1978 Apr-Jun XI 4(78) - XI 6(78)





ABOUT "Watchman, What of the Night?"

WWN 1970s Start online:

1975 Jan-MarVIII 1(75) - VIII 3(75)

1975 Apr-Jun VIII 4(75) - VIII 6(75)

1975 Jul-Sep VIII 7(75) - VIII 9(75)

1975 Oct-Dec VIII 10(75) - VIII 12(75)


1976 Jan-Mar IX 1(76) - IX 3(76)

1976 Apr-Jun IX 4(76) - IX 6(76)

1976 Jul-Sep IX 7(76) - IX 9(76)

1976 Oct-Dec IX 10(76) - IX 12(76)


1977 Jan-MarX 1(77) - X 3(77)

1977 Apr-Jun X 4(77) - X 6(77)

1977 Jul-Sep X 7(77) - X 9(77)

1977 Oct-DecX 10(77) - X 12(77)


1978 Jan-Mar XI 1(78) - XI 3(78)

1978 Apr-Jun XI 4(78) - XI 6(78)

1978 Jul-Sep XI 7(78) - XI 9(78)

1978 Oct-Dec XI 10(78) - XI 12(78)


1979 Jan-Mar XI 1(79) - XI 3(79)

1979 Apr-Jun XI 4(79) - XI 6(79)

1979 Jul-Sep XI 7(79) - XI 9(79)

1979 Oct-DecXI 10(79) - XI 12(79)


WWN 1980s

1980 Jan-Mar

1980 Apr-Jun

1980 Jul-Sep

1980 Oct-Dec


1981 Jan-Mar

1981 Apr-Jun

1981 Jul-Sep

1981 Oct-Dec


1982 Jan-Mar

1982 Apr-Jun

1982 Jul-Sep

1982 Oct-Dec


1983 Jan-Mar

1983 Apr-Jun

1983 Jul-Sep

1983 Oct-Dec


1984 Jan-Mar

1984 Apr-Jun

1984 Jul-Sep

1984 Oct-Dec


1985 Jan-Mar

1985 Apr-Jun

1985 Jul-Sep

1985 Oct-Dec


1986 Jan-Mar

1986 Apr-Jun

1986 Jul-Sep

1986 Oct-Dec


1987 Jan-Mar

1987 Apr-Jun

1987 Jul-Sep

1987 Oct-Dec


1988 Jan-Mar

Feb Knight Descends On Jones. 1of 4.

Mar Knight Descends On Jones. 2 of 4.

1988 Apr-Jun 3 & 4 of 4.

1988 Jul-Sep

1988 Oct-Dec


1989 Jan-Mar

1989 Apr-Jun

1989 Jul-Sep

1989 Oct-Dec


WWN 1990s

1990 Jan-Mar

1990 Apr-Jun

1990 Jul-Sep

1990 Oct-Dec


1991 Jan-Mar

1991 Apr-Jun

1991 Jul-Sep

1991 Oct-Dec


1992 Jan-Mar

1992 Apr-Jun

1992 Jul-Sep

1992 Oct-Dec


1993 Jan-Mar

1993 Apr-Jun

1993 Jul-Sep

1993 Oct-Dec


1994 Jan-Mar

1994 Apr-Jun

1994 Jul-Sep

1994 Oct-Dec


1995 Jan-Mar

1995 Apr-Jun

1995 Jul-Sep

1995 Oct-Dec


1996 Jan-Mar

1996 Apr-Jun

1996 Jul-Sep

1996 Oct-Dec


1997 Jan-Mar

1997 Apr-Jun

1997 Jul-Sep

1997 Oct-Dec


1998 Jan-Mar

1998 Apr-Jun

1998 Jul-Sep

1998 Oct-Dec


1999 Jan-Mar

1999 Apr-Jun

1999 Jul-Sep

1999 Oct-Dec


WWN 2000s

2000 Jan-Mar

2000 Apr-Jun

2000 Jul-Sep

2000 Oct-Dec


2001 Jan-Mar

2001 Apr-Jun

2001 Jul-Sep

2001 Oct-Dec


2002 Jan-Mar

2002 Apr-Jun

2002 Jul-Sep

2002 Oct-Dec


2003 Jan-Mar

2003 Apr-Jun

2003 Jul-Sep

2003 Oct-Dec


2004 Jan-Mar

2004 Apr-Jun

2004 Jul-Sep

2004 Oct-Dec


2005 Jan-Mar

2005 Apr-Jun

2005 Jul-Sep

2005 Oct-Dec


2006 Jan-Mar

2006 Apr-Jun

2006 Jul-Dec

last of WWN published

Site Overview









Publisher of the
"Watchman, What of the Night?" (WWN)... More Info
William H. Grotheer, Editor of Research & Publication for the ALF

- 1970s
- 1980s
- 1990s
- 2000s

SHORT STUDIES - William H. Grotheer -
"Another Comforter", study on the Holy Spirit
1976 a Letter and a Reply: - SDA General Conference warning against WWN.
Further Background Information on Zaire -General Conference pays Government to keep church there.
From a WWN letter to a reader: RE: Lakes of Fire - 2 lakes of fire.
Trademark of the name Seventh-day Adventist [Perez Court Case] - US District Court Case - GC of SDA vs.R. Perez, and others [Franchize of name "SDA" not to be used outside of denominational bounds.]


Interpretative History of the Doctrine of the Incarnation as Taught by the Seventh-day Adventist Church, An
- William H. Grotheer

Bible Study Guides
- William H. Grotheer

End Time Line Re-Surveyed Parts 1 & 2 - Adventist Layman's Foundation

Excerpts - Legal Documents
- EEOC vs PPPA - Adventist Laymen's Foundation

Holy Flesh Movement 1899-1901, The - William H. Grotheer

Hour and the End is Striking at You, The - William H. Grotheer

In the Form of a Slave
- William H. Grotheer

Jerusalem In Bible Prophecy
- William H. Grotheer

Key Doctrinal Comparisons - Statements of Belief 1872-1980
- William H. Grotheer

Pope Paul VI Given Gold Medallion by Adventist Church Leader
- William H. Grotheer

Sacred Trust BETRAYED!, The - William H. Grotheer

Seal of God
 - William H. Grotheer

Seventh-day Adventist Evangelical Conferences of 1955-1956
 - William H. Grotheer

SIGN of the END of TIME, The - William H. Grotheer

- William H. Grotheer

Times of the Gentiles Fulfilled, The - A Study in Depth of Luke 21:24
- William H. Grotheer

Elder William H. Grotheer



Song of Solomon - Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary

Ten Commandments - as Compared in the New International Version & the King James Version & the Hebrew Interlinear


Additional Various Studies --
"Saving Faith" - Dr. E. J. Waggoner
"What is Man" The Gospel in Creation - "The Gospel in Creation"
"A Convicting Jewish Witness", study on the Godhead - David L. Cooper D.D.

Bible As History - Werner Keller

Canons of the Bible, The - Raymond A. Cutts

Daniel and the Revelation - Uriah Smith

Facts of Faith - Christian Edwardson

Individuality in Religion - Alonzo T. Jones

"Is the Bible Inspired or Expired?" - J. J. Williamson

Letters to the Churches - M. L. Andreasen

Place of the Bible In Education, The - Alonzo T. Jones

Sabbath, The - M. L. Andreasen

Sanctuary Service, The
- M. L. Andreasen

So Much In Common - WCC/SDA

Spiritual Gifts. The Great Controversy, between Christ and His Angels, and Satan and his Angels - Ellen G. White

Under Which Banner? - Jon A. Vannoy


As of 2010, all official sites of ALF in the United States of America were closed. The Adventist Laymen's Foundation of Canada with its website, www.Adventist Alert.com, is now the only official Adventist Layman's Foundation established by Elder Grotheer worldwide.

The MISSION of this site -- to put works of the Foundation online.

Any portion of these works may be reproduced without further permission by adding the credit line - "Reprinted from Adventist Layman's Foundation, AdventistAlert.com, Victoria, BC Canada."

Thank you for visiting. We look forward to you coming back.

Share your thoughts
with us




WWN 1978 Apr - Jun


1978 Apr -- NOW IT IS BEING TOLD IN PART -- In the most recent issue of Adventist Heritage (Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 35-46), Elder T. E. Unruh discusses the conferences that took place during 1955-1956 between the Evangelicals and Seventh-day Adventist Church leaders which resulted in the book - Questions on Doctrine. His involvement in these conferences places him in a unique position to state what took, place; who all were involved; and what the issues were. He writes - "I served as moderator or chairman throughout the series." (p. 37)   (1)   During these years, he was president of the East Pennsylvania Conference with headquarters in Reading. He sparked the whole episode by writing a letter to Dr. Donald G. Barnhouse commending his radio messages on the book of Romans as a true presentation of righteousness by faith.  (2)

When the results of these conferences were finalized in the book - Questions on Doctrine - no author's name appeared. It was presented only as a work of "The Editorial Committee," which also remained anonymous. (See Questions on Doctrine, p. 10) Now in this historical review, Unruh names the people who were involved - many of whom were suspected at the time. He writes - "Froom, who had a facile pen, took the responsibility of composing the initial answers" to the questions advanced by the Evangelicals. This was a document of "twenty pages." (Heritage, op. cit., p. 38) This accounts for the basic similarity in doctrinal heresy between the book - Questions on Doctrine and Froom's book Movement of Destiny. It needs to be noted at this point - while much detail involving personalities who were behind the book, Questions on Doctrine, is being revealed by Unruh, all the questions involved in the controversy resulting from its publication cannot be answered until each of the documents leading up to the final draft are released for careful analysis. And this has not been done yet.

