Two Seed Baptist Ideology (LIII)

In this chapter we will put on record what else Elder Lemuel Potter wrote in connection with Two Seedism, which had caused so much trouble in the ranks of the "Primitive," "Old School," or "Hardshell" Baptists. Primitive Baptists, with few exceptions, claim that they have thrown away the heresies of Two Seedism and yet they still retain remnants of Two Seedism. Historian and Professor John G. Crowley, author of "Primitive Baptists of the Wiregrass South" (1999), himself a "Primitive Baptist" of a Georgian faction that still believes that the word of God is a means in saving sinners, said that one may still find remnants of Two-Seed doctrines expounded by today's Primitive Baptists "if one knows where to go and what to listen for." (page 133) If you have followed me through this series on Two Seedism, its beliefs and history, you too will see the remnants of Two Seedism if you listen to their sermons.

In this chapter we will look at some other things Potter said in some scraps of his writings that should be included before I close this part of our series dealing with what Potter wrote about Two Seedism.

We will return to Potter's 1895 treatise titled "A Treatise on Regeneration and Christian Warfare" which you can read at the web site of the Primitive Baptist Library (here). We have already cited much about Potter's views on "regeneration" in the other two writings we have cited from, from "Life and Travels of Lemuel Potter," and from his1880 pamphlet "Unconditional Election Stated And Defined; Or, A Denial Of The Doctrine Of Eternal Children, Or Two Seeds In The Flesh."

In chapter four under "No Souler" Potter wrote in his treatise on regeneration (highlighting mine):

"He challenged for the proof that any of his brethren believed anything of the sort. And yet when a text is given him with the word soul in it, to give a distinction of soul and body, he will squirm under it and say "Soul in that text means life." Give him another, and he will say, "Soul in that text means simply the man." Then give him the case of the rich man and Lazarus, and he will ask if you believe that circumstance just as it reads. Then ask him if he believes that the body of Lazarus went to Abraham's bosom, and he will say, "I believe that Lazarus went there; the book says it was Lazarus, not his soul, or a part of him." In speaking of the rich man he makes about the same turn, and yet he says he believes men have souls, and thinks hard of being called a No Souler. Ask him what he thinks of the idea of a man out of the body, and he will try to make it appear that he was simply not out of the body, but in such a strain of mind, or so transported, that for the time being, he had forgotten himself. Everything he says goes in the direction of denying that man possesses a soul, distinct from the body, and that it helps to make up the man, yet he thinks hard of being called a No Souler."

Potter speaks of the Two Seeder who, when under scrutiny and being challenged with reasoned questions, would predictably "squirm under it and say..." Recall that Elder Watson spoke of how Two Seeders were serpentine, slippery, and hard to nail down, acting like weasels. That seems to be what Potter was also saying. It also reminds us of what Elder Grigg Thompson wrote about the serpentine ways of many of the Two Seeders.

Next he mentions the teaching regarding "the rich man and Lazarus" and gives it as his belief that it taught what happens to people when they die and go to Hades or the place of the dead. In chapter forty six of this series I gave some citations from some leading Hardshells about what they believe about the story of the rich man and Lazarus, showing that the older leaders who debated the Universalists, like Potter, all taught the common orthodox opinion that it is talking about where saved and lost people go when they die. I showed, however, that it was common for the Two Seeders to deny the orthodox teaching and give it a parabolic non-literal interpretation which denies that it is teaching what happens when the body dies. I showed how many in my lifetime wanted to declare non-fellowship for you if you didn't take the Two Seed view. I told of how it was asked in two ordination services in the Bear Creek Association (NC) when I was a young elder in that association. I was asked my views on it in my ordination and I gave the orthodox view and was surprised that I was still ordained.

It was a common practice, as Watson testified, for the Two Seeders to "allegorize" literal events in the bible, give a figurative or symbolic interpretation to literal things like the resurrection of the physically dead. On the other hand, they would take some things hyper literally, such as the term "seed" or "children of the Devil." There is simply something terribly wrong with how the Two Seeders handled scripture, the kind of bible interpreters Paul spoke of who "handled the word of God deceitfully." (II Cor. 4: 2) It is what Peter called "twisting" or "distorting," like a contortionist, or wrestler, the holy scriptures, interpreting them according to their own whims. (II Peter 3: 16)

Many Two Seeders did deny that the Devil's people had souls, much like many Southerners thought about the black people they enslaved, and believing this made them feel little guilt for treating them as animals without human souls. However, many Two Seeders chose not to say "there is no soul" but simply fought all attempts to define it as given by others. 

In chapter six titled "The Soul Born Again" Potter wrote:

"This verse certainly does teach that our Savior recognized the idea that the soul lived separate from the body. We see two points in this text; one is that there is a distinction of soul and body; and the other is that the soul lives after the body dies. I know of nothing else mentioned in the Scriptures pertaining to man that survives the body, except the soul, or spirit, and when I read of a person going into heaven at the death of the body, even if it should be called by the name of the person, as in the case of Lazarus, I understand it to be the soul; or if he goes to hell, as in the case of the rich man, for I know of nothing that dies as they did only the body, and I know of nothing that lives after the body dies, except the soul, or spirit. I do not believe that the dead body of Lazarus was carried by the angels to Abraham's bosom, but I believe his soul was. I might not have thought about it being his soul, if the Savior had not told me that the soul survived the body. I do not believe that the dead body of the rich man lifted up its eyes in hell, being in torment; but I do believe that something that was called the rich man did, and I believe it was his soul, in all this agony, while his body was dead in the grave. The reason I believe it was his soul, is because the Savior has already taught me that the body might be dead, and the soul yet alive. Our Savior said to the thief on the cross, "Today shalt thou be with me in paradise." I do not believe his body went to paradise that day, but I believe it died, for the Scriptures say so. Men killed his body, who were not able to kill the soul. At the death of the body, the soul went to paradise. Paul says, "For me to live is Christ, and to die is gain." Philippians 1: 21. I do not understand what he would gain by dying, if there is to be no more of him until the resurrection."

So, we can add Potter to the list of those "Primitive Baptist" leaders who taught the traditional orthodox view on the story of the rich man and Lazarus. Also, we notice once again how Potter contends that a denial of the orthodox view came from Universalists and from some Two Seeders. Recall that in earlier chapters when we were examining what Two Seeder Elder Thomas P. Dudley said about man having a soul, that his beliefs were characterized as the "two souls" doctrine, one soul of the elect being that eternal child of God that was begotten in eternity and one soul coming from Adam. However, that is how others described Dudley's view. For himself he would always challenge his opponents by asking "what is the soul?" 

Potter continued:

"If you mention the "inner man" to him, to prove that man has a soul, or something internal, that is called "inner man," in the Bible, he will tell you that the "inner man" is Christ, and that the unrenewed sinner has no "inner man."

Recall what Two Seed apologists Gilbert Beebe and Thomas Dudley taught about the "inner man." They believed this was that eternal seed or seminal child that was begotten in Christ before the world began and comes down from heaven, enters the physical form of man (the "Adam man"), and dwells there for awhile and engages in battle with the "outer man" (the physical or fleshly man), and then at death the "inner man" or "new man" returns to heaven and the outer man goes back to dust ever to stay dust. For the above no-souler to say that the "inner man" is Christ is a kind of dodge for he believes that the eternal child is divine in origin, being the very emanation or mystical body of Christ from eternity.

