THE CHRISTIAN MESSENGER AND REFORMER.
No. 8. OCTOBER, 1837. VOL. 1.
FROM THE CHRISTIAN BAPTIST.
ADDRESS TO THE READER. - NO. 4.
Experimental Religion.
WE have, in two preceding Numbers, presented our views on two charges that have been very generally rumoured against us.* There yet remains another which we have promised to notice. On these points we wish to be clearly understood. The charge now before us, is, that we deny "experimental religion." Before we plead "guilty" or "not guilty," of this impeachment, we should endeavour to understand the subject matter of it. Not having been in the use of the phrase "experimental religion," I could neither affirm nor deny anything about it. The question, then, is, what is the thing? The name we have not in our vocabulary; and, therefore, could only deny the thing constructively. We will first ask, what does the Bible say about it. Upon examination, I found it says not one word about "experimental religion." The Bible is as silent upon this topic as upon the "Romish mass." I then appealed to the Encyclopaedia. The only thing like it, which I could find, was "experimental philosophy," which is a philosophy that can be proved by experiment. I then looked into the theological dictionaries, and soon found different kinds of religion, such as "natural," "revealed," &c., but not a word about "experimental." I then applied to a friend, who had once been deeply initiated into the modern sublimities of the refined popular doctrine. I was then informed there were two kinds of religion much talked of in the pulpit and amongst the people - the one called "heart religion," and the other "head religion" - the latter dwelling exclusively in the head, and the former in the heart. I also learned that the former was sometimes called "Christian experience," and this was presumed to be the thing intended by the words "experimental religion." As the New Testament is my religious creed, I appealed to it again. But it was as silent as the grave on all these distinctions. I then began to philosophize, in the popular way, on the head and the heart, with a design of deciding which of these two religions was the better one. I had heard that "head religion" consisted in notions, and "heart religion" in feelings. - Finding that all the learned agreed that the spirit of a man dwells in his head, and not in his heart, I had well nigh concluded that "head religion" must be the better of the two, as the human spirit is concerned more immediately with what takes place in its habitation than elsewhere. I reasoned in this way - that if the spirit of a man dwells in his head, then head religion must be better than heart religion, and heart religion than hand religion,
***
__________________________________________________________________
*See page 145 and 152, Christian Messenger.
&c.* Being unwilling to conclude too hastily on this subject, I thought of examining the phrase "Christian experience." On reflection, I found that this phrase represented a very comprehensive idea. Every Christian has considerable experience, and some have experienced a thousand times more than others. Paul experienced many perils by land and by sea - by his own countrymen - by the heathen - in the city - in the wilderness - among false brethren. He experienced weariness, painfulness, watchings often, hunger, thirst, fastings, cold, and nakedness, stripes and imprisonments. From the Jews he experienced five whippings, each of forty stripes, save one. He was thrice beaten with rods - once stoned - thrice shipwrecked - a day and a night in the deep. Besides this, he experienced all the anxieties and griefs, all the sorrows and joys, that arose from the care of the churches. This was, indeed, the experience of a Christian, and this I never denied. Many Christians can tell of similar experiences, but none can give a narrative so long, so varied, and entertaining, as that of Paul. Even Peter the apostle, was not able to detail such an experience.
But, on reading this to a friend, I am told that I have not yet hit upon the point in question; that the Christian experience of which the populars speak, is, "the inward experience of this grace upon the heart." What is the meaning of this grace upon the heart, said I? I know that the glad tidings is sometimes called the grace of God. - Thus says Paul, "the grace of God that brings salvation, has appeared to all men, teaching us," &c. Here the gospel is called "the grace of God appearing to all men." Again, says Paul, he who seeks to be justified by the law, is fallen from grace; or has renounced the gospel. Indeed, nothing is so worthy of the name "grace of God" as the gospel. Now, if this gospel, which is sometimes called "the word of God," "the spirit," "the grace," and "the truth," dwell in a man, that is, be believed sincerely, like a fruitful vine, it yields in his heart and in his life the heavenly cluster of love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, fidelity, meekness, temperance. These are the fruits of the Spirit. Like precious ointment, it diffuses in his heart heavenly odours, and the sweetness of its perfume exhales in his life, in the work of faith, in the labour of love, and the patience of hope. This, said I, is just what I contend for. If you call this "Christian experience," I never denied it; yea, I have always taught it. But I cannot approve of the name, since it is altogether an ambiguous name.
My friend replied, "this is not precisely the popular use of the phrase. It denotes, amongst most of the populars, a certain mental experience to becoming a Christian, an exercise of mind, a process through which a person must pass before he can esteem himself a true Christian; and until we know from his recital of it that he has been the subject of it, we cannot esteem him a Christian."
Then it is some invisible, indescribable energy exerted upon the minds of men, in order to make them Christians; and that, too, independent of, or prior to, the word believed. I read in the New Testament of many who were the subjects of energies
***
_______________________________________________________________________________
*To prevent mistakes, let it be understood that, in speaking of the head and heart, in the above connexion, we speak after the manner of vain philosophy. The term heart is often met with in the scriptures, and it has ascribed to it every exercise of the understanding, will, and affections. The moderns suppose it to have respect to the affections and dispositions only. But in scripture it is said, "to know, to understand, to study, to discern, to devise, to mediate, to reason, to indite, to ponder, to consider, to believe, to doubt, to be wise," &c. See Deut. 4:39; Ps. 45:1, 49:3; Prov. 10:8, 15:28, 16:9, 19:21; Eccl. 8:5; Jer. 24:7; Matt. 13:15; Mark 2:6-8, 11:23; Luke 2:19-35.
and diverse gifts of the Holy Spirit, but it was "after they had believed." The gifts of the Holy Spirit by which the gospel was confirmed, by which it was demonstrated to be of God, were conferred on the Jews and Samaritans, after they had believed. Even the apostles themselves did not receive those powers and gifts of the Holy Spirit until they became disciples of Christ. On the Gentiles was poured out the Holy Spirit, or his gifts, while they heard Peter preaching the glad tidings, which they believed; for they came to hear Peter in such circumstances as to dispose them to believe every word he said. The age of those gifts has passed away, and now the influence of the Holy Spirit is only felt in and by the word believed. Hence, says Peter, "You are born again, not of corruptible, but of .incorruptible seed, by the word of God, which lives and abides for ever" - and "this is the word that by the gospel is preached to you."
This descriptive preaching, of which we hear so much, is the most insipid and useless thing in the world. An orthodox divine of my acquaintance spends about one-fourth of every year in preaching up the necessity, nature, and importance of regeneration. He usually tells the people his own story; that is, the history of his own regeneration. He sometimes comes to "visions and revelations." He tells the people that they are "as spiritually dead as a stone;" "there is not one spark of life in unregenerate sinners;" nor can they, "in the state of nature," do any thing that can contribute to their regeneration, "It depends entirely upon the Spirit of God, which, as the wind blows where it lists, works when, and upon whom it pleases." If there were not a thousand preachers like him, I would not disturb his mind by thus noticing the burden of his message. The spirit by which he speaks is doubtless not that Spirit which was promised the apostles; for that Spirit, Messiah said, would not speak of himself, but of him. But this preacher's spirit speaks of himself, and not of Christ. It is worthy of notice that the twelve apostles, in all their public addresses, on record, delivered not one sentence of this kind of preaching; no, not one. - And suppose it were as true as the gospel, that such is the state of mankind, we can conceive of no possible good which could result from such descriptive harangues. They resemble a physician, who, instead of administering a remedy to his patient, delivers him a lecture on the nature of his disease. Miserable comforters are such preachers! They have no glad tidings of great joy to all people. Methinks I see a poor unfortunate sinner, lying in a slough, up to the neck in the mire, perishing with cold and hunger; and one of the orthodox divines riding along observes him. Methinks I hear him tell him, fellow sinner, you are in a miserable condition - mired from head to foot. Believe me you are both cold and hungry; and I can assure you that you are unable to help yourself out of this calamity. You could as easily carry one of these hills upon your shoulders as extricate yourself from your present circumstances. Perish with cold and hunger you must: it is in vain for you to attempt an escape. Every effort you make to get out only sinks you deeper in distress. Your Creator could, if he pleased, bring you out; but, whether he lists or not, is uncertain. Fare you well! - The unfortunate sinner exclaims, What good is in your address? He is assured that it is an article of precious truth, worthy to be believed. But when believed, what good is in the faith of it? The gospel is glad tidings of great joy to all people; and whatever is called "gospel," that is not good news and worthy of all acceptation, is not gospel. - But I have wandered from my subject.
