EPISODE 5 ~ STUDIES IN MATTHEW ~ STEPHEN BOHR

STUDIES IN MATTHEW

Part 5/14 - Stephen Bohr

HARBINGER OF THE FUTURE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CFQ_9rrYvw

EPISODE 5 TIDAK DITERJEMAHKAN KARENA ISINYA ADALAH TENTANG KOMENTAR-KOMENTAR PARA PEJABAT DAN ORANG-ORANG BERPENGARUH  DI AMERIKA SERIKAT PADA AKHIR ABAD 19, KETIKA SUNDAY LAW NYARIS DIBERLAKUKAN. KOMENTAR-KOMENTAR ITU TIDAK TERLALU RELEVAN BAGI KITA SEKARANG, JADI SAYA TIDAK MEMBUANG WAKTU UNTUK MENERJEMAHKANNYA. TAPI BAGI YANG MAU MEMBACA PELAJARANNYA DALAM BAHASANYA YANG ASLI, SILAKAN.

PELAJARAN INI HANYA UNTUK MENUNJUKKAN BAHWA SUNDAY LAW (UNDANG-UNDANG NEGARA UNTUK MEMAKSAKAN PEMELIHARAAN HARI MINGGU SEBAGAI HARI IBADAH), WALAUPUN KEDENGARANNYA SANGAT ABSURD DAN MUSTAHIL BISA TERJADI DI SUATU NEGARA YANG MENDUKUNG KEBEBASAN BERAGAMA, TERNYATA SUATU WAKTU DI AKHIR ABAD 19, PERNAH DIGALAKKAN DI AMERIKA SERIKAT, WALAUPUN AKHIRNYA GAGAL DIBERLAKUKAN SECARA NASIONAL. DAN INI MEMBUKTIKAN BAHWA HAL YANG SAMA BISA TERJADI LAGI, TETAPI UNTUK KEDUA KALINYA, TIDAK BAKAL GAGAL MELAINKAN MALAH DIBERLAKUKAN SECARA INTERNASIONAL.

In our last study together we noticed the prophetic dimension of Matthew chapter 24. We dedicate this significant amount of time to study the abomination of desolation in prophecy. And we noticed that there was a definite connection  between the eagles of Rome and the eagle which was adopted for the state of arms of the USA. We also noted that according to Bible prophecy eventually, someday, we believe soon, there is going to be in the US, a national Sunday Law. Mandating the observance of Sunday as the day of rest. And this will be the abominations spoken of in prophecy, which eventually will lead to desolation. Another way of expressing it is that national apostasy will lead to national ruin.

Now, many of those who are here today, probably are saying, “This could never happen in the USA. This is the land of the free and the home of the brave. This is the land that has the greatest constitution in the history of the world. We are the people of the First Amendment, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The fact is, folks, that we don’t have to speculate  about whether this can happen or not,  because in the 1880’s we have an experience in the history of the US where something like this almost transpired. And that’s what we want to study about today. We want to go back to 1864 and we want to study through the end of the 19^th century to see how these events transpired in our history. And in this way we are going to see that this is not only possible, but it becomes very probable.

Now, in order to prepare for what we are going to study today, we need to remember that there were two sieges of the city of Jerusalem. There was the first siege by Cestius Gallus, he surrounded the city in the year 66 the Romans placed their standards in the ground, they worshiped them. But for some unexplainable reason ~ we know that it was Divine Providence ~ Cestius Gallus withdrew. And the Jews followed the Roman armies and there were many casualties among the Romans when they suddenly left Jerusalem. Of course, Christians who were in the city saw that as the sign that they were supposed to flee, and so the Christians in the city, those who were attached to the Lord Jesus Christ, left. A while later, Titus, the new general of the Roman armies returned to the city of Jerusalem and surrounded it once again. And this time there was no withdrawal. The destruction of the city of Jerusalem came.

I believe that the same thing is going to transpire in the USA. I believe that what happened in 1888 would be parallel  to the first siege of Jerusalem. It was a  sign for God’s people that this was eventually going to take place in the US and that we should prepare for momentus events that are going to take place in the future.

Now I would like to give you a few of the sources that are viewed in preparing the material for our study today. And I’ll go through this quickly. There are some sources from the writings of Ellen White, she lived during this period. She actually wrote The Great Controversy during this period. So we would need to read from her writings especially the chapter titled “The Impending Conflict” in the book The Great Controversy.

