The first issue of the Protestant Layworker under the direct editorship of Elder David L. Bauer has now been published. It had been anticipated for several months since the interim issue had been published in March. Invariably, when in the field, questions were asked, "Do you know what has happened to the Layworker?" - "When do you think Bauer will get the first issue out?" I had no inside information, except that the content would not reflect the same objective that dominated the Rue editorial policy. Now that the first issue is a matter of public record, evaluation and comment are in order.

One of the highlights of this first issue was the revelation of the fact that Jon Vannoy is to be the associate editor. His return to the arena of public discussion of the current issues in the Church is, I am sure, welcomed by many. In my contacts with him, I always found him to be concise, to the point, forthright, and honest. You knew where he stood, and even if you might differ with him in some details, you could communicate with him in a profitable give-and-take manner.

It is to be remembered that some fifteen years ago, Vannoy and Dr. Kirby Clendenon as young men conceived and executed the first "Silver Lake" campmeeting. Their vision was so full of promise and hope for the people of God who were concerned over the growing apostasy in the Church. However, it was thwarted through false and ill-advised counsel on organization which permitted fanatics and extremists to "enter in among" the group "not sparing the flock." These cared little for the vision of these young men, seeing only an opportunity to have an audience before which to air their "hobby horses." But the supreme tragedy has been the spiritual loss that followed in the wake of this disaster.

One can only understand the change being made in the editorial policy of the "new" Layworker by noting carefully what was written in the interim issue called the "Special Issue, March, 1991." Under the editorial guidance of Mr. Robert Nelson, president of the board of directors of the Rue Publications, this March, 1991

Page 2

issue presented side-by-side what Dr. Rue's editorial policy was, and what Bauer's was to be. Selections of Rue's "Favorite Quotes" and a series of quotations from the Layworker from 1971 through 1989 were printed. These quotations were prefaced by a note which read:

This selection was made with the intent to highlight Dr. Rue's long concern for the Layworker function in bringing alternate views to the Seventh-day Adventist Community. (p. 3)

The one selection which best summarizes Dr. Rue's viewpoint was from the July 20, 1988 issue. It read in part:

The Layworker is for the lay people of the church. We hope that it inspires a studious attitude. One reason we print variable views, which to some seem heretical, is to stimulate the readers to think and study and pray for light and guidance. (pp 3, 7)

I do not doubt Dr. Rue's sincerity of purpose, but as in the case of the "Silver Lake" vision of the young men, many perceived of the Layworker as a place to get their name into print and an opportunity to air their wild interpretations of the Bible and the Writings. The end of a sincere objective was confusion.

In the same interim issue, Elder Bauer wrote quoting from the Review (January 19, 1905), "We are to proclaim the message that in 1843 and 1844 brought us out of the other churches." Then he set forth his editorial policy for the "new" Layworker:

We hear considerable about the New Light! But it is the firm conviction of the new editor of the Protestant Layworker that, as stated in the quotation above, "God is not giving us a new message." (p. 4)

The "new" Layworker will not be an open-ended sounding board for any and every new interpretation blowing through the corridors of Adventism as previously, but there will be control exercised over what is printed in the Protestant Layworker. It appears each issue will deal chiefly with the message of 1843 and 1844 as the message relates to the present crisis.

In reading through Vol. 1, No. 2 of the Protestant Layworker, I did not find defined for the reader the real purpose in the selection of the name, "Protestant." There can be no question but that the term, Protestant, carries specific connotations. It means for one thing, "ecclesia reformata, sempter reformanda" (the church reformed always undergoing reformation). Further, it is the very essence of Protestantism - "the Bible, and the Bible only" - which separates it from Romanism, and thus places it in the pathway of truth. (GC, p. 448) There was not much evidence of either the meaning, nor the essence of Protestantism to be found in the first issue. Two main articles dominated the issue. The one by David Lin on the Battle of Armageddon, though accurate in conclusion - "We see that the nature of the 'battle of that great day' is clearly spiritual" - did not conform to the essence of Protestantism. Further, while David Lin's article presented the "new" view of Armageddon, the article on "The Daily" conformed to the "old" view.

Bauer's "confession" was an exception and followed the essence of Protestantism - "the Bible, and the Bible only." For this he is to be commended. What Bauer wrote in "Confession" (p.1) should be carefully studied. He accurately analyzed the symbolism of Revelation 17. (The "woman" - Babylon the GREAT - could include a world-wide ecumenical movement headed by the Papacy since the "spirits of devils" come from the dragon, beast and false prophet.) His assessment of "socialism" in future issues should be considered in the light of the recent Papal encyclical, Centesimus Annus, commemorating the l00th year of Roman Catholic social justice as set forth by Leo XIII in his, Rerum Novarum.

