THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
T. Fanning, Editor
D. Lipscomb
VOL. VIII
NASHVILLE, FEB. 6, 1866
NUMBER 6
THE PATH OF SAFETY
The wise man said, “There is no mancill, the people fall; but in the multitude of counselors, there is safety.” While we feel no disposition to give undue importance to the labors of brethren with whom we have associated religiously, we think it possible there are often incidents in the lives of good men to which we might frequently refer with profit, to such as desire to know the truth. Some twenty-five years since we had a large gathering of members in Tennessee and most of the States South, from the Baptists and other denominations; and while the transition seemed slight, the manner of proceeding differed so widely in the Church of Christ from denominational practices, that we had serious trouble with many of our new associates.
Members from the Baptists, Methodists, and Presbyterians had been accustomed to regular associations, conferences, presbyteries, missionary societies, temperance societies, Sunday-school societies, tract societies, and various other good associations, through which to perform all their religious services; but it had not seemed to enter the minds of most of these brethren that there was anything of a practical character in the Church of God. Indeed, it was difficult to lead many to realize that Christ really had an authoritative spiritual body on earth. In the denominations, many had stood high in office, but in coming amongst the disciples, it was always difficult, and in some cases impossible, to bring our new members to a level with those they were in the habit of calling “brethren.” Some, indeed, were so fond of the “official” “leeks,” “onions,” and “garlic,” that they went back to their respective churches. The utter destitution of the Church of Christ touching “auxiliaries,” it was always believed, led that very popular, and in many respects, excellent teacher, Peyton Smith, back to the Baptist.
There were pressing calls for every sort of association for years, to carry out the purposes of religion, but there were some who stubbornly…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
opposed every religious institution, save the church, as it came from the
hands of its Divine author. We were everywhere threatened with division. Finally, with the view, if possible, of coming to the unity of faith, the following expedient, (if such a style is appropriate) was adopted: The venerable Andrew Craig and Robert G. Foster, great and good men from the Baptist, and James C. Anderson, and the writer, who claimed to be free-born, took sweet counsel together, and agreed to call a meeting of the brethren from different sections of the country, in Nashville, for the purpose of studying together the following subject, viz:
THE TEACHING OF THE NEW TESTAMENT REGARDING CHRISTIAN CO-OPERATION
Quite a number of brethren met in obedience to the invitation, in the house of worship, in Nashville, in the month of January, 1852, and continued in close examination of the word of God seven days and nights. We endeavored to look at the Bible as if we had never seen it before. There was little or no preaching, and no effort was made to excite the public. No bills were posted, telling that some popular orator would declaim. At first, there was but little harmony, and in fact, there was a considerable amount of bad feeling. In getting to the main question, viz: The authority of the Scriptures upon the subject of cooperation, there were various other important matters which were necessarily examined, such, for instance, as the office of bishops, elders, deacons, evangelists—the manner of making them—their authority, labor, and the very important question as to the possibility of deciding authoritatively religious controversies, was more carefully studied than any other. For several days after the opening of the meeting, bad temper was apparent. Men declared that they were officers, that their “authority should be felt,” and that they never could or would come down to the level with the unofficials. They also maintained that men had a right, at least in this free country, to differ religiously—that it was impossible, to see eye to eye, and to speak the same thing. To tell all that occurred, would require a stout volume. This is not our purpose. The brethren discussed matters more earnestly and humbly than we had previously witnessed, and at the close of their investigations they all, black and white, old and young, came to oneness of mind in reference to the following conclusions, viz:
- That there is positive Scriptural authority for every religious work that is pleasing to God.
- That the Church of Christ is the only Divinely constituted organization on earth for Christian labor.
- All other organizations through which men propose to perform spiritual labor, tend but to obscure, discredit, and subvert the reign of the Messiah.
Whether these conclusions were correct or not, they were heartily…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Page 83
Believed to be true, and strife ceased with the brethren concerning religious expedients.
What, brethren, is thought of these things in this day? Have advances been made? Have the churches or the brethren learned a better way? We had a thought of making a very respectful suggestion to many of our brethren, who seem not only to think that we are in error, but act towards us as if they considered us a troublesome man and their enemy. Hence they refuse to co-operate with us, unless we will publicly declare ourselves in favor of matters we have perhaps never fully examined or appreciated. Why the effort to make us an enemy to mission and missionary societies? We never, to the best of our recollection, wrote an enemy on the subject, or delivered discourse with reference to such matters in our life.