Also Vol. 5 of the Testimonies pg 711-718. Besides this there are some other sources, we have the book Civil Government and Religion by A.T. Jones, who had to go and testify before the Education Committee of the US Senate. Also a book of Essays written by A.T. Jones and Pastor Waggoner, and the title of that book is Views of National Reform. And then finally the last source I would like to mention is the book National Sunday Law written by A.T. Jones, actually it is a transcript of his testimony before Congress appealing to Congress to not impose this Sunday Law which was being proposed. Incidentally A.T. Jones says in his book that Senator Blair who was the one who was pushing for this national Sunday Law interrupted him many, many times during the period in which he was giving his speech.

Now what I want to do is I want to speak about what transpired back then. And for this I am going to have to read several statements. I hope that you don’t get bored listening to all these statements but I feel that I need to read what the religious leaders of that day were actually saying about the proposed amendment to the Constitution of the US. However before we read these quotations I need to tell you something about the National Reform Movement. This organization was established in the year 1864 and the avowed purposed was to amend the Constitution so that the Constitution would say that the US is a Christian nation. Also it was the purpose of the National Reform organization to have Congress write a national Sunday Law and impose it by law upon the citizens of the US. The first National Reform convention was held in Allegheny, Pennsylvania, January 27-28, 1864. According to the sources there were 120 vice presidents of this organization. It kind of makes me remember the 120 satraps in Daniel chapter 6 that ended up throwing Daniel in the lions’ den. By the way, they had a publication, the National Reform Movement had a publication called the Christian Statesman, and this is a very, very interesting publication because it tells what their objectives were and what their methods were as well. The Christian Statesman for 24 December 1885 said this about those who composed the National Reform Movement in that year. It stated that there were 15 college professors, 16 college presidents, 3 ex-governors, 7 justices of Supreme Court, 5 judges of Superior Court, 2 judges of the US District Court, 1 judge of the US circuit court with many, many others who you would address as “Your honors”, “Reverends” and “Doctors of Divinity”.

Now the national Sunday Law was actually proposed as a bill to the Senate of the US by Senator Henry W. Blair of New Hampshire, it was bill nr. 2983 and the idea was to write a national Sunday Law that would be imposed upon the citizens of the US.

In our next lecture we are going to notice that something else was happening in 1888. There was a famous Congress of the 7^th Day Adventist Church being held in the city of Minneapolis. This is not a coincidence as we are going to study in our next lecture.

While God was trying to draw His people together, Satan was working to draw his people together in other words the battle lines were being drawn in that very year, the year 1888.

By the way, going beyond a little bit, beyond 1888, in 1889 the National Catholic Congress which met in Baltimore resolved officially to unite with Protestants to secure proper Sunday observance. In the year 1892 the US Supreme Court declared that the US is a Christian nation. Allow me to say that I don’t believe that the US is a Christian nation, I believe that the US is a nation composed mostly of Christians. It’s very different to say that it is a Christian nation than to say that it is a nation composed mostly of Christians. It is a nation that is based on divine principles, the principle that we need to render on to Caeser  that which is Caeser’s and unto God that which is God’s upon the idea of full civil and religious  liberty, upon the idea of the separation of Church and State. These are Christians principles upon which the nation is built. However, the nation is not as such a Christian nation. Finally, this proposal of a national Sunday Law led A.T. Jones to be sent by the SDA denomination to testify before the Education and Labor Committee of the 50^th US Congress. This happened on December 13, 1888. And I believe that the arguments that were presented by A.T. Jones were so persuasive and so powerful that the national Sunday Law was placed on hold.

Now, let’s examine a few things that the National Reformers were saying as we move from 1864 to the 1890’s.

First of all it is important  to notice that Catholics were behind this religious amendment, this amendment to make the US a Christian nation and this amendment to have a national Sunday Law.

In an encyclical  letter in 1885 Pope Leo XIII said this, “All Catholics should do all in their power to cause the Constitutions of States and Legislation to be molded on the principles of the true church. And all Catholic writers and journalists should never lose sight for an instant from the view of the above prescription.”

Also the famous Henry Cardinal Gibbons had this to say,  “I am most happy to add my name to those of the millions of others who are laudably contending against the violation of the Christian Sabbath by unnecessary labor and who are endeavoring to promote its decent and proper observance by judicious legislation.” [Civil Government and Religion pg 75]

So Gibbons is saying, “Add my name to the list of those who want national Sunday Law.”

Something very interesting that was taking place during this period is that the ministers that belonged to the National Reform Movement, actually wanted to join Church and State, they wanted to amend the Constitution to make this possible.

