OF the papacy, the Beast, as one of the three items which mark his exaltation against God, it is written that he should “think to change the times and the law” of the Most High. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 408.1
This the papacy did, as far as it lies in any power to do it, when it set aside the Sabbath of the Lord, and, under a papal curse, condemned its observance, and exalted Sunday in its stead. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 408.2
In these articles we have given quite fully the evidence that demonstrates the fulfillment of that prophecy which said that he would “think to change the times and the law” of the Most High. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 408.3
It is this attempted change of the Sabbath which, more than anything else, reveals that feature of the papacy by which the word of God distinguishes the papacy as “the man of sin”—“transgression of the law”—and “the mystery of lawlessness.” Greek and R.V. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 408.4
This, because it is a principle in governmental procedure, recognized as such in law, and so regarded in history, that for a subordinate government to reenact, especially with changes, a law made by the supreme authority for the government of the subordinate State, is “tantamount to a declaration of independence” on the part of the subordinate government. And any power, whatever it might be, however it might be organized, and wherever it might be on the earth, that would presume to take the law of God and incorporate it in legislation, with changes, would, in that, declare itself independent of God. The papacy did this when, by its working, the Sabbath was incorporated in legislation, and yet all that pertained to it was transferred to another day, thus incorporating the law of God in the legislation, with changes. That was the assertion of independence of the power and government of God. That was the assertion of independence of the power and government of God. And that could be nothing less than the very pinnacle of the arrogance of lawlessness. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 408.5
Now, as has already been pointed out in these studies,—in the REVIEW of May 29,—the government of the United States has exactly repeated that action of the papacy. When the United States government incorporated the fourth commandment of the law of God in its legislation, and then in its legislation deliberately changed the Sabbath of that commandment to Sunday—in that thing the government of the United States asserted its independence of the power and government of God, in the very likeness of the papacy. It would be impossible for any power more certainly to change the Sabbath, so far as any power can change it, than the United States government has done in the exact likeness of the papacy before it. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 408.6
And this action of the United States was performed at the bidding of an apostate church, just as the change was originally made in the Roman Empire. From 1888 until 1892, the whole National Reform combination tried its best to get Congress and the whole government of the United States to do what the leaders of that combination knew to be an unconstitutional thing; that is, for the government of the United States to decide the Sabbath question by law, and fix it to Sunday as the American sabbath. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 408.7
While the National Reform combination was making this endeavor, as Congress did not respond readily enough to suit them, they added threats to their “petitions and their other efforts. These threats of the combined religious elements of the country were to the effect that they pledged themselves and one another that they would never again vote for, nor support for any office or position of trust, any member of Congress, either senator or representative, who should refuse to do their bidding to pass the church-instituted provision closing the Columbian Exposition on Sunday—the “Christian sabbath,” the “Lord’s day,” etc. And everybody knows, or at least has had an opportunity to know, that Congress surrendered to these threats, and publicly advertised that it did not “dare” to do otherwise. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 408.8
And when an effort, based upon the Constitution, was made to have Congress undo its unconstitutional action, and place itself and the government once more in harmony with the Constitution, and with the sound fundamental principles of the nation, this same religious combination renewed its former threats, and added to these such others as best suited its purpose. The result was that the Congressional committee that had the matter in charge, and that thus acted for the whole Congress, definitely excluded the Constitution from its consideration, and deferred exclusively to the demands of that religious combination. And this, as declared by representatives in Congress, because not to do so only resulted “in stirring up animosity toward the fair, and in creating antagonism on the part of the church people.” ARSH June 26, 1900, page 408.9
And, as declared by a United States Circuit Court:— ARSH June 26, 1900, page 408.10
By a sort of factitious advantage, the observers of Sunday have secured the aid of the civil law, and adhere to that advantage with great tenacity, in spite of the clamor for religious freedom, and the progress that has been made in the absolute separation of Church and State.... And the efforts to extirpate the advantage above mentioned, by judicial decision in favor of a civil right to disregard the change, seem to me quite useless.... ARSH June 26, 1900, page 408.11
Christians would become alarmed, and they might substitute for the stars and other symbols of civil freedom upon the banners of their armed hosts, the symbol of the cross of Christ, and fight for their religion at the expense of their civil government. They have done this in times that are passed, and they could do it again. And he is not a wise statesman who overlooks a possibility like this, and endangers the public peace.... ARSH June 26, 1900, page 408.12
