C. The Mission of the Third Angel’s Message

During the period 1845-49 the third angel’s message gradually emerged and became the central theme of the new Sabbatarian Adventist theology of mission. Much time was spent in theological reflection and discussion, and basic differences were ironed out at a series of conferences in 1848.FSDA 192.1

In 1849 the emphasis of the third angel’s message was on “the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus” (Revelation 14:12). It was designated as “present truth” and considered the sealing message which was to protect its adherents from God’s final judgments. Those who rejected this message would eventually receive the mark of the beast.FSDA 192.2

Developments after 1849 dealt with a further quest into the significance of Revelation 14:12 and its relation to the spiritual, mental and physical dimensions of man, the interpretation of “the beast and his image” (Revelation 14:9, 11); the implications of God’s wrath (Revelation 14:10, 11); the future missionary role of the third angel, and its relationship to the other angels’ messages. During the years the third angel’s message was developed into a more elaborate theological system which became the basic structure of the SDA theology of mission.FSDA 192.3

1. The central theme of the third angel

The central theme of the third angel’s message was described in Rev. 14:12: “Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.” In 1849 the phrase “the commandments of God” was identified with the continued validity of the Decalogue with special emphasis on the Sabbath, the expression “the faith of Jesus” equated with the past Advent experience, ^{1[J. White], “Repairing the Breach,” p. 28; Edson, “Beloved Brethren,” p. 34. At this time the terms “faith of Jesus” and “testimony of Jesus” were used interchangeably ([J. White] “Repairing the Breach,” p. 28). Cf. [J. White], “Angels No. 4,” p. 71 (AR, p. 25). He paraphrased Revelation 14:12; 12:17 as “the commandments of the Father” and “the faith or testimony of the Son” (ibid.).} and the central theme incorporated into the earliest Sabbatarian Adventist hymnbook entitled Hymns for God’s Peculiar People That Keep the Commandments of God and the Faith of Jesus. ^{2[J. White], Hymns. Cf. titles of hymnbooks published in 1852, 1855 and 1869.} FSDA 192.4

In 1850 J. White stated that the open door of the Philadelphian church (Revelation 3:8) pointed to the new insights in the significance of the Decalogue after 1844 which gave relevance and power to Revelation 14:12. ^{3J. White, “TAM,” pp. 68, 69 (TAM, p. 14).} When in November 1850 the periodicals the Present Truth emphasizing the Sabbath doctrine and the Advent Review stressing the 1844 Advent experience were united into the Second Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, Revelation 14:12 was chosen as its motto. ^{4See, RH, Nov. 1850, p. 1. For nearly a century Revelation 14:12 appeared under the title or name of this periodical. After Dec. 29, 1938, it was discontinued, probably because of a diminishing historical consciousness of the SDA self-image. The abbreviation of the name of the periodical to Review since Sept. 7, 1967 might also be attributed to similar reasons. In March 18, 1971 the original title was reintroduced but at the same time the popular title Review was retained. In 1853 E. G. White said that the RH was “the only paper in the land owned and approved of God” (Letter, E. G. White to the Dodges, No. 5, 1853). To J. White it had to be “the best religious paper in the world” (“The Review and Herald,” RH, Dec. 6, 1870, p. 200).} In this way both aspects of the central missionary message-the Sabbath and the Advent experience-had been united in the name and motto of the periodical which was the representative voice of the theological views of the Sabbatarian Adventists. ^{6The necessity for this visual aid was stressed in a vision (Letter, E. G. White to the Lovelands, No. 26, 1850; Letter, E. G. White to the Church in Hastings’ House, No. 28, 1850). Samuel W. Rhodes (1813-83) had been a Millerite preacher. In 1850, through the influence of Edson, he became a Sabbatarian Adventist and participated in missionary work.} In 1850 Nichols published a Pictorial Illustration of the Visions of Daniel & John designed by Samuel W. Rhodes. On this chart the third angel was indicated by the motto “The Commandments of God and the Faith of Jesus.” When in 1863 J. White designed a prophetic chart (Appendix V), no change was made in regard to the central message of the third angel. In 1851 E. G. White stated that Revelation 14:12 in connection with the sanctuary doctrine could very well “explain the past Advent movement, show what is our present position, and establish the faith of the doubting, and give certainty to the glorious future.” ^{1E. G. White, CEV, p. 51 (Early Writings, 63).} She added that these “were the principal subjects on which the messengers should dwell.” ^2Ibid. Cottrell indicated the importance of Revelation 14:12 by calling it “the primitive, apostolic platform” upon which “the remnant of God’s people” would be brought together. ^{3Cottrell, “Unity,” p. 125 (Unity, p. 16).}FSDA 193.1

During the 1850s various attempts were made to define the “faith of Jesus.” In 1851 E. G. White wrote that “the faith of Jesus takes in the whole life and divine character of Christ.” ^{4Letter, E. G. White to [Stephen] Pierce, No. 2, 1851.} In the same year J. White said that the faith of Jesus “embraces all the doctrines and precepts taught by Christ and his apostles, peculiar to the new covenant.” ^{5[J. White], “Angels No. 4,” p. 71 (AR, p. 26).} In 1852 he defined it as embracing (1) “all the requirements and doctrines of the New Testament, peculiar to this dispensation” which included “every requirement peculiar to the gospel,” (2) “the suffering, death, resurrection and ascension of Christ, also his priesthood in the True Tabernacle above, including his work of cleansing the Sanctuary since the termination of the 2,300 days, and his coming the second time in glory to reign in judgment,” (3) the good works mentioned in Mt. 5:2-16, particularly the missionary obligation to be the “salt of the earth” and the “light of the world.” ^{7[J. White], “The Faith of Jesus,” RH, March 7, 1854, p. 53.} In 1854 he expressed the phrase “faith of Jesus” more concisely as “the gospel system, embracing all the doctrines and requirements spoken by Jesus in person, and those written by his inspired apostles.” Not everyone had accepted such interpretation because in 1857 some believers confined the expression as a reference to the healing of the sick. In an attempt to change this view E. G. White pointed out that “it is not healing the sick, merely, but it is all the teachings of Jesus in the New Testament. ‘The Commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.’ I saw that it was the whole New Testament which relates to Jesus.”FSDA 194.1

For several years the term “the testimony of Jesus” (Revelation 12:17) was used synonymously with “the faith of Jesus.” ^{9See supra, pp. 141; 193, n. 209. In describing the differences between the various Sabbath-observing religious groups on the basis of Revelation 12:17, Bates said that the Jews did not believe the testimony of Jesus, the Seventh Day Baptists accepted only part of it, but those belonging to the Philadelphian church acknowledged the whole testimony as expounded by the sanctuary theology and the angels’ messages (“The Holy Sabbath,” RH, April 7, 1851, p. 58).} In 1855, as a result of a renewed emphasis on the function and value of spiritual gifts among Sabbatarian Adventists, a new interpretation of the testimony of Jesus began to emerge. According to J. White, the only biblical answer as to the meaning of this term was found in Revelation 19:10, “the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.” ^{1J. White, “The Testimony of Jesus,” RH, Dec. 18, 1855, p. 92. Cf. Editorial, “‘False Prophets,’” p. 124.} Interpreting Revelation 12:17 in this light he suggested that it was especially the “spirit of prophecy” within the remnant of God’s people which would provoke the anger of the dragon. ^{2J. White, “Testimony of Jesus,” pp. 92, 93. Cf. Letter, James Newman, True Day Star, Dec. 29, 1845, p. 4.} The term “spirit of prophecy” came to be associated with the testimony of E. G. White. ^{3In order to make the view of E. G. White as being a manifestation of spiritual gifts within the church more acceptable, a publication appeared which provided evidence for the doctrine of the perpetuity of the New Testament gifts of the Spirit throughout the history of the Christian church. See Cornell, Miraculous Powers ..., 1862. J. White wrote the introductory essay, “Perpetuity of Spiritual Gifts” (Perpetuity of Spiritual Gifts, [1870]).} This interpretation was generally accepted and integrated into the missionary proclamation of the SDA Church, but it did not become as prominent as the central message of Revelation 14:12.FSDA 194.2

2. The “beast and his image.”

The next step in the quest for the significance of the third angel was the interpretation of “the beast and his image” which formed the key to the understanding of Revelation 14:9-11. In 1851 one of the most influential attempts in this direction was made by Andrews, who determined the meaning of this expression in the context of the symbolism of Revelation 13 in which it was used several times. ^{4Andrews, “Revelation,” pp. 82-86. See e.g., his influence in Bates, “The Beast with Seven Heads,” RH, Aug. 5, 1851, p. 4; [J. White], “Angels No. 4,” pp. 69, 70 (AR, pp. 14-20); Loughborough, “THB,” RH, March 21, 1854, pp. 65-67, 73-75, 79 (THB, 1854).}FSDA 195.1

a. The beast.FSDA 195.2

Andrews identified the beast of Revelation 14:9-11 as the beast of Revelation 13:1-10, the latter of which was identified with the fourth beast of Daniel 7. The identification of the first beast of Revelation 13 with the fourth of Daniel 7 he based on the fact that (1) in John’s time three of the beasts (empires) ^{5See supra, p. 23.} had passed away, making it logical that only Daniel’s fourth beast was shown to John; (2) both beasts ascended out of the sea. ^{6Andrews, “Revelation,” p. 82.} He concluded that the beast of Revelation 13 “is evidently the Papal form of the fourth beast, for it receives its seat and dominion from the dragon [Revelation 13:2], Rome Pagan. The seat is Rome, which was given to him at the same time that his power was given.” ^{7Ibid. Later he added that “the seat of the empire was by the emperor Constantine removed from Rome to Constantinople. And that Rome itself at a later period, was given to the Popes by the emperor Justinian” (“TAR,” RH, March 20, 1855, p. 194 [TAR, p. 74]). Cf. E. G. White, The Spirit of Prophecy 4:276. She said that “through the great powers controlled by paganism and the papacy, symbolized by the dragon and the leopard-like beast, Satan for many centuries destroyed God’s faithful witnesses.” Later she defined more precisely that “while the dragon primarily, represents Satan, it is, in a secondary sense, a symbol of pagan Rome” (The Great Controversy, 438).} The period of persecution under this beast during forty-two months (Revelation 13:5), or 1260 years, terminating in 1798 with a “deadly wound [Revelation 13:3] which has been healed,” was also seen to support his views of Revelation 13:1-10. ^{1Andrews, “Revelation,” p. 82. The history of the first beast as described in Revelation 13:1-3 he saw repeated in Revelation 13:4-10 (“TAR,” p. 194 [TAR, pp. 74, 75]).} Andrews’ interpretation closely followed that of Litch. ^{2See Litch, PE, I, 95-105; Litch, The Restitution ..., 1848, pp. 119, 120. Litch’s arguments for the identity of the little horn of Daniel 7 with Revelation 13:1-10 were adopted by Sabbatarian Adventists. These arguments were: “1. The little horn was to be a blasphemous power. ‘He shall speak great words against the Most High.’ Daniel 7:25. So, also was the beast of Revelation 13:6, to do the same. ‘He opened his mouth in blasphemy against God.’ 2. The little horn ‘made war with the saints and prevailed against them.’ Daniel 7:21. Thus the beast of Revelation 13:7, ‘was to make war with the saints, and to overcome them.’ 3. The little horn had ‘a mouth that spake very great things.’ Daniel 7:8, 20. So, likewise, there was given the beast of Revelation 13:5, ‘a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies.’ 4. Power was given the little horn of Daniel 7:25, ‘until a time, times, and the dividing of time.’ To the beast, also, power was given ‘to continue forty and two months.’ Revelation 13:5. 5. The dominion of the little horn was to be taken away at the termination of that specified period. The beast of Revelation 13:10, who led into captivity and put to death with the sword so many of the saints, was himself to be led into captivity and killed with the sword, at the end of the forty and two months” (Andrews; “TAR,” pp. 193, 194 [TAR, p. 73]; Litch, Restitution, pp. 119, 120). Cf. Litch, PE, I, 96, 97. See also supra, p. 25. One year before Andrews published his views, Geo. W. Holt mentioned the Roman Catholic Church as “the beast” of Revelation 13:1 (Letter, Geo. W. Holt to Dear Brethren, The Present Truth, March 1850, p. 74). [Rhodes], 1850 Chart, defined Revelation 13:1-7 as “papal Rome.” So did Bates, “Beast with Seven Heads,” p. 3.}FSDA 195.3

b. The two-horned beast.FSDA 196.1

In order to define the “image of the beast” it was first necessary to determine the significance of the “two-horned beast” (Revelation 13:11-18). Andrews felt that the two-horned beast was “another and distinct power,” not another form of the fourth beast of Daniel 7 or the first beast of Revelation 13 healed of its deadly wound, or the Roman Catholic Church as some Millerites had believed. ^{3Andrews, “Revelation,” p. 82. Cf. Miller, ESH, 1836, p. 56. Litch had taken the position that Napoleon Bonaparte was the two-horned beast (PE, I, 106, 107), but in 1848 he had given up this view and expected that power to develop in the future (Restitution, pp. 132, 133).} Some interpreters who seemed to have made similar observations associated this beast with Protestantism. ^{4See e.g., John Bacon, Conjectures on the Prophecies; Written in the Fore Part of the Year 1799, 1805, p. 26; Samuel M. M’Corkle, Thoughts on the Millennium, with a Comment on the Revelations ..., 1830, pp. 54-58. Some called the two-horned beast the “Image Beast,” e.g., J. White, A Word to the Little Flock, 8-10; Letter, Holt to Dear Brethren, p. 64. [Rhodes], 1850 Chart, designated it as “Image of Papacy.” [J. White], 1863 Chart (Appendix A), indicated it as “Protestantism.” To Edson it was “Protestant Rome” (“Appeal,” p. 9). Prior to Andrews the most extensive treatment of the two-horned beast was by Edson (ibid., pp. 9, 10, 12, 13). For a discussion on the various interpretations, see Loughborough, “THB,” p. 65 (THB, pp. 1-7); Andrews, “TAR,” pp. 194, 195 (TAR, pp. 77-86). Similarities in action between the two-horned beast and the false prophet (Revelation 19:20) suggested to Andrews that they were identical. Their contextual situations seemed to him of a complementary nature, for “the Bible gives us the origin of the two-horned beast, but does not, under that name, give us its final destiny. The origin of the false prophet is not given under that name but his destiny is dearly revealed” (“Revelation,” p. 84). Cf. Editorial, “Human Sympathy,” JS, Aug. 7, 1845, p. 165.} In determining the time of its appearance in history, Andrews said that from its rise it would be “a power cotemporary [sic] with the beast whose deadly wound was healed [Revelation 13:12],” because the two-horned beast “exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him” (13:12). ^{1Andrews, “Revelation,” p. 82. The healing of the wound (Revelation 13:3) of the Roman Catholic Church Bates dated from 1815 onward (“Beast with Seven Heads,” p. 4). Cf. [J. White], “Angels No. 4,” p. 69 (AR, p. 14).} He concluded that it would “come on the stage of action about the close of the first beast’s dominion, at the end of the 1260 years” ^{2Andrews, “Revelation,” p. 82. Cf. E. G. White, The Spirit of Prophecy 4:276.} and was to “cause the world to worship the first beast whose deadly wound was healed, which shows that its period of action is this side of 1798.” ^{3Andrews, “Revelation,” p. 82. In this context he quoted Litch who had said that “the two-horned beast is represented as a power existing and performing his part, after the death and revival of the first beast.... I think it is a power yet to be developed or made manifest as an accomplice of the Papacy in subjecting the world” (ibid.; Litch, Restitution, pp. 131, 133).}FSDA 196.2

The identification of the two-horned beast Andrews based on a number of arguments: (1) “The location of the two-horned beast is not in the ten kingdoms of the fourth beast” because the first beast of Revelation 13 did not give its seat to another power. ^{4Andrews, “Revelation,” p. 82.} (2) His allusion to a theory that the course of the world empires was westward indicated that “the seat of the Babylonian and Persian empires was in Asia. The seat of the Grecian and Roman empires was in Europe. The Roman empire, in its divided state as represented by the ten horns, occupies all the remaining territory west to the Atlantic Ocean. Hence we still look westward for the rise of the power described in this prophecy.” ^{5Ibid., pp. 82, 83.} (3) The third angel’s message “pertains almost entirely to the action of the two-horned beast,” making it “the last one with which the people of God are connected” (cf. Revelation 14:9-11 with 13:11-18). ^{7Andrews, “Revelation,” p. 83.} (4) The westward course of Christianity implied that the territory of the two-horned beast “is to be the field of the angels’ messages, the land where the crowning truths of the gospel, ere it finishes its course, are to be brought out.” (5) The rise of the two-horned beast was different from that of the beasts of Daniel 7 and the first beast of Revelation 13. These latter beasts arose out of the sea as a result of the striving of the winds (Daniel 7:2, 3; Revelation 13:1) and symbolized the overturning of “the powers that preceded them, by means of general war.” This was a direct contrast to the rise of the second beast of Revelation 13 which “seems to arise in a peaceful, or lamb-like manner from the earth.” On the basis of these arguments Andrews was led to conclude that the two-horned beast pointed to nothing less than the U.S.A. He added that since its discovery, this country had been a refuge for many Christians who desired to obtain religious freedom during the Reformation and post-Reformation times. The fact that these people “did not establish their power by overturning another power, but ... planted themselves in an uncultivated waste and laid the foundation of a new government” was typical of the emerging two-horned beast “out of the earth” (Revelation 13:11) in a “peaceful manner.” ^{1Andrews, “Revelation,” p. 83. He supported this view with a description of the progress and power of the U.S.A. by The Dublin Nation, n.d. Cf. E. G. White, The Spirit of Prophecy 4:277.} In summary he stated that the progress of our own country since its first settlement, has indeed been wonderful. We trace its rise from the time of its settlement by those who fled from the oppression of the fourth empire, onward till it assumes its station among the great powers of earth, a little previous to the end of the 1260 years. Its territory has trebled since that period, by addition of the vast territories of Louisiana, Florida, Texas, New Mexico and California, and the extension of an undisputed title to Oregon. Thus extending its dominion to the vast Pacific. This power was seen arising from the earth, as though it had not time to develop itself in full, before the end. Mark its onward progress and tell, if it be possible, what would be its destiny, if the coming of the Just One should not check its astonishing career? ^{2Andrews, “Revelation,” p. 83.}FSDA 197.1

