The books and tracts of these people have been scattered broadcast through the land, and are being read by multitudes who know little or nothing of what lies at the foundation of their system.
In the former paper the writer has already noticed briefly their teaching on the Sabbath, the immortality of the soul, and some other points. The object of the present paper is to call attention to several things of a very fundamental nature, which reveal the real character and origin of the movement, and which ought to be weighed in the fear of God, and by His Word, by any who seriously think of committing themselves in any way to the tenets of Seventh Day Adventism.
The reader’s serious attention is called to the following points: 1. They deny that the Person of the Son of God existed from all eternity; or, in other words, they say that He had a beginning, and so was not eternal. In a book entitled “Christ and His Righteousness,” by E. J. Wagoner, we read: “It is not given to men to know when or how the Son was begotten.... We know that Christ ‘proceeded forth and came from God’ (John 8:4242Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me. (John 8:42)), but it was so far back in the ages of eternity as to be far beyond the grasp of the mind of man.” (Page 9.)
“He is begotten, not created. As to when He was begotten, it is not for us to inquire.... There was a time when Christ proceeded forth and came from God, from the bosom of the Father (John 8:42;1:1842Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me. (John 8:42)
18No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. (John 1:18)), but that time was so far back in the days of eternity that to finite comprehension it is practically without beginning.” (Pages 21-22.)
“But the point is that Christ is a begotten Son, and not a created subject.... And since He is the only begotten Son of God, He is of the very substance and nature of God, and possesses by birth all the attributes of God.... Life inheres in Him, so that it cannot be taken from Him, but, having voluntarily laid it down, He can take it again...
“If any one springs the old cavil, how Christ could be immortal and yet die, we have only to say we do not know.” (Page 22.)
“Christ ‘is in the bosom of the Father’; being by nature of the very substance of God and having life in Himself, He is properly called Jehovah, the self-existent One.” (Page 23.)
These extracts present unquestionable proof that they deny the Son’s co-eternity with the Father, and thus rob Him of His personal glory.
Now the plain, simple, yet blessed and profound teaching of Scripture is, that Christ, the Son not only existed co-eternally and in co-equality with the Father, but that He thus existed in relationship, Son with and of the Father.
If we compare Isaiah 6:1-5 with John 12:40-4140He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them. 41These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him. (John 12:40‑41), we see that He is the same person as the Jehovah (translated Lord) of Isaiah 6. Compare also John 8:5858Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. (John 8:58), where He says, “Before Abraham was, I am.” These Scriptures show that He is identified with JEHOVAH, the I AM. And this Mr. Wagoner strangely enough admits, saying, “He is properly called Jehovah, the self-existent One.” (Page 23.) But it is very easy to see that if the Son had a beginning, as Adventists claim He had, He could not be “self-existent”; for if He had a beginning He must have derived His existence from Another, and so could neither be self-existent nor eternal.
Let us now look at John 1:1-21In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2The same was in the beginning with God. (John 1:1‑2), where His eternal existence as a distinct Person in the Godhead is the very question. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God.” That is, go back to any point we can call “the beginning,” and the Word existed then. It does not say “from the beginning,” but “in the beginning.” He did not begin to be, but He was — He existed; consequently He was before time, before there was any beginning. He existed thus a divine Being. “God,” and “with God,” a distinct Person in the Godhead, not “from,” but “in the beginning,” and was Himself the Creator of every created thing — of everything that had a beginning. But if He Himself had a beginning, then He was not before the beginning — did not already exist “in the beginning,” and thus the doctrine of these people would give the lie to Scripture.