Potter continued:

"If you quote the language of Jesus, "Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul; but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell," and tell him that this text is so plain a distinction of soul and body that he can not very well say that it is man's life, or that it is man himself, and as we know that it is not the body, he will say, "I do not know what that means." Yet he says he believes that man has a soul, distinct from the body, and he thinks hard if he is accused of not believing it. The truth is he does not believe it. He does not believe that man's body will die, and the soul still live, and he is afraid of any text, or construction of a text, that means that when the bodies of the saints die, that their souls leave the body, and go to heaven. They, some of them, make very strange at the thought, that when the body dies, any part of the man still lives. Whether it is the proper name for them or not, I call all such No Soulers," and I charge them with believing and preaching heresy. It is not warranted in the Bible, and it antagonizes the Primitive Baptist doctrine. Those who deny the doctrine of a distinction of soul and body have become so intolerant in some localities, that with them a man jeopardizes his standing, if he says soul and body. I heard one brother, with whom I am well acquainted, in referring to one of his brethren, who believed as I do, stigmatize him "Doctor of Divinity," with quite a sarcastic air. I think that was a bad spirit."

Heretical cults have certain spirits connected with them. So the apostle John indicated when he wrote:

"Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world." (I John 4: 1-3 nkjv)

Here we see that false teaching on fundamental doctrine is connected with false spirits. The word "spirit" in the above text is the same in meaning as seen in these verses:

"And when His disciples James and John saw this, they said, “Lord, do You want us to command fire to come down from heaven and consume them, just as Elijah did?” But He turned and rebuked them, and said, “You do not know what manner of spirit you are of. For the Son of Man did not come to destroy men’s lives but to save them.” (Luke 9: 54-56 nkjv) 

James and John thinking that Christ would want the cities who did not receive him to be instantly destroyed were thinking wrongly and were acting out of a bad spirit. I have seen such spirits manifesting themselves in various cults with whom I have interacted. The "Church of Christ" (aka "Campbellites") have a spirit that is like Alexander Campbell, one of their leading founders. The "Primitive Baptists" (aka "Hardshells") likewise have a unique spirit, the very kind that characterized many in the anti-mission movement that spawned their sect. The Two Seeders likewise had a "familiar spirit." They could be intolerant, stubborn, cantankerous, schismatic, and have a "holier than you" or "more orthodox than you" attitude towards all other Christian churches. Recall that Elder John M. Watson in his book "The Old Baptist Test" bore witness to the spirit of Two Seeders, saying their ways were "serpentine." Potter in the above citation also reveals something of this evil spirit, speaking of the intolerant spirit of the Two Seeders and of their sarcastic air. The very label "Hardshell" expresses the fact that many Christians judged the "spirit" of the "Primitive" or "Old School" Baptists as being stubborn and recalcitrant. 

Potter wrote further under the same section:

"I now want my readers to know that the reason I am saying so much on this subject is that there are some who do not believe that man is changed in the new birth, but just a new principle is put into him, and the same old principle that was in him before regeneration, is still in him, and that makes the warfare, and that the whole man, soul, body and spirit, some of them say, is born of God in time, and that the same man, all of him, soul, body and spirit, will die, and remain dead until the resurrection. They make strange of the idea that any part of man goes to heaven at the death of the body. They believe that man is not changed until the resurrection."

The two extremes of the Two Seeders on the change that occurs to a person in being born again are expressed by two labels as we saw in previous chapters. One view came to be known as the "hollow log" doctrine and the other came to be known as the "whole man" doctrine. We also saw how the Two Seed idea of spiritual birth stated that something came down from heaven and was "planted" within a person but did not change the person but simply dwelt inside the person, like a parasite or virus. In fact, even among today's "Primitive Baptists" who claim not to be Two Seeders one can still hear them describe the new birth as denoting something being "implanted" within a person. Thus, Christ is implanted, faith is implanted, spiritual life is implanted, etc. Other Two Seeders spoke of the "whole man" being born of the Spirit or regenerated because they denied that man had a soul. In an upcoming chapter we will hear Hardshell leader elder C.H. Cayce comment on these two doctrines.

It is ironic however that today's "Primitive Baptists" carry a Two Seed view of regeneration or rebirth. They do not believe that being born again makes a person a believer in the one true God nor in Jesus Christ. That is why most of them teach that many heathen people who worship false gods have been regenerated and born again. It is also why they speak of regeneration being something done on the sub-conscious level, a person being born again but does not know it. 

In chapter five under the title"The Body Not Born Again in Time" Potter said:

"So, I will start out by saying that when a man is born of God, he is born of an incorruptible seed. "Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth forever." I Peter 1: 23. To carry out the rule, given by the Savior to Nicodemus, which is, "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit," so, that which is born of corruptible seed is corruptible, and that which is born of incorruptible seed is incorruptible, we would necessarily have to admit that our bodies, after being born of incorruptible seed, are incorruptible, and I do not see any way for a man who believes the body is born of God in time, to escape the conclusion that the body is incorruptible. But the apostles recognize the body as corruptible, mortal, vile and natural, and they no where allude to the body as immortal, spiritual or incorruptible. On account of these facts I have always denied, and do yet deny, that the body is regenerated in time."

I do not understand how the Two Seeders could believe that the physical body was regenerated or born of the Spirit. Again, we see how this idea falls under the label "whole man" doctrine. It is true that when the spirit of a man is reborn, it becomes the place where Christ sits enthroned, in the place where the ego or self once ruled, and from then on that experiential fact will take control of the body, for the mind controls much of what the body does.

Potter wrote further:

"I presume no one will claim that in regeneration the body is cleansed and sanctified. Then it is not born again. But I have been often told by good people that the body must be born again, for the Savior said to Nicodemus, "Ye must be born again." They claim that he did not say a part of him, nor he did not say that his soul or spirit must be born again, but he, Nicodemus, must be born again. Let me ask, did he tell Nicodemus that his body must be born again? But "no soulers" claim that the body is born again, for it is the body that weeps and cries and feels badly and condemned. I doubt very seriously that the arrow of conviction ever touched the body, even if the body did cry and weep on account of sin, the pain and ache that caused those tears were not pains and aches of the body. But I have often been told that when the sinner is born again, the body turns its course, and begins to act differently from what it did formerly. They talk this way: "It was I that felt like I was a great sinner, and that God's holy law had been broken by me, the greatest sinner in the world. I mourned and grieved and prayed the Lord to forgive my sins. It was I, and not something in me that had sinned, and it was me that was made to hate sin, the very thing that I had loved before. I tried all the good things that I could do to drive the trouble away, and I finally concluded I must die and be lost, for there was no mercy for such a sinner as I was; and when Jesus revealed himself to me as my Savior, I felt like I was the beneficiary of his mercy, and it seemed that it was me all the time. While it was I that mourned, it was I that afterwards rejoiced, not something in me, but me. I do not wish to divide the man up, I do not want to dissect man. I believe I am the man, both soul and body, that is born of God, in the work of regeneration, in time."

Potter ought to have been a little more careful and precise when he said that no one claims that the body is cleansed or sanctified. That is because the bible does speak of the body being ceremonially cleaned and sanctified. Notice these texts:

"Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water." (Heb. 10: 22 kjv)

"I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service." (Rom. 12: 1 nkjv)

"Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you completely; and may your whole spirit, soul, and body be preserved blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." (I Thess. 5: 23 nkjv)

Being made holy does not necessarily mean that the physical substance is changed. In the old testament there were holy utensils such as forks and bowls. These sanctified utensils did not experience a change in their physical makeup, but were simply "set apart" for divine service. So Paul wrote:

"I speak in human terms because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you presented your members as slaves of uncleanness, and of lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves of righteousness for holiness." (Rom. 6: 19 nkjv)

By "members" he means the parts of the body, or human faculties. The Christian should make sure that his hands, feet, etc., are employed in doing the will of God. The whole body is to become a holy living sacrifice to the service of God.

