Do I still believe it must all come to pass... yes.

Rev. 13--   16   And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:   17   And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

Daniel and Revelation- Revelation Chapter 13-  (by Uriah Smith 1897-1911?) Excerpt-

*******

(1911…)

Another most significant and alarming step toward the accomplishment of these evil designs, is the position taken by the great "Christian Endeavor" movement, which has arisen to a membership of millions within a few years, and is a common channel through which all denominations can work. The political functions of this great body are centered in a "Christian Citizenship League," which boasts that it will have branches in every state, county, city, village, and hamlet in the United States, and see to it that only Christian men are put into office. What remarkable "conversions" will then take place! How politicians will become "Christians," and the "millennium" hasten on! At the great Christian Endeavor convention, held in Boston, Mass., July 10-15, 1895, W. H. McMillan, as given in the published Proceedings, p. 19, said: -

"Here is a power that is going to wrest the control of affairs from the hands of political demagogues, and place it in the hands of Him who is King over all, and rules the world in righteousness. Our political leaders have been counting the

p 617 -- saloon vote, the illiterate vote, and the stay-at-home vote, and all other elements that have hitherto entered into their canvassing's of probabilities; but they have not yet learned to count the Christian Endeavor vote. I want to serve notice on them now that the time is drawing near when they will discover that a political revolution has occurred, and they will be found coming home from Washington and our state capitals without a job." 

These sentiments were cheered to the echo in the convention; and it is not difficult to foresee the effect they will have; for they were intended for that class of men among whom they "will do the most good;" that is, the body of average politicians, who, when threatened with a boycott, become the most abject sycophants on the face of the earth.

All this, however, would be of no avail, if those who are really patriots at heart would awake to this danger before they find themselves committed to movements, the effects of which they did not foresee, and if the two houses of Congress would stand true to the Constitution which they are sworn to maintain; for this movement means nothing less than a subversion of that noble instrument.

But alas! Congress has already turned its back on its sacred trust to fawn upon the church influence so rapidly rising. When the managers of the World's Fair of 1893, in Chicago, asked Congress for an appropriation in their behalf, churchmen brought their influence to bear upon the national legislators, and induced them to make it a condition of the gift that the gates of the Fair be closed on Sunday. In carrying this point a most remarkable scene occurred. A senator called for a Bible, and caused the clerk to read the fourth commandment of the decalogue; whereupon grave statesmen argued, and at length by vote decided, that the day enjoined by that commandment as the Sabbath, is Sunday!

This was legislating upon a religious question, which the Constitution expressly forbids. (See Amendment I.) It broke down the barriers against the union of church and state, and opened the flood-gates for all the evils that invariably accompany such a union. The religious-amendment clergy hailed the

p 618 -- event as a great triumph, and openly boasted that they had Congress in their hands, and could compel it to do their bidding.

What the practical working of these changes will be is already made apparent. On the statute-books of most of the states of the American Union, are found Sunday laws; and as the agitation in behalf of the seventh day increases, religious zealots are not slow to use these laws to put the machinery of persecution in operation. Observers of the seventh day manifest no defiance of these laws in laboring on Sunday, as the higher law of God gives them an unalienable right to do; and they studiously refrain from disturbing others, or in any way infringing upon their rights, by boisterous or offensive labor. Yet it is construed to be "disturbance," if they are even seen anywhere at work, or even if it is known that they are at work anywhere, though unseen or unheard. If no other way appears for detection, they are searched out by ministers or church-members, or the police acting under their direction. Then follow arrest, conviction, and penalty by fine, imprisonment, or the chain-gang. Up to Jan. 1, 1896, over one hundred arrests of this kind had been made, some of them under circumstances of great oppression and cruelty, fines and costs had been imposed to the amount of $2,269, and prisoners had served an aggregate of nearly fifteen hundred days in jail and chain-gangs.

But public sentiment would not endorse such proceedings, and the leaders in the movement, noting this fact, decided to call a halt until such time as they would have public opinion molded in their favor. Hence there have been fewer cases of prosecation for non-observance of Sunday in recent years; but meanwhile a vigorous campaign has been carried on by the National Reform party, the "International Reform Bureau" or lobby at Washington, D. C., the "Lord's Day Alliance," the "Sunday League of America," the "New England Sabbath Protective League," and other religious bodies, having in view the creation of Sunday-law sentiment among the people, and in the state legislatures, and especially in the national legislature at Washington. Within recent years, the contest between the

p 619 -- friends and foes of American liberty, has been concentrated upon an effort to commit Congress to religious legislation by the enactment of a Sunday law for the District of Columbia. Bills for this purpose have been repeatedly introduced, and one introduced by Senator Johnston, of Alabama, in 1908, has been urged upon Congress continually up to this date (1911), being promptly reintroduced at the first opportunity after each faillure of enactment; and the intention seems to be to keep pressing it upon Congress until that body yields to the demand, and the decisive step is taken which will give to the cause of religious legislation the endorsement of the national government. That will greatly strengthen the Sunday movement throughout the nation, and the work of securing and enforcing Sunday legislation in the state governments will be much more easily accomplished. 

At this point it may be profitable to take a glance at the progress of the Sunday-law movement in this country during the recent past. The following are some of the more prominent of the events which mark its advancement.

   1890. - Breckenridge Sunday bill for the District of Columbia introduced in Congress. (January 6.)

  1892. - Congress orders the gates of the Chicago World's Fair closed on Sunday, and decides that Sunday is the Sabbath of the decalogue. (July 19.)

  1900.  -  Congress makes the appropriation of $5,000,000 for the Louisiana Purchase Exposition at St. Louis, conditional upon Sunday closing of the gates "during the whole duration of the fair." (March 1.)

  1904. - A Sunday bill for the District of Columbia passed the House of Representatives. (April 6.)

  1906. - Congress makes the appropriation of $250,000 for the Jamestown Exposition, conditional upon Sunday closing. (June 29.)

  1906. - Wadsworth District Sunday bill passes House of Representatives. (June 11.)

  1908. - Samuel Gompers officially announces that the Arnerican Federation of Labor not only is in favor of Sunday rest, but that it has "done as much, if not more, than any other

p 620 -- organized body of men and women, to enforce the observance of the Sunday rest-day." (September 14.)

  1907-8. - Ten bills for Sunday observance introduced during the first session of the sixtieth Congress. (December 5 to May 1.)

  1908. - Johnston District Sunday bill, passed by the Senate. (May 15.)

  1909. - Johnston District Sunday bill reintroduced in the Senate. (March 22.)

  1910. - Johnston District Sunday bill reintroduced in Senate. (January 17.)

            - Johnston District Sunday bill passes Senate. (January 27.)

            - Johnston District Sunday bill introduced in the House. (January 28.)

  1911. - Johnston District Sunday bill introduced in special session of Congress. (April 6.)

            - Favorably reported by the Senate District Committee. (May 22.)

            - Mann bill, "For the Observance of Sunday in Post-Offices," introduced in House of Representatives. (May 16.)

All this is exclusive of Sunday legislation in the states of the union, and in other countries. During the year 1910 there was such legislation or agitation over the same, in California, Connecticut, Indiana, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Massachusetts, North Dakota, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and the countries of Canada, England, Italy, Portugal, Russia, Spain, and Switzerland.