Mr. Wagoner says that Christ was the Son of God by birth. This is true of Him as born of the virgin Mary, but this is not what Mr. Wagoner means; he means that at some indefinite point of time before the creation of angels or men, the Son of God was born. This, Scripture never says, nor intimates, and is false doctrine. He also says that “Christ proceeded forth and came from God, from the bosom of the Father.” This also is false. He did come from God, but Scripture never says He came from the bosom of the Father. It says He “is in the bosom of the Father” (John 1:1818No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. (John 1:18)), and this when He was here on earth. And when Mr. Wagoner applies Christ’s proceeding forth from God to the mode of His becoming the only begotten Son, ages before He was born of the virgin Mary, he misses the whole point of the passage, which refers simply to His coming into this world as the sent One of the Father, as the context clearly shows. He was indeed the only begotten Son, before His birth into this world. He was this from eternity; but the expression “only begotten Son,” is used to express an eternally existing relationship, and not the mode of His coming into being, for He did not come into being, since He existed “in the beginning.”
In John 1:1414And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. (John 1:14) we are told that “the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.” When the Word thus became flesh, He was manifested in the world, and visible to the eyes of men. But faith saw something the world could not see. It saw a glory that belonged to Him in that wondrous relationship in which He subsisted from eternity with the Father — “glory as of an only begotten with a Father,” J.N.D. Trans. — a personal eternally subsisting glory of this kind and not what began to be by the Word becoming flesh.
The Word “dwelt (or tabernacled) among us”; but, shining through that tabernacle, a glory was seen which existed before, a glory in which He subsisted as the Object of the Father’s love before time began, and in which we shall behold Him only to wonder and worship, when with Him in the Father’s house. And this is His desire for us according to the prayer of John 17:2424Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world. (John 17:24): “Father, I will that they also, whom Thou hast given Me, be with Me where I am; that they may behold My glory, which Thou hast given Me: for Thou lovedst Me before the foundation of the world.” This is His glory, as the only begotten in the bosom of the Father from and to eternity.
This we see also in John 1:1818No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. (John 1:18). At Sinai a glory was seen which demanded the obedience of the creature and the judgment of the transgressor — a glory before which sinful man could not stand. But now the Father opens His bosom, and a deeper glory shines forth. “No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him.” Faith looks into that open bosom and reads the Father’s heart revealed in Him who dwelt in that bosom. It was indeed necessary that He should become flesh, that He might thus declare the Father to men; but it was as “the only begotten Son,” holding this unique position of eternal relationship, “in the bosom of the Father,” as at home, and subsisting in all the love and delight of that heart, that He could declare Him. Wondrous revelation, and wondrous grace that such a Person in such a relationship should have become incarnate, in order to reveal the Father, and bring guilty men into relationship with Him through redemption! “The Son of man” the incarnate One “must be lifted up,” a Sacrifice; but God’s measureless love to a perishing world has been revealed in providing that Sacrifice in the gift of “His only begotten Son,” while in the death of that blessed One His glory and majesty have been made good in the judgment of sin, so that grace reigns through righteousness.
In Psalm 2:77I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. (Psalm 2:7), and Hebrews 1:55For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son? (Hebrews 1:5), the term “begotten” is applied to Christ in connection with His birth as Messiah. And Acts 13:3333God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. (Acts 13:33) shows that these passages refer to this birth, and not to a birth at some remote period before creation. God had made a promise to the fathers, and here we are told, “God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that He hath raised up Jesus.” (R.V.) This is His relationship in time with God as Messiah. Mr. Wagoner tells us “It is not given to men to know when or how the Son was begotten,” while this passage expressly tells us it was when God “raised up Jesus” in fulfillment of His promise to the fathers. This is clearly in connection with His first advent over 1,900 years ago.
But it is to be remarked that neither in the second Psalm, nor in Hebrews is He called “the only begotten Son.” In those Scriptures it is a time relationship that is expressed, and which began as such with His birth. And here He is said to have been “begotten.” “This day have I begotten Thee.” This is not said in John 1:14,1814And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. (John 1:14)
18No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. (John 1:18), where the term “only begotten” is used to express His position and glory with the Father, and in the bosom of the Father as Son from eternity. In this connection it is never said He was “begotten” as if there were a specific act and time of begetting, which might also involve priority of existence in the begetter. The term “only begotten,” declares what He is, not what He became in time, and is used to express an eternally existing relationship which belongs to Himself alone.
