Editor's Preface

In this issue of WWN, we begin noting the second phase of the Everlasting Gospel   - sanctification. Believing must be followed by living. In the record of Scripture, there is only one who when justified by faith, was unable to demonstrate evidences of sanctification. That one was the thief who addressed the crucified Jesus as Lord, and received the assurance that day of a place in the Kingdom of God. Perhaps we overlook a factor. We do not have a record of his thinking in the hours till death ended his suffering. However, we do have a confession that indicates his thinking. He rebuked his companion in evil saying "Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation? And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this Man hath done nothing amiss." (Luke 23:40-41) To see the contrast between one's self and the One sent from God, and the cost that One paid for one's redemption is the beginning of straight thinking   - receiving the mind of Christ.

Within Part 4 of this series on the Everlasting Gospel, we discuss "the man" of Romans 7. Before you draw any conclusions on the observations made, may we suggest that you take a careful look at the first quotation in "Helps." Observe, it says, "apostle" not "Pharisee" nor even "Paul, the believer." Remember, too. that Paul did not become Paul "the apostle" until the official call recorded in Acts 13:2.

Two articles have a direct relationship though separated - "Papal Thinking" (p. 4), and the "Proposed Reorganization of the WCC" (p. 6). The implications, as basic in both articles, merit more than a passing glance.

In this issue, we conclude the answer to the question asked in the last issue   - "Why the Ignorance?" Has the knowledge been purposefully kept from the laity due to suppression and a limited publication of sources, or has a fear of what God is saying by what He has permitted, distorted our thinking? Is our nakedness causing us to hide from truth? (Rev. 3:17)

Page 2

The Everlasting Gospel - 4

After believing comes living. Here is where "the rubber hits the road." Having set forth the fact that "where sin abounded, grace did much more abound" (Rom. 5:20), Paul asks  -  "Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?" (Rom. 6:1)   - and answers -   "God forbid." (μη γενοιτο - literally, "Let it not be.") Then a further question is asked - "How shall we that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?" (Rom. 6:2) But the fact remains, we do continue to sin.

Even John who could write - "Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin" (I John 3:9) - and "these things write I unto you, that ye sin not" (I John 2:1) could in the next stroke of the pen write - "And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous." In other words, how do we relate the "living" we do, with the goal set in "Jesus Christ the righteous," for that "living"?

"Believing in Jesus" involves death, for the wages of sin is eternal death. I, recognizing myself a sinner faced with this prospect, and knowing that Jesus accepted the penalty of my transgressions in Himself, accept crucifixion in Him. "In Christ, I am crucified." (Gal 2:20 Gr.) I publicly express this belief in baptism. I accept that "so many of us as were baptised into Jesus Christ were baptised into His death." (Rom. 6:3) Beyond this is life. He arose, so also I "should walk in newness of life." (Rom. 6:4) But "the life which I now live" is still in the flesh, and that flesh has not changed and will not be changed till this vile body is "fashioned like unto his glorious body." (Phil. 3:21)

(Lest there be any misunderstanding of what I have written, let it be noted that I believe because of the hope contained in the Everlasting Gospel of Revelation 14, that prior to the close of probation, there will be a victorious group of mortals who cease to sin. They will be keeping "the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus." This factor will be discussed in a future issue.)

This experience of death in life is also noted in Scripture as "the new birth." I am born again of the Spirit. (John 3:5) But the tension between the flesh in which I still live and the Spirit by which I am newly born is still there. Paul wrote - "The flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other; so that ye cannot do the things that ye would." (Gal 5:17)

To this experience of living after believing - being justified, declared righteous - is applied the term, "sanctification." Before discussing what sanctification means under the everlasting gospel, let us first note what it is not! It is not accruing merit to assure one's salvation. It is not adding to what Christ has accomplished in His death. Salvation still remains as Paul wrote: 

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God not of works, lest any man should boast." (Eph. 2:8-9)

However, there is another verse that dare not be overlooked. It follows:

For we are His workmanship created in Jesus Christ unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them."' (Eph. 2:10)

God has not changed His standard of judgment. The same life demanded in Eden is the same standard required under grace. The same way of life, set for Adam and Eve before sin, is the same life asked of all who believe in Jesus Christ now. Is there merit in doing the things we should do? Absolutely not, we are merely doing what we ought to do. Jesus illustrated this clearly. He asked:

Which of you having a servant plowing or feeding cattle will say unto him by and by, when he is come from the field, Go and sit down to meat? And will not rather say unto him, Make ready wherewith I may sup, and girt thyself and serve me, till I have eaten and drunken; and afterward thou shalt eat and drink? Doth he thank that servant because he did the things that were commandet him? I think not.