Most of the state governments have in their constitutions, or in their adopted "Bill of Rights," provisions guaranteeing the fullest religious liberty; and the inconsistency of legislating on religious questions, under these circumstances, is at once seen; while the treachery of oppressing people for opinion's sake, in such states, is keenly felt. Every conceivable invention is therefore resorted to, to make it appear that it is not religious persecution at all, but only the question of obedience to civil law. One of these inventions is that Sunday is only a civil institution, and its enforcement only a police regulation, a civil requirement necessary for the public good. But this is

p 621 -- impossible; for every one knows that Sunday in its origin, history, and very nature, is a religious institution. No claims in its behalf would ever have been heard of, but for its religious basis. Hence any enactment to enforce it by pains and penalties is religious legislation and religious oppression. 

But if there is a law for it, should not that law be obeyed until repealed? Every law that does not trench upon the domain of conscience, if it becomes unacceptable to the people, should nevertheless be obeyed till it can be changed or repealed. But Sunday laws interfere with the conscience of the observer of another day, and for that reason cannot "bear upon all alike." And no true Christian can make his obedience to God depend upon the permission of his fellow men. It may be said again, In a country like the United States, do not majorities rule? and must not their decisions be obeyed? And the answer again is, Yes, in everything but questions of conscience, but never there. "Render ... unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's." Men may legislate to guard the mutual rights of all members of society, but no further; and in this they will never infringe upon the rights of any one's conscience; for a "good" conscience (I Peter 3:21) will never invade the rights of others, like the polygamy of the Mormons, or the human sacrifices of the heathen.

The founders of the American republic never intended that any trouble should arise, through the laws of the land, over any question of conscience; but they permitted the evil principle of religious laws to remain in their political structure, a principle sure to spring to life at the first opportunity. In the further development of religious truth, it is now found that these laws forbid men to render obedience to what the Bible requires of them, and thus conflict with their unalienable rights. Such laws, therefore, the Christian cannot regard, and the government, to be true to its professed principles, should wipe them off the statute-books wherever found. But this the religio-political clergy will not permit; and the nation is doomed; for it will thus put itself in line with the religious despotisms of the past; and the cry will go up from God's suffering children,

p 622 -- "It is time for thee, Lord, to work: for they have made void thy law." Ps. 119:126.

While, according to the prophecy, the "image" can be looked for only in the United States, the worship of the beast will prevail in other countries also; for all the world is to wonder after the beast.

Some one may now say, As you expect this movement to carry, you must look for a period of religious persecution in the United States; nay, more, you must take the position that all the saints of God are to be put to death; for the image is to cause that all who will not worship it shall be killed.

A period of persecution has been for about fifty years expected and predicted. It has now begun, and is thus demonstrating the correctness of the application of the prophecy as set forth in this work; but it does not by any means follow that all, and we do not think that even many, will be put to death, though a decree to that effect will be promulgated; for, as the prophet elsewhere declares, God does not abandon his people to defeat in this dire conflict, but grants them a complete victory over the beast, his image, his mark, and the number of his name. Rev. 15:2. We further read respecting this earthly power, that he causeth all to receive a mark in their right hand or in their foreheads; yet chapter 20:4 speaks of the people of God as those who do not receive the mark, nor worship the image. If, then, he could "cause" all to receive the mark, and yet all not actually receive it, in like manner his causing all to be put to death who will not worship the image does not necessarily signify that their lives are actually to be taken.

But how can this be? Answer:   It evidently cornes under that rule of interpretation in accordance with which verbs of action sometimes signify merely the will and endeavor to do the action in question, and not the actual performance of the thing specified. The late George Bush, Professor of Hebrew and Oriental Literature in New York City University, makes this matter plain. In his notes on Ex. 7:11 he says:  -

"It is a canon of interpretation of frequent use in the exposition of the sacred writings that verbs of action sometimes

p 623 -- signify merely the will and endeavor to do the action in question. Thus in Eze. 24:13: 'I have purified thee, and thou wast not purged;' i.e., I have endeavored, used means, been at pains, to purify thee. John 5:44: 'How can ye believe which receive honor one of another?' i. e., endeavor to receive. Rom. 2:4: 'The goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance;' i. e., endeavors, or tends, to lead thee. Arnos 9:3: 'Though they be hid from my sight in the bottom of the sea;' i. e., though they aim to be hid. I Cor. 10:33: 'I please all men;' i. e., endeavor to please. Gal. 5:4: 'Whosoever of you are justified by the law;' i. e., seek or endeavor to be justified. Ps. 69:4: 'They that destroy me are mighty;' i. e., that endeavor to destroy me; English, 'That would destroy me.' Acts 7:26: 'And set them at one again;' i. e., wished and endeavored; English, 'Would have set them.'" 

So in the passage before us. He causes all to receive a mark, and all who will not worship the image to be killed; that is, he wills, purposes, and endeavors to do this. He makes such an enactment; passes such a law, but is not able to execute it; for God interposes in behalf of his people; and then those who have kept the word of Christ's patience are kept from falling in this hour of temptation, according to Rev. 3:10; then those who have made God their refuge are kept from all evil, and no plague comes nigh their dwelling, according to Ps. 91:9, 10; then all who are found written in the book are delivered, according to Dan. 12:1; and, being victors over the beast and his image, they are redeemed from among men, and raise a song of triumph before the throne of God, according to Rev. 14:2-4.

The objector may further say, You are altogether too credulous in supposing that the masses of our people, many of whom are either indifferent or wholly opposed to the claims of religion, can be so far brought to favor the religious observance of Sunday that a general law can be promulgated in its behalf.

We answer, The prophecy must be fulfilled, and if the prophecy requires such a revolution, it will be accomplished.

To receive the mark of the beast in the forehead is, we understand, to give the assent of the mind and judgment to his

p 624 -- authority in the adoption of that institution which constitutes the mark. By parity of reasoning, to receive it in the hand would be to signify allegiance by some outward act.

VERSE 18. Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast; for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.

The Number of His Name. - The number of the beast, says the prophecy, "is the number of a man;" and if it is to be derived from a name or title, the natural conclusion would be that it must be the name or title of some particular man. The most plausible expression we have seen suggested as containing the number of the beast, is the title which the pope takes to himself, and allows others to apply to him. That title is this: Vicarius FiIii Dei, "Vicegerent of the Son of God." Taking the letters out of this title which the Latins used as numerals, and giving them their numerical value, we have just 666. Thus we have V, 5; I, 1; C, 100 (a and r not used as numerals); I, 1; U (formerly the same as V), 5 (s and f not used as numerals); I, 1; L, 50; I, 1; I, 1; D, 500 (e not used as a numeral); I, 1. Adding these numbers together, we have just 666.

This title, there is reason to believe, was formerly inscribed upon the pope's crown. The following testimony on this point is given by the late Elder D. E. Scoles, of Washburn, Mo.:  -

"I have met two men who declare that they have seen this specific crown; and their testimony is so perfectly in agreement that I am convinced that what they saw is true. The first man was M. De Latti, a Sabbath-keeper who had previously been a Catholic priest, and had spent four years in Rome. He visited me when I was pastor in St. Paul, Minn., several years ago. I showed him my tract, 'The Seal of God and the Mark of the Beast.' He at once told me that the inscription was not correctly placed in my illustration. He stated that he had often seen it in the museum at the Vatican, and

p 625 -- gave a detailed and accurate description of the whole crown. When my tract was published, I was ignorant of the arrangement of the words of the Latin inscription, hence, in the illustration of the crown, placed them in one line. Brother De Latti at once pointed out the mistake, and said the first word of the sentence was on the first crown of the triple arrangement, the second word on the second part of the crown, while the word Dei was on the lower division of the triple crown. He also explained that the first two words were in dark-colored jewels, while the Dei was composed entirely of diamonds. 