For example, Jonathan Edwards at the New York City Convention which was held on February 26-27, 1873, said this about what the ministers and the churches wanted. “We want State and religion  and we are going to have it. The Christian oath and Christian morality shall have in this land an undeniable legal basis. We use this word religion in its proper sense, as meaning a man’s personal relation of faith and obedience to God.”

So what he is saying is, that State and religion need to be placed on an undeniable legal basis. By the way the word “legal” means “by law”.

Notice what Rev. M.A. Gault has to say, another one of the great leaders of this movement. He says, speaking about all the malefic influences in society, the problem with  liquor,    immorality and materialism, and the  problem with the civil war, he said this, “Our remedy for all these malefic influences (liquor, immorality, consumerism, Civil War]  is to have the government simply set up the moral law, and recognize God’s authority behind it and lay its hand on any religion that does not conform to it.”

Dr. Mandeville who was another one of the great leaders of this movement said this, “When the Church of God awakes and does its duty on one side and the State on the other, we shall have no further trouble in this matter.” Of the matter of the desecration of Sunday which  is what he is talking about.  [Civil Government and Religion pg. 105].

Sam Small, who was Secretary of the National Prohibition Convention held in Indianapolis in the year 1888, preached a sermon in Kansas City in January 1888 where he said this, “I want to see the day come when the Church shall be  arbiter of all legislation…” are you catching that? He wants to “… see the day when the Church shall be the arbiter of all legislation, State, national, and municipal.  When the great churches of the country can come together harmoniously…” notice,  when the churches of the country can come together harmoniously “…and issue their edict and the legislative powers will respect it and enact it into laws.”  [Civil Government and Religion pg. 63] Not much camouflage there, is there about what their motivations were?

Regarding the duties of the State Rev. J.M. Foster said this, “That a constitutional provision be made for recognizing God as king of nations, that a constitutional recognition  be made that the State is the divinely appointed keeper of the moral law, that a constitutional provision be made detailing the moral and religious qualifications of those who would occupy an office of trust, that the nation needed to make a covenant with God, that the nation must guard and protect the Church by suppressing all public violation of the moral law; by maintaining  a system of public schools, indoctrinating their youth in morality and virtue, by exempting Church property from taxation and by providing her funds out of the public treasury for carrying on her aggressive work at home and in the foreign field. [Christian Statesman, Feb 21, 1844]  

Notice what they wanted the government to do. What the church should do, they wanted the State to perform.

At the Cleveland National Convention we find this resolution which was adopted, “Resolved, that we reaffirm that this religious Amendment instead of  infringing on any individual’s right of conscience or tending in the least degree to a union of Church and State will afford the fullest security against a corrupting church establishment and form the strongest safeguard of both the civil and religious liberties of all citizens.” [Views on National Reform pg. 33]

Now, one is left to ask “How would this be possible if you are declaring the US to be a Christian nation and if by law you are obligating everyone to keep the first day of the week as a day of rest?”

Dr. McAllister, another one of the leaders of this movement, in Lakeside, Ohio, in July 1887 had this to say, “Let a man be what he may ~  Jew, seventh day observer or some other denomination, or those who do not believe in the Christian Sabbath ~ let the law apply to everyone, that there shall be no public desecration of the first day of the week. The Christian Sabbath, the day of rest for the nation. They may hold any other day of the week as sacred and observe it,  but that day which is the one day in seven for the nation at large, let that not be publicly desecrated by anyone, by officer in the government, or by private citizen high or low, rich or poor.” [Civil Government and Religion pg. 100]

Do you notice that a couple of times in this statement he speaks about “the day of rest for the nation at large”, this in other words was a proposal of a national Sunday Law by the Churches and the State was supposed to rewrite the Constitution and mandate the observance of this day as the day of rest.

In the Elgin Sunday Law Convention, Dr. Mandeville of Chicago used the example of Nehemiah in the Old Testament to say what the State should do. These are his words,  “The merchants of Tyre  insisted upon selling goods near the temple on the Sabbath and Nehemiah compelled the officers of the law to do their duty and stop it. So we can compel the officers of the law to do their duty.”  [Civil Government and Religion pg. 103]  

Does that sound like the voice of the dragon? And this is not happening in this day and age, this was happening back in the 1870’s and 1880’s.

