HARVEST GATHERING AND SIFTINGS.

ZION’S WATCH TOWER VOL. XI. ALLEGHENY, PA., MAY, 1890. NO. 6.

 

R1214

 

...However, we were then merely getting the general outlines of God’s plan, and unlearning many long-cherished errors, the time for a clear discernment of the minutiae having not yet fully come.  And here we should and do gratefully mention assistance rendered by Brothers George Stetson and George Storrs, both now deceased, the latter the editor of The Bible Examiner.  The study of the Word of God with these dear brethren led, step by step, into greener pastures and brighter hopes for the world, though it was not until 1872, when I gained a clear view of our Lord’s work as our ransom price, that I found the strength and foundation of all hope of restitution to lie in that doctrine. Up to that time, when I read the testimony that all in their graves shall come forth, etc., I yet doubted the full provision-whether it should be understood to include idiots or infants who had died without reaching any degree of understanding, beings to whom the present life and its experiences would seem to be of little or no advantage.  But when, in 1873, I came to examine the subject of restitution from the standpoint of the ransom price given by our Lord Jesus for Adam, and consequently for all lost in Adam, it settled the matter of restitution completely, and gave fullest assurance that ALL must come forth from Adamic death and be brought to a clear knowledge of the truth and to fullest opportunity of everlasting life in Christ.

 

Thus passed the years 1869-1872, and the years following, to 1876, were years of continued growth in grace and knowledge on the part of the handful of Bible students with whom I met regularly in Allegheny. We progressed from our first crude and indefinite ideas of restitution to clearer understanding of the details, God’s due time for clearer light not having come until 1874...

 

C.T.R.

 

SONSHIP

THE WORLD’S CRISIS DATE (?-1861)

 

...On the Sonship I should have no controversy with Brother Grew but on the point of ‘being made like,’ it strikes me there is a principle involved that we should look to. If true in the first sense, it would not, but parity of reason, prove immortality, because Paul says, ‘it was Christ that died;’ therefore we (in spirit) might also dies. But would it not be a very strong inferential argument of the condition of man’s spirit between death and the judgment, and have a direct bearing on the case of the thief on the cross, Stephen, Paul’s being unclothed,’ ‘desire to depart,’ ‘be with Christ,’ etc.

 

G. W. STETSON

 

Olens, Ohio

 

———-

 

REPLY TO G. W. STETSON

THE WORLD’S CRISIS DATE (?-1861)

 

In reply to the question of Bro. G. W. Stetson, I remark that I understand that the union of the pre-existent Spirit, (denominated the Son of God, Ro 1:4) with the body prepared him, qualified or capacitated him for that actual participation of ‘our feelings and infirmities,’ which constituted him a faithful High Priest, whose offering and mediation were acceptable to God.

 

The fact that the divine Spirit of the Son of God existed anterior and independently of the body prepared him, involves no proof that mere human spirits can exist independently of the body. The Son of God was a peculiar being. Although, in his incarnate state of humiliation, he ‘was made like unto his brethren’; in his original ‘begotten’ divine nature, he was made ‘much better than the angels,’ Heb 1:4, whose nature is superior to ours. Heb 2:7.

 

As the Son of God, in his divine nature, was ‘begotten of the Father,’ Joh 1:14, his declaration, ‘I live by the Father,’ Joh 6:58, must be understood as referring to his highest nature, and consequently, the words, ‘thou shalt make his soul (life) an offering for sin,’ Isa 53:10, may be referred to the same nature. I understand that it was the voluntary offering of the heights and entire life of the Son of God, in conformity with the will of the Father, in connection with his general obedience, which constituted and adequate ‘propitiation for the sins of the whole world’; so that God might be just and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.’ 1Jo 2:2 Ro 8:2. I appears to me, that both the Trinitarian and simple Humanitarian theories are open to the serious charge of diminishing the efficacy of the great sacrifice by limiting the actual death of the Son of God to simple humanity. I understand that my brother S. is not an advocate of either of these theories.

 

HENRY GREW

 

DOCTRINES OF STETSON’S CHURCH

 

January 18, 1863. (1) They believe in the personal coming and reign of Christ on the earth during the Millennium, as taught in Re 20

 

(2) At the beginning of which period the righteous dead will be raised, the living saints changed from mortal to immortality, and will reign with Christ during the thousand years.

 

(3) They now believe the intermediate state between death and the resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked is that of unconsciousness.

 

(4) They believe, as the wicked do not lay hold of Christ as their Life-giver, and neglect to seek for immortality, they fail of that attribute, and consequently will be raised up at the end of the one thousand years to a mortal life, and will fall under the power of the Second Death, being the wages of sin, which will be an extinction of being, and eternal in its results.

 

(5) Some believe that as all the family of man that have "died in Adam" will be raised up in the resurrection to another life, that all who have lived and died in unavoidable ignorance of a saving knowledge of God’s plan of salvation, in this or previous dispensations, will then have the opportunity of hearing of Him who died for all and tasted death for every man, and of accepting or rejecting Christ for themselves; then their due time for hearing of Him will have come.

 

(6) The belief in or the rejection of these doctrines or any part of them is not made a test of fellowship. The only test is Christian character.

 

(7) Their creed is simply this: ‘We, whose names are hereto attached, do hereby associate ourselves together as the Church of Christ in Norwalk and vicinity, and agree to take the Bible as our only rule of faith and practice."

 

 

 

"IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD." -- John 1:1

THE WORLD's CRISIS (Wednesday, August 3, 18..)

 

 

A recent reading of this declaration of the Evangelist, and a careful comparison of his words with those of the other New Testament writers, as also his own comments thereon in his epistles, has led me to suspect that the phrase "In the beginning," like many other Scriptures, has been very generally misapprehended, and consequently misapplied. It is most frequently referred to the beginning of the creation of the material worlds, of the heavens and the earth, as recorded by Moses in Genesis, and outside of the record I do not recollect of having seen any other.

 

But is it even probably that John, is giving his "treatise of all that Jesus began to do and teach," would in his narration of events take some other and different starting point than that assumed by all the other evangelists and apostles, widely differing also from his own other statement, as made and recorded by himself in his first epistle (1:1-2)? We think not. Let us, then, collate the different writers on this point, and note the unity of testimony among them as given upon this subject.

 

Matthew introduces his narrative with -- "The book of the generation of Jesus Christ," and goes no further back than Abraham, fourteen generations. Then, "The birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise." (Statement of events follows.)

 

The record by Mark opens with -- "The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ the Son of God." - 1:1. The preface of Luke is more explicit; thus: "Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us, even as they delivered them unto us, who from the beginning were eye witnesses, and ministers of the word [i.e., the word of testimony, or the word testified]; it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, more excellent Theophilus, that thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein, thou has been instructed." Luke goes no further back for "the very first of this beginning" than to a "certain priest called Zacharias, in the days of Herod." -- 1:5.

