Review and Herald, Vol. 47, No. 4. (1/27/1876)

Review and Herald

Jan 27, 1876

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jan 27, 1876

THE TWELVE HUNDRED AND SIXTY DAYS

By Dudley Marvin Canright

IMPORTANT COMMENTS ON THE PROPHECIES—NO. 2.

BY ELD. D. M. CANRIGHT.

THE TWELVE HUNDRED AND SIXTY DAYS.

A DEFINITE time was allotted to the supremacy of the little horn. After it had overthrown the three horns, it was continued for a time, times, and a dividing of time. Dan. 7:25. John, in the book of Revelation, speaks of the same power and the same time. In one place he says this power shall “continue forty and two months.” Rev. 13:5. In another place he gives the same time as 1260 days; Rev. 12:6; in another place, as a “time, and times, and half a time.” Rev. 12:14. We claim that the time mentioned in each place is the same, and that the 1260 prophetic days represent 1260 years. That this is the correct interpretation we believe can be plainly shown. Now hear what others say upon this point:—

“It is a singular fact that the great mass of interpreters in the English and American world have, for many years, been wont to understand the days designated in Daniel and the Apocalypse as the representatives, or symbols, of years. I have found it difficult to trace the origin of this general, I might say almost universal, custom.”—Hints, Prof. Stuart, p. 77.

“It [the papacy] is to continue a definite period from its establishment. Verse 25. This duration is mentioned as ‘a time, and times, and the dividing of a time,’—three years and a half—1260 days—1260 years.”—Barnes on Dan. 7.

“Rev. 12:6. A thousand two hundred and threescore days. That is, regarding these as prophetic days, in which a day denotes a year, 1260 years. The same period evidently is referred to in verse 14, in the words ‘for a time, times, and half a time.’ And the same period is undoubtedly referred to in Daniel 7:25: ‘And they shall be given into his hand until a time, and times, and the dividing of time.’ I regard it here as I do there, as referring to the proper continuance of the papal power.”—Barnes.

“Thus matters would be left in his hands ‘till a time, and times, and the dividing of time;’ that is, for three years and a half, or forty-two months, which, reckoning thirty days to a month (and that was the general computation), make just 1260 days; and those prophetical days signify 1260 years; a number which we shall repeatedly meet with in the Revelation of St. John.”—Scott.

“Rev. 13:5–7. Power also, or authority, even the secular empire, was given him to continue or rather to practice, or to prosper in his undertakings, for 42 months, or 1260 years.”—Scott.

“Mr. Wintle has shown, that both the New Testament and classic writers use times (or seasons) for years; so we sometimes say so many summers or winters. These years usually consisted of 360 days, prophetically used for years. Thus three years and a half, or 1260 days, will stand for so many years.”—Cottage Bible.

“Until a time (i. e., a year), times (two years), and the dividing of time (i. e., half a year); making, in the whole, three prophetic years and a half,—or reckoning thirty days to a month, 1260 days, equal to the same number of years in prophetic language.”—Bagster.

“There are three different expressions of the period during which the church is to be subjected to suffering;—1260 days; forty-two months; a time, times, and half a time; all of which signify the same duration, or 1260 prophetic years.”—Croly on the Apocalypse, p. 163.

That the time is a year is shown by what Josephus says of Nebuchadnezzar. The Bible said that he should be cast out till seven times should pass over him. Dan. 4. Josephus says:—

“When he had lived in this manner in the desert for seven years, he should recover his dominion. . . . And as he foretold, so it came to pass; for after he had continued in the wilderness the aforementioned interval of time, while no one durst attempt to seize his kingdom during those seven years, he prayed to God that he might recover his kingdom, and he returned to it.”—Antiquities, book x, chap. x. sec. 6.

THE 1260 DAYS ENDED IN 1798.