2. Another dreadful heresy held by these people is that the divinity, as well as the humanity, of our blessed Lord became extinct, when He died on the cross; and that for three days the Son of God ceased to exist.
Mr. Wagoner does not pretend to know “how Christ could be immortal and yet die.” And remember when he says this, he means an immortal being, yea Jehovah Himself the self-existing One ceasing to exist, for this is their meaning of death! Mr. W. truly enough tells us that Christ “is of the very substance and nature of God”; but when we remember again that he means Christ derived His substance and nature as a divine Person from God by birth before the creation of the world, we are again confronted by blasphemy. But what folly, not to say monstrous wickedness, to speak as if the very “nature” and “substance” of God were destructible, or could cease to exist! If any one raised a difficulty as to this, he calls it an “old cavil.” He would have us believe it is a “mystery” (page 23), and well he might, if death means ceasing to be. Unfortunately for Mr. Wagoner, it does not mean this, and what he would have us believe to be a mystery is simply falsehood and blasphemy. To be immortal, and yet cease to be, is impossible. The one thing positively contradicts the other; and there is no “cavil” about it either. God only has immortality absolutely. (1 Tim. 6:1616Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honor and power everlasting. Amen. (1 Timothy 6:16).) In Him it is inherent. Others have it as derived from, and dependent on Him, as angels and men. Men have it in the soul, not yet in the body. See Matthew 10:2828And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. (Matthew 10:28), where we are told that men can “kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul.” It is the body that is mortal, not the soul, and 1 Corinthians 15:51-5551Behold, I show you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 52In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. 53For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. 54So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. 55O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? (1 Corinthians 15:51‑55) shows that at the resurrection, the mortal body will “put on immortality.” It is because man has a mortal part — the body — that he is called mortal. And it is because the Son of God became man, with a human body, as well as soul, that He could die. Adam and his race, because of sin, became subject to death. The Son of God was not subject to death, because in Him was no sin; but He could, and did, die for others, and this without laying aside immortality, a thing impossible. When He became man, and died on the cross, He did not cease to be God, nor could He, for God is from eternity to eternity (Psa. 90:22Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God. (Psalm 90:2)). God cannot give up His own existence but having become man, He who had become such could die. But this does not mean that He ceased to exist. He laid down His human life in atonement for sin, and all the value of what He is as God belonged to this wondrous act; but He still remained God, though the human life was laid down to be taken again in resurrection; and man, too, though in death the soul left the body, going into hades, while the body was laid in the sepulcher.
When the Jews wanted a sign from the blessed Lord, He said unto them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” He referred to “the temple of His body” (John 2:19,2119Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. (John 2:19)
21But he spake of the temple of his body. (John 2:21)). If, in death, He ceased to be, how could He raise up that temple? How could a nonentity raise a dead body to life? Let no one say this is “caviling.” It is not. It is only exposing one of Satan’s horrible lies about the Person of the Lord Jesus.
John 10:17-1817Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. 18No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father. (John 10:17‑18) is in keeping with the above Scripture. Jesus says: “I lay down My life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of My Father.” Wondrous truth! But if He ceased to exist when He laid down His life, if His divinity and His humanity both alike became extinct, how could He have power to take His life again? You cannot connect power with what does not exist. If His divinity and humanity were both extinct those three days, the Savior had ceased to be; there was no Savior to take His life again. It is an absurdity on the face of it. But if, when He died, He still continued to be God, the living God, and man, too, with a living soul, though the body was dead, He could, according to the authority received from His Father, take His life again. This He did in resurrection and He who died for us, now lives for us, a Savior and High Priest, able to save unto the uttermost all that come unto God by Him.
3. The Seventh Day Adventists declare that Christ, in becoming a man, took a sinful human nature, thus assailing the truth of His humanity, as well as His divinity. Again we read from Mr. Wagoner’s book: “Moreover, the fact that Christ took upon Himself the flesh, not of a sinless being, but of a sinful man, that is, that the flesh which He assumed had all the weakness and sinful tendencies to which fallen human nature is subject, is shown by the statement that ‘He was made of the seed of David according to the flesh.’ David had all the passions of human nature. He says of himself, ‘Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.’ Psalm 51:55Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me. (Psalm 51:5).”