 

Now in contradistinction to this beginning, Peter introduces a secondary, in Acts 1:22; "Wherefore of these men who have companied with us all the time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John." Again (10:36-37), "the word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ. . . . throughout all Judea, and began form Galilee, after the baptism which John preached." (See also Mark 1:14.) Paul refers to the same when he says in Heb. 2:3, "How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him?" but this secondary beginning was only the manifestation of that word to which John refers when he says, "The word was with God." (John 1:1); i.e., the word of life; the word which God sent to Israel, preaching peach by Jesus Christ; the word which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord; the word of promise ("for this is the promise that he hath promised us, even eternal life; and this life is in his Son"); this word was in the beginning at the very first with God, and this word was God; became it constitute the utterance of the Spirit's voice, and God is spirit. So John in his epistle  (1:1-3) is in perfect harmony with the primary, declaration when he says, "That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father [of whom are all things], and was manifested unto us."

 

Next, let us turn to the record that God has given us concerning his Son, and see if this view is in harmony with that.

 

1. -- The word of promise. Matthew, in his narrative, goes back to Abraham; and Paul says, in Rom. 9:9, "For this is the word of promise"; then he quotes that which constitutes that word: "At this time will I come, and Sarah shall have a son"; and, in verse 7, "In Isaac shall thy seed be called." In Gal. 3:8, Paul says the gospel was comprehended in this promise of blessing to Abraham; and in ver. 16 he affirms that the seed of promise referred to Christ. So far, then, what was said of and done to Abraham, Sarah, and Isaac, was only the shadow of (foreshowing) the good things to come; but the body (substance) was of Christ. Leaven, then, the shadow, let us come at once to the substance of the word of promise, which "in the beginning was with God."

 

1. Gal. 4:4. "But when the fullness of the time was come God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law." How? In fulfillment of the promise. At this time, or at the set time, will I come. Where? Luke 1:26-55. "And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God, unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, to a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary. And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favored, the Lord is with thee; blessed art thou among women. And the angel said unto her, Fear not Mary: for thu has found favor with God. And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his Father David; and he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end... The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the hightest shall overshadow thee; therefore, also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren. (see Gal. 4:2) For with God nothing shall be impossible. And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her. And Mary arose in those days, and went into the hill country with haste, into a city of Juda; And entered into the house of Zacharias, and saluted Elisabeth. And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost: And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? . . . And blessed is she that believed: for there shall be a performance of those things which were told her from the Lord. And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour. For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed. For he that is mighty hath done to me great things; and holy is his name. . . He hath holpen his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy; As he spake to our fathers, to Abraham, and to his seed for ever."

 

In the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ (Mark), the word (of promise -- Paul) of life (John), spoken (Peter), was with God. Came from God by the angel, sent to Mary in Nazareth, when God promised by the angel that she should have a son and call his name Jesus. (Luke.) "and the word [of promise] was made flesh, and dwelt among us." John 1:14. When in the fullness of the set time, Jesus was made of a woman, made under the law. (Gal. 4:4), "and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth." John 1:14. -- "For he received from God the Father honor and glory, when there came such a voice from the excellent glory, . . . and this voice . .. we heard, when we (Peter, James and John) were with him in the holy mount." 1 Peter 1:18.

 

Lastly, "The word spoken by our Lord" was "In the beginning" with God. John 17:5-22. "And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word. Now they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee. For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me. I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine. And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them. And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are. While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled. And now come I to thee; and these things I speak in the world, that they might have my joy fulfilled in themselves. I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil. They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world. And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth. Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one."

 

Most assuredly the word of faith which we preach is the word of God, and was in the beginning with God. "And this is life eternal, that we may know the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom he hath sent."

 

Olena, OH. G.W. STETSON.

 

 

WHO WAS IT?

World's Crisis

Boston, Tuesday, May 24, 1864

 

"OF whom it was said, "Thou madest him a little lower than the angels." Heb. 2:7; Ps 8:3.

 

Our question is an important one if we consider that its definite, positive, and unequivocal answer must of necessity determine the application of the prophet, Micah 4:8, as to what is meant by the "first dominion." Should it appear as spoken of the "first Adam," who was of the earth, simply an animal or fleshly man, then the "first dominion" is spoken of in an ORDINAL sense; but if spoken of CHRIST, then it is used cardinally, i.e., as being pre-eminent, superior to, etc., answering to Paul's Jerusalem which now is, . . . in bondage with her children." Gal. 4:25; which "shall be trodden down of the Gentiles," (Luke 21:24,); and Jerusalem which is above, Gal. 4:26, i.e., uppermost, superior, having gotten the advantage of her adversary, who has heretofore led her a captive and had her foot upon the neck of the "free woman's" children, but now the time has come when "the tables are turned," and she that was first in order herself becomes subjugated, the children of the "free woman" having gained the ascension and the victory over their "persecutor," rising "above" the oppressor, obtain the "first" or superior "dominion," and the former oppressor becomes the "foot-stool" of the once oppressed.

 

But as the first Adam "was the figure of Him who was to come" (Rom 5:14) so the Jerusalem "that now is," is the figure of that which is to be "above," "free;" which is our mother." Gal. 4:24-25. Hence, says the apostle, "unto the angels hath He (the Father) not put in subjection the world to come, whereof we speak." If my memory be correct the phrae here is, "oi koumene," the habitable globe. After declaring that he is speaking of "the world to come," and not of "the heavens and the earth which now are," or "The earthly house of this tabernacle," he proceeds to quote the Psalmist (Psalm 8:4-8), "What is man that thou art mindful of him? or the Son of man that thou visitest him? Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honor, and didst set him over the work of thy hands. Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that HE put all in subjection under him, He left nothing that is not put under him."

 

Now comes Paul's exposition of the same." "But now, we see not yet all things put under him, but we (do) see JESUS, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honor; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man, for it became him, for whom are all things and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the Captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings." Thus we find the language supplied by the "one Spirit" through the apostle of the Gentiles to JESUS, the anointed of God, and "is his times he shall show who is the blessed and only potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords."

 

"Now if any many build upon this foundation . . . hay, wood, stubble; . . . if any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss." May the Lord help us all to build thereon, "gold, silver, precious (and living) stones," that our work may "abide" the fiery ordeal.

 

Olena, Ohio

G. W. STETSON

 

 

THE ONE OFFENCE - No. 1

World's Crisis

Boston, Tuesday, May 31, 1864

 

"By the one offense judgment came upon all men." -- Rom. 5:18

 

The sentence of condemnation fell not upon man only; the ground, or earth, was also cursed "for man's sake;" or, as De Sola's, Lindenthal's, and Raphall's version give it, better, I think, "cursed be the ground because of thee."

 

Man was made "dust of the ground," and now this living dust had sinned, and by the penalty of the law was, according to its judgment given, to return "to the dust;" and, as if his MOTHER, earth, was in sympathy with him, groaning for deliverance from death, the source from whence man came is embraced in the curse, on account of his sin, as being a portion of himself; hence Paul in Romans 8:22 tropically represents the "whole creation" as groaning and travailing "in pain," anxious to "be delivered from the bondage of corruption," as we that are in this tabernacle, -- being constituent parts of the same building upon which the curse has fallen, and of the same "cursed" material -- do groan, being burdened -- with the curse pronounced upon the "whole creation," or ground, out of which we have our formation, and from which -- cursed corruption -- we would have deliverance, "that mortality might be swallowed up of life."