"During a tent-meeting which I held in Webb City, Mo., I presented the subject, 'The Seal of God and the Mark of the Beast.' I used charts to illustrate it, one being a reproduction of the crown as Brother De Latti had described it. A Presbyterian minister was present, Rev. B. Hoffman, and when I described the crown, he spoke out publicly and made a statement to the congregation, saying that while in Rome studying for the priesthood, he had seen this very crown, and noted its inscription, and that the word Dei was composed of one hundred diamonds. I met him and learned his name, and visited him at his home, and was convinced from his description that this was the identical crown that Brother De Latti had seen, but which has been denied by many. I then asked him for a written statement, and he gave me the following: -

"'To Whom It May Concern:    This is to certify that I was born in Bavaria in 1828, was educated in Munich, and was reared a Roman Catholic. In 1844 and 1845 I was a student for the priesthood in the Jesuit College in Rome. During the Easter service of 1845, Pope Gregory XVI wore a triple crown upon which was the inscription, in jewels, Vicarius Filii Dei. We were told that there were one hundred diamonds in the word Dei; the other words were of some other kind of precious stones of a darker color. There was one word upon each crown, and not all on the same line. I was present at the service, and saw the crown distinctly, and noted it carefully.

"'In 1850 I was converted to God and to Protestantism. Two years later I entered the Evangelical Church ministry, but later in life I united with the Presbyterian Church, of

p 626 -- which I am now a retired pastor, having been in the ministry for fifty years.

"'I have made the above statement at the request of Elder D. E. Scoles, as he states that some deny that the pope ever wore this tiara. But I know that he did, for I saw it upon his head.

"'Sincerely yours in Christian service,

(Signed) 

"' B. HOFFMAN,

"' Webb City, Mo., Oct. 29, 1906.'"

The following extract is from a work entitled The Refomation, bearing the date of 1832:  -

"'Mrs. A.,' said Miss Emmons, 'I saw a very curious fact the other day; I have dwelt upon it much, and will mention it. A person, lately, was witnessing a ceremony of the Romish Church. As the pope passed him in procession, splendidly dressed in his pontifical robes, the gentleman's eye rested on these full, blazing letters in front of his miter: "VICARIUS FILII DEI," the Vicar of the Son of God. His thoughts, with the rapidity of lightning, reverted to Rev. 13:18.'    'Will you turn to it?' said Mrs. A. Alice opened the New Testament and read: 'Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.' She paused, and Miss Emmons said, 'He took out his pencil, and marking the numerical letters of the inscription on his tablet, it stood 666.'"

Here we have indeed the number of a man, even the "man of sin;" and it is a little singular, perhaps providential, that he should select a title which shows the blasphemous character of the beast, and then cause it to be inscribed upon his miter, as if to brand himself with the number 666. The foregoing extract doubtless refers to a particular pope on a particular occasion. Other popes might not wear the title emblazoned on the miter, as there stated. But this does not affect the application at all; for the popes all assume to be the "Vicar of Christ" (see Standard Dictionary under "vicar"), and the Latin words given above are the words which express that

p 627 -- title, in the form "vicar of the Son of God;" and their numerical value is 666.

Thus closes chapter 13, leaving the people of God with the powers of earth in deadly array against them, and the decrees of death and banishment from society upon them for their adherence to the truth. Spiritualism will be, at the time specified, performing its most imposing wonders, deceiving all the world except the elect. Matt. 24:24; 2 Thess. 2:8-12.

 This will be the "hour of temptation," or trial, which is to come, as the closing test, upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth, as mentioned in Rev. 3:10. What is the issue of this conflict? This important inquiry is not left unanswered. The first five verses of the following chapter, which should have been numbered as a part of this, complete the chain of this prophecy, and reveal the glorious triumph of the champions of the truth. 

*******

Read the last few paragraphs again--

'Thus closes chapter 13, leaving the people of God with the powers of earth in deadly array against them, and the decrees of death and banishment from society upon them for their adherence to the truth. Spiritualism will be, at the time specified, performing its most imposing wonders, deceiving all the world except the elect. Matt. 24:24; 2 Thess. 2:8-12.

This will be the "hour of temptation," or trial, which is to come, as the closing test, upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth, as mentioned in Rev. 3:10. What is the issue of this conflict? This important inquiry is not left unanswered. The first five verses of the following chapter, which should have been numbered as a part of this, complete the chain of this prophecy, and reveal the glorious triumph of the champions of the truth.'

This is truth. Yes, perhaps so much time has passed it barely seems relevant that all that happened because it didn't seem to result in the 'mark of the beast', it didn't seem to result in our imminent salvation. The Sunday law came and passed away and today there is barely anyone who holds the false sabbath sacred let alone having it close to becoming a law.

Do I believe it still must come to pass? I believe God's word. I believe God's prophecy. I believe that for this nation to come to a place where enforcing any religious laws upon anyone that there will have to be some major changes first. I've spoken of that before and I still believe it.

More tomorrow by the GRACE and MERCY of our LORD and SAVIOR- through HIS WILL ALONE!

Amen.

Prophecy, History, The Unknown

  

Rev. 13--   16   And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:   17   And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

Daniel and Revelation- Revelation Chapter 13-  (by Uriah Smith 1897-1907) Excerpt-     

My note--  (History--  is this applicable for today?  It is history so it WAS applicable to the time is was written. It does NOT negate the prophecy.  The prophecy is real, it will come to pass and we can see things working. This isn't the first time in Biblical history that things changed… remember Jonah?

Jon 1:1  Now the word of the LORD came unto Jonah the son of Amittai, saying,

Jon 1:2  Arise, go to Nineveh, that great city, and cry against it; for their wickedness is come up before me.

Jon 1:3  But Jonah rose up to flee unto Tarshish from the presence of the LORD, and went down to Joppa; and he found a ship going to Tarshish: so he paid the fare thereof, and went down into it, to go with them unto Tarshish from the presence of the LORD.

Jon 1:4  But the LORD sent out a great wind into the sea, and there was a mighty tempest in the sea, so that the ship was like to be broken.

The story goes, Jonah didn't want to go, but he ends up going.

Jon 3:4  And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.

Jon 3:5  So the people of Nineveh believed God, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them.

Here Jonah is preaching that in 40 days the city will be overthrown.  Was it?

Jon 3:10  And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

No.  Yet Jonah preached it would happen.

Our God is an exacting God and His word of truth will come to pass.  Do we know exactly HOW it will all come to pass? No. We can see the signs, the Holy Spirit will guide us in all understanding. Now please, read the history with the understanding that full comprehension will come as it is needed. We can do an update on all this after we get through with the book or as the Spirit leads. By the will and grace of our God!*******

(Excerpt)

13.  The Closing Work. - We have now seen what would properly constitute an image to the beast, such as the two-horned beast is to erect, and also the probability that such an image will soon be perfected in this country; and we have also learned what constitutes the mark of the beast, which is to be enforced upon all the people. An ecclesiastical organization composed of a greater or less number of the different sects of our land, with some degree of coalition also between these bodies and Roman Catholicism, together with the promulgation and enforcement of a general Sunday-sabbath law, would fulfil what the prophecy sets forth in reference to the image and the mark of the beast; and these movements, or their exact equivalent, the prophecy calls for. The line of argument leading to these conclusions is so direct and well-defined that there is no avoiding them. They are a clear and logical sequence from the premises given us.

