XIX - 01(86)

"The hour has come, the hour is striking and striking at you,
the hour and the end!"           Eze. 7:6 (Moffatt)



ADVENTIST FUTURISTS MEET


BASIC CONCEPTS OF HISTORIC ADVENTISM

ABANDONED

JESUIT METHODOLOGY ADOPTED


In a circular letter dated August 21, 1985, Dr. G. Harvey Rue wrote:

We had a wonderful session in Lincoln, Nebraska last week. The exchange of ideas was harmonious and profitable. Dr. Price, Richard Lange, Dr. Hauser, Fritz Alseth, Dr. Waggerby, Lon Cummings, Stan Smith, Charles Wheeling, Pat Robinson (Langworthy), Chet Green, several retired ministers and about 75 others attended most of the five-day assembly. A Pentecostal (sic) atmosphere prevailed and all of us received light and broadening ideas on final events.

This session was held on the campus of the University of Nebraska. Some of the discussions from tape recordings have been published in The Layworker (Fall Issue, Oct. 15, 1985). Based on these reports - accepting them as an authentic transcription this Thought Paper is being published.

Robert W. Hauser, M.D. author of Give Him the Glory, appears to have made the final presentation. He told the conference that in his study, he would seek "to condense and to outline the basic concepts upon which I feel we can agree." He began at the very ABC's of Bible prophecy - Daniel 2 - with the emphasis on "the stone cut out of the mountain without hands." (2:45) This stone Hauser declared to be "not only Jesus but also His people." After quoting from Daniel 7, he concluded - "So the kingdom, the stone, is a kingdom of people. But more specifically, we find that it is a kingdom of priests. We are going to be named as kings and priests unto God. And it is this kingdom of kings and priests and this great stone that strikes the image on his feet." (The Layworker (LW), op. cit., p. 35)

The historic position of Adventism on the designation of the stone has been very consistent. In the 1897 edition of Thoughts on the Prophecies of Daniel, Uriah Smith wrote:

Time has fully developed this image in all its parts. Most strictly does it represent the important political events it was designed to symbolize. It stands complete upon its feet. Thus it has been standing for over fourteen hundred years. It waits to be smitten upon the feet by the stone cut out of the mountain without hand, that is, the kingdom of Christ. This is to be accomplished when the Lord shall be revealed in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. (p. 74)

Speaking of "the stone which smites the image... as having been quarried out of the mountain without hands," George McCready Price wrote in The Greatest of the Prophets:

Such a work will be accomplished when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God. Then will be the time when His everlasting kingdom will be set up, and not till then. (p. 82)

The idea that the people of God - the church, the 144,000, priest-kings, or by whatever term one wishes to identify them - constitute the "stone" is borrowed right out of Mormonism, who perceive of themselves as "the stone." In Doctrine and Covenants, it is

Page 2

stated:

The keys of the kingdom of God are committed unto man on the earth, and from thence shall the gospel roll forth unto the ends of the earth, as the stone which is cut out of the mountain without hands shall roll forth until it has filled the whole earth."(65:2)

All Hauser has done is to give this Mormon concept an injection of Jesuitical futurism and apply it to "the remnant of her seed." (Rev. 12:17)

Further, in seeking to give the interpretation plausibility, an association is made between the "stone" of Daniel 2, and the kingdom concepts of Daniel 7. There is an association, but not as Hauser and his fellow futurists have sought to intimate. The distortion of truth comes because the very language of the prophecy of Daniel 7 is overlooked. In Daniel 7, the horn "made war with the saints, and prevailed against them; until the Ancient of days came." (21-22) Then the Judgment was set and the books were opened. As a result "judgment was given to the saints" (v.22) - a legal expression which means that the decision was rendered in behalf of the saints. Then, Daniel saw - "the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom." (v.22) And when is that time? Jesus gave the answer to this question which no amount of futuristic speculation can gainsay. He stated:

When the Son of man shall come in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then shall He sit upon the throne of His glory: and before Him shall be gathered all nations: ... Then shall the King say unto them on His right hand, Come ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. (Matt. 25:31-34)

The inheritance - possession - is received only when Christ comes sitting "upon the throne of His glory" with all His holy angels. In the Judgment, it is the Son of man who comes before the Ancient of days to receive a kingdom. The saints receive that kingdom "in Him." The Son of man comes the second time to give the saints the inheritance the judgment awarded them. The prophecy does not say that the kingdom was given to the saints in the judgment, but that judgment was given to them. Then "the time came" for the possession of the kingdom. The text which Hauser quotes (7:27; LW:35) follows the revealed fact of the prophecy that the horn's dominion is taken away, "to consume and destroy it unto the end." (v.26) After "the end" - and only then - do the saints possess the kingdom! They are not "the stone" of Daniel 2. The historic position of Adventism still stands against the attack of the futurists in the Church.