Notice that the National Sunday Law Mass Meeting held in Hamilton Hall in Oakland, Calif. in fact January 1887, Dr. Briggs of Napa Calif. spanked the political leaders for not imposing a national Sunday Law as a day of rest. He said to them, “You relegate moral instruction to the church and then let all go as they please on Sunday, so that we cannot get at them.”  [Civil Government and Religion pg. 96]  In other words, you let them go shopping, and ride the trains and read the newspapers ~ as we are going to notice in a few moments ~ on Sundays, and that way people don’t come to church and we don’t have access to them. So he is saying, you political leaders need to give a  national Sunday Law, so that people are forced to come to church, so that we have access to them, so that we can then moralize them, so to speak. In other words they want the State to coral all of the people and bring them to church by force on Sunday so that they would have access to them. Since when is it the role of the State to get people to go to church so that the pastors can preach sermons to them and moralize them, so to speak?

Now why did they want this national Sunday Law? Well, actually the reason why is because they saw society falling apart, they saw an increase in crime. By the way this was in the aftermath of the civil war, there were tremendous suicidal problems, there were problems with liquor at that time so the prohibition arose. And so they said in order for the US to correct these problems everybody needs to get back to church. And in order to get back to church there has to be a national Sunday law.

In fact I want you to notice what Dr. Briggs had to say about the Sunday newspaper. He said this, “What a melange! What a dish to set down before a man before breakfast and after breakfast…” he is talking about the newspaper, he says “What a melange! What a dish to set down before a man before breakfast and after breakfast to prepare him for hearing the word of God. It makes it twice as hard to reach those who go to the Sanctuary and keeps away from the house many from worship altogether. They read the paper, the time comes to go to church; but it is said, ‘Here is something interesting; I will read it and not go to church today.’”[Civil Government and Religion pg. 97]

Another one of the leaders said this, “The laboring class are at  to rise late on Sunday morning, read the Sunday papers, and allow the hour of worship to go by unheeded.” And so the idea is to eliminate the Sunday newspaper so people can’t sit down to read it at breakfast and therefore they decide to go to church.

At the Elgin Convention, Dr. Everts who is one of the better known personalities of the Movement, said this about the Sunday trains, you see they want to eliminate the Sunday trains also, this is what he said, “The Sunday train is another great evil. They cannot afford to run a train unless they get a great many passengers, and so break up a great many congregations. The Sunday railroad trains are hurrying  their passengers fast on to perdition. What an outrage that the railroad, that great civilizer should destroy the Christian Sabbath.”  [Civil Government and Religion pg 97]

By the way that name for the day of rest “Christian Sabbath” is definitely a misnomer because there is nothing Christian about the first day of the week. It is a pagan day all the way back ~ as we have studied ~ to ancient Babylon.

The Rev. M.A. Gault of the National Reform Association published an article in the Christian Statesman on September 25, 1844,  excuse me, 1884, where he said this about the railroad, “This railroad…” he is talking about the Chicago and Rock Island railroad, “…has been running excursion trains from Des Moines to Colfax Springs on the Sabbath for some time, and the Ministers complain that their members go on these excursions.”

So of course you need a national Sunday law to shut down the trains, to get rid of the newspapers on the first day of the week, and that way the people don’t have anything to do other than go to church and listen to the sermons by the pastors.

In the Boston Monday Lectures, Dr. Joseph Cook, this was in the year 1887 clearly said that the ministers did not want a civil Sabbath. They did not want just a secular day of rest. They wanted a religious day of rest. Notice his words, “The experience of centuries shows however,  that you will in vain endeavor to preserve Sunday as a day of rest, unless you preserve it as a day of worship. Unless Sabbath…” and by the way when he says “Sabbath” he is meaning “Sunday”,  “… Unless Sabbath observance be founded upon religious reasons, you will not long maintain it at a high standard on the basis of economic and physiological and political considerations only.”  [Civil Government and Religion pg 73]

It’s interesting that they saw that anyone who is opposed to this idea of mandating Sunday as a day of rest would be considered unpatriotic.

Notice the Resolutions of the Elgin Convention. The argument is that the first day of the week belongs to natural law, biblical law, civil law and is American besides. This is what this resolution says, “Resolved, that we recognize the Sabbath as an institution of God…” he means Sunday by the way,  “…revealed in nature and the Bible…” by the way it’s not revealed in nature or the Bible,  “…and of perpetual obligation on all men…” we believe that the Sabbath is a perpetual obligation upon all men, and he continued saying, or the convention continued saying, “… and also as a civil and American institution bound up in vital and historical connection with the origin and foundation of our government, the growth of our polity and necessary to be maintained…” notice this,  “…in order for the preservation and integrity of our national system, and therefore as having a sacred claim on all patriotic American citizens.” [Civil Government and Religion pg 94]

So the Sunday was considered to be American. Anybody against it was not considered to be patriotic. And it’s interesting that he says this institution was in harmony with natural law, biblical law, civil law and of course the history of Blue Laws in the US.

