Old Paths Masthead

Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. Jeremiah 6:16

The secret of the LORD is with them that fear him; and he will show them his covenant. Psalm 25:14

Vol. 22, No. 6 Straight and Narrow June 2013


“I will rescue my flock; they shall no longer be a prey. And I will judge between sheep and sheep.” (Ezekiel 34:22 ESV )

This month’s articles:

The Angel of the LORD

West Virginia Camp Meeting

The Risk We Eat

Tasty Recipe

Women's Ordination

Youth’s Corner

YouTube Channel Update

The Angel of the LORD

This study is designed to give an understanding concerning the identity of the angel of the LORD, as well as the function and purpose of the angel of the LORD and what it means to us to have an angel of the LORD.

The angel of the LORD is a title given, first and foremost, to Jesus Christ, but it is also given to a selected angelic servant of God, who, with Christ, is given specific tasks in the furthering of God’s purposes among humanity. These tasks include the giving of the revelation of God; the giving of guidance, encouragement, warnings; and the execution of judgment on those who oppose God’s purposes. The scope of this study does not allow us to examine all of these facets, so we will focus upon Christ being the angel of the LORD.

The first thing we wish to look at is the word angel. The Hebrew word that is translated angel is malak. It is defined as: “one sent, a messenger, whether from a private person, Job 1:14, or of a king, 1 Sa. 16:19; 19:11, 14, 20; 1 Ki. 19:2, etc” (Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament). In the King James Version of the Old Testament, malak is translated angel(s) 111 times, messenger(s) 98 times, and ambassadors 4 times.

The Old Testament also carries the concept of angel being “a supernatural being as a class creation that is God’s servant, esp. in informing or proclaiming a message from God (2Ki 1:3a)” [Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains : Hebrew (Old Testament); electronic ed.].

The Greek word for angel is angelos which means messenger. An angel is “one who brings a message,” or a “messenger” (Vol. 1: Theological Dictionary of the New Testament). Angelos is translated angel(s) 179 times and messenger(s) 7 times in texts, such as:

For this is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger (angelos) before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. (Matthew 11:10)

And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger (angelos) of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure. (2 Corinthians 12:7)

Revelation 14 depicts three angels giving worldwide messages. These messages are given by messengers, but these angels, or messengers, are not supernatural beings. They are representatives of human beings who are sent as messengers with a message.

There is also a group of beings which possess supernatural stature. They are angels by both nature and function. Humans can serve in function as angels, but are not angelic by nature.

In Hebrews 3:1, Jesus is called the apostle of God, and we think of him as fulfilling the function of an apostle (one who is sent), though he is the only begotten Son of God. Since he is also a messenger for God, he may be considered as an angel in function, but not in nature. Second Corinthians 4:5 and 6 give us the great focus and objective of Christ in the incarnation: “For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus’ sake. For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.” Jesus came to this earth to reveal the light of the knowledge of the glory of God. He came to be the “express image of his [the father’s] person” (Hebrews 1:3). In John 1:1, Jesus is called “the word of God.” Jesus brings the word of God to humanity and shows us what the character of God is like. Jesus said in John 14:6, 7: “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.” Then, “Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us. Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father” (vs. 8, 9)? As we see Jesus Christ, we see God.

Now let us look at the phrase the angel of the LORD. In Exodus 23:20 and 21, we read:

Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him.

As we read or hear this, it is as if we are hearing the words of God himself, and he is telling us, through Moses the prophet, that he has an angel and to obey this angel and to not provoke this angel because the angel has the power to forgive sins. Can beings that are angels by nature forgive transgressions, or sins? God through Christ can forgive sins. (See Mark 2:5–10.) This angel is no normal angel, but Jesus Christ. Adding to our understanding, let us read Exodus 3:1–6:

Now Moses kept the flock of Jethro his father in law, the priest of Midian: and he led the flock to the backside of the desert, and came to the mountain of God, even to Horeb. And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush: and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed. And Moses said, I will now turn aside, and see this great sight, why the bush is not burnt. And when the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses, Moses. And he said, Here am I. And he said, Draw not nigh hither: put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground. Moreover he said, I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. And Moses hid his face; for he was afraid to look upon God.

Notice that it is the angel of the LORD, with the word LORD written in capital letters. When this is done in the King James Version, it is to denote the divine name Jehovah, or Yahweh. So this is not the angel of any lord, but the angel of Jehovah. Furthermore, it says that “God called unto” Moses from the bush, and Moses was instructed to remove his shoes, for the ground was holy ground. Then in verse 6, this angel of the LORD says that he is “the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. And Moses hid his face; for he was afraid to look upon God.” This event is referenced in the book of Acts with the story of Stephen. Notice the commentary that Stephen gives:

And when forty years were expired, there appeared to him in the wilderness of mount Sina an angel of the Lord in a flame of fire in a bush. . . . This Moses whom they refused, saying, Who made thee a ruler and a judge? the same did God send to be a ruler and a deliverer by the hand of the angel which appeared to him in the bush. (Acts 7:30, 35)

Stephen says that the one who appeared to Moses in the bush was an angel, or messenger. This angel of the LORD comes speaking the word of God, and in John 1:1 we find Jesus Christ is called the word of God. Jesus is the word of God come to us. So Jesus Christ is the angel of the LORD in the primary, or main, sense. There is an exception, though, for another individual is mentioned in the New Testament. In Matthew 28:1, 2, we read:

In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulcher. And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.

This angel certainly was not Jesus, for he was in the grave at this time, awaiting the resurrection. Here is someone called the angel of the Lord, not Jehovah, but the angel of the Lord (lower case letters). Does Jesus, then, have a special angel, an angelic being, an angel by nature, who also serves as his special covenant messenger? The answer is yes, and we can know his name, too. In Luke 1:18, 19, we read:

And Zacharias said unto the angel, Whereby shall I know this? for I am an old man, and my wife well stricken in years. And the angel answering said unto him, I am Gabriel, that stand in the presence of God; and am sent to speak unto thee, and to shew thee these glad tidings.

Gabriel is the one who stands in the presence of God. Gabriel is the only good angel whose name is given in the Bible. He is also mentioned in Daniel 8:16, where he is commanded of Jesus Christ: “And I heard a man’s voice between the banks of Ulai, which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision.” Revelation 1:1 tells us that Jesus has an angel through whom the Revelation is given. The book of Revelation does not mention who this angel is, but the Spirit of Prophecy tells us:

Of Gabriel the Saviour speaks in the Revelation, saying that “He sent and signified it by His angel unto His servant John.” Revelation 1:1. And to John the angel declared, “I am a fellow servant with thee and with thy brethren the prophets.” Revelation 22:9, R.V. Wonderful thought—that the angel who stands next in honor to the Son of God is the one chosen to open the purposes of God to sinful men. (The Desire of Ages, p. 99)

Gabriel, who took the place of Lucifer and stands in the presence of God, comes, at times, as the angel of the Lord, not because he is another begotten Son of God, but because he fulfills the function of the angel of the Lord.

When the president of the United States flies, he flies on Air Force One. When we think of Air Force One, we usually think of an especially outfitted Boeing 747, especially equipped to transport the president, but when that plane is setting in the hanger, it is just another U. S. Air Force plane. It does not take on the call sign of Air Force One until the chief executive steps on board. In fact, any plane the president flies in, regardless of its size or type, immediately becomes Air Force One. The plane that carries the president becomes, in function, Air Force One. So the angel that fulfills the function of the angel of the Lord becomes, at that moment, the angel of the Lord. In the Old Testament that was usually Jesus Christ; in the New Testament it appears to always be Gabriel.

God has contact with man through Christ and the angels. Let us notice this first from the Bible: “But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him” (1 Corinthians 8:6 ). Notice carefully the prepositions in the verse. All things are of the Father, but they come by Christ. Jesus is that angel that carries the word of the Father. On Mount Sinai Jesus spoke the law of God, yet he said, “I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (Exodus 20:2). Why didn’t Jesus say, “My Father is the LORD thy God?” Why didn’t he say, “He is the LORD thy God?” It sounds like Jesus is the LORD God, instead of the Father. How could that be? The answer is simple. Jesus is the translator of God. When I have traveled overseas to countries where I did not know the language, I have needed a translator. I might begin by saying, “Hello. My name is Allen Stump.” My translator would follow, saying in the local language, “Hello. My name is Allen Stump.” Even though he is not me, he says he is me, for the job of a translator is to speak exactly what the other person says, without interpretation. So when God speaks, Jesus is the exact translator for God. He comes and brings the very word of God to us. He is the angel of Acts 7:38, and “the angel of his presence” (Isaiah 63:9). This angel had the name of Jehovah in him (Exodus 23:21).

The Spirit of Prophecy also teaches this truth:

Since the sin of our first parents there has been no direct communication between God and man. The Father has given the world into the hands of Christ, that through His mediatorial work He may redeem man and vindicate the authority and holiness of the law of God. All the communion between heaven and the fallen race has been through Christ. It was the Son of God that gave to our first parents the promise of redemption. It was He who revealed Himself to the patriarchs. Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Moses understood the gospel. They looked for salvation through man’s Substitute and Surety. These holy men of old held communion with the Saviour who was to come to our world in human flesh; and some of them talked with Christ and heavenly angels face to face.

Christ was not only the leader of the Hebrews in the wilderness—the Angel in whom was the name of Jehovah, and who, veiled in the cloudy pillar, went before the host—but it was He who gave the law to Israel. Amid the awful glory of Sinai, Christ declared in the hearing of all the people the ten precepts of His Father’s law. It was He who gave to Moses the law engraved upon the tables of stone. (Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 366)

It will baffle the keenest intellect to interpret the divine manifestation of the burning bush. It was not a dream; it was not a vision; it was a living reality,—something that Moses saw with his eyes. He heard the voice of God calling to him out of the bush, and he covered his face, realizing that he stood in the immediate presence of God. God was conversing with humanity. Never could Moses describe the impression made upon his mind . . . (The Youth’s Instructor, December 20, 1900)

Here Ellen White speaks about manifestations of God, and then she immediately continues speaking about Jesus, seemingly out of context, but this is very much in context:

This lesson contains instruction that is profitable for all. Here is revealed a symbol radiant with the glory of Christ, the Great Teacher. The symbol chosen for the representation of the Deity was not a cedar of Lebanon, but a lowly bush, that seemingly had no attractions. This enshrined the Infinite. The all-merciful God shrouded his glory in a most humble type, that Moses might look upon it, and live. God declared: “Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.” All the manifestations of God’s glory have been shrouded, that man might behold it, and not be consumed. Veiled in a pillar of cloud by day, and a pillar of fire by night, God could honor finite man by communicating to him his will, and imparting to him his grace. God’s glory must be subdued, and his majesty veiled, that the weak vision of finite man may look upon it. (Ibid.)

Think of Christ’s humiliation. He took upon himself fallen, suffering human nature, degraded and defiled by sin. He took our sorrows, bearing our grief and shame. He endured all the temptations wherewith man is beset. He united humanity with divinity: a divine spirit dwelt in a temple of flesh. He united himself with the temple. “The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,” because by so doing he could associate with the sinful, sorrowing sons and daughters of Adam. (Ibid.)

In this article Ellen White speaks of this manifestation of the glory of God and then relates this to Jesus Christ. This “divine temple,” instead of coming to a mighty cedar, comes to a scrub bush, symbolic of Jesus coming to this earth and accepting the fallen sinful nature of man. One very touching passage concerning the angel of the LORD is found in 1 Kings 19. There we find that the Prophet Elijah, who after winning a tremendous victory on Mount Carmel, is running for his life and fleeing from the threats of the morally corrupt, and iniquitous, foul, and depraved Jezebel. As his energy is finally expended, the text says he lay down to sleep:

And as he lay and slept under a juniper tree, behold, then an angel touched him, and said unto him, Arise and eat. And he looked, and, behold, there was a cake baken on the coals, and a cruse of water at his head. And he did eat and drink, and laid him down again. And the angel of the LORD came again the second time, and touched him, and said, Arise and eat; because the journey is too great for thee. (1 Kings 19:5–7)

The text begins by saying an angel touched Elijah and provided him food, but later the text calls this angel “the angel of the LORD.” The angel of the LORD touches humanity in its need. The angel could have said loudly, Awake, get up and eat, but instead he gently touches the servant of God. This happened twice. In our needs, whether they are mental, physical, emotional, or spiritual, the angel of the LORD comes to us and touches and comforts us.