Potter wrote further:

"But I have often been told that the body is certainly affected in the new birth. We are not talking about what is affected by the new birth, but what is born again. Jesus did not say to Nicodemus, "Ye must be affected." He did not say "Except a man be affected he can not see the kingdom of God." The man, then, must be born again, not affected. So, I see nothing to convince me that the body is born of God, in time. I claim that it will be born again in the resurrection. You will find my argument on that in another part of this little work."

Potter makes an important distinction between what is born again and what is affected by the spirit of a man being renewed.

In chapter six titled "The Soul Born Again" Potter wrote:

"It seems to me, from all that I have heard men say on the subject, that it is a hard matter for any of them, no matter what their views may be on the subject, to just simply admit that man has no soul. After an admission that man had a soul, and that it was distinct from the body, by one of those men who denied the separation of soul and body at death, I asked him where the soul went when the body died? He answered me that if I would tell him where the light went to when I blew out the lamp, he would tell me. He was not a Soul Sleeper. He did not believe in the existence of the soul separate from the body, neither did he believe that the soul existed in the body after the body died. He believed that all that pertained to man, or all that constituted man died."

Recall in earlier chapters where Elder T. P. Dudley, one of the foremost apologists for Two Seedism, likewise seemed to be a "no souler." In chapter fourteen I cited these words of Dudley:

"It is contended by some, yea, many professors of religion, that the soul is regenerated. We confess we know but little about the soul...If the soul were regenerated, would it not be as wholly devoted to God, subsequently, as it had been to sin, antecedently to the new birth? 

We also looked at how Dudley's Two Seed views led others to charge him with believing that man had "Two Souls." 

Potter wrote:

"I will first try to prove, then, that man has a soul, distinct from the body. "And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." Matthew 10: 28. The soul in this text can not be said to mean simply the man, for if it is the man, then there is a man without a body, for we here have a soul without a body. Soul, in this text certainly does not mean the breath of life, for the very idea of killing a man's breath is a grand absurdity."

A man has to be very stubborn to resist such plain teachings about the distinction between body and soul. It is bewildering how anyone could deny that man has a soul distinct from the body.

In the next chapter we will continue to review what Potter wrote in "A Treatise on Regeneration and Christian Warfare."

The Divine Library (10)

"And the voice which I heard from heaven spake unto me again, and said, Go and take the little book which is open in the hand of the angel which standeth upon the sea and upon the earth. And I went unto the angel, and said unto him, Give me the little book. And he said unto me, Take it, and eat it up; and it shall make thy belly bitter, but it shall be in thy mouth sweet as honey. And I took the little book out of the angel's hand, and ate it up; and it was in my mouth sweet as honey: and as soon as I had eaten it, my belly was bitter." (vs. 8-10 kjv)

In this chapter we are still talking about one of the most mysterious books in God's library, the seven sealed book of the Apocalypse, the legal instrument that authorizes the Redeemer to execute the terms of that instrument, which includes taking possession of all that was lost by sin and removing all liens and encumbrances upon fallen man's title to the heavens and earth, and by kicking out the foreigners and invaders, which includes all who have rejected God and his word, and the Messiah, and casting out of the world "that old serpent the Devil." It is the time when the weeds (tares) will be removed from among the wheat so that only wheat remains as Jesus taught in the parable of the wheat and tares. (Matt. 13)

In the last chapter we took notice of what is recorded in the first part of Revelation chapter ten where a "mighty angel" (who is none other than Christ) holds the seven sealed scroll in his hand and who, by its authority, carries out the things specified in the writing that is on the inside of that document, which things all have to deal with "the redemption of the purchased possession" (Eph. 1: 14) and with "the restitution of all things" (Acts 3: 21). What an important book this is to us!

The Lord Jesus in the form of a "mighty angel" takes the scroll and gives it to the apostle John and tells him to eat it and of the effects that John experiences as a result.

Wrote Seiss:

"The ultimate disposal made of this document is also such as to correspond with the character I have assigned to it, and to identify it as the same that was taken by the Lamb from the hand of sovereign majesty. John says, “The voice which I heard out of the heaven [I heard] again speaking with me, and saying, Go, take the book [or roll] which is opened in the hand of the Angel who standeth upon the sea and upon the land. And I went to the Angel, saying to him, Give me the little book. And he saith to me, Take, and eat it. And I took the little book [or roll] out of the hand of the Angel, and ate it.” Thus the history of this Βιβλιον terminated. And for what does our blessed Redeemer take the book out of the right hand of eternal sovereignty? Why does he appear in the court of heaven as a once slain Lamb that he may be accounted worthy to take the book and to open the seals thereof?"

Bible commentators are not all in agreement as to what is signified by the apostle John being told to eat the little scroll whose seals had been broken and its contents revealed and its instructions that are to be executed. Many see John as acting strictly as a representative for all the people of God, so that what he does in eating the scroll, and in what he is commanded to do, is applicable to every saved person. Seiss takes this view on John acting as such a representative person on this occasion and in other places in the Apocalypse. When John is called up to heaven in chapter four verse one by a voice from heaven, Seiss says this signifies the coming "rapture" of believers at the second coming of Christ. I disagree completely with him on that point. Later in the last verse of chapter ten the angel tells John, after his eating the scroll, "you must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings," and Seiss does not believe that John fulfilled or will fulfill this ministry himself, but in the persons he represented. Again, I firmly believe this is not correct. However, more on that shortly.

Wrote Seiss:

"There is no book like the roll which the Lamb takes from the right hand of the Sitter on the throne. It embodies in itself all the prophetic, priestly, and royal rights of Christ, in the attitude of our Goel, or Redeemer. It compasses the very spring and kernel of all sacred prophecy, all evangelic preaching, all true faith, all abiding hope. It is the eternal charter, from the right hand of eternal sovereignty, on which reposes the whole right, authority, work, kingdom, and dominion of Jesus, as the Lord and Saviour of men. And the grand intent and purpose of all that he has done in reference to that document, for which he has obtained it and freed it of its seals, and for which he holds it open in his hand as he proceeds to take possession of the earth is, that his people may have the benefit of it—that they may take it from his hand, feed on it, incorporate it with their inmost being, make it the subject of their hopes, their prophecies and their prayers, and in the strength and virtue of it live and reign with him forever. And if we have at all hit upon the nature of the document which John beheld upon the right hand of Him that sitteth upon the throne, the analogy of faith, and the whole congruity of things, come into play to establish and confirm the belief that this βιβλιον, or βιβλαριδιον, in the hand of the Angel, is the same book, and that the Angel who holds it is none other than the Lion from the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, the Lamb that was slain, the blessed Jesus."

Though I agree that the benefits of the Lion Lamb being found worthy to take the scroll and to loose its seven seals extends to all the chosen people of God, yet John's eating of the book is not intended to teach the same truth. John's eating the book is for John's primary benefit and new commission. But again, more on that shortly. First, however, let me cite from John Gill on whether the little scroll of Revelation chapter ten is the same seven sealed book of chapter five. Gill agrees with Seiss that it is the same, writing the following in his commentary:

"...but the same book is here designed, which in Revelation 5:1 is represented as in the right hand of him that sat on the throne, as shut and sealed; but the lion of the tribe of Judah, the Lamb in the midst of the throne, having taken it out of his hand, unloosed its seals, and opened it; and whereas we never read of his laying this book down, or of his delivering it to any other, he may be well supposed to be this mighty angel, who held it open in his hand..."

Returning to the commentary of Seiss, we note that he said:

“And the Angel, whom I saw standing upon the sea and upon the land, lifted up his right hand into the heaven, and sware by Him that liveth for the ages of the ages, who created the heaven and the things in it, and the earth and the things in it, and the sea and the things in it, that there shall be no more delay; but in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall sound, the mystery of God is [to be] fulfilled, even as he preached glad tidings to his servants the prophets.”

