The Seal of God, and the Mark of the Beast.
By J. H. Waggoner
It is in the very nature of the case that our faith on these points should be strongly excepted to by our opponents. We cannot wonder that they strongly oppose it, considering the position they occupy, if it be proven true. We have greater reason to wonder that they still persist in this course when their opposition is shown to have no just ground. It is very seldom that those who reject the messages of Rev. xiv, enter into an argument on this subject. Even the Adventists, who profess that it is our privilege and duty to read and understand the book of Revelation, content themselves with the declaration that the Sabbath is not the seal of God, and Sunday-keeping is not and will not be the mark of the beast, without attempting to show what is the seal and the mark. Some time since, I heard a preacher of the United Brethren faith endeavor to disprove our position, and some of his points on this subject may be interesting to the readers of the Review. He declared as follows: "A seal will not settle controversy, because it may be counterfeited. If we knew it was put on by proper authority, it would answer. The fourth commandment comes to us through human language. The prophets of Baal might give a law, saying he created heavens and earth." That the Lord calls the Sabbath a sign, because he created heaven and earth in six days, and rested the seventh; and that sign and seal are synonymous terms in scripture, were admitted by the speaker, and must be by all. Then the only question of authority is the question of the authenticity of the Scriptures. If the Bible is to be believed, there is no further controversy about the Sabbath being the seal of God, and it is the only seal in the law. See Isa. viii, 16. By Jer. x, we learn that the gods that have not made the heavens and the earth shall perish. The position taken above is calculated to invalidate all scripture testimony, and destroy the force of every argument and claim in behalf of the knowledge of the true God. Paul might have been met with this objection, (See Acts xvii), and if it is of any force now, it was of equal force in the days of Jeremiah and Elijah. How then would God's prophets have proclaimed His Name? If our faith needed any strengthening, such opposition is calculated to accomplish it. "We want evidence which cannot be counterfeited. The divine power manifested at the Red sea, at Mt. Sinai, &c., cannot be counterfeited. These confirm his truth, and thus we find a seal which cannot be counterfeited." This objection seems to be taken rather unfortunately for the objector, its weakness being apparent in so many respects. 1. The Sabbath is directly called a sign (or seal) of the power and of the knowledge of God. Ex. xxxi; Eze. xx. In this respect it stands alone and unrivaled. 2. All the manifestations of divine power specified above, could be counterfeited as easily as could creation! 3. We never saw the divine power manifested at the Red sea, Mt. Sinai, &c., and so cannot know personally that any of them ever transpired; and for our belief in them we are dependent on the same testimony by which we learn that God created heaven and earth, and that the Sabbath is a sign or seal of that fact. If the testimony concerning the Sabbath could be counterfeited, so could that93concerning the other facts referred to. 4. A fact of occurrence is evidence to them who witness it; and to them only. Others are dependent on testimony respecting it. The bodily presence of Jesus was evidence to the apostles of his resurrection, and thus they stand as witnesses of the fact. We are not witnesses of the fact, and can only believe on their testimony. A striking illustration of this is found in Joshua iv. When the children of Israel passed over Jordan the waters were stayed in their course, and "stood and rose up upon an heap," so that they all passed through the bed of the river on dry ground. No evidence of that fact could be required by them who thus passed over. But the Lord directed them to set up twelve stones in Gilgal, of which he said: "When your children shall ask their fathers in time to come, saying, What mean these stones? Then ye shall let your children know, saying, Israel came over this Jordan on dry land. For the Lord your God dried up the waters of Jordan from before you, until ye were passed over," &c. Verses 21-23. To those who witness a fact, the fact itself is evidence; to all others, a memorial is the best evidence that can be given. And such is the Sabbath; and all who take issue on this point, war against the plainest truths of God's word. "There is not a text in the Bible to show that keeping Sunday is the mark of the beast." On this it would be fair to ask, is there a text in the Bible informing us what the mark of the beast is? Has the passage, warning against this mark, any meaning at all? How shall we learn what it is? It is a significant fact that our opponents always take a negative position, merely denying, without offering a solution of this important question. A few plain points might aid them on this subject if they would well consider their bearing. Note the following: 1. By carefully comparing Rev. vi, vii, and xiii, xiv, we find that the angel having the seal of God, and the angel warning against the mark of the beast, belong to the same age, and are succeeded by the same events. Thus they synchronize, in time, and stand related to each other by contrast. 2. There is a contrast again in Rev. xiv between them that receive the mark of the beast, and them that keep the commandments of God; thus plainly referring us to the commandments as a test of the worship of the beast. 3. We find the seal of God in the fourth commandment, viz., the Sabbath, and we can carry out the contrast in the Sunday-Sabbath, and in nothing else. 4. The Bible plainly and strongly enforces the keeping of the Sabbath. 5. The beast, the Roman power, plainly and strongly enforces the Sunday; which the Bible does not. And thus its power and authority stand directly opposed to God in the matter of the Sabbath. To us, the conclusion from these points, here merely referred to, is unavoidable, and so plain as to be seen and appreciated by any one having capacity to do a sum in simple addition. This is a subject upon which we can afford to invite criticism. But, considering its position in the book of Revelation, and the times in which we live—the events soon to transpire, our opponents cannot afford to occupy a mere negative position in regard to it. Such ground is dangerous; and the day which shall try every man's work, will soon reveal the fallacy of mere denials. That is the ground and work of infidelity; faith stands upon a better basis.