Many times the angel of the LORD comes in human likeness to meet the needs of mankind. (Genesis 16:7–11; Numbers 22:22–35; Judges 6:11–22; etc.)

Jesus is the express image of the Father’s person, of his character, and because he is the only begotten Son of God, he can take humanity upon himself to die for the sins of mankind. God the Father could not do this, for he alone has an absolute immortality. Paul teaches this in 1 Timothy 6:14–16:

That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.

The context is speaking of a demonstration that Jesus Christ will make, showing the Father to be the blessed and only Potentate. A potentate is an autocratic ruler who is the head over all. This Potentate only hath immortality. This is speaking of an absolute immortality, for some day saved humanity will put on immortality (1 Corinthians 15:54).

God says no man can see his face and live (Exodus 33:20). Our God is a consuming fire to sin (Hebrews 12:29). His holiness is a fire to sin, and we cannot approach his face and live. He must veil himself, but the Son could come to this earth and accept humanity. Not only could he step down to serve as an angel, but Jesus could be the apostle of God, the one sent who could take upon “his sinless nature our sinful nature” (Medical Ministry, p. 181). In Romans 8:3, 4, we read:

For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

Though God’s people have flesh, and even sinful flesh, they, as Jesus did, may live after the spirit. Romans 1:3 says: “Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh.” In Hebrews 2:16–18, we read:

For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.

Because he took upon himself our sinful flesh and was victorious, we may be victorious also. The text in Hebrews says that he was made in all things like unto his brethren. Who are his brethren? The converted only? Perhaps, but as we shall see later, it is not a position to which A. T. Jones could have agreed. Could it mean something else? In Hebrews 10:5, Paul writes: “Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me.” Who is the me? Of course, it is Jesus; but neither his person, personality, or spirit were prepared by God. Those were his, and he did not have to have them prepared or made, but all that is in the flesh he could and did have prepared by God. Yet this was sinful flesh, flesh with all the liabilities of our flesh. Please note that the brain is not the mind! Jesus had a brain made of sinful flesh, just like everyone of humanity today, but his spirit was pure and holy. While some might wish to make Jesus to be exactly like the rest of humanity, Ellen White has counseled: “Let every human being be warned from the ground of making Christ altogether human, such an one as ourselves: for it cannot be” (Manuscript Releases, vol. 13, p. 19).

Jesus Christ was born of the spirit in a way that humanity normally is not born. Matthew 1:20 says he was conceived of the Holy Spirit: “But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.” Luke 1:35 states:

And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

Normally when an added word is needed to make the proper translation, the KJV will italicize the word; however, in this verse a key word is not italicized that should be. It is the word thing. Though some Bible programs, like Online Bible and E-Sword, label thing with the word holy, as being the Greek word associated with Strong’s #40, this is incorrect. That is because the Greek word translated holy is hagion from hagios. In Luke 1:35, hagion is in the form of an adjective and, therefore, must modify something. Furthermore, it is neuter in gender. In Greek the language is very specific and nouns and their adjectives must agree in gender; therefore, something must be modified by the word holy, and it must be neuter in the Greek. The text speaks of something holy that would be born of Mary, but a holy what? Is it a holy child? Is it a holy angel? The text does not directly say, and the translators have used the word thing. Here translator bias comes into play. Since most translators are trinitarians, they have to fit their theology to the verse. Even Young’s Literal Translation, which usually keeps close fidelity to the text, ventures into uncharted waters here, translating the latter part of the verse: “therefore also the holy-begotten thing shall be called Son of God.” There is no Greek word for thing, nor for the the word begotten in the verse. Yet something must be put in to properly translate the text and since it must be neuter in the Greek, we must comb the verse to find the nearest possible neuter noun that might fit. The only neuter noun in the verse that can fit is pneuma which is translated ghost or spirit. So the text would be best translated:

And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy spirit which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

This perfectly agrees with what we read earlier from The Youth’s Instructor article of Ellen White, where she stated “a divine spirit dwelt in a temple of flesh” and with 2Corinthians 3:17, where we are told that “the Lord is that Spirit.”

The Bible associates mind and spirit together (see Isaiah 40:13; Romans 11:34; 1 Corinthians 2:16; Ezekiel 11:5). This mind of Jesus was very pure, holy, and divine. It was human in the sense that Christ was not omniscient. He did not have all knowledge as a man, but he was pure. He was that holy thing or Holy Spirit.

This spirit, or mind, the Christian is to have. Paul wrote, “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus” (Philippians 2:5). “For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ” (1 Corinthians 2:16). Why do we need the mind of Christ? We need it because everyone who can read this paper has sinned and fallen short of God’s glory (Romans 3:23). We are all in the need of something more and better than we have. Romans 8:6–10 states:

For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

In a physical sense all of humanity is in the flesh, including born-again believers. We are flesh and blood in a literal sense. Paul is not speaking about disembodied spirits who do not live in flesh anymore—that is not about whic he is speaking. He is speaking about what is controlling, or ruling, the person. Is it the flesh and the things of the flesh, the sinful nature, that pulls one naturally away from God? Because if it is, there is death, and only death, awaiting because the carnal mind is enmity against God and not subject to the law of God and cannot be subject to it! It is at war against God. I have heard people, in an attempt to make Jesus altogether like us, teach that Jesus had a carnal mind and somehow he overcame in this carnal mind. I have heard this and shuddered! In an attempt to make Jesus our perfect example, they make him too much like us, and Ellen White says that is an extreme position that cannot be!

Let us remember that the mind and the brain are not the same thing. His brain was part of sinful flesh, capable of temptations produced from within, but his mind, or spirit, was never carnal, but ever pure. Because of its divine purity, he was ever connected to his Father, the source of his power and strength over temptations and sin. That pure, divine spirit he offers to each of us and when the believer is born again, he receives of the spirit of Christ, and he then has every advantage for living the Christian life that Jesus had in the incarnation. We have been told:

We need a constant sense of the ennobling power of pure thoughts and the damaging influence of evil thoughts. Let us place our thoughts upon holy things. Let them be pure and true; for the only security for any soul is right thinking. We are to use every means that God has placed within our reach for the government and cultivation of our thoughts. We are to bring our minds into harmony with Christ’s mind. His truth will sanctify us, body, soul, and spirit, and we shall be enabled to rise above temptation. (The Signs of the Times, August 23, 1905; all emphasis supplied unless otherwise noted)

Thoughts come from the mind, and we must have pure thoughts. We are to bring our mind into harmony with his mind.

The Christian has the mind that is in Christ. His hopes and aspirations are pure and noble; for he is growing up into Christ. (The Youth’s Instructor, May 16, 1901)

Not everyone has the mind of Christ. She says the Christian has that mind which gives him pure and noble aspirations.

In 1888 God sent two men to the General Conference with a special message and for the next decade plus, they shared the message of the righteousness of Christ with God’s church, ringing loud and clear with what Ellen White declared to be a “most precious message” (Testimonies to Ministers and Gospel Workers, p. 91). In 1895 at the General Conference Session, A.T. Jones gave a series of talks on the three angels’ messages, highlighting the importance of the incarnation. Notice what Jones said about the mind of Jesus:

Now as to Christ’s not having “like passions” with us: In the Scriptures all the way through He is like us and with us according to the flesh. He is the seed of David according to the flesh. He was made in the likeness of sinful flesh. Don’t go too far. He was made in the likeness of sinful flesh, not in the likeness of sinful mind. Do not drag His mind into it. His flesh was our flesh, but the mind was “the mind of Christ Jesus.” Therefore it is written: “Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus.” If He had taken our mind, how, then, could we ever have been exhorted to “let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus?” It would have been so already. But what kind of mind is ours? O, it is corrupted with sin also. (A. T. Jones, General Conference Bulletin, February 25, 1895)

Notice the date of this study by Jones, for we will come back to this in a little bit. Remember what we saw from the Youth’s Instructor, December 20, 1900? Sister White wrote that “. . . a divine spirit dwelt in a temple of flesh.” Now if mind and spirit are even to a minimal degree interchangeable, then she is saying a divine mind dwelt in a temple of sinful flesh. That is the formula we need today for victory over sin, and Jesus is still willing to abide in sinful flesh today, our sinful flesh, so that by his spirit we might have victory over all sin. Paul notes that the mystery among the Gentiles is “the hope of glory,” and that “is Christ in you” (Colossians 1:27), and “he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit” (1 Corinthians 6:17). Then in 1 Corinthians 6:19, he tells us that our bodies are to be temples of the Holy Spirit. Simply, the miracle of Bethlehem is reproduced in each believer. The reality of “God with us” (Matthew 1:23) becomes personal: a divine spirit dwelling in a temple of flesh!

I was not conceived of the Holy Spirit, as was Jesus (Matthew 1:20), nor can I say I was a holy spirit when born, but when I am born again, I receive of the spirit of Christ and may walk just as Jesus walked.

The idea that Jesus came to this earth with nothing more to offer than what we begin with may sound inviting to some, but it leaves us without a ladder that reaches heaven. Sure, such a ladder would be firmly planted on earth, but I need more and you need more, for the truth of Romans 3:23 cannot be avoided, but the advantage that Jesus had we may have, as we accept him as our personal saviour; therefore, we may say that Jesus had no advantage that is not fully available to us. We may have the mind of Christ; we can receive of his spirit.

Christ was the prince of heaven, but he made an infinite sacrifice, and came to a world all marred with the curse brought upon it by the fallen foe. He lays hold of the fallen race. He invites us: “Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” The offer is ours, and every advantage is ours if we will accept the terms. I am trying to do this most earnestly. We can be an example to others by our cheerful obedience to the will of God. Let us comply with the conditions, and in complying we shall find the rest we crave. (The Review and Herald, August 6, 1914)

There are advantages we may have, but we do not have them without accepting the terms.

Christ’s example shows us that our only hope of victory is in continual resistance of Satan’s attacks. He who triumphed over the adversary of souls in the conflict with temptation understands Satan’s power over the race, and has conquered in our behalf. As an overcomer, he has given us the advantage of his victory, that in our efforts to resist the temptations of Satan, we may unite our weakness to his strength, our worthlessness to his merits. And, sustained by his enduring might, under strong temptation, we may resist in his all-powerful name, and overcome as he overcame. (The Signs of the Times, May 27, 1897)

It is a great thing to believe in Jesus. We hear many say, “Believe, believe; all that you have to do is to believe in Jesus.” But it is our privilege to inquire, What does this belief take in? and what does it comprehend? There are many of us who have a nominal faith but we do not bring that faith into our characters. . . . We must have that faith which works by love and purifies the soul, that this belief in Christ will lead us to put away everything that is offensive in His sight. Unless we have this faith that works, it is of no advantage to us. You may admit that Christ is the Saviour of the world, but is He your Saviour? Do you believe today that He will give you strength and power to overcome every defect in your character? (In Heavenly Places, p. 118)

If Jesus had no more than I have, do I need his strength and power to overcome? Of course not; it would be meaningless! But because of his spirit coming into our lives, we have this great advantage.

Earlier we mentioned the messages of A. T. Jones to the General Conference of 1888. We noted a message from the Bulletin of February 25, 1895, where Jones warned the people to not drag Christ’s mind into the discussion. He said that based upon what he had said the day before. Jones wanted to be sure that the message from the prior day was not taken to an extreme. So let’s see what Jones said earlier which was printed in the Bulletin of February 24, 1895, but as we read, remember that he cautioned later to not drag the mind of Christ into the discussion.

In Jesus Christ alone is the fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man, and in Jesus Christ we find the brotherhood of man only when we find Christ the Brother of every man.

