An understanding of the subject we are presenting today is fundamental to our understanding of the gospel. Without such a grasp of New Testament teachings we cannot hope to appreciate the vital elements of Righteousness by Faith, or understand the subject in its fullness. We are dealing with the foundation stone of gospel truth.
One little word--but it turned the world upside down. The thought is taken from Acts 17:6, where we read that the followers of Jesus were accused of turning the world upside down. But to be accurate, it needs to be recognized that what really turned the world upside down was one little word, and that one little word was the great "love" word of the New Testament. And it is this word to which we shall be turning our attention in this study.
The Greeks had different words for "love" during their long and colorful history. Some five hundred years before the time of Christ, the time of the heyday of Greek philosophical thought, the Greek philosophers, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, had conceived of the ultimate of human emotions in terms of a "love" which they called eros. But the problem was that this word was the product of a human mind, and because it was of human origin, the word eros had nowhere to go but down, and down it went, until by New Testament times it had gathered for itself an aura, or meaning, almost of unpleasantness, and was thus completely unsuitable for New Testament use, which is why we do not find the word used even once in the New Testament. The word "erotic" in the English language comes from the Greek word eros.
There were other words for "love" which the Greeks used. One was the word storgi, a word with a very narrow meaning, implying close clannishness, such as the "natural affection" one would find among the hill folk of some areas of Kentucky and Tennessee, where families have been known to carry on quarrels and feuds among themselves, but should anyone from outside try to stick his nose into their business it would get bent out of shape in a hurry. Storgi appears only twice in the New Testament, and then only in its combinative form of astorgous, in Romans 1:31 and 2 Timothy 3:3, where it is translated "without natural affection." But then there is another word which appears in the New Testament, and that is the word philía. Here is a very beautiful, warm, and tender word which is best expressed in the love found among close friends and family members. The meaning of warmth and tenderness which it conveys makes it an important word of the New Testament, where it is found some 100 to 150 times.
And yet these are not the central "love" word of the New Testament which we would like to consider. That word, the theme of our discussion, was quite obscure in New Testament times, but the writers of the New Testament took this word and raised it to heights where it transcends in meaning every other word in the human language. We have about six thousand languages in the world today, and one thousand of these are spoken in Africa alone. In none of these languages, including English, can we find a match in meaning for this little word we are discussing now.
There are places in the world where missionaries have gone where people do not understand the meaning of love as we know it. Some of them do not even have a word for "love." In such cases the missionary either has to learn the language and then try to find a way to describe what he is trying to say, or, working with the leaders of the group, invent a new word in that language, one which will convey the same meaning as the word in the Greek New Testament.
This once obscure word about which we are talking is the Greek word agape. This is the word which has been raised from an obscure place in human language to a place where it stands on a level far exceeding any other word in the whole world today. This word is one which describes a love which is ultimately selfless, depicting the very essence of God. It is used in the New Testament between 300 and 350 times.
The Apostle Paul reached his highest point of linguistic expression when he wrote what is known as his "Hymn To Agape" in 1 Corinthians 13. As you read this chapter remember this word and what it means. Nevertheless, it was not Paul the apostle who reached the highest rung of the ladder of linguistic expression, but the apostle John, who penned the formula, "God is Agápè," in 1 John 4:8. This is as high as anyone can go.
Early in Christian history a man named Augustine, regarded even today, among Catholics at least, as the greatest of their theologians, tried to come to grips with the "love" theme of the New Testament. He had a problem with this word agápè. He found himself in an area with which he was completely unfamiliar. Fluent in Greek, steeped in Hellenistic thought, he knew about eros. But this word agápè caused him to become confused. In his wrestling with the problem he tried to bring about a fusion, or synthesis, between the words agápè and eros. The result was a word which he called caritas. This is the word from which we get the word "charity," in the New Testament. The meaning of agape is completely distorted by this word, and especially is this true today, when the word "charity" conveys a meaning to most people to which they do not react favorably. A suggestion: when you read 1 Corinthians 13, read "love" for the word "charity," in the King James Version, or, better yet, read "agápè," as you begin to understand it.
