(Continued from last month)
Surely the Seventh-day Adventists will tell us that Paul went into the synagogues on the Sabbath day. This he certainly did, and it was of God that he did. That was the one day when he could find the Jews gathered together, and so he utilized the same in preaching Jesus to them. The same thing was true of the Lord, and the other apostles. They had a message to deliver to the Jews, and they fulfilled it.
Adventists may well stress the Sabbath, for it is clear evidence that they do not understand the whole Christian era; they do not comprehend new creation. They are "law-keepers," and that belongs with the old dispensation. In this age of grace, God has brought in new creation through Christ dead and risen, and the eighth day is a sign of the new creation. Of this they seem to be willingly ignorant. The eighth day is the beginning of a new week, and in the types of the Old Testament, the eighth day (the first day of a new week) has this significance. It prefigures the bringing in of something new. Lev. 23 is a case in point: everything that referred to this period of time was on the first day of a new week. Thus the Lord arose on the first day, and the wave sheaf was offered that day; the Spirit of God descended to form the Church on that day, and the type of it—the wave loaves—was carried out on that day. It was the day on which the Lord Jesus met with His disciples after His resurrection, once and again. It was the day "when the disciples came together to break bread." It was on that day the Corinthian believers were to lay by of their means for the poor saints at Jerusalem. True, the Jewish women who came to anoint the Lord's body in the tomb rested on the Sabbath day, but they were devout Jews and were living on the other side of His resurrection. Neither the Adventists nor anyone else can prove that any Christian assembly met on the Sabbath day, nor that there is even a hint in any Christian epistle that Christians should observe it; nay, rather, it is embraced in the things condemned.
Some may refer to the Lord's words in Matt. 24, "Pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day," as a warrant for Sabbath-keeping. But even a casual examination of the subject should clear that matter. It is the Lord's direction to the Jewish remnant (not on Christian ground) which will exist in a future day, and who will have to flee for their lives when an idol is set up IN THE TEMPLE AT JERUSALEM. (See Matt. 24:15-2115When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) 16Then let them which be in Judea flee into the mountains: 17Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: 18Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. 19And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! 20But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day: 21For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. (Matthew 24:15‑21), and Dan. 12:1111And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. (Daniel 12:11), where "abomination" means an "idol" which will be set up in the "holy place" of the temple.) When the Lord gave directions for the Jewish believers to flee Jerusalem before Titus destroyed the city, He said NOT ONE WORD about not fleeing on the. Sabbath day, for they were not under law. (Luke 21.) These things are all mixed up in hopeless confusion in Adventist literature, and they boldly assume positions that are really untenable. And all their talk about the Church of Rome being the beast who, supposedly, changed the Sabbath is just so much dust thrown into the air. What if Rome does take credit for such a change, that alters nothing. Why go back to the second or third century and speak of what Rome did; go back, rather, to the beginning of Christianity and learn what Christianity is, and do not annex Judaism to Christianity. When the Church has been translated to heaven, then it will be God's mind to go back to the Sabbath, and the Sabbath will be observed on earth in the Millennium. (But, of course, there is no millennial reign of Christ to the Adventists, for their weird and fantastic doctrine teaches that the earth will remain a burned out, uninhabited place for that period of time; and everything must fit their doctrine.)
Regardless of what the Adventists and their apologists may say, it is no light matter for them to bind themselves to the Sabbath. It is evidence of their whole legal system which undermines the very truth of the gospel. It is part and parcel of their Judaised Christianity, or, perhaps rather, Christianized Judaism.
Besides the more serious soul-destroying features of this Sabbath and commandment-keeping legalism, the Adventists' obsessions carry them into many hard and ridiculous situations. Their General Conference president, Mr. R. R. Figuhr, who recently visited Iceland, wrote back, "Iceland lies far to the north.... It was a new experience Friday evening to await the beginning of the Sabbath. The sun actually set at 11:46 p.m. and rose the next morning at a little before 2:00.... In the winter, of course, the opposite is the case."—Review and Herald, August 8, 1957. What a short night! Just over two hours. If he had gone farther north, to where the sun does not set in summer nor rise in winter, what would he have done? From sunset to sunset might be months long; it would either be a long Sabbath or a long period without one. And an Adventist sailing across the international dateline might easily have two Sabbaths together, or, sailing in the opposite direction, miss one entirely. At any rate they would vary from six to eight days apart. The children of Israel, to whom the law of the Sabbath was given, had no such problems in the land which the Lord their God gave them.