We claim that these days ended in 1798, at the overthrow of the papacy by the French. That this was the period when the papacy was overthrown, according to the prophecy, is very plainly shown by what authors say of it:—

“In 1798, the French republican army under General Berthier took possession of the city of Rome, and entirely superseded the whole papal power.”—Clarke’s Com. on Dan. 7:25.

“In October, 1797 General Bonaparte sent him [Berthier] to Paris to deliver to the directory the treaty of Campo-Formio. In January, 1798, he received the chief command of the army of Italy, and was ordered by the directory to march against the dominions of the pope. In the beginning of February, he made his entrance into Rome, abolished the papal government, and established a consular one.”—Encyc. Americana (old edition), Art. Berthier.

“On the 10th of February, 1798, the French army under Berthier entered Rome, took possession of the city, and made the pope and cardinals prisoners. Within a week Pius VI. was deposed; Rome was declared a republic; the tree of liberty was planted; and the city and the states were delivered up to a long series of the deepest insults, requisitions, military murders, and the general injury and degradation of the feelings and property of all classes of the people. Pius VI. died in captivity. Pius VII. was dragged across the Alps to crown Napoleon, but was held in duress, and finally was restored only on the fall of the French empire. The papal independence was abolished by France, and the son of Napoleon was declared king of Rome.”—Croly on the Apocalypse, pp. 146, 147.

“The Roman republic was proclaimed on the 15th of February, 1798. The pope, however, made one additional effort for the continuance of his temporal existence, by sending an embassy to Berthier, who was encamped outside the walls. The general refused to admit any other deputation than that of the people of Rome, thus dissipating the last hope of the holy father. The arrival of the French army, and the proclamation of the general, had given the fatal blow to the papal sovereignty.”—Christ. Kelley, in French Revolution, p. 243.

Here the papacy received a deadly wound.

THE DEADLY WOUND HEALED.

But this deadly wound was to be healed for a short time. Rev. 13. Shortly after this fatal overthrow, Napoleon caused the papacy to be partially restored. Thus Mr. Bower says:—

“The papacy, that fatal and monstrous institution, which had been the cause of such numberless calamities, disasters, and persecutions, at the death of Pius VI. was apparently on the verge of complete extinction. But men were not sufficiently satiated with superstitions, and the triumph of permanent liberty was still deferred!”

“Bonaparte, consul, who began to think of placing on his head the diadem of Charlemagne, and who anticipated the period when he should want another Leo III. to consecrate him, collected the scattered stones of the pontifical Babel, which the public had almost razed, and anew reconstructed it. Twenty days after his attainment of power, thirty-five cardinals assembled at Venice to fill the vacancy in the pontificate, and to elect the chief of the popedom.”

“Each secular power, according to custom, intrigued to have one of its own minions nominated, and to insure the voices of the cardinals for him; but France was successful. Whether the first consul was more ably served, or whether he paid most generously for the votes, after one hundred and four days of discussion and strife, the majority was announced for the Cardinal Gregory Barnabas Louis Chiaramonti, who was proclaimed pope, on March 14, 1800, by the title of Pius VII.”

“The Protestant princes of Germany themselves were vigorously urged, solicited, and even threatened, respecting their permission for the Jesuits to be domiciliated in their territories. In fine, the restoration of popism was everywhere proclaimed.”—Hist. of the Popes, pp. 420, 428.

DANIEL 8.

In the eighth chapter of Daniel a very important prophecy is introduced. There are four symbols in this prophecy—the ram, the he goat, the little horn, and the twenty-three hundred days.

THE RAM.

The ram with two horns represents Medo-Persia; for so Daniel directly says, “The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia.” Dan. 8:20.

“Dan. 8:3. There can be no error in explaining the design of this symbol; for in verse 20 it is expressly said that it denoted the two kings of Media and Persia. The united power of the kingdom was denoted by the ram itself; the fact that there were two powers, or kingdoms, combined, by the two horns of the ram.”—Barnes.