The civilian, as contradistinguished from the churchman, though united in the same person, may find in the principle of preserving the public order a satisfactory warrant for yielding to religious prejudice and fanaticism the support of those laws, when the demand for such a support may become a force that would disturb the public order. It may be a constantly diminishing force, but if it be yet strong enough to create disturbance, statesmanship takes account of it as a factor in the problem.—The U. S. Circuit Cout for the western district of Tennessee, 1891. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 408.13
Thus, by the confirmed lawlessness of the National Reform combination—the apostate Protestantism of the United States—the government of the United States was driven into the course of declaration independence of the power and government of God—the course of lawlessness marked out originally by “the mystery of lawlessness” itself. And by that example, from that day to this, lawlessness has risen and spread like a mighty tide in this nation, and now is being further followed by the nation itself, as such, in its repudiation of the Declaration of Independence, and its abandonment of the Constitution of the nation in its present practice of “governing without the Constitution.” ARSH June 26, 1900, page 408.14
And these things we expected and mentioned at the time. Six years ago we wrote and published the following words: “Multitudes of people in the United States are wondering and perplexed in beholding how widespread and how persistent is the spirit of violence and lawlessness throughout the land. To those, however, who have been carefully considering public movements in the last two or three years, there is nothing to wonder at not to be perplexed about in all this, or even more than this, that has appeared. Indeed, to those who have been carefully studying the public movements of the last two or three years, this widespread spirit of violence and lawlessness has been expected; and now, instead of expecting it to end at the limits that it has reached, widespread though it be, it is expected to become universal.” ARSH June 26, 1900, page 408.15
We then recounted the facts, as to the change of the Sabbath by this nation, and further said that in all this “they have demonstrated that they have no respect for any law but such as their own arbitrary will approves. For without the slightest hesitation, yea, rather, with open persistence, they have knowingly disregarded and overridden the supreme law—the Constitution—of the United States. They have set the example, and established the principle, of absolute lawlessness. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 408.16
“These facts demonstrate that instead of their being truly the law-abiding portion of the people, these men are among the chiefest law-breakers in the land—the most lawless of all the nation. Nor is this at all to be wondered at. For, in order to accomplish this their had purpose, they ‘gladly joined hands’ and hearts with the papacy—that power which the Lord designates as the ‘lawless one’ and as the very ‘mystery of lawlessness’ itself. 2 Thessalonians 2:3, 7 R.V. In view of such an example as this, should it be thought surprising that lawlessness would be manifested by others throughout the whole country as never before, and that violence would cover the land from ocean to ocean? ARSH June 26, 1900, page 408.17
“It was because of this lawless example of ‘the best people of the land,’ this principle of violence and lawlessness, forced upon the government by the combined churches of the country,—it was because of this that we have expected nothing else than that violence and lawlessness would spread through the land, and that we still expect it to become universal. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 408.18
“This is not to say that the particular phases of lawlessness that have of late been manifested in so many parts of the country, have been carried on by the human actors therein in conscious and intentional pursuance of the example of lawlessness set by the churches; but it is to say that there is a spirit of things that must ever be taken into account. There is the Spirit of order, and there is the spirit of disorder. And when the Spirit of order has been so outraged, and the spirit of disorder chosen and persistently followed instead, as it has been in this case,—and that too by the very ones who profess to be the representatives of the Spirit of order in the earth,—then things are given over to the spirit of disorder and lawlessness, and nothing remains but that this spirit shall prevail and increase until it becomes universal.” ARSH June 26, 1900, page 408.19
It is the truth that, in the change of the Sabbath, this tearing down of God’s memorial and exalting in its place the papal counterfeit by the government of the United States, in 1892-93, under the threats of the apostate Protestantism of the National Reform combination, the government of the United States was delivered over to the spirit of disorder and lawlessness, as really as was the Roman Empire in the fourth century. And that lawlessness, individual and national, will here increase, as it did in the Roman Empire of the fourth century, until it shall swallow up in ruin this nation, as it swallowed up in ruin the Roman Empire. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 408.20
A RELIGIOUS paper, deploring the growing abandonment of the Greek and Latin classics in the schools, says: “The study of natural history is a study of matter, the study of the classics is a study of mind.... They throb with the mightiest passions and thoughts of the human mind.” Yes, and that is just the essential evil of them; they do throb with the mightiest passions and thoughts of the human mind; and these are the altogether human passions and thoughts of the human mind, which “is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.” What mankind needs to study is not the human mind at all, much less its mightiest passions and thoughts, but the divine mind. “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus.” ARSH June 26, 1900, page 408.1