The popular belief of a regeneration previous to faith, or a knowledge of the gospel, is replete with mischief. Similar to this is a notion that obtains among many of a "law work," or some terrible process of terror and despair through which a person must pass, as through the pious Bunyan's Slough of Despond, before he can believe the gospel. It is all equivalent to this; that a man must become a desponding, trembling infidel, before he can become a believer. Now, the gospel makes no provision for despondency, inasmuch as it assures all who believe and obey it, upon the veracity of God, that they are forgiven and accepted in the Beloved.
A devout preacher told me, not long since, that he was regenerated about three years before he believed in Christ. He considered himself "as born again by a physical energy of the Holy Spirit, as a dead man would be raised to life by the mighty power of the Eternal Spirit." Upon his own hypothesis, (metaphysical, it is true,) he was three years a "godly unbeliever." He was pleasing and acceptable to God "without faith;" and if he had died during the three years, he would have been saved, though he believed not the gospel.* Such is the effect of metaphysical theology.
I read, some time since, of a revival in the state of New York, in which the Spirit of God was represented as being abundantly poured out on Presbyterians, Methodists, and Baptists. I think the converts in the order of the names were about three hundred Presbyterians, three hundred Methodists, and two hundred and eighty Baptists. On the principles of Bellamy, Hopkins, and Fuller, these being all regenerated without any knowledge of the gospel, there is no difficulty in accounting for their joining different sects. The Spirit did not teach the Presbyterians to believe that "God had foreordained whatsoever comes to pass;" nor the Methodists to deny it. He did not teach the Presbyterians and the Methodists that infants were members of the church, and to be baptized; nor the Baptists to deny it.
But on the hypothesis of the Apostle James, viz., "Of his own will begat he us by the word of truth." I think it would be difficult to prove that the Spirit of God had any thing to do with the aforesaid revival.
Enthusiasm flourishes, blooms under the popular systems. This man was regenerated when asleep, by a vision of the night. That man heard a voice in the woods, saying, "Your sins be forgiven you." A third saw his Saviour descending to the tops of the trees at noonday. A thousand form a band, and sit up all night to take heaven by surprise. Ten thousand are waiting in anxiety for a power from on high to descend upon their souls; they frequent meetings for the purpose of obtaining this power. Another class, removed so far south, by special illumination, have discovered that there is no hell; that the Devil and his angels
***
__________________________________________________________________
*We would observe, that we conceive the great error of the modern philosophers, concerning the operations of the Holy Spirit, to be, that they are the same physical operations now, which were exhibited in those days, when men spake with tongues, healed diseases, and wrought every species of miracles, by the immediate agency of the Holy Spirit, for the confirmation of their testimony; when they spake, prophesied, discerned spirits, and interpreted oracles, by the immediate impulse of the Spirit. We do not suppose that they contend for an agency to the same degree, but only of the same species. But we are taught that since those gifts have ceased, the Holy Spirit now operates upon the minds of sinners only by the word. With respect to pagans, all those incapable of hearing the word, the scriptures do not teach us what Plato has taught thousands of modern divines. The regeneration of pagans without the word, is a dogma not quite so rational as the dogmas of a regeneration after death in purgatory. In spite of all our efforts, the vortex of metaphysical jargon will draw us in. I wrote this to prevent mistakes - perhaps it may create some. But, "to the testimony," believe us not if we speak not its dogmas. We doubt not but in the above we speak a mixed dialect; perhaps half the language of Ashdod, and half the language of Canaan. We are positive on one point, that the scriptures teach us not the modern doctrine, and the ancient philosophical doctrine of "physical operations of the Divine Spirit," in order to faith."
will ultimately ascend to the skies; and that Judas himself, Herod, and Pontius Pilate, will shine like stars for ever and ever. And, to encourage the infatuation, the preacher mounts the rostrum, and with his sermon, either in notes or committed to memory, he "prays to God for his Spirit to guide his tongue, and to send a message that he will bless to the salvation of that dear congregation." Thus the people lay themselves out for operations and new revelations. Like the Phoenix in the fable, they and the preacher have gathered a bundle of dry sticks, and they set about clapping their wings with one accord, that they may fan them into a flame - which sometimes actually happens, if our faith could be so strong as to believe it.
From all this scene of raging enthusiasm, be admonished, my friends to open your Bibles and to hearken to the voice of God, which is the voice of reason. God now speaks to us only by his word. By his Son, in the New Testament, he has fully revealed himself and his will. This is the only revelation of his Spirit which we are to regard. The popular preachers, and the popular systems, alike render the word of God of none effect. Some of them are so awfully bold as to represent it as "a dead letter. According to them it ought never to have been translated; for the reading of it in an unknown tongue, if accompanied with some supernatural power, with some new revelation of the Spirit, would have been as suitable to the salvation of men, as though read in our own tongue. The jarring elements of which their systems are composed, do, however, by the necessary laws of discordant principles, in the act of combustion reflect so much light as to convince us that the written word is the last appeal. Let us make it the first and the last. It comes to us in the demonstration of the Holy Spirit, and with the power of miraculous evidence. The word of Jesus Christ is, "spirit and life," "The word of God is quick and powerful, sharper than any two-edged sword;" yea, it is the sword of the spirit, it is the spirit of his mouth. "The entrance of thy word, O Lord, gives light, and makes the simple wise."
***
FOUNDATION OF CHRISTIAN UNION.
(From Christianity Restored.)
FAITH. - No testimony, no faith: for faith is only the belief of testimony, or confidence in testimony as true. To believe without testimony, is just as impossible as to see without light. The measure, quality, and power of faith, are always found in the testimony believed.
Where testimony begins, faith begins; and where testimony ends, faith ends. We believe Moses just as far as Moses speaks or writes; and when Moses has recorded his last fact, or testified his last truth, our faith in Moses terminates. His five books are, therefore, the length, and breadth, the heighth, and depth, or, in other words, the measure of our faith in Moses. The quality, or value of faith is found in the quality or value of the testimony. If the testimony be valid and authoritative, our faith is strong and operative. "If," says John, "we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater," stronger, and more worthy of credit. The value of a bank bill, is the amount of the precious metals which it represents, and the indisputable evidence of its genuineness; so the value of faith is the importance of the facts which the testimony presents, and the assurance afforded that the testimony is true. True, or unfeigned faith, may be contrasted with feigned faith; but true faith is the belief of truth; for he that believes a lie, believes in vain.
The power of faith is also the power, or moral meaning of the testimony, or of the facts which the testimony represents. If by faith I am transported with joy, or overwhelmed in sorrow, that joy or sorrow is in the facts contained in the testimony, or in the nature and relation of those facts to me. If faith purifies the heart, works by love, and overcomes the world, this power is in the facts believed. If a father has more joy in believing that a lost son has been found, than in believing that a lost sheep has been brought home to his fold, the reason of this greater joy is not in the nature of his believing, but in the nature of the facts believed.
Here I am led to expatiate on a very popular and pernicious error of modern times. That error is, that the nature, or power and saving efficacy of faith, is not in the truth believed, but in the nature of our faith, or in the manner of believing the truth. Hence all that unmeaning jargon about the nature of faith, and all those disdainful sneers at what is called "historic faith," - as if there could be any faith without history, written or spoken. Who ever believed in Jesus Christ, without hearing the history of him? "How shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard?" Faith never can be more than the receiving of testimony as true, or the belief of testimony; and if the testimony be written, it is called history - though it is as much history when flowing from the tongue, as when flowing from the pen.
Let it be again repeated, and remembered, that there is no other manner of believing a fact, than receiving it as true. If it is not received as true, it is not believed, and when it is believed, it is no more than regarded as true. This being conceded, then it follows that the efficacy of faith is always in the fact believed, or the object received, and not in the nature or manner of believing.
"Faith was bewildered much by men who meant
To make it clear, so simple in itself,
A thought so rudimental and so plain,
That none by comment could it plainer make.
