************"After the warning against the worship of the
beast and his image, the prophecy
declares, “Here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.”
Since those who keep God’s commandments are thus placed in contrast with those that
worship the beast and his image
445
and receive his mark, it follows that the keeping of God’s law, on the one hand, and its
violation, on the other, will make the distinction between the worshipers of God and
the worshipers of the beast.
************The special characteristic of the beast, and therefore of his image, is the breaking
of God’s commandments. Says Daniel, of the little horn, the papacy, “He shall think
to change the times and the law.” [
Daniel 7:25, Revised Version.] And Paul styled the
same power the “man of sin,” who was to exalt himself above God. One prophecy is
a complement of the other. Only by changing God’s law could the papacy exalt itself
above God; whoever should understandingly keep the law as thus changed would be
giving supreme honor to that power by which the change was made. Such an act of
obedience to papal laws would be a mark of allegiance to the pope in the place of God.
************The papacy has attempted to change the law of God. The second commandment,
forbidding image worship, has been dropped from the law, and the fourth
commandment has been so changed as to authorize the observance of the first instead
of the seventh day as the Sabbath. But papists urge, as a reason for omitting the second
commandment, that it is unnecessary, being included in the first, and that they are
giving the law exactly as God designed it to be understood. This cannot be the change
foretold by the prophet. An intentional, deliberate change is presented: “He shall
think
to change the times and the law.” The change in the fourth commandment exactly
fulfills the prophecy. For this the only authority claimed is that of the church. Here the
papal power openly sets itself above God.
*************While the worshipers of God will be especially distinguished by their regard for
the fourth commandment,—since this is the sign of his creative power, and the witness
to his claim upon man’s reverence and homage,—the worshipers of the beast will
be distinguished by their efforts to tear down the Creator’s memorial,
to exalt the
institution
446
of Rome. It was in behalf of the Sunday, that popery first asserted its arrogant claims;
[See appendix, note 9.] and its first resort to the power of the State was to compel the
observance of Sunday as “the Lord’s day.” But the Bible points to the seventh day, and
not to the first, as the Lord’s day. Said Christ, “The Son of man is Lord also of the
Sabbath.” The fourth commandment declares, “The seventh day is the Sabbath of the
Lord.” And by the prophet Isaiah the Lord designates it, “My holy day.” [
Mark 2:28;
Isaiah 58:13.]
*************The claim so often put forth, that Christ changed the Sabbath, is disproved by his
own words. In his sermon on the mount he said: “Think not that I am come to destroy
the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto
you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law,
till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments,
and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven; but
whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of
Heaven.” [
Matthew 5:17-19.]
*************
It is a fact generally admitted by Protestants, that the Scriptures give no authority
for the change of the Sabbath. This is plainly stated in publications issued by the
American Tract Society and the American Sunday-school Union. One of these works
acknowledges “the complete silence of the New Testament so far as any explicit
command for the Sabbath [Sunday, the first day of the week] or definite rules for its
observance are concerned.” [“The Abiding Sabbath,” p. 184, a $500 prize essay.]
Another says: “Up to the time of Christ’s death, no change had been made in the
day;” and, “so far as the record shows, they [the apostles] did not give any explicit
command enjoining the abandonment of the seventh-day Sabbath, and its observance
on the first day of the week. [“The Lord’s Day” pp. 185, 186, a $1,000 prize
essay.] **************
Roman Catholics acknowledge that the change of the Sabbath was made by their
church, and declare that Protestants, by observing the Sunday, are recognizing her
power. In the “Catholic Catechism of Christian Religion,” in answer to a question as
to the day to be observed in obedience to the fourth commandment, this statement is
made: “During the old law, Saturday was the day sanctified; but
the church,
instructed
by Jesus Christ, and directed by the Spirit of God, has substituted Sunday for Saturday;
so now we sanctify the first, not the seventh day. Sunday means, and now is, the day
of the Lord.”
