THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
T. FANNING AND W. LIPSCOMB, Editors.
VOL. V.
NASHVILLE, JUNE, 1959.
NO. 6
PRAYER.-No. 4.
Having as we think, shown that the children of the kingdom alone have the right to ask the Father for the blessings of religion, and that God does really and truly answer prayer, we next wish to examine the evidence that the Lord bears and answers prayer.
There are two kinds of evidence that our Heavenly Father answers prayer, viz: Miraculous and Ordinary.
Elias prayed earnestly that it might not rain, and it rained not for the space of three years and six months, and he prayed again, and the heavens gave rain: and the earth brought forth her fruit.
James says, “The prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up.”
It is remembered that in the primitive church, when one was afflicted, they were to call the seniors of the congregation, who were to anoint the sick with oil, praying over him, and the Lord was to raise him up. This we consider as all miraculous and peculiar to the Apostolic and former ages.
The signs were for the completion of the body, and were to continue, “till they all come into the unity of the faith, and to the knowledge of a perfect man in Christ Jesus.”
From the date of attaining to this perfection, they were to be “no more children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine.”
The disciples came to the unity of the faith, when the testimony was all embodied, which was about the close of the first century, and hence there has been but one faith for all Christians.
As to opinions, their name is legion, and regarding them, men are engaged everywhere in the bitterest strife, but the war improves no one.
A “single thus saith the Lord,” is worth all the speculations on earth.
But we return to the…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Subject, and ask the question, if most persons are not looking for miraculous answers to their prayers. Are not sinners exhorted, at the mourner’s bench and in the altar, to pray fervently to God, for “a feeling sense of pardon.” Are they not, many at least, induced to profess the reception of a direct witness by the spirit, in an extraordinary feeling that they are pardoned? We think we are not mistaken, when we say that the converts of Presbyterian, Baptist and Methodist ministrations all profess to have received some positive or miraculous evidence of pardon, in answer to prayer. The whole machinery of revivals is got up with the view of storming the citadel of the Almighty, in order that the stately steppings may be seen among the people.
Take from the converts this direct revelation in answer to their prayers, and they have nothing they call Christian experience, and indeed, there is no orthodox church in the land that would fellowship one who could not give satisfactory evidence of direct grace, received in some paroxysm of prayer. Not all, however, who look for miraculous answers to their prayers, are physically, intellectually, by education or otherwise qualified to get this direct witness from above. Some are saved from this whirlpool of sin, and stygian lake of despair, by the Gospel light streaming in upon them. We have perhaps as good reasons to thank God for the glorious sun which led us from this night of death, as any being on earth has for his salvation.
But most of those who look for signs still, and whose thoughtfulness and want of imagination prevent them from “seeing Religion,” become insane. This is proved by the reports of our Lunatic Asylums. At least two-thirds of the inmates have become insane, from disappointment in their religious anticipations. Though it is a sad picture, it is true to life. Hence, we repeat such as look for miraculous answers to their prayers, must either profess to be what in the very nature of things cannot exist, escape by the power of truth, or go mad. The picture, however, has another side. “We walk by faith and not by sight,” or feeling either.
Under the reign of Jesus Christ, there are neither voices, signs, dreams or visions. These existed to confirm the truth to the world, and ceased when the testimony was completed. When men look for additional testimony through table tippings, dreams or mourner’s bench revelations, the Gospel has no place in their hearts. They are thoroughly bewitched. Our faith in the promises of God, is the highest and only evidence, we can have, under the Gospel dispensation that God hears us. On this point the Savior said, pointing directly to the establishment of his kingdom, “Hitherto have ye asked…”
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
nothing in my name, ask and ye shall receive that your joy may be full. If ye ask any thing in my name, I will do it. The reader will please call to mind that remarkable passage, which reads, “And it shall come to pass; that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved,” and also the declaration of our Savior, “Not every one that saith unto me Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of Heaven, but he that does the will of my Father who is Heaven.”
It has long seemed to us there was a vagueness—a want of meaning—with most of us, in the words, “calling on the name of the Lord.” Is it the idea of the scriptures, that all the creation who are disposed to pray to God have the promises? All who say “Lord have mercy,” are to look for pardon?
Without any argument whatever, we offer our own view of the matter. Whosoever seeks the blessings in the name, by the authority, or as the Lord prescribes, shall receive them, and hence the manner of praying is to be determined by the duty required. When we approach the Father, believing that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him, we entertain no doubts as to his answering our prayers.