The KJV says "time shall be no more" but that is not correct, and is why better translations have "no more delay." On that we could say much, but doing so would enlarge this chapter and we might lose some readers who will not want that much at this time. However, I will say that the second coming of Christ and all that the Apocalypse discloses as occurring in conjunction with it has been delayed now for about two millenniums, being the time of God's longsuffering. But, there will come a time when God's longsuffering and all delay of coming judgment will be ended.

Wrote Seiss:

"The Mystery of God is nothing more nor less than the final sum of all God’s revelations and doings for the reinstatement of man into his lost inheritance. The fulfilment of this mystery is the final accomplishment of the last items of the Divine administrations which make up that sum—the ultimate realization of all the foreannouncements made to and by any and every one of God’s prophets in all the ages—the Gospel of the kingdom of heaven at length merged into full and everlasting fruition of that kingdom—the consummation of all things. And concerning this consummation, sundry particulars are here observable."

The time period when the "mighty angel" or Lion Lamb takes possession of earth, sea, and sky is the time when the seals are broken, its contents revealed and its terms executed, and when "the mystery of God should be finished." By "mystery of God" being "finished" is exactly what Seiss says above.

John's Commission At The Second Coming

"And he said unto me, Thou must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings. And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein. But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months. And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth." (Rev. 9: 11- 10: 1-4 nkjv) 

When John eats the scroll as commanded, it is then said that he will prophesy again before many peoples, nations, tongues, and kings. Seiss again thinks that this is not true of John as an individual but is symbolic of others, which is what many other bible commentators say. However, there is absolutely no reason for doing this. Some commentators will say that John fulfilled this commission by writing the rest of the book of Revelation from this point onward, a view that I find ridiculous for several reasons. That interpretation would necessitate that he be eating the scroll as each scene of the Apocalypse occurs. I also find it ironic that Seiss, who upholds a literal interpretation of Revelation, except in cases where there is warrant to do otherwise, is quick to interpret the words of John's new commission figuratively. 

I rather am convinced that the apostle John is one of the two witnesses of the Apocalypse, described in Revelation chapter eleven. I have written on this in the past (See here and here). I also have some drafts of articles proving that John is one of these two prophets and I hope I can finish that series soon. 

John did not fulfill his new commission when he was let go from his exile on Patmos and then began to preach to the churches in Asia Minor, which some traditions say occurred. There are also some traditions that say John was martyred, or that emperor Domitian tried to boil him in oil but he was miraculously kept from harm and was not killed. Actually there is no record of John dying, although some traditions say he died an old man. We have, however, some interesting words about John in these words of the risen Christ to Peter about John and about John's commentary on the prophetic words of Christ:

"Then Peter, turning around, saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following, who also had leaned on His breast at the supper, and said, “Lord, who is the one who betrays You?” Peter, seeing him, said to Jesus, “But Lord, what about this man?” Jesus said to him, “If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you? You follow Me.” Then this saying went out among the brethren that this disciple would not die. Yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but, “If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you?” (John 21: 20-23 nkv)

Consider also the fact that the scroll is not eaten by John until it is taken by Christ and unsealed it, and until he has set his feet upon the land and sea and declared that there is no more delay. Since John's eating of the scroll is therefore in the future, so too must be his prophesying to the entire human population as one of the two witnesses, described as occurring in chapter eleven following the scenes of chapter ten. We see this in the similar case of Ezekiel. 

"And you, son of man, do not be afraid of them nor be afraid of their words, though briers and thorns are with you and you dwell among scorpions; do not be afraid of their words or dismayed by their looks, though they are a rebellious house. You shall speak My words to them, whether they hear or whether they refuse, for they are rebellious. But you, son of man, hear what I say to you. Do not be rebellious like that rebellious house; open your mouth and eat what I give you.” Now when I looked, there was a hand stretched out to me; and behold, a scroll of a book was in it. Then He spread it before me; and there was writing on the inside and on the outside, and written on it were lamentations and mourning and woe. Moreover He said to me, “Son of man, eat what you find; eat this scroll, and go, speak to the house of Israel.” So I opened my mouth, and He caused me to eat that scroll. And He said to me, “Son of man, feed your belly, and fill your stomach with this scroll that I give you.” So I ate, and it was in my mouth like honey in sweetness. Then He said to me: “Son of man, go to the house of Israel and speak with My words to them." (Eze. 2: 6-9 - 3: 1-4 nkjv)

John's eating of the scroll of the Apocalypse was for the purpose that he might speak to everyone on earth as one of the two witness prophets who prophesy in Jerusalem for forty two months during the time of the great tribulation. Further, we see how the book written on the inside and outside in Ezekiel's vision is full of "lamentations, mourning, and woe," which is what we see occurring in the Apocalypse in conjunction with the second coming of Christ and day of judgment, and in connection with the commission of the apostle John and the other witness prophet, which is none other than Elijah the prophet.

The Divine Library (9)

In the previous chapter we gave much information (though there is much more) on what is that special mysterious book in the divine library that is described in chapter five of the Apocalypse as a book or scroll with seven seals. In this follow up chapter we will see what occurs in Revelation chapter ten to this same book.  First, we will notice the book in relation to a "mighty angel" and then in relation to the apostle John. 

"And I saw another mighty angel come down from heaven, clothed with a cloud: and a rainbow was upon his head, and his face was as it were the sun, and his feet as pillars of fire: And he had in his hand a little book open: and he set his right foot upon the sea, and his left foot on the earth, And cried with a loud voice, as when a lion roareth: and when he had cried, seven thunders uttered their voices...And the angel which I saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth lifted up his hand to heaven, And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time (delay) no longer: But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets." (Rev. 10: 1-3, 5-7 kjv)

Upon this glorious scene Dr. Seiss wrote:

"John writes, “And I saw another, a mighty angel descending out of the heaven.” This person I take to be the Lord Jesus himself. He is called an Angel, but there is nothing in that to prove him a created being. Angel is a title of office, not of nature. In the Old Testament the Son of God is continually described as the Jehovah-angel. We had a somewhat corresponding vision in the first chapter; yet, he who there appeared, announced himself as the First and the Last, the Living One, who became dead and is alive forever. We had an account of an angel in the seventh chapter, and again in the eighth, whom there was reason to regard as none other than the Lord Jesus. We do know that he appears in the Apocalypse as a Lamb, as a Lion, and as an armed Warrior, and there is nothing to hinder his appearance also as an Angel."

I firmly believe this is correct and good commentary. There are three chief things to ascertain in studying this passage. First, is this "little book" or "scroll" the same as that with the seven seals? Second, who is this "mighty angel" who has possession of the little book? Third, what is this significance in what the angel does in connection with the little book?

Seiss wrote further:

"The attire of this angel indicates Deity. John beholds him “clothed about with a cloud.” Wherever clouds are connected with glorious manifestations, there we find the presence of Divinity. If there is cloud, there is mystery; and if there is mystery, there is suggestion of Deity. The Lord descended on Mount Sinai in a thick cloud. He appeared on the mercy-seat in a cloud. When Israel was delivered, “the Lord went before them by day in a pillar of cloud.” When the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle, “a cloud covered the tent of the congregation.” When God reproached Israel for their murmurings, “the glory of the Lord appeared in the cloud.” “The Lord said unto Moses, Lo, I come unto thee in a thick cloud.” The Psalmist gives it as the characteristic of the Almighty, that “clouds and darkness are round about him;” that “he maketh the clouds his chariot:” and that about him are “thick clouds.” When the King of glory cometh in his divine majesty to judge the earth, the exclamation is: “Behold, he cometh with clouds.” Clouds, therefore, belong to the attire of Deity, particularly in his manifestations toward fallen men. They indicate his unapproachableness, his infinite majesty, his consuming power toward sin, which cannot live before his uncovered glory, and yet his drawing near to communicate with the dwellers upon earth. No mere angel is ever arrayed in such drapery, and the vision is that of the glorious God-man himself, in the midst of the grand administrations of judgment."

