ANSWER:
1. My view have
been somewhat changed on the subject of the "Sanctuary" since 1845,
when I wrote the article on the Law of Moses, from which the Sabbatarian Adventists quote
so often. As early as 1848 I saw enough of the nature of the coming Age to satisfy
my mind that our view on the Atonement needed some modifying. The above named
persons [the Sabbatarian Adventists] appear to me to be insincere in quoting from that
article, (1) because they know that it was written for the express purpose of
explaining and proving the doctrine of the "shut door" which they now, I
understand, disclaim. (2) The persons referred to never
received my views on the Atonement, as their leaders well know; and the points on which we
always differed were the means of leading me out from shut door errors.
2. I think we
have no means of knowing the precise time when the antitype of the ancient 10th
day of the 7th month service did or will begin; but we have evidence that it will not
close the "door of mercy" against all the previous impenitent.
According to the best light I can obtain from the Scriptures, I conclude that that service
will occupy the next age. I have no confidence in any "revelation" except
those contained in the Bible.
3. I think the
terms "the most holy place" and "heaven itself," as they occur in Heb.
ix. are not convertible. The contrast, you will see by verse 24, is between
"the holy places made with hands" and "heaven itself." In my
opinion we fail to see much of the instruction obtained in the type, if we confound the
services of the "holy place" with those of the "most holy
place." They had distinct apartments in the sanctuary, services were performed
at different times, and under different circumstances. These differences are
recognized in the New Testament exposition. For the law to have a complete
"shadow of good things to come," it must, like the prophecies, indicate the Age
to come. -- This I think it does in the atonement services of the
sanctuary. I see no more evidence that our Great High Priest entered upon the
antitype of the peculiar service performed in the holy of holies on the 10th day of the
7th month under the law when he ascended to heaven, than that the millenium began at that
time.
4. If they
consider that article unanswerable, why do they disclaim the doctrine of the shut door
which it teaches? Is it to shun reproach, and to get access to intelligent people
under false colors? I exceedingly regret ever having published the errors contained
in that article and feel thankful to our heavenly Father for the clear light of his word
which enabled me to see and renounce them. The many truths it contains are still
precious; and had I time to write and means to publish, I would like to separate the
latter from the former and more clearly and fully develop them.
5. What
enjoyment I had while trying to keep the Sabbath is not to be placed to its credit.
I had as much before, and more since. My observations and experience have convinced
me that there is no real Christian enjoyment in attempts at Sabbath keeping. The
enjoyment persons have in such attempts spring from other sources -- from having
the prejudice of early and erroneous education satisfied, and from preventing disunion
among believers, and from truths they may hold in practice. The Sabbath is legal,
not Christian; therefore it cannot yield Christian enjoyment. It carries with it the
spirit of "bondage" as all know who have tried to keep it; and torments with a
constant consciousness of coming short of meeting its imperious demands. How often
have I heard Sabbatarians say, "We can't keep it: we do the best we can; yet we can't
keep it according to the Bible." The reason is, it was never designed for
Christians to keep. Hence there are no directions in the New Testament how to keep
it, nor to keep it at all. The Sabbatarian leaders never considered me sound on that
question. I could not "wrest" the plain language of Scriptures to suit my
prejudices and theories with so much facility as they. I had to admit it all, though
my prejudices made the Scriptures appear to contradict themselves, and then decide what
was duty from what seemed the balance of obligation, all things considered. Of this
my article in the Day Dawn is proof, which Sabbatarians quote in a mutilated
form. I subsequently saw the full and harmonious testimony of the New Testament
against Sabbatizing. The testimony being clear and abundant, removed every doubt
from my mind, so soon as I dared open my mind to receive it. Then the truth
afforded me Christian enjoyment. Excited feeling is no evidence of Christian
enjoyment or Christian character. It may spring from various causes and be had by
the worst of men. Christian enjoyment, as such, can only spring from a sincere
reception, confession and practice of the truth.
O.R.L. CROSIER