HOW DO WE KNOW? by J. F. Ballenger

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Nov 5, 1901

HOW DO WE KNOW?

By J. F. Ballenger

ELDER J. F. BALLENGER.

Professor.—Now, Elder, do you really think that there will be another persecution for conscience’ sake, and that, too, for refusing to keep the Sunday?

Elder.—If I did not, Professor, I certainly would not preach it.

Professor.—Indeed, Elder, I do not doubt your sincerity for a moment; I think you honestly believe what you preach, but may it not be true that you put a wrong interpretation upon the prophecy? It seems impossible that with the history of the Dark Ages before us, the pages of history could ever again be stained with cruel persecution.

Elder.—Indeed it does seem strange that history should repeat itself that way, but human nature is the same in all ages, and when the conditions are equal, the results will be the same.

Professor.—Yes, that is true; and I am aware that since the Reformation of the sixteenth century, persecution has raised its hydra head at times, and that, too, by those calling themselves Protestants. But we had hoped that with the advancing light upon religious liberty of the nineteenth century such a thing could never be repeated.

Elder.—As to being mistaken in regard to the interpretation of the prophecy, you will admit that if we have no infallible guide by which to apply the prophecy it would be of no more use to us than the heathen auguries. But if we can be positive that we have the right application, then there can be no doubt in regard to the results.

Professor.—That is the great question. Elder, if you can show beyond the possibility of a doubt that you are right in your application of the prophecy, then we need not be in doubt in regard to the results.

Elder.—You will agree with me that the leopard beast of Revelation 13 and 14 is a symbol of the papacy?

Professor.—Yes; I agree with you that that beast is a symbol of the Roman Catholic Church. I do not think it possible to apply it to anything else. But that the Sunday institution is the mark, or sign, of the papacy I am not so sure.

Elder.—Why are you so sure that the leopard beast is a symbol of the papacy?

Professor.—All Protestant commentators of any note that I have read apply the symbol to the papacy; but even if we had no such testimony, any one who has read the history of that Church cannot fail to see that it has fulfilled every specification of the symbol.

Elder.—Exactly; then the events that fulfill the prophecy in every particular are infallible guides to its interpretation.

Professor.—Yes; when the events described in the prophecy come to pass, it would be foolish to deny the application; but where are the events that have taken place to prove that the Sunday is a mark of the papacy?

Elder.—You were present in the tent when we read the testimony from both Catholic and Protestant historians that the governors of the Church, in connection with the emperors, transferred the rest from the seventh to the first day of the week?

Professor.—Yes. I am quite well convinced that the bishops of Rome changed the Sabbath, and I am also convinced that there is no Scriptural authority for the change.

Elder.—Then if the Catholic Church changed the Sabbath, and the Protestant world accept the change, would not that be a sign that they, the Catholics, had the power to change God’s times and the law? See Dan. 7:25, R. V.

Professor.—I suppose it would.

Elder.—But do you not know that it would?

Professor.—Yes; of course, if we acknowledge that the Church changed the Sabbath, and we accept the change, then we must acknowledge that the change itself is an evidence that they had power to make it.

Elder.—You acknowledge that they made the change. Now if you keep Sunday, do you not confess by your own conduct that Sunday-keeping is a mark of their power to make the change?

Professor.—Well, I had not looked at it just in that light before, yet I must confess that it is a pretty strong argument against us.

Elder.—Again: if the leaders of the Catholic Church confess that they made the change, and set it before all the world as a mark of their power to legislate in matters of religion, would you dare stand up and say that the Catholic leaders do not know themselves what the mark of their power is? To illustrate, suppose a man did not know what the mark or sign of the Masonic order was, and on inquiry he found that all the leaders of the fraternity declared that the square and compass was a sign of their order; would he, or any one, be so presumptuous as to contradict them, and declare that they themselves did not know what their sign was?

Professor.—O, no; of course no person would be so foolish as to do that.

Elder.—Very well; then if you admit that the Catholic Church changed the Sabbath, and you keep the day that they have substituted in place of God’s Sabbath, and by so doing you acknowledge their power to make the change, then when they set forth the change as a mark, or sign, of their power to change God’s law, how in the world can you deny their claim to the change as a mark of their power to do the very thing that you admit they did do?

Professor.—Are you sure that the Catholic leaders publish to the world the change of the Sabbath as a mark of their power to make the change?

Elder.—Listen to the answer of Cardinal Gibbons to the question asked by Mr. J. F. Snyder, of Bloomington, Ill., if the Catholic Church held the change of the Sabbath as a mark of their power to make the change, to which the Cardinal gave the following reply: “Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change was her act. It could not have been otherwise, as none in those days would have dreamed of doing anything in matters spiritual and religious without her, and the act is a mark of her ecclesiastical power and authority in religious matters.”

“Yours respectfully, “Wm. Rewday, “Sec. for the Cardinal.”

Could anything be more plain and to the point than this acknowledgment on the part of this noted Catholic official? Do you not think that the Cardinal knows what the Catholic Church holds as a mark of her power to legislate in matters of religion?

Professor.—When you men make a statement, you generally have the documents at hand to back it up; but I tell you it places Sunday-keepers in a box. If you are right (and we must admit that the evidence is very conclusive), then it means to stand up against the ire of the Beast or drink the unmixed wrath of God.

Elder.—That is just what it does mean; and when you consider the fact that more than one hundred of our people in the United States and Canada have been arrested, fined, and imprisoned, and in some instances worked in the chain-gang with common criminals, and that, too, in the face of the fact that good citizens not of our faith have testified that it was persecution pure and simple, and nothing else, it sets an infallible seal to our interpretation of the prophecy, and it ought not to take long for you and every other professed Christian to decide what to do.

Professor.—That is so, Elder. My work demands that I must bid you good-by for the present, but I wish to have another talk with you on this subject.

Elder.—All right; come over to the tent any time, and we shall be glad to give you any information we can on this question.