all will be saved. Here we have Universalism. The Scriptures are equally clear, however, that not all men will be saved, and hence, in an effort to harmonize this with their definition of atonement, some are led to the conclusion that the sacrifice of Christ was only for a chosen few who are predestinated to be saved. And here we have ultra-Calvinism.
The glorious plan of salvation-involving the incarnation of Christ, His life among men, His death as an offering for sin, His resurrection from the dead, His ascension to heaven, and His ministry there in behalf of sinners-is almost beyond our human comprehension. God has endeavored to lead us into an understanding of this great mystery of His love through the sacrificial system, which was the gospel in type, and through the inspired records of Jesus' earthly life and atoning sacrifice. We need to study all this revelation in order to comprehend the profound truths of the plan of redemption. We fully agree with A. H. Strong, D.D., LL.D., when he says that "a correct view of the atonement must therefore be grounded upon a proper interpretation of the institution of sacrifice, especially as found in the Mosaic system." - Systematic Theology, p. 721.
The first outstanding impression one gets from the study of the sacrificial system is that the shedding of blood is necessary for the remission of sin. Said the Lord, "The life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls." Lev. 17:11.
In the sanctuary service of the Old Testament the entire redemptive work of Christ is typified the confession of sin, the death of the expiatory victim, the bearing of the guilt by the priest, the transfer of sin to the sanctuary by the blood of the sacrifice, and finally the cleansing of the sanctuary and the removal of sin from the camp of Israel. In connection with every feature of these services the thought of atonement was expressed.. This is no less true of the services that prefigured the ministry of Christ as high priest than of those that typified His suffering as the sinner's substitute. It is definitely stated again and again that the service on the tenth day of the seventh month was a work of atonement. That was, in fact, the great Day of Atonement, which typified the events connected with the close of human probation and the total eradication of sin. In view of this use of the word "atonement" in the Bible, how can its meaning be limited to the single act of Christ's death on the cross?
Priesthood of Christ Necessary
Note again Romans 5:10, 11. First it says that while we were yet sinners "we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son." As enemies we were not seeking salvation; yet we were reconciled. "God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them." 2 Cor. 5:19.
Thus provision was made for all to be saved, but all will not avail themselves of this reconciliation. "Whosoever will may come." And those who do believe and surrender will be saved. Reconciled by His death, we are "saved by His life." In His resurrected life as our great high priest He ministers His blood in behalf of repentant sinners and imputes to them His righteousness. Such may say, "We have now received the atonement" ("reconciliation," margin and Revised Version). Dr. Strong has said, "As Christ's union with the race secures the objective reconciliation of the race to God, so Christ's union with believers secures the subjective reconciliation of believers to God." - Systematic Theology, p. 802.
Read Hebrews 2:14-18. Here you will see the two great purposes of Christ: (1) to "destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil," and (2), "deliver them who. . . were.. . subject to bondage." In order to accomplish this, it was necessary for Him to do three things: first, take upon Himself our human nature; then, die for our sins; and finally, become our high priest. W. H. G. Holmes says, "He was called to the office [of high priest] by the Father, and fitted for it by His experience on earth, but He only began to exercise His high priestly ministry after the ascension." - The Epistle to the Hebrews, p. 330.
He was "delivered for our offenses," "raised again for our justification," and "ever lives to make intercession" for us. Rom. 4:25; Heb. 7:25. Could we be saved without His resurrected life? Paul answers, No. "And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins." 1 Cor. 15:17. "He is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by Him, seeing He ever lives to make intercession for them." Heb, 7:25.
Our critic takes the position (No. 17) that the Decalogue "has been annulled, because by Him who brought to a law-enslaved, law-condemned race His precious 'grace and truth,' it has, for all who believe, been perfectly obeyed, and hence, fulfilled brought to its end."
And this Decalogue Which Jesus "perfectly obeyed," was, Mr. Jones says, "the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us," and which Jesus took "out of the way, nailing it to His cross." Col. 2:14. Strange words! that Jesus' perfect obedience to the Decalogue should bring it "to its end"! In anticipation of the subtle teaching of those who would claim that His purpose was to destroy the law, Jesus, in His first recorded discourse, said, "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, and the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill." Matt. 5:17. And to assure us of the eternal nature of the law, He added, "Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Verse 18. In reporting this same sermon Luke puts it in these words: "It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail." Luke 16:17.
In the face of such statements from our Lord how can anyone affirm that the law has been brought to an end? The Weymouth translation, which seems to be a favorite with Mr. Jones, renders these two verses in Matthew as follows: "Do not for a moment suppose that I have come to annul the Law or the Prophets: I have not come to annul them but to give them their completion. In truth I tell you that until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter, not a particle shall pass away from the Law until all has taken place."
The prophet Isaiah had said that the Messiah would "magnify the law, and make it honorable" (Isa. 42:21), and that is what Jesus proceeded to do in His sermon on the mount. He showed that the law is spiritual and reaches to the thoughts and intents of the heart. It is evident that the law referred to includes the Decalogue, for Jesus used two of the Ten Commandments to illustrate His meaning. (Matt. 5:21, 22, 27, 28.)
Note what the Savior says about such as disobey His holy law and teach others to do so. Again quoting from Weymouth, "Whoever therefore breaks one of the smallest of these commandments and teaches others to do so, will be called the least in the Kingdom of heaven; but whoever practices them and teaches them, will be acknowledged as great in the Kingdom of heaven." Thus He magnified the law and made it honorable.
How "fulfill" can mean abolish or bring to an end is difficult to see. It would seem ridiculous to make Jesus say, "I came not to destroy but to abolish." When John the -Baptist hesitated to baptize Jesus, He replied, "Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becomes us to fulfill all righteousness." Matt. 3:15. Did He mean to abolish all righteousness? Paul gives the true meaning of this expression when he tells us that-love is the fulfilling of the law." Rom. 13:10.
Mr. Jones calls the Decalogue a "yoke of bondage," but James, by inspiration, calls it "the law of liberty." (James 2:8-12) We are asked to believe that Paul taught the abolition of the law. Commenting on Romans 10A, Mr. Jones says, "Therefore, to ,every one that believes,' Christ is, in very truth, 'the end, the termination, or conclusion-of the law." Paul, the great exponent of righteousness by faith, seems to have anticipated the confusion of our antinomian friends, for after his strong presentation in Romans 3 of justification by faith "without the deeds of the law," he concludes by saying, "Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law." Rom. 3:31.
Testimony of Protestant Authorities
Dr. Adam Clarke says: "This law [the moral law]- also was established by the doctrine of salvation by faith; because this faith works by love, and love is the principle of obedience: and whosoever receives salvation through faith in Christ, receives power to live in holy obedience to every moral precept; for such are God's workmanship, created anew in Christ Jesus, unto good works; in which they find it their duty and their interest incessantly to live."-Commentary on Romans 3:31.
Dwight L. Moody had a clear perception of the perpetuity of the Decalogue. He said, "The commandments of God given to Moses in the mount at Horeb are as binding today as ever they have been since the time when they were proclaimed in the hearing of the people." - Weighed and Wanting, p. 15.
A statement from John Wesley, the founder of Methodism, makes clear. the distinction between the ceremonial law, which did come to an end at the cross, and the Ten Commandments, which are eternal. http://www.ThreeAngels.com.auHe said:
"The ritual, or ceremonial, law, delivered by Moses to the children of Israel, containing all the injunctions and ordinances which related to the old sacrifices and service of the temple, our Lord indeed did come to destroy, to dissolve, and utterly abolish. To this bear all the apostles witness.. . . This .'handwriting of ordinances' our Lord did blot out, take away, and nail to His cross. [Col. 2:14.]
"But the moral law contained in the Ten Commandments, and enforced by the prophets, He did not take away. It was not the design of His coming to revoke any part of this.... Every part of this law must remain in force upon all mankind and in all ages; as not depending either on time, or place, or any other circumstances liable to change; but on the nature of God and the nature of man, and their unchangeable relation to each other." -Sermons on Several Occasions, Sermon XXV, "On the Sermon on the Mount," Vol. I, pp. 221, 222.
These statements from men who are recognized in the Protestant world as great Biblical scholars and Christian leaders, stand out in bold contrast to the captious efforts to show the Ten Commandments, spoken from heaven by Jehovah, to be a "weak and ineffective law."
"The most precious document in the possession of mankind is the law of God contained in the Ten Commandments. It was spoken by God Himself in majesty upon Mount Sinai, confirmed by Christ while on earth, and given to the church and the world as a guide of life and standard of conduct. Its clear, crisp, decisive commands comprehend the whole duty of man. In its original form it is the constitution of the universe; as adapted to man it defines his every duty. It is the foundation of all human law, the bulwark of society and civilization, the protector of liberty, the guardian of morality, the preserver of the home, the security of the state. Obeyed, it brings happiness, prosperity, and peace; disobeyed or ignored, it brings sorrow, disaster, and chaos. Men and nations have disregarded it; pew and pulpit have attempted to disannul it; evil men and seducers have violated it; society has flouted it; yet it remains the one accepted standard of conduct; and mankind, whether they approve of it or not, pay it lip service. It is a builder of character, a reprover of sin, a guide of life."-M. L. ANDREASEN, The Sabbath, p. 91.
In discussing his "Reason No. 35" the author of the pamphlet under review again assures us that the Decalogue was abolished at the cross. As we have already considered this claim, we need only to mention it briefly here. We are told that the ten-commandment law was "weak and unprofitable," that it "genders bondage," and that it was "against us.... contrary to us." -But candid reader, are the Ten Commandments weak and unprofitable? And for the Christian, which commandment "genders to bondage"? The sixth, "Thou shall not kill"? The fourth? Do you think an all-wise, loving God would put a weak, unprofitable, and enslaving commandment right in the midst of these good commandments on which the security and happiness of the human race depend? Believe it or not, the one underlying purpose back of this teaching that the Decalogue has come to its end is to get rid of the seventh-day Sabbath.
The Sabbath has never been changed. It was instituted by Christ, for it was He through whom all things were created. (Gen. 2:2, 3; John 1:3.) It was given to man as a memorial of creation. (Ex. 20:11.) Is there any real reason to think that God, "with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning, would abolish that memorial as long as the fact of creation stands?
When Christ, who instituted the Sabbath, came to live among men, He kept the Sabbath. (Luke 4:16.) The Pharisees, who had encumbered the Sabbath with a multitude of their own rules and restrictions, complained to Jesus that His disciples were doing on the Sabbath day "that which is not lawful." "And He said unto them, The Sabbath was made f or man, and not man for the Sabbath: therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath." Mark 2:24,27,28. Jesus brushed aside these man made rules, asserting that He was Lord of the Sabbath. He made it and He prescribes the manner of its observance. Do you think Jesus would have proclaimed Himself Lord of an institution which was weak and unprofitable and about to pass out of existence? And does the reader think that any man or group of men would have the right to change an institution of which Christ is Lord?
An example of the faithfulness of Jesus' disciples in keeping the Sabbath is seen in the story of the women who came and saw where He was buried, and then went and prepared spices and ointment for His body. This was the preparation day, and they postponed this embalming, or anointing, until after the Sabbath. Luke writing of this years afterward, said that they rested on the Sabbath "according to the commandment." (Luke 23:55, 56.) Note that the Sabbath which they kept was the day just preceding the first day of the week. (Matt. 28:1.) There is nothing here about the Sabbath's being annulled and a "better day," Sunday-a new "Lord's day"-being instituted!
There is not even a hint in all the teachings of Christ that the Sabbath would be changed. He does indicate in His prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem that He expected His followers to be keeping the Sabbath forty years after He left the earth. He said, "Pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the Sabbath day." Matt. 24:20.
And Christ's apostles kept the Sabbath. It was Paul's "custom" to hold services for both Jews and Gentiles on the Sabbath. (Acts 16:13; 17:2; 18A.) There is no evidence, not even an inference, that the apostles kept any day except the Sabbath of the fourth commandment. Is it not passing strange that if the Decalogue was "nailed to His cross" and the age-old Sabbath institution gave way to a "better day," there is no evidence that even the chosen apostles, upon whom was laid the burden of carrying the gospel to the world, knew of, or said anything about, it? Is it like God to give the Ten Commandments on Sinai in the most spectacular manifestation of His presence ever made to this world and then let that law pass out in secret, along with the Sabbath that was given by Him as a memorial of creation?