We desire no hard feeling among the advocates of the cause of Christ. There should be no differences between us. The Bible is one, the Church is one. How shall we get rid of the strife we witness in regard to “matters” in religion? What say you, brethren, in reference to a full and most thorough examination of all matters of difference, somewhat after the manner adopted by the brethren at Nashville in 1851? We think we would be willing to travel a thousand miles, to England, or to any place on the earth, to attend a general meeting of the brethren with such a purpose in view. What say you brethren, who are officers of the missionary society? A large amount of the talent of the brotherhood seems to question the authority of your proceedings, and many good men, who are not merely blind, really believe the tendencies of your labor are detrimental to spiritual progress. Our firm confidence in the authority of the Scriptures emboldens us to declare that it is our settled conviction, that the brethren who now seem to differ across the whole heavens, will come together in the spirit of the Master, and powerfully examine the whole grounds of difference (a few days or weeks, or even months, if necessary), they will arrive at the same conclusion on every point.
Remember, brethren, that “in the multitude of counselors, there is safety.”
T. F.
DISCOURSE
Some of our brethren are very fearful of discussion of questions that continually arise among us brethren. They seem to think the time will come when there will be no difference of sentiment, no dissent or jars, no need for the investigation of subjects connected with the interests of our Lord’s Kingdom. They seem to think if there are differences of sentiment, they had better not be discussed. It makes a bad impression upon the world.
Alas, that the church does not learn that the world can never be cheated or fooled into the profession of Christianity. Do you wish to make the impression that there are no differences, when children…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Page 84
Does such a thing exist? That would be to perpetrate a deception upon the public, to net a falsehood. No church can afford to do this. But why anxious to make such an impression? Is it because we wish to make the impression that we are all perfect in knowledge and character? If not, diversities and differences are to be expected. The pretension to extraordinary perfection, in conduct and attainment, has given the character of hypocrisy to the church and to the ministry, and the claiming of exemption from investigation for its tenets and dogmas of faith has done more to bring the profession of Christianity into contempt than all other causes combined.
Christ did not avoid investigation and discussion. The Apostles did not avoid them, nor attempt to conceal the differences that arose among them. Wonder if those cautious brethren would not have been outraged, had they lived in the days of the Apostles, at the discussions and dissentions that arose on the subject of circumcising the Gentile converts? Don’t they think it very imprudent of Luke to have published it to the world, and to have related that difficulty—that difficulty between Paul and Barnabas, was scandalous? Paul was a very zealous fellow, or he would never have let the world know of that conference between himself and Peter, the two chief Apostles.
Ah! brethren, their object was different from yours. Their object was not to wheedle human nature into an approval of their course and to make the impression that the road to Heaven was a smooth paved pathway, without difficulties to be met and unfaithfully surmounted. But their object was to subject nature to the inexorable law of Jehovah. They endeavored to make the impression that mortal men must come to Christ in spite of difficulties, and they must surmount obstacles. Their object was not to attain an indolent, passive quiet in the church, but through continual and earnest striving to bring that church up to the standard of God’s law.
The water, whose quiet is never disturbed, becomes a fetid, stagnant pond, breeding corruption and disease in its stagnation. The ocean, by its ceaseless commotion, throws the mud, and foam, and putrid matter to the surface, thereby preserving its deep waters pure. The Church of Rome tolerates no discussion, evolves from its bosom heresies or false teachings; they are left within to work their lethal influences. The result is, her mighty carcass has ever been a hold of crime and putrefying corruption. So it must be with every church that stifles discussion within its bosom.
And yet there is a manner of conducting discussion, a proper spirit in which it must be done, in order that the greatest good may thereby be effected. Personalities, bitterness of feeling, and unkind invectives are unworthy of Christian men, and always harm the cause they are used to sustain. Bitterness is not force, nor is personal denunciation argument. We hope our scribes will remember these things, and like David of old, forget all personal insults and indignities in their holy indignation at insulted and injured truth, and in the name of Christ, with Christ’s spirit, battle manfully for the truth as it is in Christ the Lord.
D.L.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
OUR LABORS IN TENNESSEE
It will doubtless be a matter of interest to our brethren generally to know the location of our preaching brethren throughout Tennessee and the South. We are able to give only a partial list. Brother P. S. Fall has steadily, quietly, and uninterruptedly, through all the trials and vicissitudes of war, pursued the even tenor of his way, preaching to the congregation and citizens of Nashville. There has been a steady and constant growth of the congregation under his labors for the past few years. Bro. Jesse Sewell resides near Hickory Creek Post Office, in Warren county, Tennessee.
