When a Man Forsakes the Truth, which is the Loser?
By James White
A LATE number of the Prophetic Expositor, under the head of “renunciation of sabbatarianism,” has the following: “Some of our readers will recollect that Eld. M. Curry, of Mich., a few years since embraced the seventh-day Sabbath theory. He has since become fully convinced of its untenableness, and has heartily renounced it, as he informs us in a letter bearing date, June 29th, 1857, and is now endeavoring to amend the mistake into which he had fallen, by showing its fallacy by preaching the gospel of Christ. Others may be expected ere long to follow the example of Bro. Curry, in abandoning this modern error. May he and others, in the future, ever be guided by the unerring word of truth.” Eld. Curry’s course is another illustration of the futility of endeavoring to amalgamate the Third Angel’s Message and the Age to Come. “What communion has light with darkness?” Some time since while discussing the doctrine of the Age to Come with him I stated the testimony of the Scriptures relative to the moral condition of the whole human family, and the events connected with the close of the present dispensation, clearly showing that the Age to Come had no foundation in the word of God. The same argument, substantially, may be found in Nos. 5 and 6, Vol. VIII, of the Review. I was led to believe, from the profession he had made, that he would readily submit to such plain scriptural facts, and throw aside his groundless theory. But to my great surprise he evaded them, and took positions subversive of the plainest doctrines of the Bible and inconsistent with what he professed firmly to believe. I then told him publicly that he had laid the foundation for antinomianism, and that to be consistent with himself he must give up his Sabbath views, or retrace his steps and renounce the positions he then took. But he affirmed his faith in the Sabbath, and also his ability to harmonize his positions. Time has shown what I looked for. “The last state of that man is worse than the first.” Others have run the same course: but there is something connected with the case of Mr. Curry that may not be with the others. Those who heard A. N. Seymour’s reply at a Conference held in Jackson over two years since, to some observations made by Mr. Curry, will understand the cause of this “renunciation” as well as those who are personally acquainted with him and his course. If there are any others now professing the faith of the Third Angel’s Message whose interest is of the same nature, it is to be hoped that the “sieve of vanity,” alias the Prophetic Expositor will soon catch them. Isa. xxx, 28.