THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

T. FANNING AND W. LIPSCOMB, Editors
VOL. II
NASHVILLE, FEBRUARY, 1856
NO. 2

FIRST PRINCIPLES – NO. 8

FAITH, REPENTANCE AND BAPTISM, IN THEIR PROPER ORDER

In every instance, confidence in Jesus of Nazareth is the first prerequisite to admission into the service of God; but, as we have endeavored to show elsewhere, “faith alone is dead.” We deny not that faith may momentarily exist, but unattended by its indispensable concomitants, it dies, and leaves not even its impress upon the heart.

To the uninstructed Philippian jailer, Paul said, “Believe, and thou shalt be saved and thy house;” but to others who had heard, understood and received the word into their hearts, as the Pentecostians, said the man with the keys, “Repent,” and to one who had believed and repented, as Saul of Tarsus, one divinely commissioned said, “Why tarriest thou? arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.”

Thus we have plainly given the Gospel conditions of adoption into the Heavenly family in their true order; and we have also tacitly presented the reason for each step, and better still, the whole philosophy for commanding one class of persons to believe, another to repent, and another to be baptized.

The jailer was not sufficiently advanced in the knowledge of the new institution to receive an order to repent, pray, and be baptized; the Pentecostians who had heard, believed and been pierced to the soul from their solemn conviction of truth, would have been mocked, if Peter had erred so far as to command them to believe; their confidence in Christ had already slain the enmity of their hearts, and it would have been most inappropriate for Ananias to say to Saul, who trusted the Savior from the moment the words were uttered, “I am Jesus whom thou persecutest,” and who had repented three days in sackcloth and ashes, “believe;” or “repent”—he had done.

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

Both effectually, yet he was not relieved—therefore said the servant of the Lord, “Arise, and be baptized.”

It must occur to the most casual observer, that if we destroy the order of these appointments, we also destroy their value and efficacy. The idea of commanding one to reform or pray to God for remission, who believes not in the Lord Jesus Christ, is preposterous in the extreme; and it would be still worse to encourage a person who had not believed and renounced every sin, to be baptized.

From these almost, if not quite Gospel axioms, it is most clear that the appointments of the New Testament are SPECIFIC in their operation and effect, and no one can be substituted for another, and no one can possibly be omitted without deranging the whole order of grace. These Heaven-born and Heaven-ordained specifics, it is true, contain no intrinsic worth, but their value is in the authority with which they have been given.

Philosophically considered, the ordinances of the Bible and religion also are “foolishness,” and man alone is the director of his own passions and is his own intuitive law-giver, if the term law is admissible in infidel speculations. But our purpose is briefly to give the uninitiated reader the order of the appointments, which must be understood—Christianity being true—in order to enjoy the blessings of Christ.

Faith in God’s appointment changes the stubborn heart of the sinner, and brings his thoughts and affections into the obedience of Christ. We say it is through faith, the heart is changed without reference to any other appointment, and we can see no impropriety whatever, in asserting it is by faith alone. (In every instance in the New Testament, the effect of belief—confidence in the Lord—was a complete change of the feelings of the soul, and revolution of all the moral powers.) With this subjugation of the stubborn will, baptism, prayer, or the Lord’s supper has nothing more to do than in controlling the seasons, or giving direction to Jupiter’s moons. Therefore we contend it is the specific office of faith to conquer the enmity of the heart.
Repentance is the Lord’s appointment for changing the life of the sinner. We are not disposed in this statement of the Gospel means of salvation to define repentance, further than to say it etymologically implicates a change of life for the better. While sorrow prompts it, repentance is not sorrow. Hence the Apostle informs us that, “Godly sorrow worketh repentance unto salvation, not to be repented of.” Godly sorrow is sorrow after a Godly manner, but if sorrow works repentance, it cannot be the repentance of which it is in some sense, the cause. Faith in the…

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

35

Lord Jesus Christ brings the alien to a solemn pause, and he resolves like the prodigal son when he came to himself, to seek the Father’s face; but repentance works all the change in the conduct and life of the afflicted offender before God. Conscious of his own poverty, suffering, and imminent danger, and knowing that oceans of tears cannot repay God for the least offence, or purchase his blessing, he is led in the last extremity, to “cease to do evil and learn to do well.” Nothing more is possible, and Heaven asks no more. But we fear few indeed realize the absolute necessity of this deep, abiding and effectual repentance.

3d. Baptism

Baptism is God’s specific appointment to the trusting and penitent alien for the remission of sins. Were we at present disposed to invite a discussion on this subject, we would first settle the question as to one man’s philosophy or opinion being better than all others, and secondly, we would endeavor to show that the subject of remission of sins is to be determined by the authority of Scriptures alone.

The first baptism—that practiced by John—was “the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins,” and the first inspired man who commanded believers by the authority of Jesus Christ said to the heart-stricken Jews, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.” The translation is fair, the words cannot be made plainer, and the only question is, are we disposed to prefer the Spirit’s teaching to the cowardly unbelief of men?

We may be asked, “If baptism has not other objects?” We answer many, but all the objects center in the salvation of the sinner. The Lord commanded, “Preach the Gospel, he that believes and is baptized.” Paul said, “We are buried with Christ by baptism, and rise to walk in newness of life;” that we “Put on Christ in baptism;” and last of all, Peter held baptism to answer the identical place to the believer, the water did to Noah, “Eight souls were saved by water.” They passed from an old to a new world by water, and we “cross the line” from the world into the church, when after having put our confidence in the Lord and heartily repented of all our sins, we are baptized into him. Hence, “Baptism is not washing away the filth of the flesh, but it is the answer of a good conscience towards God.”

We see not how the subject can be made plainer. True, many objections may be offered, but we think every one can be most satisfactorily answered by the Scriptures.

In regard to the style of some of our ablest writers on the subject of what they call “The regenerating process,” making baptism “a part of,” we have a word or two to say.

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

The theory to which we refer makes faith a part of regeneration, or the first step, repentance another part, and baptism the finishing operation in the process. There is no fitness in such assumptions. The regeneration of the Bible is not a process, but an institution. Hence the Savior said the twelve should sit with him on thrones in the “regeneration,” (Mat. 19, 29) and in Luke’s record, the twelve were to be seated on thrones, “In the kingdom.” Scholars must see that the regeneration, renovation, and kingdom or new institution, are identical.

Worse still, some—Rome and England—have made baptism regeneration. Paul calls it the “washing of regeneration,” or the washing of the new creation or church, but who does not know that the washing of a thing is not the thing itself? The baptism of the church is not the church. It was a most unfortunate error for some of the brethren many years ago, to make baptism equivalent to the new birth or regeneration. No man amongst us believes it now, and it would be but the part of candor for some of our writers to admit they have changed, so far as to correct this exceedingly gross and dangerous mistake. But we forbear.

We repeat, faith is the Lord’s specific for changing the heart of the sinner. Repentance is the only appointment of the New Testament to change the life, and baptism is the only ordinance of the Scriptures for changing the state of the penitent believer. Thus, we think we have placed these first appointments, or “The beginning of the teaching of Christ,” in the scriptural order, and in a form which cannot be misunderstood. If we have erred, we are willing to be corrected.

T. F.

JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH ALONE

AS TAUGHT BY S. W. LYND, D.D., OF THE COVINGTON THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

Since the death of the lamented J. L. Waller, L.L.D., the writings of no Baptist minister in the West have exerted a greater influence, we presume, than those of Dr. Lynd. Indeed, whatever he says commands, at least, the respect of the Protestant denominations generally. The Doctor has addressed a letter to Alexander Campbell upon the subject of “Justification by faith alone,” which appears in the December number of the Harbinger, and which should be carefully examined by the brethren. Brother Campbell has replied, we think, in quite a satisfactory manner; but some with whom we have conversed suppose he did not fully meet the question. Be this as it may, Brother Camp…

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

Page 37

bell has his peculiar manner of examining difficult points, and it is very certain he never exhausts a subject upon the first trial. Although he may not have answered Dr. Lynd as many might desire, he surveys all the ground, and leaves the impression very distinct in the mind, that he regards no single, disconnected appointment of the New Testament as the only condition of eternal life.