How the Transfer to Sunday Came
Our critic, as well as practically all Bible students, knows that there is no Bible evidence for the change from Sabbath to Sunday. He says that the "better covenant" which was established by Christ had a "better day," but gives no Bible proof. He does assert that the "leaders of the early church" set apart Sunday as a memorial of Christ's resurrection, designating it as the "Lord's day," and he refers to Revelation 1:10. But that text says nothing about Sunday, or the first day of the week, and nothing about a memorial of the resurrection. As to which day is the Lord's day we are not left in doubt. "The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord." Ex. 20:10. Through Isaiah the Lord speaks of the Sabbath as "My holy day." Isa. 58:13. So the seventh-day Sabbath is the Lord's holy day, the day of which Christ is Lord. This expression, "Lord's day" is not used elsewhere in the New Testament nor in any reliable Christian document until nearly AD. 200. Not http://www.ThreeAngels.com.aua single Christian writer during the first three hundred years used Revelation 1:10 or any New Testament texts to prove that Sunday was the Lord's day. Any observance of Sunday that was practiced was simply a matter of custom without divine authority.
The custom of honoring Sunday as the day of Christ's resurrection came into the Christian church early. The apostasy against which the apostle Paul warned the Ephesian elders, and the "falling away," which he told the Thessalonian church was already at work (Acts 20:29-31; 2 Thess. 2:3-7), brought the church into a serious condition by the middle of the second century. We have historical evidence of the lack of devotion on the part of many of the clergy and a growing spirit of ambition, jealousy, and strife among the leaders, as Paul had foretold. There came into the church not only the. observance of Sunday as a day of assembly, but many other practices not known to the apostolic church, such as making the sign of the cross. As to the authority for such things, Tertullian, a priest and writer of the church in North Africa, wrote about AD. 200:
"If, for these and other rules, you insist-upon having positive Scripture injunction, you will find none. Tradition will be held forth to you as the originator of them, custom their strengthener, and faith as their observer. "-"The Chaplet," chap. 4, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. III, p. 95.
That unscriptural customs thus came into the Christian church is freely and tersely acknowledged by the Presbyterian scholar, Dr. W. D. Killen, in his The Ancient Church, preface to the original edition, pages 15, 16:
"In the interval between the days of the apostles and the conversion of Constantine, the Christian commonwealth changed its aspect.... Rites and ceremonies of which neither Paul nor Peter ever heard, crept silently into use and then claimed the rank of divine institutions."
The Sabbath was not abandoned for a long time, but was observed long after Sunday had come to be kept. This was the case as late as the year AD. 480, according to the historians Socrates and Sozomen. Socrates, in his Ecclesiastical History, book V, chapter 22, 'page 289, states that "almost all the churches throughout the world celebrate the sacred mysteries on the Sabbath of every week, yet the Christians of Alexandria and at Rome, on account of some ancient tradition, refuse to do this!' In recognition of this fact, the able Anglican scholar, Dean Farrar, in his Voice From Sinai, page 167, declares that "the Christian church made no formal, but a gradual and almost unconscious transference of the one day to the other."
During the early centuries of Christian history the Jews were in great disfavor with the Roman state, and there was much antagonism between Christians and Jews. These antipathies had a great deal to do with the substitution of Sunday for the Sa6bath.
Seventh-day Adventists do not teach that Constantine changed the Sabbath. His civil enactment, in AD. 321, forbidding labor on the "venerable day of the sun," was doubtless prompted largely by the desire to win the support of both Christians and pagans.
The Council of Laodicea (4th century), to which reference is made in the pamphlet under review, did not dare, especially in the East, at that time, to entirely rule out the Sabbath. It directed that the Scripture should be read aloud on the Sabbath, but also decreed that Sunday should be especially honored. (Charles J. Hefele, History of the Councils of the Church, Vol. 11, pp. 310, 316.) While the decisions of the Council of Laodicea had a wide influence, its decree regarding Sunday was only one of many similar conciliar and papal decrees which resulted in the abandonment of the seventh-day Sabbath. These were all landmarks in the gradual apostasy. For instance, Pope Gregory (AD. 590-604), in a letter to the Roman citizens, denounced as "preachers of Antichrist" those who "forbid any work being done on the Sabbath day."-Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 2d series, Vol. XIII, p. 92. Incidentally, this papal letter is an evidence of Sabbath keepers, even in Rome, as late as the close of the sixth century.
For the want of space, only a brief outline of the history of this great transaction of the substitution of Sunday for God's appointed day of rest can be given. Anyone interested in studying the subject further will find an abundance of material. It was the apostate Christian church, now known as the Roman Catholic Church, of which the pope of Rome is the head, that finally effected the transfer.
The change from Sabbath to Sunday is briefly summarized by Dr. F. H. Yost in an article in Signs of the Times, April 3, 1945, as follows:
"The church began early to keep Sunday. But it was the Catholic Church centering in Rome which suppressed Sabbath observance and established Sunday keeping in its place. This change it claims to have made on its own ecclesiastical authority, and not on the authority of Scripture. Tradition is the means whereby it has done it. Tradition is in turn, they claim, established by the fact that Sunday is now being kept."
http://www.ThreeAngels.com.auCatholic and Protestant Testimony
Many Catholic authorities could be cited which claim that the church is responsible for the change, and even boast of it. The Catechism of the Council of Trent, a most authoritative Catholic document, says, "The Catholic Church of God has thought it well to transfer the celebration and observance of the Sabbath to Sunday." (2d. English revised edition, p. 402.)
In A Doctrinal Catechism by Reverend Stephen Keenan, page 174, we read:
"Q-Have you any other way of proving that the church has power to institute festivals of precept?
"A-Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her-she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday the first day 'of the week, for the observance of Saturday the seventh day, a change for which there is no Scriptural authority."
It remains only to give a few of the many admissions from Protestants that there is no Bible authority for Sunday.
"The reason why we keep the first day of the week holy instead of the seventh is for the same reason that we observe many other things, not because the Bible, but because the church, has enjoined it."-ISAAC WILLIAMS, B.D. (Church of England), Plain Sermons on the Catechism, Vol. 1, p. 336.
"There was and is a commandment to keep holy the Sabbath day, but that Sabbath day was not Sunday. It will be said, however, and with some show of triumph, that the Sabbath was transferred from the seventh to the first day of the week. . . . I ask, Where can the record of such a transaction be found? Not in the New Testament, absolutely not. There is no Scriptural evidence of the change of the Sabbath institution from the seventh to the first day of the week. I wish to say that this Sabbath question, in this aspect of it, is the gravest and most perplexing question connected with Christian institutions which at present claims attention from Christian people."-Dr. E. T. HISCOX, author of The Baptist Manual, in a paper read before a ministers' meeting at Saratoga, New York, Aug. 20, 1893.
"There is no direct Scriptural authority for designating the first day the Lord's day."-DR. D. H. LUCAS (Disciple), Christian Oracle, Jan. 23, 1890.
"It is true there is no positive command for infant baptism. ... Nor is there any for keeping holy the first day of the week!' -Amos BINNEY (Methodist Episcopal), Theological Compend, pp. 180, 181.
We have recorded in that marvelous book of Revelation, the last book of the Bible, the visions which the apostle John saw of the closing events of the great conflict between good and evil, and the ushering in of the everlasting kingdom of God. In the fifteenth chapter we read of the redeemed host: "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. And they sing the song of Moses the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying, Great and marvelous are Thy works, Lord God Almighty: just and true are Thy ways, Thou King of saints." Verses 2, 3. Here are brought to view in symbols the forces opposed to God in the last battle with sin, which began in heaven when Satan and his angels were cast to the earth. (Rev. 12:7-9.) It is a battle in which all the inhabitants of the earth will take their stand for or against God, for we are told that "all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him [the beast], whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." Rev. 13:8. Thus the last great spiritual battle will truly be a global warfare-no neutrals. And all who worship the beast are caused "to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads." Verse 16. No wonder that in these crisis days there is much inquiry regarding the mark of the beast.
"Faulty Conjectures"
In discussing "reasons" No. 33 and 34 the critic boldly asserts that our teaching regarding the seal of God and the mark of the beast is "just one more of Adventism's presumptuous endeavors to conform the predictions of Inspiration to the faulty conjectures of men," and that "so far as the Bible is concerned, there is not an iota of support" for the Adventist position. If the reader will, however, carefully read Mr. Jones' exposition of these prophecies, we are sure he will discover that his is all "conjecture." For instance, a "consolidated, end-time form" of the Roman Empire, which Mr. Jones predicts, can never materialize, according to the Bible. Since the breaking 'up of that empire, the divine prediction that "they shall not cleave one to another," has held true, in spite of all ambitious efforts to the contrary; and it will stand until the God of heaven "shall. .. set up a kingdom." (Dan. 2:42-44.) We are also told that the "mark" is "the number." However, in Revelation 13:17, we read of those who "had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name," and in the scripture quoted at the beginning of this section the saints are said to be victorious "over his image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name." Is it not perfectly clear that the "number of his name" is distinct from "the mark," being separated by "or" and "and"?
The Sabbath a Test
The test of man's devotion to God is obedience. That was the test in Eden. (Gen. 2:17.) That was the test laid down by Jesus. "If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments." Matt. 19:17. "If you love Me, keep My commandments." John 14:15. And it will be the test in the final judgment. (James 2: 8-12; Rev. 22:14.)
The Sabbath commandment is, in a special sense, adapted to be a test of obedience. There is nothing in nature or in the movement of the heavenly bodies to mark off the week, as is the case with the day and the month. Every day is alike as far as anyone can discern with the physical senses. We seem to know instinctively that it is wrong to kill and steal, and we can easily understand that we would be dishonoring God by worshiping an idol or by taking His name in vain. But there seems to be no inherent wrong in working on one day more than another. The Sabbath rests solely on the positive appointment of that definite day of the seven-day cycle as a day of worship, on a "Thus says the Lord." For this very reason it is especially adapted as a test of obedience-to determine whether we are willing to obey the word of God even if we do not fully understand the reasons why.
When the Lord delivered the children of Israel from Egyptian bondage and took them in training to be His own people and His representatives among the nations of the ancient East, they were admonished to "diligently hearken to the voice of the Lord," and "do that which was right in His sight," and "give ear to His commandments." Ex. 15:26. Very soon God brought them to a test of their willingness to do this. He said He would "prove them, whether they will walk in My law, or no." And the test was the Sabbath commandment. Manna fell on six days, but none on the Sabbath, and they were commanded to gather a double portion on the sixth day and not go out to gather on the Sabbath. (Ex. 16:4,15,25,26.) When some http://www.ThreeAngels.com.audisobeyed, the Lord said, "How long refuse you to keep My commandments and My laws?" Verse 28. It does seem that the Sabbath commandment has always been a test of loyalty. Through Isaiah the Lord said, "Blessed is the man that does this, and the son of man that lays hold on it; that keeps the Sabbath from polluting it, and keeps his hand from doing any evil!' And that blessing was also extended to the Gentiles. (Isa. 56:2,4,6,7.)
The Sabbath, the Lord said, "is a sign between Me and the children of Israel forever: for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth!' Ex. 31:17. And again: "Hallow My Sabbaths; and they shall be a sign between Me and you, that you may know that I am the Lord your God!' Eze. 20:20. We are told by Mr. Jones that "the 'Sabbaths'-all the various Hebrew festivals called 'Sabbaths,' not the weekly Sabbath alone-were a-'sign' between God and Israel." (No. 18.) Strange to say, he refers to Exodus 31:13, which says, "Verily My Sabbaths you shall keep; for it is a sign between Me and you!' Evidently the reference here is to the weekly Sabbath. In the twenty-third chapter of Leviticus, where are listed the annual feasts, or Sabbaths, a clear distinction is made between them and the Sabbath of the fourth commandment. "These are the feasts of the Lord, which you shall proclaim to be holy convocations. .. . beside the Sabbaths of the Lord." Verses 37, 38.
Not only is the Sabbath a memorial of creation and a sign of a knowledge of the true God, but it is a sign, or seal, of sanctification. "Moreover also I gave them My Sabbaths, to be a sign between Me and them, that they might know that I am the Lord that sanctify them." Eze. 20:12. True Sabbath keeping really involves complete dedication, for no one can keep the Sabbath holy who himself is not holy. In this work of sanctification the Holy Spirit is the instrument. So we are admonished by Paul, "Grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, whereby you are sealed unto the day of redemption!' Eph. 4:30.