This synthesis between agápè and eros, which Augustine produced, actually continued for more than a thousand years, until there came a man who began to unravel it, and restore the original meaning. Presently, we shall deal with this more fully. Some New Testament passages bring out interesting differences between agápè and philía, for example. Consider this passage beginning with John 21:15, describing an interesting conversation between Jesus and the apostle Peter. Notice:
"So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou Me more than these? He saith unto Him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love Thee. He saith unto him, Feed My lambs."
This conversation was repeated three times. But what does not come out clearly in the English translation is that when Jesus asked Peter, "Do you love Me?," He actually asked, "Do you love Me with the supremely selfless love of agápè?" However, when Peter answered he actually said, "Yes, Lord, I love You with the warm and tender love of philía." The second time it was the same, but on the third occasion Jesus came down to the level of Peter, as it were, and asked, "Do you indeed love Me with the warm and tender love of philía?" Here it was that Peter felt hurt, and answered, "Lord, You know all things. You know that I love You."
Why, it may be asked, was Peter unwilling to say that he loved his Lord with the selfless love of agápè? One possible explanation is that Peter had recently denied his Lord, which may have knocked all the self-confidence out of him, making him unwilling to say that he loved his Lord with the ultimate love of agápè.
When we look at another interesting comparison we find that in the New Testament whenever the love of Jesus for Lazarus is described it is always philía. Remember, philía indicates a warm, tender, closeness. We can picture Jesus coming to Lazarus, putting his arm around him, and saying, "Lazarus, My friend, how is your courage today, how strong is your faith?" That sort of thing. But whenever the love of Jesus for Mary or Martha is described it was always agápè. Why? Clearly, that the motives of Jesus be not misunderstood.
Consider now the background of agápè and eros. Here we find some most striking contrasts. A Swedish Lutheran bishop, whose name was Anders Nygren, wrote a book entitled "Agape and Eros." It is a classic in its field, and if you ever want to wade through a mass of heavy but interesting material and gain an understanding of these vital essentials as you never have before, get that book and read it, and give yourself plenty of time. In this book the contrasts between agápè and eros are clearly considered and tabulated. Let us touch on some of them.
Eros is a love that is essentially self-centered. Here is a love which operates wonderfully when there is an under-the-table kickback, as we would say, when there is a return in real benefits. As an example, eros is capable of loving a beautiful object, because there is pleasure and reward in such love. How different is agápè. Agápè not only loves the unlovely, but actually creates beauty in the object it loves. For example, there is this description of humanity in Isaiah 1:6, where we are told how God sees us: "From the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it; but wounds, and bruises, and putrefying sores: they have not been closed, neither bound up, neither mollified with ointment." What a revolting picture! And into this seething mass of ugliness God sent His Son. And with what result? Notice this in Isaiah 13:12: "I will make a man more precious than fine gold; even a man than the golden wedge of Ophir." Agápè not only loves the unlovely but actually creates beauty in the object it loves.
Eros is an acquisitive desire and longing, where as agápè is sacrificial giving. Notice the self-centered motivation here. Eros, grasping for itself, but agápè giving itself away. Agápè is extra-centric, Christo-centric. Eros is always climbing up. It is essentially an upward movement. It is constantly seeking its own betterment. This is the very essence of all heathen religions, and even some Christian religions. For example, consider the "salvation-by-works" idea which is found in one after another of such religions as Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, and many more. The Buddhist raises himself up from one plane of spiritual attainment, by a series of mental efforts, to an ever higher level. The Moslem goes through many kinds of spiritual exercises in seeking his final reward. There is the Hindu who lies upon a bed of nails, walks through a bed of white-hot coals, has flesh hooks placed into his body by which he draws a cart containing an idol, and so on, all in an effort to attain some high spiritual goal.