But we have taken the liberty of calling attention to the subject, because we are quite sure from the teaching of most parties of this section, that the subject of justification by faith alone, is not only regarded vital in the different schemes, but we feel confident that it is to afford the last battle ground and entrenchment of the respective denominations, in opposition to what we regard as the teaching of the Gospel. The subject is not to be examined and met in one way only, but in many. We will give Dr. Lynd’s statement of this faith alone view of redemption. It is both fair and full.

He asks Alexander Campbell, if he teaches that, “Faith and baptism are connected together in order to justification?” “If so,” he adds, “then it is a fundamental doctrine, we are wide apart in our views. I believe that justification is by faith alone, and I am persuaded the Scriptures will bear me out in this position. This is a cherished scheme with all Baptists. They regard it as vital to correct errors upon the whole system of grace.”

The Doctor, we think, succeeds very well in showing, by a quotation from Brother Campbell that, he admits the doctrine of justification by faith alone. His words are, “I believe in the justification of a sinner by faith, without the deeds of the law and of a Christian, not by faith alone, (implying that the sinner is justified by faith alone) but by the obedience of faith.”

But we very respectfully suggest, that much of the contention and strife of our times, arise from a failure to clearly define the terms employed. The word justify, for instance, is not used in the same sense by all who employ it. Grammarians inform us, it is “a derivative word” from just, and as just simply implies a state of innocence, or right course of life, we need not infer that the idea of making a just out of an unjust man, is in it.

Neither are we to suppose that to justify necessarily implies the cleansing of a bad man, remission of sins, or adoption into the family of God. Most usually in the Bible, Old Testament and New, the term is applied to good people. For instance, (Deu. 25:1,) “Then they shall justify the righteous.” The idea of approval is the specific thought in the word justification; but it is quite possible it is employed metaphorically to denote the whole.

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

Passage from the kingdom of the world into the kingdom of the Savior, but it is also probable it is used to describe the state occupied after taking the gospel steps to enter the fold. However, we have no objection to the style, salvation by faith only, when properly qualified. Paul says, “We walk by faith not by sight,” and we see nothing improper in maintaining that we walk by faith alone, without the aid of a dream, a modern spirit revelation, speculations or demonstrations, so far as religion is concerned. To say that religion is of faith only, we think entirely correct. It consists in believing heartily the truths set forth in the Bible with the obedience this faith prompts.

There is another view of this matter, which may throw some light upon our pathway. As value is given to all the ordinances of the Bible by faith with a proper understanding of the subject, we can see no very great impropriety in attributing everything to faith. Baptism is not merely going into the water and rising from it, but it consists in performing the act in sincere faith; the same may be said of the Lord’s supper or prayer, of relieving the distressed, and of every duty to God. The cup of cold water administered “in the name of a disciple,” gives all its value to the donor through faith, and faith alone.

With this view, we think we see much propriety in Paul’s saying to the Roman brethren, “Therefore, being justified by faith, (approved before God, by faith only,) we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.” We do not well see how good men can possibly differ so widely on this subject; but the differences are among us, and it is evidently our duty to use all propensities to remove the cause.

But granting that justification implies remission of sins, regeneration and adoption into the spiritual family, we ask Dr. Lydl with the most courteous intentions, if he and the Baptists teach, that the faith which accomplishes so much for the sinner, is merely a mental act, and has no reference to the church or its ordinances? Faith cannot live out of the church, and especially out of the ordinances. An instance cannot be found. Hence we deny the existing existence of a faith which reaches not to repentance, to baptism into the church, to prayer, praise, etc.

We must think there is something in Dr. Lydl’s mind which we cannot appreciate, if he employs, and we believe he does, the word faith, to the exclusion of everything which can possibly give it life and energy, as the only condition of remission. Were we disposed to discuss the matter with the Doctor or others, we would not fear to…

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

Page 39

Assume, that faith is neither the condition of remission. To be sure, it is God’s specific appointment to subdue the heart, as we observe in the instance of the Samaritan woman, the Pentecostians, etc., and without it, there can be no spiritual life, but we presume another appointment can be found for remission.

But surely Dr. Lynd, the Baptist brethren and the many sincere men of the respective denominations, do not mean to teach that the simple act of faith is the only condition of pardon and church membership.

We must be permitted in conclusion to present a few difficulties which occur to our mind.

It is most singular, that men of very profound scholarship, and denominations of great devotion to God, and the members of which, entertain the highest regard for the scriptures of truth, should so tenaciously advocate a form of words not found in the Bible, and which is plainly contradicted in the word of God. James says, “We see, then, how that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.” Yet Mr. Wesley said, the doctrine “That we are justified by faith only, is very wholesome and full of comfort.”
Paul informs us, that “The doers of the law shall be justified.” (Rom. ii. 13.)
The Apostle speaks of “Being freely justified by his grace.” (Timothy iii. 7.)
He speaks also of “Being justified by his blood.” (Rom. v. 9.)
We are justified “In (by) the name of the Lord Jesus.” (1 Cor. vi. 11.)

But why multiply difficulties? We repeat, it is not only strange, but surprising beyond measure that good and great men, who love the Bible, should place themselves in such an attitude. What can they mean by asserting the scriptures will support them in the doctrine that we are justified by faith only, when the scriptures directly point out other conditions of justification, and positively declare, it is not by faith only.

We doubt whether our Baptist brethren can believe that men are pardoned and saved before they sincerely repent of their sins and put on Christ in baptism.

We can assure Dr. Lynd and all whom it may concern, that the disciples of Christ, or Reformers—as some are disposed to distinguish us—neither teach nor believe that the faith which stops short of the obedience in which it alone can be active, is of the least value religiously considered. “As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.”

—T. F.

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

“THE PERMANENT ORDER OF THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY.”

BY PROFESSOR MILIGAN, OF BETHANY COLLEGE, FORMERLY OF WASHINGTON COLLEGE, PENN., AND MORE RECENTLY OF BLOOMINGTON UNIVERSITY, INDIANA.

“We commend to the special consideration of our readers the following essay.” – A. Campbell.

An article from a Professor of Bethany College, with the sanction and commendation of Brother Campbell, certainly carries with it very high authority amongst the brethren. In reading it, we expect to find everything that should be said, and nothing more. We take pleasure in bearing our humble testimony to the very pleasant manner in which Brother Miligan has examined the subject of his effort. He has traveled over all the ground of organization, re-organization, and cooperation, in such a frank, Christian, and courteous style, that at the first glance our kind impulses inclined us to publish all he had written without a word, by way of note or comment.

Indeed, a brother for whose judgment we entertain a very high regard, intimated to us in a letter, that the production was complete, and the very ne plus ultra of all that could in truth be written on the subject, and urged us to give it to the public in an extra. This induced us to re-examine it, and now with all the premises before us, we desire very respectfully to take such ground in reference to the subjects discussed, as we believe is authorized in the Scriptures.

As we advance in age, our dislike to fault-finding increases, and indeed, we have witnessed such a forwardness, pertinence, and ridiculousness in mere tyros, attempting to correct men of age, experience, and wisdom, that we find ourselves unconsciously inclining to long established customs. Every impertinent quack and stripling seems to think his only hope of greatness consists in his success in slaying some venerated man, who has worn himself out in the cause of truth.

With these suggestions, we beg leave to say to the writer of the essay; and our readers generally, that while we find so much that is wholesome, good, and most valuable in it, and which we would be pleased to give to our friends, there are some points which we think should be better understood before the subjects can be pronounced exhausted.

As intimated in a previous number, we expect to examine the whole subject of church organization and cooperation so soon as circumstances will justify. At present our design is to lay before our readers some of the very accurate and important results at which Prof. Miligan has arrived; and in the second place, we feel in duty constrained to…

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

41

express in a few brief notes, if not pointed objections, to some of his conclusions, at least very important qualifications of them.