So likewise ye, when ye shall have done all those things which are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants: we have done that which was our duty to do (Luke 17:7-10)

Can we offer "our righteousnesses" as evidence of our profitability when they are but "filthy rags"? (Isa. 64:60) And if by the Spirit, we do what God asks us to do in some specific task chosen by Him for us to do, can we claim credit for its performance and ask that it be applied as merit toward our salvation? How ridiculous can one become? Yet can you ever imagine those leaders in what is called "historic" Adventism confess that they are unprofitable servants? To do so would puncture their balloon of egotism into which they have blown themselves.

Page 3

Now that we have considered what "sanctification" will not do  -  add to the merits provided by Jesus for our redemption; let us consider what its purpose is. First, our sanctification is the will of God (I Thess. 4:3). It is a must or we shall not see God (Heb. 12:14). The same word is found in both texts, so that Hebrews 12:14 could read - "Follow ... sanctification, without which no man shall see the Lord"  -  while I Thess. 4:3 could read  -  "This is the will of God, even your holiness." The word translated either as "sanctification" or "holiness" is αγιασμος derived from the verb, αγιαζω, meaning, "to separate, consecrate, cleanse, purify, and sanctify." Sanctification is all of these  -  separated, consecrated, cleansed, purified, sanctified. These words are a part of a family of words, the base word being, αγιος, meaning, "holy." This word as used in the New Testament is applied to those "set apart for God, to be, as it were, exclusively His." These are the ones who are described by the word, "sanctification, or holiness."

A note in Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament is of interest on this point. It reads:

Just as the Israelites claimed for themselves the title οι αγιοι  [holy ones], because God selected them from the nations to lead a life acceptable to Him and rejoice in His favor and protection, so this appellation is very often in the New Testament transferred to Christians, as those whom God has selected εκ του κοσμου [out of the world], that under the influence of the Holy Spirit they may be rendered through holiness, partakers of salvation in the kingdom of God." (p. 7)

This very objective, in a special sense, is the basic reason for the giving of the Everlasting Gospel as the final message of mercy to the world. This factor dare not be overlooked. The "how" is the question to answer.

Now back to the struggle involved in the on-going living following justification. Paul indicates that "the old man" is crucified that the "body of sin might be destroyed" so that from that point we should not "serve sin." (Rom. 6:6) These are figurative expressions, and must be carefully applied. "The body of sin" should not be confused with "the law of sin" which still remains in the flesh. (Rom. 7:25) The "old man" controlling through the "body of sin" must be crucified so that instead of being "servants of sin" we may become "servants of righteousness." (Rom. 6:17-18) Further, "he that is dead is justified from sin." (Rom. 6:7, Gr.) The price sin demands is paid, thus no further penalty may be exacted, one is freed.

This does not end the struggle because we are still alive in the flesh where the law of sin reigns. Being in the flesh, the passions of sin, which are by the law, seek to work in our members "to bring forth fruit unto death." However, having been delivered from the law "wherein we were held," we should now serve "in newness of spirit and not in oldness of letter." (Rom 7:5-6) Does this make the law sin? No, it is merely serving the only office it has - "for by the law is the knowledge of sin." (Rom. 3:20) Then Paul illustrates from his own experience. He says:

I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died. (Rom. 7:9)

The commandment which tripped him up was the 10th, "Thou shalt not covet." He was a Pharisee who could boast that concerning "the righteousness which is in the law," he was living blamelessly. (Phil. 3:6) Though consenting to the death of Stephen, he did not throw a stone! Then came the experience on the road to Damascus. A changed Paul, yes; one who now believed in the Lord Jesus Christ; but a Paul still struggling with the law of sin in his members. Follow carefully his confession, that all too familiar experience in our own lives. It reads:

For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good. Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me, but how to perform that which is good I find not. ... I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me. For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: but I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. (Rom. 7:14-18,21-23)