Others involved in the initial confrontation with the Evangelicals were Elder W. E. Read who in 1955 was Field-Secretary of the General Conference. R. Allan Anderson, editor of the Ministry, whom Unruh describes as possessing a "gift for diplomatic dialogue with leaders of other communions," joined the group at Froom's request. (Ibid., p. 39)

Following the initial conferences which involved only Walter R. Martin and George E. Cannon, a professor of theology on the faculty of Nyack Missionary College (New York) for the Evangelicals, the whole confrontation broadened with the prospects that Dr. Barnhouse was planning to become personally involved with a series of sessions in his own home at Doylestown, Pennsylvania. At this point, Elder R. R Figuhr, president of the General Conference, "gave the support of his office to the conferences and the publication of the definitive statement of Adventist belief which resulted." (Ibid., p. 39) After the sessions at Barnhouse's home, "it

p 2 -- was planned to demonstrate consensus" within the Church "by submitting the questions and answers to Adventist leaders in North America, and then around the world, using a mailing list of more than 250 names." The document had grown from the first draft of twenty pages to book size involving some sixty questions and answers. (Ibid. p. 41) At this juncture a committee of fourteen members was appointed with the General Conference approval. They were R. R. Figuhr (chairman), A. V. Olson, W. B. Ochs, L. K. Dickson, H. L. Rudy, A. L. Ham, J. I. Robinson, W. R. Beach, C. L. Torrey, F. D. Nichol, and the four Adventist conferees - Unruh, Anderson, Froom, and Read. (Ibid.) It will be noted by those who remember the make-up of the General Conference hierarchy at that period that these men were the officers of the General Conference president, vice presidents, secretary, and treasurer, plus Figuhr's personal secretary, and the Editor of the Review. This fact dare not be overlooked, for the apostasy presented in the book - Questions on Doctrine - carried the approbation of the highest spokesmen of the Church. When the book was being prepared for publication an editorial committee chaired by A. V. Olson was appointed with W. E. Read, M. Thurber, W. G. C. Murdoch, R. Hammill, L. E. Froom, and R. A. Anderson as consultants. (Ibid., p. 44) These names are revealing for Murdoch served for a long period of time as Dean of the Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, and Dr. Richard Hammill has been president of Andrews University. Thus the involvement in the book - Questions on Doctrine - reads like a Who's Who among the leadership of the Church at that period.

The most critical revelation is how these original conferees - Unruh, Froom, Anderson, and Read - perceived their work and the results of that work. To Unruh, this book which resulted from the confrontation with the Evangelicals - "is a definitive statement of contemporary Adventist belief." (Ibid., p. 35) This is emphasized throughout the paper - Unruh declares that the Evangelical conferees "were satisfied that we were presenting contemporary Adventist doctrines." (Ibid., p. 38) Yet the Adventist participants did not conceive of themselves as setting forth "a new theology, but [were] clarifying and amplifying the doctrines most generally believed by contemporary Seventh-day Adventists." (Ibid., p. 44) Herein is to be found two vital points:

   1)   On the Evangelical side, Walter Martin "acknowledged that all whose beliefs followed the Questions on Doctrine should be counted members of the Body of Christ (the Christian church in the Evangelical definition) and therefore his brethren." (Ibid., P. 35) Again - Martin became "persuaded that Adventists who believed as did the conferees (Unruh, Anderson, Froom, and Read) were truly born-again Christians and his brethren in Christ." (Ibid., P. 38) Even Barnhouse, according to Unruh, came "to see that there were sober, truly born-again Christians among Seventh-day Adventists." (Ibid., p. 39)

What were these beliefs which our conferees presented as "contemporary" Adventist doctrines in contrast to the historical position of the Church? The overall picture involved "correcting misconceptions about Adventist doctrines as to the nature of Christ in the incarnation, the Trinity, and the completed atonement on the cross." (Ibid., p. 42) This brings us to the second vital point:

    2)   The book - Questions on Doctrine - was supposed to have been merely a clarification and amplification of "The Statement of Fundamental Beliefs of Seventh-day Adventists" first published in 1931, and "later given General Confer-

p 3 -- ence approval and regularly included in church manuals and yearbooks of the denomination." (Ibid. p. 44) Herein is a dilemma. Was this 1931 Statement of Fundamental Beliefs a correct representation of those statements of belief published by Elder James White in the first edition of the Signs of the Times, which he declared to be held "with great unanimity" by the Church? (June 4, 1874, Editorial) Concerning these same beliefs, Uriah Smith wrote - "There is, so far as is known, entire unanimity throughout the body." (Review & Herald, Aug. 22, 1912) Or was the 1931 Statement of Beliefs a change of doctrinal course within the Church? Or did the conferees representing the Adventist Church seek to interpret the 1931 Statement of Fundamental Beliefs in such a way to be acceptable to the Evangelicals? While the possibility the historic faith of the Adventist Church was altered in the 1931 Statement of Fundamental Beliefs needs to be investigated, Unruh's report of the events during the conferences with the Evangelicals leads one to conclude that the latter possibility is a more viable answer. He wrote - "Our friends [Barnhouse and Martin] helped us to express our beliefs in terms more easily understood by theologians of other communions." (Heritage, op. cit., p. 40) Further, Unruh reveals that as a result of these conferences, Frank E. Gaebelein, an official in the National Association of Evangelicals, wrote "stating in his opinion, that the Seventh-day Adventist church would qualify for membership in the evangelical group." (Ibid., p. 42)

Two other observations must be noted in Unruh's report. He traces the original answers from a twenty page document, to a preliminary document sent to at least 250 leaders of the Church in different parts of the world, to a final book of 720 pages. It is known and can be documented that the final result - the book, Questions on Doctrine - is itself a revision of the original answers given to the Evangelical conferees. The book is heretical enough; what were the original answers like? This is still held in secret, and until all the documents are given the light of day, we shall not know how dark was the apostasy committed by the Adventist conferees - Unruh, Anderson, Froom and Read. Unruh does call attention to an article appearing in Eternity, entitled, "Are Seventh-day Adventists Christians?" (Sept., 1956) This was written by Barnhouse himself. Unruh quotes only a non-critical paragraph from the article. This article reveals to some extent how far our leaders went in compromise of the historic teachings of the Church. Barnhouse wrote concerning his view of our understanding of what took place on October 22, 1844 in these words:       It is to my mind, therefore, nothing more than a human, face-saving idea! It should also be realized that some uninformed Seventh-day Adventists took this idea and carried it to fantastic literalistic extremes. Mr. Martin and I heard the Adventist leaders say, flatly, that they repudiate all such extremes. This they said in no uncertain terms. Further, they do not believe as some of their earlier teachers taught, that Jesus' atoning work was not completed on Calvary but instead that He was still carrying on a second ministering work since 1844. This idea is also totally repudiated. They believe that since His ascension Christ has been ministering the benefits of the atonement He completed on Calvary.  (3)

As a final observation - Unruh claims that Elder M. L. Andreasen was the sole source for the controversy which followed the publication of the book - Questions on Doctrine (4)   He also claims that Andreasen made his "peace" with the hierarchy

p 4 -- and that the "incident was soon closed." (Heritage, op. it, p. 45) The burden of proof that Andreasen repudiated his opposition to the changes made in historic Adventist teaching as set forth in the book, Questions on Doctrine, rests with Unruh. This he does not give. To our knowledge, Andreasen never backed away from what he had written, and the charges he made in Letters to the Churches. These letters are still available.

(1) Following his service as president of the East Pennsylvania Conference, T. E. Unruh came to the Indiana Conference where I served for seven years as a pastor and evangelist. I knew that he was connected with the conferences between the Evangelicals and our men in Washington, but not until this article did I know that he was the moderator and chairman of these dialogues. Now I can understand the vehemence of the reaction which he displayed toward me because of the stand that I took on the book, Questions on Doctrine. I recall vividly one experience. A. V. Olson had been invited to be a key speaker at one of the camp meetings during the time Unruh's and my service paralleled in Indiana. Following camp meeting - mind you during the breaking up of the camp - I was called off the work detail for a private conference with Olson and Unruh. I was asked concerning my position on the Incarnation. I asked these men to define the word "infinite" - for me. They demurred, and I said that I wasn't trying to pull anything over on them. Then they gave me a definition. I asked them to read from Christ's Object Lessons, p. 388 which stated - "Tell the wanderer of an almighty hand that will hold him up, of an infinite humanity in Christ that pities him." The two men - Olson and Unruh - then got into an argument over Matthew 8:17 that Jesus "took our-infirmities, and bare our sicknesses." They discussed whether Christ could catch a cold. I had to smile for it sounded to me like the medieval theologians arguing -about how many spirits could dance on a pinhead. This enraged Unruh and he said to Olson - "I want to tell you about this man. He has a very peculiar personality. Whatever he says to the laity, they believe, but they won't believe what I tell them about theology." This embarrassed Olson, who broke up the meeting stating that he had a plane to meet. We had prayer together and Olson apologized that I had been called in before them.
(2) For a minister of the Seventh-day Adventist Church to commend a Babylonian Evangelical on his presentations from the book of Romans reveals his lack of knowledge of the true gospel and righteousness by faith. It is not very likely that Unruh had any acquaintance at that time with Waggoner's Studies in Romans, or much of a concept of what took place during the decade following 1888. The only publication available on 1888 at the time Unruh wrote his first letter to Barnhouse - November 28, 1949 - was Daniells' book Christ our Righteousness. Wieland and Short's manuscript - 1888 Re-Examined had not been written.
(3) This paragraph is taken from a photocopy of the complete article, "Are Seventh-day Adventists Christians?" as found in Eternity, September, 1956

Unruh's reasoning regarding Andreasen and the agitation following the publication of Questions on Doctrine is typical Unruhism. He wrote:

It came as a surprise to the planners, after the demonstration of a solid consensus from the world leaders in the church and the preview --- PAGE 5 ---- in the Ministry of what was to come, that Questions and Doctrine should be subjected to attack from Adventist sources. The critics seemed to be saying the same things, suggesting a common source. This was not hard to find. M. L. Andreasen, a respected retired Adventist theologian, author and Bible teacher, had widely circulated eleven mimeographed documents and six printed leaflets addressed to the churches. (Heritage, p. 44)

Such a conclusion was inaccurate. I know from experience of my own concern about the articles appearing in the Ministry, and of a letter I wrote to Elder H. L. Rudy asking for an explanation * It was not until the book Questions on Doctrine had been published, and I was discussing the questionable parts of the book with friends in Canada that I was told about Andreasen's opposition. But this is the way Unruh's mind works. Many people may be concerned, but always there is just one agitator, whom he seeks to zero in on. At a camp meeting in Indiana - one year prior to the experience noted in Footnote #1 - R. Allan Anderson was the main speaker. The laity challenged him over and over again after his presentations of "new look" Adventism. Unruh concluded there could be only one man responsible for this reaction on the part of the laity - that was the Adventist Laymen's Foundation. He called a meeting of the entire working force after an evening service. This meeting was held in the chapel of the old administration building on the campus of Indiana Academy, and lasted till I a. m. Three of us ministers withstood Anderson to the face regarding the work of Christ as priest, and the historic teaching of the pioneers in regard to the final atonement, and whether Crozier had the true light on the sanctuary as Ellen G. White indicated he had.