All faith was one. In object, not in kind,
The difference lay. The faith that saved a soul,
And that which in the common truth believed,
In essence, were the same. Hear, then, what faith,
True, Christian faith, which brought salvation, was:
Belief in all that God revealed to men,
Observe, in all that God revealed to men,
In all he promised, threatened, commanded, said,
Without exception, and without a doubt."*
***
__________________________________________________________________
*Pollock's Course of Time, Book 8 p.189.
This holds universally in all the sensitive, intellectual, and moral powers of man. All our pleasures and pains, all our joys and sorrows, are the effects of the objects of sensation, reflection, faith, &c., apprehended or received, and not in the nature of the exercise of any power or capacity with which we are endowed. We shall illustrate and confirm this assertion by an appeal to the experience of all.
Let us glance at all our sensitive powers. If, on surveying with the eye a beautiful landscape, I am well pleased, and on surveying a battle field strewed with the spoils of death, I am pained, - is it in accordance with truth to say, that the pleasure or the pain received was occasioned by the nature of vision, or the mode of seeing? Was it not the sight, the tiling seen, the object of vision, which produced the pleasure and the pain? The action of looking, or the mode of seeing, was in both cases the same; but the things seen, or the objects of vision, were different, - consequently, the effects produced were different.
If on hearing the melody of the grove I am delighted, and on hearing the peals of thunder breaking to pieces the cloud, dark with horror, hanging over my head, I am terrified, - is the delight or the terror to be ascribed to the manner or nature of hearing, or to the thing heard? Is it not the thing heard, which produces the delight or the terror?
If I am refreshed by the balmy fragrance of the opening bloom of spring, or sickened by the foetid effluvia of putrid carcasses, - are these effects to be ascribed to the peculiar nature or mode of smelling, or the thing smelt? Or when the honey and the gall come in contact with my taste, - is the sweet or the bitter to be regarded as the effect of my manner of tasting, or to the object tasted? And when I touch the ice, or the blazing torch, - is the effect or feeling produced to be imputed to the manner of feeling them, or to the thing felt? May we not, then, affirm that all the pleasures and pains of sense; all the effects of sensation; are the results, not of the manner in which our five senses are exercised, but of the objects on which they are exercised? It may be said, without in the least invalidating this conclusion, that the more intimate the exercise of our senses is with the things on which they are exercised, the stronger and more forcible will be the impressions made; but still it is the object seen, heard, smelt, tasted, or felt, which affects us.
Passing from the outward to the inward man, and on examining the powers of intellection one by one, we shall find no exception to the law which pervades all our sensitive powers. It is neither the faculty of perception, nor the manner of perception, but the thing perceived, that excites us to action; it is not the exercise of reflection, but the thing reflected upon: it is not memory, nor the exercise of recollection, but the thing remembered: it is not imagination, but the thing imagined : it is not reason itself, nor the exercise of reason, but the thing reasoned upon, which affords pleasure or pain - which excites to action - which cheers, allures, consoles - which grieves, disquiets, or discommodes us.
Ascending to our volitions and our affections, we shall find the same universality. In a word, it is not choosing, nor refusing; it is not loving, hating, fearing, desiring, nor hoping; it is not the nature of any power, faculty or capacity of our nature, nor the simple exercise of them, but the objects or things upon which they are exercised, which give us pleasure or pain; which induce us to action, or influence our behaviour. Faith, then, or the power of believing, must be an anomalous thing; a power sui generis; an exception to the laws under which every power, faculty, or capacity of man is placed, unless its measure, quality, power, and efficacy be in the facts which are testified, in the objects on which it terminates.
There is no connexion of cause and effect more intimate; there is no system of dependencies more closely linked; there is no arrangement of things more natural or necessary, than the ideas represented by the terms fact, testimony, faith, and feeling. The first is for the last, and the two intermediates are made necessary by the force of circumstances, as the means for the end. The fact, or the thing said or done, produces the change in the frame of mind. The testimony, or the report of the thing said or done, is essential to belief; and belief of it, is necessary to bring the thing said or done to the heart. The change of heart, is the end proposed in this part of the process of regeneration; and we may see that the process on the part of Heaven is, thus far, natural and rational; or, in other words, consistent with the constitution of our nature.
THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST.
(From the Heretic Detector.)
THE Bible is the most ancient and authentic book in the world. It contains information upon subjects the most important. It answers the most perplexing and interesting questions ever asked. - What am I? Whence came I? Whither am I going? - As voluminous as the volume is, its contents may be reduced to the following classes:- 1. History. - 2. Prophecy. - 3. Law. - and 4. Gospel. The two first relate to events; the first to past, the second to future events. Law relates to authority, and depends upon it for its existence. Gospel has respect to condition.
There are many gospels mentioned in the Scriptures. - One by Moses to the Hebrews in Egyptian bondage. Heb. 4:2; One by the Angel to the shepherds on the night of Emanuel's birth - Luke 2:10-11. Neither of these may, with propriety, be called the gospel of Christ. There is more than one method of ascertaining what the gospel of Jesus Christ is. It may be done,
1. By learning where - when - and by whom, it was first to be preached.
i. Where? (Isa. 2:3; Micah 4:2; Luke 24:47; Acts 1:4-8.)
ii. Time, or when? This may be learned from the type, Pentecost, which took place fifty days after the feast of unleavened bread - fifty days after the resurrection of Christ:- (Make the calculation yourself.)
iii. By whom? Matt. 16:13-19; Acts 2d chap.
Peter was the man who was honoured with the privilege of first preaching the gospel. True it was preached in the Garden of Eden, - to Abraham, in miniature; and it may be seen in these and many other prophecies and promises in the old scriptures, just as the oak may be seen in the acorn.
2. A second method of ascertaining what the gospel is, is to learn its constituent parts. They are facts - commands - and promises.
Facts three - that Christ died for our sins - was buried - rose from the dead - 1 Cor. 15:3-4.
Commands three - Believe - reform - be immersed.
- The first relates to facts - second to motive - third to state.
Promises three. - Remission - Holy Spirit - Eternal life. The first relates to the past - second to the present - third to the future.
Now, let us see whether these were ever preached in this way before the day of Pentecost. Facts were not - see them - they were not facts until after the resurrection of Christ. To be preached first, not in the wilderness by the baptist; nor in Galilee by Jesus - but in Jerusalem by Peter.
These are two methods of ascertaining what the gospel is - They both lead to the same conclusion.
I have thus given you, in brief, my methods of finding out what the gospel is. Some of my best preaches have been made on this subject. It is a very impressive method of exhibiting the glorious gospel of Jesus Christ.
J.R. HOWARD.
***
INFANT SPRINKLING IS A DOGMA OF THE PRIESTS.
No one who understands the gospel needs puzzle himself about "the salvation of infants." It is a dogma of the priests, by which they make money, and build up their unholy craft. They have invented the dogma of the imputation of original sin, by which they make out that infants are in danger of hell fire.* They have invented a rantism or rite of sprinkling, by which to wash away this sin, and fit them for heaven. If they die unsprinkled, some of them will not bury them in "consecrated ground;" for "they have died as dies a dog." They "regenerate" a sinful child, and wash away its original sin by sprinkling it in the name of the Father, &c.! Infants are fit subjects for the rights of superstition; for it is all Amen to them! And thus it is by inventions that Antichrist has conjured up a "Salvation" and "damnation of infants," and so far hoodwinked the world as to cajole the most of us into its reception.
J.T., M.D.
***
__________________________________________________________________
*They have taught, though I believe they are getting ashamed of the dogma, that "there are infants in hell a span long!" - Merciful priests! And nothing can save them hut sprinkling their faces with holy water!
MODERN HERESY. - NO. 1.
(From the Heretic Detector.)