Agápè, by contrast, is a love which comes down. It is a descending movement. More on this presently. Whereas eros seeks to gain its life, "a life divine, immortalized" (see Nygren, p. 210). Agápè, by contrast once again, lives the life of God, and therefore" dares to lose it." (Nygren, p. 210). Eros is primarily man's love, whereas agápè is primarily God's love. God is Agápè.
Romans 5:7-8 brings out a lesson in contrasts on this very theme of self-centered and Christ-centered loves. Romans 5:7 reads: "For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die." Though I was familiar with this text for many years, I never knew its background for some time. Then one day I learned that the apostle Paul evidently had in mind a well-known Greek legend. The story is that of Alcestis and Admetus. According to this legend Admetus, who was an exceptionally fine example of young Greek manhood, was condemned by the gods to die, unless someone could be found who would be willing to die in his place. Frantically, the Greeks in that community sought to find someone who would be willing to do this, but without success, as not even his parents were willing to give their lives for him. Finally, when all seemed lost, a beautiful young maiden, named Alcestis, said that she loved Admetus so much that she would die for him. And the people were ecstatic. Here, they said, was true love, a willingness to die for someone else. And the story has it that even the gods were so moved by this example of the devotion of Alcestis, that they removed the condemnation of death from Admetus and he did not have to die. And so Admetus and Alcestis finally got married and lived happily ever after.
However, the apostle Paul viewed this matter in a different light. Contrasting this with God's love for us he said, "But God commendeth His love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us" (Romans 5:8). Agape again, a love for the unlovely, not just for someone beautiful and good like Admetus. "While we were yet sinners," Paul said, lost in a mire of iniquity. A revolting sight!
As mentioned earlier, there is a descending movement about agápè, the very opposite of eros, which "seeks its own" by constantly climbing up to higher levels of attainment. This concept of a love which comes down from God to lost humanity was a favorite theme of the apostle Paul, as we learn from such passages as Acts of the Apostles, p. 333 and The Ministry of Healing, p. 501. This favorite sermon of Paul's appears beautifully in Philippians 2:5-8, where he traces the descent of Christ from the loftiest heights of glory to the lowest depths of humiliation in seven steps.
Philippians 2:5-6 describes the first of these steps, where we see Jesus on the same level as that of the Father, as high as it is possible to go in this universe: "Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God." Then comes the second step, in verse 7: "But made Himself of no reputation." How He was regarded by those unfallen beings, who worshipped and adored Him, we can only imagine, but here we find that He "made Himself of no reputation." This was the second step. And then verse 7 again: "and took upon Him the form of a servant." He who had been joyfully served for untold eons of time by loving angels and other created beings now Himself is willing to become a servant, to serve others. This is the third step.
Then verse 7 continues: "and was made in the likeness of men." Here we imagine the Son of God reaching this earth in His journey to a lost world, becoming one with humanity. The word "likeness" here is the same word used in Romans 8:3, "the likeness of sinful flesh," which in the original Greek is "homoiomati," and means "likeness or sameness," not "unlikeness." He actually became "one with humanity." This was the fourth step.
We read now in verse 8: "And being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself." This next step takes Him to an even lower level. We do not find Jesus saying to the people around Him, "Now understand this, you people, I may look like one of you, but in fact I am the only begotten Son of the living God, so let us have some respect around here!" This was not the way of our Lord, the Son of God. We are told that "He humbled Himself." This was the fifth step.
We now come to the very important sixth step. Verse 8 continues: "and became obedient unto death." Surely, we would be tempted to say, this is as low as He could go. He, the Life-Giver, now is willing to be "obedient unto death." But Paul tells of one final step.
Verse 8 continues: "even the death of the cross." This later portion of the verse needs to be examined more closely.
Death by crucifixion, or by being hanged upon a tree, or any part of a tree, was no ordinary death to the Jewish mind. Notice this very important verse in Galatians 3:13: "Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree." The apostle Paul here quotes from Deuteronomy 21:22-23, where we are told that one who is hanged is accursed of God. Ever present in the minds of the Jews of Christ's day was the memory of the death of Absalom, who died while suspended by his neck from the branches of a great oak tree as the mule upon which he was riding passed under it. Moses described anyone who died in such a manner as being "accursed of God."