Daniel 8:13-14

The second point in which Hauser indicated an agreement among the Futurists involved an understanding of Daniel 8:13-14. In Daniel 8:13, a question is asked - "How long the vision, the daily, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?" (This is quoted with all words supplied by the KJV translators deleted.) To this single question, the answer is given - "Unto two thousand and twenty three hundred evenings mornings; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed." (Hebrew & LXX combined) Concerning this single question, Hauser stated:

"The answer given to the 2300 day question in Daniel only refers to the cleansing of the sanctuary itself, but that there were three other parts of that vision that were not answered: 1) How long shall be the daily? 2) the transgression of desolation? and 3) the host to be trodden under foot? These three questions are not answered at this point in the vision." (LW:36, emphasis his.)

First it is obvious from the text itself that if the question concerning the "host" is not answered here, then neither is the cleansing of the sanctuary answered, for the text reads - "to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot." That which is represented by the "host" is linked inseparably with the sanctuary - both were "to be trodden under foot"! Not only is the sanctuary to be cleansed at the close of the 2300 prophetic days, but also the judgment is to be "given to the saints of the most High" in that same cleansing. But this is only the beginning of the misconceptions connected with the Adventists futurist's interpretation of this prophecy.

To give a touch of credibility to such misconception of the prophetic word, the Hebrew is introduced to aid the conclusions drawn. In so doing there is mingling

Page 3

of error with truth.

In seeking to unravel the truth from the error, let us first observe certain facts regarding the use of the Hebrew words involved. 1) In Daniel 8 & 9 two different Hebrew words are translated in the KJV by the one word, "vision." These words are ghahzohn and mareh. (The Layworker uses the word, chason for ghahzohn, and mara for mareh. We will follow the transliteration of the Englishman's Hebrew and Chaldee Concordance.) 2) It is true that in Daniel 8 & 9, the 2300 day prophecy is referred to as the mareh, while the vision as a whole - which includes, the ram, the he-goat, notable horn, four other horns, the little horn, the daily, and the abomination of desolation are noted as the ghahzohn.

That you the reader might have available the different verses in Daniel 8 & 9 as how these two words are used, we give the following list:

Daniel 8:1 - "vision" = ghazon

          8:2 - "vision" = ghazon(2x)

          8:13 - "vision" = ghazon

          8:15 - "vision" = ghazon

          8:16 - "vision" = mareh

          8:17 - "vision" = ghazonn

          8:26 - "vision" = mareh (1)

                 - "vision" = ghazon (2)

          8:27 - "vision" =mareh

Daniel 9:21 - "vision" = ghazon

          9:23 - "vision" =mareh

          9:24 - "vision" = ghazon

It is the last use of the word ghahzohn in Daniel 9:24 which is omitted in the discussion by the Adventist futurists. It doesn't fit into the conclusions drawn concerning Daniel 8:13-14. Gabriel in his explanation makes it very clear that during the "seventy weeks" the whole of the vision - ghahzohn - is to be sealed as the segments of the 2300 days - the mareh - unfold in history. Daniel 8 & 9 is one whole piece of cloth which cannot be rent in twain. It is a seamless garment which clothes our Lord's ministry as both priest and victim, and High Priest in the sanctuary above with a revelation of the adversarial forces arrayed against that ministry. Adventist futurists would rend that garment of prophecy and insert as do the Evangelicals, a prophetic parenthesis or seek to reinterpret, the 2300 days in literal time.

It is a limited perception of what the judgment is all about - its cleansing and the rendering of the decision in favor of the saints of the most High - which leads to the deceptive speculations in which the Adventist futurists are now indulging. There is a close association between the visions of Daniel 7 & 8 - only two years separated these revelations to Daniel. Different symbolisms are used, but the sequence remains the same. In fact, in Daniel 8, it is specifically spelled out that "the ram which thou sawest ... are the kings of Media and Persia. And the rough goat is the king of Grecia." (8:20-21) The parallel between the third beast of Daniel 7 with the four heads, and the rough he-goat with the four horns which should come up after the "great horn" was broken, converges the two prophetic visions. This leaves the non-descript beast with the little horn as parallel to the horn of Daniel 8 which seeks to take away the daily, cast the truth to the ground and prospers even to the point of magnifying himself against "the Prince of the host." (8:11-12)

While we in our prophetic interpretation, have pictured the little horn of Daniel 7 as a separate entity - the Papacy - still the prophetic imagery indicates it ever as a part of the fourth beast, coming up out of the beast's head! It is this power in Daniel 7 & 8 which defiles the sanctuary, and the cleansing relates to this power's activities against the "saints of the most High."

