THERE are two classes who hold opposite views concerning the hope of God’s people: one hopes to go to Heaven at death, while the other places all its hope in the personal advent of Jesus Christ to raise the dead and translate the living saints. Which of these is right? We will let the prominent men of the Bible, some from every age, from Genesis to Revelation, testify as to their hope. The advent of Christ and the resurrection of the saints are events immediately and inseparably connected, so that when one is affirmed the other is necessarily implied. For when Christ appears, the trumpet sounds, and the dead are raised. 1 Thess. 4:13–18. With this fact before us, let us now examine the word of God upon this important subject.
The first promise of the Deliverer was made to Adam immediately after his fall, Gen. 3:15, when God said that the “seed” of the woman should bruise the serpent’s head. From this time we shall find that the eyes of God’s people were ever turned with eager longing to the coming of this Saviour to deliver them. Thus we read of Enoch: “And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment upon all,” &c. Jude 14, 15.
This holy man was only the seventh from Adam, was the first prophet, and lived before the flood. He is a good witness from the old patriarchs of the antediluvian age. How plainly and boldly he expresses his hope in the advent of the Lord! Looking by faith through the long vista of over five thousand years, his prophetic eye sees this grand event, and in the rapture of his soul he exclaims, “Behold, the Lord cometh.” This, then, was his hope.
In Hebrews 11, Paul enumerates a host of ancient worthies. Beginning with Abel, he mentions Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Samuel, and many more “who through faith subdued kingdoms, . . . and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance, that they might obtain a better resurrection.” The resurrection, therefore, was the glorious hope for which all those old patriarchs believed and suffered and died. But not one word do we anywhere hear from them about going to Heaven at death. They had no such hope.
Let us now call up a witness from the far-off land of Uz—the patient Job. In his deep affliction, he had need of a firm hope and strong consolation to sustain him. What was this hope? We are not left to guess; for Job has recorded it in the clearest terms: “Oh, that my words were now written! oh, that they were printed in a book! that they were graven with an iron pen and lead in the rock forever!” He has something important to tell which he wished all coming generations to know. “For I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth: and though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh I shall see God: whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; though my reins be consumed within me.” Job 19:23–27.
The most zealous modern Adventist could not express his faith and hope more clearly than this. “I know,” says Job, “that my Redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand upon the earth in the latter day.” This shows his advent faith. He further declares that then he will see God in his flesh. That he was a firm believer in the sleep of the dead is very evident. Thus he says: “But man dieth, and wasteth away; yea, man giveth up the ghost, and where is he?” Now mark his own answer: “As the waters fail from the sea, and the flood decayeth and drieth up; so man lieth down, and riseth not; till the heavens be no more, they shall not awake, nor be raised out of their sleep.” Job 14:10–12.
Leaving the desert of Arabia, we will now come down the stream of time about five hundred years and call up a royal witness from the land of Judea, the man after God’s own heart. His testimony is clear and decisive. He had no faith in the conscious state of the dead. Thus he says: “The dead praise not the Lord, neither any that go down into silence.” Ps. 115:17. Again: “Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help. His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.” Ps. 146:3, 4. Our thoughts constitute our consciousness; when we cease to think we cease to know or to have any consciousness. David says our thoughts perish the very day we die, and that the dead do not praise the Lord. This is in perfect harmony with what the great majority of Adventists now believe.
But now listen to what David did hope and wait for: “As for me, I will behold thy face in righteousness; I shall be satisfied, when I awake, with thy likeness.” Ps. 17:15. He knew that he should fall asleep, but his hope was that from this sleep he should awake in the likeness of his Lord. The apostle tells us when this will be, viz., at the advent of Christ: “Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be; but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.” 1 John 3:2. When Jesus comes, the saints will see him as he is, and will be made like him. For this glorious event, David, like all before him, earnestly hoped. This sufficiently shows his advent faith.
Our next witness shall be the wisest man who ever lived, a great king of Israel. In the most unqualified terms he states his faith in the unconscious sleep of the dead. Thus he says: “The heart of the sons of men is full of evil, and madness is in their heart while they live, and after that they go to the dead.” Yes; they go to the dead, not to Heaven or hell. He continues: “For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not anything, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten. Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished.” It is not simply the body which ceases to live and act, but the mind also ceases to operate; for it neither knows, nor loves, nor hates. He further says, “Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.” Eccl. 9:3, 5, 6, 10. This is a good, decisive testimony, and shows that Solomon firmly believed in the sleep of the dead the same as his father David did before him. He shows his faith in the resurrection in the following language: “The righteous hath hope in his death.” Prov. 14:32.