When the application of Rev. 13:11-17 to the United States was first made, as early as the year 1850, these positions respecting a union of the churches and a grand Sunday movement were taken. But at that time no sign appeared above or beneath, at home or abroad, - no token was seen, no indication existed, that such an issue would ever be made. But there was the prophecy, and that must stand. The United States government had given abundant evidence, by its location, the time of its rise, the manner of its rise, and its apparent character, that it was the power symbolized by the two-horned beast. There could be no mistake in the conclusion that it was the very nation intended by that symbol. This being so, it

p 609 -- must take the course and perform the acts foretold. But here were predictions which could be fulfilled by nothing less than the above-named movement respecting church and state, and the enforcement of the papal Sabbath as a mark of the beast.

To take the position at that time that this government was to pursue such a policy and engage in such a work, without any apparent probability in its favor, was no small act of faith. On the other hand, to deny or ignore it, while admitting the application of the symbol to this government, would not be in accordance with either Scripture or logic. The only course for the humble, confiding student of prophecy to pursue in such cases is to take the light as it is given, and believe the prophecy in all its parts. So the stand was boldly taken; and open proclamation has been made from that day to this, that such a work would be seen in the United States. With every review of the argument, new features of strength have been discovered in the application; and amid a storm of scornful incredulity we have watched the progress of events, and awaited the hour of fulfilment.

Meanwhile, Spiritualism has astonished the world with its terrible progress, and shown itself to be the wonder-working element which was to exist in connection with this power. This has mightily strengthened the force of the application. And now, within a few years past, what have we further seen? - No less than the commencement of that very movement respecting the formation of the image, and the enactment of Sunday laws, which we have so long expected, and which is to complete the prophecy and close the scene.

Reference has already been made to the movement to secure a union of the churches for the purpose of adding strength and influence to ecclesiastical movements in certain directions. And now a class of men is suddenly springing up all over the land whose souls are absorbed with the cognate idea of Sunday reform, and who have dedicated themselves, heads, hands, and pockets, to the carrying forward of this kindred movement. Organizations called Sabbath Committees have been formed in various places, and have labored zealously, by means of books, tracts, speeches, and sermons, to create a strong public sentiment

p 610 -- in behalf of Sunday. Making slow progress through moral suasion, they seek a shorter path to the accomplishment of their purposes through political power. And why not? Christianity has become popular, and her professed adherents are numerous. Why not avail themselves of the power of the ballot to secure their ends? Rev. J. S. Smart (Methodist), in a published sermon on the Political Duties of Christian Men and Ministers, expresses a leading sentiment on this question, when he says: -

"I claim that we have, and ought to have, just as much concern in the government of this country as any other men.... We are the mass of the people. Virtue in this country is not weak; her ranks are strong in numbers, and invincible from the righteousness of her cause, - invincible if united. Let not her ranks be broken by party names." 

In accordance with the logical development of these feelings, an association has been formed, now called "The National Reform Association," which has for its object the securing of legal enactments for religious institutions, by means of such an amendment to the national Constitution as shall "place all Christian laws, institutions, and usages of the government on an undeniable legal basis in the fnndamental law of the land." Here is the germ of religious revolution, the entering wedge of church and state.

This movement originated at Xenia, Ohio, in February, 1863, in a convention composed of eleven different religious denominations, who assembled for prayer and conference.

To be sure the leaders in this movement disclaim vehemently any such purpose as a union of church and state; but a sentence now and then escapes them which reveals more than they intended. Thus, at a convention of this association in Pittsburg, Pa., Dr. Stevenson, one of these leaders, said: -

"Through the immense largesses it receives from corrupt politicians, the Roman Catholic Church is, practically, the established church of the city of New York. These favors are granted under the guise of a seeming friendliness to religion. We propose to put the substance for the shadow, - to drive out the counterfeit by the more complete substitution of the true."

p 611 -- There are several guess-roads through which we may look for the intent of this language; but inasmuch as they all arrive at one conclusion, this conclusion is neither ambiguous nor doubtful; it is simply that the Protestant Church shall become really established, as the Roman Catholic now is practically. This is confirmed by the very next sentence, which reads:  

"What we propose is nothing of a sectarian character. It will give no branch of American Christians any advantage over any other."

Professor Blanchard undertakes to give a definition of what they mean by a "union of church and state," as follows: -

"But union of church and state is the selection by the nation of one church, the endowment of such a church, the appointment of its officers, and the oversight of its doctrines. For such a union, none of us plead. To such a union we are all of us opposed."

The reader is requested to mark this well. Here is given a definition of a union of church and state such as no one expects or fears; such, in fact, as is not possible in the existing state of the churches, and then a special plea is set up that they are opposed to a union of church and state! To such an impossible combination as they describe, they may safely write themselves opposed; but to a union of church and state in the popular sense of the phrase, - a union, not of one church, but of all the churches recognized as orthodox, or evangelical, - a union not giving the state power to elect church officers nor to take the oversight of church doctrines, but giving the churches the privilege of enforcing, by civil laws, institutions and usages of religion, according to the faith of the churches, or to the construction put upon those institutions and usages by the churches, - to such a union, we say, they are not opposed. They are essentially and practically, despite their professions, open advocates of a union of church and state.

We are not alone in this view of the subject. Mr. G. A. Townsend (New World and Old, p. 212) says: -

"Church and state has several times crept into American politics, as in the contentions over the Bible in the public schools, the anti-Catholic party of 1844, etc. Our people

p 612 -- have been wise enough heretofore to respect the clergy in all religious questions, and to entertain a wholesome jealousy of them in politics. The latest politico-religious movement [italics ours] is to insert the name of the Deity in the Coustitution." 

The Christian Union, January, 1871, said: -

"If the proposed amendment is anything more than a bit of sentimental cant, it is to have a legal effect. It is to alter the status of the nonchristian citizen before the law. It is to affect the legal oaths and instruments, the matrimonial contracts, the sumptuary laws, etc., etc., of the country. This would be an outrage on natural right."

The Janesville (Wis.) Gazette, at the close of an article on the proposed amendment, speaks thus of the effect of the movement, should it succeed: -

"But, independent of the question as to what extent we are a Christian nation, it may well be doubted whether, if the gentlemen who are agitating this question should succeed, they would not do society a very great injury. Such measures are but the initiatory steps which ultimately lead to restrictions of religious freedom, and to commit the government to measures which are as foreign to its powers and purposes as would be its action if it should undertake to determine a disputed question of theology."

The Weekly Alta Californian, of San Francisco, March 12, I870, said: -

"The parties who have been recently holding a convention for the somewhat novel purpose of procuring an amendment to the Constitution of the United States recognizing the Deity, do not fairly state the case when they assert that it is the right of a Christian people to govern themselves in a Christian manner. If we are not governing ourselves in a Christian manner, how shall the doings of our government be designated? The fact is, that the movement is one to bring about in this country that union of church and state which all other nations are trying to dissolve."

The Champlain Journal, speaking of incorporating the re1igious

p 613 -- principle into the Constitution, and its effect upon the Jews, said: -

"However slight, it is the entering wedge of church and state. If we may cut off ever so few persons from the right of citizenship on account of difference of religious belief, then with equal justice and propriety may a majority at any time dictate the adoption of still further articles of belief, until our Constitution is but a text-book of a sect, beneath whose tyrannical sway all liberty of religious opinion will be crushed." 