When a father tells his son who has erred, that upon certain conditions he will pardon him, and the son complies, he has no doubt as to the fact of his pardon though he does not repeat the promise; and if the child has the least confidence in the truth of the father’s statements, he looks not for him to say in, or after his obedience, “I am as good as my word, I have forgiven you.” If the Lord tells us that on certain terms, he will forgive us our sins on earth and grant us a right to the tree of life in the next world, we see no necessity for his repeatedly performing miracles to satisfy us; he has spoken the truth.
A few scriptures on this point will remove every cloud. John says, “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” The evidence of the forgiveness in this instance at least is in the confession. One who can understand all that is necessary to make the full and sincere confession, can have no difficulty in determining whether or not his prayer is heard or answered.
The same Apostle says, “We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren.” But if asked as to the evidence we love the brethren, John replies, “By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and keep his commandments. For this is the love of God that we keep his commandments.” (John 5:2, 3.) We know that we love the brethren, when we love God and keep his ordinances, and when we
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
We know we love the brethren, we have the testimony within our own hearts that we have past from death unto life. But to conclude the matter John says, “And this is the confidence we have in him, that if we ask any thing according to his will he heareth us. And if we know that he hear us, whatsoever we ask we know that we have the petitions we desired of him.” Here again, our confidence the Lord bears us arises solely from the fact that we “ask according to his will.” This will is revealed, and when we obey it, as John says, we have “the confidence,” he hears us. Hence John concludes by stating, “And whatsoever we ask we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.” It seems to us that comment is unnecessary. If then we believe and obey the will of the Lord, we can entertain no doubt as to his hearing and answering our prayers.
T. L.
PRAYER – NO. 2
Bro. Fanning: Since reading your strictures upon my former No. in the March issue, I have greatly relented in my feelings in some respects towards the advocates of Infant and Adult Sprinkling—the mourners bench and transubstantiation. If you can find the principles, and sentiments which you attribute to me, and Bro. Milligan from anything written by us upon the subject of prayer, I am wholly unable to see why the advocates of the above dogmas may not also make them out from the Oracles of God, for I am sure that such results as you deduce from my position never entered my mind. I advocated but one position, to wit:—that every “penitent believer in Christ” not only might, but would petition a throne of Grace, with thanksgivings, deprecations, and petitions, as the natural result of his faith, love and dependence upon God. Out of these positions, you have constructed the following unmerciful catigation, reproof, and decision.
In your March issue you say, “Jesus Christ has made it the duty of the church, and especially the Evangelists, to preach the Gospel to the world, to tell sinners to come for all things are ready, but they have no right to ask or expect other light, different aid, much less a right to petition the Lord to pardon them, adopt them, grant them the Christian honors on earth, or the Christian reward in Heaven without a faithful compliance with all that is required in the Gospel.” Who among us, Bro. Fanning, say that they have such rights? I do not know the man and hope that I never shall. But what is more singular you ask,
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
“Are not converts required to say in answer to their bitter groanings—called prayers, they have light from heaven, revelations from heaven’s court to their inner man, that all their sins are blotted out. Our friends are doing nothing less. They pray at the altar for the direct conversion of sinners. Write that the penitents implores is an authorized prayer to the Almighty for ‘Salvation,’ in the style of Dr. Walsh, for the pardon of sins.”
“Prof. Milligan, and his defender, Bro. G. W. Elley, either teach the same things, or there is no meaning in their words.
For myself, I give to the above a flat, and positive denial of your assertion. I never spoke, wrote, or thought such ungodly and infidel sentiments in my life, and there is not a tribunal on earth who can so understand my former number. If you can therefore deduce such principles, and practices from my former number, I ought not to doubt that Arch Bishop Hughes can prove transubstantiation from the Bible, and also that Nathan Rice and his compeers can prove that sprinkling, pouring, or wetting meets the demand of the word baptize.
But you go further and say that “we deem it proper in concluding on this matter to say that in our judgment, this system nullifies the obedience of the Gospel, bars from the world the church of God, and says to the world, you have as good a right to ask for pardon of sins, regardless of obedience as the humblest disciple of Christ, that has meekly submitted to his authority, and humbly bears his cross before men.”—pp. 85, 86.
If such conclusions can be drawn from anything written by Prof. Milligan or myself, upon the subject of prayer, I acknowledge my total ignorance of words, and my total incapacity to write one sentence of good sound sense, upon any subject. It will be your province, Bro. Fanning, with your readers, to decide how far my words can bear such a construction fairly interpreted.
Should anyone decide against me, I hereby confess my error, and promise to amend my ways in the future. May the Lord guide us into all the truth, my brother, is my prayer.
GEO. W. ELLEY.