Dismissing Solomon, we will next call up one of the greatest of the old prophets, Elisha, the son of Shaphat. Like modern Adventists he believed in “going up,” and like them he “had trial of cruel mockings” (Heb. 11:36) on account of it. As he returned from viewing the translation of Elijah, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. 2 Kings 2:23. This shows that he believed and taught that doctrine, and that it was as much hated and mocked at then as now. How often we have heard the question mockingly asked, “When are you going up?” But let these modern mockers take warning from the punishment which God visited upon those mockers of old. “And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.” Verse 24.
Passing down more than a century later, we find Isaiah the prophet all aglow with the grand doctrine of the second advent and the resurrection of the saints. He has said so much about these that I hardly know what to select. As his prophetic eye sweeps over the wonderful events of the last days, he breaks out thus: “Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in the dust; for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead. Come, my people, enter thou into thy chambers, and shut thy doors about thee: hide thyself as it were for a little moment, until the indignation be overpast. For, behold, the Lord cometh out of his place to punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity.” Chap. 26:19–21.
He shows that when the Lord comes the saints will be waiting and eagerly watching for him, ready to hail him when he comes. “It shall be said in that day, Lo, this is our God; we have waited for him, and he will save us: this is the Lord; we have waited for him, we will be glad and rejoice in his salvation.” Chap. 25:9. The fact is made prominent and emphasized that they have waited for him.
As Isaiah foresaw the persecution which the Adventists would receive for their faith, he comforts them thus: “Hear the word of the Lord, ye that tremble at his word: Your brethren that hated you, that cast you out for my name’s sake, said, Let the Lord be glorified: but he shall appear to your joy, and they shall be ashamed.” Chap. 66:5. While he thus frequently shows his faith in the advent of the Lord, not one word does he say about going to Heaven at death. He had no such hope.
From Isaiah who walked in kings’ palaces, we will pass down one hundred years later and listen to the voice of the weeping prophet from his dungeon. “Thus saith the Lord; A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, and bitter weeping; Rachel weeping for her children refused to be comforted for her children, because they were not.” This refers to the destruction of the little children in Bethlehem by Herod, as we are informed in Matt. 2:16–18. Those children were martyred and their mothers were weeping over their dead bodies. Jeremiah now comes forward with words of comfort and consolation. “Thus saith the Lord; Refrain thy voice from weeping, and thine eyes from tears.” Now carefully notice the hope which the prophet holds forth to these bereaved mothers. Contrast it with the comfort offered to mourning mothers in our days by popular ministers. As the little dead child lies before them, the minister says, “Sister, do not weep. This is not your child. He is not dead, but is now with the angels in Heaven, happy in the presence of God. Your loss is his gain. Be faithful, and you will soon go to join him.” Such words we often hear. Now listen to the hope held out to weeping mothers by this inspired seer. “Refrain thy voice from weeping, and thine eyes from tears; for thy work shall be rewarded, saith the Lord; and they shall come again from the land of the enemy. And there is hope in thine end, saith the Lord, that thy children shall come again to their own border.” Jer. 31:16, 17.
What was their hope? That they should come again from the land of the enemy, and return to their own border. Then at death they went into the land of the enemy. Did they go to Heaven? No; for Heaven is not an enemy to children. But they did “go to the dead,” Eccl. 9:3, there to remain till Jesus comes to awake them. John 5:28, 29. Then death, the last enemy, shall be destroyed. 1 Cor. 15:26. If there was any other, better, or nearer hope, why did not Jeremiah think of it? Because he, too, was an Adventist, and offered to others the same hope which consoled his own sorrow.
D. M. CANRIGHT.
(Concluded Next Week.)
The Seventh-Day Adventists.
UNDER the above head appears an article in the London Christian Shield, of Jan. 30, 1874, from the pen of Eld. W. M. Jones, the pastor of the Seventh-day Baptist church in that city. It was called out by the publication in that paper of an attack upon ourselves copied from an American paper.
THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISTS.
