Untitled article | AdventAI

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · February 11, 1868

Battle Creek Bible Class, Feb. 1, 1868.

This session of the Bible Class was given wholly to the consideration of questions, which had been proposed by different ones for the action of the class.

1. The first question introduced related to the propriety of preparing food upon the Sabbath. This grew partly out of the lesson the preceding Sabbath, which spoke of a day of preparation for the Sabbath, and partly out of inquiries sent in from abroad. After remarks by various ones on the evident design of the day of preparation, the impropriety of using the heartiest kinds of food on the Sabbath, bread and fruit being preferable, &c. &c., the class gave it as their conviction that all labor in washing dishes, making beds, and other household duties should be strictly avoided, up to the point of absolute necessity, and voted to adopt the testimony of Spiritual Gifts, as expressive of their minds, and sufficiently explicit on this question. See Spiritual Gifts, Vol. iii, pp. 253, 254, 293. [As this was given in Bro. Miller's communication last week, its insertion is omitted here.]

2. “Is it a legitimate business for Sabbath-keepers to engage in, to manufacture, and teach the art of manufacturing, hair jewelry, going about the country for that purpose?”

In the discussion of this question, the manufacture of gold jewelry, wax work, fashionable dress and bonnet making, costly and useless work in building, and, in short, all unnecessary labor, was fully discussed. A carpenter building a house for another, is simply his servant, and does as he is bidden. Fashionable dresses and bonnets, though they may be foolish and extravagant, yet do serve a certain purpose; while it was suggested that hair jewelry could serve no useful purpose with the single exception of watch-guards. After quite an animated discussion, the following resolution was offered:

Resolved, That we consider the teaching of the manufacture of hair jewelry, a legitimate business for Sabbath-keepers.”

No one seemed ready to vote for this resolution; while quite a number voted against it. It was therefore lost by a very decided majority. Another resolution was then offered as follows:

Resolved, That we do not deem it right to encourage the art of the manufacture of hair jewelry, or the teaching of the same, by Sabbath-keepers, but would advise any who may be engaged in it to seek a more useful employment.”

This resolution was passed with no dissenting votes. 3. “Is it a violation of the Sabbath to deal out milk on that day to those who are regular customers?”

Under this question, the various circumstances in which persons are sometimes placed, were taken into consideration, such as the wants of children, the infirm, &c. It was suggested that at certain seasons of the year, milk was very liable not to keep for 24 hours, in which case it must be procured on the Sabbath, if used at all. This was answered by the fact that in such instances it was rarely the case that the persons could not do without it till after the Sabbath. Those receiving milk can receive it just before the Sabbath, and the following night just after, so as not to violate the sanctity of that day. It is evident that the pay is the great point with those who deliver milk on the Sabbath; as it was considered quite certain that if they could receive nothing for what they disposed of on that day, they would very soon devise some method of avoiding the practice. If any are disposed to give away milk on that day, nothing can be urged against it.

It was remarked that those who have cows, milk upon the Sabbath, which is more labor than going a short distance to obtain some from a dealer. This was met by the consideration that delivering and receiving milk is a matter of traffic, while milking cows is a matter of necessity. But on this point it appeared from the testimony of some, that brethren were more or less at fault in many places. One instance was mentioned, in which a brother having quite a number of cows, was in the habit of milking them three times upon the Sabbath instead of only once as it should have been. Thus he would keep about his other work till the Sabbath commenced, and do his milking afterward. In the morning he would milk again, and the next night was sure to have his milking done before the Sabbath ended. This was considered a plain infringement of the Sabbath law. He should have milked before the commencement of the Sabbath, and the next night deferred it till the Sabbath was past, milking only in the morning upon that day. All circumstances considered, the class unanimously passed the following resolution as an expression of their views on this point:

Resolved, That, in the opinion of this class, it is an infringement upon the Sabbath, to buy or receive, sell or deliver, milk upon that day.

4. Would you consider it a transgression of the fourth commandment for a Sabbath-keeper, who has a license from town or city authorities, to sell ardent spirits for medicinal and chemical purposes, to sell these articles on the Sabbath day? Could such an act be construed to be one of mercy or necessity? Is it your opinion that the above employment is a suitable one for Sabbath-keepers and Health Reformers to engage in?

Not deeming it necessary to spend a great amount of time in the discussion of this question, the class proceeded to adopt the following resolution, which was passed unanimously.

Resolved, That the traffic in drugs or ardent spirits as medicinal agents, is productive of much evil, and should not be engaged in by a Sabbath-keeper or a Health Reformer, either on the Sabbath or any other day.

5. A correspondent writes: I have had the following question propounded to me, which I wish to lay before the Bible Class, to wit: “If Jesus be the only life and resurrection, will the wicked be raised? and if so, by what power?”