What is the answer to this problem? Paul responds - "I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord." Deliverance is found in Jesus, not self. "So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin. There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus. ... For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death." (Rom. 7:25-8:2)

Here was Paul whose "delight [was] in the law of the

Page 4

Lord." He was a godly man, for "the ungodly are not so." (Ps. 1:2, 4) Even though he did not do what he wanted to do, he did not let go of Christ. Abiding in Christ, he was "now" under no condemnation. Yet he did not have victory over the law of sin until "the law of the Spirit of life," resultant from Christ's victory wherein He "condemned sin in the flesh" (Rom. 8:3), likewise worked in him. It was necessary to become "spiritually minded," and walk after the Spirit. There was to be a new Guide in life. "As many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God." To as many as would receive Christ Jesus, to them was extended the privilege "to become the sons of God;" but to those who are following the lead of the Spirit, they "are the sons of God." Herein is the difference between profession and reality. One may boast of his sanctification and how much this is contributing to his fitness for Heaven, but it requires the surrender of self and following the Divinely appointed Guide to reach Home at last.

Jesus said that this Guide whom He would send "will guide you into all truth." (John 16:13) Here is the basis of sanctification, of holiness - the truth, the Word of God. (John 17:17) This Word which is "sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even" to the inmost soul becoming "a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart" is God's cleansing agent. (Heb. 4:12). "Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you," said Jesus. (John 15:3)

Too many fail to realise that truth is the issue in the great controversy. The devil "abode not in the truth." (John 8:44) Jesus came as the truth (John 14:6) and asks that we "abide in" Him. (John 15:4) This is the key factor of being "in Christ." This applies not only to truth in the abstract, but to truth in the life as well. We must be in our inmost souls true and honest, guileless as was Nathaniel, and our theology, pure and unadulterated. This is the work of a lifetime. It is merely doing "that which it is our duty to do" as children of God.

(To Be Continued)

Helps

"At every advance step in our Christian experience, our repentance will deepen. We shall know that our sufficiency is in Christ alone, and shall make the apostle's confession our own: ' I know that in me (that is in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing."' (Acts of the Apostles, p. 561)

"The Christian life is a battle and a march. But the victory to be gained is not won by human power. The field of conflict is the domain of the heart. The battle which we have to fight - the greatest battle that was ever fought by man - is the surrender of self to the will of God, the yielding of the heart to the sovereignty of love. The old nature, born of blood and of the will of the flesh, cannot inherit the kingdom of God. The hereditary tendencies, the former habits, must be given up." (The Mount of Blessing, p. 203; Sec: "Strive to Enter in at the Strait Gate.")

"The Comforter is called 'the Spirit of truth.' His work is to define and maintain the truth. ... It is through false theories and traditions that Satan gains his power over the mind. By directing men to false standards, he misshapes the character. Through the Scriptures the Holy Spirit speaks to the mind, and impresses truth upon the heart. Thus He exposes error, and expels it from the soul. It is by the Spirit of truth, working through the word of God, that Christ subdues His chosen people to Himself." (The Desire of Ages, p. 671)

"Because the Spirit is to come, not to praise men or to build up their erroneous theories, but to reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment, many turn away from it. They are not willing to be deprived of the garments of their own selfrighteousness. They are not willing to exchange their own righteousness, which is unrighteousness, for the righteousness of Christ, which is pure, unadulterated truth." (Testimonies to Ministers, p. 65)

"Truth is sacred, divine. It is stronger and more powerful thar anything else in the formation of a character after the likeness of Christ. In it is the fullness of joy. When it is cherished in the heart, the love of Christ is preferred to the love of any human being. The words are fulfilled, 'A new heart will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you.' There is a nobleness in the life of the one who lives and works under the vivifying influence of the truth." (R&H, Feb. 14, 1899)

Papal Thinking

In May of 1995, Pope John Paul II issued his twelfth encyclical - Ut Unum Sint - "That All May Be One." It was hailed as a breakthrough for the solution of the controversial issue of the primacy of the Pope. He said he was "heeding the request made of me to find a way of exercising the primacy which, while in no way renouncing what is essential to its mission, is nonetheless open to a new situation." What did the Pope really mean by the apparent concession?

