OPPOSITION IN VERMONT by C. W. Stone

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Apr 10, 1879

OPPOSITION IN VERMONT.

By C. W. Stone

In my report of March 13, I stated that since their mother's death, the five Sisco brothers had begun a praying life under the labors of first-day Adventist preachers. I am happy to correct this. It is better. Two of them were converted before their mother's death, and are members of the Methodist church.

Since that report, the Methodist minister has spoken upon the Sabbath question once, at Westfield, a mile away. His text was Col. 2: 16. He said that for four thousand years the seventh-day Sabbath was observed as a memorial of the greatest work that had then been accomplished,—creation. When he came to speak of his text, he said that it was evident that Paul referred to some things connected with the ceremonial law; but that the expression, “the Sabbath days,” must refer to the Sabbath of the decalogue, and, said he, “Paul says that was a shadow, of which Christ is the body.”

I reviewed his discourse at South Troy in the evening, before a large audience. Eld. Evans acknowledges that the Sabbath was instituted at creation, and that for four thousand years it was a memorial thereof. Then it is a shadow, not of things to come, but of things past; and the body that casts the shadow is creation. By this truthful acknowledgment he spoils his argument from the text, and unwittingly acknowledges that the text can have no reference at all to the weekly Sabbath; for the text speaks of sabbath days which are a shadow of things to come. Such were the annual sabbaths of the Jews. See Lev. 23: 24, 27, 32, 34, where three of those annual sabbaths are mentioned. These were connected with meats and drinks as those are in Col. 2: 16. They were for the purpose of offering burnt-offerings, meat-offerings, and drink-offerings (Lev. 23: 37) which were typical of the offering of Christ on Calvary.

Thus those were “shadows of things to come; but the body is of Christ.” But they are clearly distinguished from the Sabbath of the Lord in the very next verse, that is, in Lev. 23: 38. The Sabbath was instituted before sin entered the world, and could not point forward to Christ; for there was at that time no promise of a Saviour, nor any necessity for one, for man had not sinned. After sin entered, the plan of salvation through a crucified and risen Saviour was made. Then was instituted a system of worship including ceremonies, as the offering of the blood of animals, designed to keep in mind the promise of the offering of the blood of Christ, and pointing forward to that. Those annual Sabbaths were devoted to such purposes; but the Sabbath of the Lord stands unconnected with these. It existed before them, it points back to creation, and the law commanding it is enshrined amid the moral precepts of God's unchanging words. The ceremonial sabbaths, with the whole system of rites pointing to Christ, ceased at the cross. Right here we have the Lord's supper and baptism, as similar rites in this dispensation to point us back to the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ.

Eld. Evans spent but very little time in the use of Scripture, but fled to the fathers, where he could find spurious testimony to supply that which is wanting in the Bible. The epistle of Barnabas was quoted as though genuine.

One more decided to keep the next Sabbath, and is now rejoicing in the truth.

The next evening I had liberty in examining before a good audience the slanderous statements afloat in the community, and the scurrilous book from which they were taken. The evening following, I presented the subject of spiritual gifts.

Soon after, I was present at a prayer-meeting where the man referred to in my report of March 13 was present. At the close of the meeting he produced and read that report, and asked if it referred to him. I told him it did. He complained of the language. I told him I was sorry that the report represented him as “peddling scurrilous books,” for it sounded harsh, and was too broad; but it was not exactly according to my copy. As for his course, I told him that I called it very wrong. He had circulated a vile slander, and reported things from that book that were base falsehoods. I proposed to visit him, and give him proof that those things were false. He said he did not know that it would be of any use. Last Monday evening the Methodist house at Westfield was opened for the purpose, and this man stood before an audience, and read for over an hour and a half from the slanderous portion of that book, commencing with my report of March 13.

When persons teach that the ten commandments are abolished, and then publish such vilifying reports of their neighbors, we can at least see a consistency between their theory and their practice; for one of those precepts says, “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.” And when a person will publicly circulate such libelous publications, at the same time under protest, and rejected offer of proof of their real nature, we can account for it only by charging it to the same theory. Both those who make and those who love a lie are respectfully referred to Rev. 22: 15, with a prayer that they may see their unchristian course before repentance shall be too late.

C. W. STONE.

South Troy, April 2.