Lexington, Ky. April 30, 1859.
REPLY TO BRO. GEO. W. ELLEY.
We desired, in our former reply to Bro. Elley, to make the impression that prompted by his sincere devotion to certain men, he was possibly defending sentiments contrary to the whole teaching of his earnest life; contrary, also, to the teaching of all the reliable brethren.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
and subversive, as we believe, of the whole authority of Christ. Perhaps we were not perspicuous. We will endeavor to be plainer in future, and if possible, fear no ground for misunderstanding with the brethren.
The clearest point in Bro. Elley’s first defense of Prof. Milligan, consists in an opinion that prayer precedes baptism, but we ask Bro. R., in all candor, if he really does endorse the following from the pen of Prof. Milligan, as found in the July number of the Harbinger for 1868? He says: “It was right for Saul of Tarsus to pray after he believed and before he was baptized; and consequently, it is right for every truly penitent believer to pray to the Lord at all times, whether before or after baptism.” Again he adds: “Whatever was right in the case of any one believer, before his baptism, is still equally so in every similar case.”
To establish the truth of this doctrine, he makes the following point: “Want of faith with that change of heart which it immediately produces, is the only barrier between any sinner and the mercy seat.” With these premises fully stated, Prof. Milligan proceeded to prove that the sinner on the cross was “transformed from a blasphemer and scoffer, into the humble, contrite, acceptable worshipper of the gathering Savior.” This is an example to prove that one reached the “mercy seat,” “the prayer being sanctified by faith and repentance” before, and therefore others are encouraged to pray for forgiveness before entering the church.
Such, Cornelius, and the publican are also cited to prove to the brotherhood, the right of sinners to pray before baptism, and consequently we may conclude that the sinner has the same right to pray as the believer to ask for the remission of sins before submitting to Christ.
Dr. E. H. B. has contended for this right, and we shall defend it.
We have already shown that Dr. Walsh, in defending Prof. M.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Page 167
uses the very words that “Penitent believers are to pray for pardon of sins,” and we have pointed to the fact, that certain teachers who are represented by even Bro. Campbell as sound men, have chimed in with the parties in praying to God at the mourner’s bench for the conversion of sinners.
We feel in our soul that the brethren are really trifling with the word of God, in defending men who teach such things as we have noticed. Already do we hear of factions in Ohio, Illinois, etc. Did we not call this over-spirituality, “Infidelity” brethren? You blamed us—the writers found fault with all—editors closed their columns, and one in Cincinnati—not D. Franklin—supposed when matters were pronounced right or wrong, in certain quarters, it was vain in us to murmur.
Who was right? We threaten not, but we cannot see how we can continue such heavy restraints upon our moral creation. It is really lamentable for such men as Elder John Rogers, and Elder Geo. W. Elley, to become the defenders of Professor Robert Milligan’s teaching on the subject of Prayer. Desist, brethren, and we will likely have no further discussion of the matter. Pardon us for intimating that perhaps you have not carefully examined what Prof. M. has written.
T. F.
“THE DEFECTION.”
Under this very objectionable caption, Bro. B. Franklin, has penned some remarks that will bring upon him such a war, that if he should not use the old Jerusalem blade dexterously, he may have cause to wish he had not been born.
Hear him. He says,
“THE DEFECTION AGAIN.”
We have tried to construe things we have seen among us in a favorable light, and to keep up the conviction that no evil was intended. But it was all in vain; the conviction is there, deep and strong, and though we desire to remove it, have tried to have it removed, it only becomes deeper and still deeper, that cruel, most ruinous and scandalous evil is intended.
We are satisfied an effort is now determined upon to renounce, insidiously repudiate, and covertly sink all we have done and are now doing. We have some men among us, who have accidentally fallen among us, without ever being of us, nor having the work we are engaged in at heart; or having any sympathy with us; who have a deep and settled opposition to the main principles developed, advocated and maintained by Alexander Campbell.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
“It is now widely discovered that the terms of pardon laid down in the New Testament, as advocated, propagated, and defended with such unprecedented success by the Disciples, for the last thirty years, as one man expressed it, ‘have rendered us ridiculous in the eyes of the world,’ and that we must ‘go on to perfection!’ But where have these men gone to, in ‘going on to perfection?’ Some of them have gone so far as to reach the silly, the anti-evangelical practice of praying for the conversion of sinners at the mourner’s bench! Others of them have progressed so far as to make the remarkable discovery that the voice of conscience is the voice of God. Again, it has been discovered, that man can not believe the testimony of God till the Spirit quickens him and gives him life. It is again maintained that men in our time speak by inspiration, and that miracles should be performed in the church! What use have such men as these for a Bible?