WHAT HAPPENED TO MAN IN THE FALL? -- The restoration of man can be understood only when we understand what happened to man in the Fall. We say that man sinned, and this is true; but what all was involved in this experience? The Biblical account of the temptation and its results is brief. It involved a mental process, a rationalization that perverted the judgment of our first parents. When Eve concluded the tree to be good for food, its fruit pleasing to her senses; and when she accepted the suggestion that it had properties no other tree in the garden possessed, she took of the fruit and ate. (Gen. 3:6) When Adam faced with the choice between the unknown future, and the loss of someone tangible and material whose association had brought the most favorable and pleasant reactions, he chose the material and present for the unknown and future.

It is immediately obvious that the Fall involved the human appetite and inclinations which are a part of the very fabric of humanity. The paramount question then is simply - Were these inclinations and appetites a part of the nature which man received in Creation? Of this we read:        Our natural inclinations and appetites ... were divinely appointed,

p 6 -- and when given to man, were pure and holy. It was God's design that reason should rule the appetites, and that they should minister to our happiness. And when regulated and controlled by a sanctified reason, they are holiness unto the Lord. Ms. 47, 1896 (Temperance, p. 12)

There is another factor in the sin problem which must be included in any analysis of what happened in the Fall. The account in Genesis states simply that when God asked man to give an accounting of himself, Adam replied, "I was afraid." (Gen. 3:10) This not only reveals a sense of guilt, but also an imbalance in the whole system of man. When Adam was created, "he stood before God in the strength of perfect manhood, all the organs and faculties of his being fully developed and harmoniously balanced." (Spirit of Prophecy, II, p.28) Man because of this imbalance resultant from sin cannot make correct value judgments. Let me illustrate. I recall vividly when about ten years of age, I attended a meeting at the local Baptist church in my home town in Iowa, where my mother, sister and I attended regularly. It was real dark when the meeting was over, and I had three blocks to go to be home. The first block was especially dark, and a cross alley way in the middle had heavy bushes. It had been reported that some folk walking along this particular block had been attacked by thieves hiding in the bushes. However, this block had an exceptionally wide street as the trolley cars which traversed our small town east and west passed each other in this block. I decided to walk in the middle of the street for this first block. When I got to the alley way, I "heard" some rustling in the bushes, and the next two blocks were made in record time. I was afraid. My sense of hearing only touched base with a questionable input, and reacted immediately with my emotions and glands. I did not stop to consider whether a wind was blowing, or possibly a dog that I might have frightened moved quickly through the underbrush producing the rustling sound I heard. This thinking and reacting to our emotions which has increased with the physical deterioration of the race because of continued transgression from generation to generation is a major factor in the sin problem.

We must also consider in any analysis of what happened to man in the Fall, that which is called, "original sin." To my knowledge, the expression is used only once in the Spirit of Prophecy - never in the Bible - and then not in a theological sense. The sentence from the writings of E. G. White in which this term is used reads - "Every sin committed awakens echoes of the original sin." (Review & Herald, April 16, 1901) Like the term - Trinity - which is not found in either the Bible or the Spirit of Prophecy; the expression -"original sin" - is too involved in the theological controversies of the Church Fathers to be usable today in comprehending truth. But because the servant of the Lord did not choose to use the word, Trinity, did not mean that she was a Unitarian. Neither, because she didn't elect to use the expression, original sin, in a theological sense, does not mean that she had nothing to say regarding what we have received from the Fall, which no child of humanity has ever escaped as a part of his human inheritance. We read:        The result of eating of the tree of knowledge of good and evil is manifest in every man's experience. There is in his nature a bent to evil, a force which, unaided, he cannot resist. (Education, p. 29)

What is this "bent to evil" - this force which overpowers man? Is it some different nature that man now has, which he did not have before the Fall? Is it some

p 7 -- thing that must be eradicated before man can be restored? Just what did happen in the Fall? We read:       In creating man, God gave him noble qualities. He endowed him with a well-balanced mind, and made every power of his being harmonious. After the fall there was not given to man another set of faculties. The powers given him before sin entered the world through Adam were high, and their aims holy; all in perfect harmony with the divine mind. The fall did not create in man new faculties, energies, and passions; for this would have been a reflection upon God. It was through disobedience to God's requirements that these powers were perverted; the affections were misplaced, and turned from the high and holy purpose to a lower aim and to meet a lower standard. (Review & Herald, March 1, 1887)  (1)

Note the expressions and words from this inspired comment - "The fall did not create in man new faculties, energies, and passions" but these forces of our human nature which were created "high" and "holy" and "harmonious" were "perverted" and "misplaced" and "turned."

The restoration of man is not the eradication of the fallen nature, but the restoration of the harmony and balance with which man was originally endowed - "the kingly power of reason, sanctified by divine grace," bearing sway once again in our lives. (Ministry of Healing, p. 130) We again read:       In returning to God, the inclinations, the taste, the appetite, and the passions are brought into higher, holier channels. The bias to evil is overcome through man's determined effort, aided by the grace of Christ. The faculties that have been warped in a wrong direction are no longer misused, perverted, and misapplied. They are not wasted in selfish purposes, or fastened upon perishable things. The truth has been accepted, has convicted the soul, transformed the character, and there is a purification and elevation of all the powers of the being, and the God-given powers are no longer debased. (Review & Herald, op. cit.)

The key to man's restoration is to be found in his recognition of the fact that the perversion of his faculties and passions through sin has placed within him a "force which, unaided, he cannot resist. To withstand this force, to attain that ideal which in his inmost soul he accepts as alone worthy, he can find in only one power. That power is Christ." (Education, p. 29)

Christ alone will accomplish for man that which he cannot do for himself in the final atonement. He will send forth the Holy Spirit in unlimited and unrestrained power. For this we are admonished to pray:       Pray that the mighty energies of the Holy Spirit, with all their quickening, recuperative, and transforming power, may fall like an electric shock on the palsy-stricken soul, causing every nerve to thrill with new life, restoring the whole man from his dead, earthly, sensual state to spiritual soundness. You will thus become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust; and in your souls will be reflected the image of Him by whose stripes you are healed. (5 Testimonies, p.267)

p 8 -- With every nerve thrilling with new divine life, the kingly power of reason will control the faculties, energies, and passions of the whole man bringing every thought into captivity to the Lord Jesus Christ. Then will the image of Jesus be perfectly reflected in His own. The Latter Rain will have accomplished its objective.


While researching the Holy Flesh Movement, I discovered among the papers of S. S. Davis, originator of the teaching, this quotation. The sheet of paper on which it was typed had the notation - "Copied from Missionary Magazine, June, 1900." (It was not until later I verified it as first being published in the Review & Herald, March 1, 1887.) You will observe the date - 1900 - which was the year of the high tide of this movement. In all of the published writings of Davis - which are few - and in the exchange of correspondence between him and the officers of the Indiana Conference following 1901, nowhere is this statement alluded to - even though Davis does use references from the Spirit of Prophecy in seeking to defend his position. Neither does R. S. Donnell who was president of the Conference prior to 1901, and who actively led out in the Movement, use this reference in any of his papers. It is quietly ignored by the Holy Flesh Movement so far as can be ascertained. And the reason is obvious. It strikes directly at the tenet upon which the whole teaching of Holy Flesh rests - the eradication of the fallen nature. To teach this doctrine is to teach holy flesh.

This basic teaching of the Holy Flesh Movement was also taught by Brinsmead during Decade - I. It is still being advocated by Fred Wright, which he states is "the cross in [his] message." (News Review, May, 1973, p. 2) Brinsmead discovered that you cannot harmonize the teaching of the eradication of the fallen nature and the teaching regarding the Incarnation that Christ in His humanity took upon Himself our fallen nature. He abandoned first this historic Adventist position and went over to the same teaching on the Incarnation that the leaders of the Holy Flesh Movement advocated - that Christ took the nature of Adam before the Fall. This led to his complete change from all that he taught during Decade - I. This was inevitable. When one forsakes the only foundation upon which man's salvation rests that Jesus is the Christ, what is left? (I Cor. 3:11) And we need to remember that Jesus is the name given to that unique Person who at Bethlehem accepted the fallen nature of man with all of its risks. (Matt. 1:21; Desire of Ages, pp. 48-49) A complete picture of the Holy Flesh Movement can be obtained - The Holy Flesh Movement, 1899 1901.

SPECIAL ISSUE -- Many have written for a copy of January, 1978, "Watchman, What of the Night?" in which we discussed the Papal audience in which B. B. Beach participated as a representative of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. This issue, though we ran extra copies, has been depleted. Rather than reprinting it, we are planning a special issue on this subject alone. We have heard from Elder W. Duncan Eva. While he refused to answer certain questions, he did clarify a few points. We have also received a "fall out" from some files in Washington, which we will share with our readers.

p 9 -- SIGNS OF THE TRENDS -- An "Ecumenical" Approach -- Every other issue of the Ministry - "the international journal of the Seventh-day Adventist Ministerial Association" - is printed with a view toward reaching the clergy of other denominations.

On the January, 1978, issue was a special cover with a letter on the back page addressed to "Dear fellow clergymen" - written by the editor, Elder J. R. Spangler. The last sentence reads - "Since ours is a day of dialogue and ecumenism, we trust that you will receive this gift subscription in the spirit in which it is given."