It is written, “For which cause He is not ashamed to call them brethren.” Not ashamed to call who brethren? Every one that is of flesh and blood—Christ is not ashamed to call him brother. He is not ashamed to go and take him by the hand, even though his breath does smell of liquor and say, “Come with me, and let us go a better way.” That is the brotherhood of man.

It has been Satan’s work always to get men to think that God is far away as possible. But it is the Lord’s everlasting effort to get men to find out that He is as near to every one as possible. So it is written: He is not far from every one of us.

The great trouble with heathenism was to think that God was so far away—not only far away but full of wrath at them all, and only waiting to get a chance to pick them up and savagely shake them and plunge them into perdition. So viewing Him, they made offerings to get Him in a good humor and to keep Him from hurting them. But He was not far from every one of them all the time. “Not far.” That is near—so near that all they had to do was to “feel after him.” Although they were blind and in the dark too, all they had to do was to feel after Him and they would “find him.” Acts 17:21–28.

Then the papacy came in, the very incarnation of that enmity between man and God. This incarnation of evil entered under the name of Christianity, and it again puts God and Christ so far away that nobody can come near to them. Everybody else comes in before God.

Then in addition to all this, He is so far away that Mary and her mother and her father—and then all the rest of the Catholic saints clear down to Joan of Arc and Christopher Columbus pretty soon—all these have to come in between God and men so as to make such a connection that all can be sure that they are noticed by Him.

But this is all of Satan’s invention. Christ is not so far away as that. He is not far enough away to get a single relation in between Him and me or between Him and you. And this is just where God wants us to view Him—so near that it is impossible for anything or anybody to get between. But to how many people has He come so near? He is not far from every one of us, even the heathen.

The incarnation of that enmity that is against God and that separates between man and God—the papacy built up this, and now here is this same thought that we mentioned a moment ago, the false idea that He is so holy that it would be entirely unbecoming in Him to come near to us and be possessed of such a nature as we have—sinful, depraved, fallen human nature. Therefore Mary must be born immaculate, perfect, sinless, and higher than the cherubim and seraphim and then Christ must be so born of her as to take His human nature in absolute sinlessness from her. But that puts Him farther away from us than the cherubim and the seraphim are and in a sinless nature.

But if He comes no nearer to us than in a sinless nature, that is a long way off, because I need somebody that is nearer to me than that. I need someone to help me who knows something about sinful nature, for that is the nature that I have, and such the Lord did take. He became one of us. Thus, you see, this is present truth in every respect, now that the papacy is taking possession of the world and the image of it is going on in the wrong way, forgetting all that God is in Jesus Christ and all that Christ is in the world—having the form of godliness without the reality, without the power. In this day is it not just the thing that is needed in the world, that God should proclaim the real merits of Jesus Christ once more and His holiness?

It is true He is holy; He is altogether holy. But His holiness is not that kind that makes Him afraid to be in company with people who are not holy for fear He will get His holiness spoiled. Anybody who has such a kind of holiness that they cannot be found in the company—in the name of Jesus Christ—of people who are fallen and lost and degraded, without spoiling it would better get rid of it as quickly as possible and get the right kind, because that kind of holiness is not worth having. It is already spoiled. . . .

It is one of the most blessed truths in the Bible, that our God is a consuming fire because of His holiness. For then in Jesus Christ we meet Him whose holiness is a consuming fire to sin, and that is the pledge of our salvation in perfection from every stain of sin. The brightness, the glory, the all consuming purity of that holiness will take every vestige of sin and sinfulness out of the man who will meet God in Jesus Christ.

Thus in His true holiness, Christ could come and did come to sinful men in sinful flesh, where sinful men are. Thus in Christ and in Christ alone is found the brotherhood of man. All indeed are one in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Some have found and all may find in the Testimonies the statement that Christ has not “like passions” as we have. The statement is there; every one may find it there, of course.

. . . Some have drawn the conclusion some time ago—and you can see what a fearful conclusion it is—that “Christ became ourselves; He is our flesh. Therefore, I am Christ.” They say Christ forgave sins; I can forgive sins; He wrought miracles; I must work miracles. That is a fearful argument. There are no two ways about that.

Christ became ourselves, in our place, weak as we, and in all points like as we are, in order that he might be that forever and never that we should be Himself. No. It is God who is to be manifested always and not ourselves. In order that this might be, Christ emptied Himself and took ourselves in order that God Himself might come to us, appear in us, and be revealed in us and through us in all things. It is always God and never ourselves. That which ruined us at the start was the exaltation of ourselves, the setting forth of ourselves and the putting of ourselves above God. In order that we might get rid of our wicked selves, Christ emptied His righteous self and stood in the place of our wicked selves and crucified ourselves, putting ourselves under foot always, in order that God might be all in all. How much? All. All in how many? All. It was done that God might be all that there is in me and all there is in you and all there is in Christ. Assuredly that is what this was done for. We are not to exalt ourselves. Christ is to increase. I am to decrease. He is to live. I am to die. He is to be exalted. I am to be emptied. (A. T. Jones, General Conference Bulletin, February 24, 1895)

That is what the angel of the LORD is all about. He comes and empties himself and lifts us up. This was published in the Bulletin of February 24, but the next day Jones cautioned against taking his remarks too far and bringing Christ’s mind into the discussion. The mind of Jesus was ever pure and holy, and we may have this mind. The secret of success in living the Christian life is having divinity blended with humanity, and we are told:

In Christ divinity and humanity were united, and the only way in which man may be an overcomer is through becoming a partaker of the divine nature having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. Divinity and humanity are blended in him who has the spirit of Christ. (The Youth’s Instructor, June 30, 1895)

This is the key to victory over sin, but we must allow Jesus to come in. We must choose to be saved and to walk under his shadow and be ever held up by his mighty arms. We must abide in him day-by-day, as we die to self (1 Corinthians 15:31). Will you allow the angel of the LORD to touch you today?   Allen Stump

West Virginia Camp Meeting

Smyrna Gospel Ministries will be hosting their annual camp meeting June 25–29 this year. The camp meeting theme is “The Sabbath.” We certainly hope you will be able to attend this study and fellowship retreat. Brother Lynnford Beachy will have a seminar on the lunar Sabbath each day, with question and answer sessions at the end of the meetings. The lunar Sabbath fallacy has sadly taken some brothers and sisters into its deceitful grasp, and we believe it is past time for God’s people to have a better understanding of the many problems with this wind of doctrine. Looking at the negative aspects of the lunar Sabbath will just be a small part of the camp meeting, though. We will also emphasize the truth of the biblical Sabbath, with speakers covering areas of the Sabbath, such as how it dovetails into the three angels’ messages and righteousness by faith and how to enjoy the Sabbath in a manner that pleases God.

We are also planning on programs for the youth, and Brother Ron Toel will be back this year to share with us from his broad knowledge of nature.

Brother Elvis Alberto and Sister Elaine Nailing will be sharing health presentations each day. Brother Elvis has recently been on a mission trip to South America and is very eager to share a report of the work there.

Sister Onycha Holt will have a story tent involving science demonstrations that teach spiritual lessons designed for our youth, but they will be a blessing to all who can attend.

Some of the other speakers include Thomas Aken, Demario Carter, Reuben Gomez, Morgan Polsky, Dennis Robertson, David Sims, Allen Stump, Michael Woodward, and Wally Woodward,

Please do not forget to bring your Bibles and a cheerful heart. This is a camp meeting, and there is no cost to attend. For those who do not wish to camp, there are motels nearby, and for those who are older or who have medical issues and would like to come but cannot afford a motel, contact us, and we will find a place on site for you.

There are complete directions and maps on our website. If you use GPS, the co-ordinates are: N 37° 31’ 13", W 81 36’ 09".

Why should you come to camp meeting? Ellen White said:

Our camp meetings are arranged and held at great expense. God’s ministers who advocate unpopular truth, labor excessively at these large gatherings to bear the message of mercy from a crucified Redeemer to poor fallen sinners. To neglect or treat these messages with indifference, is to slight the mercy of God and His voice of warning and entreaty. Your absence from these meetings has been very detrimental to your spiritual welfare. You have missed the strength that you might have gained there by listening to the preached word of God, and mingling with the believers of the truth. (Testimonies for the Church, vol. 4, p. 115)

Let all who possibly can, attend these yearly gatherings. All should feel that God requires this of them. If they do not avail themselves of the privileges which He has provided that they may become strong in Him and in the power of His grace, they will grow weaker and weaker, and have less and less desire to consecrate all to God.

Come, brethren and sisters, to these sacred convocation meetings, to find Jesus. He will come up to the feast. He will be present, and He will do for you that which you most need to have done. Your farms should not be considered of greater value than the higher interests of the soul. All the treasures which you possess, be they ever so valuable, would not be rich enough to buy you peace and hope, which would be infinite gain, if it cost you all you have and the toils and sufferings of a lifetime. A strong, clear sense of eternal things, and a heart willing to yield all to Christ, are blessings of more value than all the riches, and pleasures, and glories of this world. (Ibid., vol. 2, pp. 575, 576)

Come join us as we gather together to fellowship with one another, to be encouraged, to enjoy nature outings, to listen to inspiring and stirring messages, and more. As we are learning by God’s grace to love and to grow together as God’s family, this could be the best camp meeting yet.

The Risk We Eat

By Onycha Holt

Editor’s Note: For the past several decades, medical science has been documenting the heavy impact of meat eating upon such diseases as heart disease and cancer. In this article we will not go over all the facts and statistics that document this, but we will present facts, many disturbing, concerning the transmission of disease from animal to man (and even from man to man) through the use of meat as food and about the cruel treatment of man in the raising and in the slaughtering of animals for food. We do this because we believe people need to make intelligent, conscientious decisions based on a broad grasp of the facts involved. The information in this article is graphic, but it is reality, and hiding from the facts does not change the reality nor help us. It was only as humanity began to understand the reality of the holocaust that a permanent change in the mindset of man could be accomplished, and so in our society today. We have people that say change is not going to come, so why do we need to deprive ourselves and live outside the norm, if the overall picture is not going to change? Please consider the facts that just a generation ago medical doctors promoted cigarettes as healthy and social drinking was very acceptable in almost all circles. Today, however, using tobacco is not an acceptable pleasure for most people, and public drunkenness is considered appalling. Through proper education, change has come in those areas, and we hope in this article to aid a paradigm shift that will take humanity away from the thinking which accepts meat as an article of food and animals as disposable possessions unworthy of kindness and consideration. Allen Stump

A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast. (Proverbs 12:10)

In January 1970, a gentleman was admitted to a hospital in Germany because he felt strange—at first tired, achy, and restless, then feverous. Suspecting typhoid fever, the doctor placed him in isolation and started an antibiotic. The man was told to keep the door to his room closed and to not leave for any reason. After perking up a little, he opened his window a small amount to allow fresh air into his stuffy room. (Researchers later determined this allowed the virus to seep outside, follow the wall up like smoke, and enter an opened window above him, where people who had had no contact with him later became infected.) A few days later he again became restless and developed a cough, a red spot in his throat, and then reddened face and forearms.

The red areas spread into blotches across Peter Los’s1 face and arms, and within hours the blotches broke out into seas of tiny pimples. They were sharp feeling, not itchy, and by nightfall they covered his face, arms, hands, and feet. Pimples were rising out of the soles of his feet and on the palms of his hands, and they were coming up in his scalp and in his mouth, too. During the night, the pimples developed tiny, blistery heads, and the heads continued to grow larger. They were rising all over his body, at the same speed, like a field of barley sprouting after rain. They were beginning to hurt dreadfully, and they were enlarging into boils. They had a waxy, hard look, and they seemed unripe. His fever soared abruptly and began to rage. The rubbing of pajamas on his skin felt like a roasting fire. He was acutely conscious and very, very scared. . . .