“There was in His whole life a struggle. The flesh moved upon by the enemy of all righteousness, would tend to sin.” (Pages 26, 27, 29.)
Much more might be added to these extracts, but surely these are enough to stamp the brand of horrible blasphemy on the whole system, for every one whose heart is loyal to Christ. If these shocking words were true, we would all be left without a Savior. For if Christ had a sinful nature He had an unholy nature, and would have needed a Savior for Himself. He did take human nature, and He was made in the likeness of men, but Scripture never says He took sinful human nature; and, though sent “in the likeness of sinful flesh,” it never says His flesh was “sinful flesh.” Just think of the presumption and awful wickedness of Mr. Wagoner intimating that our blessed Lord Jesus was shapen in iniquity and conceived in sin! He does not say this directly, but David says it of himself, and Mr. Wagoner tells us this was the kind of flesh assumed by the Son of God — flesh which “had all the weakness and sinful tendencies to which fallen human nature is subject.” One shrinks from recording such unholy statements about the Person of the Lord Jesus; but there is need that the danger-signal be made plain, and souls warned against the fatal vortex into which this system draws its deluded victims.
The words of the angel to Mary were: “The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall over-shadow thee; therefore also that HOLY THING which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.” Luke 1:35. 0! how different from the words of Mr. Wagoner. I am aware Mr. Wagoner says He did not commit sin, but he says He had sinful flesh, a sinful nature, while the angel says “that holy thing.” A sinful nature cannot be a holy nature, and sinful flesh cannot be holy flesh. The terms are opposite in meaning, and to apply the terms “sinful nature” or “sinful flesh” to the Person of the Lord Jesus is blasphemy of the worst kind. I know Scripture says He “was made sin for us,” but it does not say He was made sinful. That is a very different thing. In the original the word for “sin” and “sin offering” is the same; and when it says He “was made sin for us” it refers to His becoming a sin offering on the cross, made sin sacrificially: that is, He took our place and was dealt with as a sin offering under the judgment of God, in order that sin might be put away. If He had been sinful in His own nature, He could not have done this; He could not have been an acceptable sacrifice; His own sinful nature would have been something only fit for judgment itself, and could not have been accepted for others.
It is well to remark that, in Scripture, the term “the flesh” is used in two widely different senses. It may be used of the body simply, as “the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak”; “the life which I now live in the flesh” (Matt. 26:4141Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak. (Matthew 26:41); Gal. 2:2020I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. (Galatians 2:20)), or it may be used of the fallen, sinful nature of the first Adam, in which we have our position morally before God by nature, as “the flesh lusteth against the Spirit”; “sin in the flesh”; “they that are in the flesh.” (Gal. 5:1717For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would. (Galatians 5:17); Rom. 8:3,83For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: (Romans 8:3)
8So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. (Romans 8:8), and other passages.) Our blessed Lord had a body of flesh; but in the second sense the term is never applied to Him. To do so would be blasphemy.
May God in great mercy preserve His people from receiving these shocking statements about the Person of His beloved Son. It is Satan’s work, bringing in a false Christ altogether, a foundation that will not stand. The Christ of Scripture is a divine Person, who exists from eternity to eternity, the I AM, the Word and Son of God, in eternal relationship with the Father, co-equal and co-eternal. In God’s due time He became man, yet never ceasing to be God — not a sinful man, nor a man with a sinful nature, but one who was “holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners,” sinless in His life, and without taint of sin or defilement in His nature, which He derived from God, and not from sinful, fallen Adam. He took humanity but not fallen humanity, and “through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God” (Heb. 9:1414How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? (Hebrews 9:14)), a sacrifice for us; and as Peter tells us, He was a Lamb “without blemish and without spot,” by whose precious blood we are redeemed and brought to God. The sacrifice was of infinite worth, and His blood avails for all those who put their trust in Him. May the reader know the blessedness of having a conscience purged forever, according to the unceasing eternal value of that blood.