An Ecumenical Jesuit -- "Rev. Irenee Beaubien, a Jesuit and one of Quebec's leading ecumenists, will preach in Toronto tomorrow evening to mark the beginning of the annual Octave of Prayer for Christian Unity" - so stated the Toronto [Canada] Star, January 21, 1978 (p. G-5).Jesuit Beaubien "director of

p 10 -- the Canadian Centre for Ecumenism," was sponsored by the North York Ministerial Association, and the service was conducted in St. George's United Church. North York, a part of Metro-Toronto, is a center for Seventh-day Adventist work, as Branson-North York Hospital is located there. It would be interesting for believers living in that area to inquire to see if the ministers of the Church in the North York vicinity are members of the Ministerial Association which sponsored the Jesuit. We would pray they are not.

Rome - Moscow Affinity? -- Malachi Martin, a former professor at the Pontifical Biblical Institute in Rome, and ex-Jesuit priest, who was also a close associate of Pope John XXIII has written a book entitled - The Final Conclave. According to the Indianapolis Star (Feb. 20, 1978, p. 15), "it predicts that there is a powerful faction in the (Catholic) church that will favor election of a new pope who will make a deal with Communist leaders of Eastern Europe." The ex-Jesuit also claims that "many cardinals and Vatican officials are pro-Marxist." A Jesuit - in good and regular standing - Robert Graham - who is assigned to the Vatican, labels the book - "pure fiction" and "whatever its literary merits, it is not history or even good journalism." However, Graham admitted - "The question of the Catholic Church's present attitude toward Communism, Marxism, Euro-Communism, etc., and the possible configuration of the next conclave are certainly legitimate subjects of consideration." (Religious News Service, Feb. 17, 1978, p. 13) What are the facts - what is being observed in events taking place at the Vatican? Religious News Service reports:       For the first time in the history of the Italian Republic, Italy's Ambassador to the Holy See invited the head of the Communist Party to the traditional reception marking the signing of the Lateran Treaty,,,. During the reception, Mr. Berlinguer [Communist Party head] spent a good deal of time in conversation with Archbishop Agostino Casaroli, Pope Paul's top foreign aide, who is chief engineer of the Vatican's policy of detente with Eastern European Communist countries. (Feb. 13, 1978, p.27)

Again: --     In his unprecedented meeting with Edward Gierek, Poland's Communist leader, Pope Paul strongly affirmed the Catholic Church's significant role in the history of Poland ... Following private talks that included several Polish government and Vatican dignitaries, the Pope reminded Mr. Gierek that from its very beginning, Poland has been "impregnated with Christianity" and has constantly maintained close ties with the Vatican. Mr. Gierek in turn stated that the Polish government wished to work with the Catholic Church as has been outlined in statements to Poland's Catholic Primate, Cardinal Stefan Wyszynski of Warsaw. The meeting between the Pope and Poland's Communist leader was the second in 1977 with a Communist head of state. In June the Pope met with Janos Kadar, who heads the Hungarian Communist Party. (Dec. 2, 1977, pp. 6-7)

Box Score
Ex-Jesuit - 3
Jesuit - - - 0

(Apr 1978)---END--- TOP

1978 May -- "ROOTS" OF THE ECUMENICAL MOVEMENT -- For source material, otherwise than as documented, I am indebted to an article by Dr. Earle Hilgert in the Review, October 12, 1967, pp. 4-5. Dr. Hilgert, then Vice-president for Academic Administration at Andrews University, was the first Seventh-day Adventist to serve on the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council of Churches.

In 1870, William Reed Huntington, an American Episcopalian, published a book entitled - The Church Idea. In this book, the author set forth four points as a basis for Christian unity. These points were:
1) The Scriptures as the Word of God.
2) The creeds of the early church as the rule of faith.
3) The sacraments of baptism and the Lord's Supper.
4) The historic episcopate as the basis of organizational unity.  (1)

In 1888, these four points, substantially as Huntington had proposed them, were adopted by the bishops of the Anglican Church at the Lambeth Conference of that year, and thereafter were known as the Lambeth Quadrilateral.  (2)   One must keep in mind that the Anglican Church is considered the "bridge" church between Protestantism and Roman Catholicism. In 1910 at the Edinburgh Missionary Conference, an Episcopal (Anglican) missionary to the Philippines, Bishop Charles H. Brent, called for an international, interdenominational conference on questions of doctrine and organization. Herein is the idea of the Faith and Order Movement.

In 1920, the Lambeth Conference of Anglican bishops based on the Quadrilateral issued "An Appeal to All Christian People" urging the Christian world to strive for an united church. The same year representatives from 70 denominations, and 40 countries convened in Geneva, Switzerland. Bishop Charles H. Brent presided at this meeting which marked the "official" beginning of the Faith and Order Movement. The call was based on only one doctrinal confession - that "our Lord Jesus Christ [is] God and Saviour." This is also the same doctrinal criterion for fellowship in the World Council of Churches.

This meeting in 1920 prepared the way for the First World Conference on Faith and Order, which was held in Lausanne, Switzerland in 1927. The Lausanne Conference adopted a methodology for the purpose of studying the differences between the various communions in the hope that such a study would lead to a better understanding of one another's position with the ultimate objective of bridging the separating gulfs. Herein is the concept of "dialogue." However in the years following,

p 2 -- an "irreconcilable"impasse developed between those who considered the church as "catholic" and those who considered the church as "protestant." This was faced up to in the Third World Conference on Faith and Order in 1952 held in Lund, Sweden. Here a new methodology was adopted which sought to bridge the divisions between the "catholic" and "Protestant" concepts of the church. Joint studies on theological and organizational problems common to all were arranged with the conviction that in seeking cooperatively a truly Christ-centered answer to the problems previously faced, they might draw closer to one another.

In the meantime, in 1948,  (3)   the World Council of Churches was organized by a merger of the Faith and Order Movement, and a parallel ecumenical group, the Christian Life and Work Movement. Following the merger, the Faith and Order Movement became a Commission of the World Council of Churches, and under the World Council became a well organized structure holding working sessions every three years in preparation for further World Conferences on Faith and Order.

Near the close of the first decade of the last half of the 20th Century, events within the Catholic Church were to play a part in the ecumenical movement. On October 9, 1958, Pius XII died and was succeeded by Angelo Roncalli as Pope John XXIII. One of the announced objectives of John's Papal reign was "to bring the Church up to date." With this in mind he called for a council of bishops. The idea was his own, "a heavenly inspiration, he said when he made the announcement soon after his coronation in 1959." ( Britannica, Book of the Year 1964, p. 717) Prior to the convening of Vatican Council II, October 11, 1962, Pope John "established the Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity, headed,by the ecumenical minded Augustin Cardinal Bea, which in a very short time has proved to be an effective instrument of Christian renewal and interfaith amity."(Ibid., p. 718) In preparation for this Council, the Vatican asked several branches of what they called "separated brethren" to appoint official observers. "The World Council of Churches, several Protestant communions, the Anglicans and at least one of the Eastern Churches responded favorably."(Ibid 1963, p. 690)

In 1963, several events occurred in the ecumenical movement. Pope John died to be followed by Paul VI who announced his intention to pursue the policies of his predecessor. He convened the second session of Vatican II with overtures toward more friendly relations with other Christian bodies. By invitation an increased number of Protestant and Orthodox observers were present at the Council. Also during this year, the Faith and Order Commission called a consultation in Montreal, Quebec, with Roman Catholic observers present.

The Third Session of Vatican II was convened in September, 1964. Prior to this session in his Good Friday message, Pope Paul VI referred to the Anglican and Eastern bodies as "churches" and the Protestant bodies as "communities" instead of "separated brethren," thus according to them a status not previously recognized. The Seventh-day Adventist Church had "observers" at this Third Session. It was through contact between "observers" from the Church, and the World Council of Churches at the Third Session of Vatican II, that the events began which led eventually to B. B. Beach's audience with Pope Paul on May 18, 1977, as an official representative of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. He documents this beginning contact in these words:

p 3 -- Strange as it may seem, these yearly Consultations [between the World Council of Churches and Seventh-day Adventists] are an indirect byproduct of Vatican II. In fact, while in Rome in connection with the Vatican Council a WCC staff member and an Adventist representative came to the conclusion that an informal meeting of a small group of Seventh-day Adventists with an equal number of representatives from the World Council of Churches would fulfil a useful purpose - Adventists being insufficiently informed regarding the World Council of Churches, and the WCC staff and church leaders being equally in need of additional and more comprehensive knowledge regarding the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

The first meeting was held in 1965, the participants being selected by the two organizers. (So Much in Common, p. 98)

Out of these Consultations came a series of rapid-fire events which led to a representative of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, Dr. Earle Hilgert, sitting at the Bristol, England, triennial meeting of the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council of Churches from July 30 to August 8, 1967.   (4)   First in the January, 1967, issue of the Ecumenical Review (Journal of the World Council of Churches) a paper prepared by the Faith and Order Commission on the Seventh-day Adventist Church was published. An editor of the Review responded, expressing regret that the SDA Church could not "as an organization, be more closely associated with others who profess the name of Christ." (Review, April 6, 1967, p. 13) But he suggested that "if the Secretariat on Faith and Order, for instance, were to~ invite SDA's to appoint someone competent in that area to meet with their group from time to time and represent the SDA point of view, we could accept such an invitation with a clear conscious." (Ibid.) The action moved so rapidly that the Central Committee of the World Council of Churches appointed Dr. Hilgert, and the General Conference approved the selection, so that Dr. Hilgert could be in Bristol, England representing our "point of view" by the end of July of the same year. When Dr. Hilgert left the Seventh-day Adventist Church, becoming a professor at McCormick Theological Seminary in Chicago, his place on the Faith and Order Commission was filled by Dr. R. Dederen, also of Andrews University.

Thus from 1888 to 1967 two Movements were in parallel - the Faith and Order Movement for Christian unity, and the Advent Movement for a completed work on the earth. In 1967, the Seventh-day Adventist Church - a trustee under God of the Three Angel's Messages - broke the parallel and became identified with the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council of Churches.