The Seventh-day Adventists are Christians who observe the seventh day of the week instead of the first day as the Sabbath of the Lord God. About the year 1836, Captain William Miller, a member of the Low Hampton, Baptist church, Washington Co., State of New York, began to lecture on the second coming of Christ, which he affirmed would take place in 1843. Being of irreproachable character and very devout, his preaching attracted attention among Baptists and others, and many adopted his views. At first, the people were called Millerites. Their views on the speedy and set time of the Saviour's coming, as they spread, elicited great opposition. In some cases, churches were divided, and in others, members were excluded. Since 1843, they have organized churches and a national Conference. After the death of Mr. Miller, Elder Joshua V. Himes became the leading spirit among the Adventists. The converts were numbered by thousands, grouped in societies of three and a score over a vast extent of country, and to propagate their views they have spared no pains in giving themselves and their property to what they consider the work of the Lord.
About 1846, two of their ministers met a Seventh-day Baptist sister in the State of New Hampshire, from whom they received tracts on the Sabbath question, and upon investigation adopted the view stated above. From that circumstance and that time begins the history of Seventh-day Adventists. They practice believers’ baptism, enjoin the giving of the tenth of their income for benevolent work, discard in all its forms the use of tobacco, and also of alcoholic beverages, and many of the grotesque fashions in dress. . . . While they believe in the speedy coming of Christ, they do not fix upon the time. They number about 6,000 communicants, and are found from Maine to California. Numbers of people favor their sentiments who are not members. They have a mission in Switzerland, and home missions among the Danes, Swedes, Germans, and French. A large steam-power press is worked at Battle Creek, Michigan, and they contemplate publishing establishments on the Pacific and Atlantic coasts. Their publications, besides Sabbath and other tracts and books, are the ADVENT REVIEW AND HERALD OF THE SABBATH, a weekly; the True Missionary, a monthly; the Danish Advent Tidende, and the Svensk Advent Harold, both monthlies; besides contemplated monthlies in German and French. Confessedly they combine learning, talent, energy, and devotion. In their school at Battle Creek, Michigan, the Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and modern languages, and the sciences, are taught. In the last issue of the HERALD it is stated that they have 30,000 dollars' worth “of publications ready to ship,” which means that they are sent everywhere. Theirs is an itinerant ministry, the ministers often being absent from their families months at a time. They say “the field is the world, and the original commission, ‘go ye,’ has the same weight and power for the consciences of all true ministers of Christ, and the same fire for their souls, as it had nearly nineteen centuries ago for Christ’s first ministers.”
REMARKS. The above statements are substantially correct. The introduction of the Sabbath, however, to the Advent people was in 1844 instead of 1846. They have now three power-presses in active operation, and use two large offices for their work of publication at Battle Creek. The third is also erected, and will soon be used in the same manner.
The Atonement.—No. 11.
By Joseph Harvey Waggoner
SOME affect to think it derogatory to the character of God that his Son should suffer for us—the innocent for the guilty. But their opinions must have been formed without any careful examination of the principles upon which pardon may be granted without dishonor to the law or disparagement to the government. Or they must have views of the divine government unworthy of the subject; unworthy of the eternal truth and infinite justice of a holy God. The Lord has said that death was the penalty of transgression, and that his law should not be set aside, nor its penalty relaxed; for he would by no means clear the guilty. Ex. 34:7. Was it necessary for God to keep his word? If so, in order to man’s salvation, it was necessary to clear man from guilt—to save him from sin; for, as guilty, in sin, he could by no means be cleared. Reason attests that the salvation of a sinner can only be effected by providing a willing and honorable substitute. The Bible attests that God gave his own Son, and the Son gave himself to die for us. What reason, in the name of justice and mercy, demands, the Bible reveals as the gift of that holy One in whom infinite justice and mercy unite. Were the opposers of an atonement as correct in reasoning as they are loud in professing reason, they would cease to abuse the Bible, and admire with wonder and with awe “the mystery of godliness.”
Inasmuch as the law of God is honored by the death of his Son, it shows the high estimate God places on his law; and we shall have correct views of each only so far as we have correct views of the other. Now, as the glory of God was the first great object of the gospel; Luke 1:14; and, as we have seen, the honor of the law must be the chief object of an atonement, we shall best be able to estimate the value of the law of God by having just views of the price paid for man’s redemption from its curse. And it is also true that they only can properly appreciate the gift of Christ who rightly estimate the holiness and justice of that law for which he died.
What, then, was the sacrifice offered for us? the price paid to rescue us from death? Did Christ, the Son of God, die? Or did a human body die, and God’s exalted Son leave it in the hour of its suffering? If the latter be correct, it will greatly detract from our views of the atonement; for the death of a mere human being, however sinless, would seem to be a very limited sacrifice for a sinful race. But, however that might be, we should not question God’s plan, if that was the plan. But what say the Scriptures? This must be our inquiry.