The world has been deluded by these vagaries too long already and the blessed God has something better for the people of our times. We will not and cannot conscientiously see the clear light, elicited by the efforts of holy men, in their godly sacrifices, hard trials and immense struggles during the last thirty years, relinquished, abandoned and repudiated. We are decided upon it, and settled in the determination, never to see what we have labored so long and hard to gain, what others have struggled for, and what is of such immense value to the world, sneered at, despised and bartered away, by men that have never done anything but discourage and try to break down the influence and work of good men. Men must choose their own course, make their own election, and take the consequences.
The effort we are engaged in, is as widely from heaven as that the Bible contains a revelation from God. It is but a simple effort to return to the pure and holy teachings of the Prophets and Apostles; to restore to the world the pure and holy religion of Christ, as it was at the beginning; to unite all the people of God under Christ, their Head; to restore the pure ordinances of Christ to his people and have everything as it was at the beginning. But we are sorry to be compelled to the conclusion, that some among us, who have professed to be of us, but are not, are consistently showing their alienation of feeling, their heartlessness in this work, their determination to create and maintain a faction among us. Several brands of these factious are now at work among us. The most of them are men of such indolence ever to read and master the great principles lying at the bottom of the great movement in which we are engaged. They have never had the
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Page 169
Energy to build up anything; but are simply working into bodies built up by the labors of other men, distracting, confusing and misguiding the unsuspecting. These, like all others of their sort, make superior pretensions, put forth extraordinary claims, and are the embodiment of sanctimoniousness. They have a few cant phrases and watchwords on their lips, for the unsuspecting and the unenlightened. Those who can see through their empty pretensions they despise, but never try to enlighten. They preach the Spirit, but do not have it; preach inspiration but do not possess it; preach miracles, but cannot do them; preach heart work, but are the most heartless, lifeless and insipid preachers in the world.
“We must dismiss the matter for the present, but shall handle this whole matter without gloves.”
Fear not brother Franklin, the cause we are advocating is the Lord’s. We have felt confident for years that you have seen the storm cloud rising. The trifling matter with J. D. Ferguson, in Tennessee, is not to be compared with the evils still threatening the brethren, particularly in your latitude. Remember, we have been speaking of “infidelity,” and it is still in progress, and gaining strength. It is positively lamentable to find well-meaning but not discriminating preachers, standing with their arms folded, ready to attribute the worst motives to those who cry “wolf,” “enemies in the camp,” but the curtain will soon rise. God in heaven knows we wish to create no useless alarm, but when men begin to speculate about something they call “UNITY,” and clearly the practicability of Christian union on the words of the spirit, it is time to feel that danger is at the door, if not in the house.
T. F.
THE CHILDREN OF GOD – No. 1
Viewed from the Bible standpoint, the whole human family comprises but two classes of persons—the children of God, and the children of the wicked one. Various as are the different degrees of mental and moral development, numerous as are the different shades of civilization and refinement, still, as respects the Gospel of Jesus the Christ, every son and daughter of Adam belongs to one or the other of these two classes. There is no third class to which anyone can belong. It may be an unwelcome truth to some, to many; yet it is a most important truth, that every man is either a child of God, or a…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Child of Satan—is either pursuing his upward course to heaven and eternal life, or treading the downward road to hell and endless death. In the great battle between God and Satan, Light and Darkness, Truth and Error, there is no central ground. “He that is not with me is against me,” said the Messiah. The distinction between these two classes is so clearly drawn by the pen of inspiration, that none but the wilfully blind can fail to see it.
Not only does the Bible teach that these two widely different classes exist in this world, but also that their respective destiny in the world to come will differ as widely as their characters do in this. At the resurrection, the one class will be rewarded with “an inheritance incorruptible, undefiled and unfailing,” while the other will be “punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and the glory of His power.”
In view of these momentous truths, the candid attention of every reader is invited to the following all-important questions:
- How do persons become the children of God?
It is impossible to exaggerate the importance of this question. In it is involved not only the peace and happiness of man in this life, but also his destiny, for weal or woe, in the life to come. Being a child of God, a man has passed from death unto life, and has become an heir of a blissful immortality. Not being a child of God, a man is dead in trespasses and in sins; is without hope, and without God in the world, and to him, while in this state, there can be but a fearful expectation or a dreadful judgment. But to the question. A man can become a child of God only by being “born again.” An appeal to the Sacred Record will place the correctness of this answer beyond the possibility of a doubt. John says: “But as many as received Him, to them gave He power to become the Sons of God, who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” “They were born.” This was spoken of those who had been born once, born of blood; yet they had to be born again, to become the sons of God. The teaching of this passage is unmistakable, and many more of the same import might be adduced. But without multiplying quotations, we will appeal to the conversation of Christ with Nicodemus, in which the absolute necessity of being born again is most clearly and forcibly presented. Nicodemus: Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
171
Jesus: Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except a man be born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.