Without attempting an etymological definition of the word heresy, I shall content myself by giving Professor Stuart's explanation in the following words; "The claims of the Bible to be authoritative being once admitted, the simple question in respect to it is, what does it teach in regard to any particular passage; what idea did the original writer mean to convey? When this is ascertained by the legitimate rules of translation, it is authoritative. This is orthodoxy in the highest and best sense of the word, and every thing which is opposed to it - which modifies it - which fritters its meaning away, is heterodoxy, is heresy; to whatever name or party it is attached." In connexion with this explanation coming from high authority, let it be remembered that Paul ranks heresies among the works of the flesh. (Gal. 5:20.) From which we may rationally conclude that so long as naughty persons go about with froward mouths sowing discord, heresy will be as a thorn in the sides of the righteous. Peter predicted there would be false teachers, who would "bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction." "And many," said he, "shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of." (2 Peter, chap 2.) The Bible-distorters have pernicious and hateful ways. They lead astray thousands by their cunningly devised fables; keep the minds of the obsequious hearers locked up as much as possible from the light of life, and bind the devotees of priestcraft fast to the car of fate. Much has been done, and much remains to be done, to put a stop to the march of lying teachers, whose steps are attended with blight and mildew. 'Tis not a momentary glare of sunlight that dispels the fogs that rise up in the night and cover "hill and dale." The sun in his strength for several hours in succession, must act through the medium of a clear atmosphere in order to exhibit fairly the mountain's brow, or the ocean's face. So, it is not now, and then, the light contained in a beautiful essay that can drive away the inky clouds of mental darkness overspreading states and nations. These things premised, the reader is informed, that it will be my object in this and the subsequent number to notice and attempt to disprove some of the claims, pretensions, and teachings of those who profess to have an extraneous call, qualification, and mission to expound the oracles of Heaven. What I mean by an extraneous call, is one that professes to have heavenly information through some other means than that of the Bible. There are many now in the field of strife, who claim to be sent of God in a very peculiar sense, having, when at meeting, in sight of a multitude, a visible sanctimoniousness about them. They pretend to a quantum of super-excellent wisdom, which is far better than any mortal can derive from written Revelation; and, hence it is, that they are rarely ever heard to recommend the Bible to the attention of those who attend their ministrations. Such teachers, not unfrequently, are heard endeavouring to make the impression in the commencement of their harangues, that just what the Lord may please to suggest to their minds, they will speak forth to the people; and, strange enough, in the winding up petitions of their long-winded exercises, they ask God to bless the truth and pardon errors, for Christ's sake! Now, to what does such a course of conduct amount? When stripped of the mantle of deceivableness, it just amounts to this:- Lord, if thou hast spoken any thing erroneous through empty organs of clay, be pleased to forgive it in the name of Jesus thy dear Son!! Has any man of common sense the moral jaundice so bad, as not to see the inconsistency and absurdity of such notionalities? Ah! these modern "self-commissioned soul-savers!!" Nothing of an intellectual cast under the wide expanse of heaven, is more clear to impartial, intelligent, reflecting Bible-readers, than that such pretenders as they who profess to be called to preach in the popular acceptation, do not declare the plan of a present salvation from sin, as laid down in the New Testament. Now, one of two things is evident. They either know the plan and will not declare it, or they do not know it, and, therefore, cannot make it known, and in either case, not called of God to the office which they have usurped. Consequently, they are not under the protecting smiles, but repulsive frowns of insulted Heaven. If they know the right way, and do not walk in it themselves, nor tell others how to walk therein, they must be denounced as dishonest persons. But if they do not know it, it is demonstration at once, that they are not called; for it surely would be bad policy to call a set of dishonest, selfish, bigoted, non-true-teaching mortals.
Having briefly glanced at some of their claims and pretensions, I will in the next place, call up for reflection a few items of their teachings. They teach that the Spirit of God, as a precursor, must first illuminate the mind before it can see the beauties displayed in the pages of God's holy book. But how will this agree with what David says? (Psa. 119.) "The entrance of thy words giveth light." It follows as a matter of course, that their teaching, in this respect at least, is wrong. For how could the entrance of words give light when the mind is previously enlightened by superior brightness and splendour? Can the twinklings of a star illuminate the sky, when the broad blaze of the sun is on the upper blue? What is the advantage of candle light in the midst of an apartment filled with solar rays? Such teachers, in contending for such spiritual illumination, and yet contending that it is necessary to send Bibles to heathen lands, are too much like Diogenes the Cynic, walking the streets of Athens at mid-day with a torch of fire in his hand to find what he pretended he was unable to see by natural light - an honest man.
Let those who contend for the extraneous teachings of the Holy Spirit, put their finger on the moral chart of the world, and point out if they can, the country, enjoying the blessings of enlightened institutions, where the Bible is not read, nor its precepts known! The spangled arch on high, bends over none such upon earth. This is a truth that must meet every eye that scans the history of the world.
It often happens at Camp-meetings, that people are struck down as with a stroke of lightning: they are seen rolling and tumbling, screaming and wringing their hands, &c. The heaving bosom - the deep sigh - the long groan - the anguish of mind - the remorse of conscience - the anxieties and fears bordering on the regions of despair - and other indescribable symptoms, at such places, are said by those teachers I have in view, to be the fruits of the Spirit. O yes, say they, the Spirit is now at work with these people, and they are exhorted to wrestle and agonize on, in hope that the Lord will set their souls at liberty ere long Such fruits are not like those which Paul describes as being the offspring of the good Spirit. For he says, "The fruit of the Spirit is joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, fidelity, meekness, temperance." (Gal. 5.) These things being so, I might as well be told that wheat-stalks can spring from tobacco-seeds, as to be told that the keen twinges of remorse - the horrifying throes of guilty hearts, &c. are the fruits of the Spirit.
From what has been said, I do most sincerely hope, that none will think, that I suppose sinners can become Christians without deep sorrow and contrition of heart. Far from it. I only object to the heretical notions and the practices springing thence which fritter away the meaning of the Bible. I am at war with the vague idea that makes void the counsel of God, by supporting the traditions of men.
Another absurd trait in modern heresy, is, that it is strenuously maintained from the pulpit and the press of various sects of religionists, that folks can, and do have a resurrection with Jesus Christ to walk in a new life here on earth before, and independently of a gospel immersion in water. But I would ask in the name of Bible sense and every other kind of good sense, how can they rise with Jesus in baptism if they have never been buried with him? How can they be raised, if they never have been put down? Shall I be informed that to be buried in baptism means in the mouth of Paul, a burial in sorrow? I might as well be told that the holy kiss mentioned by him, meant the "kissing of the great toe of the bronze statue of St. Peter at Rome, which in the course of centuries has been worn down to less than half its original size by the successive kisses of the faithful!!" - (Combe's Physiology of digestion, Page 18.) If Paul had a resurrection from an overwhelming of sorrow, how comes it to pass that long after his conversion, he said, "I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart"? - (Rom. 9.) From this it would appear that he had undergone a second burial without the benefit of a resurrection; for his sorrow was continual.
It is hoped that none will have the hardihood to say they are buried in sin with the Lord - who is undefiled and separate from sinners; unless they with the presumptuous Martin Luther, have the effrontery to assert that Jesus Christ was the greatest sinner in the world! How much better it is to bow to the Bible, than to attempt to make it speak what its author never intended!
I will conclude this sketch by asking one question. Who is it that has the greater appearance of deceiving people, the man who invites their serious attention to the Bible: exhorts them to examine its contents; speaks its doctrine in its own words, and persuades them to obey it; or he who professes to have a special message from God, but instead of telling what the Lord's word says, rambles about in the arena of imagination, making now and then a random quotation from the good old book?
C.F.R. SHEHANE.
***
CHRISTIANOS AND THE EIGHTH CHAPTER OF ROMANS.
(From the Millennial Harbinger. - Vol. 1.)
"Does he believe in the Deity, and distinct personality, of the Holy Spirit? If so, why has he had recourse to such laboured criticism, to set aside the plain meaning of Rom. 8:26; and to shew the absurdity of believing, that the Holy Spirit helps the infirmities of the children of God, and maketh intercession for them with groanings which cannot be uttered." - Jones's Strictures, page 17.
(We are persuaded that many of our readers, who really understand the important truth concerning the resurrection from the dead, and have been immersed into Jesus; especially those who in the providence of God, are called to pass through scenes of sorrow and affliction, will be much comforted by the views which are here introduced to their notice. Respecting: the "laboured criticisms to explain away the meaning of the 26th verse," after we have given, in a subsequent number, the reply of Christianos, with A. Campbell's rejoinder, our readers will be able to judge, which of the two has the best of the argument.) -ED.