 

Death on account of sin, is in the ground from whence we came and wither we return. It is in the good we eat, the water we drink, the air we breathe, the fire we warm by, the cold we suffer from, the healing medicine we take; in the sunlight that invigorates, and the darkness that appalls; in the tempestuous storm and in the calm, alike we find death, on sin's account, by the curse that has fallen upon the whole creation, groaning "in pain." Oh! Who would not hope for the time when there shall be "no more curse?"

 

No sooner had man, by eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, become like the Elohim, that he was sent forth from the garden to till the ground from whence he was taken, and having been driven thence, the attribute of God's justice under the allegorical representation of a "cherubim and a flaming sword," was placed between man and the tree of life, "lest," said Jehovah of the Elohim, "he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat and life forever."

 

So long as man had remained in obedience he had free access to that tree, but it seems from the word, "also," that he never had eaten of it, for the declaration of God is, that if he ate of it, as he had eaten of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, the result would be that he would live forever; and we are told that he had partaken of the forbidden fruit but once, became it is called by Paul, in Romans 5, the "one offense." This, God's goodness, compassion and justice, would not permit; he could create him knowing that he might transgress, and he is just, for he knew that if man became evil by his own act of disobedience, he could redeem him from that evil; but to give him unconditional access to the source of immortality after he had become evil, by which grant of right will would be eternally perfected by not living forever in evil, he could not do, and be persistent with his own attributes; for this would man have not, the other of evil, but of eternal perpetuation, and thereby contradict his word, which says that he will make and end of evil, it shall not rise up the second time.

 

Had man been permitted to eat of that tree subsequent to his fall, what a scene would this earth have presented for all time. I have listened to and read some graphic descriptions of imaginary hells gotten up for effect, but nothing human has ever begun to paint the living horrors that would have been witnessed on this planet, and never will, had sinful man only been permitted to taste of immortal life in disobedience. We see the dearest loved ones sicken and languish; painful, acute, agonizing suffering is added to disease; day after day, night after night, wear away, till days and nights pass into weeks, and weeks roll into months, and months are making years, and still the stricken ones are moaning, wasting, suffering in anguish, until bond after bond is sundered, tie after tie is loosed, hope after hope is extinguished; the sympathizing heart is beginning to desire that the suffering one may be released from all the ills of life, and be at peace; willing at last to part company, that the loved one may be at rest, for --

 

"There is rest for the weary;"

 

the silver cord is loosed, the golden bowl is broken, the pitcher also at the fountain and the wheel broken at the cistern, the throbbing heart lies still, and the weary are at rest, -- and the living thank a merciful God that men do not seek death, and are "not able to find it." We all come to it at last, and it is well it is so, for if it were otherwise, worn out nature and exhausted humanity overburdened with grief, sinking in despair, would only find relief in lunacy, and the world would be converted into one vast "mad house," filled with raging maniacs.

 

G. W. STETSON.

 

 

 

THE DAYS OF THE SON OF MAN

World's Crisis

Boston, Tuesday, March 8, 1864

 

"The kingdom of God" (Luke 17:20), "the days of the Son of man" (Luke 17:22), "the Son of man in his day" (Luke 17:24) "his times," (1 Tim. 6:15), "his appearing and his kingdom," (1 Tim. 4:1), "shall appear the second time" (Heb. 9:28), "the last time" (1 Peter 1:5), "the day of the Lord" (1 Thess. 5:3 and 2 Peter 3:10), "the day of God" (2 Peter 3:12), "the dispensation of the fullness of times" (Eph 1:10), "appointed a day in which he will judge the world" (Acts 17:31). "Ye shall not see me, until the time come when ye shall say, 'Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord" (Luke 13:35), "the times of the restitution of all things" (Acts 3:21), "everlasting kingdom of our Lord" (2 Peter 1:11), and "thy kingdom come" of our Lord's prayer, all refer, I apprehend, to one and the same epoch only, with reference to the events transpiring therein it is relatively like one of our days. Some things are done at its beginning, then others succeed in their regular order. Save, perhaps, this difference, that instead of measuring time by hours as now, it may be measure by events.

 

But it is urged by those claiming to be "teachers" among Protestants and Catholics that "the kingdom of God" was "set up" by the gift of the Spirit on the "day of Pentecost," and that the church of Christ on earth constitutes that kingdom, by Christ ruling the the hearts of believers through the Spirit. Now if this be true, it should be known and seen of all men, that they might not be deceived by heresies, schisms and false teachers blindly leading the blind, and if it be untrue then it should also be known, that those who have been deceived by these "piled up" teachers, "speaking lies in hypocrisy" may be undeceived and found clothed in their "right mind" by a knowledge of the truth.

 

When Christ had done talking to the Pharisees, who had asked him when the kingdom of God should come, he turned from those children of iniquity to his disciples, and said unto them (Luke 17:22), "The days will come, when YE shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and YE SHALL NOT SEE IT." "For as the lightning that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven, So shall also the Son of man be in his day." Who is ever deceived or mistaken concerning the bright, vivid, sudden, forked lightning's flash, as for a moment it lights up the dark and angry vault of heaven, overspread with rolling, surging, tempest tossed thunder clouds, "black as Erebus and dark as Hades," like the think canopy of nigh spread over us? And are we to be told after reading of the "down treading of the children of the free woman" for eighteen centuries, and have witnessed the "groanings of earth," the carnage and slaughter, the tears and sufferings, the despotisms, and oppressions," the "wrongs and outrages, with which earth is filled," the "carnival of death" that fills our own land, with lamentation, and weeping, with curses and blasphemies against God and his Christ, -- I say, are we to be told that ruin has been so many hundred years of "the kingdom of God" wherein his "will is done upon the earth as it is now done in heaven"? Do teachers of heavenly and divine truth expect to (XXXXXX XXX - EDITOR: The original copy is unreadable at this point) to "pandemonium on earth" upon lovers of truth (XXXX - EDITOR: The original copy is unreadable at this point) and righteousness, and seekers after holiness who love the "glorious appearing of the great God and Savior Jesus Christ, and his peaceable kingdom, and the days of the Son of man, in which "the righteous flourish and abundance of grace fill the earth so long as the sun and moon endure," with any hope or expectation of success?" If so, may the good Lord deliver us, and may they be confounded and most thoroughly disappointed, is my most devout supplication. (Paul, I think, would have said, improcation, "anathema maranatha," accursed at the Lord's coming. 1 Cor. 15:22)

 

Christ himself positively affirmed that before the kingdom of God, comprehending "one of the days of the Son of man," should come, himself must suffer many things and be rejected of that race of men, the Jews, and they, the disciples, should not see one of his days when persecutions against his church arose, and they should anxiously long to behold "one of his days."