We honor the great Reformers of the sixteenth century, who broke away from the Catholic Church and emerged from medieval darkness. That they would be able at once to throw off all the errors of the great apostasy is almost too much to expect. But many of these mighty men, if they could have lived, would doubtless have kept advancing in light and would have recognized every unbiblical tenet of faith. On this question of the Sabbath some did know of the papal claims regarding the change of the Sabbath, as stated in Part 2, Article 7, of the Augsburg Confession, and there were some of the Reformers who kept the seventh-day Sabbath. (Philip Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, Vol. III, p. 64.) The Catholic Mirror (Baltimore), September 23, 1893, stated the facts when it said: 'The Protestant world at its birth found the Christian Sabbath [Sunday] too strongly entrenched to run counter to its existence; it was therefore placed under the necessity of acquiescing in the arrangement, thus implying the church's right to change the day, for over three hundred years."
Sunday a Mark of Apostasy
From Reformation times until now, and especially in recent years, the Catholic Church has held up the change of the Sabbath as a mark of papal power "to make alterations in the commandments of God."
"Instead of the seventh day, and other festivals appointed by the old law, the church has prescribed the Sundays and holy days to be set apart for God's worship; and these we are now obliged to keep in consequence of God's commandment, instead of the ancient Sabbath." - RICHARD CHALLONER, The Catholic Christian Instructed, p. 211.
In answer to a letter addressed to the American cardinal, James Gibbons, the following answer was received, which definitely asserts that the change of the Sabbath is a mark of the authority of the Catholic Church:
"Cardinal's Residence, Baltimore, Maryland. Nov. 11, 1895.
"J. F. Snyder,
Bloomington, Illinois.
"Dear Sir:
"In answer to your question, directed to the Cardinal, 'Does the Roman Catholic Church claim the act of http://www.ThreeAngels.com.auchanging the observance of the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the week, as a mark of her power?'
'The answer, of course the Catholic Church claims that the change was her act. It could not have been otherwise, as none in those days would have dreamed of doing anything in matters spiritual and ecclesiastical and religious without her. And the act is a mark of her authority in religious matters.
"Very Respectfully, "C. F. Thomas"
In Romans 4:11 the words "sign" and "seal" are used interchangeably. As the Sunday institution is the mark of the apostate church's boastful claims to have changed God's law, so the Sabbath is a sign of sanctification (Ex. 31:13; Eze. 20:12), a sign of loyal obedience in the closing conflict of the great controversy. Today we believe that God is calling for a restoration of the Sabbath in the Christian church. The message is, "Fear God, and give glory to Him; for the hour of His judgment is come: and worship Him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters." And "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." Rev. 14:7,9,10. The result of this last-day message is the gathering out of a people "that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus." Verse 12. God's remnant church will pass through serious conflict and will stand the test. "The dragon was wroth with the woman, and went 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. In both these texts commandment keeping is especially pointed out by Inspiration as a characteristic of the remnant church.
We do not question the sincerity of millions of Christians who conscientiously keep Sunday as the Lord's Sabbath, nor do we claim that God does not reckon them as Sabbath keepers. But when the light comes to them as it came to the home of the writer when he was a boy, and they see that there is no Biblical basis for Sunday sacredness, and that the Ten Commandments are, as ever, the rule of life, then the Sabbath becomes a test, and the keeping of it a sign, or seal, of their complete dedication to God. With a new meaning they can pray in response to the reading of the commandments, "Lord, have mercy upon us and incline our hearts to keep this law." And regardless of life-long customs, or even the loss of friends and other hardships, they make their decision "to obey God rather than men." Thus in the closing days of the great controversy between good and evil the world is being brought to the test of obedience, whether we will keep the Sabbath which is a memorial of God's work in creation and also of His creative power in sanctification, the Sabbath of which Christ is Lord, and thus receive the seal of God; or receive the mark of that apostate power which the Lord said would "think to change times and laws" (Dan. 7:25), and which boasts of having done so.
Six of Mr. Jones' "reasons" (Nos. 24-29) pertain to the use of the term Israel as designating the Christian church, and to Adventist interpretation of the prophecies concerning the Jews. A number of detached statements are made and many Scripture references given, but a careful study of these "reasons" fails to reveal a very definite idea of the author's theory concerning the Jews, and there seems to be no serious attempt to furnish the proofs for the assertions made. He tells us that there is "gospel hindering confusion and disunion" within the ranks of professed Christians because of the wrong application of Scripture regarding the Jews. With this we heartily agree.
Principles of Prophetic Interpretation
These theories concerning the return of the Jews to Palestine -of which there are several-are based on a misapplication of Old Testament promises and predictions, and are clearly confusing because they are out of harmony with other Bible teachings. While space forbids an adequate treatment, certainly a few statements from Scripture will point the way to an understanding of this question.
There are many prophecies in the Old Testament concerning Israel, several of which evidently have not yet been fulfilled. Let us observe, first of all, that God's promises to a nation, as such, are conditional. The Lord says, "At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it; if it do evil in My sight, that it obey not My voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them." Jer. 18:9, 10.
The well-known story of Jonah's prophecy against Nineveh illustrates this point. The prophet preached to the Ninevites, as God had bidden him, that in forty days Nineveh would be destroyed. (Jonah 3:1-4.) But the people repented, and the city was spared. Even Jonah did not seem to understand that God's promises or threatenings are conditional.
It is also evident that many Bible prophecies have a twofold application. The prophecy of the message of Elijah in Malachi 4:5, 6, is a case in point. When John the Baptist was asked whether he were Elijah, he said, "I am not." John 1:21. Doubtless he was not, in the sense meant by his questioners; yet Jesus afterward said, "If you will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come." Matt. 11:14. Evidently, in a secondary sense John fulfilled this prophecy in preparing the way for Christ's first coming, but it is very clear from other scriptures that it is the second coming of Christ, rather than His first coming, which is "the great and dreadful day of the Lord."
Promises to Abraham and David
In Genesis 17:1-8, and several other scriptures, we have the promise to Abraham that he and his seed should possess "all the land of Canaan for an everlasting possession." These texts are strongly emphasized by those who believe in the return of the Jews to Palestine. The seed of Abraham did possess Palestine; yet neither he nor his faithful children received the promise in its fullness. "These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but. . . confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth," thus declaring that they sought "a better country, that is, an heavenly!' Heb. 11:13-16.
So this promise to Abraham and his seed of an everlasting possession included more than Palestine. Indeed, it included much more than "about twenty-five times the area of little Palestine," said by the author of the pamphlet to be the earthly homeland of the Jews. Paul tells us that the promise was "that he should be the heir of the world." Rom. 4:13. Doubtless Abraham understood this, "for he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God." Heb. 11:10. Yes, Abraham looked for a heavenly country, where there will be no curse of sin, and for that holy city, the New Jerusalem, not built by men.
Again, we have the promise of the Lord to David that his throne should be established forever. (2 Sam. 7:12,.13; Ps. 89: 4, 29, 36.) But his earthly kingdom did come to an end. The Lord said, "I will overturn, overturn, overturn, it: and it shall be no more, until he come whose right it is; and I will give it him." Eze. 21:27.
And who is this one "whose right it is"? Let the angel answer who announced to Mary the birth of Jesus. "He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto Him the throne of His father David: and He shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of His kingdom there shall be no end." Luke 1:32, 33. Yes, Jesus is the heir to David's throne. David understood this. (Acts http://www.ThreeAngels.com.au2:30.) , And King Jesus will rule the saved of all nations. (Matt. 25:31, 32, 46.) His kingdom shall fill "the whole earth" (Dan. 2:35), and the New Jerusalem will descend from God out of heaven to be its capital. (Rev. 21:2.)
The Return of the Jews
The Lord promised that His people should be delivered from their captivity and return to their own land. At the end of the seventy years the way was opened for all to return, and many did return, thus fulfilling these promises. As to the promises regarding the gathering of the children of Israel, which seemingly were not fulfilled, it is evident that either the people did not fulfill the conditions or that the prophecies have a double application. It is a significant fact that there is no promise in the Bible concerning Israel's return to their own land which was written this side of the, return from Babylonian captivity.
There are surely some strained interpretations of Scripture to support the theory of the return of the Jews to Palestine. In this pamphlet under review it is said that the Zionist movement is clearly a fulfillment of Ezekiel's prophecy of the valley of dry bones. (Eze. 37:1-14.) However, the Lord's explanation to Ezekiel gives no hint of a return to Palestine in this life. He said, "Thus says the Lord God: Behold, 0 My people, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into-the land of Israel." Verse 12.
Rejection of the Jews as a Chosen Nation
We are told in the---pamphlet that "the natural descendants of Abraham have not been, and never will be, rejected of God." This assertion is plainly unscriptural. God's dealings with the children of Israel and their rejection as a chosen nation-not as individuals-is plainly set forth in the Word of God. In fact, their allotted time was clearly predicted. (Dan. 9:24.) In these seventy weeks of years they were "to finish the transgression." And the surety of the prophecy is established by the prediction that during the seventieth week the Messiah was to be cut of, .and thus cause the typical sacrifice to cease. (See p. 37.) After AD. 34 the Jews were no longer a chosen nation of God. Of them the apostle Paul said, "Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men: forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins always: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost." 1 Thess. 2:15, 16. And again speaking to the Jews, Paul said, "It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you:
Spiritual Israel
Exception is taken to our use of the term Israel to designate the church of the Christian dispensation. What is the teaching of the New Testament regarding that? Paul speaks of the "Israelites; to whom pertains the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises." Rom. 9:4. But he adds, "They are not all Israel, which are of Israel.... That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed." Verses 6-8. To the Galatians he wrote that the seed promised to Abraham was Christ (Gal. 3:16), and that "if you be Christ's, then are you Abraham's seed, and heirs. according to the promise" (verse 29). And further, "There is neither Jew nor Greek.... for you are all one in Christ Jesus!' Verse 28. So according to the Word of God, if we are Christ's children we belong to spiritual Israel, whether we are by nature either Jews or Gentiles.
Our critic suggests that we study the entire eleventh chapter of Romans. Agreed. The chapter begins with the question: "Hath God cast away His people?" The answer: "God forbid." Rom. 11:1. And why? Because "there is a remnant according to the election of grace." Verse 5. And, referring to the change in God's plan no longer to make the Jews the special depositaries of His truth, he says: "Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fullness?" Verse 12. And while they are no more His chosen nation, it is Paul's earnest hope that God "might slave some of them." Verse 14.
Then Paul uses an illustration which makes the matter very clear. (Verses 17-24.) He likens this faithful remnant of Israel to an olive tree from which the branches have been broken off "because of unbelief," and says that branches from a wild olive tree, representing the Gentiles, have been grafted in. These grafted branches, he indicates, are born by the original root. (Verse 17.) He further states that the Jews who believe may he grafted in again. And he concludes by saying that "so [in this manner] all Israel http://www.ThreeAngels.com.aushall be saved." Verse 26. All who accept Christ, Jews and Gentiles, become spiritual seed of Abraham and will be saved.
And note, there is but one olive tree, not two. Our Savior said, "Other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also but seeing you put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles." Acts 13:46.
I must bring, and they shall hear My voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd." John 10:16. And Paul, writing to the Ephesians, said that Christ died, that He might reconcile both Jews and Gentiles in "one body," and that the Gentiles "should be fellow heirs." (Eph. 2:11-16; 3:6.) This idea of Christ's having two bodies "wholly distinct one from the other," one "exclusively Jewish" and the other "composed of both Jews and Gentiles," is a human invention with no Warrant in the Word of God or in reason.
The Jews rejected their Messiah because He did not meet their erroneous idea of what He should be. They were looking for a Messiah who would break the Roman yoke and set up a temporal kingdom on earth. And likewise today many Christians are blinded to the true nature of the "glorious appearing of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ," when His resurrected saints and living righteous shall be taken to heaven (Titus 2:13; 1 Thess. 4:15-17), by a belief in the setting up of a temporal Jewish government in Palestine and also the gradual development of the kingdom of God on earth. The truth is that when the kingdom of God is set up, it will "break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms." Dan. 2:44.
In the interpretation of the great lines of prophecy, Seventh day Adventists are not teaching some new, fantastic theories. On the contrary, they follow in general the expositions given by the Reformers, the founders of the Protestant churches.
