World's cresset. [volume] (JAH-ville [Colony], Fowler, Mo.) 1891-19??, 1911-12-21
ANSWER To QUESTION
NJ M. 10
~ I.NTIUN NO 20.

"hcr does Il make to as ;nt!lis dav
II there was two men. ore crraf.
vt Oh the sixth day andthe either
one lofmcu alter the seventh day:
--Eli:am ppcol.
We believe that We snail be
Anle TO prove that it makes quite
IL difference, knowing tlat There
WAS two different mel'. SPOKEN Of
III (Gpn. I-.j.2Il and, (Ccn. 2.D
And we shall say. speaking from
our limited know edge that it. he.
comes very necessary. and very
important for us to know. And
. the first reaSyn for this is: that
! The man who breaches should
know, whctner he is preaching
the truth OF not. And it might
be asked, VIII God hold man
responsible, tor what he does
not know? Ard shall answer
we think not. But. yet, vc must
say farther, that there must be
I consideration in this. And
that consideration is this; II the
man who breaches has never had
any Opportunity Of learning any
better, then God will not hold
. shem responsible. But in this
case we would have to exclude
the word of God. Or else We
would have to accept the two
man theory. For Coo said this
Tue word is a lamp unto my feet and ii light
l,nto my path. Psalms lIo-o5.
Therefore you will see, that if
the lnan had access to the word
of God, under the one man
theory there would Re no excuse
for him, For Poul said.
Study to shcw thysrlf approved unto Cod. n
workman that needeth not to he ashamed
rightly diyi!mg the word of truth, Tim. = i
Py this the elders will plainly
see that there is 70 excuse left
for the one man theory preacher;
unless as we have said that he
has no Bible nor can't get 'ne
I For the Instructions is 10 study
, to shew yourself approved unt'
God and then the word become'
a lamp unto your feet and a ]igh
to your pathway. For Paul Sale
again.
But vc, hrcthcn. aye not in darkness, tina
that day should ovcrtnkc you as Il thief.
Yea,e all the children Of light. and tho chile
rem of the day: we are rot of the night nor {
. darkness Thcss. 5-4-5.
So the reader learns that the-
is no excuse for ignorance under
the one man theory, unless a.
we said above, he has no bible
Therefore. if there is n) excus
for the man, under the one ma
theory, it becomes very nessar
TOR the man tc know that Their
was two men. And that the
were two separate and distlnc
characters from the beginning {
each Of them. For there is n
mistake, the reasonings above
does not give any room for a
excuse of ignorance under tn
one mar theory only to have 7
Bible. For this reason we repea
that, it becomes nessary for I
:, to know that there was two me-
and yet we will find an cxcu:
under the TWO MEN theory Il
ignorance, to the Jew first ar
also to the gentle, Or else de-
reader the scril ire above quo
ed from Il Thes. 3.4.5| Confllc
with the following scripture,
.Andif any one of the common people
i, through ignorance, while he doch somew
against AIRY of the commandments OF IN" IL
concerning things which ought not To- be dc
and he guilty
Or il his sin, which he hath sinned' come
b,s knowledge; then he snail bring his otleii
a,kid of the go 'ts. IL female without blemish,
his sin which he hath sh.nei. Lev. 4-"s -
In ignorance there is an e
cuse hut when you know once
), was wrong you must repent.
Leaving now the point OF igr
!. rance for the consideration oft
reader, we say again that it /
cones necessary for us to lzn(
\ that ther4were two men, inord