 

Now look at it, the disciples were themselves baptized with the Holy Spirit, as none are at this day; preached the kingdom of God from Pentecost until they were killed for their witnessing in its favor. Some of them coming down over thirty years this side of the destruction of Jerusalem, making over half a century that some of them were absolutely living in the days of the Son of man -- if it be true that the kingdom was set up at Pentecost -- and yet Christ told them they should not see one of his days when they should desire to.

 

Again, he is still rejected of that race of men, and the church are still "filling up the measure of his sufferings that were left behind;" the Gentiles are still "treading down the holy city," and their times are not yet ended; and until they are, the "times of the Messiah" cannot begin, and the Jews are not yet crying, "Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord!" and we in the kingdom! What infatuation!

 

Olena, Ohio.

G. W. Stetson

 

 

THE VISIBLE AND THE INVISIBLE

No. 1

World's Crisis

Boston, Date Unknown 1864?

 

"The things that are seen are temporary," (A. Clarke's trans.) "but the things that are not seen are eternal." Paul, 2 Cor. 4:18.

 

The visible things of Paul's day of which he was then writing were the figurative or tropical, and have long since passed away; but the true temporary, still remain, and constitute the literal "first tabernacle" referred to by the apostle also in Heb. 9:8.

 

The unseen eternal, are yet future; but as surely as the "temporary" that now exist in fact, once, in times past, were not, so certainly will these things that now only exist in the purposes or plans of the Deity, be produced in their time and place. The things that now are, came into existence in their regular order and succession, and very many of the primary were of a long time completed prior to the commencement of others, and thus of the unseen, -- part may already exist, possibly incomplete, but like the "first tabernacle," now existing, shall be carried on to perfection by the formation and super-addition of the remaining portions, which as yet have had not beginning.

 

After this mode was the creation, the deluge, the call of Abraham, the going down into and the coming up out of Egypt, the giving of the law and the building of the tabernacle in the wilderness, the coming of the Just One, the rejection of Israel, the destruction of their house and chief city, and the calling of the Gentiles. So of all things human and divine, past and present, and so when he that "sat upon the throne" shall "make all things new."

 

The work of reconstruction, nevertheless, though progressive, is of long time commenced, and ever since the time of reformation, in the days of Christ and the apostles, has been steadily advancing towards completion.

 

A portion of the future, unseen, eternal things, are already occupied "at the right hand of God where Christ sitteth;" hence the unseen things of 2 Cor. 4:18, are the same as those of Col. 3:1, "upon which we are to set out affections," the things of 1 Cor. 2:9-10, "that God hath revealed to us by his Spirit," as in reserve for them that love him, the "good things to come by a greater and more perfect tabernacle," for which Christ has now the ministration of the office of the antitypical Aaronic high priesthood by the oath of the Deity." Not high priest, by a "greater and more perfect tabernacle," -- and incorruptible body -- but by the oath and after, or through "the power of an endless life," the Spirit of Deity, that raised him from the dead, and conveyed him away, beyond or above the vail. (See Heb. 7:16, 20-21; 9:11; 6:19-20; Eph. 1:19-21.)

 

These unseen but eternal things constitute "our far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory," of 2 Cor. 4:17, the "exceeding riches of his grace in" Eph. 2:7, the "glory of Christ" that is to come after "his sufferings," (1 Peter 1:11), but not until the measure of those sufferings that are left behind are filled up by the Ecclesia which constitutes his body." Col. 1:24. Then this grace of God (favor) will be brought unto us by the "revelation of Jesus Christ," at the end of this dispensation, "when this gospel of the kingdom has been preached in all the world for a testimony," (1 Peter 1:11, 13; Mat. 24:14), "that in the dispensation of the fullness of times (completeness) he may gather into one, all things in Christ, both which are in the heavens (marginal) and which are on earth, that we should be found unto the praise of his glory, at the redemption of the purchased possession;" on "the appearing of Jesus Christ," who "loved the church and gave himself for it; that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word," in order "to present it unto himself a glorious church, [… there is a missing line in the original … ] or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish;" and having thus "made us unto our God kings and priests; we shall with him reign on the earth." Eph. 1:10, 14; Eph. 5:25-27; Rev. 5:10; 20:4.

 

These things constitute the temporary or first tabernacle in their typical or figurative representation, and an exact counterpart must constitute the second or true tabernacle "when that which is perfect is come." 1 Cor. 13:10. It was by a knowledge of these unseen future things drawn from the visible through the promised Spirit by the word, that Paul and Peter were enabled to give correlative testimony in relation to them without collusion. The evidence of this exists in the different style of narration in the two witnesses. The first, a learned Hebrew, of the Hebrews, schooled at the feet of one of the doctors of the Levitical law, Gamaliel, taking the seen temporary and the unseen eternal for his predicate, proceeds in the figurative and poetic style of the prophets, to rear his superstructure thereupon, after the model of the tabernacle of Moses reproduced on a grader scale in Solomon's temple, and then deduces legitimate conclusions from his promise by contrasting the two by opposition in , [… there is a missing line in the original … ]  "For we know (by the Spirit), that OUR earthly house (the temporary, that Christ called, in John 2:16, "my Father's house," , [… there is a missing line in the original … ] said in Matt. 24:3 "there shall not be left here one stone upon another that shall not be thrown down;) of this tabernacle (dwelling) were dissolved (taken down, destroyed, abolished, 2 Cor. 3:7-13), "we have a building of God, an house NOT MADE WITH HANDS (unseen), eternal, "in the heavens."

 

It would seem that Paul took it for granted that his Corinthian brethren were not so dull of apprehension as were those "whose minds were blinded," (2 Cor. 3:14), and had no need that one "should teach them again what be the first principles of the oracles of God." Heb. 5:11-12. Moreover, he had just gone over the whole "ground work" of the abrogation of the law and the introduction of the gospel, -- the typical end of the "things seen," and the "beginning," (John 1:1; 1 John 1:1) of the unseen, eternal things, that they might e without excuse for begin "unlearned."

 

But no sooner does he address himself to those "whose minds were blinded," and "dull of hearing," unstable -- not settled in the truth, though he maintains the figurative, how very careful he is to explain each point in the type as he proceeds step by step. Beginning with the "house," in Heb. 3, build by Moses under the law, he contrasts it with the house to be build under the gospel, going through the whole, progressively, until in Heb. 6:12, he brings his blinded Hebrew brethren to the perfected antitypical temple or tabernacle, the "Mount Zion, the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, the innumerable company of angels, the general assembly and church of the first born, to God, the Judge of all, and to the spirits (lives, Clarke) of just men made perfect and to Jesus, the mediator of the NEW covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling." THESE are the subjects and objects of our faith, represented by the "figurative tabernacle" and its "appointed divine services." "For there was a tabernacle made" (Heb. 9:2), "which was a figure for the time then present," (Heb. 9:9), "until the time of reformation." (Heb. 9:10). But Christ being come an high priest of good things, to come by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, -- that is to say, not of this building" -- (i.e., the building spoken of in verse two that WAS made with hands, Heb. 9:11); "for Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into the heaven itself, not to appear in the presence of God for us," Heb. 9:24.