Again, I am sure that this is correct. Seiss continued:

"He has “the rainbow on his head;” not a rainbow, but the rainbow. This is a further mark to show that he is not a created angel. We had this rainbow in the fourth chapter, where it is given as one of the grand appurtenances of the throne. It refers back to God’s ancient covenant with the earth. It was originally ordained as God’s mark in the cloud, and the sign of His, and no mere angel’s covenant. We never read of any one surrounded with the rainbow, but the person is God. The clouds are indicative of Divine judgment, and storms, and rains, and floods of wrath; and so the rainbow is indicative of Divine mercy in the midst of judgment, and a covenant of security to the believing, even though everything seem to be going to destruction. A garment of cloud, and a tiara of the iris, would, therefore, well befit the Saviour, in the administrations which we are now considering, but would in no manner of truth be suitable to a mere angel, however mighty."

As Seiss has stated, Jesus Christ, the eternal Son of God, was known in the old testament as the "angel of the Lord" or "Malak Yahweh." In an old post in the Baptist Gadfly blog I wrote on Christ being the angel of the Lord and who was himself Yahweh. (See here) It was the angel of the Lord who spoke out of the burning bush to Moses and whose name was "I Am That I Am." Jesus is an angel by office, meaning he is the messenger of the Godhead, which is part of his activity as "the Word of God," but also specially in his dual character as both God and man. In the old testament he is revealed as the "Angel of the Covenant" (Malachi 3:1) because he is the one who establishes the covenant between God and humanity, and as the "Angel of His Presence" (Isaiah 63:9). Christ is also called "the Apostle of our confession" (Heb. 3: 1) because he is divinely sent by the Father to communicate divine messages to men. So Paul wrote earlier in the Hebrew epistle:

"God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds; who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high." (1: 1-3 nkjv)

By God's Son being the person through whom God speaks to mankind he is functioning as an "angel" and as an "apostle." Further, the way Paul describes the Son of God in the above text is not only as an angel or apostle, but as possessing divine attributes and trappings. Seiss also shows that the description of this "mighty angel" has the emblems of deity. John Gill in his commentary agrees with Seiss when he wrote (emphasis mine):

"...however, a created angel is not intended: not the angel that made proclamation for the opening of the book, and unsealing it, Revelation 5:2; between which, and having the book in his right hand open, is a wide difference; nor any other, though the epithet "mighty" belongs to angels in common; and though this angel swears by the living God; and though it was an angel by whom Christ signified the things contained in this book to John; but the uncreated Angel, the Lord Jesus Christ, seems rather designed, as appears both by comparing this with Daniel 12:7; and from the power he gave to the two witnesses, Revelation 11:3; which cannot agree with a created angel; and besides, who so proper to hold the book open as he who unloosed the seals, and opened it, and to whom the epithet "mighty" may be applied in the highest sense, as God; and who as man may be said to swear by the living God, and to whom the whole description well agrees? he is sometimes called an Angel simply, Genesis 48:16; sometimes the Angel of the Lord, and who appears to be Jehovah himself, the second Person, Genesis 16:7, compared with Genesis 19:1; and sometimes the Angel of God's presence, Isaiah 63:9; and the Angel of the great council in the Septuagint on Isaiah 9:6; and the Angel, or messenger, of the covenant, Malachi 3:1; and may be so called, because he is a messenger from God as man and Mediator, being sent by him to declare his will and redeem his people...he appears now as "another" angel, distinct from the seven angels who had trumpets given them to sound..."

Wrote Seiss:

“And his face as it were the sun.” This again identifies him as the same who appeared unto John in his first vision. It is there said of Him who walks in the midst of the golden candlesticks, that his countenance was “as the sun shineth in his strength.” This luminousness of face is also one of the ascertained characteristics of Christ, in connection with the final revelation of his kingdom. Peter speaks of the appearance on the Mount of Transfiguration, as a foretaste and earnest of “the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ;” and yet, in that sublime picture, the record is, “his face did shine as the sun.” It was thus that he appeared unto Saul of Tarsus, on his way to Damascus. (Acts 26:13.) And from the most ancient times, the prophets were accustomed to refer to him as the outbeaming glory of God—the very Sun of Righteousness. “And his feet as it were pillars of fire.” These are manifestly the same feet beheld in the vision of the first chapter. There they dazzled the eyes of the seer, like fine brass melted and glowing in a furnace; and they were the feet of Him who was dead, but is alive forevermore, and has the keys of death and of hell. There they presented an image of terrible pureness, and here they furnish an image of steadfast and consuming majesty, which no one can encounter and live. Nothing of the kind is ever affirmed of a created angel."

So, having seen clearly that this "mighty angel" cannot be a created angel but the uncreated Son of God, who in his functions and offices is a prophet, priest, king, apostle, and angel. Further, if the "little book" in the hand of this mighty angel is the same book with seven seals, then it is even more obvious that the mighty angel is none other than the Lion Lamb who is the Redeemer. That all being so, what is the significance in what this mighty angel does in connection with the book with seven seals?

Wrote Seiss:

“And he set his right foot upon the sea, but the left upon the earth.” This was a distinct and deliberate act, and is full of significance. To set one’s foot in a place, expresses a purpose to take possession of that place. Jehovah said to Israel, “Every place whereon the soles of your feet shall tread shall be yours.” (Deut. 11:24.) Abraham could not “set his foot on” any part of Palestine in this sense, inasmuch as God gave him none inheritance in it. And when this mighty Angel deliberately sets his right foot on the sea, and the left on the land, he thereby claims possession of it, and asserts his purpose to take it as his own, and to establish his occupancy and rule over it. It is an act befitting the character and office of Christ, but hardly a created angel. He is the rightful sovereign of sea and land. His taking of the sealed book from the hand of eternal majesty, and his breaking and destroying of its seals, proved and legitimated his right to the possession of the earth; and here we have his assertion of that right, and his purpose to enforce it. Long has both sea and land been under the dominion of his enemies, but now he sets foot on each, and takes hold upon them as his own."

The little book in the hand of the glorified Lord Jesus, now with its seals broken and its contents revealed, signals the time when Christ begins to foreclose and to repossess the heavens and the earth, to remove the aliens, squatters, intruders, the proud, yea, all those who "know not God and obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ" and to act as the Redeemer and Avenger, to send tribulation upon the wicked world. It is then that the meek will inherit the earth as Jesus promised. (Matt. 5: 5)

Wrote Seiss:

"And with the symbolic act, and as part of it, there is a corresponding utterance. “He cried with a great voice, even as a lion roareth.” It was not a cry of distress and fear, but a shout of power, and the herald of vengeance upon enemies and usurpers. We have already seen who it is that is called “the Lion from the tribe of Judah.” Of old it was written, “The Lord shall roar out of Zion, and utter his voice from Jerusalem; and the heavens and the earth shall shake.” “The Lord shall roar from on high, and utter his voice from his holy habitation: he shall give a shout, as they that tread the grapes, against all the inhabitants of the earth. A noise shall come even to the ends of the earth; for the Lord hath a controversy with the nations, he will plead with all flesh, he will give them that are wicked to the sword.” (Jer. 25:29–31.) And the great voice before us connects directly with these predictions. It is not the voice of a created angel, but the cry of the almighty Judge himself. As yet he is in his cloud, like the lion in his covert. But when he comes forth to set his feet upon the earth, the shout, like of those who tread the grapes, shall be given, and the winepress of the Divine fury shall be trodden. It is the cry for and the herald of the oncoming judgments of God..."