But it may be asked how the Sunday question is to be affected by the proposed Constitutional Amendment. Answer:    The object, or, to say the least, one object of this amendment, is to put the Sunday institution on a legal basis, and compel its observance by the arm of the law. At the national convention held in Philadelphia, Jan.18, 19, 1871, the following resolution was among the first offered by the business committee: -

"Resolved, That, in view of the controlling power of the Constitution in shaping state as well as national policy, it is of immediate importance to public morals and to social order, to secure such an amendment as will indicate that this is a Chrristian nation, and place all Christian laws, institutions, and usages in our government on an undeniable legal basis in the fundamental law of the nation, specially those which secure a proper oath, and which protect society against blasphemy, Sabbath-breaking, and polygamy."

By Sabbath-breaking is meant nothing else but Sunday-breaking. In a convention of the friends of Sunday, assembled Nov. 29, 1870, in New Concord, Ohio, one of the speakers is reported to have said:      "The question [of Sunday observance] is closely connected with the National Reform Movement; for until the government comes to know God and honor his law, we need not expect to restrain Sabbath-breaking corporations." Here, again, the idea of the legal enforcement of Sunday observance stands foremost; and the same principle would apply equally to individuals.

Once more:   the Philadelphia Press of Dec. 5, 1870, Stated that some Congressmen arrived in Washington by Sunday

p 614 -- trains, December 4, on which the Christian Statesman commented as follows (we give italics as we find them): -

"1.   Not one of those men who thus violated the Sabbath is fit to hold any official position in a Christian nation....

"2.   The sin of these Congressmen is a national sin, because the nation hath not said to them in the Constitution, the supreme rule for our public servants, ' We charge you to serve us in accordance with the higher law of God.' These Sabbath-breaking railroads, moreover, are corporations created by the state, and amenable to it. The state is responsible to God for the conduct of these creatures which it calls into being. It is bound, therefore, to restrain them from this as from other crimes, and any violation of the Sabbath by any corporation should work immediate forfeiture of its charter. And the Constitution of the United States, with which all state legislation is required to be in harmony, should be of such a character as to prevent any state from tolerating such infractions of fundamental moral law.

"3.   Give us in the national Constitution the simple acknowledgment of the law of God as the supreme law of nations, and all the results indicated in this note will ultimately be secured. Let no one say that the movement does not contemplate sufficiently practical ends."

What these National Reformers desire and design to secure in their campaign, is expressed by one of the secretaries of said association, J. M. Foster, in the Christian Statesman, October, 1S92. He says: -

"But one danger lies in this: The church does not speak as a church. The American Sabbath Union has done a good work. The denominations have spoken. But the Christian organized church has not officially gone to Washington and spoken. The work there has been largely turned over to associations. But the voice of God, authoritative, official, is through his church. Should there not be joint action of the denominations in this? They should, it would appear, appoint a joint committee to speak for God; and properly and courageously done, there can follow but the very same results. ... Much is lost by the church failing officially to speak at the

p 615 -- right time, and in the right place. No association is clothed with this authority. They are individual and social; but the church is divine. She can, and ought to, utter the voice of God in the halls of Congress, as an organized church." 

The italics are as we find them; but other declarations in the foregoing extract are equally deserving of emphasis. It may well be questioned whether any more arrogant and pompous words were uttered previous to the setting up of the papacy itself. What they complain that they lack, they of course intend to have. And look at the picture:   The church (that is the different denominations, confederating on dogmas held in common, and represented by a "joint committee," - a central authority) is divine, and woe unto all dissenters from the authority of a divine church! So said Rome in its palmiest days of dungeons, stakes, and blood; so she would say to-day had she the power; and so apostatized Protestantism will say when it gets the power! And this "joint committee" is to "speak for God,"   "utter the voice of God" (a second vicegerent of the Most High, now claimed as a monopoly by the pope), and authoritatively and officially lay upon Congress the commands of God, for it to perform! Such are the dark schemes for which these men are now working. Alas, that the realization of them should now stand as an attainable prospect before their eyes! Did ever Rome ask for more? And when these would-be spokesmen for God secure their object, will it not be, we still ask, Rome over again in a Protestant garb - a very image of the beast itself'?

Within recent years the influence of the National Reform party has been rapidly on the increase. It has now become international in its scope, and at frequent intervals, holds world conventions, at which plans are laid to set up the National Reform ideal of government in all other countries where it does not already exist. To this end much is hoped for from the influence of Christian missionaries, many of whom have seemingly been captivated with the idea of converting heathen governments to Christianity, and see greater results to come from that than from the slow process of converting heathen individuals. At a world convention held in Philadelphia, in November,

p 616 -- 1910, the.following pronouncement was made on this point: -

"This conference expresses its appreciation of the fact that so many missionaries are alive to the importance of the kingship of Christ over the nations, and we urge upon all missionaries in all lands, the inculcation of these principles, and that they testify in their respective nations for the royal prerogative of Jesus in national life."

Among those who participated in the program at this convention, were F. E. Clark, president of the World's Christian Endeavor Union, Bishop Neely of the Methodist Episcopal Church, the Rev. Dr. McCauley, district secretary of the Federal Council of Churches, Attorney John A. Paterson, of Toronto, representing the Canadian government, the Rev. David J. Burrell, president of the Alliance of Reformed Churches, besides missionaries from India and China, and from Roman and Greek Catholic countries. This affords striking evidence of the extent to which National Reform ideas have permeated the religious world.

*******

The Mark- Today? Tomorrow? Soon.

Rev. 13--   16   And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:   17   And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

Daniel and Revelation- Revelation Chapter 13-  (by Uriah Smith 1897-1907) Excerpt-

Why should any one labor to prove that Christ changed the Sabbath?

Whoever does this is performing a thankless task. The pope will not thank him; for if it is proved that Christ wrought this change, then the pope is robbed of his badge of authority and power. And no truly enlightened Protestant will thank him; for if he succeeds, he only shows that the papacy has not done the work which it was predicted that it should do, and so that the prophecy has failed, and the Scriptures are unreliable.

The matter would better stand as the prophecy has it, and the claim which the pope unwittingly puts forth would better be granted. When a person is charged with any work, and that person steps forth and confesses that he has done the work, that is usually considered sufficient to settle the matter. So, when the prophecy affirms that a certain power shall change the law of God, and in due time that very power arises, does the work foretold, and then openly claims that he has done it, what need have we of further evidence?

The world should not forget that the great apostasy foretold by Paul has taken place; that the man of sin for long ages held almost a monopoly of Christian teaching in the world; that the mystery of iniquity has cast the darkness of its shadow and the errors of its doctrines over almost all Christendom; and that out of this era of error and darkness and corruption, the theology of our day has come. Would it, then, be anything strange if there were yet some relics of popory to be discarded ere the reformation will be

p 605 -- complete? A. Campbell (Baptism, p. 15), speaking of the different Protestant sects, says:  -

"All of them retain in their bosom, - in their ecclesiastical organizations, worship, doctrines, and observances, - various relics of popery. They are at best a reformation of popery, and only reformations in part. The doctrines and traditions of men yet impair the power and progress of the gospel in their hands."

