The Two-horned Beast

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Oct 9, 1866

The Two-horned Beast.

In Review, Vol. xxvii, No. 13, we spoke as follows of the present truth: “The present truth is a nicely-adjusted and harmonious system; and we cannot remove a plank or draw a bolt, without precipitating the whole structure to ruins.” Some, we learn, whose delight just now is to oppose present truth, are putting upon this a construction as follows: “that we regard the present truth as a frail structure, standing upon a sandy foundation, unable to endure the slightest shock, and liable to fall in at the first attack of opposition, or tumble into a shapeless mass.” Such altogether mistake our meaning. Who has brought out this harmonious system? Who has adjusted together all its parts in their present comely proportions? It is not the work of man. Human wisdom has not done it. But God is its author; and it is his word which sustains it.

The remark above quoted was made in reference to one who seemed ready to give up any point upon which any little difficulty might occur to his mind, without considering its bearing upon, or connection with, other portions of the truth. And the idea we intended to convey was, that the whole system was to stand or fall together, that all the parts were locked and interlocked with each other; or, to use another figure, that each point in relation to every other point, becomes in turn both a citadel of interior strength, and an outpost of defence; and a person, before he can give up one point, must be able to overturn the whole.

For instance, one thinks there is some difficulty in the view that the 1335 days end in the past, and hence proposes to give that up, and place their termination in the future. Ask him if he is satisfied with other main points of the truth, and perhaps he will answer, Yes. Is the great period of 2300 days shown by evidence that cannot be shaken, to have ended in the past? Yes. Are the messages of Rev. xiv, rightly located, and established with satisfactory evidence? Yes. Is the subject of the sanctuary, and its present cleansing, one of the clearest and most beautiful subjects in all the Bible? Yes. Yet he proposes to give up the view that the 1335 days have ended, and terminate them in the future. Let us see how this will affect the points named.

There is brought to view in Rev. x, a mighty angel who swears to the close of all the prophetic periods. The 1335 days being a prophetic period, if they have not yet terminated, the time has not yet come for the message of Rev. x. But this angel can be shown by the clearest characteristics to be identical with the first of the three angels of Rev. xiv. Hence if the angel of Rev. x, has not yet sworn to the close of prophetic time, we have not yet had the first message of Rev. xiv. And if this first message has not yet been given, we are not, of course, now having the third. But the third message synchronizes with the closing work in the sanctuary in Heaven, and is founded upon that work; and if we are not now having the third message, we have not reached the period in which the sanctuary is being cleansed. But if the sanctuary is not now being cleansed, the 2300 years which bring us to that event have not yet terminated. So we might go on, till, from simply giving up the termination of the 1335 days in the past, we should be obliged to give up nearly all the points of faith which compose that system which we denominate present truth. It then follows, in the instance we are considering, that every argument which shows that the third angel’s message is now being given, or that the 2300 days have ended, or that the sanctuary is being cleansed, is so much proof, indirectly, that the 1335 days are ended; and a person cannot consistently give up this point without being able to meet and answer the mighty array of evidence by which these other points are sustained.

Another thinks it is a little more consistent to put five of the seven last plagues of Rev. xvi, in the past, and consider that we are now living under the sixth; hence he proposes to take that position. What follows? It follows that the two-horned beast existed, and made the image, and caused men to worship it, ages in the past, for the very first plague is poured out upon the men who worshiped his image. It follows further that the third message was fulfilled at the same time; for that message is a warning against beast and image worship. This would throw interminable confusion into the sanctuary subject, and the prophetic periods, or prove that all was accomplished ages in the past. So every argument which would show that the two-horned beast is now coming upon the stage of action, or that the three messages belong to this generation, or that the prophetic periods have expired, or that the sanctuary is now being cleansed, is so much evidence that the seven last plagues are yet future; and we cannot take the ground that any of them are past without changing our position on all these points.

Another thinks that the two-horned beast cannot be a symbol of this government, but must have its application in the past. This view, equally with the two already noticed, necessitates a change of our views upon almost every other point of present truth. And we cannot take such a view without being able to meet the evidence which shows that the seven last plagues must be experienced by the last generation of men, that the third angel’s message is now going forth, that the prophetic periods have ended, that the seventh angel has begun to sound, that the mystery of God is being finished, the sanctuary being cleansed, &c. And arguments upon any of these points, traced out in all their bearings, add to the weight of evidence which shows that the two-horned beast is the power with which the last generation of saints will chiefly have to do.

In attempting an explanation of the symbol of the two-horned beast, arguments on any of these points would therefore be in order. These we do not design here, however, to present, but only refer to this general relation of these subjects to each other, to show to those who may feel satisfied with the system of truth which we advocate, as a whole, that it is not composed of a number of isolated positions, any one of which may be changed or set aside without affecting the rest; but that all are component parts of one great whole, and no single point can be given up without encountering the whole array of evidence that supports the entire system. This is what we mean by calling the present truth a nicely-adjusted and harmonious system. Are we understood?

A fresh agitation of the subject of the two-horned beast, has of late sprung up. The attention of different classes of Adventists seems to be called to the subject; and those who have departed from the faith in Iowa, make this one of the chief points of difference between themselves and S. D. Adventists. In March last, we received a letter from H. E. Carver, stating some objections to our application of the symbol of the two-horned beast. In Review, Vol. xxvii, No. 14, in notices to correspondents, we stated that we could not publish the article, as it was merely of a negative character, and that we could not give up our positive view, unless we could have an equally positive and better view. A few weeks afterward an article was received from him setting forth his views in brief on the subject. We had matters on hand which prevented our noticing it then; and learning soon after that he was about to publish his views more in full, we concluded to wait till we could have the benefit of all he had to say on the subject, before examining his position, promising him, meanwhile, that the readers of the Review should in due time be informed in regard to the views he held. This pledge we purpose now to redeem.

From the dust and noise which some kind of a beast has apparently made while tearing over the prairies of Iowa, we supposed we should find in it an antagonist, which would be in no small degree formidable, a beast with as many at least as two horns, and those perhaps not altogether as harmless as a lamb’s. We confess therefore to some degree of disappointment to find, on approaching to reconnoiter, that it is a creature merely of imagination, appearing formidable only at a distance, but vanishing even to hide and hair on closer inspection. To drop the figure, what was our surprise, on looking over the articles of H. E. C., which have appeared in the Hope of Israel, preparatory to reviewing them, to find them but a rehash of the views of Bishop Newton and Dr. Clarke; views reflecting so dimly the present light that shines on these prophetic questions, that no Adventist of whom we are aware, previous to H. E. C., has considered them of any weight whatever. We will try however to give them an impartial examination, and see how they will compare with the views we have thus far held on this question.

(To be continued.)