“The kingdom of Media and Persia, before represented by a voracious bear, was on this occasion shown to Daniel, under the form of a ram with two horns.”—Scott.

“The ram had two horns of unequal height, representing the Medo-Persian empire, and answering to the former emblem of the bear.”—Cottage Bible.

THE GOAT.

The goat represents Grecia. Thus the Lord says, “And the rough goat is the king of Grecia; and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.” This is so plain that we will give but a few words upon it.

“Verse 5. In verse 21, this is called the ‘rough goat.’ There can be no doubt as to the application of this; for in verse 21 it is expressly said that it was the ‘king of Grecia.’ The power represented is that of Grecia when it was consolidated under Alexander the Great, and when he went forth to the subjugation of this vast Persian empire.”—Barnes.

“A he-goat, however, is seen coming from the west, evidently pointing to the Greek or Macedonian empire.”—Cottage Bible.

“Greece was certainly intended by the prophet Daniel under the symbol of the single-horned goat (Dan. 8:5–21).”—Encyc. of Religious Knowledge, Art. Grecia.

THE FOUR HORNS.

The he-goat had four horns after the first horn was broken. This represented four kingdoms into which Grecia should be divided. “Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.” Dan. 8:22.

“From four of his [Alexander’s] commanders, as mentioned in chapter 7, proceeded the kingdoms of Greece, Thrace, Syria, and Egypt.”—Cottage Bible.

“Afterward his [Alexander’s] captains had fierce contests about his dominions, till at length, four kingdoms arose which continued for some time, and were ‘notable,’ conspicuous, and eminent in the world. The kingdom of Egypt was to the south; that of Syria and its dependencies, to the east; that of Thrace with Bithynia, &c., to the north; and that of Macedonia, to the west.”—Scott.

THE LITTLE HORN OF DANIEL 8.

Out of one of these horns came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great. This little horn represents Rome.

“Out of one of these arose another ‘little horn,’ which many writers, both ancient and modern, have interpreted of Antiochus Epiphanes who persecuted the Jews with great cruelty; but some important objections have been raised to this hypothesis; and Hartwell Horn says that Sir Isaac Newton, Bishop Newton, and Dr. Hales, have clearly shown that the Roman temporal power, and no other, is intended. It was the Roman power that destroyed the polity and temple of the Jews, and left the nation and holy city in that state in which they are to remain to the end of 2300 prophetic days or years.”—Cottage Bible.

“Verse 23. Of fierce countenance. The Roman empire, which reduced Judea to a province, burnt the city and temple, and scattered the Jews to the four winds of heaven.”—Bagster.

THE TWENTY-THREE HUNDRED DAYS.

The 2300 days of Dan. 8:14, are prophetic days, representing 2300 years. So we believe and so others teach.

“Two thousand and three hundred days. See margin. That is, 2300 years.”—Bagster.

“The sanctuary and host were trampled under foot 2300 days (verse 14), and in Daniel’s prophecies days are put for years.”—Sir Isaac Newton.

“No doubt the end of the 2300 days, or years, is not very distant.”—Scott on Dan. 8:14.

“Two thousand three hundred years . . . may properly enough be said to be for many days.”—Bp. Newton.

THE END NEAR.

That we are now at the end of all these prophetic periods is coming to be felt by a great many.

“It should be added, that whichever of the three first periods referred to be regarded as the time of the rise of the papacy, if we add to them the prophetic period of 1260 years, we are now in the midst of scenes on which the prophetic eye rested; and we cannot, as fair interpreters of prophecy, but regard this mighty domination as hastening to its fall. It would seem probable, then, that according to the most obvious explanation of the subject, we are at present (1853) not far from the termination and fall of that great power, and that events may be expected to occur at about this period of the world which will be connected with its fall.”—Barnes on Dan., p. 333.

THE SEVENTY WEEKS. DAN. 9:24.