By dawn on Thursday, January 15th, his body had become a mass of knob-like blisters. They were everywhere, all over, even on his private parts, but they were clustered most thickly on his face and extremities. . . . The inside of his mouth and ear canals and sinuses had pustulated, and the lining of the rectum may also have pustulated, as it will do in severe cases. Yet his mind was clear. When he coughed or tried to move, it felt as if his skin were pulling off his body, that it would split or rupture. The blisters were hard and dry, and they didn’t leak. They were like ball bearings embedded in the skin, with a soft velvety feel on the surface. . . .

The pustules began to touch one another, and finally they merged into confluent sheets that covered his body, like a cobblestone street. The skin was torn away from its underlayers across much of his body, and the pustules on his face combined into a bubbled mass filled with fluid, until the skin of his face essentially detached from its underlayers and became a bag surrounding the tissues of his head. His tongue, gums, and hard palate were studded with pustules, yet his mouth was dry, and he could barely swallow. The virus had stripped the skin off his body, both inside and out, and the pain would have seemed almost beyond the capacity of human nature to endure. (Richard Preston, The Demon in the Freezer: A True Story, pp. 34, 35)

Once the diagnosis of smallpox was made, the health authorities got Peter Los out of the hospital “fast. The police closed off the hospital, and a squad of attendants dressed in plastic biohazard suits and with masks over their faces ran inside the building and wrapped Los in a plastic biocontainment bag that had breathing holes in it. He lay in agony inside bag. The evac team rushed him out of the building on a gurney and loaded the bag into a biosafety ambulance, and with siren wailing and lights flashing, it took him” (Ibid., p. 43) to a hospital thirty miles away that had a newly built isolation unit—a one-story building with a flat roof, sitting in the middle of the woods. And then the vaccination program began in the area of the first hospital.

Smallpox is the worst disease humanity has ever experienced, and it continues to be the disease that those in the know fear the most. Today we drive to the store, roam libraries, ride buses, and freely fellowship with family and neighbors without fear of this highly contagious disease, all because a heroic group of scientists dedicated their lives to its extinction and in so doing have saved billions of lives.

Though the disease was eradicated over 20 years ago, several samples of the live virus were preserved, mainly for research purposes. Today the only verified repositories of the virus are held in secure laboratories at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta, Georgia, and the State Center for Research on Virology and Biotechnology in Koltsovo, Russia. (http://www.immunizationinfo.org/vaccines/smallpox)

When scientists handle smallpox, they are required to wear full space suits and to be inside a sealed Biosafety Level 4 containment zone. It is that serious, and it is generally considered to be the most dangerous of viruses known to infect the human race, but from where did it come?

The origin of smallpox is uncertain. Hippocrates does not describe it, it is not mentioned in the Old or New Testaments (we don’t know with what disease Job was afflicted), and the literature of the Greeks and Romans is silent about it, but we can most likely date smallpox back to the 2000-year-old Egyptian mummies. Smallpox has not been found to harbor in any animal, insect, or fowl, although other pox viruses abound in nature—mousepox, monkeypox, skunkpox, pigpox, goatpox, dolphinpox, penguinpox, snakepox, crocodilepox, beetlepox, mosquitopox, and grasshopperpox, to name a few. A paper presented to the National Academy of Sciences for the United States of America in 2007 reported that smallpox “likely diverged from an ancestral African rodent-borne variola-like virus.”2 In other words, most likely “smallpox jumped from an unknown animal into a person and began to spread. It was an emerging virus that made a trans-species jump into people from a host in nature” (Preston, p. 63).

Mad Cow

My companions all ordered roast beef and Yorkshire pudding.

“Aren’t you afraid of Mad Cow disease?” I asked them, astonished. A few years before in 1985, cases of this disease, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), had been found in British cattle. By 1988, hundreds of cows had become ill, and the British government banned feeding bone meal from the ground-up remains of sheep and cattle to other such animals as a protein supplement. (Sheep have long been known to have a related disease called scrapie.) The government later banned the marketing of sick cows to humans. In 1989, as the number of cases climbed into the thousands, the government barred selling animal parts most likely to be infected, notably brain and spinal cord, from infected herds. Still, thousands of cows died. In May 1990, a cat died of the disease, and British beef consumption fell. Yet it slowly rose back up. Now, in September 1990, I was amazed to see my friends all ordering beef.

“The beef is now safe,” Mark, the other physician among us, answered, surprised at my question.

“But the infectious agent can take decades before it affects someone,” I said. “If even one infected cow gets through, people could become infected and die.”

“But the government has experts,” Susan, a tall woman, argued. “They say the beef’s okay.” She lifted her fork and bit off a piece of pink meat. This willingness to accept government assurances shocked me, given the potential risks.

“I think it’s better to be careful,” I argued.

“Don’t be silly,” Susan said. “They’ve killed all the sick cows.” . . .

“But the disease can take ten, maybe twenty years to show up or affect you.” They all looked at me like I was crazy. . . .

“It’s never been transmitted to man,” Mark replied. (Robert Klitzman, The Trembling Mountain: A Personal Account of Kuru, Cannibals, and Mad Cow Disease, pp. 3, 4)

Six years later “the first cases of human disease acquired from Mad Cows were reported” (Ibid., p. 4).


Nelia Laroza was the first of two nurses to die during the SARS [severe acute respiratory syndrome] outbreak [in Canada]. She worked at North York General Hospital and succumbed when SARS reappeared after authorities thought they had beaten the outbreak. She was 52 years old and died on June 29, 2003.

Her death sent shockwaves through the nursing and medical communities. Her funeral was attended by union leaders and politicians, including Ernie Eves, Ontario’s Premier at the time. An honour guard of nurses, wearing black arm bands, paid tribute to her at her funeral.

Nelia Laroza was known for her skills and was well respected by doctors and colleagues. She was an unlikely candidate to be struck by SARS because she was meticulous about precautions against infection.

. . . [and] feared SARS from its first outbreak at Scarborough Grace Hospital. She did not work there, but it was not far from her family home. Members of her family told the Commission that she bought masks and family members carried antibacterial hand wash at all times.

Whenever her daughter picked her [Nelia] up from work, she had to wait in the parking lot and call her mother on a cell phone. Nelia did not want her daughter to wait inside the hospital, fearing that the air was contaminated.

When she came home, she headed for the shower and changed her clothes before hugging any members of her family. . . .

[But] she became ill with fever and muscle aches on May 16. She went to [the] hospital on May 21, but was sent home with a diagnosis of “viral illness.” She returned to the hospital on May 23 as a patient and was admitted with a diagnosis of possible SARS. She died on June 29. (The SARS Commission, vol. 3, pp. 874–876; accessed at http://www.archives.gov.on.ca/en/e_records/sars/report/v3-pdf/Vol3Chp5.pdf)

As she was exhibiting serious symptoms, the first reports were being released that the SARS coronavirus was found in “samples of wild animals sold as food in the local market in Guangdong, China,” and the “preliminary conclusion was the SARS virus had crossed the barrier from palm civet [a mammal] to humans” (Science 310, pp. 676–679). The virus was later found in raccoon dogs, badgers, and domestic cats, but it was not until 2006 that scientists in China and Hong Kong conclusively “established a genetic link between the SARS coronavirus appearing in civets and humans, bearing out claims that the disease had jumped across species.”3


June 1981 is the official birth date of the AIDS epidemic.…

Nobody could have imagined that, within three decades, more than twenty-nine million individuals would have died from AIDS, leaving in the process sixteen million orphans. By 2009, another thirty-three million were living with its HIV aetiological [causative] agent, making it by far the most dramatic epidemic since the Black Plague devastated Europe 500 years ago. (Jacques Pepin, The Origins of AIDS, p. 1)

But how did this terrible disease begin in humans? We know how the Black Plague spread—by being bitten by a flea from an infected rat, but AIDS? “Chimpanzees are the closest relatives of humans, sharing between 98 and 99% of their genome with us, and are considered the most intelligent non-human animal” (Pepin, p. 18). Interestingly, “like humans, chimpanzees have their own personalities. Some are gentle, others are more aggressive. Some have a good relationship with their parents or other members of the troop while others are loners. Some have a strong maternal instinct, others do not” (Ibid.), and chimpanzees, interestingly, can become infected with human illnesses:

Like humans, chimpanzee communities are occasionally stricken by epidemics. In Gombe, during an outbreak in the region’s human population, poliomyelitis caused four deaths and left some chimpanzees permanently paralysed. Respiratory infections followed, also with fatal consequences. This reflects . . . their biological similarity to humans, whose microbes can be transmitted to chimpanzees and vice versa.

 . . . it gradually became clear that one subspecies of chimpanzees was the source of HIV-1. (Ibid., p. 22)

The most plausible explanation, according to Dr. Pepin, for how the immunodeficiency virus of chimpanzees (SIV) became the immunodeficiency virus of humans (HIV) is that the transmission occurred through the “handling of chimpanzee meat by hunters or their wives who would cut up the animals before cooking them” (Ibid., p. 43; see also page 58). Humans ate seemingly healthy chimpanzees infected with SIVcpz (the simian immunodeficiency virus peculiar to chimpanzees), but it was the handling of the diseased chimpanzee in either the slaughtering process or the cooking phase that allowed the virus to cross the species barrier into man, becoming HIV as it settled in. HIV would have remained an isolated illness in pockets of Africa, as it had for centuries, had it not been mostly for the spread of the promiscuous behavior of the twentieth-century world and for the sharing of illicit drug needles. SIVcpz is “genetically identical to HIV-1” (Ibid., p. 221), and the transformation of it into HIV-1 is generally irrefutable (see Pepin, page 221), although some pieces of the transformation puzzle are still “the most plausible hypotheses” (Ibid.). A map from the World Health Organization’s website shows the preponderance of AIDS cases to be in Africa, not because of the continued use of chimpanzees as food, but because of person-to-person transmission. It is truly the worst pandemic of modern times, and it all started with eating meat.4


Kanisi and Opaba were brothers in the Fore (pronounced for-ay) community of the northern highlands of Papua, New Guinea, and both died from the always fatal disease of kuru. Their only exposure to this terrible disease was at two memorial feasts for dead relatives. One relative was Tononda, their aunt. The brothers were 3 and 8 years old at the time, and their mother, because she was the closest female relative of Tononda, was honored with the cooked brain of Tononda, which she ate, and she also gave parts of it to her sons to eat. They returned to their hut irreversibly infected with kuru, but they did not know it, nor were they worried, for in their minds Tononda had not died from disease, but from the evil practice of sorcery. Anyone could supposedly inflict death on another by simply making a bundle containing something belonging to that person; padding it and then securely wrapping it in banana leaves; hiding it, half submerged, in one of the numerous swampy areas; and then shaking it every day while incanting over it, until the person became ill and died. Once the person died, the body was cut up and the parts were wrapped in banana leaves or stuffed in bamboo tubes and steamed over a fire. The parts were then eaten, so that family members could always carry a part of the dead person with them wherever they went. As one woman told Dr. Klitzman, “I will now always have part of my mother inside me” (Klitzman, p. 5).

The government eventually outlawed the practice of cannibalism, but in the 1950s, when kuru was first isolated, the people of Fore could not be convinced kuru was transmitted through eating the meat of their dead relatives. Dr. Klitzman tried to explain it to them:

“But kuru is caused by a tiny life-like thing,” I explained. “A virus—smaller than an insect. Not sorcery.”

“Show it to us.”

“It is too small to see with your eye and requires a special instrument to view.”

“What does it look like?”

“We aren’t sure exactly.”

“Has anyone ever seen it?”

“It’s not clear anyone has.”

They all laughed at me. “You White men don’t make sense. Kuru is caused by kuru bundles, which we have all seen with our own eyes.”

“But do you really believe that I could get kuru if, for example, a sorcerer took my boots?”

They all nodded.

“But you have only heard about the sorcery. There is no proof.”