Additional evidence for its location was provided by Loughborough in 1854. The characteristic of the two-horned beast, exercising “all the power of the first beast before him” (Revelation 13:12), he interpreted on the basis of the translation by Nathan N. Whiting ^{3Whiting, The Good News of Our Lord, the Anointed; from the Critical Greek Text of Tittman, 1849. This was a translation of the N.T. based on the Greek text of J. A. H. Tittman as revised by Aug. Hahn and edited by Prof. Edward Robinson, 1842.} which used the expression “in his sight” instead of “before him.” Thus Loughborough could remark that “the Papal beast exists on the eastern continent; his seat is definitely at Rome; and while the two-horned beast is located in the west, and is performing his wonders, they of the eastern world behold, wondering.” ^{4Loughborough, “THB,” p. 73 (THB, p. 25). Cf. Smith’s analysis of the major powers of the Eastern and Western Hemisphere in relation to prophetic symbolism (“The United States in the Light of Prophecies,” RH, Oct. 17, 1871, p. 141 [The United States ..., 1872, pp. 16-19]). His conclusion was that “of all the symbols mentioned, one, the two-horned beast of Revelation 13, is left; and of all the countries of the earth respecting which any reason exists why they should be mentioned in prophecy, the United States alone is left. Do the two-horned beast and the United States belong together? If they do, then all the symbols find an application, and all the ground is covered” (ibid., p. 141 [United States, p. 19]).} The existence of slavery in the United States at that time he saw as another confirmation of the locality of the two-horned beast and stated that Revelation 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,” indicated that the two-horned beast was to operate “where there are ‘bondmen.’” ^{5Loughborough, “THB,” p. 75 (THB, p. 39).} Reviewing the slavery situation in the world he concluded that the fact that “all other nations have abolished slavery, or declared it to be piracy, and the traffic is dying away” while it still existed in the U.S.A. was firm evidence as to the territory of the two-horned beast. ^{1Ibid., p. 75 (THB, p. 40). On the slavery situation in the world he quoted from an article on the Nebraska Bill, New York Tribune, Feb. 18, 1854 (ibid.).}FSDA 198.1

The symbolic significance of the lamb-like horns of the two-horned beast Andrews determined through illustrations from Daniel 7 and Daniel 8. He referred to the commonly accepted idea that the horns of the ram of Daniel 8 symbolized the kings of Media and Persia, the great horn of the goat (Greece) indicated its first king, the ten horns of the fourth beast of Daniel 7 signified the ten kingdoms of the divided Roman empire, and “the little horn which came up after them denoted the Papal church which was afterward clothed with civil power.” ^{2Andrews, “Revelation,” p. 83.} Thus, he inferred, “it is evident that the horns of these beasts, symbolize the entire power of the beasts. From these facts we learn that the horns of the preceding beast [Revelation 13:1-10; Daniel 7:7, 8, 19-22], denoted civil and religious powers. Hence we regard the horns of this latter beast [Revelation 13:11] as symbols of civil and religious power.” ^3Ibid. Being more specific, he said that the horns of the two-horned beast represented “the civil and religious power of this nation-its Republican civil power, and its Protestant ecclesiastical power.” ^{4Ibid. Earlier Bacon referred to the “mild and benevolent principles of civil and religious liberty, which constitute the equal rights of men” (Conjectures on the Prophecies, p. 27). Cf. E. G. White, The Spirit of Prophecy 4:277. To the objection that the republican civil power was a form of government and that it, therefore, ought to represent the beast rather than a horn, Andrews replied that “the civil power of the Macedonian kingdom, was represented by the great horn of the goat. And that when that civil power was broken the beast still remained, and in the place of that one civil government, four arose in its stead. And we may add further that when the dominion of the different beasts of Daniel 7, was taken away, their lives were prolonged for a season and time [Daniel 7:12]. That is the nation still lived, though the dominion of the nation was destroyed. Hence we understand that the beasts denote the nations which constitute the different kingdoms, and the horns of the beasts denote the civil government or governments of these nations” (“Revelation,” p. 83). The objection that Protestantism cannot be applied to a horn he answered by stating that “Papacy was reckoned as a horn, before it had plucked up three of the first horns [Daniel 7:8],-before it had civil power conferred on it” (ibid.). One year earlier Holt referred to the Protestant and Republican character of the “image beast” when he identified the two-horned beast with the image (Letter, Holt to Dear Brethren, p. 64). To Edson the two horns signified the “civil and ecclesiastical power” (“Appeal,” p. 9). H. S. Case, who was a Sabbatarian Adventist minister for a few years, determined the character of the two-horned beast by comparing it with the first beast of Revelation 13. He stated that “the two horned beast is the power of Church and State. It is an ‘image’ of the Papal Beast to whom the dragon gave ‘his power, and his seat, and great authority.’ The Papal Beast was church and state united. An image must be like the thing imitated; therefore, the image-beast is composed of church and state united-Protestant churches and Republicanism” (Letter, Hiram S. Case to J. White, The Present Truth, November 1850, p. 85). The references to Republicanism and Protestantism on the 1850 Chart are not absolute evidence of an 1850 position, for their presence was the result of later changes ([Rhodes], 1850 Chart).} In summarizing his interpretation he said that no civil power could ever compare with Republicanism in its ladylike character. The grand principle recognized by this form of power is thus expressed: “All men are born free and equal, and endowed with certain inalienable rights, as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Hence, all have a right to participate in making the laws, and in designating who shall execute them. Was there ever a development of civil power so lamb-like before? And what, in religious matters, can be compared with Protestantism? Its leading sentiment is the distinct recognition of the right of private judgment in matters of conscience. “The Bible is the only religion of Protestants.” Was there ever in the religious world any thing to equal this in its lamb-like professions? Such we consider the meaning of the “two horns like a lamb.” ^{1Andrews, “Revelation,” p. 83. Cf. E. G. White, The Great Controversy, 441. M. E. Cornell, an influential Sabbatarian Adventist, defined the profession of the two horns by stating that “the Republican’s creed is the Declaration of Independence. The Protestant’s creed is the Bible” (“The Two Horns,” RH, Feb. 4, 1862, p. 78).}FSDA 199.1

The command of the two-horned beast “to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast” (Revelation 13:14) was interpreted by Loughborough as clear evidence of an action by the republican form of the United States government, indicating that “the dwellers on earth, or the territory of this beast ... have a part to act in this work.” ^{2Loughborough, “THB,” p. 74 (THB, p. 37). Cf. E. G. White, The Great Controversy, 443.} It portrayed, he said, especially “the manner in which laws are made here: by the representatives of the people.” ^{3Loughborough, “THB,” p. 74 (THB, p. 37). He added that “as all men by the declaration, are declared to be ‘equal’, it became necessary that some course should be taken by which all could have equal privileges in the construction of the laws. If the whole mass were called together, there would be an endless discussion and no laws made. Therefore, the people were to elect such representatives as would carry out their principles; and they were to meet and make laws, which, when passed, should be considered the laws of the people. The image is to be formed by the people or their representatives” (ibid., pp. 74,75 [THB, pp. 37, 38]).} Smith saw in this text “that the supreme power is vested in the people, and that the government is consequently republican.” ^{4Smith, “Thoughts on Revelation,” RH, Nov. 11, 1862, p. 188. Cf. Smith, Revelation, 221.}FSDA 200.1

The absence of crowns on the horns of the two-horned beast (in contrast with those of the first beast of Revelation 13) Andrews interpreted as another allusion to the U.S.A. because the “two-horned beast is emphatically a government of the people; and whatever is done by the people may be said to be done by the beast.” ^{5Andrews, “TAR,” RH, April 3, 1855, p. 201 (TAR, p. 95).} To Smith its significance was that “this power is not monarchical or kingly.” ^{6Smith, “Revelation,” p. 188. Cf. Smith, Revelation, 220, 221.} The relevance of this argument has to be seen against the background that the monarchy was the generally accepted form of government at that time.FSDA 200.2

The technological advancement in the U.S.A. Andrews saw as one possible fulfillment of Revelation 13:13, “And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men.” He observed that “‘the increase of knowledge’ [Daniel 12:4] in every department of the arts and sciences, has indeed been without precedent in the world’s past history.” ^{7Andrews, “Revelation,” p. 84. He commented: “We see the chariots with the speed of lightning coursing their way through the land, and with similar speed are men enabled to traverse the mighty deep. Nahum 2. ‘The fire of God’ (the lightning, Job 1:16; Exodus 9:16) is literally brought down from heaven. Such is the wonderful power man has obtained over the elements. And the lightning thus brought down from heaven is sent as a messenger from one end of the land to the other. They ‘send the lightnings, and they go and say here we are!’ Job 38:35. And all those wonders bid fair to be eclipsed by others still astonishing’ (ibid.). Cf. Edson, “Appeal,” p. 12; Loughborough, “THB,” p. 74 (THB, pp. 31-33). Regarding Daniel 12:4 Miller said: “View this in any point you please, whether theological or scientifical, it is literally true in this day of invention and improvement, knowledge increases” (ESH, 1836, p. 214). Cf. supra, p. 51. In 1869 Andrews interpreted the bringing down of fire from heaven as an imminent future event (“The Proclamation of Revelation 14:9-12,” RH, June 22, 1869, p. 204).} The complete fulfillment of Revelation 13:13, however, he ascribed to wonders of a different class: It was Spiritualism or “necromancy” that would deceive the world. ^{1Andrews, “Revelation,” p. 84. He said: “We notice those astonishing developments from the land of spirits, which are causing the world to wonder. It would seem that communications with the spirits of the departed dead are now freely held, and men are brought into immediate connection with the spirit world. Such communications, though rare in past ages, have become of every day occurrence.... And Protestants are the chief actors in all this” (ibid.) Cf. Edson, “Appeal,” p. 13; Loughborough, “THB,” p. 74 (THB, pp. 34, 35); Andrews, “TAR,” p. 202 (TAR, pp. 99-103).} He also indicated that the principles of Republicanism and Protestantism could be considered as wonders necessary to liberate the oppressed of the world, ^{2Andrews, “Revelation,” p. 84. He remarked: “What is needed throughout the world to relieve its inhabitants of their oppressions, but that Republicanism should remodel all their civil governments? The leaven of its principles has deeply diffused itself throughout the nations of earth. In proof of this, witness the revolution of 1848, which shook nearly all the thrones of Europe. And what is so well calculated to develop, and to maintain religious freedom, as Protestantism. With the diffusion of these free principles may we not expect a scene of prosperity and triumph to the church; a period of emancipation to the poor enslaved nations of earth?” (ibid.).} for they would raise the expectation of many that the moment had arrived for “the ushering in of the period when the nation shall learn war no more, and a universal spiritual kingdom shall be set up and fill the whole earth. Micah 4:1-5.” ^{4Ibid. Cf. Edson, “Appeal,” p. 12.} The reality, according to Andrews, was quite different because the rejection of the Advent truth had left “the great mass ... to the deception which is already beginning to come on the nations of earth.... Peace and safety is the delusive dream in which men indulge whilst the wrath of God hangs over them.”FSDA 200.3

On the deceptive character of the two-horned beast with its pretensions of being a lamb but in reality manifesting dragon-like qualities, Andrews remarked that in appearance it was “the mildest form of power which ever existed, but it is after having deceived the world with its wonders, to exhibit all the tyranny of the first beast.” ^{5Andrews, “Revelation,” p. 84.} In the current political situation in the U.S.A. he saw evidences for this paradoxical character in the contrast between the statement of the Declaration of Independence that “all men are born free and equal” and the fact that there were “three millions of slaves in bondage.... reduced to the rank of chattels personal, and bought and sold like brute beasts.” ^{6Ibid. Loughborough expressed that the “very national executive body, who have before them this declaration of Independence, and profess to be carrying out its principles, can pass laws by which 3,500,000 slaves can be held in bondage. Slaves, what are they! men like ourselves, except perhaps in their complexion. The Declaration of Independence should have a clause supplied, and should read, All men are created free and equal except 3,500,000” (“THB,” p. 66 [THB, p. 14]). He also attacked vigorously the Fugitive Slave Law, the efforts in Virginia to keep the blacks illiterate, and the condemnation of a slave to be burned at the stake (ibid., pp. 66, 67 [THB, pp. 14-18]). The interpretation of Revelation 13:16 in the context of slavery was one of the reasons why for many years the SDA were not successful in penetrating the southern part of the U.S.A. (Roger G. Davis, “Conscientious cooperators: The Seventh-day Adventists and Military Service, 1860-1945,” Ph.D. dissertation, 1970, pp. 47, 48). After the Civil War, the slavery interpretation was disregarded. Cf. Andrews, TAR, pp. 105, 109 with Andrews, The Three Messages ..., 3rd ed., rev., 1872, pp. 87, 91.} The religious side of this paradox he found in the expulsion of the Adventists from the churches during their 1843-44 experience, which indicated a violation of “the right of private judgment,” for greater value was placed on the creeds of the religious bodies than on the word of God. ^{1Andrews, “Revelation,” p. 84. The formulation of a creed was considered by Loughborough as the first step in apostasy and the basis for the formation of both the beast and his image (“The Image of the Beast,” RH, Jan. 15, 1861, p. 69; “Battle Creek Conference Report,” RH, April 30, 1861, p. 189).} His future outlook on the U.S.A. was that it would enforce at the penalty of death the claims of the first beast so that the world would receive the special mark of the Roman Catholic Church, the institution of the Sunday. ^{2Andrews, “Revelation,” p. 85.}FSDA 201.1

Already in 1854 Loughborough saw trends toward a religious persecution. ^{3Loughborough, “THB,” p. 67 (THB, pp. 18-23). Cf. Letter, Mary L. Priest to Editor, RH, Oct. 18, 1853, p. 120.} The articles of the Constitution which he and other Sabbatarian Adventists highly valued were those safeguarding the principles of religious freedom based on a separation of Church and State:FSDA 202.1

Constitution of the United States. Art. 6. Sec. 2.FSDA 202.2

“This constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, ... shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.”FSDA 202.3

Sec. 3. “The members of the several state Legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States, and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation to support the constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to office or public trust under the United States.”FSDA 202.4

Amendments to the Constitution. Art. 1st.FSDA 202.5

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” ^{4Loughborough, “THB,” p. 67 (THB, pp. 18, 19). In this article he supported his interpretation with a letter of George Washington to a Baptist society in Virginia, Aug. 4, 1789, regarding the Constitution and religious liberty.}FSDA 202.6

In Loughborough’s opinion these articles had been violated by the two-horned beast in regard to Sunday legislation. He stated that the Constitution is already transgressed in a large number of the States of this Union; in the northern portion there are laws respecting the resting from labor on the first day of the week. And in four states of the Union at least, the laws are such, that the rights of those are infringed upon who keep the seventh day, because they do not also keep the first. ^{1Ibid. p. 67 (THB, pp. 21, 22).}FSDA 202.7

As specific examples he mentioned a report concerning a decision by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania declaring Sunday traveling illegal, and the condemnation of eight Seventh Day Baptists for working on Sunday in that State. This, he said, could only be interpreted as “a fulfillment of the text, ‘And he spake as a dragon.’” ^{2Loughborough, “THB,” p. 67 (THB, pp. 22, 23).} In 1855 Andrews remarked that the current movements toward Sunday legislation signified that a Roman Catholic institution was “enforced by a Protestant government,” which was a violation of the Constitution and “a most striking instance of the union of church and state in this country.” ^{3Andrews, “TAR,” p. 204 (TAR, p. 117). See W. H. Littlejohn, The Constitutional Amendment: or The Sunday, the Sabbath, the Change, and Restitution, 1873, pp. iii, 72-74 for a discussion of the National Reform Association which was founded in 1863 and had as one of its aims the legislation of the observance of Sunday as a day of worship. For later developments of Sunday legislation in the U.S.A. and the SDA response, see Warren L. Johns, Dateline Sunday, U.S.A.: The Story of Three and a Half Centuries of Sunday-law Battles in America, 1967; Eric D. Syme, “Seventh-day Adventist Concepts on Church and State,” Ph.D. dissertation (American University), 1969, pp. 80-150, 234-53.} He warned that when “most of the State governments, which have no right to infringe upon the constitution, have already decided that the Sabbath of the Bible shall be kept on Sunday, and the judges have decided such laws to be constitutional,” then “there is an end to the principle of religious liberty.” ^{4Andrews, “TAR,” p. 204 (TAR, p. 117).} The constitutional separation of Church and State was seen to be a necessity for maintaining the principle of religious liberty. The Sabbatarian Adventists realized that as long as this separation was preserved, their freedom of worship on the Sabbath was guaranteed. However, their interpretation of Revelation 13:11-18 pointed to a period of religious persecution in the near future due to the increased violation of the principle of religious liberty.FSDA 203.1

c. The image of the beast.FSDA 203.2

Finally, after having defined “the beast” and “the two horned beast,” Andrews interpreted “the image of the beast” (Revelation 13:14, 15). On the basis of his previous interpretation that “the beast was, in truth, a church clothed with civil power and authority by which it put to death the saints of God. Revelation 13:5-8; Daniel 7:23-26,” he drew the conclusion that “an image to the beast then must be another church clothed with civil power and authority to put the saints of God to death.” ^{5Andrews, “Revelation,” p. 84. Cf. Andrews, “TAR,” p. 203 (TAR, p. 108), E. G. White, The Spirit of Prophecy 4:278.} This, Andrews said, could be “nothing else but the corrupt and fallen Protestant church.” ^{6Andrews, “Revelation,” p. 84. Cf. Andrews, “TAR,” p. 203 (TAR, p. 108); E. G. White, The Great Controversy, 445. Already in 1847 J. White stated that Christendom, “the last power that treads down the saints is brought to view in Revelation 13:11-18” (A Word to the Little Flock, 8, 9). Cf. Letter, E. G. White to Bates, A Word to the Little Flock, 19. Here she described the “Image Beast” as following a religious practice of the beast.} In the context of the Sabbatarian Adventist view of the Babylon of the second angel’s message, this interpretation was not surprising.FSDA 203.3

