This is part two of a seven part series called "The prophesied cleansing and triumph of the Seventh-day Adventist Church." Read "The problem (Part I)."For many years, those conservative Adventists who have fostered doubts regarding the ultimate spiritual triumph of the organized Seventh-day Adventist denomination, have based much of their argument on a particular understanding of who and what is God’s true church. When Ellen White speaks in certain statements of the church being the object of God’s supreme regard (1), and elsewhere of the church in the last days appearing to fall but not falling (2), they have insisted she is speaking of the church as defined in such statements as the following:

From the beginning, faithful souls have constituted the church on earth (3).

God has a church. It is not the great cathedral, neither is it the national establishment, neither is it the various denominations; it is the people who love God and keep His commandments (4).

The use of the latter statement in this way, to be sure, is really very strange, as it is taken from a letter written by Ellen White to her sister and brother-in-law who had not yet joined the Seventh-day Adventist Church (5). Quite clearly, in context, she is seeking to persuade them to unite themselves with the organized Adventist body. This obviously means that when she speaks of “the great cathedral,” “the national establishment,” and “the various denominations,” she certainly does not have the organized Seventh-day Adventist denomination in mind. Rather, she is drawing a contrast between the nominal Christian churches and God’s remnant community.

In more recent years, however, a variation on this theory has been voiced by individuals who have withdrawn their support from organized Adventism out of despair at the presence of apostasy therein. Such persons have attempted to harmonize the strictly “faithful souls” definition of the church with those inspired statements which distinguish the church militant from the church triumphant (6), as well as Christ’s parable of the wheat and tares growing together till the harvest (Matt. 13:24-30). It has been correctly noted that neither Jesus nor Ellen White uses this parable as justification for retaining open sinners and apostates within the church, as some unfortunately have sought to do. Indeed, the Savior clearly states otherwise (Matt. 18:15-17), as does Ellen White (7). The modern prophet clearly explains what this parable does and does not forbid in the following statement:

Christ has plainly taught that those who persist in open sin must be separated from the church; but He has not committed to us the work of judging character and motive (8).

Certain ones have therefore advanced the claim that because the contemporary, organized Seventh-day Adventist structure contains so many open sinners and apostates, it can no longer qualify as the church militant. Because Ellen White distinguishes tares from open sinners in the above quotation, and says plainly that the latter must be separated from the church, the assumption has developed that the presence of open sin revokes a church’s divine charter in a way that secret sin supposedly does not. Clearly, God’s servants must refrain form pulling up the tares, but if they fail to root out open sin—so the reasoning goes—the church ceases to be God’s church. The following statement by one who holds this view, written a number of years ago, is typical:

If a person is false in the heart but they are making a profession, we cannot do anything about that. These are the tares, the people who are making a profession. They are not living in open sin, they are not taking their brother to court, or using NLP, or lying, and openly doing those things that are contrary to the ten commandments; they are making a profession, but their heart is false (9).

This understanding offers a new twist to the much-debated declaration of Ellen White that at the end of time, “the church may appear as about to fall, but it does not fall. It remains, while the sinners in Zion will be sifted out, the chaff separated from the precious wheat” (10). Quite obviously, this statement makes no sense if “the church” and “Zion” are seen as the true and faithful only, since a church consisting solely of true and faithful believers has no sinners needing to be sifted out of it. Especially is this true in the time context where this statement is found, for Ellen White states elsewhere that at this time, the faithful will have obtained “the victory over every besetment, over pride, selfishness, love of the world, and over every wrong word and action” (11). But with the new understanding certain ones now offer, “the church” which the earlier passage says will not fall does contain sinners, but these are secret sinners, not open ones.

This interpretation shifts the focus completely away from the Adventist Conference system, which some apparently believe has passed the point of no return so far as God is concerned. Though they stop short of advocating outright separation, they come within a hair’s breadth of doing so. According to these persons, the church militant as described by Ellen White is not the official Seventh-day Adventist denomination headquartered in Silver Spring, Maryland, but is rather the various “home churches,” independent congregations, and self-supporting ministries where faithful Adventism is presumably believed, preached, and practiced. It is freely acknowledged that there are tares amid the wheat in these groups—hangers-on whose lack of conversion seems obvious but who make no open attack on the principles and lifestyle tenets of Scripture or the writings of Ellen White. This theory holds that the end-time shaking will eventually remove these tares, thus transforming these scattered groups into the church triumphant.

