p. 179 | THE BIBLICAL INSTITUTE

Pacific Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Oakland, California · Jun 7, 1877

THE BIBLICAL INSTITUTE.

HELD IN OAKLAND, CAL., APRIL 1–17, 1877.

In this form we give a synopsis of the lectures presented at this Institute, the aim being to give principal facts, dates and references, with as few words as will serve to connect them. The lessons are not intended to measure the recitations. A lesson embraces an entire subject; but some of these occupied a number of recitations in the class.

CLASS QUESTIONS ON LESSON VII. WITH ANSWERS.

1. If the Romans crucified Christ, how can it be said that the Jews crucified him?

ANS. The Romans reserved to themselves the power of inflicting capital punishment. The Jews could try and condemn, but the Romans must have the disposal of the sentence. The Jews showed what they would do by condemning Christ on the conflicting testimony of false witnesses, and clamoring vehemently for his crucifixion. The Romans showed their spirit by giving him up to death, at the same time acknowledging that they were sacrificing an innocent person; for Pilate admitted that there was no cause of death in him. The Jews clamored for his death, because his pure teaching, his unostentatious and holy life condemned their pride, hypocrisy and extortion. The Romans were perhaps the more ready for his death through fear, from a political stand-point, of his claims as king of the Jews. It is evident that great capital had been made out of this point against him; for even the ignorant and brutal soldiery as soon as he was delivered into their power, went through all the mock ceremonies of royalty. In almost all the representations of the crucifixion, will be seen the banner with the significant letters S. P. Q. R., Senatus Populusque Romanus, The Senate and People of Rome. This showed Rome’s presence, and its sanction of the crucifixion. The Jews might have prevented it; so might the Romans. But both joined in it, and so were both equally responsible, the one to condemn, the other to execute.

2. Are our names written in the book of life at birth, or at conversion?

ANS. Evidently, at conversion; otherwise the names of all would at some time be there; but Rev. 17:8 speaks of some whose names are never found there. As this book is called “the Lamb’s book of life,” it seems more consistent to suppose that the names of those only are entered there who acquire some interest in the work of Christ as the Lamb of God, or the offering for the world; and that they are entered in the book when they thus make a profession of his name.

3. Some who have heard and understood the Sabbath question, and kept the Sabbath for years, are now keeping Sunday. Have such received the mark of the beast?

ANS. As already explained, the mark of the beast, in the light of the prophecy, can be received only when the issue comes between the claims of God’s law, and the institution of the beast, and a person deliberately chooses the latter knowing it to be in opposition to God’s requirements. That crisis has not yet come; and hence we do not say that any one now has the mark of the beast. That any one who has ever known the truth and kept the Sabbath, is now conscientiously keeping Sunday, we very much doubt. We venture to assert that it is a matter of policy merely. It does not seem possible to us that it could be otherwise. Still the strange workings of a mind that is enveloped in darkness, wholly deceived, is something we cannot comprehend or explain.

4. What is meant by receiving the mark in the forehead and in the hand?

ANS. As the forehead represents the seat of the mind and judgment, receiving the mark there may be explained as giving the assent of the judgment to the institution of the beast and his requirements. Many no doubt will so fall under the power of deception as to finally enthusiastically endorse the teaching of this anti-Christian power as the truth. The hand is the agent of outward action, and to receive the mark there may indicate compliance by some outward sign, as a matter of policy without compromising the judgment or the affections. The requirements of the truth are more strict. The Lord must have his mark or seal in the forehead and nowhere else. He must have the mind and heart; for nothing else is obedience such as he requires. The beast is not so particular; and if a person cannot sincerely endorse his work, and so receive the mark in the forehead, he will be satisfied if he will by yielding a formal compliance, receive it in the hand.

5. Is a person’s destiny sealed when he has received the mark of the beast?

ANS. Undoubtedly. When a person is so far gone either in deception, or a willingness to withstand the plain requirements of God, to save himself from persecution, that he will take such a step, he must be beyond recovery. And this is doubtless the turning point with him. The period of probation with the last generation in this country, runs to this issue and terminates. When the worshipers of the beast have received his mark, the servants of God are all sealed with God’s seal, Rev. 7:1–4; 14:1, and then the plagues begin to fall, Rev. 16, beginning with the very ones, who, in worshiping the beast and receiving his mark, have committed the highest offense against Heaven.

6. Would the Catholic, believing that his church has the right to command sacred days, have the mark of the beast, and the Protestant the mark of the image?

ANS. The objection against this supposition is that we nowhere read that the image has any mark. All that seems to be done in reference to the image is to worship it. Two powers are involved in this conflict, God and this anti-Christian power symbolized by the beast. There are but two marks to distinguish their respective followers: the mark of the beast and the seal of God. On the one side are the beast, the two-horned beast, and the image; but one mark, the mark of the beast, is common to them all.

7. Could those who are living outside of this government, and do not regard the first day of the week with any sacredness be said to have the mark?

ANS. We think not. But the first plague which falls upon those who had the mark of the beast and worshiped his image, will take those in every country who worship the beast and receive his mark, and in this country such as receive the mark and worship the image.

8. When are the beast and the false prophet cast into the lake of fire? at the beginning or the end of the thousand years?

