Three Fundamentals of ‘Present Truth’ Unites Flock & Sanctifies Soul

Photo Credit Flickr/ernestkoe
Photo Credit Flickr/ernestkoe


Biblical Numerology: NUMBER THREE – Part XXXI

 Three Fundamentals of ‘Present Truth’ Unites Flock & Sanctifies Soul

     “I saw the necessity of the messengers [pastors, evangelists, Bible teachers] especially, watching and checking all fanaticism wherever they may see it rise. Satan is pressing in on every side, and unless we watch for him, and have our eyes open to his devices and snares, and have on the whole armor of God [Eph. 6: 1-18], the fiery darts of the wicked one will hit us.

     “There are many precious truths contained in the Word of God, but it is ‘present truth’ that the flock [remnant church] needs now. I have seen the dangers of the messengers running off from the important points of present truth, to dwell upon subjects that are not calculated to unite the flock and sanctify the soul. Satan will here take every possible advantage to injure the soul.

     “But such subjects as the sanctuary message in connection with the 2300-days, the commandments of Godand the faith of Jesus are perfectly calculated to explain the past Advent movement, and show what ourpresent position is, establish the faith of the doubting, and give certainty to the glorious futureThese, I have frequently seen, were the principal subjects on which the messengers should dwell.” – Ellen G. White, Early Writings, p. 63.

     Why the sanctuary? The psalmist answers: “Thy way, O God, is in the sanctuary: who is so great a God as our God?” Ps. 77: 13, K.J.V.

     Why the 2300-day prophecy? “The scripture which above all others had been both the foundation and central pillar of the advent faith, was the declaration, ‘Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed. Dan. 8: 14.” – Ibid, The Great Controversy, 1911, p. 409.

      What is “the Faith of Jesus”? “You inquire what the faith of Jesus is. I have seen that the brethren and sisters have not understood the faith of Jesus in its true light. They have taught that it is healing the sick, etc. It is not healing the sick, merely, but is all the teachings of Jesus in the New Testament. ‘The commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.’ [Rev. 14: 12]. I saw that it was the whole New Testament, which relates to Jesus.” –Ibid, Letter 4, 1857, Vol. 5, Manuscript Releases, p. 290, par. 1.

In contrast, Pope Francis said recently that “Fundamentalism is a disease of all religions, including the Roman Catholic Church, and is idolatrous.

Nov. 20, 2015. “Pope Francis said fundamentalism is a ‘disease of all religions,’ including the Roman Catholic Church, as a he returned from a three-nation tour of Africa in which he preached reconciliation and hope.

       ‘Fundamentalism is always a tragedy. It is not religious, it lacks God, it is idolatrous,’ the Argentine pontiff told journalists at the plane back from the Central African Republic. He called on ‘Christian and Muslim brothers and sisters’ to end the sectarian conflict that has torn the country apart. He was given a rapturous welcome thousands of people as he visited a mosque in the flashpoint Muslim PK5 neighborhood of the capital Bangui, on what was the most dangerous part of his 24-hour visit to the country.

        ‘Together, we must say no to hatred, to revenge and to violence, particularly the violence which isperpetrated in the name of religion or of God himself,’ he said.

      “Speaking later in the day as he flew back to Rome, Francis said Islam is not the only religion to suffer from violent extremists such as the ones behind the deadly attacks in Paris which were claimed by the Islamic state. ‘We Catholics, we have a few, even many fundamentalists. They believe they know absolute truth and corrupt others,’ he said, adding, ‘I can say this because this is my church.’

“Pope: ‘Now’s the time to end indifference, false neutrality.’

1/1/2016 Vatican City (AP). – Wishing for a year better than 2015, Pope Francis on Friday called for an end to ‘arrogance of the powerful’ that relegates the weak to the outskirts of society, and to the ‘false neutrality’ toward conflicts, hunger and persecution that triggers exodus of refugees. In his New Year’s homily, Francis emphasized the need to ‘let ourselves to be reborn, to overcome the indifference which blocks solidarity, and leave behind thefalse neutrality which prevents sharing.  . . .

     “As he did in his homily earlier in Saint Peter’s Basilica, the pope issued a caution that ‘the enemy of peace isn’t only war, but also indifference,’ and he declared ‘barriers, suspicions, fears and closures’ toward others. . . .

     “The Catholic Church dedicates New Year’s Day to the theme of peace, and Francis this year is stressingmercy as the path toward reconciliation. To highlight the benefits springing forth from forgiveness and reconciliation in the world Francis declared a Holy Year of Mercy, which began last month [November, 2015] and runs through November, 2016. Early Friday evening he was to visit as Rome Basilica, St. Mary Majer where he sometimes slips away to pray, to open a normally sealed Holy Door as a symbolic threshold to cross toward mercy for Catholic faithful.”

Interestingly, three days later, we read the news headline from The Hill: ‘Scalia: ‘Don’t Cram religious neutrality ‘down throats of American People.’   “The idea that the U.S. government should be neutral about religion is not supported by the Constitution and is not rooted in American history, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said Saturday. ‘God has been very good to us,’ Scalia said at a speech at a Catholic high school in Louisiana, according to the Times-Picayune. ‘One of the reasons God has been good to us is that we have done Him honor.’ Scalia, a Catholic, is one of the court’s more conservative members. He recently caused uproar over remarks on affirmative action. On Saturday, he said the First Amendment prohibits the government from endorsing one religion over another. But, he added, that doesn’t mean the government has to favor non-religion over religion.” He argued that’s a more modern reading originating in the courts in the 1960s He also said there is ‘nothing wrong’ with presidents and others invoking God in speeches, according to the Associated Press. If the Americans want the government to be non-religious, he said, they should vote on it instead of courts deciding. ‘Don’t cram it down the throats of an American people that has always honored God on the pretext that the Constitution requires it,’ he said, according to the Times-Picayune.”  See

There were 1,712 posts as of publication date 1/3/2016.