Prophetic Interpretations of the Founding Fathers of Protestantism
In those marvelous prophecies in the second and seventh chapters of Daniel, outlining world history from the days of Babylon to the setting up of God's everlasting kingdom, we have foretold the successive world empires: Babylon, Medo-Persia, Grecia, and Rome; and then follows the division of Western Rome into ten parts, represented by the feet and toes of the image and the ten horns of the great beast. It was "a stone... cut out without hands" that smote the image on the feet and utterly destroyed it. The meaning of this stone which "became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth" was that, "In the days of these kings [the nations into which Rome was divided] shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed." Dan. 2:44. It is evident that Europe will continue in its divided state until the coming of Christ in glory. (Matt. 24:30, 31.) Seventh-day Adventists agree with many expositors of various denominations in finding these ten kingdoms to be in the past, and do not, with Mr. Jones and a school of modern prophetic expositors, look into the future for a "very brief period in which the ten-kingdom federation, which will constitute the Roman Empire in its final form, shall exist." (No. 39.). Says Dr. H. Grattan Guinness:
"Amidst unceasing and almost countless fluctuations, the kingdoms of modern Europe have from their birth to the present day averaged ten in number. They have never since the breakup of old Rome been united into one single empire; they have never formed one whole even like the United States. No scheme of proud ambition seeking to reunite the broken fragments has ever succeeded; when such have arisen, they have been invariably dashed to pieces.... And the division is as apparent now as ever! Plainly and palpably inscribed on the map of Europe this day, it confronts the skeptic with its silent but conclusive testimony to the fulfillment of this great prophecy."---The Divine Program of the World's History, pp. 320, 321.
With slight variations such scholarly theologians as Joseph Mede, Dr. William Hales, Sir Isaac Newton, Bishop Thomas, Newton, Rev. E. B. Elliott, and many others identify the ten kingdoms that supplanted Rome in Europe. Why should we disregard this accurate fulfillment of the prophecy and look for its fulfillment in some future age? If, as is claimed, there is to be a "final form" of the Roman Empire during the millennium, then the angel made a mistake when he told Daniel that these kingdoms should not "cleave one to another."
In Daniel 7 a power is introduced not referred to in the second chapter, "a little horn" that came up among the ten, and before which three horns were plucked up. Of this power, it is written:
"He shall speak great words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time." Dan. 7:25.
Seventh-day Adventists do not follow the expositors for whom Mr. Jones is speaking, in looking to the future for the fulfillment of this part of the prophecy. The rise of the papal power among the divisions into which Rome was broken a religio-political power fulfills in striking detail the predictions concerning this little horn. This, we believe, is "the man of sin" to which Paul referred, "the son of perdition! who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that he as God sits in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God." 2 Thess. 2:3,4. This was the teaching of the early Reformers. Their clear identification of the Papacy as the foretold Antichrist was a most powerful factor in that great spiritual awakening which was the precious heritage of Protestantism. If such a power has already risen out of the Roman Empire, then why should we look for a future fulfillment, ignoring that which has already appeared on the stage of action?
The Westminster Confession of 1647, which expresses the fundamental teachings of the great Presbyterian Church, says:
"There is no other head of the church but the Lord Jesus Christ; nor can the pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof, but is that Antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalts himself in the church against Christ and all that is called God."-WILLIAM A. CURTIS, B.D., D.LITT., A History of Creeds and Confessions of Faith, p. 272.
The Shift to Other Interpretations
Why should Protestants today ignore and repudiate the prophetic exposition of their founding fathers, and substitute therefor new and strange interpretations of prophecy? How this startling change came about is well told in the following statement:
"So great a hold did the conviction that the Papacy was the Antichrist gain upon the minds of men, that Rome at last saw that she must bestir herself, and try, by putting forth other systems of interpretation, to counteract the identification of the Papacy with the Antichrist.
"Accordingly, toward the close of the century of the Reformation, two of the most learned doctors set themselves to the task, each endeavoring by different means to accomplish the same end, namely, that of diverting men's minds from perceiving the fulfillment of the prophecies of the Antichrist in the papal system. The Jesuit Aleasar devoted himself to bring into prominence the preterist method of interpretation.. .. and thus endeavored to show that the prophecies of Antichrist were fulfilled before the popes ever ruled at Rome, and therefore could not apply to the Papacy. On the other hand, the Jesuit Ribera tried to set aside the application of these prophecies to the papal power by bringing out the futurist system, which asserts that the prophecies refer properly, not to the career of the Papacy, but to that of some future supernatural individual, who is yet to appear, and to continue in power for three and a half years. Thus, as Alford says, the Jesuit Ribera, about 1580, may be regarded as the founder of the futurist system in modern times.
"It is a matter of deep regret that those who hold and advocate the futurist system at the present day, Protestants as they are for the most part, are thus really playing into the hands of Rome, and helping to screen the Papacy from detection as the Antichrist. It has been well said that 'futurism tends to obliterate the brand put by the Holy Spirit upon popery."'-REV. JOSEPH TANNER, B.A., Daniel and the Revelation, pp. 16, 17.
The Secret Rapture Theory
According to Ribera-and Mr. Jones in his arraignment of Seventh-day Adventists follows him in the essential points-there would first be a secret rapture when the church would be caught away silently. (No. 37.) The visible return of Christ in glory, when "every eye shall see Him" (Rev. 1:7), would be seven years later. First it is said, Christ would appear for His saints, and seven years later with His saints. Between these two events separated by a brief seven years, all the great prophecies-like Matthew 24, much of the book of Daniel, and the whole of Revelation from chapters 4 to 20-are to be fulfilled, according to this theory.
Instead of studying such wonderful prophecies as the seven seals and the seven trumpets, and finding their fulfillment during the centuries of the Christian Era, as did the Reformers, futurists declare that such passages apply after the so-called secret rapture, and are therefore all future. John, however, was expressly told to “seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand." Rev. 22:10. Strange to say, in the effort to prove that Christ's coming for His saints is "alone" and "without manifestation," reference is made to 1 Thessalonians 4:16, 17, which reads:
"The Lord Himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the Archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air."
Jesus Himself explained the part the angels would have to act at His coming for His saints:
"They shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And He shall send His angels with a trumpet and a great voice, and they shall gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other." Matt. 24:30, 31, margin. This, we are told, refers to Christ's visible coming with His saints. Please reread these two passages and note the close parallelism, indicated by words and phrases italicized. There is really no Scriptural basis for this secret rapture theory; yet Adventists are charged with heresy for believing that these two Scriptures refer to the same event.
A strained effort is made by Mr. Jones to prove that Adventists do not believe Jesus' words that "of that day and hour knows no man." (No. 36.) Seventh-day Adventists have never set a time for the Lord to come, but teach that all may know when the time is near. (Matt. 24:32, 33, 36.) It is not unscriptural to believe that as Jesus descends to the earth His voice will be heard delivering the everlasting covenant to His people and announcing the exact time of His arrival.
http://www.ThreeAngels.com.auThe Millennium
According to the futurist view of the millennium, there will be thousands left living on the earth when Christ has secretly taken away His saints, who although having lived in this day of abounding gospel light, have not turned to God. (No. 38.) But now, it is said, the devil is to be banished for a thousand years, the earth's inhabitants are to be set free from his power, and Christ, the Prince of Peace, will reign. The wicked who live at this time will therefore have another and better chance. But is it reasonable to think that a just God would have an unequal plan like this? Might not many who have struggled against the temptations of Satan in former ages, and who will be lost because they have not overcome, rise up and challenge the justice of God in saving a multitude of people who have been removed from temptation and surrounded with every incentive to be righteous? But we are told that God "is no respecter of persons" (Acts 10:34), and that the "crown of *life" is for "the man that endures temptation" - (James 1:12). There is no evidence in the Word of God for such a fantastic double plan of salvation.
The Bible teaches that at Christ's coming all the righteous, living and resurrected, will meet their Lord in the air and be translated, and so shall they "ever be with the Lord." 1 Thess. 4:17. It is at this time that those "that have done good," come forth "unto the resurrection of life." (John 5:29.) These are the blessed and holy that have "part in the first resurrection." (Rev. 20:6.) The wicked are destroyed by "the brightness of His coming. (2 Thess. 2:8.) While this expression may refer primarily to that wicked power called Antichrist, it is evident that it cannot be limited to one being or to a group of the wicked, with the inference that the remaining inhabitants of the earth can endure the glory and "fiery indignation" (Heb. 10:27) of Him who comes to put an end to the reign of sin. Only of the righteous can it be said that they shall "dwell with devouring fire." (Isa. 33.14, 15.) It will be a time of fearful destruction. The apostle John says that "every mountain and island were moved out of their places." Rev. 6:14. Jeremiah evidently describes the same scenes of desolation.
"I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light. I beheld the mountains, and, lo, they trembled, and all the hills moved lightly. I beheld, and, lo , there was no man, and all the birds of the heavens were fled. I beheld, and lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down at the presence of the Lord, and by His fierce anger." Jer. 4:23-26.
Of this scripture and other "somewhat similar passages" Mr. Jones says that they have no future application. He quotes a "renowned student of the Word" as saying that they "clearly indicate that the earth [previous to the creation of man] had undergone a cataclysmic change as the result of a divine judgment." This is mere speculation, with no supporting Scripture evidence. These texts look forward, not backward. It does not take a "renowned student of the Word" to know the meaning of a future tense. Following the verses we have quoted from Jeremiah 4, we read, "For thus hath the Lord said, The whole land shall be desolate." Verse 27.
With the righteous in heaven and the wicked destroyed, this earth is left desolate for a thousand years, before "the rest of the dead" shall live again. (Rev. 20:5.) Here Satan is "bound" amid the ruin that sin has caused, until his subjects are raised, when he is again "loosed out of his prison," and goes forth to "deceive the nations." (Rev. 20:7, 8.)
The End of Sin
At the end of the thousand years the New Jerusalem, that city which God has prepared for His people (John 14:1-3; Heb. 11:10), comes down from God out of heaven (Rev. 21:2). Led by Satan, the hosts of the wicked make a desperate attempt to take the city by force, only to be devoured by fire from heaven. (Rev. 20:8.)
Our critic, of course, denies that the wicked are "devoured" or totally destroyed, for he believes in the immortality of the souls of all men, good and bad. He criticizes the Adventist teaching that men in this life are not possessed of eternal existence, and that only the righteous receive immortality. (No. 16). This is a vital question and deserves more space than can be given to it here. God said to our first parents that if they should eat of the forbidden fruit they would "surely die' (Gen. 2:17), but Satan said, "You shall not surely die" (Gen. 3:4). That Satanic falsehood is a part of all heathen religions, and unfortunately is very generally taught in the Christian church. But the Bible teaches that man forfeited his life because of sin. "The soul that sins, it shall die." "For the wages of sin is death." Eze. 18:20; Rom. 6:23. Yes, the soul dies. Man does not have natural immortality. It is Christ that "hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel." 2 Tim. 1:10. It is through the resurrection that "this mortal must http://www.ThreeAngels.com.auput on immortality." (1 Cor. 15:52, 53.) Therefore, as Paul tells us, "by patient continuance in well doing" we "seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life!' Rom. 2:7. We do not seek for that which we already have. It is generally taught that the righteous go to heaven at -death, but Peter, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, on the day of Pentecost, said that David (who was a man after God's own heart, Acts 13:22), was "not ascended into the heavens." (Acts 2:34.)
A future judgment and a resurrection is taught in most of the creeds of Christendom, but how inconsistent and confusing to believe that persons who have died are in heaven long before that future judgment which is to determine whether they should be there! Jesus said, "The hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear His voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation." John 5:28, 29. It is those that are "in the graves," both "they that have done good" and "they that have done evil," who "hear His voice" and "shall come forth." The dead are not in heaven or hell but in their graves.
A natural concomitant of the doctrine of the "eternal existence" of all men is, of course, the doctrine of an eternally burning hell. But, thank God, through the sacrifice of Christ, sin is to be forever destroyed. Satan and all his hosts are to be "devoured," and left "neither root nor branch." (Rev. 20:9; Mal. 4A.) Sin is to be annihilated, not merely segregated. The fire that consumes the wicked melts the earth "with fervent heat," and from that cleansing comes "new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwells righteousness." (2 Peter 3:10, 13.) Sin and sinners will be no more.