The choice of Bauer to make the issue of "The Daily" his main thrust in the first issue, solely under his editorship, conforms to the policy he announced in the interim issue - a topic dating from the 1843-1844 era. This is hardly "Protestantism." Protestantism in an on-going experience in doctrinal perceptions as well as in spiritual growth and understanding. Ellen G. White in writing of the Pilgrim Fathers stated:

When first constrained to separate from the English Church, the Puritans had joined themselves together by a solemn covenant, as the Lord's free people, "to walk together in all His ways made known or to be made known to them." Here is the true spirit of reform, the vital principle of Protestantism. (GC, p. 291)

Then she continued by quoting at length from John Robinson's farewell address to the Pilgrims as they were about to embark for the New World. Three paragraphs are gathered from different historical sources. The last one reads in part:

Remember your promise and covenant with God and with one another, to receive whatever

light and truth shall be made known to you from His written word; but withal, take heed, beseech you, what you receive for truth, and compare it and weigh it with other scriptures of truth before you accept it; for it is not possible the Christian world should come so lately out of such antichristian darkness, and that full perfection of knowledge should break forth at once. (ibid., p.292)

While Bauer suggested in his stated purpose for the "new" Layworker that "all true new light will not do away with, nor change our original message," and in this he somewhat echoed the caution of John Robinson; nevertheless, by his choice of "The Daily" - making it a part of the 1843-1844 message - and failing to see that new perceptions of "The Daily" are needed to clear up some of the faulty understandings of the pioneers, he placed a question mark on his publication as to whether it is truly Protestant. This error of judgment in using "The Daily" as his take off subject was due to his acceptance of Robert J. Wieland's questionable assessment of the doctrine's effect on Jones, Waggoner and others. (Vol. 1, No. 2, "An Explanation")

The second problem was Bauer's failure to study all that Ellen G. White wrote or said in regard to "The Daily." The reproduced article sets forth the statement made by Ellen G. White in Early Writings (pp. 74-75) as a "preface" to the author's outlining of the subject. But Ellen White also wrote - "I now [1910] ask that my ministering brethren shall not use my writings in their arguments regarding this question [the "daily"]; for I have had no instruction on the point under discussion, and I see no need for the controversy." (Selected Messages, bk i, p. 164) On another occasion, Elder A. G. Daniells reported that Ellen G. White told him - "I do not know what that 'daily' is, whether it is paganism or Christ's ministry." (Spectrum, Vol. 10, #l, p. 35) This leaves no other alternative, except the essence of Protestantism - "the Bible, and the Bible only" - which should be the very basis of the discussion if the "new" Layworker is to be the Protestant Layworker.

We need not delve into all the linguistics involved. This has been done before in previous studies that have appeared in WWN. (XXIII-1(90) and XVIII-8(85) A simple analysis of what is in the prophecy of Daniel, and an honest valuation of the teachings of Jesus should be sufficient.

There is a close parallel between the line prophecies of Daniel 7 & 8. While Daniel 8 begins with Medo-Persia, and enlarges aspects of the Grecian kingdom, the general succession is Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome. In Daniel 7, the "little horn" or the Papacy is pictured as arising in the head of the non-descript beast, and is never separated from it! It ever receives its nourishment from that beast. When "judgment" is rendered on behalf of the "saints" against that horn, the prophetic symbolism is that the "beast" is given to the "burning flame." (7:21-22, 26, 11) The same is also true in Daniel 8. The "little horn" is both paganism and papalism. This "little horn" is "the abomination of desolation." This power is in opposition to what is pictured as "the daily." (8:9-12) Daniel 7 describes what the non-descript beast - pagan Rome - would do. Having "great iron teeth, it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it." (7:7) Nowhere is "the daily" described as doing anything of this nature. How then can it be paganism?

Turning to the words of Jesus, we find that He told the disciples on the Mount of Olives:

When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) (Matt. 24:15)

Now all of us know from history that the forces which surrounded Jerusalem were the legions of Pagan Rome. Jesus did not say, "When ye see the daily spoken of by Daniel the prophet, then flee the City." He said "the abomination of desolation," thus confirming the symbolism of Daniel 8, that the "little horn" is both pagan and papal Rome. The "daily" is something else; it is not paganism. It would be well to study A. T. Jones' Biblical discussion of the question. (See p. 5) It is not Jones who went astray but Wieland who has not kept pace with advancing light. After all, to be a Protestant means simply as Ellen White herself recommended, to take "the Bible, and the Bible only, as the standard of all doctrine." (GC, p. 595) We seriously recommend this excellent counsel to the editors of the "new" Protestant Layworker. May every future issue reflect this commitment - "the true spirit of reform, the vital principle of Protestantism." (GC, p. 291)

"In order to receive new light there must be an open mind. Private preconceived opinions or prejudice must not cloud the perception."