The Archbishop of Canterbury, George Carey, visited Rome December 3-5, last year. He had several meetings with the Pope and other senior Vatican officials. The discussion centered on the major stumbling-block on the path to reconciliation between the Roman Catholics and Anglicans - the ordination of women to the priesthood. In reporting this meeting, The Times of London headlined its news article - "Pope scolds Carey over ordination of women priests." The article stated - "The Pope yesterday told the Archbishop of Canterbury in a blunt discussion on women priests that only he had authority 'as the successor of St. Peter ' to lay down doctrine." (ENI, 96-0682; emphasis supplied)

Page 5

Why the Ignorance? (2)

Behind this question is another question - why should Luke 21:24 as presented in the publications of the Adventist Laymen's Foundation be considered a "new teaching in Adventism"? In answering this second question, we cited in the March issue of WWN, the statement of James Edson White in his book, The Coming King; we noted the emphasis placed on this verse by Arthur S. Maxwell in the paper he presented to the 1952 Bible Conference; we called attention to the teaching of this prophecy in the 20th Century Bible Course. Then we introduced what Dr J. R. Zurcher had written in his book, Christ of the Revelation, released as a Sabbath School lesson help to the Adult Lessons he had written for the second quarter of 1980. We closed the March article with a warning given by Dr. Zurcher. This warning we shall repeat. It reads:

If we cannot see that Jerusalem is an exceptional sign of the times, then might we not be placing ourselves in the same position as the religious leaders who knew how to "discern the face of the sky" but could not discern the obvious "signs of the times."? (pp.71-72)

How did Dr. Zurcher understand this prophecy of Jesus as given in Luke 21:24? He wrote:

In order for us to understand Jesus' statement, three questions need answering,    First,  what exactly does the expression "the times of the Gentiles" mean?  Then,  what should be understood by the fulfilment of the times of the Gentiles?  Finally,  what connection is there between the retaking of Jerusalem by the Jews and the fulfilment of the times of the Gentiles?

As I understand the Biblical language, the times of the Gentiles is the period set aside by God for the evangelization of the heathen nations. It is not the time needed for them to be converted to Christianity, as some think, but for them to hear the gospel. It is in this sense that Jesus said: "This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness to all nations; and then shall the end come" (Matthew 24:14).

I believe that the times of the Gentiles began in AD 34, when the prophetic seventy weeks that God set aside for the people of Israel ended. The baptism of the first "heathens" - the Ethiopian eunuch and the centurion Cornelius - as well as the conversion of Paul as the apostle to the Gentiles mark the beginning of these new times when the gospel would be preached to the nations. And if I have understood the prediction of Jesus properly, this time will be "fulfilled" when Jerusalem will cease to "be trodden down of the Gentiles." The fact that since 1967 Gentiles no longer have occupied Jerusalem means, therefore, that we are now living at the end of "the times of the Gentiles."

Jerusalem here constitutes the last sign of the times by which our Lord shows us that the history of this world is coming to its climax and that the restoration of all things is at hand. (p.72)

Granted, we through "Watchman, What of the Night?" taught these very same concepts some eight years prior to the release of Dr. Zurcher's book by the Southern Publishing Association. Yet the same things we were teaching during those years, were published by a recognised Church press, being used as the Adult Sabbath School Lessons' helps for that quarter. Further, the paper prepared by Arthur S. Maxwell, as published in Vol. II of the 1952 Bible Conference report, Our Firm Foundation, was called to my attention, after we had published our understanding of Luke 21:24, by Elder D. K. Short when I was visiting with him one day in his home in North Carolina. The 20th Century Bible Course lesson #5 was brought to me by a student who was taking the lessons. The teachings of the Adventist Laymen's Foundation regarding Luke 21:24 is not some fanciful "new light," but a neglected truth whose time has come. But with all of this documentation released in publications of the Church, why the ignorance of this truth on the part of so many of the laity?

The reaction of the Church to Zurcher's book when his comments on Luke 21:24 were published gives a clue. A friend wanted a copy of the book for himself and went to the ABC outlet in his conference to obtain a copy, but could not find one displayed. He made inquiry and was told that they had been asked to remove them from their shelves, but that he was holding them under the counter awaiting further instruction. This friend purchased them all, and sent me a second copy for our library.

