Consistency in Bible Interpretation.
Under this heading there appeared in the Sabbath Recorder of April 4, 1872, the following article from Eld. S. S. Griswold:— How few of those who profess to interpret the Scriptures are consistent with themselves! How often is it the case that some favorite theory, or mode of interpretation, requires almost a total departure from the rule laid down by the theorist! I was forcibly reminded of this, by an article in the Recorder of March 14th, by R. F. Cottrell, under the heading of “Inquiries,” in which he evidently aimed to show, that those passages of Scripture which have been supposed to foretell a literal return of the Jews to Palestine, are to find their fulfillment in a spiritual conversion to Christ, and that it is a Zion, or Jerusalem, above, to which the Jews are to be gathered, and not to the Jerusalem in Palestine. Now, it seems to me, that a consistent mode of interpretation would require of Bro. Cottrell a literal interpretation of those passages (as Geneva shows), as the brother is most tenacious of the literal interpretation of those passages which speak of the second coming of Christ. And I ask, By what rule of exegesis does Bro. C. spiritualize the one, and literalize the other? The Bible, rightly understood, does not, in my opinion, teach either the literal return of the Jews, or the literal return of Christ to this world. And yet, almost every week, the readers of the Recorder are notified of the near approach of the coming of Christ, the conflagration of the world, and its supposed cognates, soul-sleeping and annihilation, from our Second Advent brethren. Is it not time that this error (for such I believe it is) should be made less prominent, at least, when we reflect that for nearly thirty years the notes of alarm and warning have been sounding that the bridegroom’s coming was near, and that we might expect to see the coming of the Son of Man any day or hour? Signs and wonders have been seen by these literalists, almost every day, for more than a quarter of a century, indicating the near approach of that event. Even the most common phenomena—the northern lights, the shooting of stars, the burning of Chicago and the forests of Michigan—have been urged upon our attention, as signs of the great day. Thus the credulity, the fear and superstition of mankind are played upon, and the result, I doubt not, will be a large harvest of skepticism and infidelity. Duly impressed with the above-mentioned errors, I wrote to the editor of the Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, asking the privilege of writing a few articles upon these subjects, to appear in that paper. But, as far as I have learned, the privilege was not granted. As the readers of the Recorder have been so liberally treated with Adventism, I thought that fair play might permit the readers of the Advent Review to submit to, if not enjoy, the reading of its opposite views. As we had not received the article to which Bro. G. refers in the foregoing note, we deemed it proper that he, and the readers of the Recorder generally, should understand why we had taken no notice of it, and hence sent to that paper the following note which was published in its issue of April 25:— ELD. GRISWOLD AND THE ADVENT REVIEW.
To the Editor of the Sabbath Recorder. We notice, in the Recorder of April 4, 1872, that S. S. Griswold speaks of having written to the editor of the Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, asking the privilege of writing a few articles upon the Signs of the Times and the Second Coming of Christ, to appear in that paper; which privilege, he says, as far as he has learned, “was not granted.” We regret to say, that the communication of Bro. Griswold has not come to hand; which will explain our seeming neglect of his request. We should be utterly averse to any disputation conducted in such a manner as to tend to strife and bitterness, or in any wise to ruffle the feelings of co-operation, or even of Christian fellowship, which we think, despite minor differences, may properly be cultivated between those who occupy common ground as to the perpetual obligation and immutable nature of the law of God. Believing that such need not be the result of a comparison of our views, we shall be happy to receive and lay before our readers any communication which Bro. Griswold may wish to make. We would suggest, however, that some definite proposition, or propositions, be agreed on for examination, and that what is said on both sides be published in full in both the Recorder and the Review. Yours for the truth,
EDITORS OF THE ADVENT REVIEW. To this Bro. G. has made the following response which was published in the Recorder of May 2, 1872:— LETTER FROM MR. GRISWOLD.
Hopkinton City, April 25, 1872. To the Editor of the Sabbath Recorder: In your issue of this date, an article appeared from the editors of the Advent Review, to which, with your permission, I will respond through the columns of your paper. I appreciate their very kind notice of my article there referred to, and thank them for the privilege granted, and will avail myself of their liberality, as time permits, to write some articles upon some subjects which I deem of great importance to the prosperity of the church and the cause of Christianity. To the suggestions of the editor of the Review, that the articles and their responses appear in the Recorder also, I have no objection, but must of course leave that for the editor of the Recorder to decide. As suggested by the editor of the Review, I subjoin the following propositions, or inquiries, as subjects which I wish to consider. 1. Do the Scriptures teach the doctrine of the personal advent of Christ, or his bodily return to our earth; and if so, that such advent is near at hand? 2. Do the Scriptures teach the sleep of the soul, or the unconscious state of the dead, previous to the resurrection and the day of Judgment? 3. Do the Scriptures teach the annihilation of the wicked, or finally impenitent? 4. Do the Scriptures teach the resurrection of the body? 5. Do the Scriptures teach the destruction of this earth by fire? 6. Do the Scriptures teach that this earth will be the final abode of the righteous? 7. Do the Scriptures teach that the Judgment day is some definite day in the future, in which the dead bodies of all mankind will be raised up, and their souls summoned from their abodes of happiness or misery, and made to re-enter those resurrected bodies, and that then both their souls and bodies, thus re-united, will be re-judged and re-sentenced to Heaven or hell? The above are the main points which I propose to consider. I do not do it for any party or personal consideration, but for the purpose of endeavoring to elucidate the truth. That the subjects are of grave importance, none can deny. Nor do I ask any exemption from the severest candid criticism or review. Let the subjects be subjected to the test of a true Bible exegesis, and the most profound reason, and none need fear the examination. As I am not a subscriber to the Advent Review, and may not have its post-office address, will the editors of that paper please forward it to me, commencing with the publishing of this article in that paper, and I will send them the pay for the paper. Address, Hopkinton, R. I.
S. S. GRISWOLD.