In the Question Chair

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jan 21, 1902

In the Question Chair.

[Designed for the consideration of such questions as will be of interest and profit to the general reader. All correspondents should give their names and correct post-office address, that queries not replied to here may be answered by mail.]

847.— Immortality of Christ.

1. Was Christ immortal before His incarnation? 2. Was He immortal during His incarnation? Is He immortal now? INQUIRER.

ANSWER.—1. Yes. 2. Yes. 3. Yes. The query that lies back of all these questions doubtless is this: How, then, could Christ in positions 1 and 2 give up His life to die for men? He simply laid aside His immortality, as stated in Heb. 2:9, “for the suffering of death, . . . that He by the grace of God should taste death for every man.” Emerging from the tomb, He says, “I am He that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, . . . and have the keys of hell and of death.” Rev. 1:18. If we ask Nicodemus’s question, How can these things be (John 3:9)? 1 Tim. 3:16 gives an answer in a general way.

848.— Date of Christ’s Birth.

Is there not a prophecy of the time of Christ’s birth? And was it not fulfilled according to Dan. 9:25? J. E. R., Elk Rapids, Mich.

ANS.—The answer to the question respecting the date of Christ’s birth, the reader will take notice pertained to the day of the week, which is not known, and not to the year as marked by a prophetic period, which is well known.

849.— Man in Death.—Plurality of Worlds.

I have recently had the opportunity of coming in contact with several of your literary works, which I have studied with deep interest. Your arguments on the Sabbath question are especially convincing. I conclude you are well informed on Biblical questions, and I would therefore feel greatly obliged if you would spare the time to answer the following questions: 1. Has the soul of a person, whether saved or unsaved, after death, any conscious existence apart from the body? or must we regard death as an unbroken sleep till the resurrection? 2. Is the teaching of a plurality of worlds contrary to the teachings of the Scriptures? I have read a work by Sir David Brewster, entitled “More Worlds than One,” in which he quotes divers passages of Scripture to show that other planets must be inhabited by rational beings.

L. B., Gunnedah, N. S. W., Australia.

ANS.—1. The Scriptures represent men in death, good or bad, as asleep. Dan. 12:2; John 5:28, 29; Acts 24:15. There is no knowledge nor wisdom in the grave, whither they go (Eccl. 9:5, 6); for in that condition they do not exercise any thought (Ps. 146:4); but all rest in unconsciousness till they awake and are raised out of their sleep. Job 14:11, 12. See the work published at this Office, entitled “Here and Hereafter,” in which all these problems concerning the nature of man, his condition in death, and the final destiny of both the righteous and the wicked, are fully discussed.

2. The Scriptures we think plainly teach a plurality of worlds, inhabited by Christian intelligences. There is a striking declaration made by the prophet Isaiah, from which no other conclusion can be drawn: “For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; He hath established it, He created it not in vain, He formed it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and there is none else.” Isa. 45:18. What is here said concerning the earth may be applied to all the starry worlds on high. Indeed, it would be inconsistent to apply it otherwise. God seeks the glory of His creatures, and to be glorified through them. That was His purpose concerning this world, and consequently concerning all other worlds which have a place among His handiworks. But these are not to be confounded with the “Father’s house” of “many mansions,” which Christ, at His ascension from this earth, went to prepare for His people. John 14:2, 3. This is that “inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven” for the subjects of God’s mercy (1 Peter 1:4); of which it may further be said, “Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love Him.” 1 Cor. 2:9.

850.— Baptized for the Dead.

Among the doctrines of the predominant Church in this State is the doctrine of baptism for the dead. See 1 Cor. 15:29, which we know is erroneously applied. Kindly give us a few thoughts on this reference, and oblige. F. S., Ogden, Utah.

ANS.—This question pertains to the Mormon doctrine that if one has a friend who has died in unbelief, this friend may be baptized in his place, and thus unite him to the Mormon Church, the same as if he had himself been baptized, and united with that Church, when he was alive. A very easy way to swell the enrollment of that Church! But as the correspondent says, We know it is misapplied. The Bible rule is, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved:” but a dead man cannot believe; “for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.” Solomon, speaking of the same condition, also says, “Their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion forever in anything that is done under the sun.” Eccl. 9:5, 6, 10. What possible object could it be for any one to stand in the name of one in such a condition, and then go through the form of baptism in reference to which the dead one would have no knowledge, no understanding, and no consciousness? But that is not what it means. Paul’s discourse is an argument for the resurrection of the dead, and the special point before his mind is the resurrection of Christ. “When all things shall be subdued unto Him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto Him that put all things under Him, that God may be all in all. Else [that is, if this is not so] what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?” The formula given for baptism is, “In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” Matt. 28:19. The condition of the Son is the fulcrum on which the whole argument turns, and in 1 Cor. 15:13–20 the apostle had plainly taught them that all depended on the resurrection of Christ; that if He had not been raised from the dead, then there was no resurrection of the dead, and their faith was vain, they which were fallen asleep in Christ were perished, and the whole scheme of redemption and eternal life was fallen into irretrievable collapse. Why, then, should any one be baptized “in the name of the Son,” in the hope of life through a dead man if the dead rise not at all? That seems to be Paul’s conclusive argument at this point.

851.— That Day.

What day is referred to in John 14:20? “At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.”

C. B. S., Bellefontaine, Ohio.

ANS.—The New Testament day, which is a day of knowledge and joy. It was not clearly and fully known that Jesus was the mediator between God and man, and that everything was to be asked and granted in His name, till after He had shed His blood, opened heaven, and sent down the Holy Spirit upon His Church, and till so many of the gifts of the Spirit, and so many miracles wrought by the apostles had appeared in the world. Plainly does the Spirit of Christ show the children of the new covenant the mystery of God’s paternal love. I am in my Father and ye in me, and I in you. All this the risen and ascended One showed plainly without the veil of parable to His disciples, from the first word which Mary Magdalene heard from His lips and carried to His disciples, to the very last which the Spirit saith unto the churches,—all are the showing of the Father by the Son, that is, that the Father of Jesus Christ may be known as the true Father of all who are in Christ, and Christ in them. “In that day,” He says, “ye shall know this.” It strikes us that there is no difference between the gift promised in Acts 2:38 and the one promised in Acts 1:5-8.