"LET THERE BE LIGHT" Ministries
BABYLON -- THEN and NOW , part 3 quotes
1) Can the history which the Jewish, Apostolic, and Protestant churches followed in beginning as a pure chosen church of God, but ending up becoming Babylon fallen, be repeated today by other groups of God’s professed people? What about the Seventh Day Adventist Church? Is there any chance that the SDA church could repeat this same history? Yes!
"The world must not be introduced into the church, and married to the church, forming a bond of unity. Through this means the church will become indeed corrupt, and as stated in Revelation, 'a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.'" Testimonies to Ministers, p 265.
This passage is found in Revelation 18:2, dealing with Babylon! The SDA church is married to Christ. If this married woman departs from the side of her Husband and unites herself with the world, she would become an adulterer and repeated adultery would make them into an harlot. God was warning the SDA church that if she repeated the same history that the Jewish, Apostolic, and Protestant churches followed in departing from the side of Jesus to unite themselves with the world, then the SDA church would become an harlot of Babylon!
Satan knew that he had to do something to bring in confusion and deception and divert attention away from this very plain warning. And two years later he led a man named A.W. Stanton to put out a tract calling the SDA church Babylon fallen in 1893. But in 1893 the SDA church was not Babylon fallen or any part of Babylon, and so this forced Sister White to counter Stanton’s message by plainly stating that this Babylon message was error directly from Satan.
As there were now plain inspired statements against calling the SDA church Babylon in 1893, what Satan masterfully did was to get Adventists to believe that these statements were unconditional and meant that the SDA church could never become Babylon. And most of the SDA church members today emphatically believe that sister White declared that the SDA church can never and will never become Babylon, no matter what the church does. Whereas she never stated this.
2) Every testimony where you will find Sister White saying not to call the SDA church Babylon, is only in the year 1893! There are no testimonies either before or after this date which say not to call the church Babylon. And why is this? I find two reasons.
1st - These testimonies were written in the present tense form, with the year of 1893 in mind.
“There is but one church in the world who are at this present time [in 1893] standing in the breach, and making up the hedge, building up the old waste places; and for any man to call...her as Babylon, is to do a work in harmony with him who is the accuser of the brethren.” Testimonies to Ministers, p 50.
These testimonies were not promising that the SDA church could never become Babylon, but were only stating that the church was not Babylon at that present time in 1893.
3) 2nd - There are no promises of God given to any people, including the SDA church, that are not based upon conditions of obedience.
"God's promises are all made upon conditions." Faith and Works, p 47.
"If they [God's people] did not keep His commandments, He would not--He could not--fulfill the rich promises which were given them on condition of obedience." Signs of the Times, vol 2, p 37.
"God would in no wise excuse sin in a people who had been enlightened, even if He had, in their days of faithfulness and purity, loved them, and given them especial promises. These promises and blessings were always upon condition of obedience upon their part." Spirit of Prophecy, vol 2, p 54.
"God had given them [Jews] His gracious promise that they should become a peculiar treasure unto Him, on condition of obedience; but if they were disobedient He would reject them, and choose another people." Signs of the Times, vol 1, p 152.
"The promise of God to us is on condition of obedience, compliance with all his requirements." Testimonies, vol 2, p 146.
These testimonies against calling the SDA church Babylon are conditional, not unconditional. As long as the SDA church would fulfill her part of the covenant promise with God, then she would never become Babylon. But if she would refuse to fulfill her covenant promise with God, if she chose to unite herself with the world, and if she continued to reject the message of truth, then there would be nothing to prevent her from becoming corrupt, a cage of every unclean and hateful bird or Babylon.
4) Sister White also verifies what we have so far discussed and even lists all the different phrases which God and herself use to also refer to Babylon.
"How dare mortal man pass his judgment upon them and call the church a harlot, Babylon, a den of thieves, a cage of every unclean and hateful bird, the habitation of devils...the Lord has had a church from that day [Apostolic times] through all the changing scenes of time to the present period, 1893." Review and Herald, vol 6, p 515.
This means that to call the SDA church a harlot, or a cage of every unclean and hateful bird, etc., is the same as calling them Babylon!
5) Sister White did not unconditionally promise that the SDA church would never become Babylon! It was just in 1893 the church had not yet united herself fully with the world to fulfill the conditions in the TM 265 testimony. And just so none of the Adventist people would become confused over this Babylon issue, another testimony was given just two years later in 1895.
"The world must not be introduced into the church and married to the church. Through union with the world the church will become corrupt, 'a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.' The customs of the world must not have a place; for they will be open doors through which the prince of darkness will find access, and the line of demarcation will become indistinguishable between him that serveth God and him that serveth him not....Satanic forces are continually at work through the world, and it is Satan's object to bring the church and the world into such close fellowship that their aims, their spirit, their principles, shall harmonize". Review and Herald, February 26, 1895 (vol 3, p 233).
|
||