ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS by J. H. W.

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jun 30, 1868

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.

By J. H. W.

“Is it right for a Sabbath-keeper to make coffins for any one on the Sabbath?” D. W. M.

We think there may be circumstances under which it will be right to make coffins; but these are exceptional. We have known coffin-makers to rest the whole Sabbath, and yet accommodate their orders, by working nights and first-days. Therefore we think that under ordinary circumstances it is unnecessary to work on coffins on the Sabbath; and if unnecessary it is of course wrong.

“Does not Rev. xxii, 12, to give unto every man according as his work shall be, disprove the idea of two resurrections?” W. P. F.

The fact of two resurrections is stated in plain terms, and therefore cannot be set aside by our construction of other passages. We do not see how any one can harmonize the Scriptures and make the expression “every man” in the above text refer to all the wicked in their graves at the time of the second advent. Vague and indefinite ideas of the Judgment, and of the second coming of Christ, have placed wrong constructions on this and other passages, such as Matt. xxv. We know that these terms, all men, every man, are sometimes limited, as in John vi, 45; therefore we should sooner limit them in other passages than to make confusion, or set aside positive declarations where no limitations are specified or seem admissible.

To J. E. W. By turning to the article, Vol. xxxi, No. 12, you will see that Bro. Andrews cites to “Eph. iv, 8, margin,” (9 by mistake) as evidence that those resurrected at the Saviour’s resurrection ascended with him. On this verse, it is true, there is a diversity of opinion; yet some authorities favor this construction, and it is used accordingly. See also Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 1, p. 78.

To J. R. G. There are certain data by which it is easy to arrive at the measurement of a prophetic “time.” 1st. The Jewish reckoning of 12 months, 30 days to the month, fixes it to 360. See Scott, Clarke, &c., on Dan. vii, 25. It is true the Jews had time intercalated in their year (as we have, in “leap year”) but intercalaries are never counted in computing periods. 2d. We find, on examining those prophetic events so clearly marked as to be unmistakable, with which prophetic periods are connected, that round numbers are only given. 3d. The expressions in Rev. xii and xiii, compared with Daniel, show that “a time, times and a half,” are equivalent to 1260 days, or forty-two months; but if, as you assume, “a time” be 365 days and a fraction, we would be pleased to have you harmonize the above scriptures—we cannot.

To L. M. Philosophers, in giving the “properties of matter,” give only such as apply to inorganic or dead matter, and never refer to organized or living matter. Here we find facts “not dreamed of in their philosophy.” Can they give us “the properties of spirit?” And if they could once classify and arrange the properties of matter and spirit, to which class would they refer the volitions, emotions, and affections of the lower animals? Those who would evade the plain testimony of the Bible by raising questions of “false science,” only run into greater difficulties.

“Whom do the pronouns ‘I’ and ‘my’ personate in verses 25, 26, 27, of Acts ii? also the pronoun ‘me’ in verse 28? Does soul either in the 27th or 31st verse mean the same as though translated Son?” J. S.

The pronouns, I and my, personate Jesus Christ, as the Apostle declares he is the subject of the prophecy. It certainly would not make sense to translate soul, “Son,” yet the idea is doubtless that of personality as in the other verses. Probably this question refers to the supposed difficulty relating to identity in the use of the possessive pronouns. Thus, in a late work on Spiritualism by Dr. Randolph, is this expression, “We universally speak of my body, because we instinctively know that the body is not us.” And we once heard a learned Baptist Elder commenting on 2 Pet. i, 14, say that Peter’s expression, “my tabernacle,” referring to his body, proved that the body was not Peter, but the tabernacle or body was something possessed by Peter, to be put off without interfering with his existence or identity. This may seem plausible, but it is mere sophistry. We as “universally” use the expression “my soul” as “my body.” Does this also show that we “instinctively know” that the soul is not us, but something possessed by us? Peter also, in the same connection, verse 15, says “my decease.” Now if the expression “my body” proves that the person or soul is something distinct from the body, then the expression “my decease,” proves that the death is of that person or entity in distinction from the body. But let us apply this popular method of criticism to another scripture. Paul says, 1 Thess. v, 23, “And I pray God your whole spirit, and soul, and body, be preserved,” &c. According to the above-named method of interpretation the possessive pronoun “your” personates

those who possess spirits, souls, and bodies, and all in distinction from their own personalities! Who, or what, then, does “your” personate? The truth is that the pronouns represent the entire man, person, or living being, and this, with perfect propriety, is said to possess any, or all, of its parts. J. H. W.