We may be accused of being ungracious in our comments, but we have not treated this doctrine any worse than did the inspired Apostle when he encountered it in the Galatian assemblies. His remarks were scathing, and his denunciation strong—"let him be accursed."
There is one more phase of the Adventists' law-keeping that should be examined; namely, their "health reform" doctrine. That they are dedicated to this also, we can easily prove from their own 1957 periodicals and books. Let us notice a few statements of theirs:
"Health reform is an important part of our message.... A study of health reform fits into our evangelism as an attractive feature of gospel work." Notice it is a part of their gospel. "As we begin our study on health reform we should have a few definite objectives in mind. We should aim, primarily, to lead people away from the more health-destroying and demoralizing practices, which center in the use of unclean foods," etc.—Review and Herald, July 11, 1957. "Two years ago there was not a single Seventh-day Adventist in the town. Today there are only two families that do not have at least one baptized member in our recently organized church. Neither liquor nor lard can anywhere be bought in the village, and there is now only one pig in this town, which a couple of years ago was literally overrun with them."—Review and Herald, May 16, 1957. "Since reading and studying your Bible lessons my husband and I do not eat or have any pork in any form or shape in our home. I will observe the Sabbath from now on, as stated in the fourth commandment of God."—Review and Herald, June 6, 1957. "The Spirit of prophecy writings are quite pointed concerning the matter: 'The angel's prohibition included "every unclean thing."' "—Review and Herald, August 1, 1957. "To find comfort and consolation he often read the Koran. He became interested in endeavoring to find some Christians who did not eat swine's flesh. He was greatly disappointed many times, until one day he visited one of our Seventh-day Adventist Bible instructors.... After much study he and his wife were baptized." "Probably the most effective way to curtail the accumulation of cancer viruses is to avoid eating meat,... to eliminate meat of all kinds from their diet."—Review Herald, May 2, 1957. "In 1900 the messenger of the Lord wrote: 'It will not be long until animal food will be discarded by many besides Seventh-day Adventists.'—Testimonies, vol. 7, p. 124."—Review and Herald, May 2, 1957. "He [Christ] taught them that health is the reward of obedience to the laws of God."—The Desire of Ages, p. 824.
We are aware that the Seventh-day Adventist apologists are willing to accept their "health reform" measures as merely for health's sake, but this is only part of it. It has its roots deep in their whole legal system of Jewish bondage. Listen to this: "That which corrupts the body tends to corrupt the soul."—Mrs. White, from Review and Herald, August 1, 1957. "These are included in the reforms that prepare a people to meet the Lord. There is power in presenting these principles with a 'Thus saith the Lord.'... When the time arrives for more specific instruction (which would be preparatory to baptism and church membership) the student will then see more clearly that each successive study is a link in the chain of truth in preparation for our Lord's return.... Health instruction is an important factor in true sanctification.... Before a Christian can hope to be glorified with his Lord he must be sanctified." Then in another place, "Why was it important that God's regulations be observed? [Answer] To shield them from ravaging disease and apostasy. Exod. 15:2626And said, If thou wilt diligently hearken to the voice of the Lord thy God, and wilt do that which is right in his sight, and wilt give ear to his commandments, and keep all his statutes, I will put none of these diseases upon thee, which I have brought upon the Egyptians: for I am the Lord that healeth thee. (Exodus 15:26). To preserve for Himself a holy people. Lev. 11:43-4743Ye shall not make yourselves abominable with any creeping thing that creepeth, neither shall ye make yourselves unclean with them, that ye should be defiled thereby. 44For I am the Lord your God: ye shall therefore sanctify yourselves, and ye shall be holy; for I am holy: neither shall ye defile yourselves with any manner of creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 45For I am the Lord that bringeth you up out of the land of Egypt, to be your God: ye shall therefore be holy, for I am holy. 46This is the law of the beasts, and of the fowl, and of every living creature that moveth in the waters, and of every creature that creepeth upon the earth: 47To make a difference between the unclean and the clean, and between the beast that may be eaten and the beast that may not be eaten. (Leviticus 11:43‑47). Cf. 1 Thess. 5:2323And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. (1 Thessalonians 5:23). [Question] Are these health principles important in our day? [Answer] Enjoined upon all New Testament Christians. 2 Cor. 6:17, 18; 7:117Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, 18And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. (2 Corinthians 6:17‑18)
1Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God. (2 Corinthians 7:1). A clean church will await Christ's return."—Review and Herald, July 11, 1957.