(1) Parallel events during the history of the ecumenical movement are most interesting and should be considered carefully. In 1870, Vatican Council I, promulgated the doctrine of Papal infallibility so that when the Pope speaks "ex cathedra" (from the Chair) his utterances are as the utterances of God. It should be observed that point #4 of Huntington's suggestion is that the "historic episcopate" be the basis for organizational unity. The historic episcopate placed the Bishop of Rome as the first among equals. The final outcome of the Papal doctrine formulated at Vatican I on the ecumenical process has yet to he written. ---PAGE 4 ---
(2) In 1888, "the Lord in His great mercy sent a most precious message to His people through Elders Waggoner and Jones." (Testimonies to Ministers, p. 91). This message was to produce unity in truth under the Holy Spirit, and to prepare a people to reveal to the world the matchless love of God in a revelation of the image of Jesus perfectly reproduced in them. The people of God were to experience the results of the "final atonement" when in the mighty outpouring of the latter rain, "the moral image of God is to be perfected in the character. [They] are to be wholly transformed into the likeness of Christ." (Ibid, p. 506) Through understanding the justification of God in behalf of sinners, they are to develop the trust "that divine grace alone can complete the work." (Ibid., p. 508)
(3) 1n 1948, Israel once again became a recognized nation. Coming events were casting their shadows before. In the Church, the year following, the book - Bible Readings for the Home Circle - a standard doctrinal presentation of the truths held by the Church - was revised and the historic teaching of Seventh-day Adventists in regard to the Incarnation was altered. (See our manuscript - An Interpretive History of the Doctrine of the Incarnation as Taught by the Seventh-day Adventist Church, pp. 64-66.) Events were moving swiftly. In 1950, Elders Wieland and Short wrote 1888 Re-Examined which warned the leadership of the course they were pursuing and where continued apostasy would lead. The warning was unheeded, and the conferences with the Evangelicals culminated in the publication of the heretical book - Questions on Doctrine. (See April, 1978, Watchman, What of the Night?, article -"Now It Is Being Told in Part")
(4) 1n 1967, the nation of Israel in the Seven Day War recaptured the Old City of Jerusalem bringing it once more under the Jewish flag after 1900 years of foreign rule. This event fulfilled Jesus' own prophecy as recorded in Luke 21:24. See the monograph - The Times of the Gentiles Fulfilled.

WHAT IS YOUR I. D.? -- The evening following the resurrection, two disciples were walking toward home. Jesus drew near and joined company with them. "But their eyes were holden that they should not know Him." He had listened to their conversation as He approached, and asked them about the things they were talking about. They replied that they had been conversing about "Jesus of Nazareth" and "how the chief priests and our rulers delivered Him to be condemned to death, and have crucified Him." (Luke 24:13-20) In the minds of these disciples, there was no question - their rulers and chief priests had done the deed!

On the day of Pentecost, there were gathered at Jerusalem for the celebration of the feast, Jews from all parts of the diaspora, besides God-fearers, and proselytes. Few, if any of these, had been present at "the Hall of Judgment" and cried out to Pilate along with the chief priests and officers - "Crucify Him! Crucify Him!" (John 18:28; 19:6; Mark 15:11-13) Yet, Peter filled with the Holy Spirit

p 5 -- stated to these assembled Jews, proselytes, and God-fearers in direct accusation - "ye have taken [Jesus], and by wicked hands have crucified and slain." He then concluded - "Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ." (Acts 2:23, 26) These assembled people, because of their identification with the "house of Israel" were guilty equally with the leadership in their acts which they committed as representatives of the people. We cannot escape personal responsibility when we are identified with a corporate entity. The actions of the officers of any such entity act in behalf of the whole, and thus we become guilty before God with them in their actions. This was the judgment of the Holy Spirit in the crucifixion of Christ. This Spirit of truth does not vary with the times and seasons, but speaks in truth through all ages and times.

In the consultation of the Sanhedrin which plotted the death of Jesus, Caiaphas reasoned with his peers - "It is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not." (John 11:50) These chief men of the nation were acting in behalf of the "house of Israel." The entity must be preserved at all costs. Jesus had to be eliminated. But in this decision of the Jewish hierarchy, the whole of the nation was held accountable before God. Every one who's I. D. was with the earthly house of Israel stood judged as guilty of the blood of the Son of God.

This principle clearly outlined in Scripture is well known and understood by the Papacy. They base their catholicity on the assumption that they can be historically identified with the apostolic church; that their church - the Roman Catholic - is the continuing corporate identity of the early church. Pope Paul VI in speaking to the Secretaries of the World Confessional Families in private audience stated - "In you we greet representatives of a considerable portion of Christian people and through you we send our greetings of grace and peace in the Lord to your confessional families." (Religious News Service, May 19, 1977, p. 9) Thus through our representative, Dr. B. B. Beach, the Pope conferred greetings and blessings upon each member of the Seventh-day Adventist Church family! Further, when Dr. Beach gave to the Pope the gold medallion as a "symbol of the Seventh-day Adventist Church" (Review, Aug. 11, 1977, P. 23), every member of the corporate body participated in that gift through their "chief priests and rulers." I am well aware that such trut
h is not palatable to those who wish to continue to sit comfortably in the pew, but it is truth that needs to be spoken so that the modern "house of Israel" might know that they have made obeisance to the antichrist of Scripture, and in so doing have denied Him, whom the Father raised up to be both Lord and Christ. I simply ask - Where is your I. D.?

"Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all." - Gal. 4:26

"But ye are come unto mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, ..." Heb. 12:22-23

"I saw a little company traveling a narrow pathway. All seemed to be firmly united bound together by the truth, in bundles, or companies." Early Writings, p. 88, 89

p 6 --



Letter to WWN:

January 11, 1978

I'm afraid I can't answer the questions which you propound in your brief letter of January 4. 1 believe that at the time we purchased the gold-finished medallions the price was around $45, although of course now this has doubtless increased considerably.

I'm passing your letter along to Elder Eva. No doubt he would have information you asked for that I don't.

I hope, ... that you do not feel that because the Pope was contacted this way it is any indication that the Adventist church is reaching out its hand to papal authority as prophecy has indicated apostate Protestantism will do. This can never be. Both you and I know that, as does also the administration of this church.

Thank you for your interest and concern and your prayers.

Sincerely yours,
M. Carol Hetzell, Director
Department of Communication
MCH: kt
cc: W. D. Eva


January 17, 1978

M. Carol Hetzell, Director
Department of Communication
Gen. Conf., S D A
Washington, D. C. 20012

Dear Sister Hetzell;

In your letter of the 11th, you indicated that the price of the medallion overlaid with pure gold was only $45.00. Perhaps you got your figures mixed as the price of the pure silver medallion more closely approximated the $45.00 quotes.

You stated that you hoped that I would not feel that because Pope Paul VI was given this "symbol" of the Seventh-day Adventist Church in an audience by an official representative of the hierarchy that this was an "indication that the Adventist Church is reaching out its hand to papal authority." What other conclusion can one draw from the evidence now available for all to see and read.

We state in a legal brief:       Although it is true that there was a period in the life of the Seventh-day Adventist Church when the denomination took a distinctly anti-Roman Catholic viewpoint, and the term "hierarchy" was used in a perjorative sense to refer to the papal form of church governance, that attitude on the Church's part was nothing more than a manifestation of widespread anti-popery among conservative protestant denominations in the early part of this century and the latter part of the last, and which has now been consigned to the historical trash heap so far as the Seventh-day Adventist Church is concerned. (p. 4, footnote #2, Docket Entry #84 EEOC vs PPPA C-74-2025 CBR)

Further in the same legal brief:       While, however, Adventist doctrine continues to teach that church government by one man is contrary to the Word of God, it is not good Seventh-day Adventism to express ... an aversion to Roman Catholicism as such. (Ibid., p. 30, emphasis mine.)

In the light of this, what other interpretation can be given to an audience by an official representative of the Church who in that audience gives the Pope a medallion overlaid with pure gold; and this act is noted by a vice-president of the General Conference as giving in "symbol" the Church? It is my understanding that Dr. B. B. Beach in an interview over Vatican radio used the term "Holy Father" in referring to the Pope.

p 8 -- Hetzell - 2

Our spiritual fathers in harmony with prophecy considered the Pope, the "man of sin." See Signs of the Times, June 4, 1874, article, "Fundamental Principles," by James White, Principle #13. How do you relate - "man of sin" with "holy father" and the giving of a medallion overlaid with pure gold?

Our teaching has indicated that the mystery of iniquity as described by Paul in II Thess. 2:7-10 was and is fulfilled in the Papacy headed by the Pope. Paul uses the expression - (Greek word for "that wicked") - in referring to "that Wicked" one whose coming is "after the working Satan." Thayer tells us that this expression means - "he in whom all iniquity has as it were fixed its abode." (p. 48, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament) Yet we have an official representative of the Church present a medallion overlaid with pure gold to this one in whom as it were all iniquity has fixed its abode, and then you write that you hope we will not conclude that this is reaching across the gulf to clasp hands with this Roman power.

The prophetess to the Church questioned - "Shall this power, whose record for a thousand years is written in the blood of saints, be now acknowledged as a part of the church of Christ?" (Great Controversy, p. 571) Yet, through an official representative of the Church, the Church has been placed in "symbol" in the hands of this man whose coming is after the working of Satan with all signs and lying wonders. How self-deceived has the hierarchy become?

Let us hear how you harmonize the prophecies of the Word of God, and the actions of the leadership of the Church in permitting this medallion overlaid with pure gold to be given as a "symbol" of the Church to the Pope?