 

How plain he makes the thing, where in verses one and two, he says the first "tabernacle," "holy place," where the people met God, or "tabernacle of the congregation," was the "world sanctuary;" i.e., the EARTH, in verse six, he says, "The daily priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the divine service," named in verse one.

 

Now we are doing that very thing by faith, throughout all the earth, wherever the name of Christ is named, as further shown, 1 Peter 2:5 -- "Ye also, as living stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priest hood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God through Jesus Christ."

 

In Heb. 9:3, Paul says after the second vail was the holiest of all, and in verse seven, he declares "that the high priest went ALONE into this "Holiest of all," of verse three. IN verse twenty four he shows that this "Holiest of all" represented heaven.

 

G. W. STETSON

 

 

 

THE FIRST AND SECOND TABERNACLE

No. 2

World's Crisis

Boston, Tuesday, February 16, 1864

 

In verse 8, Paul tells them that the signification of the high priest going alone into the second tabernacle (Heb. 9) was that the way into the holiest of all, heaven, was not yet made manifest (laid open) while (so long) as the first tabernacle was not yet standing, and in Hebrews 10:19-20, he says, "Having, therefore, brethren, boldness (margin, liberty) to enter into the holiest (heaven) by the blood of Jesus, through a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us through the vail, that is to say, through his flesh," etc. Whence some have concluded that since the rending of the vail from the top to the bottom (Matt. 27:51) at the crucifixion, the souls of believers in a conscious state as entities pass immediately into heaven at death, the king of terrors and the terror of kings, becomes to them

 

"The voice that Jesus sends

To call them to his arms,"

 

or "the gate to endless joy"; and yet they "dread to enter there." So also it becomes the "new and dying instead of living way," and Jesus himself is no longer the "strait way, the narrow gate," "the door," "the way and the life," but only the means by which death to them is made the way to life.

 

Perhaps these notions are the result of not having duly considered what the Scriptures of truth have said upon this subject. Nevertheless my apprehension of what is said leads me to quite a different conclusion; but in consequence of the difference of opinion, it becomes essential, for an agreement, that the subject of the "vail," the "living way," which he has consecrated (set apart) for us, should be a little more closely examined.

 

The point demanding our attention primarily is the phrase in Hebrews 9:8; -- "So long as the first tabernacle was yet standing." Now Paul has expressly stated, that that first, in the building "made with hands" by Moses, was a figure of the true and the temporary; and then he shows that the true temporary is the seen, the world, and the world "that now is" STILL STANDS as the first true tabernacle. Consequently "the way into the holiest" is not yet laid open to "the general assembly and church of the first born."

 

Again, Christ said that "though heaven and earth should pass away," one jot or tittle of the law should not pass away until all was (should be) fulfilled; and that law says (Lev. 16:16), speaking of the high priest and the atonement, "that he shall make an atonement for the holy place (world, sanctuary) because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins; and so shall he do for the tabernacle of the congregation THAT REMAINETH AMONG (or with) THEM, in the midst of their uncleanness; and there shall be no man in the tabernacle of the congregation, when he goeth in to make an atonement in the holy place until he come out."

 

NOTE -- Robinson's Calmet says that the expiatory sacrifice offered by our Saviour on Calvary, was the price or ransom, or the efficacy of which the atonement of the race of mankind depended; but to call that sacrifice the atonement, is an incorrect application of the word." Page 118. Consequently those who believe that the "sacrifice" was "the reconciliation," will have difficulty in understanding Lev. 16:16-17, when they read it; but if the reconciliation comes through the ministration of the high priest, after he enters the holiest, by the blood of sacrifice, then our application of the passage (Lev. 16:16-17) is legitimate to our subject, inasmuch as "the day of atonement" under Christ is not yet ended.


The idea contained in the words -- "There shall be no man in the tabernacle of the congregation, etc., until he come out," is in harmony with 1 Cor. 15:23. "Christ the first-fruits (of them that slept), AFTERWARD they that are Christ's at his coming." Even those that shall be alive and remain alive at his coming cannot be permitted to enter the "tabernacle of the congregation" here spoken of, the "eternal house," until "those who are sleeping in Jesus are raised from the dead," THEN those "who believe and shall never die" (John 11:26), will be changed instantly, and conveyed away in clouds to meet the Lord in the air (Query. In the spirit?); and so will they "ever be with the Lord," "that where I am (when I come again) there ye may be also." -- 1 Thess. 4:15, 17; John 14:2. So if there be no resurrection of the dead, there can be no entering into the tabernacle of the congregation; or no "being clothed upon with our house which is from heaven." "No man in," etc.

 

Once more on this point. Christ said -- alluding to the little ante-rooms in Solomon's temple, figurative emblems of those in whom should dwell the "promised spirit" -- "In my Father's house are many mansions (dwelling places); if it were not so I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you, and if I go and prepare a place for you, I will COME AGAIN and receive you unto myself, that where I am (when I come again implied), there ye may be also." Well, he has gone "into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;" that by the sprinkling of his blood, that was offered through the eternal Spirit before the mercy seat, he might prepare us for the heavenly, by taking off the curse placed upon us because of sin, which is death, and also prepare a place for us by removing the curse that was pronounced upon the tabernacle of the congregation in the sentence -- "Cursed is the ground for thy sake," etc. Gen 3:17.

 

Now there is but one way of removing the consequences of transgression, and that is through the blood of Jesus; and he has not yet "come out of the holy," not yet "come again" the second time "unto salvation," and by parity of reasoning we know that the "preparation of the place is incomplete"; and consequently he has not yet received them unto himself, for he said he would do so when the place was prepared.

 

It only remains now to look at the "vail." The vail that was rent in twain was not the true vail but the typical; and just as that was rent from one extremity to the other, and taken away from between the holy and the holiest, so must the true temporary vail be destroyed and taken out of the way, before heaven and earth can be so approximated that the inmates of the one can have actual access and intercourse with the other. It is the true vail that bars us all from the heavenly court where "the trees are all green"; and Christ himself "after the flesh" could only reach that desire haven by tearing that vail of death asunder by a resurrection from the dead, and thus set apart the living way, or way of life, through or by his flesh, when he "counterworked death, and illustrated life and incorruption by the gospel." 2 Tim. 1:10 (A. Clarke's Trans.) Hence it is said that "he died for (on account of) our sins, but rose again for (or to obtain) our justification" unto life; or rose again that we might have life. Consequently the "entering into life," being at the resurrection, it cannot be at death.

 

Thus Paul says that "when this corruptible (body) shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal (soul) shall have put on immortality (by a resurrection from the dead, 1 Cor. 15:52) THEN shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up on victory." And this he quotes from Isa. 25:7; -- "And he will destroy (margin -- swallow up) in this mountain the face of the covering cast over all people, and THE VAIL that is spread over all nations. He will swallow up death in victory, and the Lord God will wipe away tears from off all faces."