Loughborough further elaborated the concept of the image of the beast. Focusing on the Church-State relationship, he stated that “all that is wanting to complete an image to Papacy, is simply a union of action in Church and State, and for the churches to have control of the laws so as to inflict penalties on heretics, or those who do not obey their sentiments.” ^{1Loughborough, “THB,” p. 74 (THB, p. 37).} The fact that several States had provided a legal basis for Sunday observance he saw as evidence that the image was in the process of being formed, ^2Ibid. and its completion was to take place in the U.S.A. in the near future after the abolishment of the separation of Church and State. He predicted that “were the United States as a body to pass a law that Sunday should be kept holy, or not profaned by labor, there would be, I conceive, an image to Papacy; for law would then be in the hand of the church, and she could inflict penalties on those who did not obey the Sunday institution.” ^{4Loughborough, “THB,” p. 75 (THB, p. 39). Cf. J. White, “Our Faith and Hope ...,” RH, May 10, 1870, pp. 161, 162.} It was only “when moral restraint is taken from men, and the honest in heart have been called from Babylon,” he explained, that a “decree will be passed that all who will not ‘worship (keep the laws of) the image shall be killed’ [Revelation 13:15]; then you will witness a living image, breathing out the venom of a Romish Inquisition.” Andrews saw a topological relationship between the condition of Daniel’s three friends when a decree was issued to worship the image of Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 3) and “the situation of the church when the decree goes forth that all shall worship the image of the beast on pain of death.” In the context of a similar eschatological conflict Cottrell pointed to an analogy between the power and authority of the beast and its image:FSDA 204.1

The first beast received the power to kill of the dragon: the image will receive the same power and authority from the two-horned beast. The dragon power of the ten-horned monster gave his seat and authority to the Catholic church: the dragon power of “another beast” will give his authority to another church. Give civil power into the hands of Protestants, and the result will be a “holy war” against heretics. ^{1Cottrell, “Speaking of the Image,” RH, Dec. 12, 1854, p. 134. In the context of a fast-growing Roman Catholic Church in the U.S.A. the formation of a united front of Protestants seemed to him the solution to prevent annexation by the Catholics. He thought it inevitable that “Protestants must unite to oppose this law-making church by the exercise of the same kind of power by constituting themselves another law-making church. The moment this is done, the Image of the beast will be complete. The beast was church and state united; the Image will be the same” (“What Will Cause the Image?” RH, Nov. 14, 1854, p. 110).}FSDA 205.1

d. The number 666.FSDA 205.2

During the early years of the movement there existed several interpretations of the number 666 (Revelation 13:18). After the Disappointment a correspondent of the Western Midnight Cry referred to it as signifying the number of denominations, presumably in the U.S.A. ^{2Letter, J. H. Thomas to Jacobs, WMC, Dec. 21, 1844, p. 28. At that time there seemed to be over 640 denominations in the U.S.A. (ibid.).} In 1847 J. White stated that the “last power [Christendom] that treads down the saints is brought to view in Revelation 13:11-18. His number is 666.” ^{3J. White, A Word to the Little Flock, 8, 9.} At the same time he referred to this passage as a description of “the closing strife with the Image Beast.” ^{5Cf. Letter, H. S. Case to J. White, p. 85; Letter, Holt to Dear Brethren, p. 64; supra, p. 25, n. 124.} This seems to imply that the term “image beast” was used as a descriptive term for the two-horned beast which had been interpreted as an image of the first beast of Revelation 13. Thus, to J. White the image beast, or two-horned beast, represented Christendom while its number was 666. In 1850 George W. Holt also defined the image beast as the two-horned beast with its number 666. The 1850 Chart designated the two-horned beast as the “image of the Papacy” having 666 as its number. In 1851 Andrews suggested that “the Protestant Church [image to the beast] may, if taken as a whole, be considered as a unit; but how near its different sects number six hundred three score and six, may be a matter of interest to determine.” Later, Loughborough quoted J. M. Stephenson- a Sabbatarian Adventist minister for a few years-who had stated that 666 was the number of a man, the man of sin, representing the Roman Catholic Church. This church according to Stephenson continued to be a unit until the Reformation, when it started to break up, and “these divisions have continued dividing and subdividing until, according to the Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, they now number about six hundred three score and six,” ^{1Loughborough, “THB,” p. 79 (THB, pp. 47, 48); Stephenson, “Number of the Beast,” p. 166.} indicating an intimate relationship between contemporary Protestantism and historic Roman Catholicism. Thus, he could also state about the Protestant churches that “their number is the number of a man, (the man of sin,) and his number is six hundred three score and six. Those churches collectively or individually, have that number.” ^{2Ibid.; Loughborough, “THB,” p. 79 (THB, p. 48). Cf. Loughborough, The Twin Horned Beast ... , 1857, p. 64.}FSDA 205.3

In 1860 steps were taken to organize the Sabbatarian Adventists officially into an effective organizational structure for missionary outreach which implied legal incorporation of church property under the laws of the State. Plans for organizational unity were resisted by those believers who maintained that the number 666 referred to the two-horned beast and signified the total number of legally organized churches in the U.S.A. According to J. White, these opponents felt that “in order to get the victory over the number of his name, it is supposed to be necessary to reject all sectarian names.” ^{3[J. White], “Organization,” RH, July 16, 1861, p. 52.} One opponent to organization, Cottrell, advocated the principle of a total separation of Church and State and warned that the consequence of getting “incorporated as a religious body according to law” would imply a “name with the two-horned beast” and “spiritual fornication” with the kings of the earth, for it would mean that one would “look to the civil arm for aid and protection.” ^{4Cottrell, “Making Us a Name,” p. 140. Cf. Cottrell, “Speaking of the Image,” p. 134. Cottrell supported his position with Andrews’ 1855 view which related the incorporation by law of an organization to the concept of Babylon. Andrews had stated that “the United States disclaim a national religion, and yet nearly all her religious bodies are incorporated by the State. Babylon has made all the nations drunken with her wine; it can therefore symbolize nothing less than the universal worldly church” (Letter, Cottrell to Smith, in J. White, “Making Us a Name,” RH, June 5, 1860, p. 20). In the next edition of Andrews’ TAR this statement had been left out. Cf. Andrews, “TAR,” p. 178 (TAR, pp. 46, 47) with Andrews, Three Messages, 1860, p. 44. J. White accused Cottrell of not having his premises correct, for it was “the confusion of languages among the Babel-builders” which lay “at the foundation of Babylon” (“‘Making Us a Name,’” p. 180).} To this J. White replied that the number 666 referred to “the papal beast,” not to the two-horned beast, ^{5Ibid., pp. 181, 182. Smith also applied it to the Roman Catholic Church (“Revelation,” p. 188). Cf. Smith, Revelation, 224; J. White’s earliest position, A Word to the Little Flock, 9.} and added that already in 1845 “some declared the number 666 to be full-that there was that number of legally organized bodies. Since that time there have been almost numberless divisions, and new associations, and still the number is just 666!” ^{1J. White, “‘Making Us a Name,’” p. 182. Cf. Letter, Thomas to Jacobs, p. 28.} Also rejected by J. White was the idea that “to hold a legal property of any kind” would be “spiritual fornication,” because obedience to the laws of the country, as long as they did not interfere with God’s laws, was not violation of the principle of Church-State separation. ^{2J. White, “‘Making Us a Name,’” p. 181. He said that “while we are stewards of our Lord’s goods here in the land of the enemy, it is our duty to conform to the laws of the land necessary to the faithful performance of our stewardship, as long as human laws do not oppose the divine law” (ibid.). Loughborough had earlier pointed out that “there is quite a difference between our being in a position that we can protect our property by law, and using the law to protect and enforce our religious views” (“Legal Organization,” RH, March 8, 1860, p. 125).} Thus a change of attitude was brought about toward the government of the U.S.A. which paved the way for the official organization of the religious body in 1863.FSDA 206.1

Although now the number 666 was thought to refer to the first beast of Revelation 13, there was still uncertainty about its significance. ^{3Cf. Smith, “Revelation,” p. 188.} However, in 1865 Smith gave an explanation which was generally accepted by the SDA. In referring to an anonymous work entitled The Reformation, 1832, he stated that “the most plausible name we have ever seen suggested as containing the number of the beast, is the blasphemous title which the pope applies to himself, and wears in jeweled letters upon his miter or pontifical crown.” ^{4Smith, Revelation, 225.} He explained that the Latin letters of the pope’s title “Vicarious [sic] filii Dei: ‘Viceregent of the Son of God’” ^{6Smith, Revelation, 225. Cf. SDABC, VII, pp. 823, 824. One of the earliest expositors of this interpretation seemed to be Andreas Helwig (c. 1572-1643) (Froom, PFF, II, 605-608). For other similar pre-Sabbatarian Adventist expositions, see ibid., II, 649; 3:228, 242, 412; 4:112, 197, 372. Cf. Robert Fleming, Apocalyptical Key, 1793, p. 138; Fleming, Apocalyptical Key, 1809, pp. 107-110; Shimeal, Age of the World, pp. 246-48; John Leland, American Sentinel, 1797, quoted in “The Number 666 in Roman Letters,” MC, Feb. 24, 1843, p. 13; Editorial, “The Number of the Name of the Beast,” JS, April 3, 1845, p. 27.} had the numerical value of 666: “We have V, 5; 1:1; C, 100; (a and r not used as numerals;) 1:1; U (formerly the same as V), 5; (s and f not used as numerals;) 1:1; 50:50; 1:1; I, 1; 500:500; (e not used as numeral;) 1:1. Adding these numbers together, we have just 666.” Smith saw this number as “the number of a man, even the ‘man of sin,’” and considered the selection of the pope’s title somewhat providential, showing “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.”FSDA 207.1

3. The final conflict

The third angel’s message was interpreted by Sabbatarian Adventists as a message of warning for the coming confrontation between the powers of light and darkness. The scene of this conflict was described in Revelation 13:11-18 with the “two-horned beast” and the “beast and his image” as the enemies of God’s people. Concerning this conflict Andrews pointed out that “its fearful character may be learned from the thrilling and dreadful import of the angel’s message. The Bible nowhere else depicts such dreadful wrath.” ^{1Andrews, “Revelation,” p. 85. E. G. White said that the third angel proclaimed “the most terrible threatening ever borne to man” (Spiritual Gifts 1:162).} In comparing Revelation 13:11-18 with Revelation 14:9-12 he saw the final issue as follows: “On one side stands the decree of the beast who is to exercise all the power of the first beast before him, that all who will not worship the image and receive his mark shall be put to death [Revelation 13:12, 15]; on the other hand stands the solemn warning of the third angel.” ^{2Andrews, “Revelation,” p. 85.} Thus, the issue was two-fold: “We can worship the beast and his image, and as the penalty, drink the wine of the wrath of God, or we can refuse, and peril our lives that we may obey God.” ^4Ibid. It was obvious to Andrews that the third angel’s message would “draw a line between the worshippers of God and the worshippers of the beast and his image, for on either hand it reveals a dreadful penalty and leaves no chance for half way work.” The visible characteristics of both classes, he stated, were that “one class is designated by the mark of the beast, the other class is seen in the patience of the saints keeping the commandments of God,” which implied that the law of God was “a great testing truth to draw a line between the subjects of the fourth and fifth kingdoms [Daniel 2; 7].” As to the preparation for the conflict he remarked that the “third angel’s proclamation will prepare the people of God for the coming crisis: and the formation of the image and the reception of the mark will prepare all the various classes of adherents to the beast, to receive the vials of the wrath of God, the seven last plagues.” Smith predicted that “society will eventually resolve itself into two classes: Sabbath-keepers and Sunday-keepers.” From this it seems that the apocalyptic eschatology of Sabbatarian Adventists indicated that the central issue in the final conflict was the choice between the mark of the beast and the seal of God.FSDA 208.1

a. The mark of the beast.FSDA 208.2

As early as 1847 Bates had designated Sunday observance as “a mark of the beast.” ^{1See supra, p. 141.} Later this mark came to be more precisely defined. In 1850 J. White stated that the mark of the beast was “very conspicuous” and did not refer to a literal mark but to “a prominent point of religious faith introduced by the Papal power, which is the observance of the first day of the week as a holy day of rest instead of the seventh.” ^{2J. White, “TAM,” p. 67 (TAM, p. 8).} In 1852 he rejected the idea that those who presently did not observe the Sabbath were already in possession of the mark because it was to be received in the future “when the line shall be drawn between the worshipers of the beast and image, and the worshipers, or servants of God.” ^4Ibid. The third angel’s message, he saw, was a warning “not to receive the mark,” which implied that “it is yet to be received by the worshipers of the beast.” Therefore, White said, “Christians who have conscientiously observed the first day of the week, in time past, whose minds were never called to investigate the Sabbath question, certainly did not receive the mark of the beast.” The time for the reception of the mark he described as follows: “After the true light on this subject shall be given, and that period of anguish when the mark of the beast shall be enforced shall have come, and the division made between the worshipers of God and the worshipers of the beast, then will be the danger of receiving the mark of the beast.” In 1856 he commented on this event saying, “when the claims of the Sabbath of the fourth Commandment are urged upon the mind in opposition to the practice of Sundaykeeping, it is then that men choose, and receive either the Mark of the Beast, or the Seal of the living God.”FSDA 209.1

b. The seal of the living God.FSDA 209.2

For the people of God the third angel’s message seems to have a positive sound. In 1849 J. White had already interpreted it as the “sealing message” which carried “the sealing mark, the Sabbath, to the saints.” ^{8Letter, J. White to Bowles, Nov. 8, 1849; see supra, p. 145; cf. E. G. White, “DBS,” p. 21 (Early Writings, 42, 43); J. White, “TAM,” p. 69 (TAM, p. 15); Letter, Cottrell to J. White, RH, Feb. 3, 1852, p. 87.} The following year he referred in the context of the sealing to a topological relationship between Ezek. 9 and the third angel’s message. ^{9J. White, “TAM,” p. 69 (TAM, p. 15).} E. G. White remarked that “the third angel is binding them (sealing them) [God’s people] in bundles for the heavenly garner.” ^{10E. G. White, Supplement to the Christian Experience and Views of Ellen G. White, 7 (Early Writings, 89).} In 1852 Cottrell suggested that the seal “imprints the Father’s name in the forehead [Revelation 14:1] of those who have not the mark of the beast in that place.” ^{1Letter, Cottrell to J. White, p. 87. Already in 1844 the seal of the living God, although undefined, was related to the 144,000 (E. G. White [E. G. Harmon], “RSA,” p. 17). Cf. ibid., p. 14.} He associated the seal with the third angel’s message, because the commandments of God (Revelation 14:12), in particular the fourth commandment of the Decalogue, contained the Father’s name, being “the only one of the ten that distinguishes the Lord from every other God, as being the Maker of all things.” ^{2Letter, Cottrell to J. White, p. 87.} Edson pointed out that “the fourth commandment is the only precept in the great constitution that points out the true God” and it had to be interpreted that this commandment “contained his [God’s] signature and seal.” ^{4Ibid. Earlier E. G. White wrote that “the Sabbath was set apart to be kept in honor of God’s holy name” (Letter, E. G. White to Bates, A Word to the Little Flock, 18).} He saw the mission of the third angel as a means of restoring the seal of the living God, the Sabbath, to the Decalogue. Several years later, Smith commented on the significance of the fourth commandment as a seal on the basis of an analogy between the seal of a secular ruler and the seal of the Decalogue. He argued that for “any document from any earthly monarch to be valid [it] must possess his name and title of royalty, by which his subjects will know who it is that demands obedience, and by what right he demands it.” From analogy he reasoned that if God had given mankind a law then “in order for it to be valid it must declare who he is, contain his title of royalty, the extent of his dominion, and his right to reign; and whatever portion of the law does this, by just and appropriate figure may be called ‘his seal,’ ‘the seal of the law.’” In applying these criteria to the Decalogue, he said that only in the fourth commandment “we are reading the requirements of Him who made heaven and earth, and all things therein. We realize at once that the Maker of heaven and earth, is the Supreme Ruler over all his works; that the extent of his dominion is the extent of his creation; and that he has a right to demand obedience from all his creatures.” Thus, he concluded that “this commandment brings to view his title of royalty, the extent of his dominion, and his right to reign.”FSDA 209.3

