Frank Admissions by M. E. Cornell

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · May 30, 1865

Frank Admissions.

By M. E. Cornell

"CAN DO NOTHING AGAINST THE TRUTH, BUT FOR IT."

A WRITER in the Gospel Banner, although opposed to our views of the Sabbath, yet makes some very important criticisms and admissions in our favor. The fact that "admissions in favor of truth from the ranks of its enemies, constitute the highest kind of evidence," is all the apology necessary for introducing the following extracts:

"It is quite an error to imagine the Christian ordinances a mimicry of the Mosaic; their expressiveness is thus quite lost. It is by a rule of this kind that baptism is supposed to be in the room of circumcision; that the Lord's Supper is the New Testament order of the Passover; and that the first day of the week is the Christian Sabbath. This is most unwarrantable liberty to take with divine appointments. In such matters, there is something in a name: the name leads superficial thinkers to be contented with that character which is so improperly predicated of it. Hence the absolute need for the adoption of the Bible nomenclature, with strict attention to its meaning. The first and the seventh have been recognized as the festival days of the week; and a very common idea is, that what is predicated of the seventh, applies with equal propriety to the first day; any hesitancy on this point being overruled by that apocryphal saying, 'The Sabbath was changed at the resurrection of Jesus.' But this bare assertion should not satisfy any intelligent student of the divine word. Let us look into the matter.

"The phrase in Rev. i, 10:—'I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day,' is usually presumed to refer to the first day of the week. It is rather unfortunate for that idea, that there is no proof that such was meant by the writer."

Also, Eld. T. M. Preble, in his work on the parable of the ten virgins, fully justifies our position on the great Advent movement of 1843, by making it a fulfillment of the parable. He says, 1. "Definite time was preached to the church in 1844 for the Saviour to come on 'the tenth day of the seventh month.'" 2. "The church having confidence in the time preached, took their lamps, or the sacred Scriptures, and went forth to meet their Bridegroom." "This appears to indicate that there can be but one real definite time movement, for the church that can claim justification by the word of God."

This is our position exactly. The angel of Rev. xiv, 6, 7, has a message of definite time, and according to the above position, that message was given in 1844. Now as the second and third messages were to follow before Christ comes, we must certainly be now in the time of the third message. Eld. P. admits then, that the first message is past, and believes that probation will soon close, and hence he is shut up to the conclusion that the third angel's message is now going. But why is he silent in regard to it? Did the first message go in silence? Is it true that Eld. P. and others fear the cross in the last message? "Here are they that keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus," is the test in the last message. This message has moved on like the first angel, and will still continue to move, in spite of all the opposition. Better to be consistent. We can do nothing against the truth. The message will triumph. Praise the Lord.

"Now rises the message, lo! onward 'twill move, By the third mighty angel, it is brought from above. It brings the commandments which we must obey, Or receive of the plagues in that terrible day."

M. E. CORNELL.