Dear reader, Jesus has warned us against deceptive teachings regarding His Second Coming. "Take heed that no man deceive you." Matt. 24:4. And He especially warns us against the idea of a secret coming. (Verse 26.) "For," said He, "as the lightning comes out of the east, and shines even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be." Verse 27. The fatal results of following the many false teachers (verse 11), foreseen by Christ in these last days, should cause each one to be sure that his faith is founded upon the Word of God. Those who followed the popular religious teachers in Christ's day did not recognize and accept the One who came to save them. The same danger exists today.
Several of the critic's "reasons" pertain to what Seventh-day Adventists believe regarding the position and work of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. (Nos. 30-32.) Of course, if the cardinal points of our belief are unbiblical, if our interpretations of prophecy are superficial and visionary, if we neither understand nor experience the great central truth of righteousness by faith, as is claimed, and if there is no basis in Bible prophecy for the special message Which we profess to give. Then the Seventh-day Adventist Church has no justified position in the world, and no God-given mission to fulfill. On the other hand, if our teachings have been misrepresented, as we have set forth, and if the reader has seen Scriptural basis for the answers given thus far, on the great questions of the nature of Christ, righteousness by faith, the atonement, the law and the Sabbath, the coming of Christ, and other prophecies, we invite an unprejudiced consideration of the position and work of this church.
The best thinkers of the world today tell us that we have come to the most critical time in human history. There are millions of people in this time of perplexity, when men's hearts are "failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth" (Luke 21:26), who long for a message of hope and comfort from God, a voice of authority, saying, "This is the way." Is it unreasonable to suppose that God, who has been "our help in ages past," and who before has sent special messages to His people, and to the world, in times of crises-is it unreasonable to suppose that God would have a special message for this crisis hour of the great conflict between the forces of good and evil? If it is not unreasonable to expect such a message, then it is well that we should earnestly endeavor, amid all the confusion of voices, to discern and to heed God's message for our day. God's messages in the past have not been given by the so-called great men of earth but rather by the few and obscure. Noah stood alone against an unbelieving world, but his message was from God. Elijah came out of obscurity and did his work against great odds-hatred and persecution-but he was God's messenger just the same. John the Baptist was unpopular and was beheaded because of his straight testimony. Jesus came unto His own, and His own received Him not." He was "despised and rejected of men," and was crucified as a criminal. Paul, the great leader of the early church, was considered to be the off scouring of the earth, but he was God's chosen instrument. And so let us not today rest in smug security because-we may belong to some great organization or because of social or financial prosperity. Down through the centuries the torch of God's truth has often been carried by those who were few in number. Jesus said, "Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom." Luke 12:32.
Seventh-day Adventists sincerely believe that they are a people of prophecy, and that the message they bear is foretold in Revelation 14:6-12. This threefold proclamation is the last gospel message to be given to this world. Immediately following the. prophetic preview of it, John saw the coming of the Son of man to reap earth's harvest. (Rev. 14:14-16.) There are many Christians who believe that Christ's coming is near, but there is no church body except Seventh-day Adventists which even claims to be giving this threefold message.
The Three Angels' Messages
Our critic interprets "Babylon," mentioned by the second angel, as symbolical, and "the beast and his image" against which the third angel warns, as symbols; yet he insists that the angels that give the messages are literal angels, "visibly flying in, and audibly crying from, the sky." Strange exegesis, indeed-literal angels warning against a symbolic city, a symbolic beast, and a symbolic image to the beast. A rational rule of prophetic interpretation would indicate that the angels here are also symbolic and represent special gospel messages to be given. The preaching of the gospel has been committed to men. It was to His church that Jesus gave the great commission, and He added, "Lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world." Matt 28:20. So the finishing of the gospel work is not committed to angels but to the church.
In an effort to disprove our teaching that the judgment mentioned by the first angel is the investigative judgment, references are given to a number of scriptures which describe the day of vengeance, when God will execute judgment on the wicked. These furnish no proof whatsoever that there is not an antecedent investigative judgment, when the books will be opened and the dead judged out of those things "written in the books." (Dan. 7:10; Rev. 20:12.) (For previous discussion of this question see pp. 40, 41.)
It is a very significant fact that as the end of the great prophetic period of Daniel 8:14 drew near, there arose a religious movement proclaiming the hour of God's judgment. It is probably true, as has been http://www.ThreeAngels.com.ausaid, that the people were stirred by this proclamation as they had not been stirred since the Protestant Reformation.
The fact that William Miller, a Baptist, and hundreds of others in many churches, who proclaimed this message, were mistaken in believing that Jesus would come to earth in 1844, rather than enter upon the work of the investigative judgment in the heavenly sanctuary, does not prove that the message was not of God. The disciples thought that the message, "The kingdom of heaven is at hand," meant that Jesus would restore the kingdom of Israel at that time, but their disappointment regarding what was to take place did not prove that message untrue. Some of those who were in the 1844 movement soon saw the great sanctuary truth, and continued to preach that the hour of God's judgment had come. This message, together with the proclamation of the second and third angels, constitutes the threefold message which is being given by Seventh-day Adventists at this time.
In his treatment of the message of the second angel, we have again Mr. Jones' arbitrary, unproved interpretations of prophecy. He calls his a "Scripture-harmonizing interpretation," but one looks in vain for any clear-cut explanations of Scripture, to say nothing of harmony. For instance he divides Babylon into two phases and informs us that it is against the political phase that the second angel warns-that is, the "Gentile world power, or the soon to rise consolidated, world-dominating empire of the 'beast. . . out of the sea.` The religious phase, we are told, is the papacy, and that this religio-political system is to be favored and upheld for a brief time in the near future by this same beast, which will in turn destroy the papacy.
In the first place, according to the infallible Word of God (Daniel 2 and other Scriptures), there is, we repeat, to be no future world-dominating empire. (See pp. 53, 54.) In the second place, according to the Bible, it is the third angel that warns against the beast, and not the second. According to Mr. Jones both the first and second angels warn against the first beast of Revelation 13. And again, according to the prophecy, Babylon is not to be destroyed by a political empire, for we are told that "the kings of the earth, who have committed fornication and lived deliciously with her, shall bewail her, and lament for her, when they shall see the smoke of her burning." Rev. 18:9.
This "Babylon" is said to have committed fornication with the kings of the earth, and to be "the mother of harlots." (Rev. 18:3; 17:5.) So Babylon is not a beast, as Mr. Jones asserts, but a woman, an apostate church. Surely not much "Scripture-harmonizing interpretation" here.
Babylon, the Beast, the Image
While we are limited in space, it is hoped that a few observations regarding "Babylon," the "beast," and "the image" may be helpful. The history of the world since the entrance of sin has been the story of a dreadful conflict between the forces of good and evil, with evil largely predominant. Even the history of the Christian church has been a sad one. We think of the early church under the leadership of the apostles as having been in a state of purity; yet there was much evil in the church even then. The apostle Paul, who predicted the "falling away," declared that the mystery of iniquity was already at work. (2 Thess. 2:3, 7; Acts 20:28-30.) The sad story of the great apostasy and of the Middle Ages of spiritual darkness is well known. Then dawned the glorious Reformation and the revival of vital religion. But even the Reformation was marred by such things as Calvin's burning of Servetus as a heretic, oppression of dissenters in England, and the persecution of Quakers and Baptists by the Puritans of New England, themselves fugitives from religious oppression. And while God has raised up, from time to time, men like John Wesley to lead the church to higher levels of Christian experience, these revivals have usually resulted in new denominations which in turn settled down, adopted the beliefs of the founders as creeds, and then failed to advance with advancing light. And inevitably those who refuse to accept the plain teachings of God's Word, when brought to them, suffer spiritual decline.
So in Christendom today we really have great confusion, which is the primary meaning of "Babylon." Many of the churches are still in unholy alliance with the state and are the established religions of their respective governments, a relationship which is entirely contrary to God's plan for His church. Modernism, with its theory of evolution, denial of miracles and the deity of Christ, and loss of faith in an inspired Bible, has largely captured the Protestant churches. There is also a distinct trend toward Catholicism. Social betterment and political action rather than soul winning are emphasized. The churches are plagued by religious formalism, worldly conformity, love of money, and the pursuit of pleasure, while millions have no faith in the literal return of Jesus to raise the dead and take His people to heaven, And thus bring to an end the reign of sin.
The president of the University of Chicago, Robert M. Hutchins, said: 'We do not know where we are going, or why, and wee have almost given up the attempt to find out. We are in despair because the keys which were to open the gates of heaven have let us into a larger but more oppressive prison house. We thought those keys were science and the free intelligence of man. They have failed us. We have long since cast off God. To what can we now appeal“ - Quoted in "The Revolt Against Science," The Christian Century, Jan. 24, 1934.
The apostle Paul foretold the "perilous times" of these "last days" and the serious spiritual condition of those "having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof." (2 Tim. 3:1-5.) And God in His love and mercy is calling for a revival and reformation among His people, that they may quickly finish the work of the gospel in all the world and be prepared to stand before the Son of man when He comes. The Lord's loving message is, "Come out of her, My people, that you be not partakers of her sins." Rev. 18:4.
The great red dragon of Revelation 12:4,5, is identified by what it is said to have done. It was pagan Rome, inspired by Satan, that attempted to destroy Christ when He was born. That religio-political power persecuted the early Christians to the death. Then, through the apostasy of the Christian church and the adoption by the state of that degenerate Christianity, the Roman Empire became papal, and in turn became a persecuting power. Thus the leopard beast inherited the power and the "seat and great authority" of the dragon. (Rev. 13:2.) This beast is also identified by its activities. (Rev. 13:5-8.) The description marks this beast as the same power which was symbolized by the little horn of Daniel 7:8, 19-21, 24, 25. The time period is the same. Three and a half times and forty-two months both represent the 1260 years of papal supremacy. This identification of the little horn of Daniel 7 and the leopard beast of Revelation 13 as representing the Papacy was the commonly accepted view of the leaders of early Protestantism.
In Revelation 13 we have another beast which came up, not amid the strife and tumult of the Old World, but "out of the earth" in the new world of America, we believe. John Wesley writing in 1754, said of the two-horned beast: "He is not yet come, though he cannot be far off, for he is to appear at the end of the forty-two months of the first beast." - Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament, p. 735. This United States, where we have "a church without a pope, and a state without, a king," has held up to the whole world the torch of civil and religious freedom. But, sad to say, the prophecy tells us that this innocent lamb like power is finally to speak as a dragon (Rev. 13:11) and cause the creation of an image to the leopard beast, and enforce his mark. Here, where genuine religious liberty had its birth, there will doubtless yet be religious persecution. Even now we can plainly discern definite trends away from the pure principles of Protestantism and democracy. There are strong forces on both sides of this vital question, and the final result of the conflict cannot be seen, except through the predictions of the prophetic Word. (On the mark of the beast see pp. 45-52.)
While perhaps it is too much to expect our readers to accept our interpretation of this third angel's message from this brief statement regarding it, we urge a prayerful study of its meaning, for it concerns the eternal welfare of everyone. This proclamation is that those who "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." Rev. 14:9, 10. From this great conflict two classes will emerge, those who have the mark of the beast, and those who have the seal of God, whose names are written in the Lamb's book of life. (Rev. 7:4; 14:7)
Seventh-day Adventists are criticized for believing that they are God's chosen people. (No. 21.) No true Seventh-day Adventist will assume any "holier than thou" attitude, though we do believe that God has committed to us the responsibility of giving this threefold advent message, and we feel the tremendous responsibility of the task. We recognize our shortcomings, and humbly accept the reproofs given to the Laodicean church. (No. 23.) We believe there are true Spirit filled Christians in all denominations, just as there were faithful servants of God in Jerusalem in the dark days when Jesus was born, who were "waiting for the consolation of Israel." (Luke 2:25, 3S.) We believe that just as God raised up Martin Luther and others to preach the doctrine of righteousness by faith and deliver the people from the errors of the medieval church, just as He called men to lead in a great spiritual revival in England in the eighteenth century, and just as He used the church to which Mr. Jones belongs to stand for the great principles of religious liberty and to call the attention of Christians to the proper mode of baptism, so also He has raised up a people to herald the imminent return of Jesus and call the attention of all to His downtrodden Sabbath. As a result of that message a people will be prepared to meet Jesus when He comes-a people of saving faith in the atoning blood of Christ, who live in strict obedience to God's holy law.