A writer in the Religious Herald, signed "Christianos," has taken a prodigious alarm, and vows that he will sound an alarm on some holy mountain in the plains of the Bowling Green. And what is the alarm? He sees, or thinks he sees, "some attempts to banish the persuasion of a divine operation upon the soul of man" - "a sentiment which ought to make every Christian shudder" - "and other items of grievous import; such as man's ability to obey the gospel; the identity of baptism, and being born of water and of the Spirit, what he calls regeneration. He sees, or thinks he sees, other monsters squinting at a rejection of the atonement. All these he sees like a race of giants springing from the stones Deucalion threw over his shoulder. Such spectres haunt the imagination of this timorous unknown Christianos.
I sincerely pity every man who is the subject of such periodical paroxysms. Whether to recommend the shower-bath, or an electrifying-machine, I know not; but I presume something is necessary to give a healthy tone to his nervous system. To have cured the good Richard Baxter of the hydrophobia, and the mild Christianos of such spasmodic affections, perhaps may be equally beyond the skill of the medical and spiritual faculty.
This fit was brought on by hearing me lecture upon the 8th chapter of the Romans, in the Bowling Green, Caroline county, Va., in January last. Had I known that such a nervous hearer was in the congregation, I might have been more cautious. But my ignorance, I hope, will excuse me. We shall, however, examine into the cause. It is this: I gave a view of the 26th verse which did not accord with the philosophy of Christianos. And such is, or appears to be, the temperament of Christianos, that if a favourite text is not applied as he has been wont to apply it, the church is in danger! the essential doctrine is denied! His confidence is gone. His eye is jaundiced.
"He sickens by the very means of health."
With him "a divine operation upon the soul" is the life's blood of Christianity. My discourse in the Bowling Green, was to declare for practical purposes a divine operation upon the bodies of the saints. Now I teach both a divine operation by moral means upon the soul, and a physical operation upon the bodies of the saints. This is a fair statement of the case. I know of but two kinds of power in the universe, the one is moral, and the other physical. The minds of Christians are the subject of the former, and their bodies will be the subject of the latter. I make this statement for the benefit of Christianos, and all who have drank out of human fountains of theology. The Spirit of God, clothed in the gospel institution, is the operator in the one case; and that same agent which raised to life again the dead body of Jesus, and gave to it immortality, will exhibit itself in the other.
But these admirers of Fuller and Gill, these adorers of St. Andrew and St. John, are alarmed if a single text is not applied according to their direction. So entrammelled are their minds with the cords of system, they never can progress farther than the spider, whose walks are measured by the thread he weaves out of his own bowels.
I selected the 8th chapter of Romans, from the 17th verse to the end, as a proper subject from which to enforce with exhortations that most consoling hope, that our bodies shall be the subjects of a divine and supernatural operation. I shall, for the sake of some who have solicited it, and for the sake of others who have misrepresented that discourse, and especially with a view to relieve Christianos, give a very condensed view of that branch of my discourse based on that section of the 8th chapter. Premising here what I said there, that, in the views given of the 26th verse, I had no authority nor countenance from any of the living, nor from any of the writers on that epistle now dead, that I know of. I gave it as resting solely upon my own judgment; and, therefore, wished all to examine it with caution and candour.
The following is an outline of the view given of the whole section: "All Christians are heirs with God and joint heirs with Christ in the future and eternal inheritance. If, therefore, we hold fast our begun confidence unshaken to the end; if persecution and bodily afflictions cause us not to apostatize; if, in one word, we suffer with Christ, we shall be glorified with him at the resurrection. To patience and perseverance, therefore, I exhort, because of the certainty and the magnitude of the glory to be revealed in us and upon our bodies when the Lord comes."
So high argues he, are my conceptions of the glory to be displayed in our bodies at the resurrection, that I do not reckon the sufferings of the present time, in their most complicated and appalling form, as worthy to be compared with that glory which shall be revealed in our persons at the resurrection. The most earnest desire and longing expectation of mankind, of the sensitive creation, waits for nothing, anticipates nothing more desirable, more transporting, than the full development of the saints in their glorified bodies as the sons of God. We are not yet revealed in person as the sons of God; the world knoweth us not; we know not the beauty and majesty of our immortal bodies; but we know that we shall be like the Son of God in personal beauty and glory.
To decay, corruption, and worms, or to vanity, this creation, these mortal bodies of ours have been subjected; not, however, as a voluntary agent subjects himself to a master; but by him we are subjected to this vanity or corruption, in hope; yes, to a hope that this very creation, these mortal bodies of ours shall be freed from the slavery of this corruption that they may enjoy the glorious freedom from corruption which belongs to them who are children of God.
For we know that this whole creation is groaning together, and even till now are all in pain, as a woman in travail. Nay, even they who have the first fruits of the spirit, even we ourselves, are groaning within ourselves, waiting for an adoption - I mean, the redemption of our bodies from the dominion of mortality. For to this hope we have escaped, and. by it we are sustained. But remember, it is hope, and not enjoyment; for hope attained is not hope; for what a man enjoys he does not hope for. But, beloved, if we hope for these glorified bodies, let us patiently wait for them. 'Tis to a patient endurance of afflictions in these mortal bodies I exhort you.
Now, if we exercise this patience in our corporeal sufferings, the spirit helps us to sustain these bodily infirmities; for we do not know when oppressed with bodily pains and infirmities, what we should pray for as suitable to our condition. I, Paul, when groaning under these infirmities, have repeatedly prayed to be delivered from some trials, but the Lord did not deliver me as I expected, or as I prayed, but in a way which I did not expect. I say, then, the spirit itself speaks for us to God; it intercedes for our deliverance by groans which cannot be expressed in words. For although our spirit groans under these bodily afflictions and infirmities, and cannot give utterance to its own desires; yet when patiently bearing these trials, its groans have a meaning which is understood. Yes, he who searches the heart knows what these groans mean. He knows the bent of the spirit; he knows that it desires deliverance for the saints according to the will of God. And although we may not understand the design or utility of these afflictions which make our spirits groan, we know that all things are working together for good to them who love God - to them who, according to a previous purpose, are now actually called. For those who love God, whom he before approved, even these he marked out beforehand to be of a form the same as that of the image of his Son; that, as they had borne the image of Adam the first, so exactly they shall wear the image of Adam the second; so that the only difference in appearance between him and his joint heirs, between the Son and the children of God, will be, that he is the first born from the dead; and they, the children, the second birth of the resurrection. And permit me to add, that those whom he predestinated, or before marked out to be of like form and glory with his Son, he has now actually called and acquitted; he has pardoned them, and glorified them with the title, rank, and spirit of sons of God. So that we are now the sons of God, though not revealed as such. We know, then, brethren, that when this earthly house of our tabernacle is dissolved, we have a building of God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. For in this creation we groan in the earnest expectation and desire to clothe ourselves with that house of ours, that heavenly habitation; and surely, having that on, we shall not be found naked. For, indeed, we who are in this dwelling do groan, being loaded with a burthen, for which we do not wish to unclothe ourselves, but to be clothed with immortality, that what is mortal may be swallowed up of life.*
What, then, shall we say to these things? God being for us, who can be against us? He who spared not his own Son, but delivered, him up for us all, how can it be that he will withhold less favour from us; Will he not, with this inestimable gift, freely give us all things! Who shall lodge an accusation against them whom God has chosen? God who acquits them? No. Who shall condemn them? Christ who died for them! rather, indeed, who is raised up for them, placed at the right hand of God, and who intercedes for us! Who, then, shall separate us from the love of Christ which burns within us? That love which we have for him, who shall extinguish it? Shall tribulation, bodily distress, persecution, famine, nakedness, peril, or the sword of our enemies; True; indeed, to these we are exposed; for so a prophet foretold - "For his sake we are killed all the day long, we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter." We, indeed, in all these bodily sufferings are more than conquerors through him who first loved us, and called us into his kingdom and glory. Though I thus expostulate with you, brethren, I am persuaded that neither bodily sufferings, nor persecutions; nay, not death itself, nor the promise of this life, nor angels, principalities, nor powers on earth, nor things present, nor future; nor height, nor depth, nor any other created being, shall be able to separate us from loving God, from the love of him which is produced in us through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Such was the view given of this passage. This was the cause of the alarm! Now, candid reader, I ask you, is there not a unity, a correspondence, a perfect compatibility in this whole section with that one object avowed in the introduction; with that position which gave rise to it, viz. - "If we suffer with him,
***
_______________________________________________________________________________
* 2 Cor. 5:1. - This passage very much justifies this view of Romans 8.
that so we may be glorified together with him." Does he not declare the grand purpose of God to be, to conform the saints in their bodies hereafter, as in their minds now, to the image of his Son? Has he not promised to change our humbled bodies into a form like to his own glorious body, according to that strong working by which he is able to subdue all things to himself? And is not this the hope from which the apostle exhorts to patience under bodily sufferings?