Seventh-day Adventists claim that these seventy weeks are weeks of years, each day standing for a year—490 days—490 years; and that they commenced B. C. 457, in the seventh year of Artaxerxes, at the going forth of the decree to rebuild Jerusalem. The first seven weeks, or forty-nine years, were consumed in rebuilding the city. The next sixty-two weeks, or 434 years, reached from that time till the public ministry of Christ, which began in A. D. 27. The remaining one week, or seven years, reached from the commencement of Christ’s ministry, A. D. 27, to the close of the apostles’ ministry to the Jews and the opening of the gospel to the Gentiles, A. D. 34. In the midst of this week, Messiah was cut off. Now listen to what commentators have said upon this all-important subject:—

“It is universally allowed that the seventy weeks here mentioned mean ‘seventy weeks’ of years; that is, 490 years.”—Scott.

“The Messiah . . . would ‘confirm the covenant with many for one week,’ the last of the seventy, whether ending at the death of Christ, as some compute, or extending to two or three years after that event, as others. For by his own personal ministry, and afterwards by that of his apostles, multitudes of the Jews would accede to the new covenant mediated by him, and way would be made for the calling of the Gentiles also. . . . And his sacrifice of himself, offered during this week (perhaps toward the middle of it), would virtually terminate the Mosaic dispensation, and vacate the ceremonial law.”

“The date of the going forth of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem cannot, therefore, be reckoned from the time of Cyrus’ decree, or that of Darius. It is generally fixed to the commission granted to Ezra by Artaxerxes in the seventh year of his reign.”—Scott.

“Thus, also, in Daniel, the prophecy of seventy weeks is almost universally understood to mean weeks of years, chapter 9:25, 27; and again in chapter 12:11, 12, days also are used for years. See also Isa. 20:3. So Mr. Faber assumes that Daniel’s prophecy of seventy weeks, having proved by the event to be weeks—not of days but of years—with the other passages above referred to, are sufficient to warrant the like explanation of the days before us.”

“The angel announces to the prophet that the holy city shall be rebuilt and peopled within seven weeks of years, and should continue for seventy weeks, or 490 years; after which it should be utterly destroyed for putting the Messiah to death. The commencement of this period is, by Prideaux and others, fixed to the time when the order was issued for rebuilding the temple, in the 7th year of the reign of Artaxerxes.”—Cottage Bible.

“Verse 24. Seventy weeks. That is, seventy weeks of years, or 490 years, which [is to be] reckoned from the seventh year of Artaxerxes, coinciding with the 4256th year of the Julian period, and in the month Nisan, in which Ezra was commissioned to restore the Jewish state and polity (Ezra 7:9–26).”—Bagster.

Dan. 9:24. “It is clear that it must be explained literally, as denoting 490 days, or that these days must stand for years, and that the period is 490 years. That this latter is the true interpretation, as it has been held by all commentators, is apparent.”

“Verses 26, 27. The careful student of this prophecy, therefore, would anticipate that the Messiah would appear at the close of the sixty-two weeks, and that he would continue during a part, at least, of the remaining one week before he would be cut off. . . . The proper notion or meaning here is undoubtedly that of being cut off by death, and would suggest the idea of a violent death or a death by the agency of others. . . .”

“For one week. The fair interpretation of this, according to the principles adopted throughout this exposition, is, that this includes the space of seven years. See notes on verse 24. This is the one week that makes up the seventy—seven of them, or forty-nine years, embracing the period from the command to rebuild the city and temple to its completion under Nehemiah; sixty-two, or 432 years, to the public appearing of the Messiah; and this one week to complete the whole seventy or 490 years.”

“In the middle of that period of seven years, another important event would occur, serving to divide that time into two portions, and especially to be known as causing the sacrifice and oblation to cease—in some way affecting the public offering of sacrifice so that from that time there would be in fact a cessation. . . .”