We are criticized for believing that the voice of the General Conference is the voice of God on http://www.ThreeAngels.com.auearth. (No. 22.) We cheerfully acknowledge that Seventh-day Adventists believe in organization. When God led His people out of Egypt they were a *ell-organized body. The early church was organized. Paul ordained "elders in every church." Acts 14:23. He admonished the elders at Ephesus to "take heed ... to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost bath made you overseers." Acts 20:28. The household of God, said he, is "built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone." Eph. 2:20. Clear instruction was given by Jesus regarding discipline in the church, and the expulsion of unrepentant wrongdoers. (Matt. 18:17.) In the fifteenth chapter of Acts we have the record of the first General Conference, called to settle a perplexing question which threatened to bring in division. As a result of the discussions, pro and con, and the testimony of workers whose ministry God had blessed, a unanimous decision was reached, which was witnessed by the Holy Spirit. (Verses 7,12,13,25,28.) And there was delivered to the churches by chosen men, the decrees of the conference, "that were ordained of the apostles and elders." (Acts 15:22-29; 16:4.) We do not believe, with Mr.-Jones, that church organization is "a humanly conceived religious organization." Our God is a God of order. He works through His humble followers, who are organized to carry on His work. Today the message must go "to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people." This calls for earnest, organized effort. "Where no counsel is, the people fall: but in the multitude of counselors there is safety." Prov. 11:14. (Prov. 15:22.) And in this gospel work we have the assurance of His divine blessing in the person of the Holy Spirit. (Matt. 28:20; John 16:13.)
Seventh-day Adventists follow a democratic and representative form of church organization. Church officers are elected by the church, and the officers of the general organizations are chosen by representatives from the churches; and while we do not believe in the infallibility of any man or any committee, we do believe that God directs the church in its world work through the actions of the General Conference. Is that faith on our part a "reason," in itself, why you should not be a Seventh-day Adventist?
Our critic's final attack (No. 40) is leveled against the "Spirit of prophecy." We appreciate the privilege of giving Bible evidences for our belief in this gift. Although this is a fundamental feature of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, let the reader clearly understand that Seventh-day Adventists stand on the Protestant principle of the Bible, and the Bible only, as the rule of faith and doctrine, bringing every teaching and practice to the test of that divine revelation. This stand was made very clear in the earliest denominational literature. James White, one of the founders of the denomination and the husband of Ellen White, said:
"Every Christian is in duty bound to take the Bible as a perfect rule of faith and duty. We should pray fervently to be aided by the Holy Spirit in searching the Scriptures for the whole truth, and for his whole duty. He is not at liberty to turn from them to learn his duty through any of the gifts." Second Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, April 21, 1851.
Repeatedly Mrs. White gave the same testimony, such as the following from an address in Christiania (Oslo), Norway. "The Bible, and the Bible alone, is to be our creed, the sole bond of union." - The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, Dec. 15, 1885.
And again: "True Christianity receives the Word of God as the great treasure house of inspired truth, and the test of all inspiration."-The Great Controversy, p. 193.
Bible Teaching Regarding the Prophetic Gift
Before the fall of man God spoke to him face to face. Since the obscuring veil of sin has separated between man and his Maker, the Lord has made known His wonderful provision for man's salvation through His chosen human instruments-the prophets. "Hear now My words: If there be a prophet among you, I the Lord will make Myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream." Num. 12:6. Time and again, down through the centuries, God has sent special messengers to call His people to a deeper spiritual life and to encourage them in the prosecution of His work. Referring to the experiences of Israel, the Scriptures inform us that "the Lord God of their fathers sent to them by His messengers, rising up betimes, and sending; because He had compassion on His people."
2 Chron. 36:15. Such visitations have been especially marked in times of crisis. And the people have been admonished, "Believe in the Lord your God, so shall ye be established; believe His prophets, so shall ye prosper." 2 Chron. 20:20. The apostle Paul wrote to the church at Corinth, "Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant." In this connection he outlined very clearly the "diversities of gifts," all by "the same Spirit," and among them "prophecy." (1 Cor. 12:1, 4-1l.) To the church at Ephesus he wrote, "He gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers!' And the purpose of all these gifts is "for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ!' And how long will these gifts be needed? "Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ!' Eph. 4:11-13. Indeed, Paul's teachings regarding these gifts seemed especially to emphasize their need in the remnant church: "So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ!' 1 Cor. 1:7.
In the providence of God a collection was made of much that the prophets of Israel had written, together with inspired historical and poetical books, which constituted the Scriptures approved by Christ and His apostles. (John 5:39; Acts 17:11.) Likewise the inspired writings of some of the apostles and a few others were collected by the early Christian church, the canon of the New Testament being made up before the close of the fourth century. These marvelous collections of sacred writings constitute the Bible-Biblia, the Book-which is the standard by which all teachings and gifts in the church must be tested. (1 John 4:1; Isa. 8:20.)
But this wonderful gift of the Bible has not rendered needless these spiritual gifts in the church. The gift of prophecy was manifested in the early church. We read in the book of Acts of certain prophets who were active in the church. There was one Agabus, also "at Antioch certain prophets and teachers," and the four daughters of Philip, the evangelist, "which did prophesy." (Acts 11:28; 13:1; 21:9, 10.) And we are admonished in 1 Thessalonians 5:20, "Despise not prophesyings!'
http://www.ThreeAngels.com.auThe Spirit of Prophecy in the Remnant Church
Would it not be reasonable to expect that God would send special messages for the encouragement and guidance of His remnant church, during the crisis years just before the second coming of Jesus, when the gospel work is to be finished in all the world? Indeed, it would surely be unreasonable not to expect this. We would naturally conclude that just as God gent Simeon, Anna, and John the Baptist to help prepare the people for the first coming of Christ, so would He send a messenger who, through a special work of the Spirit, would prepare the way for His second coming. However, we are not dependent on reason or supposition in this matter. It was foretold in the Bible that the Spirit of prophecy would be one of the two distinctive features of the remnant church. "The dragon was wroth with the woman, and went 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. The testimony of Jesus is defined to be "the Spirit of prophecy." Rev. 19:10.
In the latter part of the year 1844 many sincere Advent believers, recognizing that divine power had attended the proclamation of the judgment-hour message, even though Christ did not come to earth as expected, were earnestly praying for light and guidance. One of these groups in New Hampshire received the light on the binding obligation of the fourth commandment and began to keep the seventh-day Sabbath. There was given to another group, in western New York, special light on the ministry of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary. And there came to an earnest, praying company in Maine a manifestation of the gift of prophecy. From these groups the light received was kindled elsewhere, and there soon came into existence a united body of Adventists who, having experienced the bitterness foretold in Revelation 10:7-11, now recognized that they still had a message to give to "many peoples, and nations, and tongues" the third angel's message of Revelation 14:9-12.
As a little group of devout, but greatly perplexed, Adventists in Portland, Maine, were gathered in a private home earnestly praying for an understanding of God's Word, and for direction from heaven, one of their number, Ellen G. Harmon, a very timid but deeply spiritual girl of seventeen, was taken off in vision. The future experiences of the faithful advent believers were presented to her, also a view of the coming of Jesus in all His glory, and of the new earth, the future home of the redeemed. While this revelation was in some respects different from the current of their thinking at this time, it came as a message of hope and courage to those who were passing through very bitter experiences. But the direction to Miss Harmon to tell to others what God had revealed to her was, to her, the source of a great trial. Of this she said:
79
"But it seemed impossible for me to perform this work that was presented before me; to attempt it seemed certain failure. The trials attending it appeared more than I could endure. How could I, a child in years, go forth from place to place, unfolding to the people the holy truths of God?"-Life Sketches, pp. 69, 70.
True messengers or prophets do not seek for such responsibilities, nor are they elected by the church. (Heb. 5:4.) With fear and trembling, Miss Harmon (later Mrs. Ellen G. White) took up her God-appointed task. As one long associated with Mrs. White has well said:
"That young girl rose from prayer to take up the burden. Faithful she was. For seventy years her voice was heard bearing messages of counsel in the advent movement; and the writings from her pen have been a blessed gift to the remnant church all along the way, and a blessing to millions of readers in many languages." The Spirit of Prophecy in the Advent Movement, p. 28.
Hers was a life of earnest toil for the cause she loved, with no feeling of self sufficiency or pride of position. Concerning her work she wrote: "I walk with trembling before God. I know not how to speak or trace with pen the large subjects of the atoning sacrifice. I know not how to present subjects in the living power in which they stand before me. I tremble for fear lest I shall belittle the great plan of salvation by cheap words. I bow my soul in awe and reverence before God, and say, 'Who is sufficient for these things?' "-Ibid., p. 44.
Some years ago Mr. Jones, then an Adventist, wrote a pamphlet, which he diligently circulated (even after he had left the church the first time), in which he spoke in the highest possible terms of the work of Mrs. White. He said: "The evidences of the genuineness of Mrs. White's divine calling, and the proofs of the reliability of her prophetic utterances, are not alone numerous and dependable, but they are thoroughly convincing. .. . 'When the word of the prophet shall come to pass, then shall it be known, that the Lord has http://www.ThreeAngels.com.autruly sent him."'-The Time, The Need, The Message, p. 50. His words were true then, and they are true now.
Evaluation of the Work of Mrs. Ellen G. White
Shortly after Mrs. White's death in 1915, an editorial appeared in The Independent (New York), August 23, 1915, entitled "An American Prophetess!' We quote a few sentences which illustrate perhaps the unbiased, nonsectarian estimate of many regarding her life and work.
"At the age of seventeen she had her first vision, and was bidden, she believed, by the Holy Spirit, to proclaim the speedy advent of Christ to glorify His saints and destroy His enemies. She dreaded the duty, but was given strength to accept it, and was rewarded with a long succession of revelations through her life....
"Did she really receive divine visions, and was she really chosen by the Holy Spirit to be endued with the charisma of prophecy? Or was she the victim of an excited imagination? Why should we answer? One's doctrine of the Bible may affect the conclusion. At any rate she was absolutely honest in her belief in her revelations. Her life was worthy of them. She showed no spiritual pride, and she sought no filthy lucre. She lived the life and did the work of a worthy prophetess, the most admirable of the American succession."
In speaking of the teachings and the character of the Adventist people, the same article said: "These teachings were based on the strictest doctrine of inspiration of the Scriptures. . . . This faith gave great purity of life and incessant zeal. No body of Christians excels them in moral character and religious earnestness."
The professed burden of Mr. Jones for years was to bring the Seventh-day Adventist denomination up to the high standard of spiritual life taught by Mrs. White. Even after he joined the so called "Reform Movement," he continued to sell his pamphlet, in which he professed to be "standing absolutely for every fundamental teaching that has received the endorsement of the Spirit of prophecy, and the approval and support of the devoted and beloved pioneers of the [Adventist] movement." Now he professes to believe that Mrs. White teaches "the gospel of dead works," that she is a deceiver and a false prophet, and that the founders of the Adventist Church were "unskilled and deluded pioneers."
If Mr. Jones had such a wonderful. spiritual transformation as he claims before he joined the Adventist Church, is it not strange that for more than twenty years he studied Mrs. White's writings and yet failed to see her unscriptural, false-gospel teachings, and that even after he was disfellowshipped from the church the first time he still avowed complete confidence in her writings.
Mr. Jones now says that "it has for years been incontestably proved ... that the profession of Mrs. White of being a specially chosen 'messenger' of God is false." It is true that the "proofs" of the mistakes which he attributes to her were propounded by the critics many years ago. As far as we can discover he offers no new criticisms. All that he gives were refuted before Mr. Jones was born. In the meantime Mrs. White has been recognized as one of the outstanding Christian workers of the nineteenth century, and for thirty years since her death there has been an ever-increasing demand for her writings. Mr. Jones may malign the good name of this godly woman, calling her an impostor, a deceiver, and a false prophet, but such accusations will not affect the high regard in which she is held by the multiplied thousands who have been blessed by her personal ministry and her writings. Mrs. White is dead, yet continues to speak through these writings, and anyone who would know the truth regarding her spiritual influence can easily learn it from what she has written.