The nature of the change which the little horn has attempted to effect in the law of God is worthy of notice. True to his purpose to exalt himself above God, he undertakes to change that commandment which, of all others, is the fundamental commandment of the law, the one which makes known who the lawgiver is, and contains his signature of royalty. The fourth commandment does this; no other one does.

 Four others, it is true, contain the word God, and three of them the word Lord, also. But who is this Lord God of whom they speak? Without the fourth commandment, it is impossible to tell; for idolaters of every grade apply these terms to the multitudinous objects of their adoration.

With the fourth commandment to point out the Author of the decalogue, the claims of every false god are annulled at one stroke; for the God who here demands our worship is not any created being, but the One who created all things. The maker of the earth and sea, the sun and moon, and all the starry host, the upholder and governor of the universe, is the One who claims, and who, from his position, has a right to claim, our supreme regard in preference to every other object. The commandment which makes known these facts is therefore the very one we might suppose that power which designed to exalt itself above God would undertake to change.

God gave the Sabbath as a memorial of himself, a weekly reminder to the sons of men of his work in creating the heavens and the earth, a great barrier against heathenism and idolatry. It is the signature and seal against atheism and idolatry. It is the signature and seal of the law. This the papacy has torn from its place, and erected in its stead, on its own authority, another institution, designed to serve another purpose. 

p 606 -- This change of the fourth commandment must therefore be the change to which the prophecy points, and the Sunday sabbath must be the mark of the beast! Some who have long been taught to regard this institution with reverence will perhaps start back with little less than feelings of horror at this conclusion. We have not space, nor is this, perhaps, the place, to enter into an extended argument on the Sabbath question, and an exposition of the origin and nature of the observance of the first day of the week. Let us submit this one proposition:    If the seventh day is still the Sabbath enjoined in the fourth commandment; if the observance of the first day of the week has no foundation whatever in the Scriptures; if this observance has been brought in as a Christian institution, and designedly put in place of the Sabbath of the decalogue by that power which is symbolized by the beast, and placed there as a badge and token of its power to legislate for the church, - is it not inevitably the mark of the beast? The answer must be in the affirmative. But these hypotheses are all certainties. 1

It will be said again, Then all Sunday-keepers have the mark of the beast; then all the good of past ages who kept this day had the mark of the beast; then Luther, Whitefield, the Wesleys, and all who have done a good and noble work of reformation, had the mark of the beast; then all the blessings that have been poured upon the reformed churches have been poured upon those who had the mark of the beast; and all Christians of the present day who are keeping Sunday as the Sabbath, have the mark of the beast. We answer, Not so! And we are sorry to say that some professedly religious teachers, though many times corrected, persist in misrepresenting us on this point. We have never so held; we have never so taught. Our premises lead to no such conclusions. Give ear:    The mark and worship of the beast are enforced by the two-horned beast. The receiving of the mark of the beast is a specific act which the two-horned beast is to cause to be done. The third message of Revelation 14 is a warning mercifully sent out in advance to prepare the people for the coming

1 -- See "History of the Sabbath," and other works on the subject. To these we can only refer the reader, in passing.

p 607 -- danger. There can therefore be no worship of the beast, nor reception of his mark such as the prophecy contemplates, till it is enforced by the two-horned beast. We have seen that intention was essential to the change which the papacy has made in the law of God, to constitute it the mark of that power; so intention is necessary in the adoption of that change to make it, on the part of any individual, the reception of that mark. In other words, a person must adopt the change knowing it to be the work of the beast, and receive it on the authority of that power, in opposition to the requirement of God.

But how is it with those mentioned above, who have kept Sunday in the past, and the majority of those who are keeping it to-day? Do they keep it as an institution of the papacy? - No. Have they decided between this and the Sabbath of our Lord, understanding the claims of each? - No. On what ground have they kept it, and on what do they still keep it? - They suppose they are keeping a commandment of God. Have such the mark of the beast? - By no means. Their course is attributable to an error unwittingly received from the Church of Rome, not to an act of worship rendered to it.

But how is it to be in the future? The church which is to be prepared for the second coming of Christ must be entirely free from papal errors and corruptions. A reform must hence be made on the Sabbath question.

 The third angel proclaims the commandments of God, leading men to the true in the place of the counterfeit. The dragon is stirred, and so controls the wicked governments of the earth that all the authority of human power shall be exerted to enforce the claims of the man of sin. Then the issue is fairly before the people. They are required to keep, on the one hand, the true Sabbath; on the other, a counterfeit. For refusing to keep the true, the message threatens the unmingled wrath of God; for refusing the false, earthly governments threaten them with persecution and death. With this issue before the people, what does he do who yields to the human requirement? - He virtually says to God, I know your claims, but I will not heed them. I know that the power I am required to worship is antichristian, but I yield to it to save my life. I renounce your allegiance, and

p 608 -- bow to the usurper. The beast is henceforth the object of my adoration; under his banner, in opposition to your authority, I henceforth array myself; to him, in defiance of your claims, I henceforth yield the obedience of my heart and life. 

Such is the spirit which will actuate the hearts of the beast-worshipers, - a spirit which insults the God of the universe to his face, and is prevented only by lack of power from overthrowing his government and annihilating his throne. Is it any wonder that Jehovah denounces against so Heaven-daring a course the most terrible threatening that his Word contains?

*******

Truth.

Are we receiving the mark now? Will we know definitively when it is given? We know that there is NO cheating ourselves into God's good graces.  We know there is no way we can live in sin willfully, wantonly, unrepentantly and jump into forgiveness when we think time is running out on us. What happens is all too often we do not KNOW when time will run out for any of us and by the time we decide to give up our cherished sins, it's too late.  So to look for a point in time when you know beyond a doubt you have to accept Christ fully as your Savior and follow His revealed truth is to look to Christ falsely. NOW is the day!

2Co 6:2  (For he saith, I have heard thee in a time accepted, and in the day of salvation have I succoured thee: behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.)

We cannot put off salvation, ever!

Please, Father, please bless us and keep us in YOU!  Help us to yield to You in ALL things to be totally YOURS, by YOUR power, YOUR love!

In the name of our Savior, Jesus Christ our Lord! 

Unauthorized Changes

Rev. 13--   16   And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:   17   And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

Daniel and Revelation- Revelation Chapter 13-  (by Uriah Smith 1897-1907) Excerpt-

We now inquire what that change is. By the law of God, we mean the moral law, the only law in the universe of immutable and perpetual obligation, - the law of which Webster says, defining the term according to the sense in which it is almost universally used in Christendom,      "The moral law is summarily contained in the decalogue, written by the finger of God on two tables of stone, and delivered to Moses on Mount Sinai."

If now the reader will compare the ten commandments as found in Roman Catholic catechisms with those commandments as found in the Bible, he will see in the catechisms - we mean those portions specially devoted to instruction - that the second commandment is left out, that the tenth is divided into two to make up the lack caused by leaving out the second, and keep good the number ten, and that the fourth commandment (called the third in their enumeration) is made to enjoin the observance of Sunday as the Sabbath, and prescribe that the day shall be spent in hearing mass devoutly, attending vespers, and reading moral and pious books.

 Here are several variations from the decalogue as found in the Bible. Which of them, if any, constitutes the change of the law intended in the prophecy? or are they all included in that change? Let it be borne in mind, that, according to the prophecy, he was to think to change times and laws. This plainly conveys the idea of intention and design, and makes these qualities essential to the change in question. But respecting the omission of the

p 601 -- second commandment, Catholics argue that it is included in the first, and hence should not be numbered as a separate commandment; and on the tenth they claim that there is so plain a distinction of ideas as to require two commandments - so they make the coveting of a neighbor's wife the ninth command, and the coveting of his goods the tenth.