“No. We have seen the kuru bundles ourselves.” (Ibid., pp. 166, 167)

Amazingly, two of the men making fun of Dr. Klitzman were Sana and Sayuma, men who had previously worked with two of the most knowledgeable men on kuru, Dr. Daniel Gajdusek and Dr. Stanley Prusiner, (both of whom later received Nobel prizes), but still Sana and Sayuma could not be convinced that kuru was transmitted by eating the flesh of their dead relatives—for they had seen the kuru bundles with their very own eyes, and they had never seen a prion!

Ebola and Marburg Hemorrhagic Fevers

Just handling the carcasses of animals that died from either the Ebola or the Marburg virus is enough to transmit the disease to humans:

Hunters and/or cooks can acquire infectious agents from their prey, including primates. For instance, Herpes B virus is a rare but highly lethal infection of individuals who handle monkeys . . . Monkeypox is a smallpox-like but benign viral infection associated with exposure to monkeys. Highly lethal Ebola and Marburg haemorrhagic fevers have been reported in veterinarians and villagers who handled the carcasses of apes that had died in the wild from these infections. (Pepin, p. 43)

The important point is that the virus which was harbored in the dead primates was able to infect the humans who came in contact with it, and why would the local people most likely come in contact with dead primates? For food.

Choose Country Living

We don’t know when the next tragic viral pandemic resulting from another virus moving across species to man will sweep our world. That is why Ebola, bird flu, mad cow disease, and the like are being monitored so closely, but our personal movement out of the cities can be a source of protection to us. Interestingly,

Epidemiologists have done some mathematics on the spread of smallpox, and they’ve found that the virus needs a population of around two hundred thousand people living within fourteen days of travel from one another or the virus can’t keep its life cycle going, and it dies out. Those conditions did not occur until the appearance of settled agricultural areas and cities . . . Smallpox could be described as the first urban virus. (Preston, p. 66)

Of course, the whole world is within that reach now, but smallpox remains a conquered foe; however, when the next viral foe does attack, it would not be in our best interest to be found living within the confines of a city.

The time has come, when, as God opens the way, families should move out of the cities. The children should be taken into the country. The parents should get as suitable a place as their means will allow. Though the dwelling may be small, yet there should be land in connection with it, that may be cultivated.—Manuscript 50, 1903. (Ellen White, Country Living, p. 24)

Parents can secure small homes in the country, with land for cultivation, where they can have orchards and where they can raise vegetables and small fruits to take the place of flesh meat, which is so corrupting to the life blood coursing through the veins. On such places the children will not be surrounded with the corrupting influences of city life. God will help His people to find such homes outside the cities.—Medical Ministry, p. 310; 1902 (Ibid.)

“Out of the cities; out of the cities!”—this is the message the Lord has been giving me. The earthquakes will come; the floods will come; and we are not to establish ourselves in the wicked cities, where the enemy is served in every way, and where God is so often forgotten. The Lord desires that we shall have clear spiritual eyesight. We must be quick to discern the peril that would attend the establishment of institutions in these wicked cities. We must make wise plans to warn the cities, and at the same time live where we can shield our children and ourselves from the contaminating and demoralizing influences so prevalent in these places.—Life Sketches, pp. 409, 410; 1906 (Ibid., p. 31)

Human immunodeficiency virus (which leads to AIDS) resulted from a virus that jumped species; Ebola and Marburg viruses cross species into humans, as can bird and swine influenzas; mad cow virus has been linked to the fatal Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease; the SARS coronavirus found in civets has infected man; and the feared smallpox virus established a home in humans most likely from a rodent source. In all of these instances (save smallpox, of which we cannot be certain because its history goes back too far to trace) the animal hosts of the viruses were being used as or prepared as human food. How seriously this should make us consider the use of meat in our diets. Though the spread of these diseases (save kuru) is accomplished person-to-person, their first occurrence in man came either from the ingestion of or the handling of the animals (or humans) as food.

Meat in America

Most of us, however, don’t handle monkeys and apes, nor eat their flesh, but most Americans and many Seventh-day Adventists, do eat meat, and since doing so can transmit disease, it behooves us to know how food animals are raised, slaughtered, and prepared for the dinner table, information that we may not relish, but information that is essential to good health. Gail Eisnitz wrote in Slaughterhouse of her difficulties in attempting to get “60 Minutes,” “20/20,” and “PrimeTime Live” to air a documentary she had created, which included eyewitness accounts, video footage, and more, on the slaughtering of animals and on the production of meat for America’s tables. The producers of all three television programs refused Eisnitz, stating, in effect, that this was a topic too gruesome for the American public to consider.

How Are Animals Slaughtered?

Humanely, according to the Department of Agriculture and as mandated by the legislation known as the Humane Slaughter Act (HAS). The HAS requires all animals to be rendered unconscious after one application of a stunning device, but the HAS is not enforced and remains a law on paper only. Many of the cows and pigs on the production line are conscious after stunning and restunning (and sometimes no stunning), but they are shackled anyway, hung upside down, and moved further down the production line, where hooves may be sawed off (to stop the operator from being viciously kicked) and where they are scalded, skinned, cut open, etc., before unconsciousness finally sets in.

“Last Saturday,” he [a USDA slaughterhouse inspector] said, “the line was smoking. There were more live [conscious] cows coming through than I’ve ever seen before.The whole line was going crazy. Just about every cow that come down the line—at least a hundred of them—was alive [conscious] that afternoon. . . . ” (Gail A. Eisnitz, Slaughterhouse, p. 28)

For a highly acclaimed series that ran in the Atlanta Journal Constitution, reporter Scott Bronstein conducted interviews with eighty-four USDA poultry inspectors from thirty-seven plants, many of whom voiced the extreme frustration they experienced in trying to enforce the law. Every week, Bronstein wrote, millions of chickens “leaking yellow pus, stained by green feces, contaminated by harmful bacteria, or marred by lung and heart infections, cancerous tumors, or skin conditions are shipped for sale to consumers.”

. . . Former Perdue worker Donna Bazemore twice submitted to Congress testimony on conditions in poultry plants. “The plants are filthy,” she reported in her first testimony: “The floors are covered with grease, fat, sand, and roaches. Bugs are up and down the sides of the walls. Some of the flying roaches were huge, up to four and five inches long. We’d joke that you could put a collar on them and walk them. . . . [ellipsis in original] There are flies all around, including big blowflies. Employees are constantly chewing and spitting out snuff and tobacco on the floor.

“There is so much fecal contamination on the floor from chickens that it kept getting into one worker’s boots and burned his feet so badly his toenails had to be amputated.

“The waste is not always from the chickens. The company won’t allow workers to leave the line when they have to go to the bathroom. . . . [ellipsis in original] Usually they just suffer and put a strain on their bodies, but sometimes they have to relieve themselves on the floor.

“The problems are just as bad in the slaughter process [as they are in the plants generally; {brackets in original}]. After they are hung, sometimes the chickens fall off into the drain that runs down the middle of the line. This is where roaches, intestines, diseased parts, fecal contamination, and blood are washed down. Workers get sick to the stomachs into the drain. The drain is a lot less sanitary than anybody’s toilet. That doesn’t seem to matter, though. The Perdue supervisors told us to take the fallen chickens out of the drain and send them back down the line.” (Eisnitz, pp. 171, 172)

Another Perdue worker stated in an affidavit:

While on the night shift, I often saw roaches crawling up and down the walls, as well as flies and mosquitoes. I’ve seen birds fall on the floor and foremen tell workers to put them back on the line without washing. And I know we didn’t condemn those that fell on the floor and were heavily soiled.

I’ve seen birds with cancerous tumors come through regularly, sometimes all day long. While on quality control, I’d pull off those I saw, but I couldn’t possibly catch them all. Right after I’d put them in the condemn barrel, foremen would have the floor workers hang the birds back on the line. (Eisnitz, p. 173)

Two years after Bazemore’s first testimony to Congress, she submitted an update:

“Workers keep finding rats and fat cockroaches in the chill tanks where chickens soak together—both the rats and their droppings. Women still keep having to relieve themselves on the floor because there are not enough bathroom breaks. Birds still fall onto the floor and are put back on the line. If the USDA catches a worker doing it, Perdue scapegoats the employee. But employees are in trouble if they don’t try to slip the chickens back in. Chickens keep getting removed from the condemn barrel and slipped past USDA. Gall birds [chickens with ruptured gall bladders; {brackets in original}] keep going out despite green pus in their intestines that is intensely painful when it gets in workers’ eyes. Diseased birds still go out although they are so sick that mucus backs up into their lungs.” (Eisnitz, p. 174)

Donna Bazemore’s testimony to Congress concerned the poultry industry in the 1980s. Perhaps it is better today. Eisintz states in her book, published in 2007:

A recent GAP investigation into conditions in six poultry plants in North Carolina turned up similar conditions.

“There were lots of rats, snakes, cockroaches, and maggots in the plant,” one worker said. “I saw flies on the chicken as it went down the line and maggots in boxes which contained bags that the chicken would be wrapped in.”

A worker at another plant described the chicken processed at the plant as “not safe to eat. Every day, I saw black chicken, green chicken, chicken that stank, and chicken with feces on it. Chicken like this is supposed to be thrown away, but instead it would be sent down the line to be processed.”

An employee at a third plant said, “I personally have seen rotten meat—you can tell by the odor. This rotten meat is mixed with fresh meat and sold for baby food. We are asked to mix it with the fresh food, and this is the way it is sold. You can see the worms inside the meat.”

One employee told a USDA inspector that “hundreds of maggots were in the clothes hamper where our smocks were kept.” Another worker, “in the department where chicken bones were ground up and processed into chicken franks and bologna,” reported that “almost continuously, the bones had an awful, foul odor. Sometimes they came from other plants and had been sitting for days. Often there were maggots on them. These bones were never cleaned off and so the maggots were ground up with everything else and remained in the final product.” (Eisnitz, pp. 174, 175)

And the slaughtering process has not become more sanitary since 2007; pathogens continue to be ubiquitous, and the conditions in raising animals for food and in the slaughtering process continue to be filthy.

Many cases of food poisoning are inaccurately called “the stomach flu.” In fact, the stomach flu does not exist. The flu (influenza) is actually a respiratory disease caused by a virus. What are mistakenly labeled stomach flus are usually intestinal diseases caused by food-borne or water-borne bacteria. (John Robbins, The Food Revolution, p. 116)

Factory farming, with cages of animals or poultry stacked over each other, with broilers so tightly crammed by the thousands into buildings that they cannot even flap their wings, and with cattle standing in their own muck in feedlots, is replete with the bacteria found in the waste products on the animals, and the slaughtering of them only makes the condition worse.


In an effort to protect their investment, the great majority of farmers turn to the use of antibiotics:

On a typical factory farm drugs are fed to the animals with every meal. In poultry factory farms, as I explained earlier, they almost have to be. Industry saw this problem from the beginning, but rather than accept less-productive animals, they compensated for the animals’ compromised immunity with feed additives.

As a result, farmed animals are fed antibiotics nontherapeutically (that is, before they get sick). In the United States, about 3 million pounds of antibiotics are given to humans each year, but a whopping 17.8 million pounds are fed to livestock—at least that is what the industry claims. The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) has shown that the industry underreported its antibiotic use by at least 40 percent. (Jonathan Safran Foer, Eating Animals, p. 140)

A ban on the use of non-therapeutic antibiotics in farm factories has been called for by the American Medical Society, the Centers for Disease Control, the Institute of Medicine, and the World Health Organization because these organizations have linked such widespread use with increased antimicrobial resistance, and this resistance in humans contributes to the risk of a pandemic, especially as more diseases cross species. (See Foer, pages 140, 141).