As Bates had done previously, ^{9See supra, pp. 143, 144.} Smith equated the Sabbath as a sign (Exodus 31:13, 17) with a seal, stating that “the Lord told his ancient people Israel, that it [Sabbath] should be a sign between him and them forever. This must include, not the literal descendants only, but spiritual Israel also.” ^{10Ibid., II, p. 20. Cf. ibid., I, p. 12.} He suggested that the command to hurt “only those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads” (Revelation 9:4) indicated that there were individuals living during the sounding of the fifth angel (A.D. 1299-A.D. 1449) ^{1See supra, p. 27} who had “the seal of God in their foreheads.” ^{2Ibid., II, p. 20.} However, the work of the third angel’s message and the sealing angel of Revelation 7:2 pointed to “a particular reform, a special work, at a special time.” ^3Ibid.FSDA 210.1

Although the third angel’s message was identified as the sealing message, J. White rejected in 1852 the idea that “all Sabbath-keepers have the seal of the living God” or that “the ‘Review and Herald’ teaches that those who embrace the Sabbath are now sealed and sure of heaven.” ^{4[J. White], “Remarks,” p. 100. Nichols had stated that those who had been sealed could fall away by yielding to temptation (“Extracts of Letters,” AdR, Sept. 1850, p. 48).} The difference, however, between the present and future reality of the sealing had not yet been solved, because it was not understood that though the sealing message had been proclaimed for years, no one seemed to be sealed in the absolute sense. In 1856 Smith analyzed the sealing process by introducing a distinction between “the possession of the seal” and “the state of being sealed.” ^{5[Smith], “Seal,” II, p. 20.} He acknowledged the possibility “that people in times past have been in possession of the seal” but stated that no one who had ever lived had experienced the sealing as described in Revelation 7. ^7Ibid. In order to possess the seal, he argued, one had to observe the Sabbath, because “if the Sabbath is the seal, a correct theory on this question, and an observance of the fourth commandment according to the letter, would of course put one in possession of the seal.” But, he said, to be in a state of being sealed required much more, for these Sabbath-observing individuals could still “be destitute of saving faith or the Spirit of God,” and added that “a mere theory of the truth will not save us.” Smith stressed that in the work of personal salvation the Holy Spirit had an essential part to play, remarking that “while we believe the Sabbath to he a seal, we believe the Holy Spirit to be the sealer.” He, therefore, concluded that the condition of “our being sealed, is not only to be in possession of the seal, but also to fulfill every other requirement of the Holy Spirit; as saith the Apostle, ‘Grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, whereby (by whom-Whiting) ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.’ Ephesians 4:30.” Smith’s concept of the mission of the sealing angel contributed to the harmonization of the present and future sealing because it included “the diffusion of light” as well as “the intelligent reception of the truth by those who would be sealed” and the guidance “in all things by the Spirit of truth that we may keep the Commandments of God and the Faith of Jesus.” ^1Ibid. Thus, owing to its broad reformatory work the sealing message had not yet sealed individuals in the absolute sense, though it had been proclaimed for several years and they had been in the possession of the seal by observing the Sabbath. In 1866 Smith viewed the sealing time as “a period during which a progressive work is carried on upon the earth,” the nature of which was “the development of a holy character, by obedience to the truth.... to a position where they [people] can be sealed absolutely, in the sense of having their cases forever decided for Heaven.” ^{2Smith, “The visions-Objections Answered,” RH, July 10, 1866, p. 42 (The Visions of Mrs. E. G. White..., 1868, p. 87).} He felt that Christ’s post-1844 ministry could also be designated as a sealing work because it involved a judgment on the character of human beings. Therefore, parallel with the proclamation of the sealing message on earth a sealing work was going on in heaven where, during the pre-Advent judgment, decisions were made which sealed the eternal destiny of individuals. ^3Ibid.FSDA 211.1

In 1852 Edson explored Bates’ allusion ^{4See supra, p. 144.} to the existence of a relation between Revelation 14 and Revelation 7 in a different way, suggesting that the work of the third angel and that of the sealing angel of Revelation 7:2 were identical. He found support for this view in the fact that the events and consequences which followed both angels were similar. The seven plagues (Revelation 15; 16) following the third angel, and the loosing of the four winds (Revelation 7:1-3) after the sealing were seen to be related events, because in both instances it affected the earth, the sea, and the trees. ^{5Edson, “Commandments of God,” p. 65. He said that “the first vial will be poured out upon the earth.—The second will be poured out upon the sea. The fourth will be poured out upon the sun, and power will be given unto him to scorch men with fire and great heat. Under this plague the trees will be hurt as predicted in Joel 1:10-12, 18-20. Thus it is seen that the earth and sea and trees are to be hurt by the pouring out of the plagues, the same as by the loosing of the four winds” (ibid.). Cf. [Smith], “Seal,” I, p. 12.} In 1856 Smith held similar views on the two angels and added that they also prepared the people of God for the final events. ^{7Smith, “Visions—Objections,” p. 42 (Visions, p. 87). Revelation 7 pictured to Cottrell two distinct classes of individuals: the 144,000 (Revelation 7:1-8) and a great multitude (Revelation 7:9-17) (“Mark of the Beast,” p. 77 [Mark of the Beast, p. 3]). The 144,000 seemed to be the living righteous who, after having gone through the final conflict and trouble, would be translated into immortality without experiencing death; see e.g., E. G. White [E. G. Harmon], “RSA,” pp. 14, 15 (Early Writings, 15, 16); E. G. White, “DBS,” p. 22 (Early Writings, 37); J. White, “The One Hundred and Forty Four Thousand,” AdR, Sept. 1850, pp. 56, 57.} In 1866, however, he seemed to imply that the sealing message of the third angel performed a preparatory work for the reception of the final sealing performed by the sealing angel of Revelation 7 who would begin his sealing work when the pre-Advent judgment would take up the cases of the living. Those who would be found righteous in that judgment would then be sealed with the “seal of the living God” and be in the “state of being sealed.” c. The location of the mark and seal.FSDA 212.1

Additional aspects of the nature of the seal of God and the mark of the beast were discovered when a comparison was made regarding their location. The seal was to be placed in the forehead of the individual, ^{1See e.g., Bates, SLG, p. 37 (he referred to Revelation 9:4 as one of the arguments to place the seal in the forehead [ibid.]); E. G. White, “DBS,” p. 23 (Early Writings, 38); Nichols, “Extracts,” p. 48.} the mark of the beast on the hand or forehead (Revelation 13:16; 14:9). Smith located the seal in the forehead, for he identified those who had the seal with those who had the Father’s name written in their foreheads (Revelation 14:1). ^{2[Smith], “Seal,” II, p. 20.} In this context Cottrell described the difference between the possessors of the seal and mark:FSDA 213.1

Those who receive the seal of God, have the Lamb’s “Father’s name written in their foreheads.” Revelation 14:1. Those who receive the mark of the beast receive “the mark of his name.” Verse 11. Name is used in a figurative sense to denote authority.... In the name of Jesus Christ, means by the authority of Jesus Christ. Hence, the mark of the beast is a sign or token of his authority, standing in opposition to the sign of the authority of the Father. ^{3Cottrell, “Mark of the Beast,” p. 78 (Mark of the Beast, p. 5).}FSDA 213.2

The seal and mark were not considered as visible signs in a literal sense. ^{4Ibid., p. 77; [Smith], “Seal,” II, p. 20.} The location in the forehead indicated to Smith that the difference in issue was of a doctrinal nature. The forehead, he remarked, was “the seat of the mind by which we receive or reject all theories presented to us, the seal and the mark there located, must evidently signify some prominent doctrines which distinguish the worshipers of the beast and the worshipers of God.” ^{5Ibid. Cf. Nichols, “Extracts,” p. 48.} According to Cottrell, the forehead was “a symbol of mind and affections, since the forehead is the seat of the intellectual faculties.” ^7Ibid. Therefore, the “seal of God can be received nowhere else. He accepts of no obedience but that which is from the heart.” This was different from the beast which was “more accommodating,” for sincerity was not a prerequisite, so that “if you do not choose his mark in your forehead, you may receive it in your right hand. If you do not believe and love his institutions, you may obey them outwardly-carry out his requirements with your right hand, which is a symbol of outward actions.” In this light he called attention to the significance of the mission of the third angel as a message of warning “against submitting to the authority of the beast and receiving the mark of his authority, and presents us the ‘commandments of God (the Father) and the faith of Jesus,’ (the Son).”FSDA 213.3

4. The wrath of God

During the latter part of the 18th century and the early part of the 19th century the “seven last plagues” filled with the wrath of God (Revelation 15:1) were frequently interpreted as being in the past or in process, while some placed them in the future. ^{1See, Froom, PFF, IV, 80, 86, 92, 95, 96, 132, 136, 159, 162, 187-90, 199, 225, 241, 261, 267, 311, 319, 341, 342, 394, 401, 701.} In the beginning of 1846 J. White adopted the position that “the seven last plagues were all in the future, and that they were all to be poured out before the first resurrection.” ^{2J. White, A Word to the Little Flock, 1. In the fall of 1845 he had become acquainted with E. G. Harmon’s view that “the saints must pass through the ‘time of Jacobs trouble,’ which was future” (A Word to the Little Flock, 22). In 1843 Litch had placed the plagues in the future (“The Seven Last Plagues,” MC, Aug. 17, 1843, p. 205).} From the reference in Revelation 15:1 to the “seven angels having the seven last plagues; for in them is filled up the wrath of God” he inferred that “as the ‘wrath of God’ on the living wicked is ‘filled up’ in the plagues, and as the day of wrath is future, it follows that the plagues are all future.” ^{4J. White, A Word to the Little Flock, 3. This typology showed him that the seven last plagues were of a literal nature (“Angels No. 4,” p. 70 [AR, p. 22]). The deceptive power of Pharaoh’s magicians “just before, and in connection with the plagues of Egypt” he saw as a type of the deception “by the ‘wonders,’ and ‘miracles,’ [Revelation 13:13, 14] performed by the two-horned beast” which would deceive the worshipers of the beast and his image “prior to, and in connection with, the last plagues” (ibid.). Cf. J. White, A Word to the Little Flock, 9.} For further evidence he used topological argumentation. The plagues on ancient Egypt, he said, were poured out “just before, and at the deliverance of Israel; so we may expect the last plagues on the wicked, just before and at the deliverance of the saints.” In the destruction of the unrighteous after the sealing time described in Ezek. 9 he saw a type of the future wrath of God. He integrated the wrath of God into the sanctuary theology by associating the termination of Jesus’ sanctuary ministry with the beginning of the seven last plagues on the living unrighteous.FSDA 214.1

When the third angel’s message began to occupy a central place in the Sabbatarian Adventist theology of mission the concept of the wrath of God in Revelation 14:10, 11 came to prominence. From 1850 onward the seven last plagues formed an integral part of the third angel’s message. In that year Holt identified the wrath of God in Revelation 15:1 with the one in 14:10, and stated that it “will be fulfilled in the pouring out of the seven last vials” on the worshippers of the “beast and his image.” ^{7Letter, Holt to Dear Brethren, p. 64. Cf. [J. White], “Angels No.4,” p. 70 (AR, p. 22).}FSDA 214.2

The extent of the wrath of God as pictured in the third angel’s message was, according to J. White, not to be confined to “a warning of the terrors of the first death of the worshippers of the beast and his image, by the seven last plagues” but included “the second death at the end of the 1000 years of Revelation 20,” for it is then that “the wicked dead will be raised with bodies capable of standing in the presence of the Lamb and the holy angels [Revelation 14:10]. And as the host of ‘Gog and Magog’ gather up around the Beloved City the final execution of the judgment will take place. ‘Fire from God out of heaven’ will ‘devour’ them [20:8, 9].” ^{1Ibid. (AR, pp. 23, 24).} Thus God’s wrath ended with the annihilation of the wicked.FSDA 214.3

It was Andrews who interpreted the seven last plagues as an integral part of the judgments of God under the angels with the seven trumpets. His rationale for the relationship between the seven trumpets and the finality of God’s wrath in the seven last plagues was the following:FSDA 215.1

The seven trumpets represented terrible judgments of God upon wicked men. The judgments that made up this series are called plagues. When six of these trumpets had been blown, and their judgments had been felt by the wicked inhabitants of earth, we read that those who were left who had not been killed by THESE PLAGUES repented not of their wickedness. Revelation 9:20, 21. So another series of plagues must come upon men, even the seven LAST plagues which fill up God’s wrath. ^{2Andrews, “The Seven Last Plagues,” RH, Dec. 29, 1868, p. 5.}FSDA 215.2

He identified the seven last plagues with the “third woe” under the sounding of the seventh angel (Revelation 11:14, 15). His argumentation was: (1) Under the sounding of the fifth and sixth trumpet there had been a full account of the first and second woes (Revelation 9); (2) the third woe under the seventh trumpet, though simply indicated by the statement “thy wrath is come” and the time to “destroy them which destroy the earth” (Revelation 11:18), was more fully described in the completion of God’s wrath in the seven last plagues of Revelation 15 and Revelation 16. ^{3Ibid. Cf. Andrews, “TAR,” RH, April 17, 1855, pp. 209, 211 (TAR, pp.120, 137). He interpreted Revelation 15:5-8; 16 as an expanded version of Revelation 11:15-19, for both accounts referred to scenes taking place when the temple in heaven was opened, and ended in the same manner with events of the last plague (ibid., p. 209 [TAR, p. 120]).} J. White, who identified the third woe with the seventh angel, concluded that its duration “reaches to the second death at the close of the 1000 years of Revelation 20, covering all woe.” ^{4J. White, “The Mystery of God,” RH, March 27, 1856, p. 205. Cf. J. White, “The Seventh Angel,” RH, March 27, 1856, p. 204.}FSDA 215.3

The understanding of the third angel’s message in the context of the sanctuary theology provided an explanation why God’s wrath had been prevented from being poured out after 1844. Jesus’ high-priestly ministry and the sealing mission of the third angel were a restraining influence on the seven last plagues. E. G. White stated that the “wrath of God could not come until Jesus had finished his work in the Most Holy Place-laid off his priestly attire and clothed himself with the garments of vengeance.” ^{5E. G. White, “DBS,” p. 22 (Early Writings, 36).} It was not until the sealing was completed that God’s wrath in the seven last plagues would be poured out. ^{1Ibid (Early Writings, 44); ibid., p.32 (EW, p. 48).} In 1851 J. White summarized the various restraining factors in this way:FSDA 215.4

The wrath of God in the seven last plagues will constitute the “time of trouble such as never was,” after Michael stands up. Daniel 12:1. The mediation of Jesus in the Heavenly Sanctuary, prevents the wrath of God from coming on a guilty world. The four angels [Revelation 7:1-3] hold the four winds until the servants of God are sealed by the last warning message. When that work is done, Christ will lay aside his priestly attire, put on the “garments of vengeance,” [Isaiah 59:17,] and take his position on the “white cloud,” [Revelation 14:14] with a “sharp sickle” to reap the harvest of the earth. Then the four angels will cease to hold the four winds [Revelation 7:1-3,] and the wrath of God, in the seven last plagues, will be poured out. ^{2[J. White], “Angels No. 4,” p.70 (AR, p. 22). (Brackets his.)}FSDA 216.1

The reason, according to Andrews, why the “third woe, or seven last plagues” did not take place in 1844 when the trumpet of the seventh angel began to sound was that “a period of days is occupied in finishing the mystery of God [Revelation 10:7].” ^{3Andrews, “TAR,” p. 211 (TAR, p. 137). On Revelation 10:7, see supra, pp. 43, 44, 131.} The mission of the third angel and Jesus’ post-1844 ministry he identified as aspects of the finishing of the mystery of God, or the “work of salvation for sinful men.” ^4Ibid.FSDA 216.2

5. The last warning

From 1850 onward the mission of the third angel’s message came to be called “the last message of mercy” or “the last warning message.” ^{5See e.g., Edson, Time of the End, p. 21; J. White, “TAM,” p. 69 (TAM, p. 15); J: White, “Third Angel’s Message,” p. 108. He also used the phrase “the last merciful warning to dying men” (“Conference Address,” RH, June 9, 1859, p.21). E. G. White used expressions like “the last notes of warning to the world” (Spiritual Gifts 2:202), “the last message of mercy to the world” (ibid., p. 213), “the last great message of mercy to the world” (ibid., p. 231).} In 1853 J. White explained that the expression “the last message of mercy to man” was based on the fact that there was “nothing but unmingled wrath beyond this message.” ^{6[J. White], “Remarks on Luke 13:23-25,” RH, May 26, 1853, p.4.} Later E. G. White referred to the relevance of the mission of the warning message as follows: (1) It was “designed to put the children of God upon their guard, and show them the hour of temptation and anguish that was before them” because of the final conflict with the “beast and his image”; ^{8Letter, E. G. White to Friends, No. 13, 1859. She added the necessity of being “baptized with the third angel’s message, the soul-purifying truth for this time” (ibid.). Cf. letter, E. G. White to Buck, No.18, 1861.} (2) it was to bring individuals together and, through a process of purification through obedience to the truth, to prepare them for translation from mortality to immortality; (3) due to the fact that the law of God had been lightly regarded by man “the Lord would not come to punish the transgressors of his law without first sending them a message of warning. The third angel proclaims the warning message.” ^{1E. G. White, TC, No. 22, 1872, p. 49 (Testimonies for the Church 3:161).} In 1854 E. G. White associated the mission of the third angel with the closing work of salvation; ^{2E. G. White, Supplement to the Christian Experience and Views of Ellen G. White, 3, 4 (Early Writings, 85, 86).} and in 1856 J. White described the mission of the “last warning Message” as the “closing work of salvation through Jesus Christ.” ^{4Ibid. He said: “Those who receive it, and live up to their profession of faith, who really keep the commandments of God and the Faith of Jesus, will be ripened for immortality, while those who reject it, will be left of God to the delusions of Satan, and thus ripen for the vials of Jehovah s wrath” (ibid.). Later, he stated that the third angel’s message “will be a test to all men” (“The Loud Voice of the Third Angel,” RH, Oct. 20, 1859, p. 172).} The response to its closing mission, he said, was to “ripen the harvest of the earth,” for “on the manner in which this Message is treated, hangs the eternal destiny of this generation” and “all will be fitted for immortality or the seven last plagues.”FSDA 216.3