The Wheat and the Tares

We begun this study with another look at the parable of the wheat and the tares, and how Ellen White applies this parable to God’s church on earth.

First of all, we need to understand that like the writers of Scripture, Ellen White uses Biblical symbols in different ways. This does not, of course, imply any disagreement between the thoughts presented. It simply means that the same metaphor can be used to represent different things. The symbol of a lion, for example, is used in Scripture to represent both Satan and Christ (I Peter 5:8: Rev. 5:5). The symbol of leaven is used by Jesus to describe both sin and righteousness (Matt. 13:33; 16:6; Mark 8:15; Luke 13:21). The word “world” is used in two ways in the writings of John the apostle, which on the surface appear contradictory, but which—when context is considered—clearly convey different though harmonious messages. Jesus declared in the famed passage of John 3:16 that “God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son.” Yet in I John 2:15 we read: “Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.” So while one verse speaks of how God the Father so loved the world that He gave His Son to save it, the other declares that if any of us love the world, the love of the Father is not in us. Obviously the difference between these verses is that one refers to the human inhabitants of the world, while the other refers to its forbidden allurements.

It is therefore not surprising that Ellen White places the parable of the wheat and tares in a somewhat different (though not contrary) focus than the Gospel record does. She writes, “’The field,’ Christ said, ‘is the world.’ But we must understand this as signifying the church of Christ in the world” (12).

She isn’t saying here that the field is not the world. Indeed, wheat and tares can be found throughout the human family, even among those who haven’t heard the name of Christ (Zech. 13:6; Rom. 2:14-16). Ellen White is simply saying that this parable applies in a special sense to the church. We need to remember her observation that in inspired writings, “different meanings are expressed by the same word; there is not one word for each distinct idea” (13).

In her use of the terms “denomination” and “denominational,” Ellen White shows a similar flexibility. We noted earlier her statement that “God has a church. It is not the great cathedral, neither is it the national establishment, neither is it the various denominations; it is the people who love God and keep His commandments” (14). Yet in another passage, speaking of Israel, she writes: “That which made them denominational was the observance of God’s commandments” (15). This is not a contradiction, only a different use of the same word. In such cases context and the inspired consensus clarify the different usages of words and phrases.

Following this line of thought, we need to understand that while Ellen White maintains that Christ’s command not to pull up the tares does not apply to open sin in the church, it is also true that Ellen White elsewhere uses the symbol of the tares to refer to the general presence of sin in the church, both open and secret. In other words, she is as flexible in her definition of the tares as in her definition of the field, with context the key to her meaning. But when all her statements are put together, as with other subjects, her position on the church and what to do about sin in its ranks remains clear and consistent.

Some of her plainest comments on this subject can be found in the book Testimonies to Ministers, in the chapter titled, “The Remnant Church Not Babylon”:

Has God no living church? He has a church, but it is the church militant, not the church triumphant. We are sorry that there are defective members, that there are tares amid the wheat (16).

After reviewing Christ’s parable of the wheat and tares in the next three pages, she makes the following statement:

False doctrine is one of the satanic influences that work in the church, and brings into it those who are unconverted in heart. . . . Instead of the unity which should exist among believers, there is disunion; for Satan is permitted to come in, and through his specious deceptions and delusions he leads those who are not learning of Christ meekness and lowliness of heart, to take a different line from the church, and break up, if possible, the unity of the church. Men arise speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after themselves (17).

And then, on the very next page, Ellen White utters one of her best known statements about the church:

Although there are evils existing in the church, and will be until the end of the world, the church in these last days is to be the light of the world that is polluted and demoralized by sin. The church, enfeebled and defective, needing to be reproved, warned, and counseled, is the only object upon earth upon which Christ bestows His supreme regard (18).

Clearly, the evils which according to Ellen White will exist in the church till the end of time, include false doctrines, men arising to speak perverse things, and the disunity thus resulting. Obviously these conditions include open as well as secret sin, conspicuous apostasy as well as a subtle lack of conversion. Painfully we observe the existence of these tragedies in contemporary Adventism. But this entire section in Testimonies to Ministers is an attempt by Ellen White to persuade us that these apostate conditions do not mean the church has experienced divine rejection or that it should be abandoned by the true and faithful. It is equally clear that Ellen White in this context uses the symbol of the tares to describe open as well as secret sinners.