In short, this scene conveys the idea that Christ is now claiming the right to the world, to possess it and to rule over it, to kick out the wicked ones and to give it all to his redeemed people. This is the time Paul described when he wrote:

"Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power." (I Cor. 15: 24 nkjv)

It will also be the time when "the wicked will be cut off from the earth, And the unfaithful will be uprooted from it." (Prov. 2: 22 nkjv)

Wrote Seiss:

"As the Angel proceeded to set his right foot upon the sea and his left upon the land, the Apostle saw “in his hand a little book, or roll.” This is a marked feature, and not without important significance. It is not the main thing in the vision, as Alford and some others have erroneously supposed, but it is an expressive accessory to the thrilling revelation."

Wrote Seiss further:

"The Apocalypse abounds with references to books and records of a remarkable character. The first verse of the fifth chapter disclosed to our view a very notable document, in connection with which all the interest, up to the chapter now before us, has arisen. We had a good deal to observe concerning that book, or roll, at the time. We were then constrained to look upon it as representing the title-deed of the inheritance, forfeited by man, and recovered by the Lamb. We saw it lifted by that Lion-lamb, amid the adoring shouts of eternity, and one of its seals after another broken open, followed with miraculous commotions, which shook the earth from centre to circumference, and affected even the great orbs of immensity. When the last of the seals was broken, that book was still in the hands of Him who alone, in all the universe, was found worthy to take it, break its seals, or even to look upon it."

I cannot understand why any bible interpreter would fail to see how this little book is the same book with the seven seals as it is the most obvious way to look at it.

Wrote Seiss further:

"The breaking of that seal introduced the seven trumpet-angels; and then, for the time, we lost sight of the wonderful document around which all this interest and these wonders concentre. And as this mighty Angel can be none other than the self-same Lion-lamb who took the book from the hand of eternal majesty, why may not this roll in his hand be the same identical roll lifted from the throne? Some commentators have ridiculed the thought, but I take it to be a most reasonable supposition. If the book in the hand of this Angel be not the same book which the Lamb took from the throne in heaven, then that marvellous document, after all the wonderful interest and events created by it, most strangely and ingloriously disappears, and is never heard of any more forever. Such awe and exultation at its first appearance, and such mighty occurrences attending the mere opening of its seals, beget the expectation and belief, and indeed require, that we should hear of it again; that it should not be so miserably hustled off the scene; and that it should have an end befitting its character and its introduction into these visions. But an unaccountably sorry fate does it receive, if we are not to recognize it in the roll in the hand of this Angel."

Mankind's destiny and salvation is at stake in what happens to this book. I find the reasoning of Seiss to be so cogent that I don't see how anyone can deny that he is properly interpreting the scene.

Wrote Seiss:

"It is said of the little book now before us that it was “opened.” This implies that it had been shut, sealed; and that what kept it shut, its seals, had been broken off; all of which accords precisely with what we saw of the book taken by the Lamb."

Again, these are solid arguments to prove that the little book is the same book with the seven seals.

Wrote Seiss:

"The nature of the case would also seem to call for the presence here of the same document which the Lamb had taken from the throne. The Angel is engaged in the solemn and sublime act of formally claiming the possession of the earth. He needs his warrant for such an act. Redemption proceeds on a legal foundation. Christ as our Redeemer had to be made under the law. It was necessary that he should fulfil all righteousness. All his successes, triumphs, and exaltations were achieved on the basis of having meritoriously met and answered all demands of the law. He could neither rise from the dead, ascend to the right hand of the Father, propose free forgiveness to men, or dare to repossess man of the forfeited inheritance, except as he had satisfactorily atoned for all man’s sins, and in himself meritoriously won and purchased all that he now or ever holds or claims for his redeemed. It was only as he was slain for mankind, and atoned for their unrighteousness, and thus overcame, that he was pronounced worthy to take the book, or open its seals, or act the Goel for those whose inheritance had been disponed away, and overrun by aliens. And so neither could he claim and take possession of the earth, and clear it of all foes and usurpers, except upon warrant from the law giving that right as the just due of his perfect righteousness. No man can claim land without showing that he holds his title-deed for it. No one can proceed to execute penalties even upon transgressors, without warrant from the government. And so our mighty Goel in proceeding to set his right foot on the sea, and his left on the land, claiming possession of the earth, and about to inflict extirpating punishments upon the rebels who infest it, holds in his hand the open title to it, worthily obtained from the right hand of eternal majesty, displays it to all observers as his warrant from the throne, and challenges the potencies of earth and hell to yield or perish; whilst all the thunders of Almighty power utter themselves for his support."

What a wonderful and significant scene is described in Revelation chapter ten! In the next chapter we will see what else occurs in conjunction with this glorious book in the divine library.

The Divine Library (8)

In this chapter we will focus on the Book of Revelation's book (or scroll) with seven seals. It is one of the most mysterious books in the divine library and bible teachers and commentators have not been uniform in their interpretation of it. In my own efforts to ascertain the significance of this seven sealed book I was helped much by what Dr. J.A. Seiss wrote in one of his more famous books titled "The Apocalypse." He connected this book, and with what occurs in conjunction with the book's opening and the breaking of its seals, with redemption. 

Most bible students do not see the events and scenes of Revelation (or the Apocalypse) with redemption. How are the awful scenes of famine, death, slaughter, plagues, earthquakes, etc., connected with "the day or redemption"? 

The Seven Sealed Book

"And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals. And I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, Who is worthy to open the book, and to loose the seals thereof?" (Rev. 5: 1-2 nkjv)

To see the proof that the seven sealed book of the Apocalypse is a book of redemption one needs to read Jeremiah chapter 32. In my series titled "Redemption" I wrote on this seven sealed book extensively. I have moved all of these chapters into a blog all their own (here). They are also in this blog beginning (here) and the rest immediately following in the archives for the months of April through July of 2018. In chapter one I cite these various words of Seiss from his book "The Apocalypse":

"It is not ecclesiastical history, which this book is introduced to foreshow, but something to which all ecclesiastical history is only the prelude and introduction, and which the Scriptures call “The redemption of the purchased possession.”

It may be well here for us to correct a misapprehension which largely obtains in the common conception of what redemption is. When this word is used, most men’s minds go back to the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Christ, and think of something already accomplished and complete in the blessed facts of the blessed Saviour’s history. This is well enough as far as it goes, and touches indeed, the great central particulars on which redemption reposes. But, viewed as a whole, redemption is a vastly wider and more wondrous thing."

"Redemption has its roots and foundations in the past, but its true realization lies in the future, and connects directly with the period and transactions to which our text (Rev. chpt. 5) relates."

"The Scriptures everywhere point forward to Christ’s Apocalypse, as the time when first the mystery shall be finished, and the long process reach its proper consummation. Jesus talked to His disciples about the signs which were to precede His coming, and said, “When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.” (Luke 21:28.) In His view, then, redemption proper, or in its true reality, lies far more in the future than in the past; so much more that the past is hardly to be named apart from what is yet to come. And with all Paul’s glorying in the cross, he did not hesitate to say: “If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are, of all men, most miserable;” and that “the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now; and not only they, but ourselves also, which have the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of the body.” (1 Corinthians 15:19; Romans 8:22, 23.) He speaks of Christians as indeed “sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,” which he commends greatly, but which he pronounces the mere “earnest” or pledge penny of something vastly greater — of an “inheritance” still future, which is only to come at a yet unaccomplished “redemption of the purchased possession.” (Ephesians 1:13, 14.) To him, therefore, redemption is still largely a subject of hope. There is an inheritance pledged, and a possession purchased, but it is not yet redeemed. The action of claiming, disencumbering, and taking possession of it is still future. And it is just this action that is brought to our view in the taking up of this book and the breaking of its seals."