When Jesus was accused by the religious leaders of His day, of what was it that they accused Him? Clearly, He was charged with the sin of blasphemy. Examples are: Luke 5:20-21, where Jesus said to the man who had been let down through the roof, "Man, thy sins are forgiven thee." And the scribes and the Pharisees present exclaimed, "Who is this which speaketh blasphemies? Who can forgive sins, but God alone?" And also John 10:33, where, after Jesus had asked the Jews for which of His good works they wished to stone Him, they replied, "For a good work we stone Thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that Thou, being a man, makest Thyself God." And, most significant of all, John 8:57-59. After a long conversation with the Jews, they said to Him: "Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? Jesus said unto them, 'Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I AM.'" At this the anger of the Jews reached a boiling point, and they took up stones to stone Him, but we read that He escaped. It was the same at the trial of Jesus (see, for example, Matthew 26:65 and Mark 14:64).
Now according to the law, the penalty for blasphemy was death by stoning (see Leviticus 24:16). But in the case of Jesus, the Jewish leaders did not want a stoning, and they had their reasons. In all of the plottings and conspiracy which went on behind the scenes, careful plans must have been laid to ensure that Jesus would be brought before Pilate, and, when that happened, that Pilate would get the message that it was the will of the people and the religious leadership that Jesus be crucified. And this undoubtedly meant that certain ones had been schooled to incite the mob to shout "Crucify Him, crucify Him," when the time came. This is exactly what happened. Pilate, too weak to resist the demands of the mob, washed his hands of the matter, and gave Jesus over to be crucified.
As those who had been responsible for this travesty of justice slowly followed the tragic procession up the hill toward Golgotha there must have been serious doubts in their minds. They had heard strange accounts of the words and works of Jesus, and even that He had raised people from the dead. Undoubtedly they examined carefully various witnesses. They could have explained, at least to their own satisfaction, the raising of the daughter of Jairus, or the widow's son, as due to the fact that they were not really dead, but only in some kind of temporary sleep or coma. But the raising of Lazarus must have presented a dilemma. Clearly, here was one who had been in the tomb for four days, and witnesses were there who would testify not only to his burial but to his resurrection four days later. Certainly there must have been deep concern in the minds of these religious leaders. Were they making the biggest mistake, not only of their own lives, but of all time?
But when they saw Jesus nailed to the cross, and the cross raised, and Jesus hanging there upon that cross, they must have breathed a sigh of profound relief, because they reasoned that, if this man, Jesus of Nazareth, had been the Messiah, God would never have permitted Him to be hanged on a tree! We imagine that they must have taunted His followers, as they pointed to Him hanging upon the cross, and saying, "There He is, your Messiah, hanging on a tree, under the curse of God." We can only imagine how the disciples and others must have felt during those terrible moments. Remember, they were themselves Jews, and had the same understanding of what it meant to be hanged on a tree.
Whenever you see pictures of Jesus on the cross He is always depicted as appropriately draped. Artists always do this in the interest of modesty. In actual fact, however, when a man was crucified in those days, he would be stripped completely, hung stark naked upon that cross, to extend his humiliation to the ultimate. As we read in Testimonies for the Church, vol. 9, p. 190: "Christ laid aside His royal robe, His kingly crown, and His high command, and stepped down, down, down, to the lowest depths of humiliation." In Isaiah 53:4 we are told: "We esteem Him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted." If you understand all this, then you are beginning to understand the meaning of the word agápè, a love so great that it is willing to be ultimately self-negated.