***************
As the sign of the authority of the Catholic Church, papist writers cite, “the very act
of changing the Sabbath into Sunday, which Protestants allow of ... because by keeping
Sunday strictly they acknowledge the church’s power to ordain feasts, and to command
them under sin.” [“Abridgment of Christian Doctrine.”]
What then is the change of the
Sabbath, but the sign or mark of the authority of the Romish Church—“the mark of the
beast”?
*************The Roman Church has not relinquished her claim to supremacy; and when the
world and the Protestant churches accept a sabbath of her creating, while they reject
the Bible Sabbath, they virtually admit this assumption. They may claim the authority
of tradition and of the Fathers for the change; but in so doing they ignore the very
principle which separates them from Rome,—that “the Bible, and the Bible only, is
the religion of Protestants.” The papist can see that they are deceiving themselves,
willingly closing their eyes to the facts in the case. As the movement for Sunday
enforcement gains favor, he rejoices, feeling assured that it will eventually bring the
whole Protestant world under the banner of Rome.
*************Romanists declare that “the observance of Sunday by the Protestants is an homage
they pay, in spite of themselves, to the authority of the [Catholic] Church.” [“Plain
talk
about Protestantism,” p. 213.] The enforcement
448
of Sunday-keeping on the part of Protestant churches is an enforcement of the worship
of the papacy—of the beast. Those who, understanding the claims of the fourth
commandment, choose to observe the false instead of the true Sabbath; are thereby
paying homage to that power by which alone it is commanded. But in the very act
of enforcing a religious duty by secular power, the churches would themselves form
an image to the beast; hence the enforcement of Sunday-keeping in the United States
would be an enforcement of the worship of the beast and his image.
*************But Christians of past generations observed the Sunday, supposing that in so doing
they were keeping the Bible Sabbath, and there are now true Christians in every church,
not excepting the Roman Catholic communion, who honestly believe that Sunday is
the Sabbath of divine appointment. God accepts their sincerity of purpose and their
integrity before him.
But when Sunday observance shall be enforced by law, and the
world shall be enlightened concerning the obligation of the true Sabbath, then whoever
shall transgress the command of God, to obey a precept which has no higher authority
than that of Rome, will thereby honor popery above God. He is paying homage to
Rome, and to the power which enforces the institution ordained by Rome. He is
worshiping the beast and his image. As men then reject the institution which God
has declared to be the sign of his authority, and honor in its stead that which Rome has
chosen as the token of her supremacy, they will thereby accept the sign of allegiance to
Rome—“the mark of the beast.” And it is not until the issue is thus plainly set before
the people, and they are brought to choose between the commandments of God and
the commandments of men, that those who continue in transgression will receive “the
mark of the beast.”
**************
The most fearful threatening ever addressed to mortal is contained in the third
angel’s message. That must be a terrible sin which calls down
the wrath of God
unmingled
449
with mercy. Men are not to be left in darkness concerning this important matter; the
warning against this sin is to be given to the world before the visitation of God’s
judgments, that all may know why they are to be inflicted, and have opportunity to
escape them. Prophecy declares that the first angel would make his announcement to
“every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people.” The warning of the third angel,
which forms a part of the same threefold message, is to be no less widespread. It is
represented in the prophecy as proclaimed with a loud voice, by an angel flying in the
midst of heaven; and it will command the attention of the world.
***************
In the issue of the contest, all Christendom will be divided into two great
classes,—those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus, and those
who worship the beast and his image and receive his mark. Although church and State
will unite their power to compel “all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and
bond,” to receive “
the mark of the beast,” [
Revelation 13:16.] yet the people of God
will not receive it. The prophet of Patmos beholds “them that had gotten the victory
over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name,
stand on the sea of glass, having the harps of God,” and singing the song of Moses and the Lamb."
Revelations 15:2,3.
"Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces."
Daniel 7:23