In Daniel 7, when the judgment convenes, it is declared - "the books were opened." This phraseology of prophecy carries over to the final judgment of the great white throne of Revelation 20 (v.12). We must never forget that the typical service of the sanctuary dealt only with confessed sins - not all that are written "in the books." Further, an element is introduced in the services of the Day of Atonement which bind the cleansing of Leviticus 16, and the judgment scene of Daniel 7 into the final picture of Revelation 19:20 and 20:11-15. When on the Day of Atonement after the High Priest had "made an end of reconciling the Holy, and the tabernacle,

Page 4

and the altar," the live goat - Azazel - became involved in the final disposition of the sins which had been confessed and thereby transferred. The antitypical reality of this part of the service on the Day of Atonement will be the fulfillment of the prophecy of Revelation 20. The prophecy of Daniel 7 also focuses on this period of time. The "beast" is pictured as being given over to "the burning flame." (7:11) The counterpart of this is the description found in Revelation 19:20.

All that is involved in the reconciling of the Holy, the tabernacle, and the altar is not given in the typical sanctuary services. Other aspects are to be found in the delineation of the Judgment scenes as found in Daniel 7 & 8. Because of this, there is no way that the questions concerning the vision, the daily, and the abomination that maketh desolate can be separated from the cleansing of the sanctuary. It is one vision. It is one issue. It is one truth. It involves the whole of the ministry of Jesus as Saviour and the High Priest. Taken together, the visions of Daniel 7 & 8, with the explanation given by Gabriel in Daniel 9, span the time from Daniel's day to the Judgment when the Son of man comes before the Ancient of days to receive a kingdom at the close of the 2300 prophetic days. The time then comes for the saints to possess the kingdom with their Saviour and High Priest - the Son of man - when He shall come forth as King of kings and Lord of lords. (Rev. 19:11-16)

INFILTRATED

In the June, 1984, issue of Battle Cry, a Chic publication, an article was published with the title - "Jesuit Priest Confirms Alberto's Claims." The one sending me this article pointed out a sentence copied from the Jesuit priest's letter. It intrigued me when I perceived its significance. However, the sentence appeared to have been abbreviated in the article. While in the Los Angeles area this past summer, I made an attempt to see the letter in full, but was informed that the Australian editor, Sidney W. Hunter, who had authored the article had the letter. I was given his address so that I could correspond with him.

The response from the editor was most gratifying. He sent me a photocopy of the letter as received from the Jesuit. It was received in the Australian office January 17, 1984, and reads as follows:

Dear Sirs,

I have just read the "Crusader" series distributed by your organization. As a teacher and priest at a Jesuit run Church of England school, and a member of the Society of Jesus for many years, I would like to agree on all points with Dr. Alberto.

I can say little as I am writing in secret. I have little time so I must finish.

The main aims of our organization have been directed against a Christian church which we have very thoroughly infiltrated. They are the Remnant Church of Revelation 12:v17 and Rev. 14:v12

I sincerely hope God will guide you in reading this letter. I will endeavor to send more information to guide you. I will sign this with another name, so you will recognize any future letters. Goodbye and God bless.

Shannon

The emphasis in reproducing the letter is ours. Now, there is only one Christian church which claims to be "the Remnant Church of Revelation 12:17 and Rev. 14:12," and that is the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

Naturally, the temptation comes to nominate who these prospective Jesuits might be within the central hierarchy of the Church, and in the periphery, even among the Adventist Futurists. But we must simply let stand on record this alleged thorough infiltration to serve as a warning so that you can with keen perception analyze the things that have taken place in recent years.

Page 5

[This cartoon is reproduced with permission from The Layworker, October 15, 1985, p. 27.]

COMMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS

The above cartoon says much more than its artist intended for it to say; in fact, something very different that it was designed to convey. There is no doubt that Alseth desired to caricature those who would not go along with the supposed "new light" of the Adventist futurists as being immobilized in concrete, while those who would accept the deviations from historic Adventist prophetic understanding are seen as walking in the daylight of the sun's warm rays. Evidently, the "inspiration" that motivated Alseth did not bring to his mind all the Scripture and incisive comments on this point to be found in the Writings of Ellen White. It left him with a half-truth motivation which would only exalt the one who originally dealt in half-truths.

Since many have a difficult time with the Holy Scriptures, let us first note a comment from the Writings apropos to the cartoon. It reads:

Just as soon as the people of God are sealed in their foreheads - it is not any seal or mark that can be seen, but a settling into the truth, both intellectually and spiritually, so they cannot be moved - just as soon as God's people are sealed and prepared for the shaking, it will come. (SDA Bible Commentary, Vol. 4, p.1161; Ms. 173, 1902, Emphasis mine)

Though caricatured in Alseth's cartoon, who is the one really being sealed? Apparently, many are being shaken out of the truth as they seek to walk in the light coming from the "sun" god!

It is not an accident that in the symbolic delineation found in Ezekiel, chapters 8 - 11, that at the time God arises to take things in His own hands, and orders a mark to be placed on the foreheads of those who sigh and cry about the abominations done in Jerusalem, some of those in Jerusalem have turned from the sanctuary to worship the sun toward the east. (8:16; 9:1-4) In fact, the last-day prophecy of Isaiah indicates that "the house of Jacob" is "being replenished from the east." (Isa. 2:6) The cartoon is significant because it is confessing that those embracing futurism are not walking in the light coming from the sanctuary, but rather have their faces set toward the sun in the east.

THE ORIGINS OF FUTURISM

"It will probably come as a shock to many modern futurists to be told that the first scholar in relative modern times who returned to the patristic futuristic interpretation was a Spanish Jesuit named Ribera. In 1590, Ribera published a commentary on the Revelation

Page 6

as a counter-interpretation to the prevailing view among Protestants which identified the Papacy with the Antichrist. Ribera applied all of Revelation but the earliest chapters to the end time rather than to the history of the Church. (The Blessed Hope, p. 37. Quoted in Bible Student's Source Book, Art. #1256) The futuristic teachings of Ribera were refined and enlarged by the most notable of the Jesuit controversialists, Cardinal Bellarmine, one of the greatest adversaries of the Protestant churches. This Jesuitical method of interpreting the prophecies was adopted by Evangelical Protestantism in the early Century, which time also marks the rise of the Advent Movement.

Adventist Futurists may retort - "We are not teaching what Ribera taught." This is no doubt true, but this is not the point! It is the acceptance of the methodology of Ribera which is the issue. G. Ebeling, a scholar in the area of methods of Biblical interpretation, has suggested that "church history is the history of the exposition of Scripture." (The Word of God and Tradition, 1968) It, therefore, follows that the history of any church or group is also the history of its interpretation of the Scriptures, be it the writings of Paul, or the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation. Thus to change or to shift the method used to understand the word of God by a church, or by students within a church, inevitably means a shift in its course, doctrines, understanding of prophecy, purpose and mission. (See Biblical Interpretation Today, p. 1) The Advent Movement's understanding of the prophecies was based securely in the Protestant and Apostolic methodology - that history is but the unfolding of the scroll of Bible prophecy. The Futuristic methodology comes out of the Catholic Counter-Reformation led by the Jesuits. This gives us a clear understanding of the origin of the methodology being used by the Adventist Futurists.

The prophetic Word tells us that the "beast" - the source of Jesuitism - received its power and authority from the "dragon," that old serpent called the Devil and Satan. (Rev. 13:2; 12:9) This serpent is none other than he who deified himself in sun worship as the sun-god. To walk in the rays of the sun from the east - as portrayed in the cartoon - is to walk in Satanic delusions, not "New Light"! Those who walk in the light coming from the sanctuary, noted in Ezekiel 9, "walk in the light as He is in the light" and they can have the confidence that "the blood of Jesus Christ His Son" will cleanse them from all sin, accomplishing in them the objective of "the final atonement." (I John 1:7; Lev. 16:33)


NEW LIGHT
How Can We Know?