Also we noticed at the Elgin convention that they were opposed to purchasing business and travel on the first day of the week. This is what one of the ministers said, “that we look with shame and sorrow on the non observance of the Sabbath by many Christian people, in that the customs prevail with them of purchasing Sabbath newspapers, engaging in and patronizing Sabbath business and travel,  and in many instances giving themselves to pleasure and self indulgence, setting aside by neglect and indifference, the great duties and privileges which God’s day brings them.” [Civil Government and Religion pg 95]

Now there was also as I have mentioned, the idea that the US was a Christian nation, they actually wanted to amend the Constitution so that the Constitution would say that the US was a Christian nation.

Notice, for example, one of the leaders who said this, “Give all men to understand that this is a Christian nation and that believing…” now notice this, “… and that believing without Christianity we perish, we must maintain by all right means our Christian character, inscribe this character on our Constitution enforced upon all that come   among us a law of Christian morality.”

And also in the Statesman, the publication you’ll find this, “What the Statesman designates as ‘political atheism’…” that is political leaders who don’t agree with the national Sunday Law,  “…is nothing more nor less than the present form of Government and the present Constitution of the US.” [December 24, 1885]

They are saying, the Constitution as it was written was political atheism. Today it would be called secular humanism, by the way.

The Statesman continues saying, “To impose national reform is to them…” that is to the National Reformers,  “…sheer atheism, and to oppose the kind of Government which they endorsed is political atheism. That no religious test should be required of a civil ruler is declared by Rev. M.A. Gault to be  ‘the infidel theory of Government’.”

Something else that the leaders were doing is that they were kind of doing a type of voter guide, kind of telling their church members who they should vote for and who they shouldn’t. Is this kind of ring a bell?

Notice the 3^rd resolution of the Elgin convention that speaks about the need to vote for certain candidates. “Resolved, that we give our votes and support to those candidates or political officers who will pledge themselves to vote for the enactment and enforcing of statues in favor of the civil Sabbath.” [Civil Government and Religion pg 95]

And the honorable John Cole of Tingli, Iowa, in the Christian Statesman, September 6, 1886 said this, “If Congress does not find in our Constitution a basis for Sabbath legislation, then let us elect a Congress who will find such a basis.”

There was also promoting   having rallies in Washington DC as the amendment was being considered, to put the pressure on the legislatures to enact the national Sunday Law. Notice this for example:

“Let us begin  without delay the circulation of petitions [to be furnished in  proper form by the Association]…”  by the National Reform Association,  “…and let an opportunity be given to all parts of the country to make up a roll of petitions so great that it will require a procession of wheelbarrows to trundle the mighty mass into the presence of the representatives of the nation in the House of Congress. Let a mass convention of  the friends of the cause be held in Washington when the Blair resolution shall be under discussion to accompany with its influence the presentation of the petitions, and to take such other action as may be deemed best to arouse the nation to a genuine enthusiasm in behalf of our national Christianity.” [John Alexander]

Notice also what the Rev. J.C.K. Milligan said in the Christian Statesman, July 26, 1888,  about the idea of electing individuals that would be in favor of the national Sunday Law. He said this, “By letters to senators and representatives in Congress, by petitions numerously signed and forwarded to them, by local, State and national conventions held and public meetings in every school district…” that’s interesting that they have the school districts involved, “… such an influence…” he continues, “…can quickly be brought to bear as will compel our legislators to adopt the measure, and enforce it by the needed legislation. The Christian pulpits if they would, could secure its adoption before the dog-days end.”

In another statement we find this,  “The changes will come gradually and probably only after the whole framework of Bible legislations have been thoroughly canvassed by Congress and State legislators by the Supreme Court of the US and of the several states, and by lawyers and citizens an outpouring of the Spirit might soon secure it.”

Others are talking of taking over all of the branches of government to secure this national Sunday Law. By the way, back then the party that was pushing for this were the Democrats not the Republicans.