4. Those at all familiar with Seventh Day Adventism are aware, that according to their theory of the atonement, Christ did not enter into “the holiest of all” until the year 1844. In an article in the Advent Review and Sabbath Herald of January 30, 1894, the writer brands as “error” “the idea that the atonement was made upon the cross,” and declares it was “not made on the cross,” but is “in process now,” and that “the final work of atonement by our Lord Jesus Christ has been going forward since the end of the prophetic period (the 2,300 days of Dan. 8) that marked its beginning in 1844, for almost fifty years.” It is held that in 1844, at the close of Daniel’s 2,300 days, the Lord Jesus entered the “holiest of all” to cleanse the sanctuary, and that since that time He has been completing the work of atonement. It is an extraordinary doctrine, but it came into existence as an after-thought to maintain the consistency of their system when they had gotten into difficulty. They had previously set the year 1844 as the year in which the Lord was to come. This was a delusion, for Christians are warned against setting dates for His coming. From the beginning they have been exhorted to “watch,” just for the very reason that they “know neither the day nor the hour.” As might be expected, these people who sought to be wiser than Scripture were disappointed. The Lord did not come in 1844; and now they were in difficulty, and must either find some plausible solution of the difficulty, to save their credit as interpreters of prophecy, or else give up and admit they had been deceived. Had they honestly confessed that they had been deceived, and humbled themselves before God, they might have been delivered from the snare; but they did not. The enemy had led them to believe a lie; and now he will lead them to believe a still more horrible lie, in order that they may believe the first lie was true. They made a mistake in their interpretation of Daniel’s 2,300 days — a prophecy fulfilled in the days of Antiochus Epiphanes, as I believe — and on this false foundation they have reared a gigantic structure of error, setting aside the truth as to the atonement, and denying the Lord’s entrance into “the holiest of all” until fifty years ago.
The 9th and 10th of Hebrews show that at the time that book was written, Christ had gone into the presence of God in the holy place with His own blood: that is, He had reached the mercyseat, the throne of God, where the blood had to be sprinkled by the high priest. He has gone into the presence of God for us, where His blood avails for all believers. And not only so, but the rending of the veil (type of His own flesh) shows that the way into the holiest of all was opened by the death of Jesus. And now even we — all Christians from the beginning — (not Christ alone) have “boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,” as a company of priestly worshipers, and there we find Christ over us as High Priest to present our worship to God according to the value of His own work for us. (Heb. 10:19-2219Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, 20By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh; 21And having an high priest over the house of God; 22Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water. (Hebrews 10:19‑22).) Nothing could be plainer in Scripture than that Christianity is founded on Christ’s death for us, and His going into God’s presence for us; and it is a piece of awful presumption for any man to attempt to prove, by a false interpretation of Daniel 8, that the Lord Jesus did not enter into the holiest till 1844.
Many other points equally erroneous, might be mentioned, were there need; but these are fundamental, seeking to overthrow the truth of Christianity, and clearly prove the anti-Christian character of Seventh Day Adventism, and that it has its origin with “the father of lies.” And this is enough to lead any heart loyal to Christ, to shun it, and turn away from it with abhorrence.
We would not deny the sincerity of the advocates of this wretched system. No doubt many of them are sincere, but their sincerity will not save them. I suppose the priests of Baal were sincere when leaping on the altar, crying to Baal, and cutting themselves with lancets till the blood gushed out; but they had allowed themselves to be deceived by Satan, instead of cleaving to the word of the Lord; and they perished by the sword of Elijah (1 Kings 18.) A more terrible sword awaits the calumniators of Christ, even the two-edged sword proceeding out of the mouth of Him who is coming, the many-crowned “King of kings and Lord of lords.” May reader and writer be found of Him in peace when He comes.