"The word redemption comes to us, and takes its significance from certain laws and customs of the ancient Jews. Under these laws and customs, it was impossible to alienate estates beyond a given time. Whatever disposition one may have been forced to make of his lands, and whoever might be found in possession of them, the year of Jubilee returned them to the lawful representatives of their former owners." 

"Upon this regulation there was founded another, which made it the right of the nearest of kin to one who, through distress or otherwise, had alienated his inheritance to another party, to step in and redeem it; that is, to buy it back, and retake it, at any time, or at such times not falling within certain stipulated intervals. When an inheritance was thus disponed away by its rightful possessor, there were two books, or instruments of writing, made of the transaction, the one open, and the other sealed, specifying price and particulars. These books or mortgage deeds went into the hands of the one to whom the property was thus made over. A sealed book thus became a standing sign of an alienated inheritance, but so held as to be liable to be recovered on the terms specified. And when any one legally representing the original proprietor, was found competent to lift and destroy that sealed instrument, and thus to buy back what had been disponed away, he was called the goel, or redeemer, and the inheritance was considered redeemed, so far that he now had full right to dispossess of it whoever might be found on it, and to enter upon its undisturbed fruition."

"From this it will be seen, that the transactions which John witnessed, in regard to this sealed book, accord precisely with this ancient arrangement for the redemption of inheritances. And the coincidence is so complete, and sealed books in Scripture are so much confined to this particular sort of writings, that I take it as separating this book in God’s right hand from all other subjects to the one subject of forfeited inheritances."

"We also know very well, that there has been an inheritance forfeited and disponed away for these thousands of years, and that for all this time the proper heirs have lain out of it, and had no proper possession of it. That inheritance we know to be just ta panta — the all things — in which man, in his first creation, was installed, and which God made good, and sin made evil. Everything testifies that it was a high, holy, and blessed investiture. But, alas, its original possessor sinned, and it passed out of his hands to the disinheritance of all his seed. The sealed book, the title deeds of its forfeiture and mortgage, are in the hands of God, and strangers and intruders have overrun and debased it. And from the days of Adam until now, those deeds have lain in the Almighty’s hands, with no one to take them up or to dispossess the aliens."

“Seven seals” are upon this book, indicative of the completeness of those bonds of forfeit which have all this while debarred Adam’s seed from their proper inheritance. The original estate is totally gone from man, apart from some competent Redeemer. Just as the final taking of the book, and the breaking of its seals, eventuate in complete redemption, and the full reinstatement of the acknowledged seed into the blessedness which sin forfeited, and the Goel redeemed, so those seals unbroken, set forth the completeness of the alienation, and the thoroughness of the incumbrances which are upon the estate, until that competent Goel has performed his work."

"This book was “written within and on the back.” This again tends to identify it with these books of forfeited inheritances. Within were the specifications of the forfeiture; without were the names and attestations of the witnesses; for this is the manner in which these documents were attested."

In this series I cited the following words from the prophet Jeremiah, also cited by Seiss, and made the following comments.

"And Jeremiah said, The word of the Lord came unto me, saying, Behold, Hanameel the son of Shallum thine uncle shall come unto thee saying, Buy thee my field that is in Anathoth: for the right of redemption is thine to buy it. So Hanameel mine uncle's son came to me in the court of the prison according to the word of the Lord, and said unto me, Buy my field, I pray thee, that is in Anathoth, which is in the country of Benjamin: for the right of inheritance is thine, and the redemption is thine; buy it for thyself. Then I knew that this was the word of the Lord." (Jer. 32: 6-8 KJV)

Notice what this text reveals about Hebrew laws of forfeiture and redemption. It speaks of the "redeemer" (Hebrew goel) who has "the right of redemption" (authority "to buy" or "buy back") and "the right of inheritance" ("the redemption is thine"). Because of sin, our "rights" to all good are lost, but because of the "redeemer" (Christ), they are restored. Further, because the rights are restored by the redeemer paying the price of redemption, they can then be enforced and such enforcement restores what was lost to those who are redeemed.

"And I bought the field of Hanameel my uncle's son, that was in Anathoth, and weighed him the money, even seventeen shekels of silver. And I subscribed the evidence, and sealed it, and took witnesses, and weighed him the money in the balances. So I took the evidence of the purchase, both that which was sealed according to the law and custom, and that which was open: And I gave the evidence of the purchase unto Baruch the son of Neriah, the son of Maaseiah, in the sight of Hanameel mine uncle's son, and in the presence of the witnesses that subscribed the book of the purchase, before all the Jews that sat in the court of the prison. And I charged Baruch before them, saying, Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel; Take these evidences, this evidence of the purchase, both which is sealed, and this evidence which is open; and put them in an earthen vessel, that they may continue many days." (9-14)

Here is a description of redemption as it deals with restoring a lost inheritance. There are "books" (scrolls) in connection with the acts of redemption. There is an "open scroll" and a "sealed scroll." Notice how these legal documents are described. Jeremiah says "I subscribed the evidence, and sealed it." He speaks of "the evidence of the purchase." He did all this redeeming transaction in the "presence of the witnesses that subscribed the book of the purchase." In a similar manner are real estate transactions performed in our day in our country.

When a person borrows money on his real estate, the lender receives a "mortgage" or "deed of trust" in exchange. However, unlike borrowing money through a pawn shop for personal property, the borrower (mortgager) retains possession and legal ownership. When the borrower is foreclosed upon, all rights to possession and ownership are forever lost, and there is no "right of redemption." Also, "deeds of trust" or "mortgages" are publicly recorded documents (or "open according to the law and custom") and disclose certain items to the general public. However, the "note" is not recorded, but is kept sealed so far as public view is concerned. The note contains particulars that the deed of trust does not contain, which is private information of concern to only the parties involved, namely the borrower and the lender."

Wrote Seiss:

"It is in the right hand of God. No literal hand is described; but, so to speak, it was on the right hand of the undescribed and indescribable One who occupied the throne. This is significant of His high and supreme right to what the sealed instrument binds. Failing from man, it reverted to the original Giver. Sin cannot vitiate any of the rights of God. Satan’s possession is a mere usurpation, permitted for the time, but in no way detrimental to the proprietorship of the Almighty. The true right still lives in the hand of God, until the proper Goel comes to redeem it, by paying the price, and ejecting the alien and his seed."

"John knew by that Spirit in which he was, what that sealed book meant. He knew that if no one was found worthy and able to take it from the hand of God, and to break its seals, that all the promises of the prophets, and all the hopes of the saints, and all the preintimations of a redeemed world, must fail. He understood the office of the Goel, and that if there was failure at this point, “the redemption of the purchased possession” must fail. Could it be possible that this should be? Had he all this while been hoping, and preaching, and prophesying what should, after all, not be accomplished? Was the promised inheritance, now at the ripened moment for its recovery, to go by default into eternal alienation? How could he bear the thought?

That book, unlifted and unopened, is the Church’s grief and distress. It bespeaks the inheritance unredeemed — the children still estranged from their purchased possession. But that book opened, is the Church’s joy and glory. It is the assertion of her reinstatement into what Adam lost — the recovery to her of all of which she has been so long and cruelly deprived by sin. Until, therefore, that book is opened, and its seals broken, the people of God must remain in privation, sorrow, and tears."