To study the mightiest passions of the human mind is but to study the mightiest sins of human kind: to study the “mightiest” thoughts of the human mind is but to study the impotence of the human mind. This is abundantly illustrated in the Greek and Latin classics. “My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord.” “Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts.” “Be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind;” “bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.” “We have the mind of Christ.” “Think on these things.” ARSH June 26, 1900, page 408.2
SABBATH, July 7, begins in all the Sabbath-schools the study of the book of Galatians. The following article, contributed by Brother L. A. Reed, will be so helpful to all, as preliminary, that we lay over for this week the regular “Study in Galatians: the Two Covenants,” to give place to this article. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 409.1
IN the REVIEW of May 22 we printed the Outlook’s statement and ground of “A Needed Educational Reform.” We reprinted the Outlook’s analysis of the present educational processes, by which students lose their religion while they are acquiring an education, which is summed up in these two sentences:— ARSH June 26, 1900, page 409.1
The process presupposes are inquiring, if not a skeptical, mood. Doubt is the pedagogue which leads the pupil to knowledge. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 409.2
In religion, the Outlook, as a matter of course, refers only to Christianity. And since Christianity is absolutely and pre-eminently the religion of faith, it is impossible for a process of education in which doubt is the pre-eminent thing to do anything else than to cause students who are subject to such process, to lose their religion while acquiring their education. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 409.3
The Outlook described the process of education in the schools in general. It might be supposed that in theological schools the process would not be the same; that there, instead of doubt being the guide to knowledge, faith would be recognized, and given that place. But such supposition would be altogether a mistake. The same process is employed in the theological schools as is so fully described in our quotation from the Outlook, in the REVIEW of May 22. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 409.4
That this is true, is put beyond all possibility of controversy, by an article in the North American Review of April, 1900, entitled “The Scientific Method in Theology,” by Frank S. Hoffman, professor of philosophy in Union College, Schenectady, N.Y., who was educated at Amherst and Yale, and spent two years in philosophical study in Germany, and from 1883-85 was instructor of philosophy in Wesleyan University. Thus every circumstance of the article is a pledge that it is authoritative. Professor Hoffman says:— ARSH June 26, 1900, page 409.5
Every man, because he is a man, is endowed with powers for forming judgments, and he is placed in this world to develop and apply those powers to all the objects with which he comes in contact. In every sphere of investigation he should being with doubt, and the student will make the most rapid progress who has acquired the art of doubting well.... We ask that every student of theology take up the subject precisely as he would any other science; that he being with doubt. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 409.6
Bear in mind that this is concerning the study of theology; and theology is “the science concerned with ascertaining, classifying, and systematizing all attainable truth concerning God and his relation to the universe; the science of religion; religious truth scientifically stated.” With this, remember also that the Lord himself has spoken, declaring that “without faith it is impossible to please him,” and “whatsoever is not of faith is sin.” ARSH June 26, 1900, page 409.7
These things, therefore, simply show that in the schools of to-day, in which is taught particularly the science of the knowledge of God, the process is directly the opposite of that which is stated by the Lord himself. God has said that “he that cometh to God must BELIEVE that he is, and [must believe] that he is a rewarder of them that deligently seek him.” The process of education to-day, in the schools which teach the science of God, is, inevitably, that he who comes to God must doubt that he is, and must doubt that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 409.8
The result of such a process can be nothing else than that each mind shall create its own god, according to the dictates of its own reason. Nor is this simply a deduction from the quotation already made, though it is clearly deducible from that quotation. It is actually stated in the sentences immediately following the one quoted. And here they are:— ARSH June 26, 1900, page 409.9
We ask that every student of theology take up the subject precisely as he would any other science; that he begin with doubt, and carefully weigh the arguments for every doctrine, accepting or rejecting each assertion according as the balance of probabilities is for or against it. We demand that he thoroughly “test all things,” and thus learn how to “hold fast that which is good.” ARSH June 26, 1900, page 409.10
We believe that even the teachings of Jesus should be viewed from this standpoint, and should be accepted or rejected on the ground of their inherent reasonableness. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 410.1
Thus, reason being set above God, and above Jesus Christ, to analyze, to criticize, and to judge, becomes, itself, the god. In this process, as thus authoritatively defined, it is proper enough that doubt should be pre-eminent, because, as has been truly said, “The highest effort of reason he is to produce doubt.” ARSH June 26, 1900, page 410.2
Let us, then, follow this process a little, in its direct working. Again we quote:— ARSH June 26, 1900, page 410.3
The great and distinctive element in all induction is the formation of the hypothesis, and there can be no inductive science formed, of any sort, where this is not the chief feature. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 410.4