Chief Justice William Rehnquist, an Evangelical Lutheran (Oct. 1. 1924-Sept 3, 2005) member of the Supreme Court till his death in 1972, served as 16th Chief of Justice after elevation from Associate Justice by Pres. Ronald Reagan in 1986. He is quoted as famously and ominously saying: “No amount of repetition of historical errors in judicial opinions can make the errors true. The ‘wall of separation between church and State’ is a metaphor based on bad history, a metaphor which has proved useless as a guide to judging. It should be frankly and explicitly abandoned.”


Now, who has long wanted the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution discarded long before the late Chief Justice expressed so? In the chapter  Americanism Versus Romanism in a  vital reference book for prophetic studies, Facts of Faith, author Christian Edwardson, points out and supports the following facts:

      “Pope Leo XIII, in an encyclical letter, Immortal Dei, Nov. 1, 1885, outlines ‘the Christian [Roman Catholic, i.e.] constitution of states,’ by saying that ‘the state should profess the Catholic religion, and that the Roman pontiffs should have ‘the power of making laws’ [of the state]. And assuredly all ought to hold that it was not without a singular disposition of God’s providence that this power of the Church was provided with a civil sovereignty as he surest safeguard of her independence.’ He says of the Middle Ages [the Dark Ages, to students of Bible prophecy]: ‘[Then] church and state were happily united.’—‘The Great Encyclical Letters of Pope Leo XIII,’ pp. 113, 114, 10, Benziger Bros., 1903.

      “’Sad it is to call to mind how the harmful and lamentable rage for innovations which rose to a climax in the sixteenth century, . . . .spread amongst all classes of society. From this source, as from a fountain-head, burst forth all those later tenets of unbridled license. . . .Amongst these principles the main one lays down that as all men are alike by race and nature . . . that each is free to think on every subject just as he may choose. . . In a society grounded on such maxims, all government is nothing more nor less than the will of the people. And it is part of this theory . . . that ever one is to be free to follow whatever religion he prefers, or none at all if he disapproves of all . . . .

      “Now when the state rests on foundations like those just named—and for the time being they are greatly inn favor—it readily appears into what and how unrightful a position the [Roman] Church is driven. . . .  They who administer the civil power. . . defiantly put aside the most sacred decrees of the Church [not the Bible!]

     “The sovereignty of the people . . . is doubtless a doctrine . . . which lacks all reasonable proof.’ – Id., pp. 120-123.  

      “The theory ‘that the church be separated from the state,’ Pope Leo further calls a ‘fatal error,’ ‘a great folly, a sheer injustice,’ and ‘shameless liberty.’ – Id., pp. 124, 125. 

      “In his next encyclical letter, of June 20, 1888, he calls it ‘the fatal theory of the need of separation between Church and state,’ ‘the greatest perversion of liberty,’ and ‘that fatal principle of the separation of Church and state.’ –Id., pp. 148, 159.

     “In his next encyclical letter, of Jan. 6, 1895, he says: “It would be very erroneous to draw the conclusion that in America is to be sought the type of the most desirable status of the Church, or that it would be universally lawful or expedient for state and church to be, as in America, dissevered and divorced . . .  he would bring forth more abundant fruits if, in addition to liberty, she enjoyed the favor of the laws and the patronage of the public authority.”Id., pp. 323, 324.

      “Among the many authorities that could be cited, we have chosen that of Pope Leo XIII, because he is not a medieval, but a modern exponent of papal doctrines, which no Roman Catholic would deny. Anyone familiar with the phraseology of the Declaration of Independence and the Federal Constitution cannot help but see in the expressions of Pope Leo a declared opposition to the fundamental principles upon which our government is founded. He urges his followers not to be content with attending o their religious duties, but ‘Catholics should extend their efforts beyond this restricted sphere, and give their attention to national politics.’ — Id., p. 131.

     “It is the duty of all Catholics. . . .to strive that liberty of action shall not transgress the bounds marked out by nature and the law of God [i.e., Catholic law]; to endeavor to bring back all civil society to the pattern and form of Christianity which We have described.  . . .Both these objects will be carried into effect without fail if all will follow the guidance of the Apostolic See as their rule of life and obey the bishops.”—Id., p. 132.

      “Especially with reference to the so-called ‘Liberties’ which are so greatly coveted in these days. All must stand by the judgment of the Holy See.”—Id., p. 130.

     “In his encyclical letter of Jan. 10, 1890, on ‘The Chief Duty of Christians as Citizens’ (Id., pp. 180-207) he urges all Catholics to put forth united action in politics in order to change the governmental politics so as to bring them into harmony with papal principles. . . .

      “These are the exact statements of Pope Leo XIII, taken from his authentic records, published by the Catholics under the seal of the Church; and they show that the Papacy stands for the same principles today as it did in the Dark Ages. How truthfully the Pontiff says: ‘And in truth, wherever the Church has set her foot, she has straightway changed the face of things.’—Id., p. 107. . . . .

     “What name is given to the doctrine that the State has neither the right nor the duty to be united to the Church to protect it?

     ‘This doctrine is called Liberalism.  It is founded principally on the fact that modern society rests on liberty of conscience and of worship, on liberty of speech and of the press.

     “Why is Liberalism to be condemned?

      ‘Because it denies all subordination of the State to the Church.” – Id., 131-133.

(To be continued next week)

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.