Worships and labors with the brethren at Philadelphia and the surrounding congregations in that and the adjoining counties. During all the strifes of war, he has at no time turned aside to vain janglings, or been thrown off his balance by the excitements through which he has passed. He has carefully excluded all partisanship in political affairs, and continually preached the gospel of peace to the world. We have at all times, especially during the last two years, heard good reports from his field of labor. Will not Bro. Sewell report his labors through the Advocate?
Bro. Isaac Sewell has also been laboring more or less in Rutherford, Cannon and Wilson counties. Is now located, we believe, near Lebanon, in Wilson county. We would be pleased to hear from him.
Bro. Elisha G. Sewell lives at Owen’s Station, Williamson county. He has not ceased to labor eagerly at every opportunity offered for the advancement of his Master’s Kingdom. His labors have been chiefly confined to Williamson and Maury counties. Faithful, true and earnest in his advocacy of the cause of our holy religion, his labors have been highly blessed. The reports of his labors would be highly encouraging to the brethren at large.
Bro. F. H. Davis, formerly of Franklin, Tennessee, now resides near Jeper’s Fork Post Office. He is engaged in teaching. He labors probably, as much as his health will permit. ‘Tis a sad thought that one so capable of usefulness should, by bodily infirmity, be prevented from doing active service continually in our Master’s vineyard, especially at a time when such service is so much needed for the good both of the church and the world. He, however, has, on several occasions during the year, held meetings with the most gratifying results. We hope truly that he may be enabled to hold many more.
While Bro. Davis’ speaking organs are so deranged as to prevent his preaching at times, he wields a mighty pen, that would do good. The columns of the Advocate will always welcome him. I know he will not withhold them.
Bro. H. M. Trimble is now located in the vicinity of Spring Hill, Maury county. He worships with the congregation at Deed’s Grove, and Johnson’s in connection with it and other congregations in Maury county. Always one of our most successful pioneer preachers. During the last two years he has done good service in enlisting recruits into the army of the faithful. We will expect an account of Bro. Trimble’s efforts.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
and Pickens, of the Lawrence congregation in Marry county, though not constantly engaged in the labor of evangelizing, have all been successful in doing good work in our Master’s vineyard. We have also heard a good report of Bro. Barrett’s labors near Lick Creek, in Giles county. Will not Brother Barrett let his brethren hear from him there?
Bro. Jas. Lucke, of Lawrence county, has not been laboring for a year or two with much regularity, but we hope when he finds himself settled at home, he will again direct his attention earnestly to the turning of his neighbors and fellow men to the way of life. Brother T. W. Brents resides near Richmond, Henrico county. His custom is to spend three or four months during the latter portion of each year in preaching. When engaged in the work, we have not a more successful laborer anywhere than he. We regret that his labors and time cannot be wholly consecrated to the work of the Lord. We hope that he will let the readers of the Advocate have the frequent benefit of his pen, which we know he is pretty industriously using.
Bro. G. R. Darwell is still devoting his time and talents to the instruction of youth. He has always been a popular teacher. He is successfully conducting a school at home, eight miles from Lawrenceburg, on Cane Creek. He preaches for the congregation on Cane Creek, and some of the surrounding congregations on Lord’s Day.
Bro. W. H. Huddleson lives at or near Spencer, Van Buren county. We have heard of him once at least from his mountain fastnesses, making a vigorous and successful assault upon the enemies of his King. We have not been able to learn anything concerning the extent of his general labors or success. We hope he will not tire.
Concerning A. Z. Scair, of the same locality, we have not been able to hear definitely for three or four years past. There are, in addition to these, quite a number of brethren, good stalwart men, who do not travel far from home, but who do good service in their communities, and who, in the midst of the distressing trials through which we have passed, have ever been found true to the Master, showing by their example, that they were resolved that, let whosoever else’s hand trail the dust that might, that the standard of the Cross should never be lowered.
In the upper portion of the mountain district of Tennessee, there are a number of brethren whose acquaintance we have never made—with whose addresses we are not familiar. We hope, through the Advocate, to continue an acquaintance with them. In East Tennessee we have occasionally heard from Bro. Gilbert Randolph, now of Maryville, Blount county, and Bro. Sam’l Millman, of Bristol. We hear occasionally of Bro. Hobbs, of Cagleville, West Tennessee, a son of Bro. Cook, now of Montpelier, and always we hear good reports of them. In each of these sections there are, doubtless, other brethren, with whose addresses we are
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
87
Unacquainted, working faithfully in the Master’s cause. We would like to hear from all such.