Another factor put forth a deception both in fact of historical record and in teaching. In 1974, a series of Bible Conferences were held in the North American Division. The thrust of these conferences was to confirm the basic methodology of interpreting the Scriptures which lay at the Foundation of Adventism. It was an attempt to offset the liberalism entering Adventism because of the adoption of a different set of hermeneutics by which the Word of God was being studied and projected. That is another question in and of itself which is discussed in depth by a new publication, Receiving the Word. At the 1974 Bible Conferences, Dr. Herbert E. Douglass was assigned the topic - "The Unique Contribution of Adventist Eschatology." In this paper, he stated:

Adventists do not see theological importance in the establishment of the Jewish state in 1948 or the annexation of Old Jerusalem in 1967. (p.6)

While it is true there is no theological importance to be attached to the establishment of the Jewish state in 1948, except that "coming events [do] cast their shadows before." (Desire of Ages, p.636) But, there is "importance" in "the annexation of Old Jerusalem in 1967."

Page 6

Observe again what Douglass was saying - "Adventists do not see ... " Does this mean that Arthur S. Maxwell, as Editor of The Signs of the Times, who said at the 1952 Bible Conference -   "There is one prophecy concerning Palestine that we should all be watching with special care"   - and quoted Luke 21:24, was not an Adventist? Elder Denton E. Rebok, Secretary of the Bible Conference in his "General Introduction" to the two volume conference report, wrote that while these presentations were not to be understood as "an official pronouncement of the church, they do, however, represent the best thinking on the part of sincere, honest, earnest, devoted loyal men - Seventh-day Adventists, first, last, and always." (Our Firm Foundation, Vol.1, p.13)

Does this mean that Dr. J. R. Zurcher, who in 1974 was Secretary of the Euro-Africa Division of the General Conference was not a Seventh-day Adventist? He wrote plainly in his book, Christ of the Revelation, translated and published in 1980 by the Southern Publishing Association, that "if we cannot see that Jerusalem is an exceptional sign of the times," we could be making the same mistake the Jewish leaders of Israel did when they could not discern the Living Truth in their day. And he was referring to Luke 21:24!

Was A. E. Lickey, a pastor-evangelist of the Church, who authored the 20th Century Bible Course not an Adventist? He perceived the significance of Luke 21:24, and wrote in Lesson 5 - "This portion of Christ's prophecy was fulfilled in our day!"

The evidence indicates that it was Douglass who was out of step with Adventist thinking in regard to Luke 21:24. There is a reason. The implication of Luke 21:24 being fulfilled was not palatable to the hierarchy of the Church. So to counteract the significance of what God was saying by permitting this prophecy to be fulfilled, Douglass in his 1974 Bible Conference presentation adopted a new prophetic hermeneutic known as the "harvest principle." This concept teaches "the conditionality of the Advent," meaning that Christ will not come until "a prepared people" will "vindicate His integrity and law." (Insight, October 7, 1980, p.5) This could prolong the coming of Jesus into the decades of the first century of the next millennium - if not longer! Further, it promotes a preparation which is "works" orientated muting the fact that the final atonement by which a people are prepared is the initiative of God in conjunction with the final ministry of the Great High Priest in the Heavenly Sanctuary. This is indicated in a clearer understanding of the typical Day of Atonement.

The "harvest principle" eschatology has no precedent in Salvation history. In fact, it is contrary to the revelation of God in the Scriptures. Of the antediluvian world, God said - "My Spirit shall not always strive with man." (Gen. 6:3) That God has not changed. Jesus said, "So shall it be also in the days of the Son of man." (Luke 17:26) To Daniel was revealed the times of the Jewish nation - "Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people." (Dan. 9:24) Jesus revealed the limit to "the times of the Gentiles," which followed (Luke 21:24). Paul warned the Gentiles - "If He spared not the natural branches, take heed lest He also spare not thee." (Rom. 11:21) There is a limit to God's forbearance. He has told us that the hour of forbearance has been reached in the fulfilment of Luke 21:24.

Proposed WCC Reorganization

The General Assembly of the World Council of Churches which is to convene in 1998 in Harare, Zimbabwe will receive proposals for radical changes in its structure and function. Some of the proposed changes are due to the necessity of a budget cut because of reduced income. The main objective is to have a more flexible organization The proposals outlined in a paper entitled "Towards a Common Understanding and Vision" (CUV), have been sent to WCC's 330 member churches. These proposals will first be discussed by the Central Committee in September before going before the General Assembly in Zimbabwe next year.