We do not have space for more such quotations, but we are convinced from their own writings that their "health reform" is but another phase of keeping the law. What does it mean but that, when they say it is "enjoined upon all New Testament Christians"? This is different from the instructions given in Acts 15 when some Judaiser's would have put the Gentile Christians under the Mosaic law. All that was prohibited was flesh containing the blood, and that has nothing to do with Mosaic law, for it was prohibited to man from the time that flesh was given him for food in Gen. 9 It antedated the giving of the law; it was a prohibition to man generally, not the Jew only. And certainly fornication was not for a Christian, as mentioned in Acts 15, for it is explained elsewhere that his body is the temple of the Holy Spirit.
People who come under the power of Seventh-day Adventism are brought into legal bondage. Let their apologists painstakingly read Adventist literature—past and present; let them not be deceived by good words and fair speeches. In our last quotation from the Adventists' official paper, they plainly state that this food restriction helps prepare a people for the coming of the Lord, that it is a part of their sanctification which a Christian MUST have before he can hope to be glorified. This is diametrically opposed to the truth of the gospel Paul preached. He would withstand to the face, as he once did Peter (Gal. 2:1111But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. (Galatians 2:11)), those who propagate such gospel-destroying heresy. "But meat commendeth us not to God." 1 Cor. 8:88But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse. (1 Corinthians 8:8). No meat or lack of meat will sanctify the Christian, nor prepare him for glory—he is not a law-burdened Jew. Perhaps we should remember that the Seventh-day Adventists claim to be the "Israel of God." To accept their "health reform" tenets is to fall from grace, and is apostasy.
If Mrs. White and her followers know so much better than God Himself did when He gave man flesh to eat, why accept the Bible as the Word of God? Surely God would have known how bad it was. Plainly, pork and pork products and all unclean flesh are forbidden to the Adventists, and many of them even make a fetish out of abstaining from all meat. This reminds us of the warning given by the Apostle Paul in 1 Timothy against those who commanded to abstain from meats, which God created to be received with thanksgiving of them that believe and know the truth. He calls such restrictions doctrines of demons. (1 Tim. 4.) Remember that "Every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving." v. 4. That does not mean that some foods may not be spoiled and unfit for human consumption, or that some people through allergies or ill-health may not be able to eat certain foods; but when man's diet is put on a basis of a legal statute for sanctification, for preparing a people for heaven, or to shield from apostasy, it is to be rejected forthwith. Besides being Mosaic law, it is the doctrine and commandments of men, of which we are warned in Col. 2 It does indeed have a show of wisdom, but it is contrary to the truth of the gospel.
We say again, this "health reform" is not a matter of indifference for people who want the truth, any more than are the other gross errors of Seventh-day Adventism with which we have already dealt.
Postscript
As we go to press we have just received a copy of Eternity magazine for November 1957, in which Dr. Donald G. Barnhouse reaffirms his stand that the Seventh-day Adventists are sound Evangelical Christians. In his latest defense of Seventh-day Adventism, he lauds the simultaneous release of the 720-page book by the General Conference of the Seventh-day Adventists explaining their position, and a book by Mr. Walter Martin, favorably reviewing Adventism, saying: "It may be the first time in modern church history that two parties with sharp differences have prayed and talked with each other and come finally to an understanding of the areas of agreement and disagreement."
Dr. Barnhouse attempts to discredit all criticism of Adventism (except that which he and Mr. Martin are willing to concede) as entirely "out of date," or the work of those who are "willingly ignorant of the facts or victims of such prejudice that they are no longer to be trusted as teachers in this field." It should be emphasized that neither of these apologists named finds anything in the "areas of disagreement" that they consider of such vital importance as to undermine the foundations of the gospel, or to constitute a barrier to Christian fellowship.