The above mentioned preachers, aided by a true set of brethren and sisters, we believe, as the world ever saw, have, during the past four years, firmly stood to their positions, and under every discouraging circumstance, labored to maintain and spread the cause of our Redeemer. Their labors, too, have been blessed. Of the preachers and churches in the counties of Middle Tennessee, we speak particularly, being more familiar with them than with other sections. In this section we have been enabled to hold our own, and we believe, to gain ground, both in numbers and membership during the prevalence of the war. Congregations which were liable, on every Lord’s day, to be surrounded by roving bands of reckless soldiery, to have their horses taken, themselves detained and subjected to indignities, bore it all, and continually met on the first day of the week, as the Lord appointed.
When the churches and the community were so impoverished that they were unable to support the evangelist, they then, like Paul of old time, labored with their own hands for food and sustenance for themselves and families, and still preached the gospel. They did not forsake their flocks when in poverty and distress. But some of them, we know, refused tempting offers from richer and more favored sections of the community, determined to share the fate of their brethren, whatever that fate might be. These churches, we know, should prosperity smile upon them, cannot forget those tried and true men of God. The church should prize highly those of her preachers who, in these times of distress and sorrow, stood true and faithful to the cause and to the churches.
Brethren and sisters all, shall we not humbly thank God that He has, through so many difficulties, and trials, and dangers, hitherto brought us safely on our way? Shall we not, from the past, take fresh courage, put our confidence more reservedly in God than ever, gird up our loins afresh for new, and perhaps, severer conflicts, and ever live in more humble obedience to His laws? May our Father help us.
D. L.
We give the following letter from our veteran Brother, N. W. Smith, of Georgia. He has ever been a faithful and true man of God. During the war he preached in faithfulness the mission of the prince of Peace, becoming no partisan of earthly governments. Still has the right spirit of the true Christian. Are there not brethren who have been blessed in their earthly store, that would rejoice to have the privilege of aiding such?
D. L.
Brothers F
- Previous to 1861, I lived for a number of years in peace and plenty, in Acworth, Cobb county, Ga., being comfortably situated there, having built a comfortable meeting house, in which my family and friends could meet and worship. The war came…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
on, with all its horrors. I and family, with many others, left the country. Sold my possessions and bought here, and moved away before the retreating army. But, ah! in the month of September, 1864, I fell into the lines of both armies, and by them I lost nearly all I had on earth—reduced from plenty and comfort to beggary. Thus have I suffered in my old age. I am here now, and no house of worship belonging to the Christian Church nearer than ten miles. A few brethren have returned to the neighborhood of Acworth, but, alas, they have no house there now to worship in. The soldiers pulled it down and moved it to Altoona to build shanties. But in all my troubles and losses, I have not ceased to proclaim the old gospel as I have had opportunity. My labors last year were, a part of the year, arduous and incessant, and thank the Lord, not without success. There were nearly one hundred added to the churches in the bounds of my labors. The Lord willing, I hope to preach this year all I can. It has been my motto through life to preach as the doors opened to me, and although our brethren are few, poor, and suffered much by the war, and can do but little in the way of sustaining evangelists, yet somebody must preach to them and try to keep the good cause going forward.
Bro. P. F. Lomax is a good Evangelist, and did a good and great work last year in Georgia, and before long I will write you and tell you of a Bro. A. C. Borden, a wonderful man and preacher, indeed. I like the ADVOCATE very much, and will do all I can for it. I pray that it may never lose its independence, but speak the truth in love and spare not.
Yours truly and affectionately,
NATHAN W. SMITH
Jonesboro, Clayton county, Ga., Feb. 1st, 1866.
The following is republished, because a typographical omission in our issue of the 2d ult., materially altered the sense of the whole article:
ROMANS XIII: 1.
“LET EVERY SOUL BE SUBJECT UNTO THE HIGHER POWER.”
Perhaps no passage in the Word of God has been quoted oftener during the four years past than this, or its kindred expression, found in I Pet., 2:13, “Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake.” It may be desirable, then, to analyze these oracles, since, possibly, they have been used without thought by many upon whose lips they have been most frequently found.
Let it be noted, first, that the language of Rom. XIII: 1, is more comprehensive than is generally supposed, and even more so than any that could have been employed. Whatever the expression of the Divine Will may be, it is obligatory upon “EVERY soul.” That Will demands subjection to the “higher powers.”