“(1) The ministry of the Saviour himself was wholly among the Jews; and his work was what would, in their common language, be spoken of as confirming the covenant. . . .”

“(2) This same work was continued by the apostles as they labored among the Jews. . . .”

“(3) This was continued for about the period here referred to; at least for a period so long that it could properly be represented in round numbers as ‘one week,’ or seven years.”

“The Saviour’s own ministry continued about half that time; and then the apostles prosecuted the same work, laboring with the Jews, for about the other portion before they turned their attention to the Gentiles, and before the purpose to endeavor to bring in the Jewish people was abandoned. . . .

“I suppose, therefore, that this last ‘one week’ embraced the period from the beginning of the ministry of the Saviour to that when the direct and exclusive efforts to bring the principles of his religion to bear on the Hebrew people . . . ceased, and the great effort was commenced to evangelize the heathen world. Then was the proper close of the seventy weeks. . . .

“Whatever difficulties there may be about the precise time of our Lord’s ministry and whether he celebrated three passovers or four after he entered on his public work, it is agreed on all hands that it lasted about three years and a half—the time referred to here. Though a few have supposed that a longer period was occupied, yet the general belief of the church has coincided in that; and there are few points in history better settled.”—Barnes.

The above quotations from these learned men fully justify the position of Seventh-day Adventists upon this point. If we are right upon this, then of necessity we are right upon the 2300 days, the cleansing of the sanctuary, the Judgment, the messages, &c.

DETERMINED.

The word rendered determined in Dan. 9:24, properly means, to cut off; that is to say, that the seventy weeks are cut off from the 2300 days.

“The word here used—chathak—occurs nowhere else in the Scriptures. It properly means, according to Gesenius, to cut off, to divide; and hence to determine, to destine, to appoint.”—Barnes on Dan. 9:24.

REV. 12:13.—THE DRAGON.

We claim that the dragon of this prophecy represents pagan Rome, the same as the fourth beast of Daniel’s prophecy. We will give extracts from a few authors on this point:—

“Nor could it [the papacy] have been expressed by the ‘dragon’ alone; that emblem representing Roman Paganism.”—Croly on the Apocalypse.

“If the great red dragon, with seven heads and ten horns, intends, as we conceive it does, the demon of paganism under the old Roman empire, his waiting to destroy the new-born child of Christianity must represent his watchful cruelty during the ten pagan persecutions.”—Cottage Bible.

“Rev. 12:3. The general interpretation which refers this vision to Rome may receive confirmation from the fact that the dragon was at one time the Roman standard as is represented by the cut from Montfaucon. Ammianus Marcellinus (xvi. 10) thus describes this standard: ‘The dragon was covered with purple cloth, and fastened to the end of a pike gilt, and adorned with precious stones.’ ‘Verse 5. Any divine intention to protect the church in its increase, or to save it from being destroyed by the dragon—the fierce pagan power—would be properly represented by this.’ ‘The scene, then, in this chapter is this: John saw a most beautiful woman, suitably adorned, representing the church as about to be enlarged and to become triumphant in the world. Then he saw a great red monster, representing Satan about to destroy the church,—the pagan power, infuriated, and putting forth its utmost energy for its destruction.’”—Barnes on Rev., p. 351.

“Verses 3–6. About the same time another marvelous sight or ‘sign’ was seen in heaven, even ‘a great red dragon.’ ‘A dragon was a known emblem of Satan, and of his principal agents or vicegerents on earth.’ ‘Red,’ purple or scarlet, was the distinguishing color of the Roman emperors, consuls, and generals, even as it has been since of the popes and cardinals. (Note 17:3–5.) The ‘seven heads’ of the dragon signify the seven hills on which Rome was built, and the seven forms of government which successively prevailed there. The ten horns marked out the ten kingdoms into which the western empire was at length divided. But ‘the seven crowns on the dragon’s heads, and not the ten crowns on his horns,’ showed, that the whole power was yet vested in the emperors and senate at Rome; and not, as afterward, in the monarchs of the ten kingdoms. This circumstance, which many have not observed, precisely fixes the date of the prophecy, and undoubtedly proves that it related to the pagan emperors, and not to the antichristian power afterward mentioned. (Note 13:1.)”—Scott.