The “closing work of the gospel of Jesus Christ” through the “last message of mercy” J. White identified with the “finishing of the mystery of God” ^{5J. White, “Mystery,” p. 205. Cf. Andrews, “TAR,” p. 211 (TAR, 137).} and suggested the existence of a very close relationship between the gospel and “the mystery of Christ in the Heavenly Sanctuary“:FSDA 217.1

As the tenth day atonement for the cleansing of the sanctuary of the first covenant was the finishing up of the work of that year, so the ministration of Christ for the cleansing of the Heavenly Sanctuary after the termination of the 2300 days of Daniel 8, is the finishing up of Christ’s entire work as Priest. And while his work as Priest is being finished in heaven, the mystery of God, which is the gospel to the world, is being finished on earth in the third message, which is the last that offers salvation. ^{6J. White, “Mystery,” p. 205.}FSDA 217.2

The warning mission of the third angel’s message was also associated with the measuring of “the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein” (Revelation 11:1). One of the most complete expositions on the measuring process was provided by Smith in 1862. This process, he felt, depicted the nature of the prophetic message of the previous verse (10:11). ^{7Smith, “Thoughts on Revelation,” RH, Oct. 28, 1862, p. 172 (Revelation, 187).} The importance of the measuring was emphasized by the command not to measure the court outside the temple (11:2), meaning that “the attention of the church is now directed to the inner temple, and the services there,” for matters related to the court were presently of less relevance. ^{8Ibid. (Revelation, 189). Revelation 11:2 signified to Smith a transition to the 1260 years of persecution as a new series of events (ibid.).} In defining the temple and its worshipers he argued that the temple of God could not be interpreted as the church, “for the church is brought to view in connection with this temple as ‘them that worship therein.’ The temple is therefore the literal temple in heaven, and the worshipers the true church on earth.” ^{9Ibid (Revelation, 187).} The worshipers, he remarked, “are to be measured as worshipers; hence the measurement has to do with character; and character can be measured only by some standard of right, namely, a law or rule of action.” ^{1Ibid. (Revelation, 188).} From this he concluded that the measuring rod which the angel placed into the hands of John embraced “the ten commandments, the standard which God has given by which to measure ‘the whole duty of man,’” and had been put into the hands of the church in the form of the third angel’s message as “the standard by which the worshipers of God are now to be tested.” ^{2Ibid. In 1854 Loughborough mentioned the third angels message as the agent to perform this measuring process with the Decalogue as measuring rod (“The Hour of His Judgment Come,” RH, Feb. 14, 1854, p. 30).} The call to rise and measure the temple he saw as a “prophetic command to the church to give the subject of the temple or sanctuary a special examination.” ^{3Smith, “Revelation,” p. 172 (Revelation, 188).} In summary Smith stated thatFSDA 217.3

the measuring rod is the special message now given to the church, which embraces all the truths to this time, including the ten commandments. By this message our attention has been called to the temple above, and through it the light and truth on this subject has come out. Thus we measure the temple and the altar, or the ministration connected with that temple, the work and position of our great High Priest; and we measure the worshipers with that portion of the rod which relates to character, namely, the ten commandments. ^{4Ibid. (Revelation, 188, 189).}FSDA 218.1

In 1872 he described the significance of Revelation 11:1 as “the last testing work to be brought to bear upon the church, to determine their fitness to be translated to Heaven, their preparation for the issues of eternity.” ^{5Smith, “Nature of the Closing Work,” RH, Nov. 19, 1872, p. 178.} Concerning the accomplishment of the testing (measuring) work, he said that one measured “the temple by first accepting the truth of its existence above, studying into the purpose for which it exists, connecting therewith the work of Christ as our great High Priest, examining into the nature and duration of that work, and the present stage of its progress.” ^6Ibid. Although the worshipers were in a general sense to be tested by the Decalogue, he felt that because of the deceitfulness of the heart and the fact that God’s law was exceedingly broad, a divine aid for this testing work had been provided in “two great instrumentalities for the perfection of character” which were brought to view in the third angel’s message, namely, “the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.” ^{8Ibid., pp. 178, 179.} This, in fact, meant that the worshipers were to be measured by the Decalogue and the various new truths discovered since the Disappointment.FSDA 218.2

From the early beginnings of their movement Sabbatarian Adventists had been conscious of the success of their missionary activity in proclaiming the message of warning. Already in 1847, E. G. White had pointed to the beginning of “the time of trouble” when the believers, who were filled with the Holy Spirit, would be engaged in a missionary work resulting in a strong positive and negative response from other Christians and their organizations. ^{1Letter, E. G. White to Bates, A Word to the Little Flock, 19. This “time of trouble,” she remarked, “does not refer to the time when the plagues shall begin to be poured out; but to a short period just before they are poured out, while Christ is in the Sanctuary. At that time, while the work of salvation is closing, trouble will be coming on the earth, the nations will be angry, yet held in check, so as not to prevent the work of the third angel. At that time the ‘latter rain,’ or refreshing from the Lord, will come [Acts 3:19], to give power to the loud voice of the third angel, and prepare the saints to stand in the period when the seven last plagues shall be poured out” (Supplement to the Christian Experience and Views of Ellen G. White, 3, 4 [Early Writings, 85, 86]).} A few years later when the third angel’s message had become the dominant factor in their theology, added support was given to the idea that their missionary work would succeed because the proclamation of the warning message was to take place with a “loud voice” (Revelation 14:9). ^{2Cf. J. White, “TAM,” p. 69 (TAM, pp. 14, 15).} Since 1850 this final future proclamation of the last warning message came to be identified by the term “the loud cry” of the third angel or of the third angel’s message. ^{4See [J. White], “Present Work,” p. 12, J. White, “Where Are We?” RH, Dec. 11, 1856, p. 45. E. G. White commented on the 1856 situation that “nearly all believed that this message [Laodicean Message when it was first presented] would end in the loud cry of the third angel” (TC, No. 5, p. 4 [Testimonies for the Church 1:186]). See infra, p. 247.} Both in 1851 and 1856 it was thought that the time had come for the loud cry. After 1856 the rationale for the delay of the loud cry was seen in the unprepared and unsanctified condition of the believers.FSDA 218.3

In 1858 E. G. White described the loud cry in the context of an invisible angelic activity as a joint action of the proclamations of the angel of Revelation 18:1 and the third angel. The mission of the angel of Revelation 18:1, which provided “power and force” for the third angel’s message, she saw described in Revelation 18:2. ^{6E. G. White, Spiritual Gifts 1:194. J. White remarked that both the angel of Revelation 18:1 and the third angel “symbolize different parts of the same great work, preparatory to the plagues.” Presently, it was the time of the third angel while the time of the angel of Revelation 18:1 was future and would “introduce the loud cry of the third message” (“Loud Voice,” p. 173).} This proclamation indicated that “the message of the fall of Babylon, as given by the second angel, is again given, with the addition of the corruptions which have been entering the churches since 1844.” ^{1E. G. White, Spiritual Gifts 1:194.} Other angels would assist the angel of Revelation 18:1, producing the effect that everywhere the call was heard of Revelation 18:4, “Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.” ^{2Ibid. Cf. Frisbie, “Church Order,” p. 147.} She remarked that “this message seemed to be an addition to the third message, and joined it, as the midnight cry joined the second angel’s message in 1844,” implying that the Advent experience of the summer of 1844 was a type of the loud-cry experience. ^{4Ibid., p. 195. She added that “the third message was to do its work; all were to be tested upon it, and the precious ones were to be called out from the religious bodies” (ibid.).} E. G. White foresaw that the response to this “last solemn warning, proclaiming the fall of Babylon, and calling upon God’s people to come out of her; that they might escape her fearful doom” had as a result that “those who had any light in the churches, who had not heard and rejected the three messages, answered to the call, and left the fallen churches.” Efforts to persuade people to sever their religious affiliation during the loud cry were seen as a type of the manner in which Lot was persuaded to leave Sodom before its destruction. In an attempt to counteract the success of the last mission of warning, she stated that prior to the loud cry Satan would create “an excitement in these religious bodies, that those who have rejected the truth may think God is with them. He hopes to deceive the honest, and lead them to think that God is still working for the churches.” She predicted, however, that this false revival would not prevent the last warning message from accomplishing its work. The concept of the loud cry had important missiological consequences, for it continually inspired believers to new hopes, provided a strong incentive to persevere in mission work-especially in times of discouragement and disappointment-and was an ever-present factor in the development of missionary strategy.FSDA 219.1

The relationship between the angelic and human activity in mission was especially brought out by E. G. White. ^{8See ibid., pp. 128-96.} Her views depicted angels sent from God as being responsible for influencing His people to engage in their God-appointed mission. From the viewpoint of human activity believers could identify their missionary proclamation with the cry of the angels’ messages. However, the general understanding seems to be that the messages of Revelation 14 and Revelation 18 were proclaimed through the united efforts of both the visible and invisible realities.FSDA 220.1

6. Health reform

During the first half of the 19th century, there was a general ignorance of principles of healthful living and treatment of disease. ^{1D. E. Robinson, The Story of Our Health Message ..., 1965, pp. 13-27.} However, movements advocating a healthier life style and improved rational methods of treating disease began to emerge both in Europe and in the U.S.A. and created increasing interest in temperance, therapeutic reform, diet reform, dress reform, etc. ^{2Ibid., pp. 28-49. Cf. Clark, 1844, II, 199-275.} In the U.S.A. the origin of such a movement, called the health reform movement, could be traced back to factors such as a long tradition of health literature, a general dissatisfaction with the medical profession, a widespread prevalence of dyspepsia, ^{4Already in the 18th century the Methodists and Quakers had expressed their concern about the excessive use of alcohol. In 1743 John Wesley appealed to Christians to abstain from “drunkenness, buying or selling spirituous liquors, or drinking them, unless in cases of extreme necessity.” He also opposed the use of snuff and tobacco unless prescribed by a physician, and objected to the drinking of tea. See L. Tyerman, The Life and Times of the Rev. John Wesley, MA., Founder of the Methodists, I, 1870, pp. 464, 521-23; 2:1880, p. 390; 3:1872, pp. 44, 133; Henry Wheeler, Methodism and the Temperance Reformation, 1882, pp. 11-110. A publication entitled An Inquiry into the Effects of Spirituous Liquors on the Human Body, 1790, by Dr. Benjamin Rush, a well-known Quaker physician and one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence, and the Six Sermons on Intemperance ..., 1827, by Lyman Beecher were very influential in generating public support for the American temperance cause. In 1826 the American Temperance Society was established, which advocated abstinence from intoxicating liquors. The leaders in the temperance movement were almost entirely Christians. In 1836 the American Temperance Union was founded. Its aim was total abstinence from all alcoholic beverages (teetotalling) and it received support of many Methodists, Quakers, Presbyterians, and Congregationalists. See e.g., Paul C. Conley and Andrew A. Sorensen, The Staggering Steeple ..., 1971, pp. 30-40.} and a growing agitation by Christians against intemperance. Some of the special characteristics of this movement, which already flourished before the SDA Church was organized, were its opposition to the use of tea, coffee, tobacco, and alcohol, its support for dietary reform and natural remedies, and its evangelical fervor which made health reform a holy cause. Many participants could not accept the general notion that disease was a divine punishment for sin, but felt that disease was caused by man’s failure to live under the laws of nature. Health reform was seen as a means to bring man’s behavior in harmony with the divine laws of the human organism in order to develop a healthy constitution. ^{1Ibid., p. 47.}FSDA 221.1

Various aspects and principles of the reforms advocated by this movement were adopted by few Sabbatarian Adventists before 1863 but, especially through the influence of E. G. White, there was a general acceptance of such reforms by SDA after 1863. ^{2See supra, p. xv. For an understanding of healthful living among believers before and after 1863, see e.g., A. W. Spalding, Origin and History of Seventh-day Adventists, I, 1961, pp. 335-52.} These reforms became designated among SDA under the general term of “health reform.” The primary reason for their acceptance of the reforms was that they were incorporated into their religious experience. It was admitted that SDA did not “profess to be pioneers in the general principles of the health reform,” but they did claim the uniqueness of integrating health reform into their theology. ^{3Waggoner, “Present Truth,” RH, Aug. 7, 1866, p. 77. Non-SDA health reform influences were to be seen in one of the earliest SDA health reform publications, Health: or How to Live, which was prepared by E. G. White in 1865. This publication was “made up chiefly from the most spirited and valuable articles and extracts from Trall, Jackson, Graham, Dio Lewis, Coles, Horace Mann, Gunn, and many others” (J. White, “Health Reform,” No. 4, The Health Reformer, February 1871, p. 152). It should be noticed that the general objective in the publication How to Live was to set forth the E. G. White teachings on the major points of health reform, and then to put with these supportive materials from medical authorities, showing that what she was saying could be substantiated (cf. E. G. White, “Questions and Answers,” RH, Oct. 8, 1867, p. 260). So, while from a quantity standpoint the six pamphlets, How to Live, were made up chiefly of valuable articles from others, the prime article in each case was written by E. G. White.} The integration of health reform into the third angel’s message after 1865 made it a vital part of their theology of mission and accounts for the emphasis in SDA thought on the intimate relationship of the human body and mind to the religious experience of the individual. In this section, first attention will be focused on the early developments of the relationship between religion and health among Sabbatarian Adventists. Then, after the organization of the movement into the SDA Church, a description will be given of the integration of health reform into the third angel’s message and its missiological consequences. The reason for this division was due to the strong influence E. G. White had on the adoption and integration of health reform after 1863.FSDA 222.1

a. Relationship between religion and health (1848-63).FSDA 222.2

The initial indication that abstinence from harmful products for the human body would become a part of the Sabbatarian Adventist profession, was a vision of E. G. White in the autumn of 1848. Here attention was called to the “injurious effects of tobacco, tea, and coffee.” ^{4J. White, “Western Tour,” RH, Nov. 8, 1870, p. 165.} The following year Bates, who had been an active participant in the Temperance movement for many years, ^{5Bates, Autobiography, pp. 205-8, 211, 228-31, 262. For a view of Bates’ personal maturing on the subject of temperance, see ibid., pp. 97, 143, 150, 168, 173, 179, 234, 235.} drew the attention of believers to this vision and reminded them of a departure from their 1844 self-sacrificing practice of abstaining from tobacco and snuff. ^{1Bates, SLG, p. 67. See supra, p. 98.} He urged them to refrain from such unhealthful habits, including the use of alcohol. ^{2Ibid., p. 68. See infra, p. 226.} The same year Edson reported that in western New York State the “brethren have seen the importance of leaving their useless habits;-therefore they have put away snuff and tobacco, as useless, filthy, and unclean.” ^{3Edson, “Beloved Brethren,” p. 34.} From the early part of the 1850s onward, one could distinguish predominantly three categories of appeals stressing the necessity for healthful living: (1) Appeals for health resulting in improvement in spirituality; (2) appeals to the importance of health in the light of the imminent Second Advent; (3) appeals for abstinence to provide means for financial support of missionary activity. Although there is some overlapping, each category has been treated separately.FSDA 222.3

i. Spirituality and health. In 1851 E. G. White pointed to the necessity of discontinuing the use of tobacco because it was “an idol” and said that “unless it is given up the frown of God will be upon the one that uses it.” ^{4Letter, E. G. White to Barnes, No. 5, 1851.} Later a correspondent of the Review and Herald supported the concept of idolatry with Ephesians 5:5 and Colossians 3:5, indicating that the condemnation of tobacco as idolatry was based on the idea that one using tobacco was a “covetous man” and that in turn “covetousness” was “idolatry.” ^{5J. M. McLellan, “The Temple of God Is No Place for Idols,” RH, Oct. 9, 1856, p. 182. Cf. Cornell, “The Tobacco Abomination,” RH, May 20, 1858, p. 1.} In discussing the use of tobacco and alcohol, J. H. Waggoner ^{7Waggoner, “Tobacco,” RH, Nov. 19, 1857, p. 13.} exhorted believers to “keep yourselves from idols [1 John 5:21].” In 1861 E. G. White classified not only tobacco, but also tea and coffee, as idols. According to D. T. Bourdeau it was obvious that “self, tea, and tobacco, etc., are idols, to which many bow and sacrifice.” This indicates that when physical habits were seen to influence spirituality negatively, an appeal for renunciation of such habits was inevitable.FSDA 223.1