Rue, Layworker, Oct. 15, 1989

Page 4

"By the 'religion of Protestants,' I do not understand the doctrine of Luther or Calvin or Melanchthon, or the Confession of Augsburg or Geneva, or the Catechism of Heidelberg, or the Articles of the Church of England, no, nor the harmony of Protestant confessions, but that wherein they all agree, and to which they all subscribe with a greater harmony, as a perfect rule of their faith and actions; that is, the Bible. The Bible, I say, the Bible only, is the religion of Protestants! Whatsoever else they believe besides it, and the plain, irrefragable, indubitable consequences of it, well may they hold it as a matter of opinion, but as matter of faith and religion, neither can they with coherence to their own grounds believe it themselves, nor require the belief of it of others, without most high and most schismatically presumption. I for my part, after a long and (as I verily believe and hope) impartial search of 'the true way to eternal happiness,' do profess plainly that I cannot find any rest for the sole of my foot but upon this rock only."

Works of William Chillinworth, Vol. II, pp. 409 - 411; Quoted in Source Book, p. 427 (1940 edition)

"Like two sacred streams flowing from Paradise, the Bible and divine Tradition contain the Word of God, the precious gems of revealed truth. "Though these two divine streams are in themselves, on account of their divine origin, of equal sacredness, and are both full of revealed truths, still, of the two, TRADITION is to us more clear and safe."

Joseph Faa Di Bruno, Catholic Belief, p. 45

STATEMENTS FROM-

With the exception of one, the following statements are taken from the chapter, "The Scriptures a Safeguard."

So closely will the counterfeit resemble the true, that it will be impossible to distinguish between them except by the Holy Scriptures. (p. 593)

None but those who have fortified the mind with the truths of the Bible will stand through the last great conflict. (pp. 593-594)

The apostle Paul declared, looking down to the last days, "The time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine." That time has fully come. ...

But God will have a people upon the earth to maintain the Bible, and the Bible only, as the standard of all doctrines, and the basis of all reforms. (pp. 594-595)

It is the first and highest duty of every rational being to learn from the Scriptures what is truth, and then walk in the light, and encourage others to follow his example. We should day by day study the Bible diligently, weighing every thought, and comparing scripture with scripture. (p. 598)

An understanding of Bible truth depends not so much on the power of intellect brought to the search as on the singleness of purpose, the earnest longing after righteousness. (p. 599)

We need to humble ourselves before the Lord, with fasting and prayer, and to meditate much upon His word, especially upon the scenes of the judgment. (p. 501)

When the testing time shall come, those who have made God's word their rule of life will be revealed. (p. 682)

Are the people of God now so firmly established upon His word that they would not yield to the evidence of their senses? Would they, in such a crisis, cling to the Bible, and the Bible only? (p. 625)

Page 5

In Daniel 8 the expression "little horn" covers the whole of Rome in both its phases, just as is shown in the closing expressions concerning the "little horn" in Daniel 7; as it is shown also by the expressions "the abomination of desolation" and "the transgression of desolation," being applied to Rome in both of its phases (Dan. 9:26, 27; Matt. 24:15; Dan. 11:31; 12:11; 8:11, 13); and as is confirmed by the teaching and history of latter Rome itself. It is all one, except only that all that is stated of the former Rome is true and intensified in the latter Rome. ...

In Daniel 8:11-13; 11:31; and 12:11, it will be noticed that the word "sacrifice" is in every case supplied. And it is wholly supplied; for in its place in the original there is no word at all. In the original the only word that stands in this place, is the word tamid, that is here translated "daily;" and in these places the expression "daily" does not refer to the daily sacrifice any more than it refers to the whole daily ministry or continual service of the sanctuary, which the sacrifice was only a part. The word tamid in itself signifies "continuous or continual," "constant," "stable," "sure," "constantly," "evermore." Only such words as these express the thought of the original word, which, in the text under consideration, is translated "daily." In Numbers 28 and 29 alone, the word is used seventeen times, referring to the continual service of the sanctuary.