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
This implies that every individual upon whom this command is laid possesses some power or authority, yet that there is a “higher power” to which he must submit. No possible relationship is excluded from this category. Is it not, then, a sad misapplication of this law, to confine its operation to any one relationship? Yet it is as lawful, quite, to limit it to one as to another. According to the Divine Will, as thus expressed, every living being—whatever his age or social position, is to be “subject” to the “power” higher than his own. If then, any living being exists, over whom there is no superior authority, that being alone is not bound by this law. But, on the other hand, if every human being must be under some superior authority, the disregard of the Will of God is as great in him who teaches men to resist that authority in one case as in another. Certainly, then, no man has a right to quote this law as demanding submission in one subordinate, while he exalts another from its operation; or while he justifies resistance to it, or a voluntary or compulsory tribute.
If a divine law be established in these words, as no doubt, its rightful operation must be defined by every man who fears God; and such a man will not dare to justify resistance even to such an “ordinance of man” as pertains to that authority that is “ordained of God.” For example: would it not be equally a violation of God’s will, as expressed in this law, to say to a child, “Call no man on earth your father,” as to say to a servant, “Call no man on earth your master?” Would it not be quite as wrong to authorize resistance to the “higher power,” either of a master or of a magistrate? The Pharisees in our Lord’s day made void the law of God by their traditions. They knew that that law said, “Honor thy father and thy mother;” but they said, “If any son had the insolence to tell his father or mother that the profit of his labor was a gift from them on his part, he should be released from the obligations imposed upon him by that law: he should be free.” Isaiah prophesied truly of this, saying, “This people draw nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoreth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me; but in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.”
We hear much, indeed, of precepts and of special ideas; but such as regard the word of God as the law of life for all men, can never submit that it can be superseded by human traditions, by civil law, or by what is called “human ideals.” For all time and for every possible phase of human life and human society, the word of God must be perfectly adapted, and always and everywhere obligatory. Divine ideals intended for all mankind can never become obsolete. Christianity is “the dispensation of the fullness of times.” We have but one alternative, and that is to discard it wholly, for if it be without authority when demanding subjection to one “higher power.”
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Power
It may be regarded in the same light as all; and the citizen may be freed from the higher power of the magistracy, as fully as a son from that of a father, or a servant from that of a master. According to interpreters who cancel any obligation to this Divine law, rebellion of any sort is impossible; for the law itself is annulled. With such persons, the term is merely an untranslatable word.
Taking the precept, we are considering, therefore, in its legitimate comprehension, we gather from it the following thought: “Every soul” is subject to an authority superior to his own, how great or how small soever that may be. This, again, suggests that in human society relationships exist that are necessarily correlated. That is, there can be nothing without citizens; no husband without a wife; no parent without a child; no master without a servant; no officer without a tribe. But the Divine law recognized all these, and prescribes their reciprocal duties, as any one may see who reads the New Testament even carelessly. This law, then, must be enforced by the same authority in regard to them all. A servant, it is the will of God, shall be “subject to the higher power” or to his master; a child, to that of a parent; a citizen to that of the magistrate; the magistrate himself to that of the organic law; while that finally must be subjected to the “higher” authority of Almighty God, to whom all power belongs of right and of necessity. The “powers that be” are subordinated at present to the Lord Jesus Christ, upon whose shoulder the government of the universe is laid.
SOMETHING TO BE CALMLY CONSIDERED
We give below an important letter from Dr. Broadhead. We cheerfully comply with his request to allow space in our columns to any brother or disciple who may desire to respond to his proposal, only on two conditions: first, that the response shall be brief, and, secondly, that it shall have a direct bearing on the object proposed. The first condition is necessitated by the pressure on our columns; and the second is enforced by the danger of drifting into the discussion of unprofitable and interminable issues. Let us see who can write most in the spirit of Christ, and contribute most to heal divisions and promote a Christian and common cause. If there can be union without a sacrifice of truth and a clear conscience, it is surely better than schism, with its bitter rivalry and constant strifes. We are ready to lend any little influence we may have to further a consultation so devoutly to be wished.
—J.J. Herald
UNION OF BAPTISTS AND DISCIPLES
Messrs. Editors:
This is the age of reconstruction. A few months ago, the two wings of the Presbyterian Church, Old School and New…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
91
School, found a platform on which they could unite, and are now happily joined in one brotherhood. At this time politicians are busily engaged in efforts to reunite our afflicted States, and restore them to harmonious co-operation. May these efforts succeed!