The relationship between religion and health was also described in a “selected” article published in the Review and Herald which pointed out that “religion, for its full development, demands all our mental powers.” ^{11“Tobacco,” RH, Dec. 13, 1853, p. 178.} Because tobacco impaired the mental powers, it was concluded that a person who “uses tobacco, cannot be as good a Christian as he could be without it.” ^{1Ibid. Cf. [J. White], “The Faith of Jesus,” RH, March 14, 1854, p. 60.} A recommended article written by a non-Sabbatarian Adventist brought out that violation of the physical laws of the human body, especially through the use of tobacco, was a moral issue involving a sin against the Creator. It stated that God was the author of “man’s organic structure,” which implied that “God’s will is as manifest in this organism as in the ten commandments.” ^{2George Trask, “Popular Poisons,” RH, Oct. 16, 1855, p. 62 (repr. from AH, September 29, 1855, p. 305).} Then it was argued that “whoever injures this ‘divine workmanship,’ by the use of a deadly thing, plants his will in conflict with God’s will,” which signified “rebellion against God” and “sin.” ^{4Ibid. See infra, pp. 230, 231.} Sin, therefore, was seen as “the transgression of law, written by the finger of God on the whole organism of a man, as well as in the Bible.” It was considered “merely a sin of ignorance” when the physical laws of the organism were violated unconsciously, but the moment when one “becomes conscious of this violation, the violation is no longer simply physical, but moral; the act becomes a sinning act, a sin, and the actor a sinner.” In 1863 D. T. Bourdeau approached the moral dimension of healthful living from a different perspective when he associated the use of tea and tobacco with transgression of the Decalogue, not with the transgression of the laws of the human organism. He reasoned that “if tea and tobacco are injurious to our health, as far as we use these herbs, we violate a principle of the sixth commandment, which says, ‘Thou shalt not kill.’ And let us remember that we profess to show a respect for all of God’s commandments.”FSDA 223.2

The Sabbatarian Adventists placed great importance on the temporal significance of the human body in relation to their religious experience. The body was seen as a temple of God designed as the habitation of the Holy Spirit. According to J. White, it was not likely that the Holy Spirit would dwell in those who used tobacco, snuff, and tea. ^{7J. White, “The Office,” RH, July 24, 1855, p. 13. Cf. Letter, Dexter Daniels to Smith, RH, Feb. 5, 1857, p. 110. Here the use of tobacco, snuff, and “intoxicating spirits” was criticized. Reflecting on his behavior when he was twenty years of age (1841), J. White said: “I had never descended to the common sin of profanity, and had not used tobacco, tea and coffee, nor had I ever raised a glass of spirituous liquor to my lips” (Life, p. 15).} The believers frequently referred to 1 Corinthians 3:16, 17, “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are,” and 1 Corinthians 6:19, “What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?” ^{8Andrews, “The Use of Tobacco a Sin Against God,” RH, April 10, 1856, p. 5; McLellan, “Temple of God,” p. 182; J. F. Case, “Tobacco,” RH, Sept. 24, 1857, p. 166; Cornell, “Tobacco Abomination,” p. 1.} These texts were quoted synonymously, so that the “temple of God” in 1 Corinthians 3:16, 17 was identified with the human body as “the temple of the Holy Ghost” in 1 Corinthians 6:19. ^{1See e.g., McLellan, “Temple of God,” p. 182; Cornell, “Tobacco Abomination,” p. 1.} Interpreted in a similar way but used less frequently was 2 Corinthians 6:16: “And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.” ^{2See e.g., J. F. Case, “Tobacco,” p. 166; Cornell, “Tobacco Abomination,” p. 1. McLellan used this text to show the incongruity of the temple of God with the tobacco idolatry (“Temple of God,” p. 182).} All these texts were seen to allude to individual responsibility to preserve the human organism in the best possible condition. A biblical passage often used as having specific reference to the cleanliness of the human body as a necessary aspect of Christian perfection in a non-eschatological as well as in an eschatological sense was 2 Corinthians 7:1: “Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.” ^{4E. G. White, Manuscript 1, 1854 (here, eating to the glory of God was interpreted in the context of the denial of unhealthy appetite); [J. White], “Faith of Jesus,” RH, March 14, 1854, p. 60; Pierce, “Tobacco,” p. 79; J. F Case, “Tobacco,” p. 166; Waggoner, “Tobacco,” p. 12; D. T. Bourdeau, “Tobacco and Tea,” p. 125; M. B. Smith, “Coffee-Its Effects,” RH, Oct. 1, 1861, p. 142. He stated that “if the use of coffee as an article of daily consumption is contrary to organic laws (and organic laws are the laws of God), then we cannot use it ‘to the glory of God’” (ibid.).} The concept of gloria Dei was also regularly employed as referring to a healthful treatment of the physical organism. Both 1 Corinthians 6:20, “For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s,” and 1 Corinthians 10:31, “Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God,” were quoted in this context. Another text which was often mentioned to stress the significance of a healthy body was Romans 12:1: “I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.” Although other texts were used, the above mentioned passages were most frequently used as non-eschatological arguments to support the religious responsibility for the care of the human body.FSDA 224.1

ii. Eschatology and health. Healthful living came to be seen as an indispensable facet of an individual preparation for the parousia. In 1849, in the light of the sealing time, Bates appealed for abstinence from tobacco, snuff, and alcohol. ^{1Bates, SLG, pp. 67, 68. He added: “I know not how he [God] can approbate one of the 144,000 that uses or traffics in alcoholic drinks, from brandy to cider, and beer.”} He especially stressed the necessity of the cleansing of body and spirit, and perfecting holiness (2 Corinthians 7:1; Isaiah 52:11), because continuation of defiling practices would prevent the entrance into the New Jerusalem (Revelation 21:27). ^{2Ibid., p. 68.} Two years later E. G. White indicated the consequences of the use of tobacco for the sealing process when she said that the tobacco consumer “cannot be sealed with the seal of the living God.” ^{3Letter, E. G. White to Barnes, No.5, 1851.}FSDA 225.1

In associating Christian perfection with the Second Advent, E. G. White said: “I saw that Christ will have a church without spot or wrinkle or any such thing to present to his Father [Ephesians 5:27].” ^{4Ibid. Here she also stated that “we must be perfect Christians, deny ourselves all the way along, tread the narrow thorny pathway that our Jesus trod, and then if we are final overcomers, Heaven sweet Heaven will be cheap enough.”} In 1854 E. G. White made an appeal for greater “cleanliness among Sabbath-keepers” as a part of the preparatory process for Christ’s return because “God would have a clean and holy people, a people that He can delight [in].” ^{5E. G. White, Manuscript 1, 1854.} She continued to say that “God would not acknowledge an untidy and unclean person as a Christian. His frown was upon such. Our souls, bodies, and spirits are to be presented blameless by Jesus to His Father [1 Thes. 5:23], and unless we are clean in person and pure in heart, we cannot be presented blameless to God.” ^{6Ibid. For the use of 1 Thes. 5:23, see J. F. Case, “Tobacco,” p. 166, M. B. Smith, “Tea-Its Effects,” RH, May 21, 1861, p. 6; M. B. Smith, “Coffee,” p. 142. The call for blameless bodies implied the necessity of becoming acquainted with “the organic laws by which we are governed” so that practices contrary to these laws might be abolished for the sake of God’s glory (ibid.).} In 1856 Andrews made an appeal to the tobacco consumer to be perfect for the Second Coming:FSDA 226.1

Do you indulge in this inexcusable worldly lust? If so let me beg you to consider that you cannot thus be presented without spot or wrinkle or fault before God. Ephesians 5:27; Revelation 14:5. Deceive not yourself. If you would stand with the Lamb on mount Zion [Revelation 14:1], you must cleanse yourself from all filthiness of flesh and spirit, and perfect holiness in the fear of God [2 Corinthians 7:1]. ^{7Andrews, “Tobacco,” p. 5.}FSDA 226.2

In view of Christ’s imminent return, one correspondent of the Review and Herald urged people to “crucify the lusts of the flesh [Galatians 5:24], and make no delay. We are living in the perilous times of the last days. We must be overcomers, or we cannot stand before the Lord at his coming.” ^{8McLellan, “Temple of God,” p. 182.} In 1857 when the Laodicean message ^{9See infra, pp. 244-48.} was emphasized, another correspondent pointed out that a healthy body was an indispensable pare of the preparation for the latter rain, the antitypical outpouring of “the Spirit of the day of Pentecost” just before the Second Advent. He remarked that to get ready for “a baptism of fire or the Holy Ghost” it was necessary thatFSDA 226.3

we must be pure in body and soul. We must cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and of the spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God [2 Corinthians 7:1]. We must not use tobacco, or snuff, or intoxicating spirits; for if we do we are filthy. The holy Spirit cannot dwell in such temples [1 Corinthians 3:16]. We must cast away all such filthy things. ^{1Letter, Daniels to Smith, p. 110.}FSDA 227.1

In the pre-1863 period the above biblical references formed the general eschatological appeal while no connection had yet been established between healthful living and the third angel’s message.FSDA 227.2

iii. Mission financing and health. When the missionary activity of Sabbatarian Adventists began to expand, there was an ever growing demand for financial support. In 1854 E. G. White called for a denial of unhealthful appetite so that money saved in this way could be “put into the treasury of the Lord.” ^{2E. G. White, Manuscript 1, 1854.} In appealing for financial assistance she employed arguments of economy, healthful living, and divine favor:FSDA 227.3

If all would study to be more economical in their articles of dress, and deprive themselves of some things which are not actually necessary, and lay aside such useless and injurious things as tea, etc., and give what they cost to the cause, they would receive more blessings here, and a reward in heaven. ^{3E. G. White, Supplement to the Christian Experience and Views of Ellen G. White, 42 (Early Writings, 121, 122).}FSDA 227.4

When some pleaded poverty as a reason for not sustaining the Review and Herald, J. White described them as being “too poor to help a brother send out the bread of heaven to the scattered flock, but have means enough to obtain tobacco, snuff and tea!” ^{4J. White, “Office,” p. 13. Cf. M. B. Smith, “Tea,” p. 6.} In 1856 he estimated that if Sabbatarian Adventists would donate their yearly expenses they had or used to have for the purchase of tea and tobacco, the amount “would be sufficient to sustain thirty Missionaries in new fields of labor.” ^{5J. White, “Tobacco and Tea,” RH, May 1, 1856, p. 24.} In 1861 E. G. White stated that “those who use tobacco, tea and coffee should lay these idols aside, and put their cost into the treasury of the Lord.” ^{7M. B. Smith, “Coffee,” p. 142.} One correspondent condemned the consumption of coffee because it was unhealthy and used “the Lord’s money for that which at most only gratifies the taste without nourishing the body.” Evaluating the results of these agitations by 1863, D. T. Bourdeau optimistically said that “as far as organization and church order are adopted and carried out among us, tobacco and tea are being laid aside.” b. Health reform and the third angel’s message (1863-74).FSDA 227.5

From the year 1863 onward more emphasis was placed on the necessity of healthful living habits. Gradually the term “health reform” was adopted by SDA to designate a variety of reforms which would lead to restoration as well as preservation of health. In its broadest sense health reform signified an intelligent understanding of the laws of life and nature, seen as divine laws, resulting in a series of reformations so individuals could enjoy the greatest measure of physical, mental, and spiritual health. Health reform principles were considered to have a biblical basis and to be a gift from God to humanity. A major reason for the growing pre-occupation with the importance of a healthy human organism for the religious experience of the individual could be traced back to E. G. White’s visions on this subject in 1863 and 1865. ^{1See e.g., Robinson, Health Message, pp. 75-171.} The successful acceptance of health reform among SDA resulted, according to Waggoner, from its integration into the third angel’s message. In 1866 he stated that the principles of health reform “as mere physiological and hygienic truths” could be studied or laid aside as of no importance, butFSDA 228.1

when placed on a level with the great truths of the third angel’s message by the sanction and authority of God’s Spirit, and so declared to be the means whereby a weak people may be made strong to overcome, and our diseased bodies cleansed and fitted for translation, then it comes to us as an essential part of present truth, to be received with the blessing of God, or rejected at our peril. ^{2Waggoner, “Present Truth,” p. 77.}FSDA 228.2

One year later, E. G. White indicated the significance of health reform for ministers by saying that “one important part of their work is to faithfully present to the people the Health Reform, as it stands connected with the third angel’s message, as part and parcel of the same work.” ^{3E.G. White, TC, No. 11, p. 19 (Testimonies for the Church 1:469, 470).} She stated further that “the Health Reform is a part of the third angel’s message, and is just as closely connected with this message, as the arm and hand with the human body.” ^{4Ibid., p. 41 (Testimonies for the Church 1:486). In 1872 she said that “health reform is as closely connected with the third angel’s message as the hand is united to the body” (ibid., No. 21, p. 90 [Testimonies for the Church 3:62]). Cf. ibid., No. 22, p. 49 (Testimonies for the Church 3:161).} However, a warning was issued against making it the prominent message when she said that “the Health Reform is closely connected with the work of the third [angel’s] message, yet it is not the message. Our preachers should teach the Health Reform, yet they should not make this the leading theme in the place of the message.” ^{6Ibid. She said: “We should take hold of every reform with zeal, yet should avoid giving the impression that we are vacillating, and subject to fanaticism” (ibid.).} She added that “its place is among those subjects which set forth the preparatory work to meet the events brought to view by the message, among which it is prominent.” At the 1869 General Conference a resolution was passed stating “that we consider the Health Reform as an important auxiliary to the cause of present truth, and recommend to all our ministers to urge it to a proper extent upon the churches, and to endeavor to be examples to all in this respect.” ^{1General Conference Report, RH, May 1869, p. 173.} In 1870 on the presupposition that “every real reform, which is calculated to improve man’s present condition, and which has a bearing on his future happiness, is under the direct providence of God,” J. White concluded that “the great cause of health reform is from Heaven.” ^{2J. White, “Health Reform,” No. 1, The Health Reformer, November 1870, p. 90. He added that “though Jews, Turks, skeptics, Christians, or modern Judases, who would sell their Lord for money, may act a part in it, the reform, nevertheless, is of God” (ibid.).}FSDA 228.3

i. The integration of health reform. A basic principle in health reform indicated that transgression of the laws of the human organism was a moral issue, and thus sinful, so that transgression of these laws could be considered as transgression of God’s law, the Decalogue. It was at this point thee the integration of health reform into the third angel’s message took place, because its central theme summoned the observance of God’s commandments (Revelation 14:12). Therefore, health reform by calling people to obedience to the laws of nature supported obedience to God’s commandments, an object similar to the mission of the third angel’s message.FSDA 229.1

Various approaches were made to explain violation of the laws of the human organism as a sin. One approach was by evaluating disobedience to these laws through using the Decalogue as a criterion. One of the first to discuss the relation of health reform to the third angel’s message in this context was D. T. Bourdeau. In 1867 he pointed out thatFSDA 229.2

the Health Reform has come to us as a part of the message; being based on the laws of our being, which are very comprehensive; growing out of the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus [Revelation 14:12], especially the sixth commandment; making it obligatory upon us to use all proper and available means within our reach to ameliorate and preserve our health and prolong our lives; making it a sin for us to be sick, if we knowingly and carelessly bring sickness upon ourselves by a violation of the laws of health. ^{3D. T. Bourdeau “Advantages of God’s People ...,” RH, Feb. 26, 1867, p. 134. Earlier he had said that “the sixth commandment, in particular, regulates our course with regard to preserving life and health. It is one of the negative precepts, and not only prohibits the sin of destroying our lives and the lives of others, but it includes the injunction of the contrary duty, viz. to make use of all proper and available means to ameliorate and preserve health, and prolong our existence and the existence of others” (Sanctification, or Living Holiness, 1864, p. 120). See supra, p. 224. Another connection between health reform and the third angel he found in the “patience of the saints” (Revelation 14:12): “We cannot have the patience of the saints without it [Health Reform], while we are constantly lessening our vitality, and abusing our nervous system by intemperance” (“Advantages,” p. 134). Commenting on the relation between sin and sickness E. G. White said: “It is a sin to be sick; for all sickness is the result of transgression. Many are suffering in consequence of the transgression of their parents. They cannot be censured for their parents’ sin, but it is nevertheless their duty to ascertain wherein their parents violated the laws of their being, which has entailed upon their offspring so miserable an inheritance; and wherein their parents’ habits were wrong, they should change their course, and place themselves by correct habits in a better relation to health” (“Duty To Know Ourselves,” The Health Reformer, August 1866, p. 2). She also stated that God required people “to obey natural law, to preserve physical health” (TC, No. 21, p. 92 [Testimonies for the Church 3:63]).}

Waggoner argued that the preservation of health was a moral duty. The sixth commandment of the Decalogue, he said, “as truly forbids injury to our own lives as to the lives of others,” which meant that it could be interpreted as “‘Thou shalt not kill’ thyself, as justly as, ‘Thou shalt not kill’ thy neighbor.” ^{1Waggoner, “A Moral Duty of Preserving Health,” The Health Reformer, February 1872, p. 51.} This led him to conclude that “it is morally wrong, according to the sixth commandment, to do anything tending to abridge the lives either of ourselves or others.” ^2Ibid. This approach with its emphasis on physical killing resulting from the violation of the laws of the body indicated a transgression of the Decalogue and formed a point of contact between health reform and the third angel’s message.FSDA 230.1