But we differed from Matthew Henry, from John Wesley, and from John Gill. The two former argued the restoration of the brutal creation from this passage. And the latter with a hundred others, made the spirit of man, in verse 26th, the Spirit of God; or rather, the spirit of patience the Spirit of God "in his official character." Christianos, sees through his green glasses, some squinting here against a divine operation upon the soul! For my part, I have no squinting, in right or left eye. I have no system to squint to, nor any to squint against. I wish to look straight forward to the infallible guide. And this way of interpreting scripture to aid a system is most obnoxious to my aversion, because I think it profaning the oracle of God, and destructive to all true piety.
It is true I have given to the 26th verse a meaning which is no way fashionable; but I hope none will reject it on that account, until they examine the passages and compare it with the references alluded to in it. I do not here give the arguments, nor the criticisms by which this view is supported. I simply present the view itself. And I ask, is it either immoral or irreligious in its tendency? Nay, is it not most moral and religious, most practical in its tendency? But I make no bond of union, no term of communion, no condition of fellowship in the adoption or rejection of it. I have no such intolerant spirit. I offer it as favour to those who look for instruction. If they tell me they cannot receive it, I feel no indignation. If they acquiesce in it, I feel no complacency in them unless their lips and lives agree. But if Christianos denounce me on this account, let him prove that he is not intolerant as a Pope, and let him give us a connected view of the whole passage.
I will suggest to him the following hints to aid him in approving or condemning according to his superior judgment:-
1. There is no adjunct or epithet attached to the term spirit, in the 26th verse, which would authorize the conclusion that the Spirit of God is referred to.
2. To represent the Spirit of God as interceding for the saints, is incompatible with any office or work assigned to the Spirit in any passage in the Old or New Testament. He cannot furnish a sentence in all the volumes of Revelation which looks like it.
3. Paul, in this context, represents the Lord Jesus as interceding for us. QUERY. - Does the Holy Spirit and the Saviour sustain the same office?
4. Why should the Spirit of God use groans which cannot he expressed in words? Does this weakness belong to that Divine Agent?
5. In some versions, in Thomson's, and in the King's Translation, it reads, "He, or it makes intercessions for the saints according to the will of God." Is it admissible to say that the Spirit of God, in this or any given case, makes intercession for the saints according to the will of God, or according to God? The Spirit of God, acting according to the will of God, in any one case implies an incongruity for which there is no analogy in the book of God.
6. If I were to make this matter plain to a child, I would ask what propriety in saying that these groans were examined in the heart and understood in the heart by God, if the Spirit of God, uttered these groans himself?
An inattention to the Hebraisms in Paul's style, and in the style of the New Testament, has given rise to some difficulties. Why a man's spirit could speak for himself or intercede for himself, or how the first person and the third person can be applied indiscriminately to the same being, at the same time, is a puzzle to some. But to those who study the style of the New Testament, such usages will not appear strange. "Jesus rejoiced in spirit;" "Shall I come to you in the spirit of meekness?" "Lord Jesus receive my spirit;" "I will pray with the spirit;" "Paul was pressed in spirit;" "I go bound in the spirit;" "be renewed in the spirit of your mind." The pronoun I represents the whole person; but how often in all languages is the body and the spirit personified and distinguised from one another; so that I represents the one, and you and it the other? The love of God, denotes both our love to him, and sometimes his love to us. I know, said Jesus, that you have not the love of God in you. This is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. Keep yourselves in the love of God - are instances of the former. In this was the love of God manifested. Hereby perceive we the love of God - are examples of the latter. In Romans 8:39 it must mean our love to God, because afflictions and persecutions could not cause the love of God towards us to abate; but they might be supposed to lesson our love to God. These hints I suggest to him, or any other person, who may take a different view of this passage.
To conclude. What a consolation to Christians, that, when groaning under afflictions, and unable how to express themselves, not knowing what to ask, their groans, which they cannot turn into language, have a meaning which God understands and regards. A patient spirit sustains infirmity, lightens the weight of persecution, and has a language more eloquent than the voice of words, and prays more effectually than any form of expression which the most fruitful imagination could invent.
A.C.
***
A GOLDEN RULE FOR STUDENTS.
"Never hold any sentiment or proposition as more certain than the evidence on which it rests: or, in other words, let your assent to any proposition be precisely proportioned to the evidence on which it rests. All beyond this we esteem enthusiasm - all short of it incredulity." - Christian Baptist.
MYSTERIES OF ORTHODOXY.
God has divided this visible creation into various distinct departments, and has adapted the laws of each to its productions. And so he has divided his revelations into dispensations, and adapted them to the inhabitants of each. They may be divided into seven dispensations: The first was delivered to Adam; the second, to Noah; the third, to Abraham; the fourth, to Moses; the fifth, to John the Baptist; the sixth, to Jesus Christ; the seventh, to the Apostles.
When men become wise in their own imaginations, they begin to pervert the arrangement and order of God. They first display their ignorance by trying to grow plants suited to one climate in another, (attempt to grow sugar cane in the wheat climate;) next they change the use of things - feed the ox on flesh, and the lion on hay, &c.
These absurdities can be easily seen, but men do not notice how absurdly they act in regard to God's revelation. They take from the different dispensations, and try to plant in this. Thus they place all Christians, Jews, or Gentiles, under the law of Moses. Next they change the use of things, by applying the Epistles, specially written and adapted to churches, to the unbelieving, the fearful, disobedient, and abominable. This is like feeding the ox on flesh, or the lion on hay. Next they change the Gospel, and substitute what they call "Holy Ghost Religion," and put every thing out of place. They set the Holy Ghost to convince the world of sin, without proof or argument; and next they set the Holy Ghost to pardon sins; they set him to teach without words, and make him give faith without testimony, and consolation without promises. Some set the Holy Ghost to baptize; others say they are baptized in, or with, the Holy Ghost. They say water means Holy Ghost, and fire means Holy Ghost; and, to cap the climax, they pray for, and to, the Holy Ghost, and at the same time profess to have it in them. They ask the Holy Ghost to come, then ask God to send it; then say it has come; then ask to be baptized in the Holy Ghost and with fire; then say they have before been baptized in the Holy Ghost and with fire. No wonder they speak of Religion as a great mystery! I fear thousands who make loud profession will die without the knowledge of God - will never understand the plain matter of fact religion, taught by Jesus Christ and his Apostles. - Millennial Harbinger.
***
WHAT IS REMISSION?
DEAR BROTHER CAMPBELL, - Is there no way that people can he made to understand what is meant by the terms pardon, remission, forgiveness of sins? How many answers would be given to the simple question, What is forgiveness of sins? One would say, "It is good feelings;" another would say, "It is love in the soul;" another, "It is love to God and man; another, "It is peace with God and man," and another, "It is joy and gratitude," &c. Now these all may be, and are, effects of the forgiveness of sins, but forgiveness itself must be a proclamation from that Power that is superior to the law transgressed; and that proclamation must be special or general - it must embrace all transgressors of a certain class, or it must have special application to some, without condition. But if it be conditional, and general, then all who comply with the condition set forth in the proclamation are the subjects of it, and such as do not comply with the condition set forth in the proclamation, are not pardoned. Jesus Christ is that Power who is superior to the law. He has made proclamation that all who believe the gospel sent to the world by his Apostles, and obey it by submitting to baptism in his name, shall have remission of past sins. And if they ignorantly or inadvertently transgress afterwards, he has proclaimed pardon on condition of confession and prayer. These things being, as before stated, the knowledge of forgiveness depends upon the performance of the condition set forth in the proclamation, or upon our knowledge of a full compliance with the condition. Then our spirits testify, by words and actions, that we have complied with the conditions of the proclamation made by the Spirit of God. In this way the two spirits testify and confirm each other's testimony, that we are Gods children - that we have been begotten and born of the institution appointed of God. Without this testimony, all the good feelings, and all the think so's and hope so's that can be enumerated will not prove the fact.