It has occurred to me that this would be a favorable time to inquire whether there could not be formed a reunion between the Baptists and the people called Reformers, or Disciples. For more than forty years this very thing has been going on, and it appears to me to be time that something should be done to ascertain whether there be any possibility of removing the obstacles that lie in the way of our again becoming one people.
Would the parties agree to select some ten men on each side, to meet in Convention, and have a friendly look, with a view to consider the question of reunion? Such convention could, of course, have no ecclesiastical jurisdiction. Their deliberations, however, might help the parties to reunite, or else convince all hands that reunion is impracticable. I deem it improper in this article, even to hint at any terms of reunion. I write to inquire what our brethren think, and what the Reformers think of the propriety of taking some steps in this direction. I hope you will give a place in your columns to any Baptist, or Reformer, who may choose to respond.
W. F. BROADDUS.
Charlottesville, Va.
We give, with pleasure, the foregoing, from the Religious Herald, published in Richmond, Va., the oldest and most influential of Baptist papers in the South, now edited by the well-known Dr. J. B. Taylor and A. J. Dickinson. We are free to say that we have not seen an article among our exchanges that has done more to advance the cause of Christ on earth than the above. There is nothing that could do so much to forward the cause of Christ on earth as the harmonious union in one scriptural body of His true professed followers. Nor can we see any reason why they should not be one. The times, too, seem propitious for a move in that direction—the disorganized and disheartened state of the churches has greatly weakened all partisan feeling and spirit, and will enable us all to look more calmly and dispassionately upon the positions that we occupy, than we could have done at any period within the last thirty years. The Baptists and Disciples certainly have much in common, that would furnish a good starting point for a union. They have a common ancestry, a common history of suffering and sorrow, through twelve long centuries of bitter persecution. We are persuaded, too, they have one common faith in our one Lord and Savior, and a sincere desire to maintain, pure and unpolluted, the ordinances as God gave them to man. Why then should they not be one?
The idea of a meeting for consultation, as above suggested by Dr. Broadus, is certainly in harmony with the spirit of the Christian religion, and at all times must result in good to those who engage therein, with the…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Proper spirit. What say our brethren, Baptists and Disciples of Tennessee and the South? Will they speak out freely on the subject? Whether for or against the pages of the Advocate shall be open to them.
T. T. & D. L. Editors.
JEWISH AND SECTARIAN ASSUMPTION
“Who has required this at your hands? Trend my court no more; bring no more oblation; incense is an abomination to me”—Isaiah 1:13, Lowth’s translation. “What could have been done more to my vineyard that I have not done to it?”—Isaiah 5:4. “These kinds are a smoke in my nostrils”—Isaiah 65:5. “You have made the word of God of no effect by your traditions”—Jesus Christ, Matthew 15:6, and Mark 7:13.
The English word assumption is from the Latin word assumptio:
- The act of taking to oneself;
- The act of taking for granted, or supposing a thing without proof; supposition.
“In logic, the minor or second proposition in a categorical syllogism”—Korn’s Encyclopedia. “He who takes the book of God for the rule of his faith and practice can never go astray; but to the strifes and perplexities produced by the traditions of elders, human creeds and confessions of faith, there is no end”—A. Clarke.
The Jews assumed that they must have other gods than the Lord of Heaven. Hence, Aaron’s calf, Baal, Ashtoreth, Dagon, and the whole list of ancient gods. They insisted that they must have another king besides God, and hence Saul and the whole catalogue of kings, good and bad. “God gave them these kings in his wrath, and took them away in his anger”—1 Samuel 8, Deuteronomy 17, Hosea 13:11.
Thirdly, the Jews assumed that God’s law was insufficient and imperfect, and, therefore, their supplemental law, or oral traditions; to explain which traditions they added the Jerusalem Babylonish Talmuds and the Gemara, or complement, all of which are called paradosis, from paradidomi, to deliver from hand to hand, to transmit, and the Latin word traditio, from tradere, to deliver from one to another.
They had two laws, the oral or mouth-law (tradition), and the written law, the Old Testament. They said the words of the scribes are comely beyond the words of the law, for the words of the law are weighty and light, but the words of the scribes are all vanity. It was the ruining sin of the Jewish nation that they made void God’s law by their oral, or mouth-law, in consequence of which their nation was destroyed. The steps in their ruin were regularly downward:
- They despised God’s law.
- They disobeyed God.
- Their idolatry; “their idols, O idols, caused them to err”—Amos 5:45.
- Their destruction.