THE PERMANENT OFFICERS OF THE CHURCH ARE DEACONS, BISHOPS AND EVANGELISTS

Professor Miligan sets forth the truth in the maintenance of the three orders of officers in the churches, in a very commendable manner indeed.

“The first office under the Apostles,” states the writer, “was not a sinecure. The duty of these men,” he says, “was to attend to the secular interests of the church.” He further maintains that “the deacons should have the charge and control of the treasury of the church.”

“But what,” asks Brother M., “was to be done with the congregations of disciples?” “The settlement of this question led to the appointment of the second order or rank of Christian ministers. The same class of officers are sometimes called elders, sometimes overseers, and sometimes bishops. There was a plurality of elders in every church. It was the duty of the elders to attend to all the spiritual interests of the congregation. This is the limit of their office. Every elder is an authorized teacher. Thirdly, the organization is not complete without evangelists.” Brother Miligan writes several pages in regard to evangelists, much of which we are not sure we understand, and therefore, in reference to doubtful points we shall say nothing. Enough, however, we find to show very clearly the importance of the office in the conversion of the world and the preservation of the congregations.

With our aged and highly respected Brother Campbell, we sincerely commend the treatise of Brother Miligan to the serious consideration of the brethren. But we think, as before intimated, that some of Bro. Miligan’s teaching needs qualification. As we promised we will make notes upon a few points which we suppose might be further examined.

Brother Miligan does not regard Christ’s government as specific in its bearings. He asks, “did they (the deacons) regularly organize by appointing a president, secretary, etc.? Can any one produce a ‘Thus saith the Lord?’ With many this is the only rule of action in ecclesiastical affairs. From their conversation and writings, the novice in Christianity would be apt to infer that the New Testament is a code of the most specific precepts. But the diligent student finds few precepts. He searches in vain for a direct ‘Thus saith the Lord,’ in many cases of paramount importance.”

On the page from which these extracts are taken, Professor Miligan denies that the “Divine founder of the Christian system attempted to govern his church wholly, by specific laws.” “God,” he adds, “has made the New Testament a book of…”

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

Motives, he has enacted some very generic laws; he has illustrated the principle of his government, and the rules of human conduct, by a great variety of authoritative examples, and whenever these are not sufficient, then, and only then, may we expect to find in the New Testament specific laws and ordinances.

From these quotations, it is quite clear our brother teaches that God governs his church, by what he denominates “generic laws,” “examples,” and “motives.” Possibly, he is correct, but we are not fully prepared for such things. We regret that our brother did not define “generic and specific laws.”

In the physical universe all laws are specific. Every particle of matter is attracted to the center, with a power which is as the inverse ratio of the square of the distance. In chemistry, Heaven has specifically ordained that so many equivalents of one simple with another, shall form a new substance. Thus, eight of oxygen and one of hydrogen form water; but no other amounts will answer the end. But there is no exception to the rule. The specific character of fire is to consume, and poison to injure the system. Throughout the Old Testament, if we understand the teaching, everything was specific. God said to Adam “do this,” but “refrain from that.” To Noah he said “build an ark,” and to Moses everything was in detail.

In the New Testament, each obligation in our view, is specific. We are commanded to believe, but there is nothing “generic,” or general as we heard one maintain not long since. The facts are all specific, special, particular, and no philosophy is to be exercised on the subject. The same may be asserted in regard to repentance, baptism, the Lord’s supper, prayer, feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, etc., etc., etc. We find nothing but specifics in the New Testament.

Where God has failed to give specific directions, “thus saith the Lord,” on the subject of ordination, or the duty of any officer in the church, who would dare say what is the will of the Father? Examples carry with them authority. We are to imitate the leads of divinely authorized men, and hence examples amount to commands.

If Brother Miligan means by “generic law,” anything short of kind, or special law, we regard his selection of words as most unfortunate, and by no means calculated to impress the unqualified favorably in regard to the volume of inspiration. To be sure, this is the view of Mr. Calvin and of many Protestants; still antiquity and numbers are not conclusive authority on the subject of religion. Brother M. correctly says the “New Testament is a book of ‘motives,'” but it is in such a connection as to convey, we think, a very inaccurate idea of motive. No.

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

Lice, he uses the word “motive” in opposition to the doctrine of “specific” laws.

From our childhood we heard it maintained that, if the motives were good—honest—all will be right, though every ordinance of Jesus Christ is rejected. This view completely nullifies the church and all the appointments of God. The doctrine of government by “motive,” without regard to the laws of Christ, has made sad havoc of truth and righteousness in most Protestant denominations, and it is an insidious evil which never fails to injure.

But there is a worse aspect of the case still. In German neology, and English and American humanitarian views of religion, this is the first point to be established. Say the sagacious philosophers of these schools, in the words of Parker, “It matters not as to the law of religion, so the motives are good,” and thus they place the idolater on the same platform with the believer in Jesus of Nazareth.

We have no idea that Brother M. is disposed to follow the teaching to such extreme results, but there is no alternative in our judgment. Transcendentalists go even further. They regard nothing that is in the Bible upon the ground of authority, but speak most grandiloquently of “absolute right,” “absolute law,” &c., planted, they mean, in human nature, and admit that if there is anything in the Bible, or the laws of Confucius, or other books corresponding to nature, it is good.

But who does not see that such a view destroys every idea of law? If there is any meaning in law, it is a rule intended to cross, hand and govern nature, and its validity is not intrinsic, but rests solely upon authority. Last of all, law is not only a rule of action, but if it exists at all, it must be defined, and if it take shape, it must be specific, and therefore, religion is the obedience to specific, authoritative rules, or it is nothing.

But we presume our Brother Miligan has no intention to weaken confidence in the power of the Gospel of Christ. There are a few other points to which we beg leave to call attention, but our remarks must be brief.

Brother M. informs his readers (page 628) that “Timothy was left at Ephesus to ordain evangelists.” For this conclusion we find no authority in the Bible. The order of the New Testament is, for evangelists to “set in order the things wanting in the churches, and ordain elders,” and the elders or old men constituting the presbytery, originally ordained evangelists.
On page 629, Brother M. speaks of “organized and unorganized churches.”

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

Every church is an organized body or it is nothing. The first hour in which a church is planted, the Holy Spirit as fully points out the various organs as it ever can do. But we find no ancient authority for such broad declarations, and we exceedingly regret to see them from the pen of brethren who are regarded as critically correct.

On the same page Brother M. has two classes of ordainers. One class—evangelists—to perform the labor before the churches are, as he says, “organized”—officered—and other churches, are to have the aid of the presbytery in the work. We find no scriptural authority for such views.
On the 6281st page Brother M. calls Timothy a “Bishop of the church at Ephesus.” We regret much that such latitudinarian views and declarations should be sanctioned by our seemingly well-informed brethren. To say the least, there is not the shadow of authority for it in the Bible.
Brother M. makes the word elder equivalent to bishop. That is to say, the word elder has to denote an officer. Bishop implies office, but Elder, never. True the word elder is often applied to a bishop, but it is indicative only of a qualification, and no more denotes a bishop than the word lawyer implies a judge of the Supreme court.
He tells us that a bishop need not have a wife, for two Apostles at least had none. Still Paul says, “Let the bishop be the husband of one woman,” and further urges the government of a family as evidence of qualification.
Brother M. advocates the doctrine of “popular elections” in the churches. If churches are to be governed by the vote of a congregation, men, women and children, black and white, we see no use in law, “genus or specific”—vox populi, vox dei—and so must all controversy end when the vote is taken. But we forbear, and we are heartily sorry that we cannot endorse our highly respected brother’s effort to settle the questions he has examined.

We regard these as very important matters, and we trust our brethren will exercise patience and courtesy in all of their investigations. There are other very serious objections to the essay, but our space forbids more at present.

We think we have studied the subject under review, and if we have not learned the truth, we sincerely desire to do so.

T. F.

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

THE CHURCH OF CHRIST – NO. 4

The purposes for which the Church was established, well understood, will throw much light upon the character of its membership. We may safely assume that there are at least two objects to be accomplished by the church of God, viz:

It is the purpose of the Prince, Founder, and Head of the body, to save men from their sins by the means appointed in his church.
The congregation of the faithful is Christ’s school, in which the initiated are educated and fitted for the society of the just in a higher sphere.