My last statement is well illustrated by the following incident. Some years ago an influential woman who was a guest at our English sanitarium near London was encouraged to read The Desire of Ages. After reading the book she was aflame with interest and eagerly read other of Mrs. White's books. "The author is inspired," she declared and from Edinburgh, on June 6, 1932, she sent a glowing testimonial for The Desire of Ages, a part of which is here quoted:
"After a lifetime studying the religions of the world-the efforts of the human soul to get into contact with the Infinite1 have come across a book by Ellen G. White, the very name of which describes its motive: The Desire of Ages. Since reading this truly wonderful book, my most ardent wish for this suffering, distraught world is that every man and woman should be-M come, through its pages, familiar with its Supreme Subject." Quoted in The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, July 21, 1932.
Thus while religious prejudice seeks to belittle the work of Mrs. White, unprejudiced observers the world around give expressions of admiration for the results of her work.http://www.ThreeAngels.com.au
Seventh-day Adventists do not feel called upon to press upon non-Adventists the obligation to accept the "testimonies" of Mrs. White (for, as Paul says, "Prophesying serves not for them that believe not, but for them which believe." 1 Cor. 14:22), but inasmuch as Mr. Jones has made her work a point of special attack, it seemed necessary to give the foregoing facts and general statements regarding Mrs. White's call and work.
Does Mrs. White Contradict the Bible?
It would indeed be strange 'were there not among the thousands of pages written by Mrs. White some things difficult to understand. Indeed, there are doubtless some things that Mrs. White herself did not fully understand, as was the case with the ancient prophets. (1 Peter 1:11.) There are many things in the Bible that are difficult of comprehension, and the opponents of the Bible make much of the "contradictions" which they find there; but the devout Bible Christian knows from the internal as well as the external evidences that the Bible is the Word of God, and he is not disturbed about some things that may still be obscure. Let it be understood, in the first place, that neither Mrs. White nor the church claimed infallibility for her. The reader will have noted, from the quotation from her on page 80, how she struggled to put in the very best language possible the exalted themes on which she wrote.
Speaking of prophets, Jesus said, "Ye shall know them by their fruits." Matt. 7:16. We have given some evidences of the fruit of Mrs. White's work. These fruits of her long life of service, and not a few obscure statements or trumped-up charges with which detractors endeavor to besmirch the second-advent message, are the test of the genuineness of her call to be a messenger" for God.
Every one of our critic's charges against Mrs. White can be satisfactorily answered, but it would take more space fully to refute all his criticisms than can be allowed in this pamphlet. It should be clear to every unbiased reader that Mr. Jones has made a strained effort to find instances in which her teachings contradict the Bible. For instance, he claims that Mrs. White "taught that the tower of Babel was built before the flood." This charge was made fully eighty years ago and has been disproved many times. One can hardly account for its repetition here, unless it be on the supposition that the critic thought that the readers of his diatribe would not have access to the facts. Perhaps he expects his readers to be so outrageously shocked to think that one who claimed to be a messenger for God, and a Bible student, should be so ignorant as not to know when the tower of Babel was built, that they will not look into. the matter further.. The little book Spiritual Gifts, Volume III, published in 1864, to which he refers, gives the exact order of events, as anyone can see from these chapter headings: chapter seven, "The Flood"; chapter eight, "After the Flood"; chapter nine, "Disguised Infidelity"; chapter ten, "Tower of Babel." And the contents of these chapters is in harmony with the sequence of the chapters. Then why the charge? Because of a typographical error (page 301) in omitting the word "and" and a comma. This was corrected in the next edition of the book, under the title Spirit of Prophecy, Volume 1, page 266, published in 1870. Here is the corrected passage with the comma and "and" in brackets:
"The Lord first established the system of sacrificial offerings with Adam after his fall, which he taught to his descendants. This system was corrupted before the Flood 1, and] by those who separated themselves from the faithful followers of God and engaged in the building of the tower of Babel."
Mr. Jones is an experienced printer and has been reputed to be a diligent student of Mrs. White's writings. To make such a charge must be due either to a bold effort to deceive or to crass ignorance. Surely neither alternative can beget confidence in him as a critic or a religious teacher.
Mr. Jones says that "Mrs. White taught that probation for sinners came to an end in the year 1844." The references given do not prove the statement; nor is it true. All the Adventists of what is called the Miller Movement believed that Christ would come and that probation would end in October, 1844. Ellen G. Harmon, with her parents, believed that teaching, but she took no part in public teaching or writing before the passing of the time. Her call, as previously stated, was after the disappointment. When the Lord did not come at the time the Adventists expected, there was, of course, great perplexity. Their experience was analogous to that of the disciples who were so desperately disappointed when Jesus was crucified. "We trusted," they said sadly, "that it had been He which should have redeemed Israel' Luke 24:21. Many of the Adventists who had experienced the great spiritual power in the movement still felt that probation must have closed, and in their perplexity they were earnestly praying for further light. This charge of teaching that probation was closed was fully refuted by Mrs. White herself years ago. A few sentences from this reply will suffice:http://www.ThreeAngels.com.au
"For a time after the disappointment in 1844, 1 did hold, in common with the Advent body, that the door of mercy was then forever closed to the world. This position was taken before my first vision was given me. It was the light given me of God that corrected our error, and enabled us to see the true position." "No one has ever heard me say or has read from my pen statements which will justify them in the charges they have made against me upon this point."-Quoted in The Testimony of Jesus, by F. M. WILCOX, pp. 95, 105. The truth of these statements is verified by the records.
Alleged False Predictions
A strained effort is made to prove that Mrs. White made false predictions. It is said she predicted that she would be among the living saints to be translated when Jesus comes. The reference given does not say this, and we have no knowledge of her ever having said it. In describing the coming of Christ she does say, "We all in solemn silence gazed on the cloud as it drew near," etc. Would our hypercritic also count Paul as a false prophet because he said in 1 Thessalonians 4:17, "Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air"? Evidently Paul in vision was transported to the scene, and so identified himself with the living saints. Likewise, in Mrs. White's vision of this glorious event,, she thought of herself as a part of the redeemed host.
Mrs. White is said to be a false prophet because she declared many years ago that time was very short. This is a question well worth our careful consideration. Of course, what Mrs. White wrote about the nearness of Christ's coming is no less perplexing than several expressions along the same line in the Bible. Paul wrote to the Corinthian church: "But this I say, ,brethren, the time is short." 1 Cor. 7:29. The beloved John wrote as if the coming of Christ were imminent in his day: "Behold I come quickly"; "Surely I come quickly." Rev. 22:7, 20. Surely the Bible believer would not infer that Paul and John were false prophets. Mrs. White, in discussing this matter, once wrote: "The angels of God in their messages to men represent time as very short. Thus it has always been presented to me."-Quoted in The Testimony of Jesus, p. 79.
In this matter of delayed or unfulfilled prophecy there are two important things to remember: It is clearly taught in the Word of God that positively stated predictions are sometimes changed by the attitude of the people. (Jer. 18:9, 10.) In harmony with this principle Peter indicates that the church may hasten the coming of Christ. (2 Peter 3:11, 12.) It would likewise be true that the slowness of God's people in preaching the gospel to the world would delay the Lord's return, for the gospel of the kingdom must be preached to all the world before the end comes. (Matt. 24:14)
While it is not the primary purpose of the prophetic gift to predict future events, Mrs. White has, in the course of her work of warning and instruction, made many forecasts of things to come. There are predictions in the book Great Controversy, written more than sixty years ago, that portray conditions as they exist today in spite of all the political, social, and religious changes since then. As Mr. Jones said in 1928, "Many predictions in connection with the work of the denomination have been made and have been remarkably fulfilled." But now he brushes aside these outstanding characteristics and joins other critics
with their microscopes, in an endeavor to find something which they can claim as a false prediction.
And in such efforts they themselves do not hesitate to make false statements. For instance, we are told by Mr. Jones that Mrs. White predicted that "Christ would come before slavery would be abolished in the United States." Yet no. such prediction was made. The reference cited makes no mention of the United States. According to the Bible there will be slaves in the world when Jesus comes. The apostle John, describing the Lord's coming, says, "The kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains." Rev. 6:15. Would Mr. Jones impeach the beloved disciple for saying there would be "bondmen" when Jesus comes?
Pursuing this line further, Mr. Jones goes to a chapter in Early Writings which contains a scathing rebuke of slavery, and calls attention to the statement that slave masters would endure the seven last plagues. Then in triumph he says, "but the slave masters of 'the Old South' have long since passed away." The "Old South" is not quoted from Mrs. White. And can it be that Mr. Jones thinks that when slavery was abolished in the United States it became extinct in the world? The Religious Digest of May, 1942, said: "There are today not less than 5,000,000 slaves in the world. Some authorities place the figure as high as 8,000,000." And details are given. And further, may we ask the reader this question: Is it right or is it good common sense, to pass judgment on any prediction until the passing of the time given for its fulfillment?http://www.ThreeAngels.com.au
Mr. Jones next turns to a statement written by Mrs. White on January 4, 1862, on "The North and the South" (Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 1, pp. 253-260). This entire statement, written early in the War Between the States, would be profitable reading to anyone interested in the history of those times and in the cause of human freedom. Mrs. White states-and this is an acknowledged fact-that "the accursed system of slavery" lay "at the foundation of the war." Thousands, she said, had enlisted as soldiers with the understanding that the war was to exterminate slavery, and were very bitter to find that this was not the objective, which was only to preserve the Union.
Then she said: "In view of all this, they inquire, If we succeed in quelling this rebellion, what has been gained? They can only answer discouragingly, Nothing. That which caused the rebellion is not removed. The system of slavery, which has ruined our nation, is left to live and stir up another rebellion." Mrs. White is giving here the sentiments of the complaining soldiers that slavery "is left to live and stir up another rebellion." But even if the statement were her own, it would only have been a statement of conditions then existing, and a warning of what would result if those conditions were not changed. But those conditions were changed. Not many months later Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation freeing the slaves, and the disaster which was feared if slavery were not abolished was averted. Thus another charge against Mrs. White is disproved merely by the reading of the context of the critic's excerpt.
Speaking further of the failure of the North to carry out the real object of the war, the abolition of slavery, Mrs. White said that "this nation will yet be humbled into the dust." At the time this was written it was the general opinion in Northern circles that the secession would easily be put down, but in the months that followed the North suffered repeated reverses, and the nations of Europe came very near to recognizing the Confederacy as a separate nation. At least in the eyes of the world this nation was humbled in the dust.
In this connection Mrs. White tells how at that time England was considering the advisability of making war on the United States, and whether or not, in that event, others nations might seize the opportunity to attack her. Then follows the statement that "when England does declare war, all nations will have an interest of their own to serve, and there will be general war, general confusion." But England did not declare war, and the results that would have followed did not come. The whole context bears out this explanation of the passage. Webster gives one definition of "when" as "in the event that," or, "on condition that." This is evidently the meaning of the word "when" as used here.
Mrs. White's Integrity
Mr. Jones makes the serious charge that deception was practiced in the preparation and revision of Mrs. White's writings, even asserting that she herself "took part in the complete suppression" of matter that had been published, which was discovered to contain error. He offers no proof. As to suppression, on no occasion have any of Mrs. White's productions been recalled or withdrawn from circulation. Some of the earlier books are out of print, being superseded by enlarged editions, better adapted to general circulation. Some of the very first things she wrote, beginning in 1851, were republished years ago in a book entitled Early Writings of Ellen G. White. Because of the interest in the early history of the church, there have been requests, in recent years, for the reprinting of other early Ellen G. - White publications. A facsimile reproduction of the first Seventh-day Adventist publication, A Word to the Little Flock (1847, by James White), has been published; also of Spiritual Gifts, Volumes 1 and II; and others of the so-called "suppressed" books are to follow.
As for revisions, a prophet has the same right as any author to improve the expression of thought. Mrs. White never claimed verbal inspiration or perfection of diction. Early in her career she wrote: "Although I am as dependent upon the Spirit of the Lord in writing my views as I am in receiving them, yet the words I employ in describing what I have seen are my own, unless they be those spoken to me by an angel, which I always enclose in marks of quotation."-Review and Herald, Oct. 8, 1867, p. 260.
The apostle Paul exercised his prerogative to set forth the truth in different forms of expression, to meet the needs of those to whom his message was being presented. We have two records of his telling the story of his first vision and his conversion. Identical words are not used, and there are expressions in each which are different from those in the other. (Acts 22:6-11; 26: 12-18.) Mrs. White in 1851 made a definite statement as to why some changes have been made in her published writings. In a pamphlet, entitled Sketch of the Christian Experience and Views of Ellen G. White, page 9, she prefaced a chapter "To the Remnant Scattered Abroad" with these words: "Here I will give the view that was first published in 1846. In this view I saw only a very few of the events of the future. More recent views have been more full. I shall therefore http://www.ThreeAngels.com.auleave out a portion and prevent repetition."-The Testimony of Jesus, pp. 118, 119.