Paul says, “these things are types and examples to us”—1 Corinthians 10. “These things were written for our learning”—Romans 15:4. We have our written gospels and mouth gospels, we have idols, our ruin is approaching daily.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
93
Catholics, Jesuits, and Episcopalians have assumed that they are successors of the Apostles; that Peter is head of the Church; that they have power to make laws to supply “God’s commission,” and their systems, as systems, are built upon these assumptions. This is a radical principle, but a religious principle. Sectarians assume that God has told us to baptize, but left it to us to find out the mode to do it. I wish you, or some of your readers, to give one instance from the Bible in support of either the Jesuitical or Sectarian principle. I challenge you to do it. Mystics assume that men cannot understand the Bible till they are born again. Give us the proof. Calvinists of every school assume that God has told us to do, but we cannot do it. Give us one instance from the Bible where a man received a law from that he could not understand what he told him to do, or that the thing was left to his discretion how to do it. One instance either of these sectarian principles will suffice.
Give us an instance from the Bible where the amount of money given for any purpose, the success of any enterprise, and the good leading were a test of that thing; or according to the Jesuits, “that the end justifies the means.” It has been conceded over and over again that missionary societies are not in the New Testament; that there is no valid reason in requiring apostolic example or precept for our religious acts. It has been denied that the apostolic churches spread the gospel after the resurrection of Christ, and that these societies stand on expediency alone. There is, therefore, but one thing that remains to be done, and that is for their advocates to tell how it was spread. If not by individual churches, will our missionary societies then tell us how it was done? The Jerusalem church existed some eight or ten years before any other church, and spread the gospel alone herself, as the first seven chapters of Acts prove, and the 11th chapter, that this mother church spread the gospel throughout Judea, Samaria, Phœnicia, Cyprus, Antioch, and the uttermost parts of the Roman empire, or world.
There is not a plainer revelation in the New Testament than this. There is not in all the New Testament a plainer law, except the things was done, than the law in Matt. x., Mark vi., Luke ix., x. The twelve, the seventy, and the original disciples acted under this law. The burden of proof that they did not lies upon the friends of missions. They received their pay after the work was done, and not before it was done, as the modern missionaries do. The ancient missionaries received from the persons to whom they preached, and not from others, by subscription or promise before the work was done. These modern missionaries support the system which supports them.
There is no need of telling us that the missionary work is a great work, and what has been done, the need for the work, and all these things. These things are all admitted. The only question now before the brethren on this subject is, whether the individual churches are to do…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
This work, or it is to be taken out of their hands, and put into the hands of societies unknown to the New Testament, and the Christian era’s first two centuries of Christianity. Let us continue the discussion to these questions. I will here relate an anecdote illustrative of the two methods of spreading the gospel, which I heard in the past year, the year that cholera was so fatal in Kentucky. It was between an old man and an old woman, on the subject of calomel and steam medicine to cure cholera. The old man was for steam and the old lady for calomel. They had it for some time but heavy, and at length the old lady closed her argument by saying, “Calomel was a very good medicine in its place.” To which the old man replied, “You and I agree entirely, madam; that is precisely my opinion, and its place is in the bowels of the earth, where God put it. It is good in its place.” He wound up the old lady so tight that she could not rally again. That is my opinion about medicine. They are good things in their place, in the hands of the individual churches, where God put them. Taken from there they are a bad thing.
J. C.
January 23rd, 1866
BRO. FANNING: I beg permission to suggest another thought or two on the subject of my former communication. It may be thought by some that this is “much ado about nothing,” but I beg leave to differ from those who may think so. When it is admitted that we think and express our thoughts in words, and that all that we know of Christianity, we learn by the words in which it is expressed, it must be admitted that a correct impression will be made on the minds of others, only when we employ such words as will correctly express our thoughts or the work in which we are engaged. This idea is clearly deduced from the language of Paul, when he says, “Which things we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but in the WORDS which the Holy Spirit teacheth.” Too much care, therefore, cannot be exercised in the selection of the words we employ in speaking of the things of God. In suggesting these thoughts, we are certainly very far from intending to diminish, in the slightest degree, the honor due the great and good men who have so nobly and bravely stood in the front ranks of the “faithful,” in the propagation and defense of the truth. But on the contrary, to prevent, as far as we can, the slander upon the character of those brethren, that would be implied, in trying to make it appear that they were engaged in simply building up another party, having for its object the reformation of the gross religious of the age, and to show, if we can, that the lives of these great men were spent in a noble and manly effort to call the attention of the world to the institution of Jesus the Christ, which was instituted eighteen centuries since. That there is a disposition in the mind of man to glorify men rather than God, does not require proof. “We,” sounds very large to name men, and makes them feel very much their own importance; but I am persuaded that the less we think about
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
95
The agents by who God accomplishes his work, and the more about Him who does the work, the more glory we shall give to God and the less we shall glorify man. The text we propose for our present paper we quote from the same author from whom we made the first quotation in the other paper, and runs thus:
“This reformation is the development of a single conception, and that conception is suggested by these words: All honor, under God, to the noble intellect and deeply pious heart that guided the pen that first wrote them.”