In all this they claim that they are giving the commandments exactly as God intended to have them understood; so, while we may regard them as errors in their interpretation of the commandments, we cannot set them down as professedly intentional changes. Not so, however, with the fourth commandment. Respecting this commandment, they do not claim that their version is like that given by God. They expressly claim a change here, and also that the change has been made by the church. A few quotations from standard Catholic works will make this matter plain. In a work entitled, Treatise of Thirty Controversies, we find these words: -

"The word of God commandeth the seventh day to be the Sabbath of our Lord, and to be kept holy; you [Protestants], without any precept of Scripture, change it to the first day of the week, only authorized by our traditions. Divers English Puritans oppose, against this point, that the observation of the first day is proved out of Scripture, where it is said, the first day of the week. Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:2; Rev. 1:10. Have they not spun a fair thread in quoting these places? If we should produce no better for purgatory and prayers for the dead, invocation of the saints, and the like, they might have good cause indeed to laugh us to scorn, for where was it written that these were Sabbath days in which those meetings were kept? or where is it ordained they should be always observed? or, which is the sum of all, where is it decreed that the observation of the first day should abrogate, or abolish, the sanctifying of the seventh day, which God commanded everlastingly to be kept holy? Not one of these is expressed in the written word of God." 

In the Catechism of the Christian Religion, by Stephen Keenan (Boston, Patrick Donahue, 1857), p. 206, on the

p 602 -- subject of the third (fourth) commandment, we find these questions and answers: -

"Ques.- What does God ordain by this commandment?

"Ans.- He ordains that we sanctify, in a special manner, this day on which he rested from the labor of creation.

"Q.- What is this day of rest?

"A.- The seventh day of the week, or Saturday; for he employed six days in creation, and rested on the seventh. Gen. 2:2; Heb. 4:1; etc.

"Q.- Is it, then, Saturday we should sanctify, in order to obey the ordinance of God?

"A.- During the old law, Saturday was the day sanctified; but the church, instructed by Jesus Christ, and directed by the Spirit of God, has substituted Sunday for Saturday; so now we sanctify the first, not the seventh day. Sunday means, and now is, the day of the Lord."

In the Catholic Christian Instructed (J. P. Kenedy, New York, 1884), p. 202, we read:

"Ques.- What warrant have you for keeping the Sunday preferable to the ancient Sabbath, which was the Saturday?

"Ans.- We have for it the authority of the Catholic Church, and apostolic tradition.

"Q.- Does the Scripture anywhere command the Sunday to be kept for the Sabbath?

"A.- The Scripture commands us to hear the church (Matt. 18:17; Luke 10:16), and to hold fast the traditions of the apostles. 2 Thess. 2:15. But the Scriptures do not in particular mention this change of the Sabbath."

In the Doctrinal Catechism (Kenedy, New York), p. 174, we find further testimony to the same point: -

" Ques.- Have you any other way of proving that the church has power to institute festivals of precept?

"Ans.- 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."

p 603 -- In Abridgment of Christian Doctrine (Kenedy, New York), p. 58, we find this testimony: - 

"Ques.- How prove you that the church hath power to command feasts and holy days?

"Ans.- By the very act of changing the Sabbath into Sunday, which Protestants allow of! and therefore they fondly contradict themselves by keeping Sunday strictly, and breaking most other feasts commanded by the same church.

"Q.- How prove you that?

"A.- Because by keeping Sunday they acknowledge the church's power to ordain feasts, and to command them under sin."

And finally, W. Lockhart, late B. A. of Oxford, in the Toronto (Catholic) Mirror, offered the following "challenge" to all the Protestants of Ireland, - a challenge as well calculated for this locality as that. He says:  -

     "I do therefore solemnly challenge the Protestants of Ireland to prove, by plain texts of Scripture, these questions concerning the obligations of the Christian Sabbath:   (1)   That Christians may work on Saturday, the old seventh day;   (2)   that they are bound to keep holy the first day, namely, Sunday;   (3)   that they are not bound to keep holy the seventh day also."

This is what the papal power claims to have done respecting the fourth commandment. Catholics plainly acknowledge that there is no Scriptural authority for the change they have made, but that it rests wholly upon the authority of the church; and they claim it as a token, or mark, of the authority of that church; the "very act of changing the Sabbath into Sunday" being set forth as proof of its power in this respect. For further testimony on this point, the reader is referred to a book entitled, The Change of the Sabbath, in which are also extracts from Catholic writers refuting the arguments usually relied upon to prove the Sunday-sabbath, and showing that its only authority is the Catholic Church. 

"But," says one, "I supposed that Christ changed the Sabbath." A great many suppose so, and it is natural that

p 604 -- they should; for they have been so taught. And while we have no words of denunciation to utter against any such persons for so believing, we would have them at once understand that it is, in reality, one of the most enormous of errors. We would therefore remind such persons that, according to the prophecy, the only change ever to be made in the law of God was to be made by the little horn of Daniel 7, the man of sin of 2 Thessalonians 2; and the only change that has been made in it, is the change of the Sabbath. Now, if Christ made this change, he filled the office of the blasphemous power spoken of by both Daniel and Paul, - a conclusion sufficiently hideous to drive any Christian from the view which leads thereto.

*******

To be continued.

This TRUTH must be known!

We can't forget that believing lies, refusing the truth, is something that will keep Christ from knowing millions of people who believe they are His.

By the grace of God may we be HIS! Believing ONLY His turth!

A law changed.

Rev. 13--   16   And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:   17   And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

Daniel and Revelation- Revelation Chapter 13-  (by Uriah Smith 1897-1907)

    12.   The Mark of the Beast. - The two-horned beast enforces upon its subjects the mark of the first beast. We have now in the prophecy three agents introduced, which we must carefully distinguish from one another to avoid confusion.

      (1)   The papal beast. This power is designated as "the beast,"   "the first beast,"   "the beast which had the wound by a sword, and did live," and "the beast whose deadly wound was healed." These expressions all refer to the same power; and wherever they occur in this prophecy, they have exclusive reference to the papacy.

       (2)     The two-horned beast. This power, after its introduction in verse 11 of chapter 13, is represented through the remainder of the prophecy by the pronoun he; and wherever this pronoun occurs, down to the 17th verse (with possibly the exception of the 16th verse, which perhaps may refer to the image), it refers invariably to the two-horned beast.

       (3)    The image of the beast. This is, every time, with the possible, but not probable, exception just stated, called the image; so that there is no danger of confounding this with any other agent.

The acts ascribed to the image are, speaking and enforcing the worship of itself under the penalty of death; and this is the only enactment which the prophecy mentions as enforced under the death penalty.

The mark of the beast is enforced by the two-horned beast, either directly or through the image. The penalty attached to a refusal to receive this mark is a forfeiture of all social privileges, a deprivation of the right to buy and sell. The mark is the mark of the papal beast. Against this worship of the beast and his image, and the reception of his mark, the third angel's message of Rev. 14:9-12 is a most solemn and thrilling warning.

