p. 28 | TO CORRESPONDENTS

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jul 18, 1878

TO CORRESPONDENTS.

A. J. DAVIS: The subject of the immortality of the soul is fully discussed in the work published at this Office entitled, “Man’s Nature and Destiny,” which see. Christ organized a church which is to continue to the end. The remnant, or last portion of this church, are distinguished as keeping the commandments of God, and the testimony of Jesus. Rev. 12:17. His ministers are those whom he has called and led into his truth.

1. Can persons using tobacco, by advice of physicians, for sore mouth, be considered members of our churches in good standing? 2. Is opium-eating held as a test of fellowship? 3. Will those who have sinned without law, Rom. 2:12, ever be raised from the dead? W. B.

ANS. 1. We would advise the person to change physicians, and adopt different treatment. 2. Yes. 3. Yes; for they will be judged, verse 16; and the sentence of judgment must be carried out; and none but conscious beings can receive the sentence. They will not be held to so strict an account as those who have had the written law in their hands, and have been instructed in it; but if they have sinned against the measure of light which they did have, as doubtless all the heathen have done, they will perish.

T. B. SNOW: We do not understand that what is said of the serpent in Isa. 65:25 is the same as the curse pronounced upon the serpent in Gen. 3:14. The sentence was not simply an announcement that dust should be for him an article of food; but it denoted his humiliation, like the words, “Upon thy belly shalt thou go.” Just as we now sometimes say of a conqueror, “His enemies were made to lick the dust;” not that they literally lapped up the dust with their tongues, but they were overthrown and humbled to the dust. So with the serpent in Gen. 3:14. But Isa. 65:25 only says that the serpent shall find in the dust an article of food, as the lion finds it in straw, without any reference to their condition. We wrote an article on this point for the REVIEW some years since, but cannot now recall the volume and number.

R. S. BARNHILL: See explanation of Rev. 20:7, 8, 9, and 10, in Thoughts on Revelation.

H. E. B.: We understand that Rom. 14:14 is spoken with reference to the meats and drinks of the ceremonial law. If a person really thought it was wrong to disregard the distinctions there made, if he did disregard them he violated his own conscience, and hence did himself the same amount of moral injury that he would have done had his course been an actual sin. Matt. 9:16, 17 illustrates the folly of trying to incorporate a new system with one which had waxed old and served its purpose. For instance: the Mosaic dispensation had accomplished its purpose, and with the introduction of the new dispensation by Christ was to be no longer of force. Yet some of the first converts did not see the distinction, and tried to bring the peculiarities of that dispensation over into this as a part of the gospel. This is what Paul in his epistles frequently alludes to. He did not sanction it, but counseled moderation and forbearance with those who still cherished so imperfect and so weak a faith.

A. W. BATHER: The new form for church letters is not yet prepared. We were appointed by the General Conference to prepare a form and shall do so before the next meeting of that body, if we have time.

Is it in keeping with the proper observance of the Sabbath to travel on the cars on that day in making a trip from California to Michigan? J. R. W.

ANS. We think if the querist had ever made the journey, he would not have asked the question. Those who have passed over the road think that, having purchased their ticket, and being comfortably established in their quarters on the cars, they can keep the Sabbath just as well there as they could keep it under the best circumstances they could find should they stop over.

1. Is an ordained deacon qualified to administer the ordinances of baptism and the Lord’s supper? 2. Is it proper to appoint a leader over the head of an ordained deacon to lead the meetings when the deacon is always present? J. W., Medford, Minn.

ANS. 1. If the church is so small that one officer is sufficient, that officer should be an elder and hence qualified to administer the ordinances in his church. A deacon is an officer to look after the temporal affairs of the church; an elder, to attend to its spiritual wants. An elder can, by virtue of his office, do the work of a deacon. But a deacon cannot, by virtue of his office, do the work of an elder. This rule rests upon the principle that the higher office includes all the lower, but the lower does not include the higher. Therefore, as already stated, if one person is sufficient to look after both the spiritual and temporal wants of the church, let that one be an elder, and he can do it all by virtue of his office. But if the church is so large that one person cannot do it all, the deacon comes in to attend to the temporal matters, leaving the elder free to devote his time especially to those of a spiritual nature.

2. To the second part of the query we reply, that, according to the foregoing remarks, if a church is properly organized it will have an elder if it has a deacon; that is, there should not be a deacon appointed unless there is an elder; hence such a situation as our correspondent refers to could not properly occur.

ANSWERED BY LETTER: S. H. Whitney, S. Rogers, J. G. Lemen, Eva Burbridge, R. F. Andrews, S. W. Smith, B. L. Francisco.