Now that the language here quoted, and a definition of “this reformation,” makes “this reformation” stand out as a separate and distinct institution from the Church of Christ, the most careless thinker will see at a glance.
Let us ask the question he asked: What is “this reformation?” The answer from our learned author is: “It is the development of a single conception.” What is that conception? “All honor to the noble intellect and deeply pious heart (Thomas Campbell) that guided the pen which first wrote them.”
That wrote what? “The plea for the union of Christians.” When was that plea written? “Near the beginning of the present century.”
Now, pray, is that the Church of Christ? Is the Church of Christ the development of a single conception, and is that conception embodied in words which ascribe all honor to a man, how noble and pious he may be? I frankly confess that I never thought so. It is precisely for the reason that this phrase makes a false impression upon others, and places the Church of Christ in a false attitude before the world, that I object to it.
I wish it definitely understood that by thus speaking, we do not mean that what is called “the current reformation” is not the Church of Christ; on the contrary, we firmly believe that it is, and for that very reason object to its being designated by so unmeaning a title as the one under consideration.
When men talk among us say that this reformation (meaning the Church of Christ) had its beginning near the beginning of this century, and that Thomas Campbell laid its cornerstone, and that it is the development of a single conception, and that conception ascribes all honor to him who laid its cornerstone, (Thomas Campbell.) Who concluded that it is a mere modern institution, and is the work of man?
Let one tell me that the church to which I belong is a modern institution, and deny it, he simply refers me to the writings of these men. What then can I say? I should have to say, as I have already been mortified by having to say, “these men did not write my creed, and I do not believe a word or what they say.” Is it not enough, brethren, that we call it by its proper name, ‘THE CHURCH OF CHRIST,’ what then?
A postles called it.
The church has had to contend against all the false religions in the world ever since its institution, but it has never sought to reform one of them, but to exterminate them. This is still, in part, the work it has in hand. And it is honor enough for every mortal that he be permitted to…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
bear an humble part in this glorious work, and enjoy the approving smile of his blessed Master when he has finished his work. The honor of men is nothing. Listen at your Master. How can you believe me, when you receive honor one of another? May our able brethren, with both tongue and pen, labor to keep out all misleading phrases, and suppress those that have already crept in, is my constant prayer.
Fraternally,
W. H. GOODLOE.
DEAR BROTHER FANNING & LIPSCOMB:
I have read with interest the numbers of the Gospel Advocate. It has given satisfaction. Its frequency makes it more valuable. By its weekly visits we are brought nearer to each other, like the meeting of the brethren on every Lord’s day. It strengthens and refreshes. Permit me to wish you complete success. Our congregation is doing well. In November, 1865, there were added to the faithful, eighteen persons. The difficulties surrounding us are passing away. The attendance on Lord’s day is increasing. The brethren are more zealous and earnest than formerly. We have reorganized, or rather renewed our covenant with the Lord and one another. A new elder and deacons have been selected or appointed.
I write the above to inform you that I have not forgotten you, nor the Lord. I am still doing what I can, and shall continue to do so as long as I continue in this earthly tabernacle. May the Lord help us to continue faithful.
Yours fraternally,
THOS. STATHIER.
Hartsville, Feb. 7th, 1866.
NOTICE
The Board of Managers of the Educational Stock Company, will hold the next meeting, at Franklin College, February 14th, 1866, at 10 o’clock, A. M. It is very desirable that every member of the Board be present, as matters of the highest importance to the Company will come before them.
DAVID LIPSCOMB, Sec’y.
It is very desirable that every subscriber to the stock of the Company should pay up the full subscription by the meeting on the 14th inst. It is an urgent and pressing interest, and will have to be settled up. It will be impossible for the undersigned any longer to act as Treasurer, and he would like to settle up the old books of the Company so nearly as possible, by said meeting.
DAVID LIPSCOMB, Treas.
February 1st, 1866.