Sincerely yours for truth,
(Signed, WWN)

RE: Cost of medallion. -- If the medallion presented to the Pope was from the group of medallions purchased from the Presidential Art Medals, Inc. in 1973, then the price was approximately $45.00; but if it were purchased near the time that the Northern Europe-West Africa Division Committee authorized B. B. Beach's trip to Rome, then the price would be approximately $95.00, and the silver issue at that time carried an approximate $35.00 tag. When all the facts were in, and could be brought together in our "Special Report" issue of Watchman, What of the Night? - we stated: "Thus the price was nominal, and the issue is simply that this gold medallion was presented by Beach to the Pope as a 'symbol of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.'" (p. 14)

p 9 -- WHY HAVE WE PUBLISHED THE LETTERS ON THE PRECEDING PAGES? -- When the RNS report came to my desk late in 1977 - a number of months after its release - and I found the news item in the Review, also a considerable time after its publication, I believed it was necessary to correspond with the leadership in Washington to obtain, if possible, all the facts involved regarding the private audience B. B. Beach had with the Pope along with other Secretaries of the World Confessional Families. My first letter was to Elder Duncan Eva, whose name was attached to the news item in the Review. He turned my letter over to Miss M. Carol Hetzell, and an exchange of letters followed, as to the medallion itself, its nature and price. But when Miss Hetzell suggested that we could not conclude this act was reaching across the gulf to clasp the hand of Rome, I wondered how the hierarchy could harmonize our historic concepts on prophecy with some of their written statements and acts. Hence the letter which we wrote to Miss Hetzell. Further, we want our readers to know that what we write in the Thought Paper, we write and say direct to the leadership of the Church prior to our saying it in the paper. This is the rule we have sought to follow from the inception of the Thought Paper, and will continue to do so. Sometimes, they choose to communicate, and sometimes they choose not to do so. This we cannot control.

p 10 -- SIGNS OF THE TRENDS -- Anita Bryant -- Whatever may be one's personal opinion of this singer, certain things happening to her should be carefully noted. Due to her stand on homosexuality, RNS (Feb. 21, 1978) reported that where she used to sing "at secular concerts for $8,500 or more a night, [she] now appears as the featured attraction at patriotic-religious revivals and shares the donations given at the rallies." According to the same report a recent article in the Gay Community News published in Boston advised - "We should not rest until Anita Bryant is utterly destroyed." The Evangelical Newsletter (Jan. 27, 1978) stated that Miss Bryant "is increasingly becoming the butt of many jokes as television shows mock her, talk shows depict her as a fanatical Bible-thumper. Her life has been threatened by more extreme homosexuals to the point where she needs police protection at public appearances." Jesus said, "As it was in the days of Lot; ... even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed." (Luke 17:28, 30) Reread the thinking and objectives of the Sodomites. Gen. 19:4-10.

Then there is another aspect to this trend - In the not too distant future, when no police protection will be afforded to those who stand stiffly for the truth, what will you do? When counted as "dross", and when "those who are supposed to be genuine will give heed to seducing spirits, and will turn traitors and betray sacred trusts" thus proving to be your "very worst" enemies, what will you do? (See Review & Herald, June 8, 1897, p. 354)

New Look at Mary -- "Interest in the Blessed Virgin Mary is undergoing a resurgence by Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox scholars," so reports RNS (Jan. 26, 1978) For two years, a group called the Ecumenical Society of the Blessed Virgin Mary have gathered occasionally in Washington, sharing papers, and discussing Mary. Recently this group held its first interreligious Marian prayer service in the First Baptist Church, the church of President Jimmy Carter. Among the members of this society is Dr. Arthur Crabtree, a Baptist theologian, who teaches at the Catholic-operated Villanova (PA) University, and who has studied under the controversial Swiss Catholic theologian, Hans Kueng. Another member, Dr. Donald Dawe, a United Presbyterian minister who teaches at Union Theological Seminary, Richmond, VA., said that in an age when the ecumenical movement has "slowed considerably" perhaps the best way to approach ecumenical understanding is through "an understanding of the hard issues, like Marian theology." One of the obstacles in the Marian dialogue has been the Catholic cults to Mary. However, "since Vatican II, cults to Mary have been downplayed and in some extreme cases condemned, leaving Catholics and Protestants open to a new view of Mary as first among all the saints." ---(1978 May) --- END --- TOP

1978 June -- THE TRUTH OF DANIEL 7 -- [In the Bible, the earthly power which is presented as the Anti-Christ is described by Paul as "the man of sin ... the mystery of iniquity." See II Thess. 2:3-10. He is pictured in the Revelation of Jesus Christ as "the beast" with the mystery number - 666. See Rev. 13. But in the book of Daniel, this power is called "the little horn" and is placed in a prophetic setting so that its identification can be historically determined. This is the purpose and importance of the truth of Daniel 7.]

In the first year of Belshazzar king of Babylon, Daniel had a dream concerning four great beasts which came up from the sea. He was told that these beasts represented four kings "which shall arise out of the earth." (7:17) From the fact that "the fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom" (7:23), it is evident that "king" and "kingdom" are used interchangeably in this prophetic vision.

The first beast - a lion with eagle's wings (7:4) - is not hard to identify, and gives the basis in history for the identification of the subsequent world powers represented by the three beasts which follow. Jeremiah, a contemporary of Daniel, pictures in two different references, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon as a lion coming swiftly as on eagle's wings. (Jer. 4:7, 13; 49:19, 22, 28) The very imagery - a lion with the wings of an eagle - was the national symbol of Babylon, and was seen every day by Daniel as he carried out his governmental duties.  (1)   The "lion" was to be followed by a "bear" (7:5), which in turn would be overcome by a "leopard," having four wings of a foul (7:6). The succession of empires which followed Babylon is a matter of historical record - Medo-Persia, then Grecia, which in turn gave way to the Empire of Rome.

It was the fourth beast or kingdom that concerned Daniel the most. He said - I would know the truth of the fourth beast, which was diverse from all others, exceeding dreadful ... and of the ten horns that were in his head, and the other [horn] which came up." (7:19-20) This fourth beast in Daniel's dream could not be associated in his mind with any known creature as the other three had been, so he only describes the details of its appearance and the drama of its evolution. To students of prophecy it is called the "nondescript" beast. Here are Daniel's words as he saw the fourth beast arise out of the sea:    After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with

p 2 -- the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns. (7:7)

I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking great things. (7:8)

beast with 10 horns - horn which spake likea dragon

Beast with 10 horns and little horn comes out of the beast.

The focus of the prophecy of Daniel 7 is on the "little horn" which comes up out of the fourth beast or fourth kingdom upon the earth from Daniel's day. The "little horn" has its roots, its source of life in the fourth beast, and derives its nourishment from it. Since the fourth kingdom from Babylon was the Empire of Rome, the identity of the "little horn" can be set in historical perspective. The prophecy relates the "little horn" to the ten horns which preceded it in four different ways. They are:

1 ) The "little horn" came up "among" the ten horns. (7: 8)
2) The "little horn" came up "after" the ten horns. (7:24)
3) The "little horn" would overthrow "three of the first horns." (7:8, 24)
4) The "little horn" would be "diverse" (different) from the ten horns. (7:24)


We shall now note carefully these and the other identifying marks of the "little horn" as given in Daniel 7.

Since the vision closely associated the "ten horns" and the "little horn", we need to note briefly the interpretation given concerning the "ten horns." The "ten horns" were defined as "ten kings that shall arise" out of the fourth kingdom. (7:24)

p 3 -- "The Roman Empire was split up into just ten smaller kingdoms between the years 351 and 476 A. D. The following are their ancient and modern names:

1. Alemanni - Germany   6. Suevi Portugal
2. Franks France   7. Lombards Italy.
3. Anglo -Saxons England   8. Heruli ***
4. Burgundians Switzerland   9. Vandals ***
5. Visigoths Spain   10. Ostrogoths ***

(Facts of Faith, pp. 34-35)   (2)

It is obvious from looking at this list, there are three of the ten kingdoms which arose in the Roman Empire that have no modern counterpart. These were Arian kingdoms - anathema to the Bishop of Rome - and constitute the three horns displaced by Papal Rome in its rise to political as well as religious dominance. Elliott in his book on Revelation wrote:      I might cite three that were eradicated from before the Pope out of the list first given; viz, the Heruli under Odoacer, the Vandals, and the Ostrogoths. (Horoe Apocalypticae, Vol. III, p. 168, Note 1 [36])

In ancient times, it was traditional for the crowns of the conquered kings to be placed upon the head of the conqueror. (See II Sam. 12:30) Bishop Thomas Newton, speaking of the power that was instrumental in the destruction of the three horns, states - "And the Pope hath in a manner pointed himself out for the person by wearing the triple crown." (Dissertation on Prophecy, p. 220 [36])

The kingdom of the Ostrogoths was the last of the three "horns" to be rooted up. In this history we find much of the story of the fulfillment of the prophetic identification of the "little horn." Witigis [Vitiges] the last of the Ostrogoth kings of Italy had received a solemn oath of fealty from Silverius upon his assumption of the Papal throne. However, in 533 A. D., an exchange of letters had passed between Justinian, Emperor of the Eastern Roman Empire, and John II, then Bishop of Rome. In this exchange, Justinian had declared the Bishop of Rome to be "the head of all Holy Churches."  (3)   Acknowledging this, John II had written - "This See is indeed the head of all Churches, as the rules of the Fathers and the decrees of the Emperors assert, and the words of your most reverent piety testify." (The Civil Law of Justinian, Book 12, pp. 10-15 [55]) In the same year, Justinian dispatched his general, Belisarius, to Africa to destroy the Vandals. Carthage, the Vandal capital, was entered on September 15, 533. "In the next year, Africa, Sardinia, and Corsica were restored to the Roman Empire. As a nation, the Vandals soon ceased to exist." (Nelson's Encyclopedia, Vol. XII, p. 381 1907 ed. [43]) In 535 A. D., Belisarius moved into Italy itself. Pope Silverius sent messengers to Belisarius offering him the peaceful surrender of Rome. Witigis reacted, and laid siege to the city from March, 537 till March, 538, when after loosing the flower of his army he returned to his capitol in Ravenna. Belisarius followed the retreating armies of Witigis to their last stronghold of power. Ravenna was soon entered by the troops of the Empire, and with it fell the great kingdom of the Ostrogoths." J. G. Sheppard, Fall of Rome, p. 306 [48-49])

This is a transitional point in human history. One writer has stated:       With the conquest of Rome by Belisarius, the history of the ancient city may be considered as terminating; and with his defense against Witigis, commences the history of the Middle Ages. (Findlay, Greece Under the Romans pp. 240 [52-53])

p 4 -- Silverius died in 538, to be succeeded by Vigillius as Bishop of Rome. Dr. Philip Schaff tells us that "Vigillius ... ascended the papal chair under the military protection of Belisarius." ( History of the Christian Church, III, p. 327 [53]) Prior to Vigillius, all popes were declared saints in the martyrologies, but with Vigillius begins "a series of popes who no longer bear this title, which is henceforth sparingly conferred. From this time on the popes, more and more enveloped in worldly events, no longer belong solely to the church; they are men of the state, and then rulers of the state." (Belmont and Monod,.Medieval Europe, p. 120 [53])

We can now summarize the four identifying marks required by the prophecy concerning the "little horn" in relationship to the ten horns. It was to come up among the ten divisions of the Roman Empire. Francis Cardinal Hays stated the case well, when he wrote:       When the Roman Empire became Christian, and the peace of the church was guaranteed, the Emperor left Rome to the Pope, to be the seat of the authority of the Vicar of Christ, who should reign there independent of all human authority, to the consummation of the ages to the end of time. (Papal Rights and Privileges, pp. 13-14)

Thus in the very center - the capitol of the ancient Roman Empire - arose the "little horn." It was to come up after them. The divisions of the Roman Empire had come about by 476 A. D. The Papal power received its political as well as its complete religious domination from Justinian during the years from 533 to 538 A. D. In its rise to power, three of the original ten divisions of the empire had been overthrown and passed into history. It was diverse, in that it began as a religious entity - a church - and then became a political entity dominating the kings of the earth.