And it is this continual service of Christ, the true High Priest, "who continueth ever," and "who is consecrated forevermore" in "an unchangeable priesthood" - it is this continual service of our great High Priest, which the man of sin, the Papacy, has taken away. It is this sanctuary and the true tabernacle in which this true High Priest exercises His continual ministry that has been cast down by "the transgression of desolation." It is this ministry and this sanctuary that the "man of sin" has taken away from the church and shut away from the world, and has cast down to the ground and stamped upon; and in place of which it has set up itself "the abomination that maketh desolate." What the former Rome did physically to the visible or earthly sanctuary, which was "the figure of the true" (Dan. 9:26, 27; Matt. 24:15), that the latter Rome has done spiritually to the invisible or heavenly sanctuary that is itself the "true." Dan. 11:31; 12:11; 8:11, 13.

[It can be] shown that in the apostasy, the bishops, presbyters, deacons, and the eucharist, were made to succeed the high priest, priests, Levites and sacrifices of the Levitical system. Now by the very evidence of the Scriptures, it is certain that, in the order of God, it was Christ and His ministry and sanctuary in heaven, and this alone, that in truth was the object of the Levitical system, and that is truly the Christian succession to that system. Therefore when in and by the apostasy, the system of bishops as high priests, presbyters as priests, deacons as Levites, and the Supper as a sacrifice, was insinuated as the Christian succession to the Levitical system, this of itself was nothing less than to put this false system of the apostasy in the place of the true, completely to shut out the true, and, finally, to cast it down to the ground and stamp upon it.

And this is how it is that this great Christian truth of the true priesthood, ministry, and sanctuary of Christ is not known to the Christian world today. The "man of sin" has taken it away, and cast it down to the ground, and stamped upon it. The "mystery of iniquity" has hid this great truth from the church and the world during all of these ages, in which the man of sin has held place in the world, and has passed it off as God, and its iniquitous host as the church of God.

And yet, even the "man of sin," the "mystery of iniquity," itself bears witness to the necessity of such a service in the church in behalf of sins. For though the "man of sin," the "mystery of iniquity," has taken away the true priesthood, ministry, and sanctuary of Christ, and has cast these down to the ground to be stamped upon, and has completely hid them from the eyes of the Christian world; yet she did not utterly throw way the idea. No, she threw away the true, and cast down the true to the ground; but retaining the idea, in the place of the true she built up in her realm an utterly false structure.

In the place of Christ, the true and divine High Priest of God's own appointment in heaven, she has substituted a human, sinful, and sinning priesthood on earth. In the place of the continual, heavenly ministry of Christ in His true priesthood upon His true sacrifice, she has substituted only an interval ministry of a human, earthly, sinful, and sinning priesthood in the once-a-day "daily sacrifice of the mass." And in the place of the sanctuary and the true tabernacle which the Lord pitched, and not man, she has substituted her own meeting-places of wood and stone, to which she applies the term, "sanctuary." Thus instead of the one continual High Priest, the one continual ministry, and the one continual sanctuary in heaven, which God has ordained, and which is the only true, she has devised out of her own heart and substituted for the only true, many high priests, many ministries, many sacrifices, and many sanctuaries, on earth, which in every possible relation are only human and utterly false.

And it can never take away sin. No earthly ministry, no earthly sacrifice, or service, in any earthly sanctuary, can ever take away sin. In the book of Hebrews, we have seen that even the priesthood, the ministry, the sacrifice, and the service in the earthly sanctuary - the very service which the Lord Himself ordained on earth - never took away sin. The inspired record is that they never did take away sin, and that they never could  take away sin. It is only the priesthood and the ministry of Christ that can take away sin. And this is a priesthood and a ministry in heaven, and of a sanctuary that is in heaven....

Therefore, by the plain word of the Lord, it is plain that the priesthood, the ministry, the sacrifice, and the sanctuary which the Papacy has set up and operates on earth can never take away sin; but, instead, only perpetuates sin, is a fraud, an imposture, and the very "transgression' and "abomination of desolation" in the most holy place.

The Consecrated Way, pp. 95-103 (all emphasis his)

Page 6

We each need to determine for ourselves whether we are Protestant or Catholic. The answer can be quickly determined by our attitude toward and our use of the Writings of Ellen G. White. Let us create an hypothetical situation. In recent months, say you, as many are doing, had been distributing widely the paperback, Great Controversy. By chance, one who received the book from you, some weeks later recognizes you as you are shopping in a Mall. He approaches you, and asks, "Aren't you the one who gave me a Great Controversy few weeks ago? I want to ask you a question." You assent, and he asks you about Spiritism, and "demands a plain ' Thus saith the Lord' " in support of your answer, as he had read he ought to do. (GC, p. 595) Do you, unable to answer from the Bible, resort to telling him that there are two sacred streams flowing from Paradise, the Bible AND the Spirit of Prophecy, and though these two streams are because of their divine origin of equal sacredness, you find the latter clearer and more readily understood?