Another approach evaluated disobedience to the laws of the human organism in the context of God’s creatorship. It considered these laws divine, which meant that transgressing them was a sinful act. E. G. White pointed out that “God has formed laws which govern our constitutions, and these laws which he has placed in our being, are divine, and for every transgression there is affixed a penalty, which must sooner or later be realized.” ^{3E. G. White, “Parents Their Own Physicians,” The Health Reformer, October 1866, p. 36 (Counsels on Diet and Foods, 1946, 19).} This suggested that the law of God included both the moral law and the laws of the human organism. J. White interpreted the phrase “sin is the transgression of the law” (1 Jn. 3:4) as referring “particularly to the moral code, yet the transgression of law, moral or physical, established by our beneficent Creator to govern our actions, is sin.” ^{4[J. White], “Redemption,” The Health Reformer, December 1872, p. 371. In this setting an allusion was made to Mt. 1:21 about the redemptive work of Jesus, whose mission was “to save man from, not in, the transgression of law” (ibid.).} This approach of designating divine status to the laws of the human organism also provided a point of contact between health reform and the third angel’s message.FSDA 230.2

A third approach viewed the violation of the laws of nature by its consequences on the body. On the basis of E. G. White’s description, the consequences can be designated as “soma-psycho-pneumatic” because each violation of the laws of health affected the physical, mental, and spiritual constitution of man. In 1864 her first extensive treatment on principles of healthful living was published, describing the “soma-psycho-pneumatic” consequences. The effect of the use of fermented wine on the body, she said, was that it impaired the mind, which in turn negatively affected spirituality. As an example she referred to the death of Nadab and Abihu (Leviticus 10:1, 2), stating that they, by drinking wine, “beclouded their reasoning faculties, and so lost their sense of sacred things, that they thought they could as well offer common fire as sacred [Leviticus 10:9, 10]. God did not excuse them because the brain was confused. Fire from his presence destroyed them in their sin.” ^{5E. G. White, Spiritual Gifts 4a:125. The prohibition against alcoholic drinks in Leviticus 10:9, 10 was seen as a direct consequence of the events in 10:1, 2.} Concerning the effects of tobacco, she said: “It is a slow poison. It affects the brain and benumbs the sensibilities, so that the mind cannot clearly discern spiritual things, especially those truths which would have a tendency to correct this filthy indulgence. Those who use tobacco in any form are not clear before God.” ^{1Ibid., p. 126.} In her opinion, people who “indulge a perverted appetite, do it to the injury of health and intellect. They cannot appreciate the value of spiritual things. Their sensibilities are blunted, and sin does not appear very sinful, and truth is not regarded of greater value than earthly treasure.” ^{2Ibid, p. 129. She also remarked that if individuals “gratify a gross appetite and by so doing blunt their sensibilities, and becloud their perceptive faculties so that they cannot appreciate the exalted character of God, or delight in the study of his Word, they may be assured that God will not accept their unworthy offering any sooner than that of Cain” (ibid., p. 148). For the relationship between appetite and sanctification, see D. T. Bourdeau, Sanctification, pp. 43-47.} In 1866 she summarized her views, saying that “every violation of principle in eating and drinking, blunts the perceptive faculties, making it impossible for them to appreciate or place the right value upon eternal things.” ^{3E. G. White, “Duty,” p. 3.} Describing this “soma-psycho-pneumatic” process, she stated thatFSDA 230.3

in order to render to God perfect service, you want clear conceptions of his requirements. You should indulge in the use of the most simple food, prepared in the most simple manner, that the fine nerves of the brain be not weakened, benumbed nor paralyzed, making it impossible for you to discern sacred things, and to value the atonement, and the cleansing blood of Christ as of priceless worth. ^{4E. G. White, TC, No. 15, 1868, p. 34. Later the verb “use” replaced “indulge in the use of” (E. G. White, Testimonies for the Church 2:46). Cf. Waggoner, “The Gospel of Health,” The Health Reformer, September 1871, p. 80. For the relation between health reform and atonement, see also E. G. White, TC, No. 11, p. 43 (Testimonies for the Church 1:488); ibid., No. 18, 1870, pp. 15, 16 (Testimonies for the Church 2:364). Due to the “soma-psycho-pneumatic” consequences of the violation of the laws of the human body, she stressed the necessity that “the animal part of our nature should never be left to govern the moral and intellectual” (ibid., p. 16 [Testimonies for the Church 2:364]). Cf. E. G. White, “Life and Mission of John,” RH, Jan. 7, 1873, p. 26; TC, No. 11, p. 42 [Testimonies for the Church 1:487]). In this context health reform provided for God’s people insights so that they would not endanger their spirituality but would have “strength and clearness to discern the sacred chain of truth, and turn from the bewitching errors and pleasing fables that are flooding the world” (E. G. White, “Life and Mission of John,” p. 26).}FSDA 231.1

It should be no surprise that the conclusion was that if violation of the laws of the human organism would lessen one’s spiritual discernment, it would also negatively affect one’s obedience toward the moral law of God. Thus, E. G. White remarked that “men and women cannot violate natural law in the indulgence of depraved appetite, and lustful passions, and not violate the law of God.” ^{5E. G. White, TC, No. 22, p. 49 (Testimonies for the Church 3:161). One of the points of the platform of the Western Health Reform Institute stated that “the moral and physical natures of man are so intimately related that it is impossible to live in violation of either of these laws without doing violence to the other. Physical law, therefore, in its sphere, is as sacred and binding upon man as moral law” (Editorial, “Our Health Institute,” The Health Reformer, February 1872, p. 48). Cf. E. G. White, “Duty,” p. 3. Here she stated that “every needless transgression of the laws which God has established in our being, is virtually a violation of the law of God, and is as great a sin in the sight of Heaven as to break the ten commandments.”} Through the analysis of the “soma-psycho-pneumatic” consequences another point of contact was established with God’s law, which formed a part of the third angel’s message.FSDA 231.2

The fact that there was an intimate relationship between the violation of the laws of the body and those of God’s moral law was, according to E. G. White, one of the major reasons that God “permitted the light of health reform to shine upon us, that we may see our sin in violating the laws God has established in our being.” ^{1E. G. White, TC, No. 22, p. 49 (Testimonies for the Church 3:161). She added that God “in love and pity to the race, causes the light to shine upon health reform. He publishes his law, and the penalty that will follow the transgression of it, that all may learn, and be careful to live in harmony with natural law.”} She also stressed the spiritual consequences of rejecting health reform by stating that “those who will not, after the light has come to them, eat and drink from principle, instead of being controlled by appetite, will not be tenacious in regard to being governed by principle in other things.” ^{2E. G. White, “Duty,” p. 3.} Such a rejection would result in the hardening of the heart with the possibility of losing salvation. She said: “Whoever turns from the light in one instance hardens his heart to disregard the light in other matters. Whoever violates moral obligations in the matter of eating and dressing, prepares the way to violate the claims of God in regard to eternal interests.” ^{3E. G. White, TC, No. 21, pp. 90, 91 (Testimonies for the Church 3:63).} The above arguments were used to appeal for a total acceptance of health reform because it was a part of the third angel’s message.FSDA 232.1

ii. Eschatological aspects of health reform. Some of the eschatological arguments for accepting health reform were similar to those used before 1863, but the fact that they were integrated into the third angel’s message made them much more forceful. Their thrust was made in the context of a preparation for the difficult times ahead and Christ’s return. In 1867 D. T. Bourdeau stated that health reform would prepare the people of God for the time of refreshing (Acts 3:19) or latter rain, the seven last plagues, and the time of trouble. ^{4D. T. Bourdeau, “Advantages,” p. 134.} Similar arguments ^{5Loughborough, “Report ...,” RH, Aug. 14, 1866, p. 84; D. M. Canright, “The Three Messages of Revelation 14:6-13,” RH, Jan. 1, 1867, p. 39; Pierce, “Eating Not of Faith,” RH, March 12, 1867, p. 158.} were used by Loughborough, D. M. Canright, ^{7Stephen Pierce (c. 1804-1883) was one of the early Sabbatarian Adventists who participated in the 1848 conferences. He functioned in the capacity of a minister, administrator, and corresponding editor of the RH.} and Stephen Pierce. Health reform was seen as indispensable in maintaining a state of watchfulness for the “day of the Lord” (Luke 21:34). In commenting on a negligent attitude toward health reform E. G. White stated that “ministers and people must act in concert. God’s people are not prepared for the loud cry of the third angel.” ^{1E. G. White, TC, No. 11, p. 41 (Testimonies for the Church 1:486).}FSDA 232.2

The majority of arguments were focused on the Second Advent and especially the preparation for the moment when the mortal body would be translated into immortality. Obedience to health reform principles had a purifying influence on the body, and, according to Waggoner, was a means “whereby a weak people may be made strong to overcome, and our diseased bodies cleansed and fitted for translation.” ^{2Waggoner, “Present Truth,” p. 77. Cf. Loughborough, “Report,” p. 84.} E. G. White remarked thatFSDA 233.1

in order for the people of God to be fitted for translation, they must know themselves. They must understand in regard to their own physical frames, that they can, with the psalmist, exclaim, “I will praise Thee, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made” [Psalm 139:6]. They should ever have the appetite in subjection to the moral and intellectual organs. The body should be a servant to the mind, and not the mind to the body. ^{3E. G. White, TC, No. 11, p. 42 (Testimonies for the Church 1:486, 487).}FSDA 233.2

The implication of obedience to principles of healthful living for sanctification and translation she expressed by stating that “if man will cherish the light that God in mercy gives him upon health reform, he may be sanctified through the truth, and fitted for immortality. If he disregards light, and lives in violation of natural law, he must pay the penalty.” ^{4Ibid., No. 22, p. 52 (Testimonies for the Church 3:162). Cf. ibid., No. 18, p. 33 (Testimonies for the Church 2:375, 376).} In a similar context D. T. Bourdeau interpreted the wilderness experience of ancient Israel before entering into Canaan as a type of the experience of SDA before entering into the heavenly Canaan, stating thatFSDA 233.3

they [Israelites] must repent thoroughly of their sins, and reform. They must cleanse themselves physically as well as spiritually. And is God less particular now than he was then? Can we meet the Lord when he comes in the glory of the Father, and with all the holy angels, without cleansing ourselves of all filthiness of the flesh and spirit? without overcoming those habits that are injurious to both body and mind? Will God change the wrong habits of those who shall never taste of death, but shall be translated alive to the heavenly Canaan, without their co-operation? ^{5D. T. Bourdeau, “Report from California,” RH, Feb. 23, 1869, p. 69.}FSDA 233.4

As a result of E. G. White’s June 6, 1863 vision believers were encouraged to adopt a vegetarian diet. ^{6E. G. White, Spiritual Gifts 4a:153; E. G. White, “Questions and Answers,” p. 260. For additional biblical arguments used to support vegetarianism, see E. G. White, Spiritual Gifts 4a, 120-22; D. T. Bourdeau, “Health,” No. 2, 3, The Health Reformer, September, October 1866, pp. 25-27, 33-35; [J. White], “Bible Hygiene,” The Health Reformer, July, August, September 1871, pp. 17, 18, 48, 82, 83; September 1872, pp. 274-76; “The Food of John the Baptist,” The Health Reformer, September 1871, p. 83; [J. White], “Flesh as Food,” The Health Reformer, January 1872, pp. 16-18, E. G. White, Diet and Foods, pp. 373-405. Cottrell interpreted the Mosaic law on clean and unclean animals as a divine criterion to indicate the healthfulness of food for human consumption. However, he felt that due to the fact that even the clean animals were not the healthiest kind of foods and that disease among animals was on the increase, the safest course would be to return to the antediluvian diet (“The Health Reform As Connected with the Third Angel’s Message,” RH, May 16, 1871, p. 173, p. 173). Cf. the contrasting attitude on meat eating before 1863: [J. White], “Swine’s Flesh,” The Present Truth, November 1850, pp. 87, 88; [J. White], “Swine Flesh,” RH, May 23, 1854, p. 140. Cf. E. G. White, TC, No. 5, p. 20 (Testimonies for the Church 1:206, 207).} In providing biblical support for this diet J. White pointed out that God’s promise, “Behold, I make all things new” (Revelation 21:5), would be fulfilled in the restoration and restitution of this earth to the condition of Eden “before the fall,” which implied a return to the vegetarian Edenic diet described in Genesis 1:29. ^{1[J. White], “Flesh As Food ...,” The Health Reformer, August 1872, p. 242.} He remarked that pain, death, the killing of God’s creatures, and the habit of eating meat were the result of sin and did not form a part of the original divine plan for mankind. Therefore, he made an appeal for vegetarianism by stating that “flesh-eating being of so doubtful origin, its continued practice, especially by those who look upon sin with abhorrence, and seek for purity and true holiness, may with propriety be called in question.” ^2Ibid. He added that “those who ‘seek for glory, honor, immortality, eternal life’ [Romans 2:7], will wisely and safely come as near as possible in conformity to God’s original plan when all creation was robed in spotless purity.” ^{3Ibid. Pierce remarked that “we are trying to bring ourselves back to the course of living practiced in Eden; in preparation for the heavenly Eden, where there will be no beasts slain for the gratification of carnivorous appetites; where the wolf shall dwell with the lamb, the leopard shall lie down with the kid, the calf and the young lion and the fatling together. Isaiah 11:6” (“Eating,” p. 158).}FSDA 233.5

iii. Non-eschatological aspects of health reform. After 1863, the non-apocalyptic thrust for health reform was on temperance. In 1865 Andrews observed that “we begin to understand not only that temperance is a Christian virtue, but also that it is the real foundation of good health.” ^{4Andrews, “How To Live,” RH, Sept. 12, 1865, p. 116.} The following year he described the SDA position as very unique: “As a people, we have undertaken to do what no other religious denomination, to my knowledge, has ever attempted. We have taken in hand the idea of Christian temperance as set forth in the Bible and endeavored to make it a practical matter throughout our whole body.” ^{5Andrews, “The Health Institute at Battle Creek,” RH, Sept. 11, 1866, p. 120. He added: “Considering the difficulties of the undertaking, we have met with great success” (ibid.).} The major expositor on temperance was E. G. White who pointed to the duty of taking a stand against “intemperance of every kind.” ^{7E. G. White, TC, No. 22, p. 50 (Testimonies for the Church 3:161, 162). Cf. E. G. White, Spiritual Gifts 4a:120.} The fall of man she used as an illustration of the consequences of an intemperate appetite. The hope for mankind, she said, was Christ’s example, for “as Adam fell, through appetite, and lost blissful Eden, the children of Adam may, through Christ, overcome appetite, and through temperance in all things [1 Corinthians 9:25] regain Eden.” The relation between intemperance and salvation she described by referring to the “soma-psycho-pneumatic” effects, stating that intemperate appetite had resulted in disease, weakening of the moral faculties, and an inability to “appreciate the sacred truth, the value of the atonement, which is essential to salvation.” ^{1E. G. White, TC, No. 14, 1868, p. 80 (Testimonies for the Church 1:693, 694).} The phrase “temperance in all things” became central in this thrust. ^{2See e.g., E. G. White, Spiritual Gifts 4a:146; E. G. White, “Duty,” p. 3; Pierce, “Eating,” p. 158; Editorial, “Our Health Institute,” p. 48; E. G. White, TC, No. 21, p. 91 (Testimonies for the Church 3:63).} It signified to E. G. White temperance in the exercise of the passions and total abstinence from all “stimulating, hurtful indulgences,” including excessive labor, drinking of tea and coffee, and use of meat. ^{4Ibid., No. 21, p. 90 (Testimonies for the Church 3:62).} In 1872 she connected temperance with the third angel’s message and remarked that “temperance in all things is to be connected with the message, to turn the people of God from their idolatry, their gluttony, their extravagance in dress and other things.” Temperance was an important tool in the successful introduction of health reform. A major reason was, according to J. White, that E. G. White “appealed to the people upon the subject of Christian temperance from a Bible standpoint.”FSDA 234.1

Closely related to temperance was the argument of self-denial. It was associated with Christ’s redemptive acts of self-denial in His incarnation ^{6E. G. White, Spiritual Gifts 4a:149.} and His temptation in the wilderness. ^{7[J. White], “Redemption,” p. 371; Jesus’ first temptation in the wilderness was interpreted as of special significance for the relation between self-denial and health reform: “Man fell under the power of appetite. The Redeemer took hold of redemption just where the ruin occurred. In order to be better qualified to redeem man, sold in transgression of moral and physical law, the Redeemer subjected himself to a total fast of nearly six weeks at the time of the temptation in the wilderness. In this, he set his people an example of self-denial.... But what of the professed followers of Jesus Christ, who are really drunkards and gluttons?” (ibid.).} Describing the importance of self-denial and temperance E. G. White said: “Providence has been leading the people of God out from the extravagant habits of the world, away from the indulgence of appetite and passion, upon the platform of self-denial and temperance in all things.” ^{8E. G. White, TC, No. 21, p. 91 (Testimonies for the Church 3:63).}FSDA 235.1