 

So according to Paul's application and explanation of the BIBLE, the "vail" signified death, and its rending the resurrection, or abolition of death by it; but he shows clearly enough, to my understanding, that he was not referring to going to heaven at death, but an act of living faith of the Christina here on earth, when he says, in the succeeding passage (Heb. 10:22), "Let us draw near with a true heart, in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled form an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water," etc.

 

If further testimony were needed to show that Paul in 2 Cor. 5:1, when speaking of the "earthly house," made with hands, did not mean our corruptible bodies, in which "an immortal soul man is groaning," because it must pass through the gate of death, to reach eternal life, -- by the way, how will those who believe, and never die, but are changed at Christ's coming, reach that life, if death be the gate, and they never pass through it, -- that testimony may be found in his summing up the argument on the "dissolution of the tabernacle" in Heb. 26:27, in these words: "But now hath he promised, saying, Yet once more, I shake not the earth only, (the first true tabernacle, the visible) but heaven also. And this word "Yet once more," signifieth the removing of those things that are made that those which cannot be shaken (the future unseen, the eternal) may remain. Wherefore (in consequence of which) we receiving (we are to receive,) a kingdom that cannot be moved (therefore), let us serve God acceptably, with reverence and godly fear."

 

Before leaving this subject, we must allow the simple minded and plain spoken fisherman, Peter, to turn the focus of his Spirit lens upon it, when all metaphors will vanish.

 

G. W. STETSON.

 

 

THE WORLD TO COME

NUMBER ONE
Hebrews 2:5

World's Crisis

Boston, Tuesday, October 1864

(Exact Date Unknown)

 

Rabbinical notions -- the days of the Messiah -- the dominion of death -- the nature of man -- the Spirit land -- the world of fact vs. the world of fancy -- modern ideas -- the restitution -- the age to come -- the Christian's hope -- the kingdom of Christ -- the incentive to godliness -- the coming of Christ.

 

There have been and still are some curious notions in the world in relation to the world to come. The Jewish rabbis claim, first, "That the Bible history of the creation begins with the letter beth; because two worlds were created; this world and the world to come. Secondly, That the phrase -- the world to come -- hints at or points out the days of times of Messiah. Thirdly, That the world to come is the state after death. Fourthly, That it means only the future, or age to come; hence, when the Pharisees said at the end of their prayers in the temple, ad-olam -- forever, the Sadducees interrupted, saying there was no age but one, i.e., this age. Then it was appointed that the service should be concluded with, min-ha-olam, voad-ha-olam, i.e., forever and ever; or, both in this age and in the age to come. -- Bab. Bersooth," fol. 54. "The distinction of olam-hazeh, this world, and olam-ha-bah, the world to come, may be found almost in every page of the rabbins." -- A. Clarke's commentary on N.T. p. 122. But among the Hebrews, as among the Gentiles, it seems there were various opinions on this subject, some of which without doubt were derived from the Gentiles during the terms of Jewish captivity at Babylon.

 

Of the afore named opinions the second and fourth may be merged in one, for they are the same in fact, being only expressed in different terms. One thing however is admitted, here and settled beyond controversy, even by Adam Clarke himself, and that is, the same word rendered world, is also, rendered age, and is the quotation before as they are used as synonymous. This is an important item in the consideration of this subject, for it destroys the philological argument, so much relied upon by many that by the term world is necessarily implied another sphere than the one we now inhabit and running parallel with it.

 

On the same page, the same learned author also admits that Paul, in the language of our text, uses the phrase "world to come" as referring to the days of the Messiah. In Matt. 12:32, speaking of the sin against the Holy Spirit not being forgiven in this world, neither in the world to come, he says, it should be "dispensation." Not the reason for this declaration is apparent, for it the world to come be another sphere, running parallel with our earth habitation into which we enter at death, as an abode during another state of existence, and the present translation be allowed to stand as rendered in the text, then by the law of language is enevitably follows that the doctrine of a future probation and a possible resoration from all other sins says that against the Holy Spirit, may obtain for [.. the original is unreadable at this point in the article … ] as this is closely applied in the [.. the original is unreadable at this point in the article … ] should fail, and the poor [.. there is one word in the original that is unreadable at this point in the article … ] have another chance of escaping such a dire calamity by another trial, the [.. there is one word in the  original that is unreadable at this point in the article … ]  prevails, though it be at the risk of exposing to the common people the great truth that the "world to come" is only the "age to come," when all things shall have been subdued unto Christ. So again, in Eph. 1:10, "fullness of times," "dispensation"; and in 2:7, it is rendered "ages to come." In 1 Cor. 10:11, "ends of the ages." Hebrews 9:26, "conclusion of the ages," etc.

 

The first notion -- creation of two worlds, indicated by the Bible history, beginning with the letter beth, is simply ridiculous, for we all know by that same history (and so might these rabbins) that not only were two worlds created, but a universe of worlds was formed.

 

The third rabbinical notion -- "the state after death" corresponds with the more modern and still prevailing phrase and idea of "spirit land," being universally adopted and believed in by the Romanists and Greek Catholics, Mohammedans and Mormons, modern Spiritualists and shaking Quakers, Indians, Africans, Asiatics, and all other heathen idol worshippers, besides numerous self styled, and sometimes so called Orthodox, Evangelical, Protestant Christian denominations.

 

Of these -- the first and third notions -- I do not intend taking further notice, except by way of contrast in considering the second and fourth idea of the rabbins corresponds precisely with the teachings of the prophets, who in times past spake unto the fathers, and of the Son who in the last days spake unto us. It is also apparent that the apostles in adding their testimony as witnesses were influenced by the same spirit, for there is (but) one God and Father, one baptism, one faith, one Lord, one Spirit and one body, -- and there is uniformity in their teachings; hence Paul's idea in our text agrees exactly, as will be found -- with that of the rabbis (second and fourth) drawn from the book of Moses; "For," says the apostle, "unto the angels hath he (the Father) not put in subjection the world (or age) to come, whereof we speak. But one in a certain place (Psalm 8:4-5) testified, saying, 'What is man, that thou art mindful of him? Or the Son of man (Christ Jesus) that thou visitest him? Thou madest him (Christ) a little lower than the angels, thou crownedst him (in the time of visitation) with glory and honor, and dist set him over the works of thy hands. Thou has put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him (Christ), he (the Father) left nothing (i.e. all sheep and oxen, beasts of the field, fowls of the air, fish of the sea, and whatsoever passeth through the paths of the sea, -- see Psalm 8,) that is not put under him." (Christ).

 

This is the testimony of one of the old prophets (David), spoken beforehand of the glory that should follow the sufferings of Christ. But is seems from 2 Cor. 4:5-7, Col. 1:24, and some other Scriptures, that the sufferings of Christ are not yet ended, for there is a filling "up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ . . . for his body's sake, which is the church." And this view of the case was held by the apostle; for having quoted the Psalmist to sustain his position in verses 5 and 6, he by the same Spirit adds his own testimony in corroboration of the former witness, when he says, "But now (in Paul's time) we see not yet all things put under him." (Christ). Then it was still future in Paul's time, and remains so in ours. "But (with Paul) we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death (that he might suffer), crowned with glory and honor (that is the extent as yet), that he by the grace (favor) of God should taste death for every man."