Nevertheless, what we have been saying in this and previous issues can be verified from current magazines of the Adventists' General Conference, or from books now being advertised and sold by them. We may well ask, Just who is "willingly ignorant"?
Any true believer in the Lord Jesus Christ has the Holy Spirit of God as the "anointing" with which to perceive "the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error" (1 John 4:66We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error. (1 John 4:6)), and he does not need Dr. Barnhouse and Mr. Martin to set themselves up to be the last court of appeal, and to act as the custodians of the consciences of other Christians in the matter of false doctrines. Dr. Barnhouse makes the bold and presumptuous statement that Mr. Martin's new book "renders obsolete every other non-Adventist book that has been written on the appraisal and criticism of Seventh-day Adventism."
Dr. Barnhouse quotes from the new Seventh-day Adventist book to show that there are 19 points of agreement between Adventists and "Conservative Christians," but this is not really so, for what Adventists mean by some of these statements and what loyal Christians mean by them are two different things. Let us examine a few of these points:
When they say, "He lived an absolutely sinless life here on earth," they really mean that He did so in spite of inheriting a sinful nature.
When they say "That the vicarious, atoning death of Jesus Christ, once for all, is all-sufficient for the redemption of a lost race," this must be taken with reservations in view of the many qualifications we read elsewhere in their books and periodicals, wherein they place great stress on things the individual must do. According to their doctrine this atoning death would not avail to those who reject their strange message of "the third angel" teaching obedience to the law, and Sabbath-keeping.
When they say "That He now serves as our advocate in priestly ministry and mediation before the Father," their whole doctrine of the heavenly sanctuary and His present examination of the records in heaven to see who are worthy of eternal life must be considered.
When they say "That He will return in a premillennial, personal, imminent second advent," they do not refer to the millennial reign of Christ on earth, as the Bible teaches, but rather to a time when, according to them, the earth will be a burned-out chaos.
When they say "That man is sanctified by the indwelling Christ through the Holy Spirit," we must remember that they claim other things are necessary for sanctification without which no one can be glorified. This we have already shown includes the abstaining from eating pork and pork products.
Dr. Barnhouse, then, quoting from the new Adventist book, lists 12 points in which the Adventists find themselves in disagreement with some while in agreement with other "Conservative Christians." In this category come the keeping of the ten commandments (Sabbath and all), their disbelief in the present existence of the soul and spirit apart from the body, their complete rejection of eternal punishment, and their teaching of annihilation which is concomitant. How can Dr. Barnhouse recommend showing fellowship to the propagators of these pernicious evil doctrines? Just who are the "Conservative Christians" with whom the Seventh-day Adventists find themselves in agreement on these "DAMNABLE HERESIES"? We do not know any such, nor would we accept them as such if they could be brought forward. Why castigate Jehovah's Witnesses for their doctrines of soul sleep and extinction of the lost and of Satan and his angels, and take to our bosom the Adventists who boldly teach the same things These teachings have put them into the company of the cults, the infidels, and the scoffers.
Dr. Barnhouse has intimated before that the Adventists were going to repudiate Mrs. White. Have they done it? NO, NO. They boldly take their same old position, and stand by her as "God's messenger." They have not the slightest thought of altering their course, Dr. Barnhouse and company notwithstanding.