Notice this interesting piece of article written in the Lansing Republican from back then. They are criticizing this idea. “Thousands of men…” speaking about those who vote for certain candidates, and the candidates giving in because of political pressure,  “thousands of men if called upon to vote for such an amendment  would hesitate to vote against God, although they might not believe that the Amendment is necessary, or that it is right… Such an Amendment would be likely to receive an affirmative vote which would by no means indicate the true sentiment of the people…. Men who make politics a trade, would hesitate to record their names against the proposed  Constitutional Amendment advocated by the great religious denominations of the land…” today we call them religious conservatives by the way, “…and endorsed by such men as Bishop Simpson, Bishop McIlvane, Bishop Eastburn, President Finney, Professor Lewis, Professor Seelye, Bishop Huntington, Bishop Kerfoot, Dr. Patterson, Dr. Cuyler and many other divines who are the representative men of their respective denomination.” [Views of National Reform pg.60]

They also spoke about uniting all of the Protestant denominations. Notice this interesting statement in the publication Christians Statesmen, February 7, 1884.  “We are different divisions of Immanuel’s army. The Methodists are the charging cavalry, the Presbyterians the fighting infantry, the Covenantiers the batteries  upon the heights, we have one Commander in Chief, and under Him we go forward one united phalanx against the common enemy, and when the victory is gained  the army will be one and  the leader one.”

Notice the idea of uniting in this common cause.

Notice what Rev. Milligan had to say about the pastors being the moral conscience of the nation. He said this,  “The churches and the pulpits have much to do with shaping and forming opinions   on all moral questions, and with interpretations of Scripture on moral and civil as well as on theological and ecclesiastical points, and it is probable that in the most universal gathering of our citizens about these, the chief discussions and the final  decision of most points will be developed there…” in other words the ministers are actually going to be the ones who are going to write and formulate theologically what this law would say.  [Views on National Reform, pg. 9-10]

And then I want you to notice the text that is used. “Many nations shall come and say, ‘Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord and to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways and we will walk in his path, for the law shall go forth of Zion. There certainly…” now, notice this,  “…there certainly is no class of citizens more intelligent, patriotic and trustworthy than the leaders and teachers in our churches.”  Isn’t that interesting that they would have the ministers be the driving force behind the politicians to redeck or write this Sunday Law and have it imposed upon the people?

Another interesting thing they were doing is they were playing games with the establishment clause. In fact they were saying that the establishment clause simply forbids the government from establishing a church, a national church, but it does not forbid the government from establishing religion.

Notice that at the Pittsburgh convention which was held in 1874, Professor Blanchard had this to say,  “But union of church and state is the selection by the nation of one church, the endorsement of such a church, the appointment of its officers and oversight of its doctrines. For such a union none of us plead. To such a union we are all of us opposed.” [Views of National Reform, pg 38]  In other words, we oppose ~ according to him ~ to the idea that the government should select the leaders and should dictate what happens in the church. But that doesn’t mean that the government cannot establish religion in general terms for everyone.

W.J. Coleman had this to say about the establishment clause. The first sentence of article 1 of Amendments reads, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Now, he explains what that means, “This would be made consistent with the proposed amendment by substituting the words “a church” for “religion”, making it read, ‘Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of a church’” in other words they wanted to amend the First Amendment to say, that Congress cannot establish a church, not necessarily religion. Then he says this,  “This is what the Reformed Association believes should be the rule in a rightly constituted state. There should be religion but no church.”

There was also an embracing of Roman Catholics by Protestants. Notice in the Christians Statesman, December 11, 1884, this: “We cordially gladly recognize the fact that in South American republics and in France and other European countries, the Roman Catholics are the recognized advocates of national Christianity and stand oppose to all the proposals of secularism.” Now, there they are saying the Catholic Church is just like us, they are opposing secularism by establishing national religion, not a national religion but establishing religious observances. And they said, “This is exactly what we want here.”

Have you ever heard of the image to the Beast in Revelation chapter 13? That’s exactly what Revelation 13 is talking about.

Now, I want you to notice another statement. And there is a very significant couple of words here. This is Christians Statesman, December 11,  1884.  “Whenever the Roman Catholics are willing to cooperate in resisting the progress of political atheism…” You understand what that means “political atheism”?  Right? That means the government does not become involve in religion at all.  “Whenever they…” that is Roman Catholics, “…are willing to cooperate in resisting the progress of political atheism, we will gladly join hands …” I want you to remember that, “… we will gladly join hands with them.”

Sylvester F. Scovel  said this about the cooperation between Protestants and Roman Catholics. He says, “This common interest ought both to strengthen our determination to work, and our readiness to cooperate in every way with our Roman Catholic fellow-citizens. We may be subjected to some rebuffs in our first proffers, and the time is not yet come when the Roman church will consent  to strike hands with other churches ~ as such ~ but the time has come  to make repeated advances and gladly to accept cooperation in any form in which they will be willing to exhibit it. It is one of the necessities of the situation. ” [Christian Statesman, August 31, 1881]

This is not the case of Catholics seeking the cooperation of Protestants, this is the case of Protestants seeking the cooperation of Roman Catholics.