Further Health Problems

The waste material from farm factories also causes health problems to those living near the farms:

The fecal mists they are forced to breathe usually do not kill humans, but sore throats, headaches, coughing, runny noses, diarrhea, and even psychological illness, including abnormally high levels of tension, depression, anger, and fatigue are common. According to a report by the California state senate, “Studies have shown that [animal waste] lagoons emit toxic airborne chemicals that can cause inflammatory, immune, irritation and neurochemical problems in humans.” (Foer, pp. 179, 180; emphasis and brackets in original)

There are even some good reasons to suspect a link between living near hog factory farms and contracting the so-called flesh-eating bacteria known formally as MRSA (methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus). MRSA can cause “lesions as big as saucers, fiery red and agonizing to touch,” and by 2005 was killing more Americans annually (18,000) than AIDS. New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof, who himself grew up on a farm, reports than an Indiana doctor was ready to go public with suspicions of this link when the doctor suddenly died of what may well have been complications related to MRSA. The MRSA-hog factory farm link is by no means proven, but, as Kristof points out, “the larger question is whether we as a nation have moved to a model of agriculture that produces cheap bacon but risks the health of all of us. And the evidence, while far from conclusive, is growing that the answer is yes.” (Ibid., p. 180)

The Meat We Eat

For most Americans, meat is a major staple of one’s diet. “The U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) estimates that the average American consumes 87 pounds of chicken, 17 pounds of turkey, 66 pounds of beef, and 51 pounds of pork every year. Add to this a pound of veal and a pound of lamb, and each”5 person eats a total of 223 pounds of meat annually. “Given that the current population of the United States is 300 million, that’s a lot of meat—and a lot of animals. To be exact, U.S. agribusinesses slaughter ten billion animals per year, and that’s not including the estimated ten billion fish and other sea animals that are killed annually. That’s 19,011 animals per minute, or 317 animals per second” (Joy, p. 37).

Just to give you some perspective, the ten billion U. S. farm-animal population is nearly double the size of the worldwide human population. It’s 33 times larger than the population of the United States, 1,250 times higher than the population of New York City, and 2,500 times larger than the population of Los Angeles.

Another way to think about this number is that if we were to try to pack ten billion people into a football field, it would take 263,000 football fields—an area about the size of Houston—to hold them all. Or if ten billion people stood in a line, the line would be two million miles long. That’s long enough to reach to the moon and back, four times. It’s also long enough to wrap around the entire circumference of the earth eighty times. And we’re only talking about the number of animals killed in a single year; consider how these numbers increase over five, ten, twenty years. (Ibid., pp. 37, 38)

The meat that is sold in practically every supermarket and restaurant in America comes from factory farms.

The vast majority of the animals we eat are not, as those in the animal agribusiness industry would have us believe, “contented cows” and “happy hens” lazing amid grassy fields and open barnyards. They are not sleeping in spacious stalls with fresh hay. From the moment they are born, these animals are kept in intensive confinement where they may suffer from disease, exposure to extreme temperatures, severe overcrowding, violent handling, and even psychosis. Despite what the prevailing imagery of farm animals suggests, small, family-run farms are largely a thing of the past; today the animals are in massive “confined animal feeding operations,” or CAFOs (sometimes called “factory farms”), where they reside until they are shipped to the slaughterhouse. (Ibid., p. 39)

And the shipping can occur in the dead of winter, with trucks with slotted trailers barreling down open highways in temperatures which create a wind chill factor of 50 or more degrees below zero. Some cattle in the trailer’s perimeter freeze to the sides of the trailer, and the legs of others can freeze, through their waste products, to the bottom of the trailer’s bed. The only way to get these cattle off the truck and onto the assembly line is to cut off the lower limbs (without anesthesia) or to tear the animals away from the sides with chains and machinery, leaving large portions of their frozen bodies behind. These helpless creatures are also shipped in the heat of summer in cramped containers and many suffocate. No law, other than that of greed, regulates such wicked behavior.

As Adventists, we have no affinity for pigs as food, but as another of God’s creatures, we should have a care and concern for their welfare.

. . . pigs are intelligent, sensitive animals; piglets as young as three weeks old learn their names and respond when called. In fact, research from Pennsylvania State University revealed that pigs could be trained to play computer games; using their snouts to control joysticks, they were able to hit their targets with 80 percent accuracy. Pigs are also affectionate and sociable, enjoying the company of humans, which is why they can make excellent pets. . . .

In natural settings, pigs roam for up to thirty miles a day and can form close bonds with one another. They may be able to distinguish between as many as thirty different individual pigs in their group, and will greet and communicate with those with whom they are close. Expectant mothers are extremely conscientious; they may wander for six miles to find the perfect spot to build a birthing nest, and then spend up to ten hours building it before settling in to care for their newborns. (Joy, p. 42)

Yet these sensitive and intelligent creatures are abused both in their living and in their dying. Millions every year are confined to small metal crates, in which they are barely able to move, much less turn around, and once at the slaughterhouse are all too often beaten, tortured, and slaughtered while still conscious and aware of every pain and of every insult.

We could also describe the cruel life forced upon young male calves (all in the name of veal), the merciless slaughter of baby roosters (no need for them), the cruel death of laying hens once they have outlived their ideal production (to the shredder they go), the farming of salmon (no fish gets a good death), but it is perhaps the force feeding of ducks that reveals the depth of man’s greed and the depth of his callous perversity of taste.

Ducks are raised both for meat and to produce foie gras (“fatty liver”), which involves a most brutal practice. Total confinement housing is the most common method of raising ducks, with thousands of birds kept in a single, dark building. Being aquatic animals, they need to submerse their heads in water in order to keep their eyes healthy. But the only water they are provided with is for drinking, from nipple-like devices. The tip of their sensitive bill is burned off with a hot knife, often resulting in chronic pain and debilitation. At about four months of age, ducks used for foie gras are put in small pens or are kept virtually immobilized in individual cages. For two to three weeks, up to two pounds of a corn/fat mixture are forced down their throats through a 12-to-16 inch pipe attached to a motorized pump. The massive quantities of food cause the bird’s liver to swell to up to ten times its normal size, a clinical disease state called “hepatic steatosis.” Many of the birds also suffer blindness, lameness, throat injuries, and ruptured livers. (Jim Mason and Mary Finelli, In Defense of Animals: The Second Wave, ed. Peter Singer, p. 110)

You may view pictures of this process at http://www.flickr.com/photos/farm sanctuary1/sets/72157603932989484/.

The ducks’ lives of misery, the untold misery of each creature on a factory farm, and the misery experienced by each worker at each slaughterhouse (it’s a terrible place to be) cry out to our heavenly Father—Enough! End this wickedness!

And lest you be inclined to go along with these practices because that is just the way it is and it’s too big to be stopped, remember that it can stop at your table. It stopped at the table of one particular man caught up in agribusiness. He had grown up on a small farm in rural Missouri at a time when animals had barnyards and pastures, and later he became a factory hog farmer. He knew it was wrong to treat his animals the way he did, but he also believed he had no choice—he did not have a high school diploma, he did not read well, and he knew of no other way to support his family, but he had the courage to STOP what he was doing. He turned to raising and selling organic vegetables and operating a pet pig farm for neighborhood children to visit. (You may read his interesting story in No Happy Cows by John Robbins on pages 3–16.)

You may not be inclined to agree that veganism promotes better health, but if there was ever a time to accept veganism for moral reasons, it certainly is now, and adopting just vegetarianism is not enough, for practically all the dairy, all the dairy products, and all the eggs we buy, either at stores or in restaurants, are obtained from factory farms. When we eat the dairy, dairy products, and eggs produced by the cruelty of these farms and when we eat the meat that is inhumanely raised and inhumanely slaughtered, we are supporting the process, and we are complicit in the evil deeds.

We may have been in great darkness about the treatment of animals destined for the table, but we can be in great light with just a little reading—try Eisnitz and Robbins for starters—and with new light, better health may come:

The vast majority, perhaps 80 to 90 percent of all cancers, cardiovascular diseases, and other forms of degenerative illness can be prevented, at least until very old age, simply by adopting a plant-based diet. (T. Colin Campbell, Ph.D., as quoted by Joy, p. 92)

Because of meat eating, many die, and they do not understand the cause. If the truth were known, it would bear testimony it was the flesh of animals that have passed through death. . . . In eating meat we partake of diseased dead flesh, and this sows its seed of corruption in the human organism. (Ellen White, Counsels on Diet and Foods, p. 412)

Food-Borne Illnesses

Viruses are not the only threat when we eat animals as food:

E. coli 0157:H7, a once rare bacterium that wasn’t even identified until 1982, has since left a trail of sickness and death across the United States. Pathogens like E. coli and salmonella, which live in the intestinal tracts of livestock and poultry, contaminate meat during sloppy high-speed slaughter and processing operations. (Eisnitz, p. 38)

Twelve-year-old Damion ate a marble-sized piece of raw hamburger at a Boy Scout cookout. It was on a platter that the scouters were using to carry patties to the grill and to take hamburgers away from the grill.

“As soon as my son popped the little morsel into his mouth, he could tell it was all mush and raw. He told me he’d been too embarrassed in front of his friends to spit it out.

“Exactly six days later … It started with bloody diarrhea, then his platelet level dropped. He was hallucinating—he didn’t recognize us anymore. Then his kidneys shut down and he required dialysis. That required one surgery.

“Then his lungs became a problem. He was put on a respirator because his lungs were filling up with fluid …

“And then his heart became involved. It enlarged grotesquely. X-rays showed it two-and-a-half times the normal size.…”

The hamburger Damion had eaten was contaminated with a deadly strain of bacteria known as E. coli 0157:H7.…

After weeks in the hospital, Damion was malnourished from eating nothing by mouth, but otherwise seemed at last on the road to recover.

“And then what comes next?” says Mary [his mother]. “So we’re all celebrating that our child finally made it, and we gave him something to drink. He took a few sips and then he collapsed. He looked at us in total agony, then passed out. What we had watched was that he was perforating his intestines. It was the first time they were challenged, and they just couldn’t handle it. They just dissolved.

“So now his intestines are emptying out into his abdominal cavity. He’s rushed into emergency surgery. Three-thirty in the morning, and the doctor comes back from unraveling our son’s intestinal tract inch by inch to find the holes, and tells us that he thinks he found them all and sutured them.” Nevertheless, the resulting infection required two more surgeries.

It took Damion a year to get back on his feet, figuratively and literally. He had to undergo extensive rehabilitation to learn how to stand and walk again. All told, he’d suffered a series of mini-strokes, had seven surgeries, received more than a hundred units of blood, and lost one-fourth of his body weight and thirty percent of his lungs’ function. (Eisnitz, pp. 37, 38)

Damion’s experience is an exceptional one, true, but millions of people suffer annually from milder forms of illness acquired from the meat and the animal products they eat:

Each case of food-borne illness cannot be traced, but where we do know the origin, or the “vehicle of transmission,” it is overwhelmingly, an animal product. According to the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC), poultry is by far the largest cause. According to a study published in Consumer Reports, 83 percent of all chicken meat (including organic and antibiotic-free brands) is infected with either campylobacter or salmonella at the time of purchase. . . .

. . . if you know what to look for, the pathogen problem comes into terrifying focus. For example, the next time a friend has a sudden “flu”—what folks sometimes misdescribe as “the stomach flu”—ask a few questions. Was your friend’s illness one of those “twenty-four-hour flus” that come and go quickly—retch, . . . [diarrhea] then relief? The diagnosis isn’t quite so simple, but if the answer to this question is yes, your friend probably didn’t have the flu at all—he or she was probably among the 76 million cases of food-borne illness the CDC estimates occur in America each year. Your friend didn’t “catch a bug” so much as eat a bug. And in all likelihood that bug was created by factory farming. (Foer, pp. 138, 139)

What Is To Blame in Disease—
Lifestyle or Genes?

Most health researchers agree that neither our genes nor our environment (which includes what we eat) “acts alone in determining which diseases we get, if any. Both contribute. The debate centers around how much each contributes. But the truth is, it’s almost impossible to assign meaningful numbers to the relative contributions of genes and lifestyle, let alone the specific contribution of nutrition” (T. Colin Campbell, Whole: Rethinking the Science of Nutrition, p. 119; emphasis in original).

. . . genes are the starting point of both health and disease. They are the source for all our biological reactions that, in effect, lead to bodily form and function—what we call life. Some of our genes start reactions that lead to health. Others lead to disease.