To this question it was answered, 1. That Christ is the only life and resurrection. 2. That the wicked will be raised. 3. That they will be brought up by the power of Christ. The reasons for this position were given in brief as follows: 1. The penalty pronounced upon Adam for transgression was death, affecting his posterity equally with himself. 2. There being no arrangement for pardon previous to his sin, that penalty must be inflicted; and it has been inflicted upon Adam and his descendants to the present day. 3. The plan of salvation, entered into immediately upon the fall of man, placed the race upon a new probation, giving them another chance for life, the first having been lost by Adam. But 4. Had not the plan of salvation supervened, the death suffered as a consequence of Adam's sin would have been final and eternal. Therefore 5. The plan of salvation involves the restoration of the entire race from the state to which they are reduced by the Adamic penalty. This must be so; for if one accountable being is left without a resurrection, he is simply under the Adamic penalty, his state resulting not from his own probation, but from that of Adam. But this is the very thing the plan of salvation proposed to undo; that is, to place every man on his own behaviour, and make his future life or death result solely from his own personal actions. When the race are thus released from the Adamic death, a death which has no bearing on the future destiny of either the righteous or the wicked, then accordingly as each person is found righteous or wicked, judged by the moral law applied to his own personal actions, he is acquitted or condemned. If, having availed ourselves of the provisions of the plan of salvation, the righteousness of the law, through the merits of Christ is found to be fulfilled in us, so that the law has no claims against us, we then live on forever and ever. If, on the contrary, we have not through the mediation of Christ become released from the claims of the law which demands the death of the transgressor, and are found guilty, the penalty for sin, death, is re-inflicted, and we are remanded back into that state

from which we were brought, to answer for our personal conduct during life.

Christ is the author and finisher of our faith, the beginning and the end of the plan of salvation; and by his power its provisions are all carried out. Hence we read that all that are in their 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. Hence, also, while those who seek for glory, honor, and immortality, are to be recompensed with eternal life, there are to be recompensed unto them who are contentious and do not obey the truth, indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first and also of the Gentile. Rom. ii, 6-9. This necessarily supposes a restoration to consciousness; for tribulation and anguish cannot be recompensed upon a dead man.

The class acquiesced in the foregoing statement, as correctly meeting the question.

6. Another correspondent proposed the following question: “I heartily acquiesce in the decision of the Bible Class, on the question of hop-raising, and would respectfully offer for their consideration the following: Is the practice of raising and fattening swine for the market, morally right?”

Drs. Lay and Russell, from the Institute, being present, participated freely in the consideration of all questions relating to hygiene, and added not a little to the interest of the examination of these questions. But three arguments can be urged in favor of raising swine. 1. The hog is a scavenger, and therefore useful in this respect. 2. Pork raising is a source of profit. 3. People will have it, and we might as well supply it as anybody. Against these reasons it was argued, 1. That the hog is a scavenger only when permitted to run at large. As he is usually kept, in a foul and contracted sty, he is a source of much more filth than he removes. One such pig-sty is sufficient to pollute a small farm; and these are usually situated in close proximity to the dwelling, where the inmates get the full benefits of the exhalations. 2. The question of profit should not be allowed to influence us in matters of right and wrong. Otherwise the liquor seller can defend his traffic; for scarcely any trade is more profitable. 3. The third argument might, with equal propriety, be urged in favor of selling whisky, tobacco, or any other injurious article which is in general use. The sole question then is, Is it injurious to such a degree that we act consistently in furnishing it to our neighbors? It was clearly brought out that the fat of a sty-fed pig is simply an accumulation of effete and waste matter which should have been thrown out of the system, and would have been, with proper exercise, and that such accumulations of fat are shown by chemical analysis to contain the same constituent elements, as pus, or the matter discharged from boils and abscesses! Instances were mentioned in which it had been thrown into the face of Sabbath-keepers, that they would not use pork themselves, knowing its tendency to disease, yet would not hesitate to sell it to their neighbors, to spread disease among them.

It did not require a lengthy examination of this question, to render the class unanimous in the following resolution:

Resolved, That we deem it inconsistent for a Sabbath-keeper or health-reformer to raise pork, to sell to his neighbors, while he argues that its use is a source of disease, and therefore refuses to use it himself; and we would discourage such practice among our people.

The correspondent who sent in this question in relation to pork raising, states in his communication, two incidents, which we deem it proper to lay before the reader, to show the sickening and suicidal course some will pursue in reference to their own diet, and thus, greatest of all earthly blessings, health. He says:—

“I once assisted to butcher a hog for a neighbor. It had been sick of the blind staggers for some time. It refused to eat; and its owner fearing it would die, actually butchered it, for the eating of himself and family. “Another neighbor, offering for sale in market the carcass of a diseased hog, was met with the inquiry. ‘How long had it been dead before you butchered it?’ Not being able to give a satisfactory answer, he was unable to sell, and, therefore, from a principle of strict economy(!), took it home and ate it in his own family!”

[Bro. Gage being absent we have hastily prepared the above report.—Ed.]