“And He came and took [the book] from the right hand of Him that sitteth upon the throne.” 

This is the sublimest individual act recorded in the Apocalypse. It is the act which includes all that suffering creation, and the disinherited saints of God have been sighing, and crying, and waiting for, for all these long ages — for six thousand years of grief and sorrow. It is the act which carries with it all else that is written in the succeeding part of this glorious revelation. It is the act by virtue of which the world is subdued, Babylon judged, Antichrist destroyed, the dragon vanquished, death overthrown, the curse expunged, the earth made new, and the reign of everlasting blessedness and peace made to cover its hills and illuminate its valleys, and transform it into an unfading paradise of God. It was the lifting of the title deeds of the alienated inheritance — the legal act of repossession of all that was lost in Adam, and paid for by the blood and tears of the Son of God. Heaven looks on in solemn silence as that act is being performed. The universe is stricken with awe, and grows breathless as it views it. And the Living ones, and Elders, and all the hosts of angels, are filled with adoring wonder and joy, as if another FIAT had gone forth from God for a new creation."

Of course, discussing this glorious book of redemption or title deed to all things lost by sin requires much more commentary. That is why I recommend reading my blog dedicated to the subject of redemption for I go into more detail than here. I have only given a portion of what Seiss wrote and I encourage the reader to read Seiss' book on the Apocalypse, which should be available to read for free online. His commentary on the seven sealed book is in his lecture on Revelation chapter five. But, I will make a few comments before we end this chapter.

Very few commentators connect the opening of the seven sealed book with final redemption at the second coming of Christ. Ellicott in his commentary lists some of these views when he wrote (highlighting mine):

"But what is meant by the book? Numberless interpretations have been offered: it is the Old Testament; it is the whole Bible; it is the title-deed of man’s inheritance; it is the book containing the sentence of judgment on the foes of the faith; it is the Apocalypse; it is part of the Apocalypse; it is the book of God’s purposes and providence. There is a truth underlying most of these interpretations, but most of them narrow the force of the vision. If we say it is the book which unfolds the principles of God’s government—in a wide sense, the book of salvation (comp. Romans 16:25-26)— the interpretation of life, which Christ alone can bestow (see Revelation 5:3-6), we shall include, probably, the practical truths which underlie each of these interpretations; for all—Old Testament and New, man’s heritage and destiny, God’s purposes and providence— are dark, till He who is the Light unfolds those truths which shed a light on all. Such a book becomes one “which contains and interprets human history,” and claims the kingdoms of the earth for God."

I agree with the fact that many of the views enumerated above do have some truth, but nevertheless fail to mention its connection with redemption. The view that says that the seven sealed scroll is part of the Apocalypse is certainly true. But, "the Apocalypse of Christ" (the divine title to the book of Revelation) has to do with the second coming of Christ and all that is connected with it and final redemption is one of the grand things happening as a result of that second coming. Those who think that the scroll simply is a book foretelling future events also miss hitting the mark, even though the coming Apocalypse (revealing) of Jesus Christ from heaven is yet future.

However, the seven seals on the scroll have not been broken, nor has its contents written on the inside been made known. The opening of the seven seals has not yet occurred, but it will occur in conjunction with that time "when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed (apocalypse) from heaven with his mighty angels taking vengeance on them that know not God and obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ." (II Thess. 1: 7-8 kjv) Part of a Redeemer's work is not only to liberate the captives from their bondage but to act as the family Avenger and bring vengeance to the ones who enslaved the redeemer's kin. Now let us cite the whole context from Revelation chapter five about this fascinating little book.

"2 Then I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, "Who is worthy to open the scroll and to loose its seals?" 3 And no one in heaven or on the earth or under the earth was able to open the scroll, or to look at it. 4 So I wept much, because no one was found worthy to open and read the scroll, or to look at it. 5 But one of the elders said to me, "Do not weep. Behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has prevailed to open the scroll and to loose its seven seals." 6 And I looked, and behold, in the midst of the throne and of the four living creatures, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as though it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent out into all the earth. 7 Then He came and took the scroll out of the right hand of Him who sat on the throne. 8 Now when He had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each having a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. 9 And they sang a new song, saying: "You are worthy to take the scroll, And to open its seals; For You were slain, And have redeemed us to God by Your blood Out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, 10 And have made us kings and priests to our God; And we shall reign on the earth." (Rev. 5: 2-10 nkjv)

Why did John weep deeply and long because the seven sealed scroll was not opened, and no one being found worthy or qualified to break the seals and disclose its contents? It was because he knew that as long as that scroll remained sealed there would be no redemption of what was lost by sin. That would mean man's salvation was not possible. However, Christ as the Lamb of God was worthy, and he first paid the price for redemption by the shedding of his blood and sacrificial death, and was qualified to be the Goel because he also a near kinsman to man by having become a man himself.

As each seal is opened some act of redemption is occurring, though what occurs is all the awful horrors and terrors described in the book of Revelation. But, keep in mind that Christ is acting as an Avenging Redeemer and is punishing the wicked for their rebellion and refusal to worship only the one true God, and ridding the world of the proud, the lawless, all who are squatters whom the Avenging Redeemer will uproot from the earth in fulfillment of ancient prophecies. The opening of these seals bring complete redemption to believers and also to the whole groaning creation (Rom. 8: 19-22), but it brings divine retribution to all who love not the Lord Jesus Christ, many of whom chose the Antichrist instead. The opening of the seals takes in what is called in scripture "the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men" (II Peter 3: 7), "the day of wrath" (Rom. 2: 5; etc.), "the day of vengeance" (Isa. 63: 4; Luke 21: 22; etc.), "the day of the Lord" (Amos 5: 18; I Thess. 5: 2; etc.), negative things for many, but positive things for the few who are the children of God, for this same time period is their "day of redemption," and day of rejoicing. This truth is seen in Amos chapter five (referenced above).

"18 Woe to you who desire the day of the Lord! For what good is the day of the Lord to you? It will be darkness, and not light. 19 It will be as though a man fled from a lion, And a bear met him! Or as though he went into the house, Leaned his hand on the wall, And a serpent bit him! 20 Is not the day of the Lord darkness, and not light? Is it not very dark, with no brightness in it?" (5: 18-20 nkjv)

The day of the Lord and the day of redemption will be for a good end purpose for the people of God, but it will be for a bad end for the those who have chosen other gods and covenanted with the Devil. In the above text this day of the Lord, for those who will find it to be a time of vengeance upon them, will begin with the beginning of a day of tribulation, described above in being a dark day when a man is in danger of being a prey to a lion, and if escaping that, to meet a bear, and if he escapes that, to go into a house for safety but ironically being bitten by a venomous snake. The Book of Revelation describes the coming of the Lord and the opening of the seals of the redemptive scroll as a time of "great tribulation" (Rev. 7: 14 and in the sermon on the mount in Matt. 24), which is what the text above in Amos likewise says. The apostle Paul described the day of vengeance in the same way when he said:

"since it is a righteous thing with God to repay with tribulation those who trouble you, and to give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ." (II Thess. 1: 6-8 nkjv)

Bringing "tribulation" upon those who have rejected God and his Son and the Gospel and its offers of salvation is connected with Christ being revealed from heaven, which is his Apocalypse. 

What is written on the outside (seen for all to read) of the seven sealed scroll? What is written on the inside (which is hidden from the view)?

In the next chapter we will, however, have more to say about this sealed book because we see it mentioned later in the Apocalypse, and we should not end our focus on this divine book in the library of God without looking at those texts where we see in chapter ten where a mighty angel has a "little book" in his hand and where the apostle John is told to go take the book and to eat it. Needless to say, this book of redemption is perhaps the most important one in his library, so far as we are concerned.