Consider also the following statements:

Even if our day there have been and will continue to be families who have once rejoiced in the truth, but who will lose faith because of calumnies and falsehoods brought to them in regard to those whom they have loved and with whom they have had sweet counsel. They opened their hearts to the sowing of tares; the tares sprang up among the wheat; they strengthened, the crop of wheat became less and less, and the precious truth lost its power to them. For a time a false zeal accompanied their new theories, which hardened their hearts against the advocates of truth as did the Jews against Christ (19).

Divisions will come in the church. Two parties will be developed. The wheat and tares grow up together for the harvest (20).

Let us examine the first of these statements. It is clear in this context, as before, that tares do not refer to secret sins and sinners, since the passage speaks of new theories accompanied by zeal as characterizing those designated as tares. This doesn’t sound very secret. In this selfsame context Ellen White utters the well-known prediction: “Many will stand in our pulpits with the torch of false prophecy in their hands, kindled from the hellish torch of Satan” (21). Who can deny that this speaks of open apostasy? And this is God’s own church being described here, for the prophet speaks of “our pulpits,” not those of some fallen religious organization.

Regarding the statement which speaks of divisions in the church and two parties being developed, we find that the immediate context refers to the church at the end of time:

“Be ye also ready, for in such an hour as ye think not, the Son of man cometh” (Matt. 24:44). This is our message, the very message that the three angels flying in the midst of heaven are proclaiming. The work to be done now is that of sounding the last message of mercy to a fallen world. . . . The work will grow deeper and become more earnest to the very close of time (22).

The End-Time Sealing

How does Ellen White describe the divisions, the conflict, and the sin in the church at the close of time? In the chapter titled, “The Seal of God” in volume 5 of the Testimonies, we find a graphic description:

At the time when the danger and depression of the church are greatest, the little company who are standing in the light will be sighing and crying for the abominations that are done in the land. But more especially will their prayers arise in behalf of the church because its members are doing after the manner of the world. . . . They mourn before God to see religion despised in the very homes of those who have had great light. They lament and afflict their souls because pride, avarice, selfishness, and deception of almost every kind are in the church (23).

A similar passage declares:

Mark this point with care. Those who receive the pure mark of truth, wrought in them by the power of the Holy Spirit, represented by a mark by the man in linen, are those “that sigh and cry for all the abominations that be done” in the church (24).

The context of the latter statement is especially clear that “the church” being described is not the nominal Christian world, but the professed Seventh-day Adventist community. This particular section, which is titled “Duty to Reprove Sin,” starts two pages earlier and reads, concerning the sin of Achan:

I have been shown that God here illustrates how He regards sin among those who profess to be His commandment-keeping people (25).

On the following page she writes:

The spirit of hatred which has existed with some because the wrongs among God’s people have been reproved, has brought blindness and a fearful deception upon their own souls, making it impossible for them to discriminate between right and wrong (26).

Then she continues, on the page to follow:

Who are standing in the counsel of God at this time? Is it those who virtually excuse wrongs among the professed people of God, and who murmur in their hearts, if not openly, against those who would reprove sin? Is it those who take their stand against them, and sympathize with those who commit wrong? No, indeed! Unless they repent, and leave the work of Satan in oppressing those who have the burden of the work, and in holding up the hands of sinners in Zion, they will never receive the mark of God’s sealing approval. They will fall in the general destruction of the wicked, represented by the work of the five men bearing slaughter weapons (27).

Immediately after we find the statement quoted earlier:

Without question, when she writes of “those who profess to be [God’s] commandment-keeping people,” “wrong’s among God’s people,” “wrongs among the professed people of God,” and “sinners in Zion,” this is the organized Seventh-day Adventist Church in focus. In Ellen White’s writings, particularly in the Testimonies which were primarily addressed to Adventists, these phrases refer to none other than organized, corporate Adventism. It therefore makes perfect sense to conclude that when she speaks of “all the abominations that be done in the church” (29), that the “church” being described is official Seventh-day Adventism.