When, then, is to be understood by a hypothesis, and what is the process the mind goes through in bringing it to view?—A hypothesis is a supposition, a guess or conjecture, as to what the general fact is which includes the given particular facts, or what the cause is which has brought about the given effects.... ARSH June 26, 1900, page 410.5
Much might be said about the conditions most favorable for making a good hypothesis; but the chief thing that concerns us for our present purpose is the fact that every hypothesis, however formed, is always a product of the constructive imagination. All previous acts are simply by way of gathering material for the imagination to rearrange and recombine into a new creation. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 410.6
In a certain sense, the mind takes a leap into the dark. It literally passes, per saltum [by a leap], from the realm of the known to the realm of the unknown. From all the material that the memory places at its disposal it makes a guess, or conjecture, as to what will best meet all the exigencies of the situation. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 410.7
It is for this reason that men of science, in all realms and in all ages, have always been men of powerful imaginations. The Greeks were the first great scientists of the race, because they were far more highly endowed than any other people with great imaginative powers. What they saw excited these powers, and urged them to conjecture, to reason about things, and try to explain their nature and cause. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 410.8
How could this process be more clearly or more fitly described than it is in Romans 1:21, 22? “When they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.” And the rest of that description will follow as certainly as this process shall be followed. For, even in the quotation made, it is admitted that this process is identical with that of old, of which the Greeks, “the first great scientists of the race,” were the exemplars, “because they were far more highly endowed than any other people with great imaginative powers.” ARSH June 26, 1900, page 410.9
But let us follow the process farther, and see what is the ground upon which it finally lands, as to knowledge:— ARSH June 26, 1900, page 410.10
Given the hypothesis, the next step in the scientific process is to verify it; and this is done by making the hypothesis the major premise of a deductive syllogism, and noting the results. If the conclusions obtained coincide with the observed facts with which we started, the hypothesis is probably a correct one [italics here are the author’s], and, other things being equal, may be accepted as an established truth. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 410.11
From this outline of the scientific method we see that no induction can be established beyond a high degree of probability; that is, no one can ever be absolutely certain that the hypothesis he assumes is a veritable truth. All generalizations in every science thus have their logical basis in the theory of probabilities. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 410.12
When Bishop Butler asserted that “probability is the very guide of life,” he might have added, “and we have no other.” ... ARSH June 26, 1900, page 410.13
Great thinkers, from Thales, Plato, and Moses, have had their theologies,—their explanations of the origin and nature of the universe, as they understood it,—and many of these explanations have been of extraordinary merit; but even St. Paul himself could never have been certain that his explanation was more than a probably true one. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 410.14
As to knowledge, then, the result of this process is exactly described in 2 Timothy 3:7: “Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.” And, as if he would make it absolutely certain that this is the sole ground, as to knowledge, which can ever be reached by this process. Professor Hoffman really goes to the limit, and declares:— ARSH June 26, 1900, page 410.15
Whether there ever existed on the earth such a person as Jesus, and what he experienced, are purely matters of historical evidence. And as everything that is a matter of evidence is a matter of probability, this must be also. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 410.16
And thus the process of education as it is to-day, ends, as well as beings, only in doubt. Its beginning, its course, and its end, is doubt, and only doubt. And instead of doubt being indeed, as is professed, the pedagogue to lead to knowledge, upon the authority of its own masters it is seen to be what it is in truth—the positive and chosen obstruction to all knowledge. Is it any wonder that students lose their religion while they are getting that education? In real truth, Christianity has to be abandoned in order to get that education; for Christianity is faith that knows, while that education is only doubt that never can know. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 410.17
Surely, there is needed, and sorely needed, to-day, an educational reform. And since the educational process of to-day is one in which doubt is the beginning, the course, and the end, it is certain that the only true educational reform for to-day is one in which faith is the beginning, the course, and the end: and that faith, the faith of Jesus Christ—the faith which enables him who exercises it to “comprehend,” to “understand,” and to “know” the truth, and only the truth—the truth as it is in Jesus. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 410.18
It is the truth that, in the change of the Sabbath, this tearing down of God’s memorial and exalting in its place the papal counterfeit by the government of the United States, in 1892-93, under the threats of the apostate Protestantism of the National Reform combination, the government of the United States was delivered over to the spirit of disorder and lawlessness, as really as was the Roman Empire in the fourth century. And that lawlessness, individual and national, will here increase, as it did in the Roman Empire of the fourth century, until it shall swallow up in ruin this nation, as it swallowed up in ruin the Roman Empire. ARSH June 26, 1900, page 410.19