p. 134 | LETTERS by E. S. Sheffield

Publishing Committee · Battle Creek, Mich. · Mar 11, 1858

LETTERS.

By E. S. Sheffield

"Then they that feared the Lord spake often one to another."

From Bro. Sheffield.

BRO. SMITH: After hearing of the last position taken by J. M. Stephenson, I have after due consideration of the subject, concluded to give a few extracts from a letter he wrote to me a short time previous to his giving up the Sabbath. My object in doing this, is, that his inconsistencies may be more clearly manifest to the readers of the Review; especially those now investigating the Sabbath question. The following extracts are from a letter written by J. M. Stephenson, dated May 23d, 1857.

"I am glad to learn that the brethren and sisters in that part of the State stand firm on the truth, in relation to the law and gospel. I have never appreciated the utility of the holy Sabbath rest until this Spring. I would certainly wear out my constitution, and that of the beasts I work, were it not for the weekly rest of the Sabbath."

"The position that the Gentiles have no Sabbath, is the most anti-Bible and unreasonable theory to my mind, advocated by any body of professed Christians. It is not only a no-Sabbath theory, but a no-law theory. It is therefore the most dangerous system of morality ever promulgated by any class of men in the world's history."

"With me, the law, gospel, and Bible, stand or fall together. We may be mistaken in reference to the application of symbolic prophecy, and innocent before God; but how can we be mistaken in relation to the plain and harmonious teachings of the Bible touching that law by which the world shall be judged, and that gospel which offers the only remedy for the transgression of that law? I am firm as a rock on these great and glorious truths."

By comparing the foregoing with what the writer has written in the Expositor against Sabbath-keeping and Sabbath-keepers, I should conclude it was not very consistent in him to charge Sabbath-keepers with "vaunted show of consistency," and at the same time charge them with inconsistency, because they do not try to make the last admonition of Moses to Israel concerning the ten commandments, a part of the voice of God. Then speaking of these words of Moses, he calls them a part of these "living oracles," i. e. the ten commandments. Now if these as he says, are "living oracles," is he not condemned out of his own mouth, when he is trying to make his fellow creatures believe that one of them has died, and that too before it ever became diseased? Surely, then, if it is dead, it became so by the hand of murderers. I should conclude by the course of J. M. Stephenson that he did think himself as he says, "as firm as a rock on these glorious truths," and that he was trying his utmost to trample, at least a part of them into the dust. But I have no fears of his or others' ultimate triumph over the commandments of God.

"For all his commandments are sure, For ever and ever they stand; The day of his rest will endure, As long as the works of his hands."

Again, in writing on another subject in the same letter, he says: "The history of the Two-horned beast, image, mark and worshipers is in the past when Christ comes. Six of the plagues, at least, are poured out before Christ comes. The first plague is poured upon the worshipers of the beast and his image, and those who have his mark. Those who resist them have part in the first resurrection. It seems to me that the history of the Two-horned beast and image must cover a much longer space in the world's history than there is time now before Christ's second advent. But all these things may have existed centuries before Christ's coming, and the message warning men against their worship, be after he comes."

If as he says, the beast and image-worship are all in the past when Christ comes, I cannot conceive how any person with this view, and with the use of reason, can see any use of a message warning people against this worship after it is all in the past. The first plague being poured out as he says on those that do receive the mark of the beast, it looks to me that this would prove to any sane mind that the warning has then been given, these have rejected it, and the result is they drink of the wine of the wrath of God; while those who heed the message, drink of the wrath of the beast. I think it is not strange in the least, that a person holding views as totally destructive of each other as the foregoing, should give up the Sabbath. He once held that there were some seventeen different specifications, either one of them being sufficient to prove the Two-horned beast to be a symbol of the United States. But with the whole of these in his possession, they now cease to be any proof in the case to him. But I must close my remarks concerning one that I consider as fallen into the snare of the enemy. I am sorry for both him and the course he has pursued; but I still feel that we have not followed cunningly devised fables when we believed the Third Angel's Message.

Your brother in hope of life. E. S. SHEFFIELD. Fort Atkinson, Feb. 10th, 1858.