Answer to Correspondents.
By J. H. W.
To A. S: Your difficulties on the subject of the Two-Horned Beast are not new, nor do we regard them as having any strong bearing against the position set forth in the book, United States in Prophecy. We shall search in vain through all the prophetic symbols for anything to justify the application of the two horns to the two political parties. But when we look at Dan. 7, which is the pattern after which all visions of beasts and horns are framed, and by the explanation of which we must be guided in our researches, we find that the church of Rome is introduced under the symbol of the “little horn” before that church had received any civil power, or was directly united with the State. And again, the 1290 years mark the supremacy of that church over other churches, while the 1260 years mark the beginning of its being allied to civil authority. Compare Rev. 13:1-3. Thus we have a precedent for applying the symbol of a horn to a church, even before its union with the State. But there never was a time when the Protestant churches did not exercise a strong influence, almost a controlling influence, in the American government. Dr. Barnes was never accused of exaggerating for saying that the American churches sustained American slavery, and that there was no power in the land, outside of the church, which could maintain slavery if it was not maintained in the church. Shrewd politicians foresaw the late war in the division of the M. E. church into “North” and “South.” The religious element even in the formation of our government cannot be overlooked; and at no time in its history could the churches have been destroyed without destroying the government itself. We looked at this subject years ago in the light of every objection that we could devise, and have never seen any view that we thought would stand the test of the closest criticism but that generally received by the Seventh-day Adventists. J. H. W.