In giving to Daniel an enlarged explanation of the "little horn", the angel noted other identifying marks which find their fulfillment in the words and actions of the Papacy. He told Daniel:       He shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and a dividing of time. (7:25)

We shall note each of these marks in reverse order, and see how the Papacy has fulfilled each. It was to continue for "a time and times and a dividing of time." Gesinius in his Hebrew lexicon tells us that the word translated time stands "in prophetic language for a year," and translates the whole phrase - "for a year, also two years, and half a year." (p. 754) Using the prophetic measurement that one day in prophecy equals one literal year (Eze. 4:6), we have 360 days, plus 720 days, plus 180 days, or 1260 years of Medieval Papal supremacy. (See also Revelation 12: 14, 6)

We noted above 538 A. D. as the date when the army of Justinian under Belisarius established the power of the Bishop of Rome as supreme in harmony with the edicts Justinian had issued. Adding to this date, the 1260 years, we arrive at 1798.

p 5 -- The events which occurred in this year are remarkable, showing beyond a shadow of a doubt the fulfillment of this specification of Daniel 7 in the history of the Papacy. In 1797 Pope Pius VI became grievously ill. Napoleon of France gave orders that should he die, "no successor should be elected to his office, and that the Papacy should be discontinued." If this had happened, the period of time allotted in the prophecy would have fallen short by one year. But what did occur? Read carefully what the Jesuit, Joseph Rickaby, has to say further:        But the Pope recovered. The peace was soon broken; Berthier entered Rome on the 10th of February, 1798, and proclaimed a republic. The aged Pontiff refused to violate his oath by recognizing it, and was hurried off from prison to prison in France ... No wonder that half Europe thought Napoleon's veto would be obeyed, and that with the Pope the Papacy was dead. (The Modern Papacy, p. 1 [59])

George Trevor, Canon of York, in his book - Rome: From the Fall of the Western Empire - writes:         The Papacy was extinct: not a vestige of its existence remained; and among all the Roman Catholic powers not a finger was stirred in its defence. The Eternal City had no longer prince or pontiff; its bishop was a dying captive in foreign lands; and the decree was already announced that no successor would be allowed in his place. (p. 440 [59])

The resurrection of the Papacy from the "dead" is covered in another prophecy of the Bible. (See Rev. 13:3 margin)

The prophecy of Daniel 7 states that the "little horn" would "think to change times and laws." The Hebrew for "law" (dath) is singular in Daniel 7:25, and refers to the Law of God contained in the Ten Commandments.  (4)   The Papacy changed the Law in two areas. From the fourth to the sixth centuries the worship of images crept into the church. It was necessary, therefore, to alter the commandment which forbids image worship. It was simply deleted, and the tenth was divided into two commandments, even though the Apostle Paul speaks of the Tenth as only one. (See Rom. 7:7-13)

The second change in the Law was in regard to the Fourth Commandment. Having deleted the Second Commandment, the Fourth became the Third.  (5)    Concerning this change the question is asked:
Q.   Have you any other way of proving that the Church has power to institute festivals of precept?
A.   Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her; - she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday the seventh day, a change for which there is no Scriptural authority. (Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism, p. 174)

And as to the origin of this change, the Catholic Church boldly states:

p 6 -- The church took the pagan philosophy and made it the buckler of faith against the heathen. She took the pagan, Roman Pantheon, temple of all the gods, and made it sacred to all the martyrs; so it stands to this day. She took the pagan Sunday and made it the Christian Sunday. She took the pagan Easter and made it the feast we celebrate during this season ...

The sun was the foremost god with heathendom ... Hence the church in these countries would seem to have said, "Keep that old pagan name. It shall remain consecrated, sanctified." And thus the pagan Sunday, dedicated to Balder, became the Christian Sunday, sacred to Jesus. (Wm. L. Gildea, "Paschale Gaudium", The Catholic World, March, 1894, p. 809. The Catholic World was "A monthly magazine of General Literature and Science.")

In both the catechism and magazine, the change of the Sabbath is clearly declared to be by the "Church" of Rome:- "The Church ... substituted the observance of Sunday ... for the observance of Saturday." "The church ... took the pagan Sunday and made it the Christian Sunday." All of these apologies, and dissertations which seek to establish the change from Sabbath to Sunday as a reaction to Judaism is simply an attempt to "white wash" the Catholic church, and soften the identification that prophecy places upon its head as the antichrist. Prophecy indicated that the "little horn" would attempt it, and the Catholic Church states that she did do it, "by virtue of her Divine mission." (Catholic Mirror, September 23, 1893, p. 29 [69])

Not only would the Papacy seek to alter the Law of God, but she would seek to destroy those who differed with her - the saints of the most High. Alfred Cardinal Baudrillart, a Roman Catholic scholar in France has openly stated:     The Catholic Church is a respector of conscience and of liberty ... She has, and she loudly proclaims that she has, a "horror of blood." Nevertheless when confronted by heresy she does not content herself with pursuasion; arguments of an intellectual and moral order appear to her insufficient, and she has recourse to force, to corporal punishment, to torture. She creates tribunals like those of the Inquisition, she calls the law of the State to her aid, if necessary she encourages a crusade, or a religious war and all her "horror of blood" practically culminates into urging the secular power to shed it, which proceeding is almost more odious - for it is less frank - than shedding it herself. Especially did she act thus in the sixteenth century with regard to Protestants. Not content to reform morally, to preach by example, to convert people by eloquent and holy missionaries, she lit in Italy, in the Low Countries, and above all in Spain the funeral piles of the Inquisition. In France under Francis I and Henry II, in England under Mary Tudor, she tortured the heretics, whilst both in France and Germany during the second half of the sixteenth and first half of the seventeenth century if she did not actually begin, at any rate she encouraged and actively aided, the religious wars. No one will deny that we have here a great scandal to our contemporaries ...

p 7 -- Indeed, even among our friends and our brothers we find those who dare not look this problem in the face. They ask permission from the Church to ignore or even deny all those acts and institutions in the past which have made orthodoxy compulsory. (The Catholic Church, the Renaissance, and Protestantism, pp. 182-184 [64])

One author has written that "careful and credible historians" have estimated "that more than fifty million of the human family, have been slaughtered for the crime of heresy by popish persecutors, an average of more than forty thousand religious murders for every year of the existence of Popery." (J. Dowling, History of Romanism, pp. 541, 542 [66]) The most concise death decree ever framed prior to the outrages of this Century was handed down by the Holy Office (the Inquisition) of the Catholic Church on February 16, 1568 which condemned all the inhabitants of the Netherlands to death as heretics. "Three millions of people, men, women, and children were sentenced to the scaffold in three lines." (The Rise of the Dutch Republic, John Lothrop Motley, Vol. I, p. 626 [67])

[It is most difficult to understand with the truth of the prophecy of Daniel 7 concerning the "little horn" and its fulfillment in the history of the Papacy before us, and with the question asked by the servant of the Lord - "Shall this power, whose record for a thousand years is written in the blood of saints, be now acknowledged as a part of the church of Christ?" (Great Controversy, p. 571) - why an official representative of the Seventh-day Adventist Church presented to the Pope a gold medallion in a special audience, May 18, 1977. See Special Report prepared by the Adventist Laymen's Foundation. It is equally as difficult to understand why the large portion of the laity continues to support this betrayal of sacred truth with their tithes and offerings. Is it because they do not know the truth of Daniel 7, or is it because they no longer believe it?]

This "little horn" was also to speak "great words against the Most High." Pope Leo XIII declared - "We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty." (Great Encyclical Letters, p. 304 [61]) In the same letters, the same Pope stated: "But the supreme teacher in the Church is the Roman Pontiff. Union of minds, therefore, requires, together with a perfect accord in the one faith, complete submission and obedience of will to the Church and to the Roman Pontiff, as to God Himself." (p. 193 [62]) The sainted doctor of the Catholic church, Alphonsus de Liguori, wrote concerning the power of the priests:      The priest has the power of the keys, or the power of delivering sinners from hell, of making them worthy of paradise, and of changing them from the slaves of Satan into children of God. And God himself is obliged to abide by the judgment of his priests, ... (p. 27)

Innocent III has written:  "Indeed, it is not too much to say that in view of the sumlimity of their offices the priests are so many gods." (p. 36) Dignity and Duty of the Priests.

The truth of Daniel 7 can be simply stated - "the little horn" - a symbol of the Anti-Christ - finds its fulfillment in the hierarchy of the Catholic Church headed by the Pope.

p 8 --

(1) While serving as pastor of the First Church in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, our family went to the Museum at Bloor and University one Sunday afternoon. As we were looking at the exhibits, we came to a section that contained a special display from the ruins of ancient Babylon. There in the center of the exhibit was a large mosaic picturing a lion with the wings of an eagle.