THE BEAST.

The beast of Rev. 13 represents papal Rome. This is so clear that, so far as I know, no Protestant denies it. We will give a few quotations:—

“Rev. 13:5. The forty-two months. The meaning in the passage before us, I take to be that the papal power, considered as a civil or secular institution, will have, from the time when that properly commenced, a duration of 1260 years.”—Barnes.

“Rev. 13:1–10. The papacy is in this chapter shown in its full action. Its symbol is a combined image, ‘a wild beast’ inspired by the dragon.”—Croly on the Apocalypse, p. 213.

“Rev. 13:1. The apostle standing on the shore saw a savage ‘beast rise out of the sea;’ that is, a tyrannical, idolatrous, and persecuting power, springing up out of the commotions which took place in the world. All interpreters agree that the Roman empire, in one form or other, was here intended; and papists continuing such, must contend, though against the most conclusive evidence which can be imagined, that pagan Rome was meant. . . . It is therefore absolutely certain, that the Roman power, as professing Christianity, and not that of pagan Rome, is meant. The dragon before mentioned had seven crowns on his heads, but this beast has ten crowns on his horns. This plainly showed that a revolution would take place before the time predicted should arrive; and that the dominion would be removed from the imperial city, and divided among ten kingdoms.”—Scott.

“Rev. 13:1. This beast, the same as Daniel’s fourth beast, Dan. 7:7, is the Roman or Latin empire, whose capital was seated on seven hills, was divided into ten kingdoms, and received its power from ‘the dragon,’ or the idolatrous heathen empire. Both imperial and papal Rome have arrogated to themselves the most blasphemous title; and the number of pious Christians who have fallen a sacrifice to the latter is incalculable.”—Bagster.

Many more quotations to the same effect can be given confirming every important position which we take on the prophecies.

SELF-CONSECRATION

By R. E. G.

My God, help me to give Myself, my all, to thee; To Him alone henceforth to live, Who gave himself for me. For me the Saviour died, So wretched and undone; For me the Lord was crucified, E'en for so vile a one.

He left the courts of bliss And glory up on high; Came to redeem a world like this, For sin condemned to die. For me he felt the smart, For me endured the cross; Melt, O my adamantine heart! Be purged away, my dross.

Let love so undeserved, In me find some return; Let this poor heart by it preserved, With gratitude now burn. Return, my willing soul, To Him who sought for thee; Yield all thy powers to His control, Who bled to make thee free.

Ah! each attempt how vain, How feeble every move, That fain would bring to him again, An offering for his love. Help me to give my all To Thee, my chief delight; The gift is so exceeding small, 'Tis nothing in my sight.

Ye angels near the throne, Help me to speak his praise! 'Tis not in all the earth alone To celebrate his grace! Such boundless love, supreme, Such pure, transcendent grace, Language can never reach the theme, Tongue cannot tell the praise!

R. E. G.

Jan. 1, 1876.

BABYLON BECOMING CHILDISH.

By Wm. Covert

A short time ago, while passing down a street in Fort Wayne, Ind., I was hailed by an interesting girl of perhaps twelve years. “Please, mister,” said she, “can you vote for my doll at Third Street Church this evening? Just one vote for the doll—only ten cents.”