In this latest defense of the Adventists, Dr. Barnhouse says that the most serious charge against the Adventists has been that they taught that "Jesus Christ had a sinful human nature," and that this has been made a large issue by one "defender of the faith" who attempted to pin this error on Mrs. White herself. Let us read what Mrs. "White has really said:
"Notwithstanding that the sins of a guilty world were laid upon Christ [this at His baptism, which is gross error], notwithstanding the humiliation of taking upon Himself our fallen nature." "It would have been an almost infinite humiliation for the Son of God to take man's nature, even when Adam stood in his innocence in Eden, but Jesus accepted humanity when the race had been weakened by four thousand years of sin. Like every child of Adam He accepted the results of the working of the great law of heredity. What these results were is shown in the history of His earthly ancestors. He came with such a heredity to share our sorrows and temptations, and to give us the example of a sinless life.... He [God] permitted Him to meet life's peril in common with every human soul, to fight the battle as every child of humanity must fight it, at the risk of failure and eternal loss." "In our humanity, Christ was to redeem Adam's failure. But when Adam was assailed by the tempter, none of the effects of sin were upon him.... It was not thus with Jesus when He entered the wilderness to cope with Satan. For four thousand years the race had been decreasing in physical strength, in mental power, and in moral worth; and Christ took upon Him the infirmities
of degenerate humanity. Only thus could He rescue man from the lowest depths of his degradation.... But our Savior took humanity, with all its liabilities. He took the nature of man, with the possibility of yielding to temptation."-The Desire of Ages, pp. 49, 112, 117.
We are loath to defile the pages of our magazine with such writings as the above, but we put them here for Christians to see for themselves whether or not Mrs. White was unjustly blamed for teaching this great evil, as Dr. Barnhouse confidently avers.
Dr. Barnhouse, evidently sensing some incongruities in his position, has sought to make a way of escape for himself and Mrs. White by saying, "The original difficulty arose from the fact that Mrs. White was not a trained theologian and was largely unacquainted with historical theology.... In my opinion she lacked profundity, accuracy, and scholarship." Under any other circumstances this would be considered an affront and an insult, but in this case it is an expediency to excuse her plainly-stated false doctrines. But such pretexts will not palliate her evil, for she and her followers claim that she had the "gift of prophecy" by which she wrote "messages of counsel and warning, which we believe were just as verily from God as were the messages of the prophets in days of old." -The Testimony of Jesus, The Spirit of Prophecy, by W. E. Read (purchased in 1957). And Mrs. White said of her own writings, "It is God, and not an erring mortal who has spoken." But very plainly it would be impossible for anyone speaking by the Spirit of God to err, much less to speak blasphemous things. The unlearned and untaught Galilean fisherman, Simon Peter, made no mistakes either in his preaching by the Spirit (Acts 2), or in writing to the Jewish believers; and he surely had no theological background. The same might be said for the "herdman" Amos and many other Bible writers whom the Spirit of God used to pen divine communications.
We would that all of our readers could be "wise unto that which is good, and simple concerning evil" (Rom. 16:1919For your obedience is come abroad unto all men. I am glad therefore on your behalf: but yet I would have you wise unto that which is good, and simple concerning evil. (Romans 16:19)), for there is little profit for the soul in being occupied with evil; but there is a time when we MUST "earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints."
Jude 1, 31Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called: (Jude 1)
3Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. (Jude 3). It would be disloyalty to Christ to let this plot to vindicate the Seventh-day Adventists go unchallenged, for the glory of the Lord is involved, and it could lead souls to perdition.
In conclusion, we contend on the basis of the Seventh-day Adventists' current literature that they have not changed from what they were, nor have their false doctrines been altered. This is even confirmed by their own statement in an advertisement for their much publicized new book, "Seventh-day Adventists Answer Questions on Doctrine," which says: "This treatise [is] not a 'new' pronouncement of faith and doctrine-every answer given comes from within the framework of fundamental beliefs of Seventh-day Adventists as outlined in the Church Manual." Therefore let none be deceived by sweet, soothing assurances to the contrary.
Then, we may ask, Why was this new book published if there is nothing new in it? Evidently to render a powerful assist to the work of Dr. Donald G. Barnhouse and Mr. Walter Martin in their great effort to have the Adventists accredited as bona fide fundamental, Evangelical Christians. Dr. Barnhouse says that the Adventists' answers in the new book "were hammered out with us." It is obviously designed to catch unwary non-Adventists. It certainly was not needed for their own followers, who have mountains of Adventist literature already.
And Mr. Martin's new book, "The Truth About Seventh-day Adventists," with a signed statement in the front of it from an official of the Adventists' group, is based on this "hammered out" new Adventist book. It seems that he has worked unofficially as their public relations adviser to make the terminology of their old doctrines less objectionable, and then written his new book to back it up. Christians, beware! Beware of poisonous doctrines with innocent-looking labels! "Let NO man deceive you."