“Soul-Sleepers’” Conference.
By J. H. W.
In Indiana, the people represented by The Restitution, a paper printed in Chicago, are called Soul-Sleepers. On the subjects of the state of the dead and the second advent, they believe as the majority of first-day Adventists do; but they are ultra Age to Comeists, and they repudiate the name of Adventists, probably to distinguish themselves from others who call themselves Adventists, but do not indorse the Age to Come. They are also ultra antinomians. They claim to have “the one faith,” but “the one idea” would far better express their position, as everything else is swallowed up by the Age to Come. Yet in fact, though the Age to Come is their sole hobby, there is as great diversity of faith among them as among any class I ever knew. They are constantly patching up the Age to Come, probably no two of them could agree in respect to it, and no one retains his views intact for any long time. As I am engaged in re-writing the work on the Age to Come, I considered myself fortunate in having the opportunity of attending their “Conference,” lately held in the “Little Wild-Cat Meeting House,” Tipton Co., Ind. The first discourse was preached by Eld. J. S. Hatch, a prominent preacher among them. He took his text, 2 Cor. 8:9, remarking that his attention had recently been called to this text by one who referred to it to prove the pre-existence of Christ (and I think the reference was quite appropriate). To show when the Lord Jesus was poor (not when he became poor) he quoted Matt. 8:20. He said Christ was rich only prospectively: he had the promises of God, which were to be fulfilled to him in the future age. He read Phil. 2:5-10, and said that Christ was not yet exalted, but would be when the heathen were given to him, &c. [see Acts 2:33; 5:31]. He also read James 2:5, to show how the saints were rich—in faith and in the promises—and said Christ’s riches were like theirs! But if we hear it said of a man that he once owned a large farm, or had a large sum of money, but he has become poor, we conclude at once that he has lost his farm, or his money; for a person cannot become poor without losing that which made him rich. Had Eld. Hatch informed us when Christ lost the promises he would have given us some tangible idea of his theory. But if any one wishes to know what the Bible teaches on this point he may compare Phil. 2:5-10; John 17:5; &c. Eld. S. G. Clark preached Sunday morning on rightly dividing the word. He said he should not handle the word deceitfully, and if earnestness of manner is any assurance of sincerity, he certainly believed he was preaching the truth. Aside from this we should have judged that his first statement was a mistake. His preaching was more deceptive than that of Eld. Hatch, as he presented his subjects in a more plausible manner, in most respects. It was a genuine, old-fashioned millennium sermon; leaving out a reference to the advent, and to the fallacy of looking for reward at death, and it was in its main features just such a discourse as I have heard the like from my childhood. That he did depart from his promise, and handle the word deceitfully, was very evident from his use of Luke 2:14, the song of the angels at the birth of Christ: “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.” He read it right, but in commenting said, this had not been fulfilled, for as yet we had never seen peace and good will among men; but it would be so in the future age. Were he so ignorant as not to know any difference between toward and among, his comment might be more excusable. But this idea was the real foundation of his whole discourse. By what I heard at this meeting I am assured that the advocates of the Age to Come have made no advance of late years so far as clearness and force of argument are concerned. The first message of Rev. 14, Eld. Clark put into the Age to Come. Eld. Hatch openly said (as we have pointed out in past years) that the privileges of the Age to Come, in the blessings it would confer on the nations, were not for his hearers, nor for any who have heard the gospel. Its probation was solely for those who are ignorant of the gospel, up to the time of the introduction of that age. Then we ask, as we have asked before, Why preach it in this age? Why make its promises the constant theme of discourse to those who cannot be benefited by it, and so divert their minds from present truth and present duty? It is one of the most dreary, lifeless delusions extant in this age of error. It has no power to move the hearts of the world, or to excite to Christian effort, and lead to piety and devotion, in those who believe it. One thing I have ever observed: that all antinomians, or no-law teachers, whether among Disciples or Adventists, or wherever found, are great boasters. Their strength and daring are wondrous, to let them tell the story. And to some it might appear strange that they who denounce the law of God as a law of works, and profess to walk by the “law of faith” alone, are so uniformly given to boasting while the apostle says boasting is excluded by the law of faith. Rom. 3. But the solution is really easy. The carnal (or fleshly) mind is not subject to the law of God, Rom. 8:7, because the law is spiritual. Rom. 7:14. And every one who casts off the necessary restraint of the spiritual law, is, naturally enough, “vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,” or carnal mind, for they are the same. Col. 2:18. But theirs is but empty boasting. They do not discover the harmony of the law and the gospel, and so put the Son of God in antagonism against his Father. “Mistaken souls, they’re in the dark,
Without the law—without the ark.”