M. WINANS.
A SINGLE HINT TO THE DISCIPLES.
"I WOULD THOU WERT COLD OR HOT."
We are a temporizing, vacillating, lukewarm race of Christians which are now upon the earth. In theory, fashionable Christianity is a compound of Judaism, Paganism, and Christianity. In practice, it is a compromise between Christ and Belial, the world and heaven. The policy of the first Christians was to secure heaven - this of the modern, to secure heaven and earth. The philosophy of the ancient leaders was to keep up the fence around the plantation of grace, and to make the landmarks plain. The philosophy of our leaders is to throw down the fence, deface the landmarks, and to place the world in the church - to embrace in the bosom of Christian charity, every sincere Turk, Jew, Pagan, Infidel, Catholic, and Protestant in one charitable communion in the bonds of honest endeavouring sincerity. The difference between a good Deist and a sincere Christian is only an opinion; and where the kingdom of Satan ends and the kingdom of Christ begins, is as difficult of discovery, as Captain Symmes' opening into the nether spheres.
We brethren of the restoration want more decision of character - more of the spirit of the approved ancients. A new costume, like that of Fox or Wesley, will soon wear out. I have seen but two Methodistic bonnets in a meeting of a hundred sisters, such as would have been regarded as orthodox forty years ago. Even the Quakers hat throws a less shade over the shoulders of the Friends than it did in my own remembrance. It is also discovered that a few changes in the Grammar of Murray will not exorcise the evil passions which are found lurking behind thee and thou.
Many are the substitutes for godliness. But it never was, nor is, nor evermore shall be, substituted. No forms of dress, of speech, or modes of worship - no creeds, nor doctrines, nor formularies, nor rites will pass in heaven for godliness. Godliness is the heavenly science which the doctrine according to godliness teaches. The knowledge of God, and of his will, and of ourselves, are pre-requisite, absolute and unconditional, in order to godliness. - Faith, courage, knowledge, temperance, patience, are imperfect without godliness. Who would not be godlike? A Pagan, accustomed to confer favours, and indisposed to receive any from his fellow-mortals, was asked the reason of his behaviour. "I will tell you, Sage," replied the Pagan chief - "I wish to be like the gods, who bestow favours on all, and receive benefits from none." To be godlike won the admiration of a sensible Pagan. Need we any comment upon its nature, its excellencies, or its value in earth or heaven? Of godliness we have a perfect model in the religious character of the Messiah. Should we propose to ourselves a less perfect model? Let the disciple imitate his Teacher and the servant his Master.
Brethren, a more untiring zeal and a more unequivocal determination to stand perfect and complete in the knowledge and practice of the Master's will, are much wanting to our happiness, and to our usefulness. - Let us, then, be more decided, zealous, and diligent, in the service of our Master in heaven, who, for the joy set before him, endured, and suffered, and practised the whole will of God. This is the way to honour - to happiness - to glory eternal at last. May the spirit of the ancient Disciples animate the whole multitude who now profess their faith, and have resolved to follow their example! - Millennial Harbinger.
***
THEORY AND PRACTICE.
(For the Christian Messenger and Reformer.)
Paris, Ten., July 10, 1837.
Theory and Practice are the soul and body of religion; and their union is as essential to its life and existence as that of the spirit and body of man are to human life. Separate the soul and body, and that singular and mysterious compound, called man, dies. The soul separate from the body is no longer man; and the body away from the soul, is but a "heap of. dust." They exist for each other. Thus it is in religion.
No theory of religion has ever been given to man merely for his belief and speculation; but in order to enable him to attend to its practice, and no theory is valuable, or worth anything, any farther than it leads and conduces to practice. But a correct theory is essential to a correct practice; and, therefore, the necessity of understanding well the theory of religion. The best theory in the world will avail the speculatist nothing, unless its practice is attended to by him. The divine Founder of Christianity has instituted a system of means, as the channels through which he intends to convey his present and everlasting blessings to the human race; and he who neglects to attend to these, cannot expect to claim them. There is no promise in the divine volume to him. "Whoesoever heareth these SAYINGS of mine, and DOETH them," says Jesus, "I will liken him to a wise man, that built his house upon a rock. And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. And every one that heareth these SAYINGS of mine, and DOETH them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man who built his house upon the sand: and the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it FELL: and great was the fall of it. It fell to rise no more.
To illustrate our subject. The mechanic has a good theory; but, what will it avail or profit him, unless he carries it out into practise? A man may be in possession of the best plan in the world for constructing a house; but it will do him no good towards rearing the building, unless he performs, or has performed, the necessary work. So with every other branch of mechanics. A physician may understand the best theory in medicine; but if he does not practice, of what use will it be to him, or of what benefit to others? Theory for the physician, but medicine for the patient. The preacher who is always dwelling upon the theory of religion, to the neglect of the practice, though he may understand it ever so correctly, will be placed in the same situation as the physician, that is always reading and lecturing, but who never practises.
J.R. HOWARD.
***
DANGER OF EXTREMES.
The sanguine are liable to take detached and isolated views of favourite topics. Let us regard the whole truth in all its connexions, and give to each its proper importance. A sound understanding will always be on its guard against one-sided views of cardinal truths. Let us not be bewitched by the glare of novelty, by the brilliancy of new discoveries, nor obstinately and superstitiously attached to old opinions.
A.C.
QUERIES.
"You will please answer in the Advocate the following inquires. How do you understand these expressions in the New Testament - Except a man be born of water and the spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God; also, whosoever drinks of this water will thirst again; but whosoever will drink of the water which I shall give him, will never thirst more; but this water I shall give him, shall be in him a fountain springing up into everlasting life; also, and the Spirit and the Bride, say come; and let him that hears, say, come, and let him that is thirsty, come, whoever will, let him take of the water of life freely. Do you understand the water in each to he material or figurative? Or do you understand the first to be material water, and the two latter figurative? Please give your views concerning the passages, and your reasons for those views. I have made these inquiries in consequence of a conversation I had with a Baptist who contended that they were figurative in each case."
***
REPLY.
The attributes of the water in each passage are sufficiently indicated by the passages themselves. In the first, or John 3:5, the water can be no other than material because we are required to be born of it. Now to be born of anything is to emerge from that in which we had been previously concealed. To be born of water, therefore, is to emerge from water in which we had previously been hid from view. It is obvious that figurative water cannot be intended; for to interpret it thus, would be to reduce the passage to an absurdity. Except a man be born of spirit, and spirit is nonsense. God, who is a Spirit, is the begetter of spiritual sons and daughters by his incorruptible seed which is the word of the Lord, which has been proclaimed as gospel to the world. 1 Peter 1:23-25. Now, who ever heard of any thing being begotten and born, in the natural or moral kingdom of God, without a material medium. A plant cannot be born of the earth unless it be begotten in the earth. The earth is the mother or material medium, of all the citizens or subjects of the vegetable kingdom. So of the animal kingdom; the corruptible seed of the flesh must be deposited in an animal before an animal can be born either of its sire or its dam. To say, that a plant is born of the earth and nature when the seed is only just now sown in the earth is about as rational as to say, that a man is born of water and the spirit who has only received the principle of spiritual life by a belief of the word of the Lord. To be born of water, a man thus begotten of the Spirit by a belief of the truth, must go into the water; which in no way can be even plausibly made to mean, that he must go into the spirit, which a figurative rendering of water would imply.
In the other passages, the subject of discourse is not a being born of water, but a drinking of water. In John 4:14 Jesus speaks of material and spiritual water. He asked the woman of Samaria to give him some water from the well of Jacob. Having commenced a conversation with her, he offered her of the water of life or living water, so that she might drink and never thirst again. When we long after anything with an ardent desire we are said to thirst after it. Now the object of natural thirst is water; so the object of a spiritual thirst is called water, living or running water which appears to be endless in its flow. In spiritual language, to long ardently after eternal life, is to thirst for living water; and to attain to a title to eternal life is never to thirst more, because having become heirs of this inestimable life, the assurance of this is as a fountain within us springing up to everlasting life.