If these propositions are true, persons who have not sinned are not saved by means of the church. Hence our Lord “called a little child unto him and set him in the midst of them, and said, verily I say unto you, except ye be converted and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.” Again, said he, “Of such is the Kingdom of Heaven.” From this unequivocal teaching, it is most clear that infants need not the cleansing of the church, and indeed, are incompetent to share any of its advantages.

In the apostasy from primitive Christianity, the remarkable discovery was made that, “Infants are totally depraved and damnable sinners,” without the “watery regeneration of the church.” Hence the origin of infant baptism. Romanists, of all the sects in the apostasy, are, however, the most candid in avowing their conviction, in regard to the efficacy of infant salvation from sin, by means of baptism. No priest or layman presumes the possibility of the salvation of any infant, without the intervention of the saving ordinance of baptism.

It is very singular, however, that Protestants who borrowed the ordinance from the mother church, many of them at least, suppose that even a sinful infant may possibly be happy without this ordinance, which the Episcopalians with Romanists denominate regeneration. But we find others, neither Romanists altogether nor Protestants altogether, who maintain the sinful and damnable depravity of infants, as some of the Baptist parties, but who at the same time have no fellowship for infant baptism.

In the place of the mystic regeneration in baptism, these teach a mystic regeneration of their sinful children, by some spirit especially when about to die. Both of these mystical operations sprung from the same error, viz: supposed culpable obliquity in infants. The members of the first party say, the child is mystically regenerated in, or by water, and the others inform us it is by the spirit alone with…

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

out water. We could make no choice between these mystic systems. To us, they are equally unscriptural and equally absurd.

Regarding the moral condition of infants we have but few words to pen. We inherit from our first parents mortality, corruption, and many defects which cannot be remedied in this life. “Sin,” however, says an Apostle, “is the transgression of the law,” and where there is no law there is no transgression. Again, “When lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin, and sin when it is finished bringeth forth death.” We are acquainted with no law which infants have transgressed, or can transgress; and lust has never conceived in their hearts to bring forth sin. They are frail, corrupt and dying, like Christians, but they are quite as innocent as the saint who has fought the good fight and kept the faith. In view of this purity or innocence, the Savior said, “Of such is the Kingdom of Heaven.” Therefore, except sinners become converted and become as innocent as the new born babe, they cannot enter the kingdom. Consequently, all that keeps the infant or Christian from Heaven, is the mortality which must be “put off” in the resurrection.

The entrance of the church secures the salvation of the soul from sin, and the perseverance in well doing after putting on Christ to the end of our journey, secures eternal life. The Scriptures are the only authority. The Savior said, “Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature, he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.” This is evidently “the common” or Gospel salvation, called by Peter “the salvation of the soul,” or the deliverance experienced in remission of sins, and translation into the kingdom of God’s dear son. The Apostle spoke of such as heard and submitted to the Gospel, as the saved. Hence in reference to the first converts it is said, the translation being literal—”The saved were daily added to the church;” To the Corinthians the Apostle says, “For us who are saved, the preaching of the cross is the power of God.” Again he said, “And such were some of you, but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.”

To conclude our quotations, the same writer said to Titus, “Not by works of righteousness which we have done,” or plans of our own, “but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Spirit.”

More need not be said to show that the members of Christ’s kingdom are delivered from their past offenses, are saved, by adoption into the family of the Lord.

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

In reference to our second proposition, viz: The Church is Christ’s school to qualify the faithful for immortality, the Scriptures are likewise most conclusive.

Luke says the members of the first church, “continued steadfastly in the Apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers. And all that believed were together, and had all things common. And they continuing with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, praising God and having favor with all the people. And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and one soul.”

The order and zeal of the primitive disciples are clearly evinced from their great care to meet for the purpose of keeping the ordinances. “And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them,” etc. But the epistles are replete with instruction on this point. To the Romans, the Apostle Paul wrote, “And I myself am persuaded of you, my brethren, that ye also are full of all goodness, filled with all knowledge, able also to admonish one another.” Peter deposeth thus, “Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God, by Jesus Christ.”

More authority is unnecessary. In these references, our purpose is, if possible, to impress our readers with a sense of the personal and congregational responsibility resting upon Christians. In the early ages of the church, and while it especially could lay any claim to purity, the members were active, energetic, religious, and were able to keep house for God. The members were able to admonish one another.

These ancient disciples were a reading, exhorting, teaching, singing, and praying people. They loved to meet the servants of the Lord, to worship, to recount to each other their sore trials, and their devotions were simple, earnest, and effective. Consequently, they were a religious people. It was not till more than two centuries after the establishment of the church that set sermons, long, studied, systematic, prosy, and speculative harangues were substituted for the spiritual worship of the saints. Tell us not that any congregation can serve God by such means.

Whenever a people cease to perform their own praying, singing, admonishing, exhorting, and in a word, worship, private and public, they are to all intents and purposes apostate, and they constitute the greatest stumbling blocks of the age to infidels. If we have persons capable of laboring for those without, let us hold up their hands among the wicked, but let Christians by all means worship God “in spirit and in truth.”

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

In such a school we may increase in wisdom—grow in grace and the knowledge of the truth—and prove ourselves a blessing to our families and to the world. No marvel that the Savior should say Christians are “the light of the world and the salt of the earth,” and that he should represent the church as a “city on a hill, whose light could not be hid.”

But with all church defects, she is the last hope of the world. Blot out the light emanating from the body of Christ, and not a single ray penetrates beyond the mind. Organization, Cooperation, and officers yet to be examined. These are weighty matters.

T. F.

RELIGION

THE OLD AND THE NEW

St. Pierre said that “everything appears in the most striking colors by contrast.” Many are the objections urged against religion, yet we think it will favorably compare with any other institution. Tom Paine objected to the Bible because it maintained, as he supposed, the dogma of a speculative trinity; William J. Newman objects to the Bible because, as he imagines, it favors the speculation of a total depravity, to be washed away in baptism, and amongst other enormities of which he complains, he regards the New Testament as a radical pro-slavery document.

But others object to religion on the ground that they can see but little which is lovely in the worship, or in the lives of very many church members. Few, if any, who object to religion, have ever gazed upon it with unveiled faces. The religion of the Bible indeed is but faintly represented in most of the service performed for the public eye, and the private life of its members offers but partial relief.

We admit, however, that there are none good in these latter days. There are righteous persons on the earth, and God has a church which he will acknowledge. But we began our remarks with the intention of presenting the “old religion,” in contrast with “the new.” We will notice but a single feature, viz: The worship of each.

By the old religion we mean the religion of the New Testament, as practiced by the ancient saints particularly, and as many as are wont to practice it in these latter days. Religion signifies a rebinding, a bringing back to God, to walk in newness of spirit. Christians trust Christ as the only Savior; they believe and love his word, and are ever delighted in keeping the ordinances of the church. In the family, Christ is sanctified in every heart, and all who believe look beyond the…

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

veil for help.

Let us contemplate for a few moments such a worshiping assembly as first convened at Jerusalem. The members “continue steadfastly in the Apostle’s doctrine, in prayer and in breaking of bread.” Hear the seniors of the congregation in simplicity of heart, instructing the tender lambs in the things of God. All bow in solemn prayer, and each utters a hearty amen to every petition—they rise to praise God in song; all lift their voices in loud strains to Jehovah, and while thus yielding themselves to God through Christ, the heart is filled with joy, the gushing tear is seen, the deep feeling heart heaves its unutterable groans. It is the Lord’s day, and the members are careful to commemorate the Lord’s death, in breaking the loaf and drinking the wine, in memory of a crucified Savior. Last of all the disciples sing a hymn, and bid each other an affectionate adieu. Nothing gorgeous or showy is seen, and nothing servile is tolerated. The members are plain, intelligent, sincere, and honest. In all their transactions, they fear God and love righteousness.