As I had no means of learning the merits of the several candidates for the prize at the church, I could but withhold my vote; for I noticed others who were equally solicitous for their dolls. I asked what all this meant, and was informed that Third Street Church was in need of means, perhaps to pay her minister, and the members were obliged to devise some way by which to raise the needed money. The parents of these girls could well afford to invest a few dollars in a nice doll to please their daughters provided they could turn this investment so as to raise the money for the church; so these daughters are sent out on the streets and into corners, stores, and shops, for the purpose of begging money to pay the pastor. They were going to have a great doll-baby show that evening for the benefit of Rev. —, D. D. Well did the prophet Isaiah prophesy concerning those blind watchmen, as recorded in chap. 56:10–13.

These precious children need the vigilant watchcare of their mothers; they need to be instructed in holiness, purity, and virtue; but, alas! they are forced out where Satan has all chances to ruin them. They must learn to be bold and impudent before they can successfully canvass for the amusements that are gotten up in order to force the “roughs” to help support the pleasure-loving churches. May the Lord preserve a people, even in this degenerate age, who will let their works and virtues shine in the midst of the moral darkness.

Wm. Covert.

LOVE VS. JEALOUSY.

By H. F. Phelps

Love is the foundation of God’s government. It was love that led him to give his only and beloved Son to die for a race of sinners. Whoever has any of the Spirit of God will love his brother.

The spirit of jealousy led Satan to envy the position of Christ as commander of the heavenly host, and finally led him on to rebellion and all the train of evils that has resulted. “Love,” says the wise man, “is strong as death; jealousy is cruel as the grave; the coals thereof are coals of fire, which hath a most vehement flame.”

In order to understand just what the word jealous means, I take down Webster’s Dictionary, and read: “Jealous—suspicious; apprehensive of rivalry; fear that we do not enjoy the affection or respect of others; emulous; full of competition. In short, jealousy is awakened by whatever may exalt others, and give them advantages or pleasures which we desire ourselves. Jealousy is nearly allied to envy.” I have abbreviated considerably, but can any one find in jealousy anything that is desirable? I have felt it, and I do not find that it makes any one very comfortable. It is the most miserable of all feelings.

Since jealousy is one of the works of the flesh, we may be sure that Satan will be prompt in trying to insinuate jealous feelings into the minds of some who are connected with the work of God. But whoever has it may rest assured that he is doing Satan’s work. He is harboring a spirit which will lead him to certain death. It has never done any good; but, on the other hand, it has broken up families, set neighbors at variance, and eaten the vitals out of many a church. It has overturned kingdoms; and it was this spirit that led Satan and his angels to rebel, and which has set our world all in an uproar.

It is astonishing that any one who professes to believe the third angel’s message should harbor such a spirit for a single moment; and it is even more astonishing that those very individuals, for the time being, think that they themselves are possessed of the Spirit of God, and others devoid of it, or nearly so at least.

It is all right that God should be jealous for his holy name, his just laws, and his righteous government. It is all right that we should be jealous for the cause and name of God, as was one of old, who said, “I have been very jealous for the Lord God of hosts.” And I am glad that there are a few of the same spirit at the present time, as is evinced by their self-denying, godly lives in connection with this cause.

An old saying worthy of remembrance, I will here quote: “Whoever had qualities to alarm our jealousy, had excellency to deserve our fondness.” It is all right for us to be jealous for one another’s interests, as was Paul for his brethren. We may no doubt be justified in provoking one another to jealousy by our good works; that is, by our good works we may provoke others to equal or exceed us in sacrifices for Christ’s sake. Let us have more of this. But when brethren harbor a spirit of distrust one of another, or are envious of another’s position, they are certainly going in the wrong

direction, and the sooner they retrace their steps the better.

May we be enabled to escape every temptation to harbor this spirit, and get more of that grace which stands opposed, which is love.

H. F. Phelps.

REVIEW OF STORR.

By A. Smith

The Sabbath Changed by the Papacy.

Eld. Storr: “The claim that the pope of Rome changed the Sabbath has no force; for there was no pope for more than three hundred years after Christ.”

Ans. The first day of the week was not kept as the Sabbath for more than three hundred years after Christ.