 

We here discover perfect concord between the prophet and apostle, only Paul says explicitly Christ's reign is over the age to come."

 

Olena, O.

G. W. STETSON

 

 

 

 

IN A DILEMMA.

The Herald of Life and Of the Coming Kingdom August 12,1868

 

Br. Storrs: I am perplexed. Allow me to tell you how I got into this dilemma. You know I have never been able to see the non-resurrection of the wicked, though I have always been kindly disposed toward those who claim to see it. But on April 1, {st} I went to the Conference at Boston; and on Thursday, P. M., listened to a discourse from Br. S. G. Mathewson, of Castleton, Vt., which upset all my philosophy and theology, too; and which, if true, leaves me no alternative, except that of no resurrection for the wicked. Speaking of ‘LIFE’ and of the State or condition in which the just or righteous are raised up from death, or out of their graves, he used the following language:

 

‘Talk about different kinds of life! Why, life is life, is it not? I do not know anything about Adamic and Christ life; about animal life and spiritual life; about temporal and eternal life; about mortal and immortal life, as differing one from the other in kind. There is but one kind of life and that was given to Adam; and if he had been obedient, he would have lived right on forever; and that would have been eternal life, would it not? But he was cut off from life on account of his transgression: and so are the wicked. Not this life is given to the righteous only, on account of their faith in Christ; and Paul says, they are raised INCORRUPTIBLE, does he not? The wicked do not get the gift of life! ‘For this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they, the dead, might be judged according to men in the flesh.”

 

Then leaving the remaining part of the verse {1Pe 4:6} incomplete in his quotation, he said:

 

‘Now let us have the right over again, so that we may fairly understand it.’

 

He then began again with Adam’s being cut off from life, etc., ran down to the same point in the quotation of Peter, and there he left it.

 

On asking him after sermon was through, When he came out on the non-resurrection of the wicked? he denied having done so; and on the query, ‘Why did you preach it, then?’ he denied that also.

 

But on calling his attention to the declarations as made by himself, and desiring to know how he was going to get the wicked up, if so be there is but one kind of life, and that one kind never given to the wicked, but to the righteous only? ‘O! (said he) I will preach another sermon and clear that up.’ Well, I hope you will, for it needs clearing up. But he did not clear it up; and as the discourse was before hundreds, and made the same impression on others as on myself, I do really hope our good brother will ‘preach another discourse’ at Springfield camp-meeting and help me out of the dilemma that he has been the means of getting me into. I never had that doctrine put home to me with such telling power since the question came up as on that occasion. But if it be true, as Br. M. says, that there is but one kind of life and that kind the wicked never get, but the righteous only, I declare my poor weak brain can see no escape from the conclusion that there is no possible chance for any kind of a resurrection for the finally impenitent sinner.

 

What say you, Br. Storrs? Is or is not such a conclusion legitimate to the premise assumed? Please send me the copy containing your answer and oblige yours in hope of life.

 

G. W. STETSON-Rutland, VT., June 1, 1868.

 

RESPONSE TO BR. STETSON

 

Without going in to the argument of the two kinds of life, it is undeniably true that ‘life is life.’ And further, Br. Stetson is entirely right in his conclusion from Br. Mathewson’s statements; we see not how it is possible to come to any other. We trust Br. M. will yet see that it is impossible to reach life and immortality as the gift of God, without excluding the wicked from any and all life, after they are once dead.

 

We never went forward to our present stand-point, until forced to do so or abandon our foundation principles. We found we had been preaching the doctrine of no future life out of Christ ever since we abandoned the doctrine of inherent immortality, and had to take special pains to keep those who heard us on the Life theme from thinking we taught that the wicked would not live again. This course we pursued for years, till we were forced in the midst of a sermon we were preaching contrasting the two Adams, 1Co 15, to see that there was, in the nature of the case no life by a resurrection from the dead to any man except in Christ; and that God had given to his ‘Son power...to give eternal life,’ and no other, ‘at the last day.’ ‘This is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life: and this life is in his Son: he that hath the Son hath life: he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.’ 1 john 5:11, 12. This we found agreed with Jesus’ own testimony, ‘Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood ye have no life in you.’ Joh 6:53. But they had the present life in them, though they did not partake of Christ. His words, therefore, will bear no other construction than that of a rejection from being ‘raised up at the last day’ into life.

 

From these starting points, we came to see that the general tenor of the Bible, and of the gospel in particular, was, that salvation from death is the grand theme of revelation from Genesis to Revelation; and that those who were only partakers of the Adamic nature inevitably perish in death, and are no more forever; that only by connection with Christ would any man be delivered from death’s dominion. ‘The Wages of sin is death.’ ‘The sting of death is sin.’ That sting must be extracted or death holds un in his eternal dominion: nothing but ‘the blood of Christ’ will destroy sin: that is the only healing or curative balm; so we see how forcible is that saying of Christ, ‘Except ye eat my flesh and drink my blood ye have no life in you.’

 

To a like result we are sure all who reject the doctrine of inherent immortality will sooner or later come, if they do not leave off ‘contending for the faith once delivered to the saints’ of ‘Christ our life.’ We can afford to wait patiently till their eyes shall be opened to see this crowning truth of the gospel, viz., ‘Life future and eternal alone in Christ:’ all out of him perish as if He had never come into the world, because they would ‘not come unto Me that they might have life,’ as saith Jesus.

 

 

INFANT DAMNATION-No. 1

WORLD’S CRISIS-September, 6, 1871

 

G.W. Stetson

 

About forty-five years ago, when quite a lad, I went one Sunday morning to a Calvinistic meeting, in Chazy, Clinton Co., N.Y., where the pastor of the flock stated in his discourse that "the way to hell was paved with infants not a span long." Now it may seem strange, yet this same old parson B___n was a good, kind-hearted old man; and, aside from his theology, everybody loved and respected him; but from that time forward he never looked so good to me as before. The third finger on his right hand was cut off just below the second join, and as he made the affirmation, he was holding up that hand, which brought the excised member conspicuously into view; and the declaration so horrified me, that the stub-finger was so ineffaceably impressed on my memory, that for nearly half a century I have never thought of him, but what that vocative digit, with his infantile pavement, are as plainly before me as when he uttered the sentiment. It may be more than probably that there and then was laid the foundation for my subsequent adoption of Armenians sentiments, little thinking that the theology held by the latter school involved all the infant race in the same sad destiny, as a result of their definition of terms.

 

But having said so much, more must be said, or my own affirmation will seem to many like a hard saying, and an untruthful statement. It is also much to be deplored that some of our most excellent and worthy Second Advent Church brethren, by their advocacy of certain theological tenants as Bible doctrine, involve themselves in the same inextricable dilemma, and it is to be hoped they will do one of two things: either get out of their glass houses, or stop throwing stones. In words and profession they say and hold that infants are saved; but in teaching they prove that infants are lost. Let us see how. Well, in Joh 3:3, Jesus said, "Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." In Joh 3:5, "cannot enter into the kingdom of God." Now the word "man’ in the text is a generic term, and not a specific one; that is, Jesus is speaking of all or any one of the race, without regard to age or sex. Some one may say that Nicodemus’ inquiry in Joh 3:4 proves otherwise. His answer only proves him to have been very ignorant in relation to the entire subject. Paul makes a like statement with that of Jesus, when he says in 1Co 15:50, that "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom." Now, infants are men and woman not matured, and are as much flesh and blood in nature as if fully developed. They are also "corruptible" in their nature, but "corruption cannot inherit incorruption"; therefore, they are included in the term man, as used in the text by the Savior; therefore, must be born again, or remain outside of the kingdom.