Among those conservative believers whose support for official Adventism has wavered and even ceased, it is common to hear the citing of long lists of outrageous sins taking place within the church organization. Sadly, many of these allegations are undeniable—false doctrines of many kinds, financial misdeeds, pastoral adultery, disregard of Biblical gender roles, support for homosexual practice in the church, the inviting of Roman Catholic and other non-Adventist lecturers to our schools, and much more. This evidence, they claim, proves that organized Adventism can’t be God’s true church any longer. Yet we saw a statement above which speaks of the saints sighing and crying “on behalf of the church because its members are doing after the manner of the world” (30), how the faithful “lament and afflict their souls because pride, avarice, selfishness, and deception of almost every kind are in the church” (31).

Does “the church” in this context truly sound like a group consisting solely of “those who love God and keep His commandments” (32), or some collection of independent groups who allegedly contain no wrongdoers except those whose sins remain private? Or does “the church” in the above statements sound more like the Seventh-day Adventist world structure today?

I have often asked these despairing ones who are ready to throw the official church overboard because of its apostasy and sin: Which sins, which abominations in contemporary Adventism. are not anticipated by such statements as the above? Some appear to think matters have gotten so bad that no inspired prediction could possibly have anticipated what we see in the church today. But such phrases as “deception of almost every kind” seem quite comprehensive to me.

Even more significantly, it is within the church—filled with apostasy and corruption—where the saints awaiting God’s seal are to be found. These discourses by Ellen White on the seal of God are obviously based on the ninth chapter of Ezekiel, where the command to seal the saints is stated as follows: “Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and set a mark upon the foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry for all the abominations that be done in the midst thereof” (Eze. 9:4) (33).

In other words, the saints are found amidst the very abominations for which they sigh and cry. We don’t find the true and faithful huddled in groups outside Jerusalem, separate from the city whose apostasy and sin they can stand no longer. Jerusalem in this chapter is described as a “city full of perverseness” (Eze. 9:9). Yet the saints remain there nonetheless.

To claim that God’s church ceases to be God’s church because open sin and apostasy exist there, is to contradict the plain testimony of sacred history. Ancient Israel harbored gross apostasy and sin for hundreds of years, including such abominations as idol worship, human sacrifice, Sabbath violation, social injustice of many varieties, and more. Israel remained God’s covenant community even while eleven of the twelve tribes were dancing naked around the golden calf (Ex. 32), while Ahab and Jezebel were putting hundreds of God’s prophets to death (I Kings 18:4), and while wicked King Manasseh consulted spirit mediums, offered his children to Molech, and filled Jerusalem with innocent blood (II Kings 21:6,16; II Chron. 33:6).

In fact, Israel’s status as God’s chosen people did not change till the end of the seventy-week prophecy in 34 A.D. (Dan. 9:24), when the stoning of Stephen closed their probation. Without question the long centuries of mounting apostasy hardened their hearts more and more, thus making the eventual rejection of Christ and His apostles a natural course to follow. But to say the open fostering and tolerance of sin and apostasy at any time annulled their status as God’s people, is to ignore the evidence of the inspired record.

In a future segment of this series, we will consider exactly what it takes for the divine charter of the faith community to be revoked. For now, however, it should be clear that simply because open sin and apostasy are to be found in that community, does not mean their corporate probation has ended.

Many faithful Adventists today are appalled by the increasingly permissive attitude toward homosexual behavior in some segments of the church. Yet it appears this sin was openly practiced in ancient Israel at times. “And there were also sodomites in the land: and they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the Lord cast out before the children of Israel” (I Kings 14:24). On several occasions Judah’s reforming kings had to deal with this recurrent problem (I Kings 15:12; 22:46; II Kings 23:7). Yet even the occasional presence of this gross abomination did not terminate Israel’s status as God’s chosen people.

Despite repeated judgments from God as punishment for their sins, Israel remained God’s chosen instrument till the seventy-week prophecy closed, which is why—despite all the corruption found there—Jesus called the Temple at Jerusalem His Father’s house (John 2:16) as well as His own (Luke 19:46). In His Sermon on the Mount He described Jerusalem as “the city of the great King” (Matt. 5:35), and thus forbade oaths to be taken in its name. After telling the parable of the wicked husbandmen and their slaying of the householder’s son (Matt. 21:33-39), Jesus declared to the Jewish leaders: “Therefore I say unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof” (verse 43).

