p. 130 | THE MARK OF THE BEAST

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Sep 22, 1863

THE MARK OF THE BEAST.

The beast, whose mark men are compelled to receive, is the one brought to view in Rev. xiii, 1-10. It is universally conceded among Protestants that this beast is the Papal Roman power. The "little horn" of Dan. vii, 8, represents the same power. Their specifications prove the powers to be identical.

1. To the beast of Rev. xiii, is given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; while in the little horn of Dan. vii, were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking great things.

2. Power was given to the beast to continue forty and two months. The little horn has times and laws given into his hands until "a time and times and the dividing of time."

3. The beast opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. The little horn speaks great words against the Most High.

4. Power was given to the beast to make war with the saints, and to overcome them. The little horn made war with the saints and prevailed against them. These facts we think prove the identity of the above symbols.

The "man of sin" brought to view in 2 Thess. ii, "who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he, as God, sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God," (see verse 4) is universally considered to be the same power.

The beast of Rev. xiii, was to claim worship of those who dwell upon the earth. The little horn of Dan. vii, was to claim the power, and privilege of changing times and laws; while the Man of Sin was to oppose and exalt himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped. If he exalts himself above God, he of course claims that his laws must be obeyed in preference to those of God. There is no other way that it can be done.

Suppose that Mr. A., in consequence of being absent from home much of the time, finds it necessary to write out a few simple rules by which to have his children governed. But Mr. B. comes into A.'s family during his absence, and says, "Children, let me see the law of your father." They hand him the law, and he reads until he comes to a precept which he thinks is not just right, and he takes his pencil and crosses it; after which he proceeds to read further until he finds another commandment that does not exactly suit him, and he changes that. Thus he goes through the whole law, crossing and changing, and dividing the commandments. Has he not in this exalted himself above the one those children call father? He has legislated for that family, and in that act he has virtually said that the father of that family either has not the ability or the right to govern his own household. Now if the children keep that law as altered, whose law are they keeping? Every one must say, that of B.

The way is now opened for the proof of the position that the Papal power has changed the ten commandments, and that if the ten commandments are kept as changed by that power, and not as given by the great Jehovah, the law-changing power is worshipped, instead of the law-making power. Paul has said, "Know ye not that, to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are?" Rom. vi, 15.

(To be Continued.)