But let us look on the other side of the picture. In the language of modern and fashionable religion, it is “A beautiful Sabbath morn, and the booming bell from yonder spire invites to the house of God.” Reader, we witnessed the following in the city of M. on our southern coast a few years ago:—As the bells continued their loud peals, we enquired at our hotel, “Who is the most popular preacher in the city?” Answering voices vociferated, “Dr. F!” Ah, said the people, “He is a choice man—so liberal in his views—much more so than many of his contracted and ignorant brethren. He is willing for all men to be free to go their own way—he is so charitable.” We at once determined to attend.

On arriving at the door, we quickly ran our eye over the contour of the exterior, and asked, what was the cost of this magnificent edifice? and were readily told $90,000. We were forcibly impressed with the elegance of the workmanship and polish of the architectural finish. “No deformity marred the regular proportions, no abrupt departure broke the perfect taper of the Gothic spire. Elaborate carvings of oriental design reposed beneath a jutting cornice of perfect symmetry.” The interior was surpassingly rich in all that is attractive to the eye. “The frescoed adornment of the ceiling exhibited a master’s touch.” The elegant pulpit, crimson cushions, and gilded Bible, relieved the level of ornamented pews and velvety aisles. Harken, the massive organ of gorgeous splendor, rolls out billowy strains of harmony, now soft as the whistle of the whip-poor-will, now resounding like the echo of distant thunder. The members sit mute, waiting to see how many of the fashionable enter this charming temple.

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

The house is full. See, there comes the preacher, the professed ambassador of Christ. He is a tall, pleasant-faced man; a little turned of sixty. The audience waits in breathless silence. The grave pastor is tastefully dressed with a fine cloak, displaying several yards of velvet, thrown over his shoulders.

As he walks through the long aisle, he looks neither to the right nor the left, but seems deeply absorbed in thought. On reaching the magnificent pulpit, he kneels to pray in silence, where all can witness his devotions. Soon he appears with cloak on and black kid gloves to read the first hymn. It is done in the most clerical manner—the congregation still silent as the grave—but the organ sounds forth in doleful strains, while a few hired singers in the gallery assist the wooden box to make music for the worshippers below. The clergyman rises again in cloak and gloves to offer prayer, all the congregation stand, and most persons look about with indifference.

The second hymn is performed in like manner, and now Dr. H. comes forward without cloak or black kid gloves to read his sermon. His dress now is a fine black frock, and his huge hands encased in a pair of snow-white kids, with a large gold ring on the little finger of the left hand, with a set extending, we judged at our distance, from joint to joint. With this hand most of the Doctor’s waving gestures were made, and in every movement he was careful to keep the enormous ring exposed to the gaze of the admiring audience.

The sermon was delivered in a pleasant manner, but as to the matter we regarded it as neither good nor bad. It was an effort at pretty composition, and there were a few very well turned periods, and once or twice the orator made passes at the heavens as if he intended to be sublime. At the close of the sermon another hymn was sung by the hirelings with the aid of the machine, the benediction was pronounced and the people wended their way homeward, by no means enlightened, and we doubt if there was much spiritual improvement.

The next day from some cause, Dr. H. was disposed to seek our acquaintance, and we found him not only civil, but really kind in his attentions. He informed us that his salary was $6100, besides marriage and funeral perquisites.

But alas, a few years afterwards we noticed in the papers, that Dr. H. had left in disgrace, and for transgressions of the most fleshly and brutal character, of which he had been guilty years without recollection. In this picture there is no exaggeration, and we give it as an effect of fashionable religion.

Benedict, the Baptist historian says, “I have adopted the theory…”

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

Page 51

That the best religious communities run out in about three centuries, often much sooner. He adds, “The great Baptist communities in England and America are now a little past the meridian of their course; we must all hope for the best, but we have reason to fear that in the course of two or three centuries hence, although their outward circumstances may be greatly improved, it will be otherwise as to their spiritual affairs.”

Why should Mr. Benedict express such fears in regard to the Baptists?

Doubtless, he felt most deeply the danger of worldly influence over the church. We intimate not that the Baptists or other sects have renounced the simple worship adapted to all God’s people, for the pomp, show and circumstance of fashionable religion, but we feel free to speak of the people with whom we have had the honor of associating over a quarter of a century. In the main, our brethren have been a reading, praying and truly religious people, superior we think in spiritual matters to any party in existence; but our great fear has been, and is yet, that we too, like the Israelites, will forget our deliverance, and in our hearts turn back, if not to the flesh pots of Egypt, to the world with its allurements.

We thank God that we have witnessed but few instances of attempts at fashionable religion amongst the disciples of the blessed Savior. Three mournful examples, however, will long be remembered in sorrow inexpressible. Philadelphia some ten years ago, witnessed the fall and utter disgrace of a most tidy and fashionable preacher by the name of T–, whom the brethren had hired to perform their work for them. It is said the apostate is now the director of one of the lowest sinks of the flesh in that great city. Marion, Ala., witnessed the apostasy of our second fashionable preacher. The brethren hired him at $1,500 to rob them of much of the interest they had in the spirit. He gave swelling and pompous sermons to please the flesh.

But alas, alas. Nashville has suffered irreparable loss from the influence of the self-serving, over covetous, fawning F. But fashion, pride, and arrogance have been, and will be humbled in our “Rock City.” The decree has gone forth that vice cannot be always veiled under specious robes. It is said a murder will out, so will all crime, secret and open. These all fell like Lucifer from Heaven, and shame has fixed its seal upon them.

But we turn our anxious eyes from the flesh and sin, to religion, God and Heaven. We are saved by hope, and while peregrinating here below, we are improved most by constantly gazing upon the Son of righteousness. In looking aloft, “we are changed from glory to glory.”

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

even as by the spirit of our God.”
Well would it be for us, if there were no sin to attract our attention, and although it is necessary to point out some of the glaring evils of our times, it will not improve us to dwell upon them.
Brethren, let us look to Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith.
He has gone to prepare mansions for us, and we may qualify ourselves for their enjoyment by walking in his footsteps.
Let us cleave to the old religion, let us practice it in our lives.
T. F.

CHRISTIAN CULTURE

The highest of all culture on this earth is Christian Culture. The purest, brightest and best character is that which possesses the most of this culture. Human knowledge and human culture are as fleeting and limited, as man is frail and imperfect, but the culture and training of a Christian life are as lasting and abiding as the word of God, which liveth and abideth forever.
No mind can grasp and measure the consequences of this culture. The glorious results of it are with him “who declareth the end from the beginning,” and “worketh all things after the counsel of his own will.” Enough we know, however, of the grandeur of its immortal results, to fill our hearts with the liveliest anticipation, and nerve every energy to faithful endeavor for the heavenly prize.

The Gospel of God’s beloved Son is intended to give us this culture in the highest degree. It possesses no talismanic power to free us from sin, or elevate us, independent of our own exertions. It can only benefit us by being received into our hearts, and manifested in our lives. Its culture begins with our hearts. It is a manifestation of the love of our Father, and as such addresses man’s heart. It turns his affections to God, and makes him a new creature in Christ.

If we who profess above all things to contend for the Gospel in all its fullness, beauty and life, without the marring or neglecting of a single point ever expect to realize what we profess, we must give ourselves more to Christian culture. The bare claim of superiority to systems of men will never insure that superiority, unless we exhibit it by a more earnest attention to that training and knowledge which the Gospel so richly displays to us. We have started in the right direction. We have planted ourselves upon the proper foundation, and defy the united assaults of sectarianism to move us. In taking the word of God alone as our guide, our strength and our hope, we occupy the most…

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

Exalted position ever assumed by men on this earth. But in doing this we have not done all. We have as it were, but begun the work. We have but declared that we prefer the words of Heaven to the traditions of men. Beyond this there is yet an arduous task—a noble work for our hands. What is it? It is to show that we are in earnest. To show that we are not vain boasters, but that our hearts and our lives are in the work of restoring pure teachings, pure ordinances, and pure practices, among the people of God.