The vast majority of our genes are the health-giving kind—otherwise we wouldn’t last very long. These are the genes that form our cells, our organs, and our bones; that regrow skin after a cut or scrape; that make apples taste sweet and poisonous mountain buckthorn berries bitter. A small number of our genes, however, produce disease.

All disease starts with genes and gene combinations; what we call diseases are the end stages of interactions between our genes and elements from our environment, through the medium of our bodies. We get the flu, for example, because our genes produce certain symptoms in response to a particular microbe. (Campbell, p. 126; emphasis in original)

So, we ingest E. coli 0157:H7, for example, and then our genes orchestrate how our bodies react to invaders—some get more seriously ill than others. Both our environment and our genetic profile impact on our wellness. Many who experience allergic reactions to pollen, for example, understand this, but there are some enemies in our environment that are lethal most of the time, such as the Ebola virus, so whatever we can do to control our exposure, it behooves us to do so, such as choosing to live in the country and choosing a whole foods, plant-based diet.

If you walked into your local convenience store and bought a package of cigars, you would notice that it carries a label warning of the potential dangers of cigar smoke. Yet research suggests that cigar smoking poses a hazard only to moderate to heavy cigar smokers, who comprise less than 1 percent of the adult population. More that 97 percent of American adults, however, eat animal foods, and despite much research demonstrating the connection between the consumption of animal products and disease, we are not warned of these dangers.

But let’s imagine that you walked into that same convenience store to buy a hot dog. Now imagine that the U. S. Department of Public Health had reviewed studies from the Harvard School of Public Health and other major research institutions and saw fit to include a warning label on animal foods. The label might read something like this:

Surgeon General’s Warning: Eating Meat Can Increase Your Risk of Dying from Heart Disease by 50 Percent. Surgeon General’s Warning: Eating Meat Can Increase Your Risk of Developing Colon Cancer by 300 Percent and Significantly Increase Your Risk of Developing Certain Other Cancers. Surgeon General’s Warning: Daily Meat Consumption Can Triple Your Risk of Prostate Enlargement and Regular Milk Consumption Doubles Your Risk. Surgeon General’s Warning: The Animal That Became Your Meat May Have Been Fed Euthanized Cats and Dogs; Rendered Feathers, Hooves, Hair, Skin, Blood, and Intestines; Road Kill; Animal Manure; Plastic Pellets That Were Harvested from Dead Cows’ Rumen; and Carcasses from Animals of Their Own Species. Surgeon General’s Warning: This Product May Contain Dangerous Levels of Pesticides, Arsenic, Antibiotics, and Hormones. Surgeon General’s Warning: This Product May Contain Microbial Organisms That Could Lead to Illness or Death. Surgeon General’s Warning: Production of This Food Has Contributed to Serious Environmental Degradation, Animal Cruelty, and Human Rights Violations. Surgeon General’s Warning: There is . . . [Feces] in Your Meat. (Joy, pp. 91, 92)

Diseased meat is not rare, but common. Every phase of disease is brought into the human system through subsisting upon the flesh of dead animals. (Ellen G. White, Counsels on Diet and Foods, p. 292)

The smallpox virus jumped species to man either through eating the host creature itself, through the handling of the meat, or, perhaps, through a third party vector, such as a flea. We just do not know how it first took up residence in man, growing into the worst disease humanity has experienced, but if it were from eating meat that God declared to be unclean, oh, the woe that has accumulated from such a perverse action. AIDS has claimed the lives of millions, and millions more are living with it, and it all started with eating the meat of a chimpanzee or with handling the meat of a chimpanzee destined to be food, another animal God has declared unclean. Marburg virus, the gentler of the viruses in the family that includes Ebola, was unleashed in Germany in 1962 because infected monkeys were shipped there from Africa (for research purposes). The monkeys did not look ill at the time, so they were cleared for shipping, but within a few weeks of handling them, the outbreak started, and the man who had cleared them for transport felt terrible. “I was appalled because I had signed the export certificate. . . . I feel now that I have the deaths of these people on my hands” (Richard Preston, The Hot Zone, p. 27; PDF version).

Brothers and sisters, we do not know the future, other than the broad strokes God has laid out in his word and in the works of Ellen White, but we do know a terrible time is coming, and we will need to be in the best health possible for that time:

Vegetables, fruits, and grains should compose our diet. Not an ounce of flesh meat should enter our stomachs. The eating of flesh is unnatural. We are to return to God’s original purpose in the creation of man. (White, Counsels on Diet and Foods, p. 380)

And in 1902, Ellen White wrote,

 . . . the time will soon come when there will be no safety in using eggs, milk, cream, or butter, because disease in animals is increasing in proportion to the increase of wickedness among men. The time is near when, because of the iniquity of the fallen race, the whole animal creation will groan under the diseases that curse our earth. (Ibid., p. 356)

Certainly that time has come.

Will the people who are seeking to become holy, pure, refined, that they may be introduced into the society of heavenly angels, continue to take the life of God’s creatures, and enjoy their flesh as a luxury? From what the Lord has shown me, this order of things will be changed, and God’s peculiar people will exercise temperance in all things. (Ibid., p. 381)


Among those who are waiting for the coming of the Lord, meat eating will eventually be done away; flesh will cease to form a part of their diet. We should ever keep this end in view, and endeavor to work steadily toward it. (Ibid., p. 380)


How we regard the lives of God’s creatures may not seem as important as how we understand the great issues involved in our salvation, such as the incarnation and the doctrine of sin. We shouldn’t be so sentimental about animals, we might be tempted to think, but consider what former Senator Robert C. Byrd said to the Congress of the United States in 2001:

Our inhumane treatment of livestock is becoming widespread and more and more barbaric. . . . Such insensitivity is insidious and can spread and be dangerous. Life must be respected and dealt with humanely in a civilized world. (Congressional Record, July 9, 2001; as quoted by Matthew Scully, Dominion: The Power of Man, the Suffering of Animals, and the Call to Mercy, p. x)

In fact, how we treat animals is a revelation of how our characters are developing:

The care of animals brings with it often complicated problems of economics, ecology, and science. But above all it confronts us with questions of conscience. Many of us seem to have lost all sense of restraint toward animals, an understanding of natural boundaries, a respect for them as beings with needs and wants and a place and purpose of their own. Too often, too casually, we assume that our interests always come first, and if it’s profitable or expedient that is all we need to know. We assume that all these other creatures with whom we share the earth are here for us, and only for us. We assume, in effect, that we are everything and they are nothing.

Animals are more than ever a test of our character, of mankind’s capacity for empathy and for decent, honorable conduct and faithful stewardship. We are called to treat them with kindness, not because they have rights or power or some claim to equality, but in a sense because they don’t; because they all stand unequal and powerless before us. (Scully, pp. xi, xii; emphasis supplied)

The control of our appetite is also part of our character development:

The controlling power of appetite will prove the ruin of thousands, when, if they had conquered on this point, they would have had moral power to gain the victory over every other temptation of Satan. But those who are slaves to appetite will fail in perfecting Christian character. The continual transgression of man for six thousand years has brought sickness, pain, and death as its fruits. And as we near the close of time, Satan’s temptation to indulge appetite will be more powerful and more difficult to overcome. (White, Counsels on Diet and Foods, p. 59)

John Robbins’s friend, Mike, couldn’t control his appetite. Robbins writes:

Not that my relationship with Mike had ever been particularly easy. He could be, to be perfectly frank, a bit of a pain. When we went out to eat, he always—knowing full well that I was a vegetarian and had written books on the subject—asked me whether I felt more like a steak or a hamburger. He always made a point of telling me during the meal how fabulous his meat or ice cream tasted, and made a display of offering to share it with me, all the while acting as if his doing so were motivated entirely by affection and generous concern for my well-being. (John Robbins, No Happy Cows, p. 162)

Mike and John were running partners, with Mike always outpacing John and then attributing it to the bacon he had eaten for breakfast. Over time, Mike began to gain weight and their times of running together dwindled and finally stopped altogether. John was concerned for his friend and mentioned to him that people who ate the way he did often developed chronic diseases like cancer, but Mike shrugged it off, saying that it would happen if it were in the cards. Mike grew irritable and short-tempered at home, and he and John saw less and less of each, until one day when Mike called John and asked him to come over. Mike had been to his doctor and had been informed he had stage IV colon cancer and that it had spread widely throughout his body.

I listened as attentively as I could and asked a few questions. They [Mike and his wife] talked about his treatment options and about the financial pressures they were dealing with. Not a word about diet. I stayed for dinner. Mike had a burger, fries, and a pint of ice cream. (Ibid., p. 164)

Mike underwent surgery and chemotherapy and had a hard time with side effects, but he “pinned his hopes for a cure on the drugs. He made it clear that he didn’t want to discuss alternative or complementary treatments” (Ibid., p. 165). His last days were difficult. John told Mike he wished he had been more assertive with him, maybe it would have done him some good, but Mike replied he wouldn’t have listened—he was set in his ways and had not wanted to change. Not long after this, one of their last, touching visits, Mike died.

Let us not be stubborn and resist God the way Mike resisted health reform. God has given us guidance in his word and through the gift of the spirit of prophecy about what we should eat and how we should treat the creatures he has placed under our dominion. God, however, graciously allows us the final word as to what our relationship with him will be, and if we resist the right, like Mike did, we will die as he did, and our death will result in eternal separation from God! Banish the thoughts of stubbornness now, “choose the right because it is right, and leave the consequences with God” (Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, p. 460). Be men and women of “principle, faith, and daring” (Ibid.) and forge ahead! Our Leader will never fail us.

All things bright and beautiful,
All creatures great and small,
All things wise and wonderful,
The Lord God made them all.

 Cecil F. Alexander

Tasty Recipe: Honey Delight

This raw dessert is very quick and fun to make. Start with 2 cups of old fashioned oats and mix in 1 cup of chopped dried fruit, such as raisins, dates, or apricots, or any combination of dried fruit. Add a cup of shredded coconut and enough honey to make the mixture slightly wet and slightly sticky. Mix well and spread out on a pan or cool in the refrigerator and serve later with mandarin oranges, but eat small portions, as this dessert is calorie dense.

 Women’s Ordination, Part 4

By Allen Stump

The first three parts of this series examined the current move among some of the Union Conferences to ordain women as pastors, then we briefly noted that God’s chosen vessels for the priesthood were not superior to others in rank or gender. We noted that God is no respecter of persons, yet not everyone was chosen to be a priest. After the exodus from Egypt, the office of priest was held only by men who were Levites, specifically the sons of Aaron. In the New Testament all the apostles chosen by Jesus Christ were men, and the apostles chosen later were also always men. This, however, does not indicate an inequality or an inferior status for those not chosen. It does indicate, however, that God has an order for the ministry. Finally, we saw that the distinction that God makes between men and women in leadership is not simply a matter of placement because of sin.

This installment in our series will examine a biblical text that has been used to support women’s ordination and why supporting the idea that Christian women have been downtrodden and must be liberated from past gender discriminations is not the focus of this verse. The text we will examine is Galatians 3:28, which says:

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

The line of reasoning goes something like this: Since there is neither male nor female, the church can have women pastors, elders, and even women apostles. All the inequalities of the past from the Old Testament times are now ended in the New Testament. But is this the teaching of the Bible?

Firstly, we need to note that the Bible says that we have a God who does not change. “For I am the LORD, I change not” (Malachi 3:6). Our God is called “the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning” (James 1:17). Yet this cannot be taken to an absolute degree. In the Old Testament God clearly required animal sacrifices, but he has not required animal sacrifices since the death of Jesus upon the cross. Has he changed? No, but the application of his character and principles may vary, according to the conditions and circumstances within which he interacts with humanity. The principles, however, that called for a male priesthood and male leadership still exist, and those principles will not change. The fact is, as we noted in Part 3 of this series (January 2013), the order of human leadership was chosen by God before sin, and we certainly cannot use changing environment or conditions as an excuse there.

So while God is allowed to adjust the application of his program to meet the changing needs and circumstances of people, we cannot see that being applied here, and, therefore, to interpret Paul’s statement in Galatians 3:28 as an approval for women pastors creates a contradiction in the word of God from the God who “cannot lie” (Titus 1:2).