You can’t take something from a person or group if they no longer have it. Even at this time Israel remained the corporate custodian of God’s kingdom, and its removal from their custody was still described as future. This is why Jesus had earlier told the Samaritan woman, “Salvation is of the Jews” (John 4:22). But once they had murdered the Son of God and understood the significance of their deed, which Stephen’s testimony to the Jewish council explained (Acts 7:51-53), their stoning of the messenger was sufficient to close their probation. Concerning this event, Ellen White declares:

The seventy weeks, or 490 years, especially allotted to the Jews, ended, as we have seen, in A.D. 34. At that time, through the actions of the Jewish Sanhedrin, the nation sealed its rejection of the gospel by the martyrdom of Stephen and the persecution of the followers of Christ. Then the message of salvation, no longer restricted to the chosen people, was given to the world (34).

Some have drawn our attention to such Ellen White statements as the following:

John declared to the Jews that their standing before God was to be decided by their character and life. Profession was worthless. If their life and character were not in harmony with God’s law, they were not His people (35).

The assumption is thus advanced that the Jews were no longer God’s chosen people at this time because of their disobedience. On an individual basis, of course, this was certainly true, and remains so today (Isa. 59:2). But can a person be severed from God individually and still be part of the earthly community chosen by God as His corporate instrument? The answer to this question is found in the following section, where we will study Inspiration’s teachings regarding the visible and invisible church.

The Church—Visible and Invisible

In recent years, some conservative Adventists have asserted that the concept of a visible and an invisible church is a Catholic doctrine which true Adventists should reject. One such person has said it this way:

This was a major controversy during the Reformation. Roman Catholic theologians had made two churches. They said there is an invisible church and that Christ is the head of that, and there is a visible church and the Pope is the head of that. John Wycliffe said, “If there are two heads of the church, that is a monster” (36).

But regardless of what Catholic theologians or even Wycliffe taught, the concept of a visible and an invisible church is found in the writings of Ellen White. In one reference she does use this language in connection with Catholicism, as she quotes from the protest of the German princes in Luther’s time against the papacy:

Protestantism sets the power of conscience above the magistrate, and the authority of the word of God above the visible church (37).

But she also uses this language to refer to God’s true church today, and speaks of the presence of both faithful and unfaithful members there:

The advancement of the church is retarded by the wrong course of its members. Uniting with the church, although an important and necessary act, does not make one a Christian nor insure salvation. We cannot secure a title to heaven by having our names enrolled upon the church book while our hearts are alienated from Christ. We should all feel our individual responsibility as members of the visible church and workers in the vineyard of the Lord (38).

All must obtain a living experience for themselves; they must have Christ enshrined in the heart, His Spirit controlling the affections, or their profession of faith is of no value, and their condition will be even worse than if they had never heard the truth. . . . As members of the visible church and workers in the vineyard of the Lord, all professed Christians should do their utmost to preserve peace, harmony, and love in the church (39).

At least seven other statements use similar or identical language to the two above (40). Particularly important about the first of the above statements is the declaration that “uniting with the church” is “an important and necessary act” (41), even though it doesn’t by itself make one a Christian. The fact that she says joining the church is important and necessary, but that by itself it doesn’t assure us of salvation, makes it clear once again that the church being described here is not a body consisting of the true and faithful only. Rather, this is a community which can be “retarded by the wrong course of its members” (42). This statement raises troubling questions for those in the ranks of conservative Adventists who see membership and participation in the organized church as unnecessary, and who prefer independent worship as a presumed means of separating from apostasy.

But Ellen White doesn’t only use the term “visible church.” She also speaks of an invisible church, this one consisting of faithful members only in contrast with the unfaithful:

There are two kinds of connection between the branches and the vine stock. One is visible, but superficial. The other is invisible and vital. So there is an apparent union, a membership with the church, and a profession of religion, which, though in itself good, is too often unaccompanied by saving faith in Jesus, or living obedience to the commandments of God. The branches that are connected with Christ, the living Vine, will make it manifest by bearing much fruit in good works to the glory of God. But the branches which have nothing but an apparent union, will be fruitless (43).

In another statement she speaks of the faithful who are hidden—another word for invisible:

Let us thank God that the Master has His hidden ones, who are not recognized by the world, but whose names are written in the Lamb’s book of life (44).