If there be truth in the Gospel, the Christian is a “new man.” He has put off the “old man, which is corrupt, according to deceitful lusts,” and “put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.” “If any man have not the spirit of Christ, he is none of his,” says the Apostle in his letter to the Romans. “If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature,” he says also to the Corinthians. Peter again says, “Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.” Fuller evidence we could not desire of the character which we possess as Christians, and the living energy that belongs to us as soldiers of Heaven’s exalted captain.

The Gospel presents Christian life not as an unmeaning profession, but as filled with arduous, unceasing trials and struggles in the service of our Lord. To be prepared to meet and endure these, we need the fullest training and culture that is within our reach, and the great question is how shall we attain it? God has given us abundant means, if we are but content to use as he has ordained. He “has given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness,” and there is nothing lacking on his part for the full perfection of Christian life.

The work to be done is with us. It is in our own hearts and lives that we are to begin. The training must be begun “at home.” Till we are right there, labor abroad will avail little. Till we learn to exhibit more of a Christian life, we cannot expect much good from the most labored efforts with the world. Unless there is life, a vigor, and strength, and sincere and godly devotion in the church of God, and around the homes and firesides of the people of God, the world can never be conquered.

While there is disease and sedition and apathy in the camp of the Lord of hosts, the loudest drummings and most vociferous huzzas can never carry terror and dismay in the hearts of the enemy. We must be united, active, and sanctified for the service of our Master, and this can never be until the love of our Master swallows up and overwhelms every feeling of selfish, petty jealousy, and strife.

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

Tied into a living host, with one purpose animating every heart. The power of the Gospel can do this when we use it aright. But so long as we neglect its teachings—neglect to read, to treasure and imbed within our hearts its pure and peaceful lessons, we will be divided, weak, and speculative. We will have no foundation upon which we can all stand and work together as brethren in one common cause, and every effort must prove abortive.

The church of Christ is the great school of Christian culture. It is his body. It lives by his spirit, and every member of that body must be filled with his spirit. We enter this body as “babes,” but if we use properly the means of growth, we increase in strength and devotion until we are ready for the most arduous service. We begin with little knowledge and weak efforts, but by reading the word of life, by prayer and praise and meditation, and attendance upon every sacred institution of our Lord, we become wiser and stronger by continued conquests over ourselves and the snares of sin.

We live in Christ, by giving ourselves to him in every thought and act of our lives. At home and abroad, and wherever we are upon this earth, his spirit dwells in us, and directs and controls every step of our lives. This is no speculation or dream. If we do not thus bring ourselves under the power of the Gospel, then there is but little use in the Christian profession. We belong to Christ, and “to whom we yield ourselves servants to obey, his servants we are to whom we obey.” The Apostle Paul in writing to the Galatians, most strongly expresses the Christian life, “I live,” says he, “yet not I, but Christ liveth in me.” Even so in the heart of every Christian man or woman on this earth, Christ lives “by the faith of the Son of God.” How glorious and exalted then is our estate! How important becomes our position on earth and solemn the responsibilities that are ours.

We are the temple of God. How careful then, that we defile not that temple in which the spirit of God makes its abode. Can we be too deeply impressed with the necessity of training and cultivating and purifying that temple, and of making it a fit habitation for His spirit? Surely nothing that can impress us with a deeper sense of the importance of every Christian obligation, and of our communal accountability to God our Father, is unworthy of our attention.

The facts, the duties, promises and hopes set before us in the Gospel of our salvation, are given to train us in the Christian life, strengthen us in our confidence in God, and build us up in holiness and purity and in righteousness. May it ever be a determination to draw our wisdom and strength from the word of life, and train and cultivate our hearts and lives, by steadfast, unwavering devotion to the commands of our Savior.

W. L.

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

ON SPIRITUALISM, BY A SPIRITUALIST

It would seem that scarce any sin or delusion, however preposterous, can be advanced in these days without securing the belief of considerable numbers, including persons of acknowledged ability, prudence and sagacity. But, (says the Journal of Commerce) they cannot long endure the severe scrutiny of religion and intelligence. Like icebergs in the blazing sun, they must before long waste away before the all-pervading light of truth.

“Spiritualism,” which is one of the most monstrous of these modern dogmas, already gives signs of approaching atrophy and decay. The editor of the “New York Pathfinder,” who represents himself as having for months past been at the head of the most extensive establishment in existence, for the investigation of the phenomena, publishing one of the leading journals, devoted entirely to the cause, and employing about the premises no less than eight mediums for public sittings, for investigation and instruction, and this establishment being carried on at an expense of over two hundred dollars a week, comes out in bold renunciation of the whole errand. Still entertaining belief in the “undeniable evidences of the existence of disembodied spirits,” these manifestations are regarded as inflicting incalculable evil wherever their influence is felt. The editor, Mr. John F. Whitney, says:

“Now, after a long and constant watchfulness, seeing for months and years its progress and practical workings upon its devotees, its believers and its mediums, we are compelled to speak our honest conviction, which is that the manifestations coming through the acknowledged mediums, who are designated as Rapping, Tipping, Writing and Entranced Mediums, have a baneful influence upon their believers, and create discord and confusion; that the generality of these teachings inculcate false ideas, approve of selfish individual acts, and endorse theories and principles which, when carried out, debase and make man but little better than the brute creation.

These are among the fruits of modern spiritualism, and we do not hesitate to say that we believe if these manifestations are continued to be received, and to be as little understood as they are and have been since they first made their appearance at Rochester, and mortals are to be deceived by their false, fascinating, and snake-like charming powers which go with them, the day will come when the world will require the appearance of another Savior to redeem the world by its departing from Christ’s turning to his followers.

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

to beware of wolves in sheep’s clothing, and try what manner of spirits ye were of.”
And again he says:

“Seeing, as we have the gradual progress it makes with its believers, particularly its mediums, from lives of morality to that of sensuality and immorality, gradually and cautiously undermining the foundation of good principles, we look back with amazement to the radical changes which a few months will bring about in individuals, for its tendencies are to approve and endorse each individual act and character, however good or bad those acts may be.”

The article from which these extracts are made concludes as follows:
“We desire to send forth our warning voice, and if our humble position as the head of a public journal, our known advocacy of spiritualism, our experience, and the conspicuous part we have played among its believers, the honesty and fearlessness with which we have defended the subject, will weigh anything in our favor, we desire that our opinions may be received, and those who are moving passively down the rushing rapids to destruction should pause, ere it be too late, and save themselves from the blasting influence which these manifestations are causing.”
— Exchange.

IS REASON AN INDEPENDENT TEACHER?

Scores and thousands of writers and speakers use the word, reason, as if they imagined that it is capable of directing us, without the aid of anything foreign or beyond itself. On this point we beg permission to take a short extract from Cousin, who is regarded as amongst the first speculative philosophers of the age. He says, “We are persuaded that reason cannot be developed without conditions which are foreign to it, cannot suffice for the government of man without the aid of another power; that power which is not reason, which reason cannot do without, is sentiment; those conditions without which reason cannot be developed, are the senses.” This is yielding all the ground. If reason is developed through the senses, all our spirituality is from without—through God’s messages.

Modern spiritualism is animal power terminating in the baser passions.
Wanton women and reckless men, abandoned to lust, are captivated by it.

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

MODERN SPIRITUALISM

In the present number we give to the public by the earnest solicitation of a friend, the experience of a “spiritualist,” and we have received various communications from the brethren on the same subject which we would be pleased to publish, but we doubt the propriety. It has been our intention from the commencement of our paper to pay our respects to this modern hallucination, but the more we think about it the less we are inclined to give it such consequence. There are two features, however, of the enormity, which ought to satisfy good men that there is nothing but evil in it.

The character of its operatives. Generally, it cannot be denied that either they are persons past the manhood of life, and in their dotage, as is the case with Tallmadge, Edmonds and Hare, or they are men of excessive animal powers, of reckless life, who desire to cover their corruption by high pretensions, or they are a class of pliant tools—men and women—who can be used for the basest purposes.
The fact that all from the least to the greatest of them, scoff at the Bible, at the Savior, and deny the authority of the church and its ordinances, is more than enough to satisfy the observing that there is something in it much worse than most men at the first view are wont to admit.