It has been often asserted that the Son of God, the pre-existent being who “came down from Heaven,” could not suffer and die; but that he left the body at the moment of its death. If so, the only humiliation the Son manifested, was to leave Heaven and dwell in such a body: and so far from the death of the body being a sacrifice on the part of the higher nature, it was only a release and exemption from the state of humiliation. This would hardly justify the Scripture declarations of the amazing love of God in giving his Son to die for the sins of the world.
That view supposes that there were two distinct natures in the person of Christ, but the Scriptures do not so teach. But if there were two natures in him which were only temporarily united, and separated in his death, we can doubtless learn it in the revelation concerning him. The question will then arise, In what terms is this distinction revealed? What terms express his higher or divine nature, and what his mere human nature? Whoever attempts to answer these questions will find the position utterly untenable. “Christ” expresses both combined. “Christ, the Son of the living God”—“the man Christ Jesus,” both refer to the same person or individual; there are no forms of speech to express his personality higher than the Son of God, or Christ, and the Scriptures declare that Christ, the Son of God, died.
On this point, we cannot be too careful in our examinations; it is of too much importance to be passed over lightly.
The divinity and pre-existence of our Saviour are most clearly proved by those scriptures which refer to him as “the Word.” “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him, and without him was not anything made that was made.” John 1:1–3. This expresses plainly a pre-existent divinity. The same writer again says: “That which was from the beginning, . . . the Word of life,” 1 John 1:1. What John calls the Word, in these passages, Paul calls the “Son,” in Heb. 1:1–3. “God . . . hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power.” In other places in this letter this same exalted one is called Jesus Christ. In these passages we find the divinity or “higher nature” of our Lord expressed. Indeed, language could not more plainly express it; therefore it is unnecessary to call other testimony to prove it, it being already sufficiently proved.
The first of the above quotations says the Word was God, and also the Word was with God. Now it needs no proof—indeed it is self-evident—that the Word as God, was not the God whom he was with. And as there is but “one God,” the term must be used in reference to the Word in a subordinate sense, which is explained by Paul’s calling the same pre-existent person the Son of God. This is also confirmed by John’s saying that the Word “was with the Father.” 1 John 1:2; also calling the Word, “his Son Jesus Christ.” Verse 3. Now it is reasonable that the Son should bear the name and title of his Father, especially when the Father makes him his exclusive representative to man, and clothes him with such power—“by whom he made the worlds.” That the term God is used in such a sense is also proved by Paul, quoting Ps. 45:6, 7, and applying it to Jesus. “But unto the Son, he saith, Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever, . . . therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.” Heb. 1:8, 9. Here the title of God is applied to the Son, and his God anointed him. This is the highest title he can bear, and it is evidently used here in a sense subordinate to its application to his Father.
The Scriptures teach that this exalted One, who was with the Father in the beginning, by whom all things were made, died on the cross; and in this consists the immense sacrifice made for man—the wondrous love of God, and the condescension of his only Son. John speaks of him as, “The Word of life,” “that which was from the beginning,” “which was with the Father,” that exalted, pre-existent One “which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled.” 1 John 1:1, 2. This testimony of inspiration makes the Word that was with the Father from the beginning, a tangible being, appreciable to the senses of those with whom he associated. How can this be so? For an answer we turn to John 1:14: “And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us.” This is plain language and no parable.
But these are not the only witnesses speaking to the same intent. Says Paul, “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus; who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: but made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself;” more literally, divested himself, i. e., of the glory he had with the Father before the world was. Phil. 2:5–8.
Again Paul speaks of him thus: “Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself took part of the same.” Heb. 2:14. The angel also announced to Mary that her son Jesus should be called the Son of the Highest; and, “That holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.” Luke 1:32, 35. Not that the “Son of the Highest” should dwell in and inhabit that which should be born of her, but her son was the holy, pre-existent One, thus by the energy of the Holy Spirit “made flesh.” Now, if the human nature of Christ existed distinct from the divine, the foregoing declarations will not apply to either; for, if that were so, the pre-existent Word was not made flesh; it was not the man, nor in the fashion of a man, nor did the man, the servant, ever humble himself, or divest himself of divine glory, never having possessed it. But allowing that the Word—the divine Son of the Most High—was made flesh, took on him the seed of Abraham, and thus changed the form and manner of his existence by the consent and mighty power of God, all becomes clear and harmonious.