ANS. At the beginning. Rev. 19:20. The scene described in this chapter from the 11th verse is undoubtedly the second coming of Christ; and it is at this time that the beast and false prophet are taken and consigned to this doom. This is what Daniel describes, Dan. 7:11, when he says that the beast was destroyed and his body given to the burning flame; and Paul, when he says, 2 Thess. 2:8, that “that wicked,” the papacy, shall be consumed by the spirit of Christ’s mouth and destroyed by the brightness of his coming. The scene at the end of the thousand years, Rev. 20:10, 13–15, seems to be a repetition, on a larger scale, of that which occurred at the beginning. The devil, says John, “was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and false prophet” were cast, as we should read it according to the literal construction of the passage. They were cast there a thousand years before, at the coming of Christ. Thus the same term is used to describe what takes place at the beginning of the thousand years, and also at the close, the destruction of the wicked being largely due in both cases to the consuming glory of the presence and power of God; “for our God is a consuming fire” (to the wicked), Heb. 12:29; accompanied more or less with the manifestation of literal fire, which at the end of the thousand years is so heightened and intensified that the elements melt with fervent heat, 2 Pet. 3:10, and the heavens and the earth flee away from the presence of Him who sits upon the great white throne, resolved into their ultimate gases by the intensity of the last purifying fires. From the elements thus cleansed from the curse and sin, the new heavens and earth appear. 2 Pet. 3:13.

9. Job 14:12 says that man riseth not until the heavens be no more. Are we to understand by this that the heavens pass away at Christ’s second coming?

ANS. The word used by the Septuagint in this passage does not convey the idea of cessation of existence, as in our English version, but that of breaking up and dashing together, like the onset of two armies in battle. The word is defined by Liddell and Scott, “to tear or break up, to dash to pieces.” “Passive and intransitive, to break or fall to pieces, to burst out, and crush together.” This agrees accurately with the commotion which New Testament writers declare will take place in the heavens when Christ appears. Matthew says, “The powers of the heavens shall be shaken,” Matt. 24:29, and John declares that the heavens then depart as a scroll when it is rolled together. Rev. 6:14. What Job affirms is that the dead shall not awake out of their sleep till this breaking up of the heavens takes place; and other writers affirm that this takes place when Christ comes, which is the time for the resurrection of the dead.

LESSON EIGHT.

THE SABBATH.

As we have seen that the third angel’s message brings out a company who are distinguished as keepers of the commandments of God, the inquiry is a natural one in what respect obedience to the message would lead a person to differ with other religionists in his efforts to keep the commandments. The only essential controversy in regard to the commandments among those who hold them to be still binding has reference to that precept which enjoins the Sabbath. If in order to keep the commandments we must keep the seventh day of the week, and almost all professors of religion are keeping the first day of the week, here is a distinction as marked as the language of the third message would lead us to infer. Thus is our attention called directly to the Sabbath by the third angel’s message, as well as by the subject of the sanctuary.

And there is consistency in this; for as the first message brought us to the hour of God’s Judgment, or the cleansing of the sanctuary, when the temple of God was opened in Heaven, the ark was seen, and the attention of the people was called to the law contained in the ark, the third message which follows the first, and is the representative of the truth during the period of the cleansing of the sanctuary, ought of consistency to bring out the same fact respecting the law; and we see that it does.

The evidence is now in order, to show that the seventh day is still the Sabbath of the Lord, and must be kept as such. The only command in all the Bible for the observance of the Sabbath is the fourth precept of the decalogue. But the nine other precepts are moral and hence immutable and eternal. Even those who contend for the abolition of the law, would not dare to advocate in any civilized community, that men were not under obligation to do or refrain from doing, just what those commandments say. Is the Sabbath like these others, immutable and perpetual? If not, why was it put in with these as one of them? and again, if not, what reason can be given to show why and in what respect it is not like them?

The Sabbath commandment is the only one in which God has seen fit to set forth the reason why it was given. It is therefore more explicit than the others. Respecting the others we may necessarily infer that they existed from the beginning of the world, but respecting the Sabbath we know that it dates from the beginning, from the record itself. The fourth commandment points back to the creation: “For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day; wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.” This day we are to remember and keep holy. It is a marvel that any one should consider this commandment indefinite, enjoining only a seventh part of time, or an institution independent of a day. The act of God in resting had reference to a day. The blessing and sanctification had reference to a day. It is a day that we are required to keep, and it is the particular day on which he rested. Let those who call it indefinite tell us how it could be more definite than it is.

Turning to the record to which the fourth commandment points us, Gen. 2:2, we read that “on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.” God performed no part of his work on the seventh day. The fourth commandment says that he made the heavens and the earth and all that in them is in six days, which would not be the case if he made any portion of them on the seventh day. Dr. Clarke says that the Septuagint, Syriac and Samaritan versions read sixth day in Gen. 2:2, instead of seventh day. But such a criticism is unnecessary, and it is not best to plead for a different translation unless there is clear and urgent reason for so doing. The expression in verse 3, “in it he rested” means the same as in verse 2 “on it he ended his work.” It means simply that on that day, and during that day, he ceased from his creative work. The entire day was devoted to rest; and this was the first essential act toward the Sabbatic institution. This made it the Lord’s rest-day, but laid no obligation on men concerning it. He then blessed it. This did not pertain to the day that was past; for past time cannot be blessed; but it referred to the seventh day for time to come. Every seventh day from that time was a blessed day. This would indicate how it should be regarded; but the next act completed the work: He sanctified it. Sanctify means to set apart to a holy use. This could not pertain to the day that was past, but to the seventh day for time to come. It was not set apart for God’s use; for he needs no such day; but Christ said it was made for man. This sanctification was therefore the giving of a command to Adam for its observance. The claim of Sabbath opponents that there is no command in the Bible for the observance of the Sabbath till Sinai, falls to the ground; for here is the record that such a commandment was given. And all the human race then received that command through Adam and Eve their representatives. And this sanctification of necessity introduced the weekly cycle; for Adam must begin to reckon as soon as the commandment was given; and when the next seventh day was past he must begin his count again, and so on. The week owes its origin to these facts. It can be traced to no other.

*(To be Continued.)