Moreover, when in other statements she speaks of “faithful souls” (45) and “those who love God and keep His commandments” (46), the term “invisible church” is quite appropriate, since only God knows who these faithful commandment-keepers are. Because only He knows the heart (I Kings 8:39), only God knows who is truly faithful. The apostle Paul writes, “Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are His. And, let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity” (II Tim. 2:19).

Years ago I was asked by a fellow conservative Adventist who advocated independent worship as the answer to apostasy (and who, I am grateful to say, has since returned to the organized church and now promotes revival and reformation within official church channels): “How can anyone have fellowship in an invisible church?” The answer should be obvious. None of us knows whether we are fellowshipping with the invisible church or not, since only God knows whether anyone’s obedience or profession of godliness is truly genuine. As we will see, only when the final shaking purifies the end-time church will the visible and invisible churches become one and the same.

It is true God has always had faithful followers since the beginning of the great controversy. It is equally true that God has consistently worked through a visible collection of believers, from the pre-Flood patriarchal community to the establishment of the Seventh-day Adventist Church structure in 1863. And in each of these visible communities, faithful and unfaithful believers have generally worked and worshiped alongside each other. This pattern will not cease, as the nest installment in this series will demonstrate, until the shaking of the last days removes the apostate majority from the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

References

1. See Ellen G. White, Testimonies to Ministers, p. 49.

2. ----Selected Messages, vol. 2, p. 380.

3. ----Acts of the Apostles, p. 11.

4. ----The Upward Look, p. 315.

5. Ibid.

6. ----Testimonies to Ministers, p. 45; Manuscript Releases, vol. 9, p. 154; Review and Herald, Jan. 16, 1894.

7. ----Testimonies, vol. 1, p. 117; SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 5, p. 1096.

8. ----Christ’s Object Lessons, p. 71.

9. John Grosboll, “Who and What is the Church?” Historic Adventist Land Marks, February 1996, p. 11; see also Gwen Reeves, “Judas—An Example of a Tare,” Historic Adventist Land Marks, April 1994, p. 12.

10. White, Selected Messages, vol. 2, p. 380.

11. ----Early Writings, p. 71.

12. ----Christ’s Object Lessons, p. 70.

13. ----Selected Messages, vol. 1, p. 20.

14. ----The Upward Look, p. 315.

15. ----Manuscript Releases, vol. 19, p. 39.

16. ----Testimonies to Ministers, p. 45.

17. Ibid, pp. 47-48.

18. Ibid, p. 49.

19. Ibid, p. 411.

20. ----Selected Messages, vol. 2, p. 114.

21. ----Testimonies to Ministers, pp. 409-410.

22. ----Selected Messages, vol. 2, p. 114.

23. ----Testimonies, vol. 5, pp. 209-210 (italics supplied).

24. Ibid, vol. 3, p. 267 (italics supplied).

25. Ibid, p. 265.

26. Ibid, p. 266.

27. Ibid, p. 267.

28. Ibid (italics supplied).

29. Ibid.

30. Ibid, vol. 5, pp. 209-210.

31. Ibid, p. 210.

32. ----The Upward Look, p. 315.

33. ----Testimonies, vol. 3, p. 267; vol. 5, pp. 207-211.

34. ----The Great Controversy, p. 328.

35. ----The Desire of Ages, p. 107.

36. Grosboll, “Who and What is the Church?” Historic Adventist Land Marks, February 1996, p. 9.

37. White, The Great Controversy, p. 204.

38. ----Testimonies, vol. 4, p. 14 (italics supplied).

39. Ibid, vol. 5, pp. 619-620 (italics supplied).

40. ----The Upward Look, p. 63; Signs of the Times, Sept. 1, 1888; Review and Herald, Feb. 19, 1880; June 16, 1885; June 25, 1887; Manuscript Releases, vol. 12, p. 293; vol. 15, p. 143.

41. ----Testimonies, vol. 4, p. 16.

42. Ibid.

43. ----Signs of the Times, July 27, 1888 (italics supplied).

44. Ibid, Aug. 16, 1905.

45. ----Acts of the Apostles, p. 11.

46. ----The Upward Look, p. 315.

Subscribe Would you like to be notified through email when the next article in this series is published?