A little prior to this, in Gethsemane, as Jesus prayed, he felt the weight of the sins of the world pressing down upon Him with a force so great that His life would have been crushed out had He been permitted to die. But Jesus was prevented from dying, and was thus subjected to a force greater than anything you and I could ever be called upon to endure. He actually endured an agony beyond the experience of death, as part of the answer to the charges of Satan when he first began his rebellion in heaven, that God makes laws, and exacts a penalty for disobedience to which He would never subject Himself Thus the Son of God not only took upon Himself the entire weight of the sins of the whole world, but in effect went beyond the experience of death in bearing the penalty for these sins. An agony which would have killed you and me in seconds, and would, in fact, have killed Him had He been permitted to die, He endured without being permitted the sweet release of death. It was like being trapped between the jaws of a giant vice, on one side the weight of the sins of an entire world pressing upon Him, and on the other the fact that He was denied the relief of death. Under this tremendous pressure something had to give, and what gave finally was the frailty of the human flesh. It was as if the blood was actually squeezed out of His system! We are told that His sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling to the ground. Can we ever understand this? What is it which causes a Creator-God to descend to the lowest depths of humiliation in order to redeem a lost humanity? It is a thing called agápè. Love. Ultimate love. Ultimate selflessness! Small wonder that we shall spend eternity in wonder and study of this exhaustless theme we call the Plan of Salvation and still not plumb to the full its shining depths.
Remember that in the Garden of Gethsemane Jesus was no longer before His heavenly Father as a Beloved Son, but as a condemned sinner. And He felt to the full His Father's wrath against sin. This is what He felt, even though in fact His Father's love through all of this was as deep and great toward Him as it had ever been. He had to drink the cup to its last bitter dregs.
Some time after this, on a hill called Golgotha, exactly what happened? What happened was that a man died there, on a Roman cross between two criminals, and that death is the only real death which the universe has witnessed to this point of time. This point needs strong emphasis. In all the history of this vast universe we call the Kingdom of God there has, to date, been only one real death, and that was the death which Jesus, the Son of God, experienced on the cross of Calvary. That death was the equivalent of what the Bible calls the "Second Death" (see Rev. 20:6 and 14; 2:11; 21:8). One who experiences this death feels the horror of eternal separation from God, as will those who after the thousand years, find themselves outside the Holy City, and realize that God has nothing to say to them. They spurned His every offer of mercy and He cannot help them. All they have before them is the horror of eternal blackness. The death which comes to them and reduces them to nothingness is actually an act of mercy on the part of God. As A. T. Jones stated in his Consecrated Way to Christian Perfection, page 119, "It is not the way of the Lord to continue men in life when the only possible use they will make of life is to heap up more misery for themselves."
And it is the equivalent of this death which will come to the lost after the thousand years, that Jesus experienced on the cross of Calvary. A graphic description of what He experienced is given for us on page 753 of the book, The Desire of Ages. It reads as follows:
All His life Christ had been publishing to a fallen world the good news of the Father's mercy and pardoning love. Salvation for the chief of sinners was His theme. But now with the terrible weight of guilt He bears, He cannot see the Father's reconciling face. The withdrawal of the divine countenance from the Saviour in this hour of supreme anguish pierced His heart with a sorrow that can never be fully understood by man. So great was this agony that His physical pain was hardly felt.
Satan with his fierce temptations wrung the heart of Jesus. The Saviour could not see through the portals of the tomb. Hope did not present to Him His coming forth from the grave a conqueror, or tell Him of the Father's acceptance of the sacrifice. He feared that sin was so offensive to God that their separation was to be eternal. Christ felt the anguish which the sinner will feel when mercy shall no longer plead for the guilty race. It was the sense of sin, bringing the Father's wrath upon Him as man's substitute, that made the cup He drank so bitter, and broke the heart of the Son of God.
As we begin to grasp the stupendousness of this demonstration of agápè then truly we "may be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height; and to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge," and "be filled with all the fullness of God." It is one thing for one who has spent a few paltry years in this world to feel the terrible anguish of eternal separation from God, bad as this is, but for One who has been with the Father from all eternity to sense such eternal separation is beyond description. Earlier we mentioned that the synthesis between agápè and eros which Augustine introduced early in history, continued for more than a thousand years, until one man appeared who began to unravel this fusion. That man was Martin Luther. He understood the Biblical teaching in regard to the condition of man and the false teaching of the Immortal Soul doctrine, and so was in a position to understand the truth regarding the Atonement.