In his discourse with the woman, Jesus adopted the style of the prophets, especially of Isaiah, who calls upon every one that is thirsty to come to the waters. But enough has been said upon so self-evident and palpable a subject.
J.T., M.D.
***
SCHISM.
Schism in religion is a dangerous thing, and should be carefully avoided by all who fear God. But this word should be well understood. In theology, it is generally allowed to signify, "a rent in, a departure from, the doctrine of the apostles; especially among those who had been previously united in that doctrine and practice." A departure from human institutions in religion is no schism; for this reason, that the word of God alone is the sufficient rule of the faith and practice of Christians; and as to human institutions, forms, modes, &c., those of one party may be as good as those of another. - Dr. Adam Clarke.
EXPOSITION OF THE THIRD CHAPTER OF JOHN.
(For the Christian Messenger and Reformer.)
Paris, Ten., July 10, 1837.
There is, perhaps, no chapter in the New Testament which has been the source of so much Biblical criticism, comment, and reference, and which, at the same time, has remained so generally misunderstood, as the third chapter of John's testimony, or gospel, as usually styled. Its great importance is owing to the part of the conversation in it on the subject of Regeneration.
To understand it rightly, we must notice the person addressed, the addresser, the subject of conversation, and the design of the writer in introducing it into his narrative. A ruler of the Jews, in the then existing kingdom of God on earth, is the individual addressed; the Messiah, long promised and predicted, and constantly expected and ardently desired, is He who addresses him; and the topic is the new kingdom of God, predicted to be "set up" in the days of the Caesars, and the near approach of it recently announced by John, by Jesus, and his Apostles and Disciples, throughout the length and breadth of the land of Judea; and which, in its extension, was to cover the whole world. The design of John in introducing this nocturnal conference into his narrative, is to be learned from the design of that narrative. His design seems to be not only that in common with Matthew, Mark, and Luke, to prove "that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God," but to prove his incarnation, that he was not what he merely appeared to be, an extraordinary man, but the "INCARNATE WORD." In order to this, it is necessary to assert and shew that all the attributes belong-to "THE WORD," which "WORD was GOD," belonged to Jesus during his incarnation on earth. In the first place, in the commencement of his testimony, lie asserts his eternal pre-existence as THE WORD. "In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God. And the word was made flesh (became incarnate) and dwelt among us." We find him afterwards introducing the expression or assertion of Jesus to the Jews, "before Abraham was, I am." But his omniscience is more capable of demonstration than any of his other attributes and, accordingly, the apostle pays more attention to that. He introduces and proves it in the case of the calling of Nathaniel to be an apostle, (John 1:48) in the reply of Peter, (21:l7) in the case of the woman of Samaria, whom Jesus told all things she had ever done, (4:29) And it seems to be for this purpose that he introduces the narrative of the conference between Jesus and Nicodemus. John had just asserted that Jesus "knew all men, and needed not that any should testify of man; for he knew what was in man," and now he proceeds to prove it in the chapter under consideration.
As with all other subjects and circumstances upon which the Bible is silent, there is much surmise and supposition why the ruler visited Jesus at night? Some have supposed that his business in the day did not allow him the opportunity; others, that the fear of incurring the displeasure of his Jewish brethren of the Sanhedrim made him chose the night instead of the day, when he might be seen with Jesus by them; and others that he designed to entrap Jesus in his conversation, and was sent for the purpose. We shall not offer any supposition of our own, but merely remark, that the introducing of apparently trivial circumstances into their narratives, such as place, time, &c., is common with the writers of the gospels, and adds weight to their testimony, by .giving to it an air of simplicity and reality.
"We know," says Nicodemus to Jesus, "that thou art a teacher come from God; for no man can do these miracles which thou doest except God be with him." In all this we have not a word - not the most remote allusion to a kingdom; nothing which would seem to make any fitness or congruity between the remarks of Nicodemus and the reply of the Messiah. But Jesus, who "knew all men, and needed not that any should testify of man; for he knew what was in man," knew that the new kingdom was the absorbing subject in the mind of Nicodemus, that he came to inquire about it, and that his remarks were only prefatory to the introduction of that subject, made to Jesus, as to a mere man, whom the ruler supposed him to be. Hence the reply of Jesus, "except a man be born again he cannot see (discern) the kingdom of God." Nicodemus, in common with the rest of the Jews, not excepting the disciples of Christ, was, it seems, expecting that the new kingdom, to the coming and near approach of which the attention of the whole, Jewish nation had recently been aroused and excited by the preaching of John, of Jesus, and his disciples, was to be an earthly or temporal reign, a remodelling and universal extension of the old Jewish kingdom; that the Messiah was to take his seat upon the throne of David in Judea, and live* and reign forever, as a splendid secular monarch, and that the Jews were to enjoy peculiar temporal blessings under him, to throw off the Roman yoke, be restored to more than their ancient privileges, to be exalted above all other nations,** and the whole world to be subjugated to them, and brought under their dominion. The nature and affairs of such a kingdom would be subjects of absorbing interest and exciting curiosity to the Jew, and particularly to the Jewish ruler. Hence the visit of Nicodemus to the Lord, to enquire concerning it, and probably to ingratiate himself into his favour, in order to secure one of the high and honourable places*** in it. With his view of this kingdom we are not surprised at his astonishment when told that a re-birth, or to "be born again," was necessary to discern it, to be a subject of its privileges, influences, &c. "How can a man he born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb and be born?" Jesus proceeds to explain this new birth to him. He does it in accordance with his other teachings, in the way best fitted to render it plain to the mind of the Jewish Rabbi. The manner of his teaching was generally by comparison, similitude, analogies, &c. Are vine dressers addressed, or the people surrounded by, or accustomed to vineyards? - then the church is a vineyard, Jesus, the vine, and his disciples the branches. Are shepherds spoken to, or persons accustomed to sheep and sheepfolds, or is the temple by, and the sheep led up for sacrifice - then
***
_______________________________________________________________________________
* See John, 12:34. - ** See Mark 9:34 - Luke 9:46 - Matt. 20:21. *** See Isaiah 2:2 - Micah 4:1.
the church is a sheep-fold, Christ is a shepherd, and Christians the sheep. Are rulers addressed, or people accustomed to rulers and a kingdom? - then the church is a kingdom, Jesus the king, and Christians the citizens. It is by analogies that the Saviour here illustrates the new birth to Nicodemus. From the questions of Nicodemus, "can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?" he evidently had a secular kingdom before his mind, such as the Jewish, and, of course, a natural birth, the only birth by which such an one can be entered. He would also have before his mind the two agents in the natural birth, mother and father. The only way now to illustrate the new or spiritual birth to him, is to contrast the two agents by which it is procured with the two in the natural. Jesus accordingly replies to him, "except a man be born of water and of the spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God." As in the natural birth, a child must be born of its mother before it can be born of its father, so in the metaphysical, the man must be born of water before he can be born of the spirit. As in the natural birth, the child cannot be born of its mother alone, or its father alone, so, to keep up the analogy in the metaphorical birth, a man cannot be born of water alone, or of the spirit alone. Jesus in placing the two agents in the latter, in opposition with the two in the former, does not say that "except a man be born of water he cannot enter the kingdom;" or "except a man be born of the spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God," but "except a man be born of water AND of the spirit," thus making "born of water" as necessary and indispensable in entering into his kingdom on earth, as "born of the spirit." "What, therefore, GOD hath joined together, let no MAN put asunder." As on almost every subject of religion there are two extremes, so there are two here. There are those who contend that a birth of the spirit alone is all that is necessary to enter the kingdom of Heaven here; and others, that a birth of water is all the necessary birth, and that the kingdom of God" alluded to, is the "everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ," into which the saints who die in the Lord will be born by a birth of the spirit from the grave. As truth generally lies in the middle between two opposite extremes, we would with the Lord say that "except a man be born of water and of the spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God."
(TO BE CONTINUED.)
Retyped by R. M Payne, 1 Kenilworth Avenue Reading, England RG30 3DL
To whom our grateful thanks is extended for her offering this material through our web site.
We would encourage you to write to Rose and thank her for making this material available.
Prepared for the internet by Arches church of Christ, Belfast, Northern Ireland, BT4 1AQ
http://www.christianhomesite.com/belfast