The proposals call for "the creation of a new ecumenical forum which would include the Roman Catholic Church and other churches which are not members of the WCC." The paper suggests that "in the year 2000, all Christian churches should - in a 'common act' - commit themselves to working 'towards the day when an ecumenical council of the entire Church of Jesus Christ, in the sense of the ancient undivided church, will take place."'

The WCC has built up an organization of its own with a 200 plus staff at its headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland. This has not accomplished the objectives which were first envisioned - "visible unity in one faith and one eucharistic fellowship." (By-laws of the Faith and Order Commission) Because of this the draft proposals emphasize that "the work of the WCC should be aimed at enhancing the fellowship among its member churches not at building up an organization for its own sake."

One of the controversial proposals suggested is that the WCC assembly, which convenes every seven years and is the organizations highest policy-making body, be discontinued. The paper points out that while, "at their best" the assemblies have been occasions "for renewal of ecumenical commitments," their "size, duration and infrequency makes them unsuited for carrying out many of the constitutionally mandated" responsibilities. Further, the paper notes that they have not "succeeded in providing a place for detailed reflection on theological issues." This last factor echoes Rome's reason for not being a part of the WCC. At the Seventh General Assembly in Canberra, Australia in 1991, Archbishop Edward Cassidy (now a Cardinal) when asked why the Roman Catholic Church was still outside the WCC, responded - "From Rome's point of view, the WCC [is] rather long on social and political issues and short on theology and doctrine." (The Catholic Leader, Feb.24, 1991, p.1).

Page 7

CUV calls for "special attention" to be given so as to enable the Roman Catholic Church to participate as well as "evangelicals and Pentecostal bodies" in the proposed forum. Konrad Raiser, WCC's general secretary since 1993, has voiced many of the proposals contained in the document. Last year in a speech to the WCC Central Committee he suggested that the WCC become an "organizing agent" of a forum in which the WCC would be one member alongside the other organizations. He later told a press conference that "any such model which would not facilitate the integration or full participation of the Roman Catholic Church would have failed its purpose."

Earlier in 1996 at an ecumenical gathering in Trier, Germany, Raiser suggested "that the main Christian traditions start preparations in the year 2000 to resolve the main issues ... dividing Christians, thereby enabling a universal Christian council to be convened." The key issue noted was "the primacy of the Pope." It doesn't take much thinking to see why this is a key issue. Who wants to preside at this proposed all inclusive Christian Council?

Well did Christ say in His prophetic projections - 

 "When ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand." (Luke 21:31)

[All quotations, other than those documented, are taken from ENI, December 4, 1996: 96-0665]

*****

"The thought that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us, not because of any merit on our part, but as a free gift from God, is a precious thought. The enemy of God and man is not willing that this truth should be clearly presented; for he knows that if the people receive it fully, his power will be broken." (R & H, Dec. 24, 1908)

"God has given His object lesson. If the world will not heed, will not the people of God take heed? In the twenty-first Chapter of Luke, Christ foretold what was to come upon Jerusalem; with it He connected the scenes which were to take place in the history of this world just prior to the coming of the Son of man in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory." (Letter 20, 1901)

We need now to take heed to ourselves. Warnings have been given. Can we not see the fulfillment of the predictions made by Christ in the twenty-first chapter of Luke? How many are studying the words of Christ? How many are deceiving their own souls, and cheating themselves out of the blessings that others might secure if they would believe and obey? Probation still lingers, and it is our privilege to lay hold of the hope set before us in the gospel." (1909 GC Bulletin, p. 237)

NOTE: -- Those desiring further in-depth study into the significance of Luke 21:24, for the professed people of God today, can be profited by the documented manuscript - The Hour and the End. (Available from alfiowa.com.)

*****

"It is the dying of our carnal nature that makes room for the impartation of the divine nature. 'God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ.' How could one glory in that instrument which was the symbol of shame and torture and death? Because it is the only means by which he can be delivered from his vile, loathsome, sinful nature, and in exchange receive the glorious righteousness of Christ."

Meade MacGuire, His Cross and Mine, p. 149

WEBSITE

Adventistlaymen.com

E-MAIL
webmaster@adventistlaymen.com