Anyone who believes in the doctrine of the Immortal Soul cannot appreciate the fact that Christ died the equivalent of the second death on the cross of Calvary. To such Christ did not really die on the cross that day, but enjoyed a glad reunion with His Father in heaven that very evening, and, so they say, did the thief! In most Bibles Luke 23:43 has been printed with a misplaced comma, which should come after "today" instead of after "thee," making the text say that Jesus and the thief would both be in heaven that very day.
Had Luther's followers continued to understand this truth about the Immortal Soul the synthesis introduced by Augustine would have been unravelled completely, and the Atonement could have been presented clearly and fully. But this was not to be, because Lutherans immediately went back to the previously held belief of an immortal soul. Consequently, the only people today who are in a position to explain this aspect of the Gospel fully are the ones who have been entrusted with the truth regarding the "poisonous drafts of Babylon" (the Immortal Soul doctrine and Sunday sacredness) and the Three Angels' Messages. What a tremendous responsibility rests upon our shoulders!
Some may feel that such a wonderful demonstration of agápè would be possible for Jesus Christ, who was the Son of God, but not for anyone who has fallen in sin. In fact, the Gospel is powerful enough so as to transform human beings who have fallen in sin that they, too, can come to the place where true agápè can be revealed in them.
Consider the example of Moses in Exodus 32:32. The people had sinned a great sin, and God was asking Moses to stand aside, so that the people could reap the results of their transgression and be destroyed. God promised Moses that he would be the father of a new generation of God's people. But Moses would not stand aside. Instead, and notice this in the verse, Moses pleads, "Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin--;" At this point there is a punctuation mark which is found nowhere else in the entire King James Version of the Bible, a dash followed by a semi-colon. There must be a reason why the translators used it here. Clearly, the context demanded it, and this the translators understood. Moses must have broken down. His big, manly frame shaken with sobs, he could not continue. When he finally recovered, he said, "And if not, blot me I pray thee out of thy book." I can imagine God saying, Moses you are a man after My own heart.
The apostle Paul reached the highest point in his linguistic expression in 1 Corinthians 13. Yes, the Apostle Paul knew about agápè. Romans 9:1 and 3, "My conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost. ... for I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh." He, like Moses, was willing to die that His friends might be saved eternally. That, my friends, is agápè.
Yes, you say, two men, but what about us living now. The last end of the human race, how can we ever be full of agápè love? I fully believe all those who are ready for translation, will be an agápè motivated people. They will reflect Christ fully, which means that they will be motivated by love, agápè, in all that they do.
There are those, for example, who will go through the time of Jacob's trouble after probation has closed. They are in an agony of concern as to whether every sin has been confessed and put away. Many think that this concern is because they will be lost if there are unconfessed sins in their lives. But the fact is, that their concern is not that their own poor little souls might not be saved, but something altogether different. It is that an unconfessed sin would cause the holy name of God to be reproached. They are motivated, not by self-centered concern, but by a Christo-centric concern for the holy name of God (see the Great Controversy, p. 619).
Again, on page 461, we are told of the great revivals of the nineteenth century, when many souls sorrowed unto repentance, and there were deep and genuine conversions. But these degenerated into so-called revivals which played upon the emotions and gratified the love for the sensational and the startling. Nevertheless we read on page 464 of a revival among God's people toward the close of time, when there will be seen again that primitive godliness which has not been seen since apostolic times, and that there will be a great outpouring of the Spirit of God. Satan, we are told, will attempt to prevent this revival by introducing a counterfeit, during which it will appear that God's special blessing is being poured out.
Usually, people measure such blessings by the standard of accessions to the churches. When large numbers are added to the church this is taken to mean that God is blessing the church wonderfully. Satan knows this, and will be only too happy to help the churches increase their memberships if, of course, they will cooperate with him and not be too particular as to whether the new additions to the church are converted or not. When churches become obsessed with numbers, this makes for a fertile field for Satan's plans.