In Paul’s time, the corruption that finally culminated in the papacy had begun to work. 2 Thess. 2:7. It was natural enough for those who were converted from paganism to a profession of the Christian faith, but who were not soundly converted to God, to bring with them a love for the cherished institutions of their heathen worship; hence, in time, the exaltation of the heathen Sunday, the invocation of saints, purgatory, and the doctrine of the immortality of the soul, followed.

The angel of God told Daniel that the fourth beast was the fourth kingdom which should exist upon the earth, and that he should think to change times and laws; and, behold, when the man of sin arose he claimed power to do that very thing. If we are not right in our application of the prophecy, will Eld. S. be so kind as to elucidate the point?

Pope Innocent III., in A. D. 1202, professed to have received a letter from Heaven commanding the observance of Sunday under awful penalties. What need was there, we ask, for such a miraculous interposition in its favor if the Sunday had been generally kept as the Sabbath from apostolic times?

Mr. S. mentioned Justin Martyr, Barnabas, Irenius, Polycarp, Origen, and others, as bearing testimony to a change of the Sabbath; but he read not a word of their testimony, except a part of the epistle of Barnabas. If the reader would like to know what these fathers did write about the Sabbath, let him send to the REVIEW Office for a pamphlet entitled, “The Complete Testimony of the Fathers.”

The following opinions of Martin Luther and Adam Clarke concerning the writings of the “fathers,” will be of interest to the reader:—

“When God’s word is by the fathers expounded, construed, and glossed, then, in my judgment, it is even like unto one that straineth milk through a coal-sack, which must needs spoil the milk, and make it black: even so, likewise, God’s word of itself is sufficiently pure, clean, bright, and clear; but through the doctrines, books, and writings of the fathers, it is very surely darkened, falsified, and spoiled.”—Martin Luther.

“We should be cautious how we appeal to heathens, however eminent, in behalf of morality; because much may be collected from them on the other side. In like manner, we should take heed how we quote the fathers in proof of the doctrines of the gospel; because he who knows them best, knows that on many of those subjects they blow hot and cold.”—Autobiography of Adam Clarke, p. 134, book iii.

Eld. S.: “Those who preach the law detract from the glory of Christ. The burden of the third chapter of Galatians is against this very thing.”

Ans. If Eld. S. refers to the ceremonial law his statement has no force; for neither Seventh-day Adventists, nor any other denomination of Christians that we know of, are preaching that law; but if he refers to the binding force of the moral law of ten commandments, we are glad to be honored as the target of his invectives. We deny, however, preaching justification or salvation by the law. Christ alone can free us from the condemnation of the law; but, when set free, we believe that the law is a rule of life to us, and that if we again transgress, we become sinners as before.

Mr. S. further claimed that Christ, by fulfilling the law, abolished it; that Paul wrote against the law in Galatians; and that if we attempt to keep it by observing days we may boast, &c.

Ans. If Christ abolished the law by fulfilling it, he also, in like manner, abolished righteousness, and there is no use, therefore, in preaching repentance; for there can be no sinners in the world. See Matt. 3:15; 1 John 3:4; Rom. 7:7; 4:15. If, as Eld. S. says, referring to the Sabbath, “by keeping days we may boast,” how shall we avoid it if we keep Sunday?

Mr. S. spoke of the importance of faith without the deeds of the law, and referred to the faith exercised by Abraham; Gal. 3:9; but if he had placed beside this testimony of Paul’s the fact that Abraham kept the law and also the testimony, as an honest expositor should, all would have been plain. See also James 2:8–26. Of faith and the law, Paul thus reasons: “Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith. Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid; yea, we establish the law.” Rom. 3:30, 31. In the 29th verse of this chapter and Eph. 2:11, he tells us who are included in these two classes. It is evident, therefore, that the same moral law of the same God is equally binding upon both the Jews and the Gentiles.

A. Smith.

Continue reading: TWO DAYS WITH A JEW