As many have asked our views on the subject, we give it as our settled judgment, that modern spiritualism is altogether of the flesh, and has not the remotest connection with anything that is spiritual or good.

T. F.

DR. FRANKLIN’S ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RELIGION

Dr. Franklin, in 1790, and just before he died, wrote a letter to Dr. Stiles, in which he employed the following words: “I am convinced that the moral and religious system which Jesus Christ has transmitted to us, is the best that the world has seen or can see.”

The ancient Jews looked for signs, and the Greeks boasted of their philosophy, but the reception of Christ’s Gospel put an end to both sign-seeking and mystic speculations.

Harmony of purpose, and correct knowledge of the Scriptures, furnish a key to the great storehouse of goodness.

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

“JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH ONLY.”

We now propose giving Dr. Ralston’s method of reconciling the seeming contradiction between the Apostles Paul and James, on the subject of justification.

We remark, in the first place, that he does not give a fair statement of the ground upon which this supposed contradiction rests. We quote his language:

“The contradiction supposed between the two Apostles respects what they have written in reference to the justification of Abraham.”

In this the learned author is certainly mistaken. Paul, in Rom. iii. 28, says,

“Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith, without the deeds of the law.”

Here the Apostle, by interpretation, is made to say,

“Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith only,”

while James, in the ii. 24, of his epistle, declares,

“Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.”

Here is a contradiction, plain and palpable, between Paul, as his language is interpreted by Dr. Ralston and his brethren, and James; without any reference to what the Apostles said in regard to Abraham’s justification. Hence the author’s first argument, stating that the two Apostles refer to different events in the life of Abraham, does not touch the question.

But another difficulty on this point suggests itself. This special interpretation of Paul’s teaching not only gives rise to the contradiction of terms above mentioned, but it also makes each of the two Apostles give undue weight to a single fact in his argument. Abraham, according to Dr. Ralston, was justified by faith only, at the time when God promised that his posterity should be as the stars of Heaven (Gen. xv. 5, 6); but James declares emphatically that the Patriarch was justified by faith and works, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar. Therefore Abraham was justified by faith only at one time, and by faith and works conjointly at another.

Now let it be remembered that James refers to the latter fact for the purpose of establishing the general principle of justification by obedience, joined with faith; but inasmuch as Abraham was justified by faith only at another time, the fact to which the Apostle alludes can have no force whatever in his argument.

For illustration. Dr. Ralston (if he is like the great majority of his brethren) is no “stickler for form” in regard to the ordinance of baptism. He will immerse, sprinkle, or pour an individual, just as he may desire.

Now, we ask, would it be fair for one to conclude that the Doctor is an advocate of immersion as the only scriptural baptism.

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

Page 59

merely from the fact that he saw him immerse a subject in water? No one of common sense, having a knowledge of the usages of the Methodist Church, would reason thus. Such an argument would be amply refuted by the fact that the same individual is known to perform what he calls baptism, by sprinkling and pouring. So in the case in consideration. The force of the fact that Abraham was justified by obedience resulting from faith, in James’ argument would be completely nullified by the fact—admitting it to be a fact—that he was justified by faith only in the case to which Paul refers. Hence we should be driven to the conclusion that the Apostle here makes a blunder in logic, unworthy of his common sense, to say nothing of his inspiration.

The second consideration which the author presents on this subject we quote entire, as a specimen of the unwarrantable means which he is compelled to adopt, to extricate himself from a serious difficulty.

“The two Apostles do not speak of the same faith—they do not use the term in the same sense. St. Paul speaks of that faith which confides or trusts in the merits of Christ for salvation, which ‘works by love and purifies the heart,’ which implies ‘believing with the heart unto righteousness,’ in a word he speaks of a living, active, powerful evangelical faith. St. James speaks of a ‘dead’ faith, a faith which is ‘alone,’ a mere assent of the understanding; such a faith as the ‘devils’ possessed. So far from St. Paul affirming that we are justified by such a faith as this, he said not one word in reference to such faith. The faith of which he speaks is never ‘alone,’ though it alone justifies. Hence it is manifest that when St. James asks the question, ‘can faith save him?’ he does not mean the same faith spoken of by Paul when he affirms that ‘we are justified by faith;’ consequently there is no contradiction between them.”

By what authority does the author affirm that the Apostles use the term faith in different senses? It is certainly very strange that men whose words were dictated by the Holy Spirit should employ the same term, without any mollification, when they mean different things. Paul, in the 11th of Romans tells us how faith comes, and he devotes the 11th of Hebrews entire to the definition and exemplification of faith, yet in these and the multitude of other instances in which he uses the word, he has no occasion to speak of different kinds of faith. James speaks of faith in the same unqualified sense, but says that without works it is dead. Men, however, who have lived in days of greater light, have penetrated so far into the mystery of theology, that they have discovered five or six different sorts of faith of which Paul and James had no conceptions!

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

But we are told that James speaks of a modified faith—a “dead” faith, such as the devils possessed. If, then, we have no other sort of faith in view, let us correct his loose style of speaking by inserting the modifying word. Thus we shall read:

“Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how a dead faith wrought with his works, and by works was a dead faith made perfect? Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by a dead faith only.”

Hence, according to James’ general conclusions, a man is justified by a dead faith united with works, while Paul asserts that he is justified by evangelical faith only.

To reconcile the two Apostles, therefore, the faith that James speaks of united with works must be equal to Paul’s faith alone!

But it can be easily shown that Dr. Ralston advocates justification by a faith which is alone, and therefore dead, notwithstanding his assertion that it is never alone. If man is justified by what theologians call a living faith without works, it follows that, although this faith is followed by obedience after justification, it still has its life prior to, and consequently independent of works.

In other words, works are not a condition of the life of faith, but a mere consequence. The Apostle James, however, if we understand him rightly, teaches that works have the same relations to faith that the soul has to the body (James 2:26). As therefore, the body has no life independent of the soul, but derives its life from the soul, so faith derives its vitality from works, and consequently until followed by works, it is dead.

Now, according to Dr. Ralston’s theory of justification, no act of obedience can intervene between the exercise of faith and justification, and therefore, although this faith may be followed by works, and so become living subsequently to justification, yet so far as justification is concerned it is alone, and therefore dead.

Lastly, on this point, the author says:

“The two Apostles do not use the term justification in the same sense.”

That St. Paul uses the term as synonymous with pardon or the remission of sins has been abundantly proved. That St. James does not use the term in this sense is evident from the case of Abraham appealed to for illustration. In the fifteenth chapter of Genesis, where Moses records the transaction referred to by St. Paul, he declares that “he (Abraham) believed in the Lord, and he counted it to him for righteousness.” Now if we understand St. James to affirm that Abraham was not pardoned till years afterward, when he offered Isaac upon the altar, we make him contradict both Paul and Moses, and we may set ourselves to reconciling him.

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

with the latter as well as the former. But surely this view cannot be maintained. Hence we conclude that the two Apostles could not use the term justification in the same sense.

This argument it will be observed, is based upon the assumption that “Paul uses the term justification as synonymous with pardon or remission of sins,” which the author supposes he has “abundantly proved” elsewhere. In our former article we think we gave some very good reasons why Paul did not use the term in this limited sense, and we referred to the case of Abraham in Gen. xv. 6, as one of the strongest evidences of the truth of the position. Dr. Ralston, however, reasons backwards on this point, assuming first that Paul always uses the term in the sense of pardon, and thence drawing the conclusion that Abraham was pardoned at the time when he believed the promise of God concerning his posterity. That Abraham received remission of sins at the time referred to is a mere assumption, without a shadow of evidence in its favor.

Indeed, according to Dr. Ralston’s own theory of justification, it can be “abundantly proved” that the Patriarchs received remission of sins anterior to the event to which Paul refers. If faith was the condition of pardon in that age, Abraham must have been pardoned long before this event, for in him, when God commanded him to leave his country and seek a strange land, we have one of the most striking examples on record of “faith in God.” Trusting implicitly in the Almighty’s promises, the faithful man left his father’s house, his kindred, his native land—all the endeared associations of his earlier years—to go into a land which he knew not.