 

N.B. The Savior does not say a man must be born twice more, making three births for the one person, but again, once more, making two births for each individual prior to entering into God’s kingdom. The word "again," in Joh 3:3, is just as significant, just as definite in its application there, as when applied to Christ’s coming, when he says in Joh 14:3, "I will come again," which means, as Paul shows in Heb 9:28, the second time, once more, in addition to his former and first coming; and I certainly have yet to see the first believer in that coming who is not very tenacious as to the particular expressiveness of that word "again," as applied to our Savior’s advent. Very well; let us be just as precise, just as particular, just as tenacious, just as critical in its use in Joh 3:3, and note the result.

 

The claim has been very general that conversion and the second birth are synonymous terms; and herein lies the secret spring which sent forth that other claim, that "born of water," in Joh 3:5, was baptism, and then, in the creeds and confessions of faith, made that baptism, regeneration, conversion, new birth. This was done expressly to cover the case of infants, because they saw that the term man comprehended them, and they knew that infants were not converted, as a result of faith and obedience in the gospel, like adults. The Roman Catholic, the Episcopal, and some other churches, still adhere to this doctrine openly, claiming that all infants not so regenerated (by baptism) are lost; hence their custom of rantizing (sprinkling) infants. Now, the question comes to me, "Do I not believe in the damnation of infants?" to which I give in answer, most decidedly and emphatically, No! but, IF conversion is being "born again," I can see no chance for them, for they are not converted; but I do not believe that conversion is the second birth, nor do I believe that baptism is, either. My scriptural evidence must await another issue.

 

Olena, Ohio

 

 

INFANT SALVATION-No. 2

WORLD’S CRISIS-September, 13, 1871

 

G.W. Stetson

 

We said in our former article that we could see no way for infants to be saved, if conversion was the new birth, but we did not believe that either conversion or baptism constituted the second birth. In Joh 3:5, "born of the water and of the Spirit" is manifestly synonymous with its equivalent in Joh 3:6 —"That which is born of the flesh [in the aqueous birth] is flesh" [and this is the first or natural birth]; but "that which is born of the Spirit is spirit," and this is the second or new birth, or being "born again." Of the first, we have a like form of expression in Nu 24:7, where it is said of Jacob’s descendants, "He shall pour the water out of his buckets, and his seed shall be in many waters." In Jer 51:13, Re 17:1, 15, "waters" are again employed to represent men in their natural or flesh state. Peter, in his second letter, 2Pe 3:5, refers to the same principle, when he says that water was an agent employed in the primary creation of the material world, and it is equally true of man’s perpetuation upon the earth, known as a physiological fact; hence the force and propriety of our Savior in using it in conversing with Nicodemus; thus avoiding tautology.

 

Of the second, also, we have a most glorious sample, and more than once referred to and specifically pointed out as the second birth, in the case of our Savior. He offers to us in his own person an exemplification of what he taught Nicodemus. In his own person he has been the subject of the first and second births. In the first, he was the word of God made flesh, when in the fulness of the time he was born of a woman, born of the flesh, and "that which is born of the flesh is flesh," and in it he was also put to death. But he was never converted. Do you say, Of course not, he never needed it? Well, we agree. But are you prepared to say, also, that he never was "born again"? Perhaps not. In Col 1:18, Paul says he was, and that he was "the beginning, the first born from the dead." But you may say, That was not the "new birth." I would like to know why; it certainly was not the old birth, of which Nicodemus inquired in Joh 3:4. Most assuredly that was the new birth, for then was Jesus born anew, or again, and was the Son of what, or whomsoever, brought him forth, which Peter and Paul testify was the Spirit of God, or God. Ac 3:15; 4:10; 10:40; 13:30; Ro 4:24; 8:11. Hence he was "born of the Spirit," and was, by being "born again," the Son of God; and "that which is born of the Spirit is spirit."

 

In 1Co 15:23, Paul declares that Christ is the (a) first fruit. But of what, and from what? Other scriptures show that he is a first fruit of the Spirit, produced or born from the dead; and then he proceeds to say that the next fruit of the Spirit will be those who are Christ’s, who are to be made alive, or born of the Spirit from the dead, at his coming. Now, in order to prove that this is just what Paul is here teaching, and that this constitutes the new birth, and is by the Bible denominated a birth, I will quote from the Bible a parallel passage, bearing upon this point; and allow me to write plainly, just as plainly as it is in the Bible; for this is an important matter that we have under consideration; something more than a theory, more than a theology; it is a Bible fact, a God given declaration.

 

Turn if you please to Isa 66:7. The prophet has just been telling us, in Isa 65, what God is about to do to Jerusalem; that one which Paul in Gal 4:26 says "is the mother of us all"; i.e., God’s children. Now in Isa 65:7, Isaiah says: "Before she [Jerusalem above, the free-woman] travailed, she brought forth; before her pain came, she was delivered of a MAN CHILD." All concede that this refers to Christ, and he (in Joh 16:19-22) applies this figure to himself. Passing over the inquiry in Isa 66:8, let us find the solution in Isa 66:9, filling out the ellipsis in fully expressed words, thus: "Shall I bring to the birth [Christ, "the man child," the "first fruit," the "first born," the "head of the body"], and not cause to bring forth [the body of Christ, the Church]? saith the Lord; shall I cause to bring forth [Christ from the dead], and shut the womb [and not bring forth afterwards those children that are Christ’s at his coming]? Saith thy God." We have studiously employed those sentences or words only, which Paul, by the same Spirit that moved the prophet, used in relation to the implied portions of the prophecy, lest some one should say we had done violence to the text, in which the resurrection of Christ and the Church is called a birth, as David also said in the second Psalm, and Pal also in Ac 13:33. But inasmuch as all of these persons had been previously born once of the flesh, this birth spoken of must necessarily have been when they were "born again" of the Spirit, for there are no more than these two births spoken of in Scripture—birth of the flesh, and birth of the Spirit, or (1) born of flesh, and (2) born of Spirit.

 

Three things are necessarily involved in order to a birth, whether natural or spiritual: 1st, the begetting; 2nd, the quickening; 3rd, the bringing forth. In the spiritual production, adults are subjected to the first, when they are begotten by "the word of truth" (Jas 1:18), the incorruptible seed, the word of God (1Pe 1:23), commonly termed "conviction." This transpires when any one "heareth the word, and understandeth it" (Mt 13:23), producing the first "the blade." Mr 4:28. The second occurs when the Spirit is conferred u