Nic.: How can a man be born again when he is old? Can he enter the second time into his mother’s womb and be born?
Jesus: Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. It is impossible for language to teach more clearly than this does the absolute necessity of being born again in order to adoption into God’s family. The man who does not believe this is an infidel, and it is time to throw away to reason with such an one out of the scriptures.
There are many Nicodemuses in this age of the world, who know of but one birth, that of the flesh into this world—many who cannot see how a man can be born again when old. Indeed, of all the oracles of Revealed Truth, none have been more repulsive to the unsubdued heart of rebellious man than this which teaches the necessity of being born again.
And, unfortunately for the cause of truth, infidelity, with regard to this cardinal truth, has not always been confined to the ranks of the avowed enemies of Christianity. It is now gravely proclaimed from many pulpits, both in the old world and in the new, that all men, irrespective of moral character and conduct, are the children of God—that the world is God’s church—that the difference between the worst good men and the best bad men is so slight that they are but the contact links of the great chain of humanity.
The New Testament teaches that Christianity is a new divine principle implanted in the human heart from within, from above. But this new philosophy teaches that religion is an out-growth of human nature, the expression from within of a term naturally inherent in man, the natural development of which leads man to worship in spirit and in truth. This philosophy is dignified with the name of Absolute Religion, and is represented as common to all nations and tribes of men, from the most degraded and ferocious cannibal, to the most enlightened and refined modern philosopher.
To those who believe the Bible, it will not be difficult to expose, in all its hideous deformity, this skeptical philosophy, which has assumed the garb of religion only that it may the more easily and successfully accomplish its foul purposes.
True it is that God “is not a respecter of persons,” but it is equally…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
It is true, that in every nation it is only “he that fears him, and works righteousness,” who “is acceptable to him.” It is true that, in one sense of the word, God “is the Saviour of all men,” but it is also true, that He is in a higher, and in a special sense, the Saviour only “of those who believe.” Indeed, it must be apparent even to a superficial reader of the Bible, that two widely different classes are delineated on almost every page.
The distinction between the believing and unbelieving, the obedient and disobedient, the righteous and the wicked, runs like a thread throughout the sacred record, from the beginning of Genesis to the end of Revelations. And the roads traveled by these two doors diverge wider and wider, and will never meet, either in this world or the world to come.
In the parable of the tares, the Saviour himself has given a clear and most forcible illustration of this subject. We will quote only the explanation.
“The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; the enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the Angels. As, therefore, the tares are gathered and burned in the fire, so shall it be in the end of the world. The Son of man shall send forth His Angels, and they shall gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and them that do iniquity; and shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the Sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.” – Matt. xiii. 38-43.
It is impossible for language to be plainer than this. It needs no comment. To attempt to explain such an explanation as this, would be like lighting a paper to help the Sun to shine. I would simply call attention to the fact, that such language as this is never used by the self-appointed oracles of the so-called Absolute Religion.
To some of the Jews who sought His life, the Messiah once said:
“I know you are not of your father, the devil, and the lust of your father ye will do.”
Strong and pointed language is this, and quite in contrast with the sentimental philosophy of modern Spiritualists and Absolutists, by which they soothe the conscience, and quiet the fear of the wicked, the ungodly and the careless, telling them that they are the children of God, and that through all their sin, impurity, and unyielding wickedness, they are advancing to a state of purity, holiness and happiness.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
One more quotation.
1 John, iii. 8. “He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning.”
“In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil,” &c.
But the Collective.
Here the two classes, or families, are clearly and boldly contrasted. There is no mincing of this matter with John. Those who obey the devil are the children of the devil. Men must, at heart, reject the Bible before they can entertain the infidel dogma, that all men, irrespective of moral character and conduct, are the children of God, and the heirs of the same blissful immortality.
“You must be born again.” These are the words of Him who “spake as never man spake”—of Him in whom is vested “all authority in heaven and in earth;” and they will stand while the sun and moon endure. Though heaven and earth pass away, yet will not His word fail.