We therefore conclude that neither Paul nor Moses in the case referred to had any reference to remission of sins, and consequently that the above argument fails to prove that the two Apostles used the term justification in different senses.

There is a very serious difficulty here, which the advocates of justification by faith only cannot surmount, and at the same time observe a decent respect for the proprieties of language. This, their favorite theory, with which so many of the stereotyped errors of popular theology are intimately connected, and which time and association have endeared to many an honest but deluded heart, must be upheld regardless of truth, common sense, and the dictionaries, Greek and English. Many honest and good men, doubtless, have become blind devotees to this time-honored error, hallowed because it has come down to them as the faith of their fathers, and in their zeal for its support they really seem to think they do no violence to the Scriptures of truth, when they take…

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

the liberty of modifying the words of the inspired pensman, and of giving them essentially different meanings in different connections, as their theory may require. O, that the sincere lovers of truth would cease to learn their “elements of divinity” from the lessons which man’s wisdom teacheth, and would content themselves to receive the instructions of Heaven, in Heaven’s own plain, simple, yet eloquent oracles!
T. M. C.

THE CHURCH IN NASHVILLE

Knowing the exceeding anxiety of the brethren generally, to receive information regarding the state of the cause in Nashville, we feel inclined to furnish such items as we may regard important.

On the last Lord’s day in 1855, J. B. Ferguson read in the congregation, a letter from five men in Nashville, no one of whom is regarded as pious, or a believer in the Christian religion, requesting him to remain in the city as preacher. Whereupon he took the vote of the audience, when, it is thought, about one-third of the persons in attendance expressed a desire for him to continue his ministrations.
Elder J. McGavock appealed from the world to the members of the church, when at least three-fourths, perhaps four-fifths, we understand, expressed an entire loss of confidence in their once respectable pastor.
On the last day of the year 1855, four out of the six Elders wrote to J. B. Ferguson that the time for which he was engaged had expired, and they would dispense with his services in future. J. B. Ferguson replied that he had possession of the house on Mr. W.’s claim, and would continue to preach till forced to vacate the building. At present the disciples in Nashville own one-half the house, and will be entitled to the other half upon the payment of $3,500 or $4,000; but they will be kept out of the use of it till the question is investigated. A committee has been appointed, we understand, to bring suit.
T. FANNING

IMAGINATION

“IMAGINATION,” says Victor Cousin, “is a child that must be educated, by putting it under the discipline and government of better faculties, it must be accustomed to go to intelligence for aid, instead of troubling intelligence with its phantoms.”

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

CHURCH NEWS

Brother Barrett writes under date of January 1st:

“At our meeting in Lynnville, including the 3rd Lord’s day in Oct., we immersed two persons, and one on the 3rd Lord’s day in November. The congregation at L. is now in as good condition as it ever has been, still it is not perfect. I preached two days at Wilson’s Hill, in Marshall Co., including the second Sunday in November, and gained four persons to the good cause by conversion and immersion. Thus ends my labors for the year 1855.
Your Brother in hope of a better day,
WADE BARRETT.

We cannot but hope that this worthy father in Israel may yet be spared to many more years of usefulness in His cause, whom he has served so long and faithfully.
W. L.

Brother Lemmons of Curia, Ark., writes:

“On Friday before the fourth Lord’s day in October, we commenced a protracted meeting with the congregation at Blue Spring, Independence Co., which resulted in seven accessions to the good cause.”
We rejoice to know the cause is prospering under the labors of our indefatigable and zealous Brother Lemmons.
W. L.

Brother Jesse Walker writes from Red River Co., Texas, Dec. 9th:

“The work of our master is going on in a prospering way. We have had some 20 additions here recently, mostly from the world, some from the Baptist ranks.”

Brother Samuel Henderson, of Rusk Co., Texas, writes Dec. 15th:

“Dear Brother:
I have been riding nearly four years in Texas, and have immersed 398 persons in six counties. We want laborers here.
I would like to say much, but have been severely afflicted with sore eyes for five months, which pain me very much.
Your Brother in Hope,
SAMUEL HENDERSON.“

Brother Robert Rogers, of Falcon, Ark., writes:

“My wife has been in the service of her Master a little over fifty years, and she grows stronger and stronger.”
Brother and Sister Rogers will please accept our continued congratulations in their labor of love and patience in hope.
T. F.

MISSION TO THE CHEROKEES

Brother T. J. Tnon is at present in the Cherokee Nation, with the view of preaching the Gospel to the most enlightened redmen known. Perhaps no man in all the brotherhood is so well qualified.

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

for the work. Whilst a member of the Methodist Church, Brother Trott spent several years in this nation, and should he finally determine to devote the remainder of his energies to the mission, he will have the prayers, sympathies, and doubtless, the necessary pecuniary support of the brethren.
T. F.

OBITUARIES

Elder Joel Yowell, in the 83rd year of his earthly peregrinations, fell asleep in Jesus, September 26th, 1855. We knew him to be a truth-loving and God-fearing man. He served out his time and has been gathered to his fathers.

DIED in Nashville, early in the month of January 1856, our aged and highly esteemed Brother, Thomas Claiborne, who was for more than twenty years a sincere and fearless advocate of the authority of Christ. No man has lived or died possessing a higher sense of honor, integrity, and Christian decorum. His exceeding distress and bitterness of spirit on account of the religious troubles of the church of which he had so long been a member, it is thought, contributed to his speedy dissolution. One of nobler traits we expect not to see again. He was “an honest man,” and left the world firm in hope that Jesus of Nazareth will raise him to the throne of the Father.

Sister Delila Petty was born April 17th, 1791, married her deeply afflicted husband, Elder John Petty, June 10th, 1807, and died in the town of Murfreesboro, December 7th, 1855. She was regarded by her acquaintances as a most exemplary disciple of our Lord Jesus Christ, and left the world fully resigned to his will. We sincerely sympathize with the afflicted relatives.
T. F.

We have just heard that our highly respected Brother, Jno. W. Northrup, died in the triumphs of a living faith in Mississippi, some months since.
T. F.

TO OUR PATRONS

Our patrons will please accept our sincere thanks for their promptness in sending in lists of subscribers. We are most happy indeed to know that our brethren particularly are disposed to cooperate with us in doing good, and we respectfully suggest that if The Gospel Advocate is calculated to exert an influence favorable to the Christian religion, the more extended the circulation, the greater will be the amount accomplished.

The smallest exertion on the part of each subscriber will make a vast difference in results. Everything valuable on earth is attained by effort.
EDITORS

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

FIRST PRINCIPLES – NO. 8

FAITH, REPENTANCE AND BAPTISM, IN THEIR PROPER ORDER

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

35

3d. Baptism

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH ALONE

AS TAUGHT BY S. W. LYND, D.D., OF THE COVINGTON THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

Page 37

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

Page 39

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

“THE PERMANENT ORDER OF THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY.”

BY PROFESSOR MILIGAN, OF BETHANY COLLEGE, FORMERLY OF WASHINGTON COLLEGE, PENN., AND MORE RECENTLY OF BLOOMINGTON UNIVERSITY, INDIANA.

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

41

THE PERMANENT OFFICERS OF THE CHURCH ARE DEACONS, BISHOPS AND EVANGELISTS

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

THE CHURCH OF CHRIST – NO. 4

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

RELIGION

THE OLD AND THE NEW

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

Why should Mr. Benedict express such fears in regard to the Baptists?

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

CHRISTIAN CULTURE

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

ON SPIRITUALISM, BY A SPIRITUALIST

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

IS REASON AN INDEPENDENT TEACHER?

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

MODERN SPIRITUALISM

DR. FRANKLIN’S ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RELIGION

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

“JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH ONLY.”

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

Page 59

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

THE CHURCH IN NASHVILLE

IMAGINATION

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

CHURCH NEWS

MISSION TO THE CHEROKEES

THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE

OBITUARIES

TO OUR PATRONS

Leave a Comment Cancel reply