TO CORRESPONDENTS

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Oct 2, 1879

TO CORRESPONDENTS.

42.—THE JEWS AND HADES.

Was the word Hades considered by the Jews as meaning the spirit world? A minister here so declared, quoting from Josephus in proof. G. W. R.

ANS. According to the essay of Josephus, if he correctly represents their views, they so regarded it. But what they thought, or what they taught, has no more to do with our views, that is, we are no more to be influenced by them, than by the views of the old monks of the dark ages on the doctrines of the Sabbath and the immortality of the soul. The Jews had fallen into many errors, and by their traditions had made void even some of the commandments of God. We have all the authoritative writings which they had on which to base our belief, that is, the Scriptures; and our appeal, at all times and on all questions, is to them, in preference to traditions of darkened Jews or apostate Christians. The question is not, what say the monks? what say the fathers? or what say the Jews? It is simply, what says the word of God?

43.—A HALL FOR A CHURCH.

When we rent a hall in which to hold our meetings, is it right to rent it for a band of music to practice in? or for the Methodists to hold pound socials (really lotteries), festivals, &c., when the Methodist minister would not hold them in their own church, not thinking it was right? Is the hall, while we hold it, the same as a church? A.

ANS. If entire control of the hall is held by the society, we should regard it the same as a church, not to be used for any purpose for which it would not be proper to use a church, certainly not for church fairs and festivals, nor for any gatherings which would defile the room with tobacco juice, or otherwise render it unclean.

44.—NO MAN ASCENDED TO HEAVEN.

Please harmonize John 3:13 with 2 Kings 2:11 and Gen 5:24. H. G.

ANS. Genesis (compared with Heb. 11:5) and Kings declare positively that Enoch and Elijah have been taken up from this earth into Heaven without seeing death. If John is speaking simply of going up into Heaven, and declares that no man has so ascended, limiting it to this idea, then there is a contradiction. But is this the subject in John 3? Christ is here teaching Nicodemus in regard to heavenly things, and says, “We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen.” Verse 11. “If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?” Verse 12. Then comes the statement of verse 13: “And no man hath ascended up to Heaven, but he that came down from Heaven, even the Son of man which is in Heaven.” Now what is the subject under consideration? What has the simple declaration that no man has ascended up to Heaven to do with the matter of his discourse, which is receiving instruction from Heaven. It is evident that this idea of gaining knowledge from Heaven, is the only one involved in the declaration; that is, No man hath ascended up to Heaven, to return and bring back information from thence, except He who came down from Heaven, even the Son of man, who, so far as his knowledge of heavenly things is concerned, was the same as if even then in Heaven. Paul uses a similar expression, but immediately explains it, thus: “Who shall ascend into Heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above :).” In a similar sense we believe the expression is used in John 3:13: “And no man hath ascended up to Heaven,” that is, to bring back knowledge from thence for his fellow-men. In this sense there is no conflict between this passage and Genesis and Kings; for Enoch and Elijah did not ascend, or rather were not taken, to Heaven for this purpose. We may add that John 3:13 implies a voluntary action under the will and control of the man: “No man hath ascended,” of his own will, purposely, voluntarily. But this was not the case with either Enoch or Elijah: they were taken up passively.

45.—EZEKIEL’S CONDITIONAL PROPHECY.

Please explain Eze. 36:25–27. J. M. L.

ANS. Many other verses naturally belong with the verses referred to, which would be too lengthy to quote in full. The reader will therefore please turn and read them with the context. Remembering, then, that Ezekiel was with his people in captivity when his prophecy was written, let us consider its natural and evident meaning. The great object which that people would have before their minds, would naturally be their deliverance from captivity. Is it not, then, in reference to this that God speaks by his prophet? For verse 24 says: “I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land.” Then follows the promise of a great spiritual blessing to be bestowed upon them, in the language of the verses referred to, set forth under the figure of sprinkling clean water upon them, and cleansing them from all uncleanness. (The false use of verse 25 in reference to baptism is exposed in Bro Waggoner’s work on that subject, pp. 32, 33.) Various promises are enumerated to the close of chapter 36. In chap. 37 the resurrection of the dead is described; and this sublime event is set before them as a fit representation of their glorious restoration, which God had then in mind. Then follows, in chapters 38 and 39, a statement of how God would deal with their enemies, in the famous prophecy concerning Gog. Then from chapters 40–48, the remainder of the book, is given a description of a wonderful sanctuary which God proposed should be erected among them. But this prophecy was conditional. The condition is expressed in verse 11 of chapter 43: “And if they be ashamed of all that they have done, show them,” etc. But they were not ashamed, Jer. 6:15, and so, the condition never having been complied with, the prophecy never could come to pass. It has long been a settled question that all this prophecy of Ezekiel concerning the sanctuary was a conditional prophecy, never fulfilled because the conditions were never complied with. See this point discussed in the late work on the Sanctuary, pp. 162–166. The query we now propose is, Does not this conditional prophecy extend back beyond chapter 40, even as far as chapter 36? If so, it includes, and disposes of, those much vexed chapters concerning Gog, the 38th and 39th of Ezekiel. Then we have there simply a description of the way in which God would have punished the enemies of his people, had the latter done what he proposed to them. As they did not thus do, those chapters never have been, and never are to be, fulfilled. But God’s purposes are not to be thwarted or marred in the least degree on this account. He changes his plan of action somewhat to suit the exigencies of the case. He breaks, to be sure, the captivity of his people, but not so fully nor gloriously as might have been. He prolongs the time. He throws in another dispensation. He now works toward “the eternal purpose, which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord,” Eph. 3:11, in another manner; and Gog and Magog do not appear again in prophecy till the end of the one thousand years of Rev. 20:8; to be disposed of then, in the manner there described, and not as they would have been had the prophecy of Ezekiel 38 and 39 been fulfilled.

46.—PSALM 102:18; LUKE 18:1–8.

1. To what does Ps. 102:18 refer? 2. Does Luke 18:1–8 have a special reference to the time just before the coming of the Lord? C. P. B.

ANS. 1. Probably to the gathering out from the Gentiles of a people for the Lord. Rescuing these from their lost condition is likened in Scripture to raising them to life from the dead, or new creating them. 2. We think Luke 18:1–8 represents the earnest importunate prayer of the people of God, just before Christ comes, and shows by contrast with the unjust judge, how surely God will avenge his people who cry unto him.