There was also talk of establishing religious instruction in public schools. Notice Senator Blair, what Senator Blair had to say about religious textbooks. He said, “I believe that a textbook of instruction in the principles of virtue morality and of the Christian religion can be prepared for use in the public schools by the joint efforts of those who represent every branch of the Christian church, both Protestant and Catholic and also those who are not actively associated with either.”

Another interesting aspect is, that this bad cause of trying to give a national Sunday Law pass was linked with other good causes, like for example the need to overcome alcoholism known as prohibition. In fact Sam Jones,  a third party prohibitionist in July  1888 in a talk that he gave in Windsor Canada, which was composed of mostly Americans there had this to say, “Now, I tell you, I think we are running the last political combat on the lines we had been running them on. It is between the Republicans and the Democrats, this contest. And it’s the last Republicans will make in America. The Democrats are going in overwhelmingly. Four years from now the prohibition element will break the solid South. The issue then will be God or no God, drunkenness or sobriety, Sunday Sabbath or no Sabbath, heaven or hell, that will be the issue. Then we will wipe up the ground, with the Democratic party and let God rule America from that time on.” Does that sound like the voice of the dragon? This is in the 1880’s not in 2007.

The Women’s Christians Temperance Union  of that time was pushing for prohibition, but they were also very strong supporters of the national Sunday Law. Actually what they wanted was a theocracy like in colonial times. Notice this, “A true theocracy is yet to come and the enthronement of Christ in law and law makers. Hence I pray devoutly as a Christian patriot for the ballot in the hands of women and rejoice that the national Women’s Christians Temperance Union has so long championed this cause.” So they are longing for the day that women can vote, so that they can vote not only for prohibition but also for a national Sunday Law.

Most of the leaders of this movement actually wanted a theocracy in the United States. A theocracy means that the civil government would be ruled by the wishes of the church. Allow me to read you some statements where they expressed this view overtly.

Professor Blanchard at the Elgin convention spoke about the role of ministers in this so-called new theocracy. He said, “In this work we are undertaking for the Sabbath, we are the representatives of God.” He says, the ministers are the representatives of God.”

Here is another statement. “The government of Israel was a theocracy. The will of God was made known to the ruler by the prophets. The ruler compelled the officers of the law to prevent the ungodly from selling goods on the Sabbaths. This government is to be made a theocracy…” he is saying it in his day and age,  “This government is to be made a theocracy. The preachers are the successors of the prophets. And they are to compel the officers of the law to prevent all selling of goods and all manner of work on Sunday.”

Dr. Crafts, general secretary of the National Sunday Law Union said this, “The Preachers are the successors of the prophets.”

The President’s annual address at the convention held in Nashville 1887 had this to say, “The Women’s Christians Temperance Union local, state, national and worldwide, has one vital organic flout, one all observing purpose, one undying enthusiasm and that is that Christ shall be this world’s king…”  Kind of sounds like the Mount of Temptation doesn’t it? “…Yea! VERILY THIS WORLD’S KING.” And that’s in capital letters. “In it’s realm of cause and effect, king of its courts, its camps, its commerce, king of its colleges and cloisters, king of its customs and its constitutions. The kingdom of Christ must enter the realm of law through the gateway of politics…” interesting!  “… The kingdom of Christ must enter the realm of law through the gateway of politics, we pray heaven to give the old parties no rest until they shall swear and  alter religion to Christ on politics and march in one great army upto the Poles to worship God.”

In fact they spoke about this in franchising people who did not agree with them. In other words people would lose their citizenship.

Notice what E.B. Graham of the National Reformed Convention of York, Nebraska had to say. “We might add in all justice, if opponents of the Bible do not like our government and its Christian features, let them go to some wild desolate land, and in the name of the devil, and for the sake of the devil, subdue it and set up a government of their own, on infidel and atheistic ideas, and then if they can stand it, stay there till they die.” [Christian Statesman, May 21, 1885]

John Calvin Knox Milligan, another minister that was in favor of  this movement, said this, “When the amendment is adopted…” and by the way he was thinking it was going to be adopted in 1888, but we know that it is going to be adopted in the future,  “… when the amendment is adopted, how will it act upon the civil and political rights of infidels, Jews etc.?” he asked. How, what effect will it have on them? He says, “This depends largely upon themselves.  The worst result will be to disenfranchise them.”

Emil Gout, district secretary of the association, said this,  “Our remedy for all these malefic influences…” the turmoil in society  he is talking about,  “… is to have the government simply set up the moral Law and recognize God’s authority behind it, and lay its hand on any religion, that does not conform to it.”