Do not the times demand that all who reverence the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ should “cry aloud and spare not?” The citadel of Truth is endangered not so much by foes without, as by traitors within. Satan, having vainly attempted to stay the onward progress of the Gospel by open opposition, has changed his mode of warfare. He has feigned conversion, joined the church, and, clad in ministerial robes, has gravely ascended the pulpit, and from behind the “sacred desk” is disseminating his specious, but poisonous philosophy, which he hopes will eventually undermine “the truth as it is in Jesus.”
In a future number I will examine the question: “How are men and women born again?”
B. F. MANIRE.
Palo Alto, Miss. March 21st, 1859.
INTEMPERANCE—”SECRET SOCIETIES.”
Brother Timothy:—I have read with care your communication on “Secret Societies.” Permit me to notice some of your reasons for opposing them. I will say in the outset, what you, and every other man of common sense knows, that the Sons of Temperance always disclaimed any pretensions to being either a religious or political association; on the contrary, every candidate who comes forward to join is assured by the presiding officer, that there is nothing in the order that will conflict with his religious or political opinions, be they what they may.
“We claim to have associated ourselves together for a specific purpose, which is the suppression of intemperance,” for, like…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
the frogs of Egypt, it has entered almost every house and every family, and has proved more destructive to our unfortunate race than the leprous spots ever did to ancient Israel. In our order, we have men of all religious and political creeds, and perhaps some of neither. We ask them no questions about their religion or their politics, but “are you determined to drink no more, and to use no unlawful means to discourage it in others?” We have a single object in view. You say the church is temperate in all things and this ought to satisfy any Christian—ah, my! she ought to be!
With my interpretation, your motto will do, “temperance in all things lawful, and abstinence in that which is unlawful,” but also, the latitude taken under it has borne, to an untimely and ungraceful grave, thousands of professors of religion. They believed it lawful to take a drink when they felt like it, or thought it would do them good, and they contracted a habit which proved their overthrow. I believe it unlawful for any Christian on earth to take a drink, as a beverage. You may think differently. But is it not as reasonable for a man to steal a little, or counterfeit a little, to be honest, as to drink a little to be temperate? Your motto will do in a temperance society, but not very well out of it.
I cordially accept your Bible motto, “whatsoever you do, in word or in deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ,” etc. No Christian ought to ever forget this. I am a farmer, and in his name, or by his authority, I plant and sow, and give God thanks for the increase, but never could I distill any portion of my grain into intoxicating liquors in his name, nor could I give a dram to my neighbor, or bill servant, in his name; neither could I give it to my children or take it myself in that sacred name, for he commands me to abstain, shun all appearance of evil. We are allowed to do nothing, as Christians, except we can invoke the blessings of God upon it. I thought the temperance men were engaged in a good work—to save from ruin poor deluded drunkards and to interpose between the rising generation and the drunkard’s grave and the drunkard’s hell, and in the simplicity of my heart I thought it “a good cause,” and again and again have I invoked God’s blessing to rest upon their efforts.
You think the money given to the divisions ought to be given to the churches for distribution. This ought to be left to the discretion of the member—it is his own. You seem to think that all that is given by Christians to divisions or lodges, is lost to the church, and if they had not been members of those lodges they would have given the…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Page 175
Amount to the church.
Are you not mistaken? Examine the church books, and the lodge division books, and you will find that the members of those associations are the most liberal members of the church. My observations, during the last thirty years in both, prove this to be true. They feel that giving does not impoverish them, and withholding does not enrich them. I venture the assertion, that the church has never lost one dime by the lodges or divisions, but on the contrary, gained; for the liberality of the members of the church belonging to those benevolent institutions stimulated others to more liberality. I will venture another assertion, that the most pious and intelligent part of the Christian community are members of the great temperance associations. (This is speaking at random, T. F.)
It is no evidence that a man is tired of the church, or loves his brethren less, or is less disposed to associate with them in church, or less liberal towards the church, or his zeal in the good cause abated, because he joins a temperance division, but on the contrary, he wishes to become useful in every good word and work, and if possible enlarge his sphere of doing good. (Should the church not be adequate for our talents and means, we might adopt some other institution. But it occurs to us that if the Lord has ordained the church, in and through which to perform our good works, it is not very respectful to the author of the Christian religion to attempt the labor prescribed by means of other institutions. T. F.)
How any good man can oppose the Sons of Temperance is more than I can understand. (No body does so. T. F.) I know they say it is a secret society. They have been told again and again, that it is neither religious nor political, and no secrets except some little ceremony, and a few passwords to prevent imposture, which, if all known, would do the world no good—all that is useful to society is made known.