Or, do you know your Bible so that you could readily give the inquirer the Bible answer he was seeking, and because of this was able to open the way for a series of Bible studies? Then in this series of Bible studies, you could point out to him that the Bible teaches the doctrine of spiritual gifts which God has provided for the edification of His people. You would point him to Ephesians 4:8,11 where various gifts are listed - apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastor-teachers. But all of these must be checked by the Bible. Whether one is given the gift of administrative ability (apostles) - and God has used administrators to lead His people; one of the greatest being Moses - or a prophet (prophete - speaking forth for God), or an evangelist, or a teaching pastor, all are in the same grouping according to the Bible, each possessing the gift of the Holy Spirit. Each must be accorded his proper place, and not one above another, unless one perceives the list in Ephesians as noting the "pecking" order. If so, administrators rank above prophets. The Biblical doctrine of spiritual gifts sustains the primacy of the Bible, and thus one, believing and accepting that doctrine as taught in the Bible, is truly a Protestant.

As an evangelist, I recall an experience I had. It was back in the "golden years" of Adventist evangelism, when the message was being given by many throughout the United States as well as overseas. Such names as Detamore, Shuler, the Venden Brothers, and B. R. Spears were names in Adventism through which many heard and accepted the truth. I was holding a tent meeting in Borger, Texas. From the first night, a family attended along with the wife's sister and daughter. From visiting, we learned that each night they went home and checked what they had heard with a book they had purchased some years previously, Bible Readings. Then came the presentation of the Sabbath question. That night on the way home, they said to themselves, "This is one topic that is not in that book." They had not seen it. When they returned on the next meeting night, they said to me, "We know more than you do about the Sabbath, we know who changed it." They had read ahead! Needless to say, they accepted the truth, including the doctrine of spiritual gifts.

Whether it be pastor, prophet, or evangelist, all messages must conform to the Word of God as contained in the Bible, not the Bible conforming to the pastor, prophet, or evangelist. That which does not must be discarded, even administrative authority which does not conform to the Word. A true Protestant is a continuous reformer advancing in the light which proceeds from the Word, refusing to be bound by any authority, practice, revelation or teaching that does not first conform to the Bible, and he remains ever a Protestant. He does not after accepting the truth become a Roman Catholic with two streams flowing from Paradise.

whg

FOR YOUR HEALTH

Jesus said, "I am come that they (His people) might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly," (John 10:10) Jesus offers us abundant life and health. Just as eternal life cannot be left to chance, good health cannot be left to chance. "We cannot be too often reminded that health does not depend on chance. It is obedience to law." (MH, p. 128) The "right arm" of the three angels' message is HEALTH REFORM, not just diet reform. While diet is very important, it is only 1/8th of the program. In addition to diet, pure air, sunlight, rest, abstemiousness, exercise, the abundant use of water, and most importantly, trust in divine power, are necessary for optimal health. How

many of us strain at a gnat in our diet, only to neglect one, two, or perhaps all the other laws of health. Should we not in this late hour come into line?

The above was taken from "Old Paths" a new publication sponsored by the Smyrna Gospel Ministries.

EXCERPTS - MANUSCRIPT 36, 1890

No work of man can merit for him the pardoning love of God, but the love of God pervading the soul will lead him to do those things which were always required of God and that he should do with pleasure. He has done only that which duty ever required of him. ...

On the one hand, religionists generally have divorced the law and the gospel, while we have, on the other hand, almost done the same from another standpoint. We have not held up before the people the righteousness of Christ and the full significance of His great plan of redemption. We have left out Christ and His matchless love, brought in theories and reasonings, and preached argumentized discourses. ...

I ask, How can I present this matter as it is? The Lord Jesus imparts all of the powers, all the grace, all the penitence, all the inclination, all the pardon of sins, in presenting His righteousness for men to grasp by living faith - which is also the gift of God. If you would gather together everything that is good and holy and noble and lovely in man, and then present the subject to the angels of God as acting a part in the salvation of the human soul or in merit, the proposition would be rejected as treason.

WEBSITE

Adventistlaymen.com

E-MAIL
webmaster@adventistlaymen.com