Could it be that this false revival could infect the Seventh-day Adventist Church? Few will deny that an obsession with large numbers and statistical accession has become ever more characteristic of our church program. Please do not misunderstand me. I am not against baptisms. In my time I have baptized hundreds of people into the Adventist Church and I hope that before this is all over I will baptize many more. But the problem, as I see it, is this: Is it possible that, with all of this emphasis on "baptize, baptize, baptize," that ministers, who are after all only human beings, may be tempted to baptize people into the church who are not ready to become Seventh-day Adventists? Can the many pressures under which so many ministers work today bring about just such a situation?
Let me pose a question. If we were to baptize every man, woman, and child in the world today into the Seventh-day Adventist Church, would that mean that the Lord would be ready to return on the clouds of glory? This question answers itself. The answer is, of course, No! All we would end up with would be a Seventh-day Adventist Mafia. We would still be fighting wars, but of course not on Saturdays, and we would be feeding the armies on Little Links and Big Franks!
If it should happen that there is a great influx into the church as a result of Satan's efforts to deceive us, someone will have to sound the warning. Ellen White, on page 464 of The Great Controversy, warns that "Multitudes will exult that God is working marvellously for them, when the work is that of another spirit." Whoever sounds such a warning will have to point our that what is thought to be the work of the Holy Spirit is actually the work of Satan. And this is where there is a serious problem.
Listen carefully! If I were to say that the work of Satan is the work of the Holy Spirit, then I would be a fool, and I can always be forgiven for being a fool. But, on the other hand, if I were to say that the work of the Holy Spirit is the work of Satan, then what? As I understand Matthew 12, this would be committing the unpardonable sin. The Pharisees accused Jesus of casting out devils by Beelzebub, the prince of devils. Solemnly Jesus warned them that they could be forgiven for speaking against the Son of man, but speaking against the Holy Spirit was something for which they never could be forgiven. Therefore, if anyone is about to warn the church that what they think is the work of the Holy Spirit is really the work of Satan, he must know that if he is wrong, he would be committing the unpardonable sin.
One who is motivated only by self-centered concerns would probably say to himself, "This is dangerous. I won't take any chances on this one. I'll just keep my mouth shut." And so he lets the devil win. But an agápè-motivated individual will not hesitate to sound the warning even though he knows his eternal salvation is on the line. It is this kind of challenge which faces God's people in these last days.
We are told about the very, very last message soon to go to the world. This message will not be a spoken message, some new revelation about the Sabbath or the Sanctuary, or some related topic. This last message is going to be a demonstration of God's character of love (see Christ's Object Lessons, p. 415). God is actually waiting for a people who will reveal His character to the people of this world. God owes it to the people of earth to give them one last look at Jesus before He comes on the clouds of glory, and He will do this through His people in whom His character of love has been perfectly reproduced (see ibid. p. 69).
According to Matthew 24:14 this "Gospel of the Kingdom" will be preached to all peoples and nations of the earth, "and then shall the end come." Such a recovery of the gospel as came to this people toward the end of the nineteenth century contains within it the power to prepare a people for translation, and this is the reason why "this is the message that God commanded to be given to the world" (Testimonies to Ministers and Gospel Workers, p. 92). At the very center of this message is the agape theme, and this message will be demonstrated to the peoples of earth through those who have been transformed by its power. It will be God's last appeal to humanity before the doors of mercy will be forever closed for the human race.
Permit me to ask you one last question. If you knew that you could put an end to sin by surrendering your hope of eternal life, would you do it? This, dearly beloved, is what Jesus did! Because He is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent, God could have dealt with the sin problem in some other way. Perhaps He could have blotted Satan and all his followers out of the universe, and then removed all memory of what had happened from the minds of every other being in His kingdom, and made a fresh start. But, in another sense, God really was not able to do this. Why? Simply because "God is Agápè." And because, finally, "GOD SO LOVED THE WORLD."