The many fanciful interpretations of Bible prophecy being proclaimed by Adventist futurists are being heralded as "new" light. Do we have all the light we need, or is there to be "new" light? The Bible is clear - "Light is sown for the righteous." (Ps. 97:11) True light comes from the source of light - "the Father of lights." (James 1:17) The "seeds" of light which God has sown for the righteous will produce "plants" which will bear continuous "fruit." The light guiding the true believer will never be extinguished, and will lead him at last into the presence of God who dwells "in the light." (I Tim. 6:16) One revelation of that light is indeed Bible prophecy. It is written:

We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the star arise in your hearts. (II Peter 1:19)

However, and this needs to be carefully considered, the Bible warns us that "Satan himself is [to be] transformed into an angel (messenger) of light." With him will come "false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles Christ." (II Cor. 11:14,13) In the resulting confusion as these various rays of light crisscross before our vision, how will we be able to distinguish between light from God's throne in the Most Holy Place, and the light emanating from Satan?

For the confusion of these last days - none can deny but that we are in the very midst of this tempest of delusions with gale force winds blowing in cyclonic fury - God has given guidance to His people through the Writings, if we know how to use them. Ellen G. White indicated "new light will ever be revealed on the word of God to him who is in living connection with the Sun of righteousness. Let no one come to the conclusion that there is no more light to be revealed." (CSW, p. 34)

Why is this so? Because, "truth is an advancing truth, and we must walk in the increasing light." (R&H, March 25, 1890) Further, there is another reason why there will be more

Page 7

light. In the same article of the Review, she wrote - "We do, not claim that in the doctrines sought out by those who have studied the word of truth, there may not be some error, for no man that lives is infallible." (Ibid.) AND she included herself in this position. She stated - "In regard to infallibility, I never claimed it." (Letter 10, 1895: SM, i, p. 37) This should give pause to those who develop their concepts solely from the Writings, and who do not seek truth from the source of truth - the Holy Scriptures.

The guideline by which we are to know how to arrive at "new" light is clearly spelled out and enjoined upon as a duty. Ellen G. White wrote - "The Lord has made His people the repository of sacred truth. Upon every individual who has had the light of present truth devolves the duty of developing that truth on a higher scale than it has hitherto been done." (Andreasen Collection #2, Ms dated March 30, 1897)

Ellen White did not say that advancing fanciful theories and bazaar interpretations of prophecy constituted "new" light, but rather a development of that truth already committed to our trust. If we would spend our time investigating "every point that has been received as truth," we would be richly repaid because we would "find precious gems. And in investigating every jot and tittle which we think is established truth, in comparing [note] scripture with scripture, we may discover errors in our interpretation of Scripture." (R&H, July 12, 1898)

This was the spirit of our forefathers in the faith. William Miller had been used of God in a mighty way, but the pioneers of this Movement discovered errors in his teaching and corrected them. This is our legacy. This should be our approach to the study of Bible prophecy. Instead of throwing out the work and study of men who have been mighty in the study of the Word of God in the Advent Movement, and substitute for their methodology, the Jesuit concepts of interpretation, we should study "that truth" and refine it so that the light will shine in all of its purity. We need not "the torch of false prophecy, kindled from the hellish torch of Satan" (TM, p. 409); but rather that light of sacred truth given to us in the beginning and advanced through careful and prayerful study of the Word of God.

Let us illustrate exactly what we mean. In Daniel 8:20-21, the angel Gabriel clearly stated that the ram represented the kings of Media and Persia, and the rough goat was the king of Grecia, with the great horn being the first king. This is the interpretation given by one who stands in the very presence of God. (Luke 1:19) We do not need the light from the hellish torch of Satan which declares these symbols represent Iran and Syria, NATO and the USA. Such voices are "deceitful workers transforming themselves into apostles of Christ." (II Cor. 11:13)

On the other hand, there are interpretations of Bible prophecy which need further study and correction. As an example, in the first article, we quoted Uriah Smith in regard to the stone of Daniel 2. (See p. 1) He interpreted the toes of the image in such a way that he could write - "It [the image] stands complete upon its feet. Thus it has been standing for over fourteen hundred years." Writing this in 1897, Smith was alluding back to the break-up of the Roman Empire in 476 A.D. However, a careful study and comparison with the prophecy of Daniel 7 shows that three of the ten horns of the fourth beast were plucked up "by the roots," (7:8) leaving only seven. The concept of ten matching the toes of the image does not come into focus again till Revelation 17:12. Another observation about the image is that the same iron which made up the legs continues down to the very toes, though in the feet it is mingled with clay. Would not the Adventist futurists do a better service to truth if they would renounce their Jesuitical methodology, confess themselves to have been deceitful workers, and repent. Then having repented, return to the truth committed to the Advent Movement and help develop "that truth" on "a higher scale than it has hitherto been done"?