Brother Timothy says; “I am convinced that these secret societies sometimes exert an injurious effect upon men of the world, in reference to becoming disciples of Christ, by causing them to rest satisfied with the morality they require as a sufficient preparation for heaven.” Well, these societies must require a very high and pure state of morality, to induce any man of common sense, or common honesty, to feel satisfied in their morality as a preparation for heaven; it seems to me, if this be true, you have little or no ground for objection, (for if these members are honest, you could certainly, by a little instruction get them into the “kingdom of heaven, and instead of their societies pro-
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
ducing the great evil you fear, they would become harbingers of the gospel, and aid greatly the advancement of the kingdom of Christ. But the truth is, that no man possessing common sense can be deceived, for Masonic Lodges, Temperance Divisions, and all other secret societies, proclaim in their books, and in their Lodges that they are not a religious association, and how any sane man can rest satisfied that he can attain the kingdom of heaven through them is more than I can understand. I differ with Brother Chinn.
I say lay on Bro. Timothy and Bro. Fanning, and if there is any evil in those societies, urge the brethren away from them, and if they don’t quit, shut the doors on them, but let us be heard before condemnation. Bro. Chinn is wrong again. A few prejudiced journals and writers never can—no never, cause multiplied thousands of the most intellectual, moral and religious men the world ever saw, to turn against the Bible or the church. Gold shines brighter by rubbing, and truth loses nothing by investigation.
TITUS.
Remarks.—The foregoing is a very good temperance lecture indeed, but the error consists in addressing it to the church instead of to the world. We would also very respectfully suggest to Bro. Osborne, that we think it would be well for him to give every moment which he cannot probably employ in preaching the gospel to lost sinners, and building up the saints in the faith, to delivering temperance lectures to the world. Indeed if the church is not competent to make the members temperate in all things, we would most cordially recommend our good brethren to try the virtues of the temperance cause.
T. F.
PRAYER—FROM TEXAS.
BRO. FANNING—A captious, fault finding disposition, I presume, we all regard as exceedingly far from the spirit of the gospel; and since I have been constrained to object to a few things in the Gospel Advocate, I have been fearful that error might be in me. I find errors, as I think, also in others, in all the papers, and in all men, most fully including myself. In all this I am, I suppose, no exception in any point of view. Others see errors, deplore and labor to correct them.
Can we possibly do better than to indulge in a free and candid interchange of thoughts touching all these matters? If we are to fall out about every difference, each man will be an Esau, and we shall have a war.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
of examination—uprooting all that is good, so far as the agency of man can do this.
I have understood from that which gives laws in language, that, as a general rule, men have a right to explain the language used in their own way. Sectarians have denied this. Citing certain remarks, they say the language means “water regeneration,” “immersion,” “et cetera.” We tell them—every writer they quote tells them he meant no such thing. And we contend, further, that if the language was capable of their construction, while it does not absolutely require it, we have a right to explain what we mean, and that after our explanation, it is very sinful in them to continue to charge us with what we disclaim.
Dr. Richardson has disclaimed a large part, if not all, the errors you attributed to him, if I understand his plain language in several recent articles. If he ever really meant what you supposed his language to mean, should we not allow that he does not mean it?—that he is right now, however wrong he was, and whether intentionally or otherwise? Perhaps he owes you much restitution—I think he does. But still, should we not give him credit so far as he is right? Would it not be the case to say Dr. R. does not now occupy the ground? Of others whom you have charged with dangerous errors, I am not prepared to speak. (We have no evidence that Dr. R. has amended.)
May it not be possible, too, that you put a construction upon Bro. Milligan’s language on the subject of prayer, which the language does not absolutely require, and which he would utterly disclaim? (I think it is certainly impossible to be mistaken.)
Your distinction between the right of petition and prayer is not clear to me. Still, I understand your view of it. Your definition of prayer is certainly correct: it is an expression of desire, not simply the indulgence of it, however strong and controlled it may be. But if this is so, is not the petition of all aliens for citizenship, or for anything else, a prayer? This is an expression of desire, as I understand you teach, and this is prayer.
Aliens, then, have a right to pray—at least for admission, and the question may differ: must be answered affirmatively. But the real question is, for what may they pray? If they may pray for anything and everything, just as if they were citizens…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Then why become citizens at all? Perhaps they might be heard while offering other petitions, such as “God be merciful unto me, a sinner!” “Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?” and some others. And, under certain circumstances, may they not pray even for pardon? But, if so, this is not to encourage them in neglecting baptism, or any other duty. Surely, none but an obedient heart can reach a throne of mercy; and these will “walk in all the commandments and ordinances” as they may be able.