It has been remarked that the titles of the Father are given to the Son, whereby he is called God. In Isa. 9:6, 7, he is called the son given; the child born; Wonderful; Counselor; the mighty God; the everlasting Father; the Prince of Peace; and he is to sit upon the throne of David. These expressions clearly identify the anointed of God, even Jesus. And he is evidently called Prince of Peace here in the same capacity that he is called the “King of Peace,” in Heb. 7, because “he is our peace,” Eph. 2:14, or makes peace for us on the throne of his Father; for it is only in his priestly office that he is King of Peace, that is, a priest after the order of Melchisedec. But Paul again says that he is our peace, reconciling us unto God by the cross, we being “made nigh by the blood of Christ.” Eph. 2:13–16. We have seen the necessity of blood in order to make an atonement, and that the high priest never entered the holies without it; and Christ, the King of Peace, our High Priest, obtains redemption for us “by his own blood.” See Heb. 6:20; 7:1–3; 8:1; 9:11, 12. Therefore, that exalted One referred to in Isa. 9:6, 7, shed his blood, or laid down his life for us. Again, he is prophesied of under the name Immanuel, which Matthew said means “God with us.” The angel said he should “save his people from their sins.” Matt. 1:21, 23. And Paul said he accomplished this or put away sin by the sacrifice of himself, purging us “by his own blood.” Heb. 9:11–14, 26.
The gospel according to John takes up the Word, in the beginning, as God, with God, by whom all things were made; says the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us; represents him as saying he came from the Father and returned to him; as praying that the Father would restore to him the glory which he had with him before the world was; relates how he taught and wrought miracles; was falsely accused of the Jews; was put to death on the cross; his blood was shed; he was buried, and rose again from the dead. Now, I would ask the candid reader to look at this testimony, and answer: Is the history of any other person given in this book than of Him who is called the Word, who was in the beginning? And if any other individual or person was referred to, who was that person?
Phil. 2:5–8, speaks of Christ as being in the form of God; he thought it not robbery to be equal with God; was made in the likeness of man; humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Again I appeal to the candid: Is not all this spoken of one person? Or did one person humble himself, and another become obedient to death?
Paul, in Col. 1:14–20, uses the same form of expression that he does in Heb. 1. He says of the Son: “In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins; who is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of every creature; for by him were all things created that are in heaven, and that are in earth, . . . all things were created by him, and for him; and he is before all things, and by him all things consist. And he is the head of the body, the church; who is the beginning, the first-born from the dead; that in all things he might have the pre-eminence. For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell; and, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things to himself.”
Here is a description of power, of authority, of fulness, of divinity, truly wonderful. Yet this exalted One, by whom all things were created, has made peace by the blood of his cross, and was raised from the dead; he is the head of the church, and we have redemption through his blood. Such testimony on the nature of the offering for our sins is too plain to need comment.
Jesus, in his letter to the church, takes up the same idea expressed by his apostle in Col. 1, of his being the Creator of all, and first-born of every creature, and says: “I am the first and the last; I am he that liveth and was dead.” Rev. 1:17, 18. Here it is expressly affirmed that he who is the first and the last was dead. And thus it is abundantly shown that Christ, the Son of the Most High, the Word by whom the worlds were made, in whom all things consist, the first and the last, the image of the invisible God in whom all fulness dwells, was made flesh and laid down his life to purge us from sin, and to redeem us to God by his own blood.
We have remarked that we should not question God’s plan, whatever that might be. But we find that there is a fitness, a conformity to the necessity of things, in God’s arrangements. The value of the atonement is not merely in the appointment of God; for, were it so, “the blood of bulls and of goats” might have answered every purpose had God so appointed. But Paul says it is not possible that such blood should take away sin or purge the conscience. Again, it is not in mere suffering; for, were that the case, man might atone for himself were he to suffer long enough. But it is evident from every principle of just government, that a man under condemnation to death, of a holy, just, and immutable law, could never make atonement for himself. But, the value of the atonement really consists in the dignity of the offering.
If this be true, and the considerate reader will not deny it, then it is not a vain effort to endeavor to prove that the exalted, pre-existent Son of God died. And that view which makes the divine Son of God merely inhabit a human body, and leave it in the hour of its death, while the divine being neither suffered nor died—that view strikes at the efficacy and dignity of the atonement, by denying the dignity of the offering.