Another thrust of arguments which motivated people to accept health reform was related to the various aspects of sanctification, such as perfection, the concept of gloria Dei, the bodily temple, being a lining sacrifice, etc. E. G. White pointed out that the object of a health institute to be established by SDA should not be “only health, but perfection and the spirit of holiness, which cannot be attained to with diseased bodies and minds.” ^{9Ibid., No. 12, p. 78 (Testimonies for the Church 1:554).} She said that it was God who through His love permitted “light to shine, that man may see that, in order to live a perfect life, he must live in harmony with those natural laws which govern his being.” ^{1Ibid., No. 22, p. 52 (Testimonies for the Church 3:163).} Thus it was of great importance that man should know “how to live, that his powers of body and mind may be exercised to the glory of God.” ^2Ibid. The concept of God’s glory was explained both in the context of the body as a temple of God (1 Corinthians 6:19, 20) and the one of 1 Corinthians 10:31. ^{4E. G. White, Spiritual Gifts 4a:148.} The argument of creation was used by E. G. White in appealing for bodily perfection. The fact that man was formed in God’s image (Genesis 1:26, 27), she said, signified the “sacred duty ... to keep that image in as perfect a state as possible.” From God’s creatorship she inferred that He is the owner of the body, so that “we are in duty bound to become intelligent in regard to the best means of preserving the habitation he has given us from decay.” The preservation of the body as a sacrifice (Romans 12:1) was also used to stress the necessity of bodily perfection. According to E. G. White, this text had implications for salvation, for it indicated that man “can make the body unholy by sinful indulgences. If unholy, they are unfitted to be spiritual worshipers, and are not worthy of Heaven.” From the intimate relationship between religion and health, and the biblical appreciation for body, mind, and spirit, J. White concluded that “the sanctification of the Bible is nothing short of the sanctification of the entire man” while referring to 1 Thes. 5:23. Although other biblical arguments were used, the above mentioned provided the major emphasis.FSDA 235.2

In addition to these arguments the prospect of enjoying better health also motivated people to accept the principles of health reform. ^{10See e.g., E. G. White, TC, No. 12, p. 77 (Testimonies for the Church 1:554); [J. White], “Progress of the Cause,” The Health Reformer, August 1873, p. 242.}FSDA 236.1

iv. Mission and health reform. The thrust of health reform was at first directed toward SDA themselves, of whom many suffered from ill health caused by the tensions and problems experienced during the Civil War period of 1861-65. ^{11Some of the major problems were the organization of the SDA Church, the costly attempts to exempt believers from military service, the formulation of a position on war and military service, and the function and credibility of E. G. White.} In 1866 an editorial in the Review and Herald stated that because of the insights provided by “the great subject of health reform ... all will be enabled to adjust their labors to their physical capabilities, and thus have the surest guarantee against breaking down, and becoming inefficient in the future.” ^{1Editorial, “The New Volume,” RH, June 5, 1866, p. 4.} E. G. White remarked that one important part of the work of the ministry was to urge health reform connected with the third angel’s message “upon all who profess to believe the truth.” ^{2E. G. White, TC, No. 11, p. 19 (Testimonies for the Church 1:469, 470).} A resolution of a similar nature was passed at the 1869 General Conference. ^{4E. G. White, TC, No. 11, p. 43 (Testimonies for the Church 1:487).} The introduction of health reform did not take place without opposition; however, when J. White observed the behavior of SDA at camp meetings from Maine to Kansas during the summer of 1870, he reported that “with hardly an exception they discarded flesh-meats, and partake of food but twice each day.”FSDA 236.2

E. G. White indicated that the mission of health reform was much broader than to be confined only to SDA. In referring to intemperance she stated that it was of “the greatest importance that mankind should not be ignorant in regard to the consequences of excess.” ^{6E. G. White, “Duty,” p. 3. Cf. E. G. White, Manuscript 1, 1863.} Commenting on health reform, J. White said that “the burden of our mission is to teach the people how to live so that those who enjoy health may remain well, and that those who are running down in health may return from wrong habits to correct ones, and live.” ^{7[J. White], “Progress of the Cause,” The Health Reformer, August 1873, p. 242.} He also called for “intelligent, big-hearted, devoted hygienic missionaries, who will assist us in our mission of sending rays of light and truth everywhere, upon the great subject of how to live.” ^{8Ibid., p. 243.}FSDA 237.1

Health reform was seen as a means which would prepare the ground for the third angel’s message. J. White remarked that it was “a sort of John [the] Baptist to prepare the way for the greater light of the last message of mercy.” ^{9J. White, “Hygienic Book Fund,” RH, Aug. 20, 1872, p. 77.} E. G. White stated that “the great subject of health reform shall be agitated, and the public mind deeply stirred to investigate, for it is impossible for men and women, with all their sinful, health-destroying, brain-enervating habits, to discern sacred truth.” ^{10E. G. White, TC, No. 22, p. 51 (Testimonies for the Church 3:162).} The work of educating people on the importance of “natural law, and urge the obedience of it” was to be associated with the third angel’s message. ^{11Ibid., p. 50 (Testimonies for the Church 3:161).}FSDA 237.2

In 1866, as a direct result of E. G. White’s December 25, 1865 vision, ^{1Ibid., No. 12, p. 76 (Testimonies for the Church 1:553).} the Western Health Reform Institute was established in Battle Creek, Michigan. Its functions were the treatment of disease and the teaching of health reform principles. An editorial in the Review and Herald stated that this institution was “a present necessity with our people, not only as a place where the sick can be treated, but where people may come and see the practical workings of the Reform, and learn more of its principles, and how to carry them out at their homes.” ^{2Editorial, “The Health-Reform Institute,” RH, July 10, 1866, p. 48. Cf. E. G. White, TC, No. 12, p. 76 (Testimonies for the Church 1:553). The editorial further stressed that “the Health Reform must be put in practice by us all” (“Health-Reform Institute,” p. 48).} The institution was established especially for the benefit of SDA because it was felt that their faith and religious principles should not be endangered by the worldly atmosphere of secular institutions. ^{4Loughborough, “Report,” p. 84. Cf. General Conference committee, “Health Institute,” RH, May 3, 1870, p. 160. This fact, according to Loughborough, was evidence that the establishment of such an institution was not a denial of faith in the imminence of the parousia, but rather a confirmation of the genuineness of their faith (Loughborough, “Report,” p. 85).} The health-reform educational program of the institution was seen to be of vital importance in the preparation of SDA for the final conflict which would culminate in the translation of God’s people at the Second Advent. E. G. White brought out that “this Institution is designed of God to be one of the greatest aids in preparing a people to be perfect before God.” The institution was also considered as an important aspect of the missionary thrust. When non-SDA would attend it, Loughborough remarked, they might also “become acquainted with the character and ways of our people, see a beauty in the religion of the Bible, and be led into the Lord’s service.” He felt that even if people would never accept the truth, their favorable impression of the institute would make them defenders of the SDA cause. E. G. White stated that if the institution were rightly conducted it “would be a means of bringing our views before many whom it would be impossible for us to reach by the common course of advocating the truth.” She further stated thatFSDA 238.1

as unbelievers shall resort to an institution devoted to the successful treatment of disease, and conducted by Sabbath-keeping physicians, they are brought directly under the influence of the truth. By becoming acquainted with Sabbath-keepers and our real faith, their prejudice is overcome, and they are favorably impressed. By thus being placed under the influence of truth, some will nor only obtain relief from bodily infirmities, but their sin-sick souls will find a healing balm. ^{9Ibid. (Testimonies for the Church 1:493).}FSDA 238.2

E. G. White referred to this healing of “sin-sick souls” as “one of the great objects of our Health Institute,” and indicated that it was the function of health-reform education “to direct the sin-sick soul to the great Physician, the true healing fountain and arouse their attention to the necessity of reform from a religious standpoint, that they no longer violate the law of God by sinful indulgences.” ^{1Ibid., No. 22, p. 64 (Testimonies for the Church 3:170). In describing the process toward a total commitment to the principles of health reform Matteson said that the essential steps were, first, “to acknowledge your sin. Then to feel godly sorrow for sin, repent of sin, and turn away from it to Jesus. There, and there only, you can find help to truly reform. But when you get Jesus to help you, how easy everything goes. Then you will have the health reform connected and interwoven with your religion, and you will praise the Lord for his loving kindness also in this respect” (“Godly Sorrow,” p. 21).} In comparing this institution with secular institutions, she said that SDA managersFSDA 238.3

do not labor selfishly for means alone; but for humanity’s sake, and for Christ’s sake. The managers of our Health Institute are seeking to benefit suffering humanity, to heal the diseased mind, as well as the suffering body, by directing invalids to Christ, the sinner’s friend. They do not leave religion out of the question, but make God their trust and dependence. The sick are directed to Jesus. ^{2E. G. White, TC, No. 22, p. 87 (Testimonies for the Church 3:184). From the viewpoint of the psychology of mission strategy she warned against the presentation of specific SDA doctrines to the patients. She said: “Our peculiar faith should not be discussed with patients. Their minds should not be unnecessarily excited upon subjects wherein we differ, unless they themselves desire it, and then great caution should be observed, not to agitate the mind by urging upon them our peculiar faith. The Health Institute is not the place to be forward to enter into discussion upon points of our faith wherein we differ with the religious world generally” (ibid., p. 58 [Testimonies for the Church 3:166]). She suggested that prayer meetings at the institution, where topics on general Bible themes should be discussed, would be a means to create mutual confidence and remove prejudice. This would result in a desire by the patients to attend also the church service. It was during the church service that the patients should have the opportunity to be exposed to the specific SDA doctrines (ibid., pp. 59, 60 [Testimonies for the Church 3:167]).}FSDA 239.1

Therefore, as far as she was concerned, the missionary nature of the institution was clear: “The great object of receiving unbelievers into the institution is to lead them to embrace the truth.” ^{3Ibid., No. 12, p. 86 (Testimonies for the Church 1:560).}FSDA 239.2

The qualifications for physicians engaged in the restoration of “sin-sick souls” were, according to E. G. White, that they should be able not only “to treat the body merely to cure disease, thus working from the popular physician’s standpoint, but be spiritual fathers, to administer to minds diseased, and point the sin-sick soul to the never-failing remedy, the Saviour who died for them.” ^{4Ibid., No. 22, pp. 60, 61 (Testimonies for the Church 3:168).} The spiritual and physical restoration of the paralytic by Jesus (Mt. 9:2-8; Mark 2:3-14; Luke 5:18-26) she used as biblical rationale to indicate that “physicians who would be successful in the treatment of disease, should know how to administer to a mind diseased.” ^{5Ibid., p. 62 (Testimonies for the Church 3:169).} Regarding the role of the physician, the 1872 platform of the Institute stated: “We recognize in nature the power to restore to health without the aid of medicines. The true Physician supplies conditions: Nature Cures.” It added: “Our materia medica: Good food, pure air, pure, soft water, light, heat, exercise, proper clothing, rest, sleep, moral and social influence.” ^{1“Our Health Institute,” The Health Reformer, February 1872, p. 48. In reprints of this platform the term “physician” was used instead of “Physician.” See e.g., R. T. Trall, The Hygienic System, 1872, p. 84.}FSDA 239.3

As a criterion to evaluate the missionary effectiveness of the Institute, E. G. White employed the narrative of the ten lepers who were restored to health by Jesus while only one returned and glorified God (Luke 17:11-19). In similar manner, she said, the efforts of the physicians of the institution would be treated by their patients. Nevertheless she stated that ifFSDA 240.1

one out of twenty makes a right use of the benefits received and appreciates the efforts in his behalf, the physicians should feel satisfied and grateful. If one life is saved in ten, and one soul is saved in the kingdom of God in one hundred, all connected with the Institute will be amply repaid for all their efforts. ^{2E. G. White, TC, No. 22, p. 80 (Testimonies for the Church 3:180). Cf. ibid., No. 11, pp. 50, 51 (Testimonies for the Church 1:493).}FSDA 240.2

She added that if the work of the “King of glory, the Majesty of Heaven” for suffering humanity was appreciated by so few, “the physicians and helpers at the Institute should blush to complain if their feeble efforts are not appreciated by all and seem to be thrown away on some.” ^{3Ibid., No. 22, p. 80 (Testimonies for the Church 3:180).}FSDA 240.3

The establishment of the Western Health Reform Institute, which took only several months, ^{4In July 1866 a property was bought on which there was already a large building. Before this could be used it needed to be remodeled and furnished with equipment. It was estimated that the first patients could be accommodated in Aug. or Sept. of 1866. Cf. Loughborough, “Report,” p. 85; E. G. White, Testimonies for the Church 7:97, 1902.} was not considered as a denial of their faith in the soon return of Christ. Because much of the leadership suffered from ill health and spirituality of many believers needed much improvement, indicating that the imminence of the Second Advent had lost some of its momentum, the founding of the institution was seen as a means which would effectively aid the mission of the church and hasten the Second Advent. Thus D. T. Bourdeau pointed out that the Institute was “one of the strongest proofs that the Lord is near” because it functioned as a mighty agency in bringing about “a state of preparation” for Christ’s return. ^{5D. T. Bourdeau, “The Health Reform,” RH, June 12, 1866, p. 12.} According to Loughborough, the Institute would provide SDA with an opportunity to learn in the “shortest possible time” how to apply the principles which would prepare them for a state of excellent health and for the Second Advent. ^{6Loughborough, “Report,” p. 85.}FSDA 240.4

Besides a health reform institution, SDA began publishing in 1866 a periodical named the Health Reformer. Its object was to educate people in the principles of health reform, especially those who did not have sufficient funds to attend the institution. ^{7Cf. [H. S. Lay], “Items for the Month,” The Health Reformer, May 1867, p. 160; E. G. White, TC, No. 12, p. 76 (Testimonies for the Church 1:553).} Later, the objectives were seen in a broader perspective when J. White stated that “its mission is to contribute to the improvement of mankind physically, mentally, and morally.” ^{1[J. White], “The Health Reformer,” The Health Reformer, December 1873, p. 372. He remarked that the most important subjects of health reform education in the periodical were “how to recover health, and how to retain it” (ibid.).}FSDA 240.5

The above philosophy on health reform formed the basis of a future world-wide system of sanitariums and hospitals which was to be considered as a powerful missionary tool to spread the third angel’s message to mankind. The elaborate outlay of means in the establishment of many of these medical institutions, however, is at the same time evidence that the expectation of the soon coming Savior had lost some of its urgency.FSDA 241.1

7. Unity between the third angel’s message and the Sabbath

The SDA missionary thrust indicated that an inseparable connection between the third angel’s message and the Sabbath was of vital importance. The central position of the Sabbath in the third angel’s message has already been mentioned earlier. ^{2See supra, pp. 140-42.}FSDA 241.2

When in 1862 some had accepted the Sabbath and considered themselves SDA but rejected the current views on the third angel’s message, E. G. White described them as being in a “dark position.” ^{3E. G. White, TC, No. 8, 1862, p. 29 (Testimonies for the Church 1:326).} She strongly opposed the fact that any influence was given to these individuals, stating that they had “an independent faith of their own. Such are allowed to have influence when no place should be given to them, notwithstanding their pretensions to honesty.” ^{4Ibid. Cf. [Smith], “A Good Move in Iowa,” RH, Feb. 20, 1866, p. 94.} Commenting that a connection between the third angel’s message and the Sabbath lay at the foundation of the success of the SDA mission, E. G. White said: “Separate the Sabbath from the messages and it loses its power; but the Sabbath connected with the message of the third angel, has a power attending it which convicts unbelievers and infidels, and brings them out with strength to stand, to live, grow, and flourish in the Lord.” ^6Ibid. It was in this respect, she remarked, that the position of SDA on the Sabbath differed from that of Seventh Day Baptists. In the light of the SDA theology of mission, therefore, the acceptance of the Sabbath also implied the acceptance of the eschatology of Revelation 14:9-12 as a necessary aspect for a successful missionary proclamation.FSDA 241.3

8. Relationship between the three angels’ messages

From the beginning Sabbatarian Adventists saw a close interrelationship between the three angels’ messages. In 1850 E. G. White stressed the validity of the three angels’ messages as a central part of their missionary proclamation, indicating that “the burden of the message should be the first, second, and third angels’ messages.” ^{1E. G. White, Manuscript 11, 1850.} In 1852 J. White stated that a knowledge of the first and second angels’ messages was a prerequisite for an understanding of the third angel’s message and pointed out that “those who might embrace the third message without inquiring for the first and second, would not be likely to stand a very fierce storm of opposition against the truth.” ^{2[J. White], “Babylon,” RH, June 10, 1852, p. 20. Cf. J. White, “Third Angel’s Message,” p. 116.} During that same year, Andrews united the three angels’ messages with the gospel by stating that they formed “a part of the gospel of Jesus Christ,” and more specifically “the closing part of that ‘great salvation.’” ^{4E. G. White, Spiritual Gifts 1:133-73.} In 1858 E. G. White described the three angels’ messages in the context of salvation history. She pointed out that it was the third angel’s message that had made the 1844 experience relevant to Sabbatarian Adventists, and said that “the third angel has lighted up the past, present and future, and they know that God has indeed led them by his mysterious providence.” This message provided a major contribution to the explanation of the Disappointment. The three angels’ messages were to her a “perfect chain of truth,” “an anchor to hold the body,” and “as individuals receive and understand them, they are shielded against the many delusions of Satan.” The messages she designated as a “firm platform,” or a “solid, immovable platform,” and remarked that those who were criticizing its foundation were fighting against God. In this context she stressed that “the true understanding of these messages is of vital importance. The destiny of souls hangs upon the manner in which they are received.” The 1844 experience, E. G. White pointed out, had taught the necessity of the acceptance of the first two messages before the third could be comprehended, becauseFSDA 241.4

those who rejected the first message could not be benefited by the second, and were not benefited by the midnight cry, which was to prepare them to enter with Jesus by faith into the Most Holy place of the heavenly Sanctuary. And by rejecting the two former messages, they can see no light in the third angel’s message, which shows the way into the Most Holy place. ^{10Ibid., p. 171.}FSDA 242.1

Thus, it was obvious that the third angel’s message could be fully comprehended only in the historical context of the proclamation of the first and second angels’ messages in the 1844 Advent experience.FSDA 242.2