Christian Edwardson, Facts of Faith, 320 pp. The "Preface" by the publishers reads in part:        During forty years of caring for districts of churches and isolated believers, besides raising up new churches by evangelistic effort, the author of this book became greatly impressed with the need of educating people in the fundamental doctrines of the Holy Scriptures. He has found very few who could give from the word of God an intelligent reason for even its most prominent and important truths ...

When we add to this condition the fact that during the past twenty years new errors have been stealthily introduced among Christians generally - errors that undermine the very foundations of Bible truth and Christianity - it becomes evident that even professing Christians are unprepared for the crises they will be obliged to meet in the near future. [How prophetic!]

The paging of all historical references taken from this book which appear in this article are noted in brackets after the reference source itself.


The following Law appears in the Constitutions of Justinian:       Concerning the Precedence of Patriarchs: Hence, in accordance with the provisions of those Councils, we order that the Most Holy Pope of Ancient Rome shall hold the first rank of all the Pontiffs, but the Most Blessed Archbishop of Constantinople, or New Rome, shall occupy the second place after the Holy Apostolic See of Ancient Rome, which shall take precedence over all other sees. (Vol. XVII, 9th Collection, Title 14, chapter 2 [56])

(4) The same word used for "law" in Daniel 7:25 is also used for "law" in Deut 33:2 - "The Lord came from Sinai ... from His right hand went a fiery law for them."

The Convert's Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, Peter Geiermann C. SS. R., reads as follows:        3. The Third Commandment What is the Third Commandment? A. The Third Commandment is: Remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath day.
Q.   Which is the Sabbath day?
   A.   Saturday is the Sabbath day.

Q.   Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?  A. We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church, in Council of Laodicea (A D 336), transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday. (pp. 49-50)

p 9 -- MORE ON THE MEDALLION (Given to the Pope) -- In the "Friendship Issue" of the Adventist Review (undated), p. 22, a photograph of the type of medallion given to the Pope by Dr. B. B. Beach appears. The caption under the picture does not tell you this, however. It is interesting as to what is said about this medallion and what it is suppose to stand for. It reads: The obverse of the church's medallion illustrates the term "Adventist" in the church's name, signifying the belief that Christ will come back to earth to set things right. The reverse illustrates the term "Seventh-day" in the name. Trusting wholly for salvation in Christ, who died to save men, church members consider it an honor to observe the day Christ, who was also Creator, set apart as a memorial of His mighty creative acts. The Sabbath is also a symbol of Christ's desire to be with His people. The Bible is Christ's message to the church.

First let us consider the reverse side. Supposedly it speaks to the fact of the first part of the church name - "Seventh-day." Where is the "seventh day" mentioned on the medallion's reverse side, or obverse side for that matter? The quotes from the fourth commandment are barely different from the way the commandment is quoted in the Convert's Catechism of Catholic Doctrine. (See p. 8, Footnote #5)

Now look closely at the obverse side which is supposed to represent our belief as an "Adventist." Honestly, as I have studied the medallion, I have wondered if the representation of the cloud only covered the fact that Christ's feet are touching the earth as indicated by the circular line. Now this gnawing question is further heightened by the fact the explanation indicates when Christ returns, He "will come back to earth to set things right." Now the Bible teaches when Jesus returns the second time, "He shall send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet and they shall gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other" (Matt. 24:31), "to meet the Lord in the air" (I Thess. 4:17). The angels, thus to fulfill the words of Jesus Himself, do not stand with folded wings and hands in adoration as is pictured on the medallion. They have a part to play. Revelation pictures these angels as taking part in the warfare which accompanies the return of Jesus as King of kings, and Lord of lords to tread "the winepress of the fierceness of the wrath of Almighty God." (Rev. 19: 11-16)

You ask - why do we raise this question? In another publication - also for missionary purposes - Man the World Needs Most - there is a chapter on the return of Jesus the second time entitled, "What Will He Do?" It is a detailed enlargement of the sentence - "Christ will soon come back to earth to set things right." After telling about his visits to a convalescent hospital, the author, the late Arthur S. Maxwell, tells of his reaction - "As I walked past the doors, there used to come over me a great longing to do something for these poor people." Then he writes:

p 10 -- Well, Somebody is going to do something about it. Indeed it will be one of the first tasks of the new world Leader.

Looking forward to that wonderful day the prophet Isaiah wrote:       "Then shall the eyes of the blind be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped. Then shall the lame man leap as an heart, and the tongue of the dumb sing." Isaiah 35:5, 6.

It will be like old times to Him. For that is exactly what He did in Palestine long ago. Matthew tells us that "He went round the whole of Galilee, teaching in the synagogues, preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and curing whatever illness or infirmity there was among the people. His fame reached the whole of Syria; and sufferers from every kind of illness, racked with pain, possessed by devils, epileptic, or paralyzed, were brought to Him, and He cured them." Matthew 4:23, 24 NEB.

As He passed from village to village not a single sick person was left behind. All who sought healing found it in Him.

Now He is about to do it again, on a global scale. His coming invasion of the world will have a similar miraculous result. Hospitals and convalescent homes will be emptied, their one-time occupants bursting with new life and vigor, radiant with joy and gratitude at their sudden restoration to health.

Even the worst patients in mental homes will be brought back to sanity. Curing the mind is His specialty. Just as the master watchmaker knows best how to repair a damaged timepiece, so He, having devised the marvelous mechanism of the human mind in the beginning, knows better than anyone else how to restore it. Thousands upon thousands will rejoice at His touch upon their poor, confused brains. (pp. 77-78)

How can we square this teaching with the Scripture as to what will take place when Jesus returns the second time "in righteousness" to "judge and make war." (Rev. 19:11) How can we relate this picture of what Christ will do when He returns with the song of Asaph - "Our God shall come, and shall not keep silence: a fire shall devour before Him, and it shall be tempestuous around about Him." (Ps. 50:3) How can we harmonize, -how can we reconcile this picture with Paul's representation of the Advent to the Thessalonians - "The Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ." (II Thess. 1:7-8) BUT the Maxwell view can be harmonized with the explanation given in the Adventist Review concerning the obverse side of the gold medallion - "Christ will soon come back to earth to set things right." And Maxwell closed his chapter with the sentences: "The Man the world needs most will soon be here. He may even now be on His way." (p. 86)

On the next page of the "Friendship Issue" (p. 23) is listed what we believe. In this list of 14 points is found this in regard to the return of Jesus:       When God intervenes in human history to eradicate evil and those who persist in it, He will re-create the earth and introduce the perfect society,

p 11 --in which only those who voluntarily have accepted God's plan and live by the principles of His kingdom will share (Rev. 21:1-4). His intervention involves, first, Christ's personal return to this earth (often spoken of as the second coming of Christ) to take His people to heaven, then, 1,000 years later, returning them to live on a re-created earth, from which all traces of evil and all perpetrators of evil will have been eliminated.

Now then let us be honest with ourselves. Is this medallion picturing the "third" coming of Christ when His feet will touch the Mt. of Olives, and it will become a great plain upon which the Holy City will descend? (See Zech. 14:4-5) If so, since when did the name "Adventist" represent an emphasis of His "third" coming? Why are we trying to mitigate the historical teaching of the church regarding the return of Jesus the second time? Are we subconsciously preparing ourselves for the final deception of Satan when he will come clothed as an angel of light and repeat the acts of Jesus, which He did when He walked among men 2,000 years ago?

SIGNS OF THE TRENDS -- Only "Incidental" - The Publishing Fellowship, published by the Publishing Department of the Southern Union Conference of Seventh-day Adventists featured an article - "New Fringe Benefits" It reads as follows:      "New fringe benefits have been added to the literature evangelist's remuneration for 1978. Any literature evangelist who delivers more than $100,000 worth of books during 1978 will be given the use of a new car in addition to his other benefits.

p 12 -- Beginning January 1, 1979, each literature evangelist who delivers more than $60,000 in 1978 will be furnished a new Ford Fairmont, together with insurance, maintenance and repairs. He can continue to use it as long as he meets specified sales requirements.

"After being furnished the car for one year, if he again delivers more than $60,000 during the second year he will have the choice of receiving a clear title to the car or being furnished another new car. A third year of delivering in excess of $60,000 will entitle him to a clear title to the first car if he chooses, and being furnished another new car for his use.

"The above benefits are in addition to other benefits which are given to those who meet the qualifications. These include a paid year vacation, rent and auto subsidy, automobile insurance, scholarship grants, medical allowance, and sustentation benefits." (p. 2, Feb. 1978)

"Replenished from the East" (Isa. 2:6) -- "Interest in mysticism is increasing and may become a worldwide force to 're-spiritualize religion' according to the author of a new book on Jewish mysticism. Perle Epstein, author of Kabbalah, said she has observed a new surge of interest in Western mysticism largely developing from the interest in Eastern religions of the past few decades." Ms. Epstein has a Ph. D in English and comparative literature and has taught mysticism at New York University and Briarcliff College.

She has a personal link to Jewish mysticism inasmuch as one of her paternal ancestors was the great Kabbalist and founder of Hasidism, the Baal Shem Tov ("master of the Holy Name.") The interest in mysticism is especially noticeable in Israel where mystics of the Jewish, Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, Sufi, and other faiths are establishing centers; and frequently interacting with each other. "Many Jews and Christians are coming into Jewish mysticism and Christian mysticism via Eastern religions," observed Ms. Epstein, including herself in this category. A central concept in the Kabbalah is that in order to reach the "highest Throne, God" one must first contact the spark of divinity, which abides in his own heart. Then the up reaching of the love from the heart of the disciple to God, opens the way for the mystic union. (RNS, Feb. 16, 1978 pp. 4-5)

Compare the"central concept" of the Kabbalah with this statement from the Spiritualist Manual, by J. F. Newton: "Man wandered over the earth for ages, searching in all places, high and low, far and near, before he thought to look within himself for the divinity he sought. At last slowly, dimly, he began to realize that what he thought was afar off, hidden in the 'pathos of distance' is nearer that the breath he breathes, even in his own heart." (Quoted in the Review & Herald, Sept. 20, 1962, p. 4) ---(1978 June) --- END ---

Read More