This, then, is the issue, which, according to this prophecy, we are soon to be called upon to meet; namely, human organizations, controlled and inspired by the spirit of the dragon,

p 596 -- are to command men to do those acts which are in reality the worshiping of an apostate religious power and the receiving of his mark; and if they refuse to do this, they lose the rights of citizenship, and become outlaws in the land; and they must do that which constitutes the worship of the image of the beast, or forfeit their lives.

 On the other hand, God sends forth a message a little before the fearful crisis is upon us, as we shall see under chapter 14:9-12, declaring that all who do any of these things "shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation." He who refuses to comply with these demands of earthly powers exposes himself to the severest penalties which human beings can inflict; and he who does comply, exposes himself to the most terrible threatening's of divine wrath to be found in the word of God. The question whether they will obey God or man is to be decided by the people of the present age under the heaviest pressure, from either side, that has ever been brought to bear upon any generation. 

The worship of the beast and his image, and the reception of his mark, must be something that involves the greatest offense that can be committed against God, to call down so severe a denunciation of wrath against it. This is a work, as has already been shown, which takes place in the last days; and as God has given us in his word most abundant evidence to show when we are in the last days, that no one need be overtaken by the day of the Lord as by a thief, so, likewise, it must be that he has given us the means whereby we may determine what the receiving of the mark of the beast is, which he has so strongly condemned, that we may avoid the fearful penalty so sure to follow the commission of this act. God does not so trifle with human hopes and human destinies as to denounce a most fearful doom against a certain sin, and then place it out of our power to understand what that sin is, so that we have no means of guarding against it.

We therefore now call attention to the very important inquiry, What constitutes the mark of the beast? The figure of a mark is borrowed from an ancient custom. Bishop Newton (Dissertations on the Prophecies, Vol. III, p. 241) says: -

p 597 -- "It was customary among the ancients for servants to receive the mark of their master, and soldiers of their general, and those who were devoted to any particular deity, of the particular deity to whom they were devoted. These marks were usually impressed on their right hand or on their forehead, and consisted of some hieroglyphic character, or of the name expressed in vulgar letters, or of the name disguised in numerical letters, according to the fancy of the imposer."

Prideaux says that Ptolemy Philopater ordered all the Jews who applied to be enrolled as citizens of Alexandria to have the form of an ivy leaf (the badge of his god, Bacchus) impressed upon them with a hot iron, under pain of death. (Prideaux's Connection, Vol. II, p. 78.)

The word used for mark in this prophecy is Caragma (charagma), and is defined to mean, "a graving, sculpture; a mark cut in or stamped." It occurs nine times in the New Testament, and with the single exception of Acts 17:29, refers every time to the mark of the beast.

We are not, of course, to understand in this symbolic prophecy that a literal mark is intended; but the giving of the literal mark, as practiced in ancient times, is used as a figure to illustrate certain acts that will be performed in the fulfilment of this prophecy. And from the literal mark as formerly employed, we learn something of its meaning as used in the prophecy; for between the symbol and the thing symbolized there must be some resemblance.

The mark, as literally used, signified that the person receiving it was the servant of, acknowledged the authority of, or professed allegiance to, the person whose mark he bore. So the mark of the beast, or of the papacy, must be some act or profession by which the authority of that power is acknowledged. What is it? 

It would naturally be looked for in some of the special characteristics of the papal power.

Daniel, describing that power under the symbol of a little horn, speaks of it as waging a special warfare against God, wearing out the saints of the Most High, and thinking to change times and laws.

The prophet expressly specifies on this point: "He shall think to change times and laws." These laws must certainly be the

p 598 -- laws of the Most High.

To apply it to human laws, and make the prophecy read, "And he shall speak great words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and think to change human laws," would be doing evident violence to the language of the prophet. But apply it to the laws of God, and let it read, "And he shall speak great words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and shall think to change the times and laws of the Most High," and all is consistent and forcible.

The Hebrew has the word (dath), law, and the Septuagint reads, nomoV (nomos), in the singular, "the law," which more directly suggests the law of God.

 The papacy has been able to do more than merely "think " to change human laws. It has changed them at pleasure.

It has annulled the decrees of kings and emperors, and absolved subjects from allegiance to their rightful sovereigns. It has thrust its long arm into the affairs of nations, and brought rulers to its feet in the most abject humility. But the prophet beholds greater acts of presumption than these. He sees it endeavor to do what it was not able to do, but could only think to do; he sees it attempt art act which no man, nor any combination of men, can ever accomplish; and that is, to change the law of the Most High. Bear this in mind while we look at the testimony of another sacred writer on this very point.

The apostle Paul speaks of the same power in 2 Thessalonians 2; and he describes it, in the person of the pope, as "the man of sin," and as "sitting as God in the temple of God" (that is, the church), and as exalting himself "above all that is called God, or that is worshiped."

According to this, the pope sets himself up as the one for all the church to look to for authority, in the place of God.

And now we ask the reader to ponder carefully the question how he can exalt himself above God.

Search through the whole range of human devices, go to the extent of human effort; by what plan, by what move, by what claim, could this usurper exalt himself above God? He might institute any number of ceremonies, he might prescribe any form of worship, he might exhibit any degree of power; but so long as God had requirements which

p 599 -- the people felt bound to regard in preference to his own, so long he would not be above God.

 He might enact a law, and teach the people that they were under as great obligations to that as to the law of God; then he would only make himself equal with God. But he is to do more than this; he is to attempt to raise himself above him.

Then he must promulgate a law which conflicts with the law of God, and demand obedience to his own law in preference to God's law. There is no other possible way in which he could place himself in the position assigned in the prophecy. But this is simply to change the law of God; and if he can cause this change to be adopted by the people in the place of the original enactment, then he, the law-changer, is above God, the law-maker.

 And this is the very work that Daniel said he should think to do.

Such a work as this, then, the papacy must accomplish according to the prophecy; and the prophecy cannot fail. And when this is done, what do the people of the world have? - They have two laws demanding obedience, - one, the law of God as originally enacted by him, an embodiment of his will, and expressing his claims upon his creatures; the other, a revised edition of that law, emanating from the pope of Rome and expressing his will.

And how is it to be determined which of these powers the people honor and worship? - It is determined by the law which they keep.

If they keep the law of God as given by him, they worship and obey God.

 If they keep the law as changed by the papacy, they worship that power.

But further: the prophecy does not say, that the little horn, the papacy, should set aside the law of God, and give one entirely different. This would not be to change the law, but simply to give a new one. He was only to attempt a change, so that the law that comes from God, and the law that comes from the papacy, are precisely alike, excepting the change which the papacy has made in the former.

They have many points in common. But none of the precepts which they contain in common can distinguish a person as the worshiper of either power in preference to the other. If God's law says, "Thou shalt not kill," and the law as given by the papacy says the same, no one can tell by a person's observance of that

p 600 -- precept whether he designs to obey God rather than the pope, or the pope rather than God.

But when a precept that has been changed is the subject of action, then whoever observes that precept as originally given by God, is thereby distinguished as a worshiper of God; and he who keeps it as changed is thereby marked as a follower of the power that made the change.

 In no other way can the two classes of worshipers be distinguished. From this conclusion, no candid mind can dissent; but in this conclusion we have a general answer to the question, "What constitutes the mark of the beast?" and that answer is simply this:    The mark of the beast is the change which the beast has attempted to make in the law of God. 

*******

More on this very important truth- tomorrow- by the will of God!

All through the mercy and grace of our Lord and Savior, JESUS CHRIST! Now and forever! AMEN!