Christians Statesman, October 2, 1884, “Give all men to understand this is a Christian nation and that believing without Christianity we perish…” those are the words of Caiaphas by the way, in John chapter 11,  “…we must maintain by all means our Christian character, inscribe this character on our constitution, enforce upon all who come upon us the Laws of Christian morality. “

Well, what eventually would come as a result of this? The result will be persecution against those who did not agree.

Notice at the National Reform Women’s Christians Temperance Union Convention which was held at Lakeside Ohio in 1887, notice these words, “There is a Law in the state of Arkansas enforcing Sunday observance upon the people. And the result has been that many good persons have not only been imprisoned but have lost their property and even their lives.” This was back in 1888.

Now this was an objection by some that belonged to the Women’s Christians Temperance Union. Notice the answer of Dr McAllister, one of the leaders of the movement. He says, and these words are prophetic. “It is better that a few should suffer…” know where that comes from? John 11. “It is better that a few should suffer than that the whole nation should lose its Sabbaths.” By the way those words of Caiaphas were fulfilled by the rejection of Christ. The nation was taken away and the nation was destroyed.

In the year 556 Pope Pelagius are called upon an individual called Narses, to command people to obey the pope’s commands by force of law. Narses, you know, complained to the pope, he says we shouldn’t  have to use force to compel the people  to do what the pope says. Notice what Pelagius wrote back to him: “Be not alarmed at the idle talk of some crying out against persecution and reproach in the church as if she delighted in cruelty. When she punishes evil with wholesome severities or procures the salvation of souls …” and now notice this, “… he alone persecutes who forces to do evil.” Is that true? Persecution is only when you persecute evil? He says, notice, “he alone persecutes who forces to do evil,  but to restrain men from doing evil or to punish those who have done it, is not persecution or cruelty but love of mankind.” In other words, to persecute error is not persecution.

That’s incredible, but it’s not so incredible because even in colonial times, ever heard of John Cotton? He was one of the prominent religious leaders in colonial times and this is what he had to say,  “Persecution is not wrong in itself. It is wicked for falsehood to persecute truth, but it is the sacred duty of truth to persecute falsehood.” [The Saving of America, pg 30]

And that’s exactly what happened in colonial times.

The question is, is Sunday falsehood?  But those who were teaching it say that was the truth. That’s why you have to have freedom of conscience, to worship God according to the dictates of your own conscience. And not as people perceived the truth.

Interestingly enough there was a Virginian Sunday Law which was enacted in 1610 which required attendance at the divine service twice a day with economic fines for the first two offenses and to suffer death for the third. This is in colonial America. First two times you missed the Sunday service, economic fines, the third time you missed, the sentence was to suffer death.

A minister in Selma California interestingly enough, right around the corner, September 1888, had this to say, “We have laws to punish the man who steals our property, but we have no law to prevent people from working on Sunday. It is right that the thief be punished, but I have more sympathy for that man than I have for him that works on that day. “

Do you know that in Arkansas and in Tennessee Seventh Day Adventists were persecuted for not observing Sunday as a day of rest?  Property was confiscated, they were fined, they were imprisoned, and some of them even lost their lives.

In fact A.T. Jones in the book Civil Government and Religion documented 21 cases with names of the accused, places, name of judges, charges and penalties that were enacted as a result  of people who simply wanted to follow the dictates of their conscience and keep the Sabbath as a day of rest.

And you don’t think that that can happen again in the United States? Most of the Sunday laws, most of the Blue Laws have never been taken off the books. They are there, they are latent, just waiting to be enacted.

Finally I would like to read from the Century which is a publication for April 1888, a Mr. Keenan described the statutes of Russia on the subject of crimes against the faith. What he’s going to say is that the United States at that day and age was very similar to Russia. Notice, he says this, he quoted statute after statute, and I quote, “providing that whoever shall censure the Christian faith, or the orthodox church, or the Scriptures, or the holy sacraments, or the saints, or their images, or the virgin Mary, or the angels, or Christ, or God, shall be deprived of all civil rights and exiled for life to the most remote parts of Siberia. This is the system in Russia,” he says. “And it is in the direct line of the wishes of the National Reform Association, with this difference however, that Russia is contend to send dissenters to Siberia, while the National Reformers want to send them to the Devil straight.”

One final statement, from the Christian Statesman August 8, 1888, “every sin secret or public, against God is a sin against our country and is high treason against the State.”

Did you know this was happening around that time?  Probably most of us didn’t. Can something like this happen again in the USA? Not only can it happen but according to what we studied, it will happen again. So we must be certain that we are keeping God’s true day of rest.

26 10 14