Our critic makes the bold accusation that Mrs. White was influenced to write personal testimonies by "both church leaders and others" who desired to gain certain objectives. He gives no proof and has none to offer. Her own reaction to such a suggestion was what you would expect from a sincere servant of God. "You think individuals have prejudiced my mind. If I am in this state, I am not fit to be trusted with the work of God." The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, Sept. 19, 1893.
This charge that the message of the prophet was of human and not divine origin is not a new one. There was a group of men in Judah who did not like Jeremiah's reproofs and words of warning. "Then spoke Azariah ... and all the proud men, saying unto Jeremiah, Thou speaks falsely: the Lord our God hath not sent thee to say, Go not into Egypt to sojourn there: but Baruch the son of Neriah sets thee on against us." Jer.. 43:2, 3.
Baffled by the acknowledged high character of the literary work of Mrs. White, who had very meager formal education, and bent on discounting any divine influence, her critics maintain that "able editorial assistants were responsible for much of the material" appearing under her name. Mrs. White had literary assistants but no "ghost" writers. In 1907 she said, "The reports that are circulated, that any of my helpers are permitted to add matter or change the meaning of the messages I write out, are not true."-The Ellen G. White Books, (a brochure), p. 9.
We would gladly give much fuller information regarding the preparation of Mrs. White's books did space permit. Her explanation of the use she, has made of the writings of others in the book Great Controversy is given in the introduction to that book, which is obtainable in many libraries.
A Consistent Life
The critic's last blow at Mrs. White-and surely a weak one is a charge of inconsistency. It is stated that while Mrs. White "urged her followers to dispose of their possessions and turn the proceeds to the cause," she herself at one time owned "two hundred or more acres of land"; and further that she warned against indebtedness and yet was seriously in debt at the time of her death.
The truth is that at no time did Mrs. White advise that Seventh-day Adventists should not own their own homes. Any counsel regarding the sale of property pertained to the disposal of surplus holdings. And in this matter of giving to the support of the gospel work, she herself was a brilliant example of benevolence.
It is true that when Mrs. White returned to the United States from Australia in 1901, she purchased a property of sixty acres of farm and hill land, on which were located her home and the houses of some of her assistants. The purchase price was $5,000. Needing firewood for heating and cooking, she later purchased one hundred twenty acres of mountain woodland for $550, which she held for a time. Would the reader condemn Mrs. White for thus providing for herself a home in her old age?
In order to hold down the retail price of her books, Mrs. White not only met the expense of her secretarial staff from her own resources, but also paid for the typesetting, plate making, and illustrations for these books. These heavy expenses, together with her many benevolences to aid in the work of the denomination, oftentimes called for sums of money beyond her immediate income; and at the time of her death an appraisal of her property for probate purposes revealed the fact that monies advanced to her for the prosecution of her work exceeded the actual forced sale value of immediately disposable property. This left for a time an indebtedness of a number of thousands of dollars, which during ensuing years was entirely liquidated from the income of her literary properties, in harmony with her specified provisions.
Mrs. White's experience in giving her entire income, beyond the bare necessities of life, to the development of the work of the denomination and leaving no estate at her death is, we believe, in keeping with the consistent life of one called as a messenger for God. She invested all her income and used her good name and the potential earning powers of her literary properties as security for money borrowed to advance the work of God. That Mrs. White planned wisely is evidenced by the fact that her indebtedness has been entirely cleared from the sale and earnings of properties which were left to meet these obligations.
A Tribute to the Character and Work of Mrs. White
Let us set down, in contrast to these carping criticisms, a testimonial regarding the character of this noble woman. Elder A. G. Daniells, for twenty-one years president of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, who had twenty three years of direct observation of the work of Mrs. White, and, in his own words, "twenty additional years for thoughtful reflection and study of that life and its fruits," wrote:
"I can say that it is my deep conviction that Mrs. White's life far transcends the life of anyone 1 have ever known or with whom I have been associated. She was uniformly pleasant, cheerful, and courageous. She was never careless, flippant, or in any way cheap in conversation or manner of life. She was the personification of serious earnestness regarding the things of the kingdom. 1 never once heard her boast of the gracious gift God had bestowed upon her, or of the marvelous results of her endeavors. She did rejoice in the fruitage, but gave all the glory to Him who wrought through her."-The Abiding Gift of Prophecy, p. 368.
As the early Adventists endeavored to communicate to their associates in the various churches and to the world, their reasons for believing in the imminence of Christ's coming in glory, it did not occur to them to organize a new denomination. Finally, believing that God had called them to proclaim special truths due to the world, they organized for fellowship and united action in proclaiming their message. It was thus a deep conviction regarding "present truth" and a message to be given, and not insistence on minor points of doctrine or on a certain form of church polity, which led to the establishment of the Seventh-day Adventist denomination.
As the name indicates, two outstanding features of Seventh day Adventists' belief are the soon coming of Christ and the observance of the seventh-day Sabbath. We believe it our duty to teach the early premillennial coming of, Christ, and, in this time of great lawlessness, to proclaim to all men the binding obligation of God's holy law-the Ten Commandments-the transgression of which is sin. (1 John 3:4.) We believe it our duty to call attention to the fourth commandment of that law, and thus help to repair the breach which has been made through the substitution of Sunday for the Sabbath by the Papacy.
In closing this treatise the author would call attention to certain facts, which, along with the evidences of the truth of Adventist teachings which have been presented, constitute outstanding reasons why you should be a Seventh-day Adventist.
In these days when there is a general breaking down of moral standards, when the acceptance of pagan philosophies beclouds the clear distinction between right and wrong, you should. Stand with Seventh-day Adventists in declaring the sacredness and perpetual obligation of God's moral law, the Ten Commandments.
If man had always truly observed the seventh-day Sabbath as a memorial of creation, he would never have forgotten God, the Creator, and therefore would never have lapsed into idolatry. Neither would the great truth of the creation of the world by a personal God have been shrouded in the mists of the evolution theory. Furthermore, if all the Protestant churches had faithfully and intelligently observed this holy memorial, there would have been no confusion regarding the Biblical record of creation, and modernism could never have flourished as it does today.
God is calling for a Sabbath reform (Isa. 58:12-14), and as a result of this message there will be a glorious company at the coming of Christ of whom it is said, "Here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus." Rev. 14:12. Dear reader, will you be among that company?
6. Many Protestant ministers have capitulated to the almost universally believed, yet unproved, theory of evolution, and hence have lost their witness for the inspiration of the Bible. The Bible tells us that the Lord created the world for a purpose and made man upright (Isa. 45:18; Ecel. 7:29), but evolutionists tell us that they no longer believe in "the action of a creator acting for a definite purpose" (ERNST HAECKEL, History of Creation, Vol. 1, p. 21), and that man developed from lower forms of life, and is ever growing toward perfection. If God did not create a perfect map in the beginning, then there was no fall, and hence no need of a Savior. Evolution robs the gospel of all meaning. Evolution is a direct attack against the doctrine of a creator and creation; while the first angel's message is a direct appeal to man to "worship Him that made heaven, and earth." Rev. 14:7. This message is God's answer to the theory of evolution.
The Sabbath is a memorial of creation and the outward sign of belief in a personal God and the truth of the Bible. This is well stated by Murphy in his Commentary on Exodus, page 230: "The observance of the Sabbath connects man with the origin of his race, with the six days' creation, and with the Creator Himself. The connection is manifestly a historical one. He that observes the Sabbath aright holds the history of that which it celebrates to be authentic, and therefore believes in the creation of the first man, in the creation of a fair abode for man in the space of six days, in the primeval and absolute creation of the heavens and the earth, and, as a necessary antecedent to all this, in the Creator, who at the close of His latest creative effort rested on the. seventh day. The Sabbath thus becomes a sign by which the believers in a historical revelation are distinguished from those who have allowed these great facts to fade from their remembrance. (Ex. 31:15.)"
Many who endeavor to oppose evolution have lost their case through their efforts to harmonize this pseudoscientific theory with the Bible, by counting the days of the first chapter of Genesis as long periods of time, thus virtually accepting the theory of the gradual development of the world. If you believe in the inspiration of the Bible and in the supernatural, if you believe that God created the world in six days, and if you recognize evolution as an enemy of the gospel, you should be a Seventh-day Adventist and demonstrate your belief to the world by the observance of the Sabbath.
7. Soon after spiritism originated in the United States, about one hundred years ago, Seventh-day Adventists predicted on the basis of the prophetic Word, that this effort to communicate with the dead would develop http://www.ThreeAngels.com.auinto a widespread deception. They declared that this was the fulfillment of Paul's prediction "that in the latter times" some would give heed "to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils," and of the revelator's prophecy concerning "the spirits of devils, working miracles." (1 Tim. 4:1; Rev. 16:14.) These predictions of ours were, at the time, considered fantastic, but today spiritism has millions of adherents, both within and without the Christian churches, and is being seriously studied in scientific laboratories. Spiritism was under the ban of God in the Jewish dispensation. "There shall not be found among you," said the Lord, "an enchanter, or a witch, or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits." Deut. 18:10, 11.
While many Christian ministers, such as the late F. B. Meyer, of England, have warned the people against this deceptive influence, other Christian leaders, as well as statesmen and even some scientists, have espoused the doctrine of communication with the spirits of the dead, and claim to have such communication.
The Seventh-day Adventist doctrine of the mortality of man, and of life only in 1 Christ, is a timely and practical answer to this last-day deception. If we accept the Bible teaching that "the dead know not anything," and that when a man dies "in that very day his thoughts perish" (Eccl. 9:5; Ps. 146:4), then we know from the infallible Word that all such ideas as communication with the dead and the supplication of the saints are deceptions of Satan. Accept these great truths that we have eternal life only in Christ (1 John 5:11) and that eventually the wicked shall be "no more" but "shall be as though they had not been"
(Prov. 10: 25; Obadiah 16), and you will not only be free from the fatal deceptions of spiritism but have a larger conception of the love of God and His plans, for a clean universe.
8. It is a well-known fact that the chief emphasis in the Protestant churches today is on the salvation of society rather than the salvation of the individual. We are told that "to appeal to this generation to repent of individual sins is to get but feeble response." But this statement of fact is all the more reason why the Christian church should redouble its efforts in the preaching of the gospel which is "the power of God unto salvation to every one that believes." Rom. 1:16. Salvation is an individual matter. Seventh-day Adventists are deeply interested in every worthy effort to better the temporal welfare of their fellow men. They believe in the "gospel of health." They conduct health institutions in many lands for the scientific and rational treatment of disease, endeavoring at the same time to permeate these institutions with an atmosphere of grace, with the hope that those who are spiritually ill may also find healing of the soul. Seventh day Adventists are active in temperance work and endeavor. to support every legitimate effort to suppress the liquor curse. Seventh-day Adventists also carry on active work in behalf of the needy. While they consider all such humanitarian efforts for a suffering world as a Christian privilege and obligation, they recognize that the greatest and only permanent good that can come to human beings is salvation from the penalty and power of sin.
Education and social welfare work have their honored place in God's plan, but the supreme method for the transformation of humanity is "the foolishness of preaching"-personal and public evangelism. (1 Cor. 1:21.)
Seventh-day Adventists do not look for the world to grow better and better until we have, by a sort of evolutionary process, the kingdom of God on earth. The Bible teaches that the great controversy between sin and righteousness will grow more and more intense (Rev. 12:12) until Jesus comes to end the conflict and calls His waiting people-His "little flock"-and gives to them the kingdom (Luke 12:32). In preparation for that day God in mercy is sending a message of love and warning "to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and *people." Rev. 14:6-12. Just following the prophecy concerning this message, the beloved John says, "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 He that sat on the cloud thrust in His sickle on the earth; and the earth was reaped." Verses 14-16.
Dear reader, do you want to be one of that glorious throng that will be redeemed from the earth, that will stand on the sea of glass and sing the song of ' victory? (Rev. 15:2, 3.) We invite you to identify yourself with the people who are giving the advent message and do your part in this day of God's preparation.