In order to teach that Galatians 3:28 gives approval of women pastors, the text must be misinterpreted. During the time when God created Adam and Eve, he plainly called them male and female (Genesis 1:27; 5:2). Jesus confirmed and approved this in Matthew 19:4: “Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female?” But we need not fear a contradiction in Scripture, for Galatians 3:28 can be clarified simply by reading the context. Simply reading the full context of the verse in Galatians immediately clarifies the matter.

Notice the verse again: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” Now, were there Jews and Greeks when Paul wrote this? Of course! Were there Jews and Greeks before he wrote this? Of course! Have there been Jews and Greeks since this was written? Of course!

What about bond (slaves) and free (men)? Have they been and are they both still with us today? Of course! The key to the entire verse is found in the prepositional phrase “in Christ Jesus.” In earthly relationships there are Jews and Greeks, slaves and free, male and female, but in our relationship directly to Jesus Christ, those distinctions are irrelevant. So the key to understanding this oftenly misinterpreted verse is to read the “in Christ” context.

Paul says that “there is neither ... male nor female ... in Christ Jesus.” In our relationships with one another—in marriage, for example—it is quite obvious, as Jesus said, that “God made them male and female ... a man ... [and] his wife” (Mark 10:6, 7). “In Christ,”in our direct relationship with him, one-on-one, the gender distinctions are irrelevant.

On earth, however, in our relationships with each other, God has kept the gender distinctions clear and simple. Galatians 3:28 is clear and authoritative, and we must not allow some perverted idea about equal rights to blur the clear teaching of the New Testament. Men have their place in God’s church, and if they will fulfill the calling God gave them, they will be honored of him. The same is true of the sisters. They have high callings, too, but simply in different lines, and if they will be faithful to the calling that God has given them, they also will be honored of God.

It might be easy for us to second guess God or, in our desire to have our own heart’s desire, to believe our calling or our desire is of God and that he will honor us in doing his work in whatsoever way we choose. Suppose, however, that a child is assigned by his parents to wash the walls of a room because they are dirty, but the child, instead, decides to paint the walls, deciding that by so doing he or she is accomplishing the parents’ request more fully and even in a better way. The walls may look fine at first but of course, the paint will not adhere well, nor will it last. Did the child honor the parents’ request and bring glory to them? Of course not.

When Saul was told to destroy Amalek, he was instructed: “Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass” (1 Samuel 15:3). Yet, he later came back with the king and the choicest animals. When Samuel learned this he confronted the disobedient king: “What meaneth then this bleating of the sheep in mine ears, and the lowing of the oxen which I hear” (v. 14)? Saul began his excuse that he disobeyed so he could serve God better. “They have brought them from the Amalekites: for the people spared the best of the sheep and of the oxen, to sacrifice unto the LORD thy God” (v. 15). Samuel confronted Saul with his disobedience, and Saul attempted to defend himself. Samuel would accept no more of Saul’s flimsy excuses and declared the immortal words, “Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams” (v. 22).

There is no doubt that many sisters desire to become ordained ministers from sincere hearts, but if that heart is sincere, it will follow truth and will defend the truth after it has learned the truth. To obey is better than sacrifice, and it is better than ordination, if that ordination is done outside the will of God.

Youth’s Corner How Young Baptists Stood the Test

(This month we continue a series based upon the book Youthful Witnesses by W. A. Spicer, published in 1921. This month’s story is from chapter 7.)

“In all these things we are more than conquerors through Him that loved us” (Romans 8:37).

It must be acknowledged that some even of our most valued historians of the Reformation make the most of the excesses and fanaticism of the so-called Anabaptists of the peasants’ rebellion, and minimize the important testimony which the large body of sober, godly Baptists bore in all those times. They were the first of all the reformed churches to preach genuine religious liberty. They alone taught it, in fact. And they were burned by Catholics and drowned and imprisoned by the reformed churches for teaching exactly what Baptists teach today.

Young Baptists bore their share in it all. In Van Braght’s Martyrology of the Baptist Churches, a Dutch work, is the following story of a lad of Swabia, a German province, in the year 1529:

A servant boy, only fourteen years old, had been there apprehended ; this youth was cast into the tower, where he lay for nearly a year, in severe confinement. He suffered many hardships, but always remained unmoved, however frequently they came to him to urge him to renounce his faith. With him were six other brethren . . .

A ring was made, as is usual at executions by the sword. As the young servant boy was standing in the ring waiting to be beheaded, a count came riding up to him on horseback, and spoke to him, and said, “My dear child, if you will give up these errors, I will maintain you and have you always with me.”

To which the youth replied: “Were I to love my life and forsake my God, in order to escape this cross, it would serve me little. Your treasure can profit neither of us. I look for better tilings in heaven.”

Upon this a great tumult was beginning among the people, and the executioner hastened to end the confession of the faithful lad. He might have been as careless of God and his soul’s salvation as many another boy of fourteen; but somehow the grace of Christ had so won his heart that with all the power of the world against him, he was true to his Saviour and to the teaching of some godly Swabian father and mother.

A little girl named Elizabeth, in Holland, was placed in a convent school. At the age of twelve she was much impressed by hearing of the burning of a man who rejected indulgences. A few years later she found a Latin New Testament, which brought to her the conviction of the gospel truth. She escaped from the convent disguised in the clothing of a milkwoman, with whom she exchanged, and found a home with a young Baptist woman named Hadewyck.

They were active helpers of Menno Simons, the great leader of the Dutch Baptists. At last they were both arrested at Leeuwarden. Hadewyck had a truly providential deliverance from prison, almost as remarkable as Peter’s from prison at Jerusalem, and she lived to a good age; but Elizabeth was called to witness by the martyr’s death.

“What do you hold concerning infant baptism,” they asked, “that you should be baptized again?”

“No, gentlemen,” Elizabeth answered, “I have not been baptized again; I was baptized once on my confession of faith, for it is written that baptism belongs to believers.”

“Are our children then lost because they have been baptized?”

“No, gentlemen, far be it from me that I should condemn the children.”

The council demanded of her a confession of her relations with the reformed teachers and of the whereabouts of associates. On the rack, with the screws biting into her thumbs and forefingers, she cried out with pain, “Oh! I cannot bear it!”

“Confess,” said the council, “and we will ease your pain.”

“Help, O my God, Thy poor handmaid,” cried Elizabeth, “for Thou art a helper in time of need.”

They told her they asked her not to call on God, but to confess; while in her distress, she could only call for divine help to bear the torture. The Lord did help; for as she called, he relieved her pain.

“Ask me, and I will answer you,” she told them, “for I feel no longer any pain in my body.”

They said: “Will you not yet confess ?”

“No, gentlemen.”

On March 27, 1549, she was drowned by being tied in a sack and cast into the water of the great canal of Leeuwarden.

We cannot read in this world the providence that allowed one believer to bear triumphant witness to the death and that delivered and spared another to live the witness during a long life. In either case, whether in life or in death, the Lord turned the faithful witness to the advancement of his cause and the salvation of souls.

Hadewyck, Elizabeth’s companion, had, as we have said, a wonderful deliverance.

She was imprisoned in the old Leeuwarden Castle. A new prison stands there now, but the old moat around the wall is still to be seen, with the place of the drawbridge. Within the ancient keep that stood here, Hadewyck waited her turn, knowing that Elizabeth had been put to death. Van Braght says:

As she was praying, a voice came to her and called, “Hadewyck!” Looking up and around, she perceived no one, and proceeded with her ardent prayer. She heard the voice a second time, and still seeing no one, persevered in her supplications, until the same voice a third time said to her, “Hadewyck, I tell you to depart!” Seeing the door open, she put on her cloak and went out of the prison.

Not knowing what to do to hide from expected pursuit, Hadewyck mingled with a crowd going into the parish church. There presently she heard people talking of the escape of the heretic from prison, so mysteriously that witchcraft was suspected. Leaving the church, she heard the town drummer giving notice in the street of the large reward offered for her apprehension. She managed to find refuge in a garret [an attic room], and got word to friends, who came by boat and carried her out to safety, to live to a good old age.

Sometimes in those days, it was the fathers and mothers, with breaking hearts, who encouraged a son or a daughter to be faithful; and again it was a youth strengthening a parent’s faith. Young Baldwin Oguier (a Lutheran), of Lisle, arrested with his father, repeated to the council a prayer used in their meetings, with such earnest simplicity as to draw tears from the judge’s eyes. At the stake he sang the sixteenth psalm, and cried to his father, “Be of good cheer, my father, it will soon be over.”

Joanna Van den Hove
Joanna Van den Hove being taken to her death

Later his mother and his younger brother, Martin, were seized. The mother recanted, and the monks sent her to persuade Martin to abjure his faith. Weeping, he cried, “O mother, what have you done? “Won again by her boy’s constancy, she confessed her Saviour, and both went to the stake and flame.

It was not will-power or physical courage that carried men and women and youth through the trying hour. It was the love and sustaining grace of Jesus in hearts that knew the forgiveness of sins. Without this, many a strong man weakened and avoided a confession of the truth when it involved reproach and danger. With it, the slender maid or the merest youth was made strong to confess the truth of God’s word.

Last of the martyr confessors in the Netherlands, it is said, was a young Baptist girl, Joanna Van den Hove. She was servant maid to two sisters who lived near Brussels. All were arrested; and the two sisters recanted, “acknowledging ignorance.” Joanna declared that “she, being a woman of mean state and condition, could not be suspected of sedition.” If she had not true sentiments of religion, she argued, it was her misfortune. And if any one by fear was led to “lie against conscience, such great wickedness was not to be punished by men, but by God.”

To strike terror to others, she was condemned to be buried alive. A picture in the Birmingham (England) art gallery represents her being led out to the fearsome death, her sad, resolute face telling of a spirit undismayed, while the cowardly, priest-led multitude follow on.

In the grave they laid her down, and poured the earth, first on feet, then on body, up to the neck. At each stage in the cruelly slow process, the Jesuits asked her if she had considered and would ask for mercy.

“They that seek to save their life here,” she answered, “shall lose it hereafter,” and continued praying to God for his sustaining grace. Then the executioner covered her face with earth, and packed it down by treading on it.

The persecutors overreached themselves, and the witness borne by this maiden confessor helped to put an end to public martyrdoms in the Netherlands. “The constancy of this poor woman,” says Brant, “was published everywhere with praise and compassion” (History of the Reformation in the Low Countries).

It is well to remember at what cost liberty to read God’s word and confess his name was purchased in the days of old. And youth and children helped to pay the price.

From the hymn, “For All the Saints,” by William How:

“Thou wast their rock, their fortress, and their might;
Thou, Lord, their captain, in the well-fought fight;
Thou, in the darkness drear, their one true light.


YouTube Channel Update

Since last month we have added four new science videos that teach a spiritual lesson and a new nature video by Brother Ron Toel. We have also uploaded two new sermons, including the message found on page 2 of this issue of Old Paths, entitled “The Angel of the LORD.”

Angel of the LORD

Available upon request or at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUbfmb-49aE



Frogs Bats and Sloths.009

You may watch this nature video entitled, “Frogs, Bugs, and Sloths,” at:



Screen Shot 2013-05-23 at 9.34.15 PM

You may watch the video “Turning Circles into Squares,”
which teaches a spiritual lesson, at:



The Force that Affects Us All

“The Force That Affects Us All” can be viewed at:



Old Paths is a free monthly newsletter/study-paper published monthly by Smyrna Gospel Ministries, HC 64 Box 128-B, Welch WV 24801-9606. U.S.A. It is sent free upon request. The paper is dedicated to the propagation and restoration of the principles of truth that God gave to the early Seventh-day Adventist pioneers. Duplication is not only permitted, but strongly encouraged. This issue, with other gospel literature we publish, can be found at our web site. The url is: http://www.smyrna.org. Phone: (304) 732-9204. Fax: (304) 732-7322.