The sectarian error, I think, is in encouraging prayer for blessings on human beings, or conditions, and while neglecting the divine ordinances. The scriptural view of the subject, if I am not mistaken, is that the sincerely penitent believer should pour out his desires before God, looking to his hand the conditions on which he has offered the blessings he seeks, and with a full purpose to comply as far, and as speedily as possible.
Circumstances caused the prayers of Paul and Cornelius to be heard while they were aliens; and circumstances will do the same for other aliens, and to the same extent, ceteris paribus. The prayer of the Publican is not in point. Do not circumstances, over which the unwilling victims have no control, bind millions now, in iron fetters, as in days of old? How many can no more understand the will of God now, without aid, which they have not, and is not within their reach, than Paul and Cornelius could without a miracle? True, we do not need a miracle now, nor any spirit rapping. We need action on the part of the church, to send abroad the light of life; and without that action the world never will know, nor can the church ever be guiltless.
I have greater objections to the views and practices of many of the brethren on the subject of prayer. Shall I be a complainer if I note some of them?
They are not candid enough to pray in the name of Christ. How often do you hear petitions “for Christ’s sake?” It occurs to me that the difference here is equal to the difference between baptism and “hito.”
Many, I discover, especially in our large towns and cities, and fashionable country, stand erect in prayer. Now, I am willing to undertake to show that this is unscriptural and unwise, against Bro. Milligan, Bro. Campbell, Bro. Franklin, and even Bro. Fanning, if need be. And if I say this at a risk, be it so: I can offer no apology. Whilst I deeply venerate age and wisdom, I have little respect for Phariseeism. Surely these good brethren have not closely investigated this subject.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
179
- Our hands are not always clear, nor our hearts pure. This, I say, judging the tree by its fruits. And this, I think, is of much greater importance than any of the matters ye brought into controversy. Whether aliens or citizens, we cannot be heard whilst our “hands are full of blood.”
- We do not pray enough—in secret—in the congregations—in our families. How often do those who are contending about prayer, imitate the Savior in secret prayer? How rare, alas! is regular family prayer night and morning? Some who pray at night—at least occasionally—do not pretend to have morning prayer. Then, again, I am ready to undertake, against all odds, to show that morning prayer is at least as important as prayer at night.
These may be complaints enough for one sitting, and I will desist for the present. If you regard me as in error, do not think I am petulant, self-important, or unkind. I am at too great a distance to correspond to good advantage on these subjects. The points made by others—the tracks I must follow in replying, get cold before the tardy mails bring them and return my answer. But my convictions urge me to write this. You can box its jaws, if you choose, without the risk of a blow; but do not send it out on its errand speedily. And may the Lord direct us all into his own ways, fill us with the spirit of kindness, quicken our conscientiousness, clothe us with humility, and prosper our good work!
C. KENDRICK
S.ALVADO, BELL Co., TEXAS, March 26, 1853
MATERIALISM AND TRANSCENDENTALISM
Dear Bro. Fanning & Lichtenstein:
I have been much astonished at some, calling themselves brethren, preaching the doctrine of Materialism or Sadduceeism, and endeavoring to make the people believe that it is the doctrine of this Reformation.
- They say the promises made to Abraham are the same that are made to the Christian under the gospel dispensation.
- The Land of Canaan is the heaven promised to mankind.
- Man sleeps in the tomb, soul body and spirit, from death to the Resurrection.
- The grave is all the hell spoken of or taught in the scriptures of the Old and New Testaments.
With these doctrines, some that once professed to be the humble…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Followers of the Lamb, are entirely taken up, so much so, that they have been, and still continue to be the source of much strife in the congregation. I had thought that the long exploded doctrine of Materialism or Saloonism had gone down to the grave, there to repose, till perhaps, the resurrection morn! But, alas! in this I am disappointed. Some of the would-be great men in Arkansas are going about preaching, they say, the things concerning the Kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ. And they teach the people that there is no hell but the grave, and all the heaven that is promised is in the Land of Canaan; that Christ is no king, and that he has no kingdom, but that he will return again to Jerusalem one thousand years before the end of time, and the saints will all be resurrected and reign with Christ, while he will be seated on his father David’s throne to rule the nation with a rod of iron, and the saints are to be his ministers to execute vengeance upon the ungodly.
All these things they teach as literal. There are many more things taught by these men that are to my mind, and to the teachings of the brethren in general, contradictory and demoralizing in their nature and tendency. But I must turn to the subject in which I am more interested. It is the subject of prayer. You seem to be somewhat engaged in controversy, on the subject, with some of the great men of this reformation, and I want to know if it is possible that any of the brethren North or South are encouraging men of the world to pray to God, or the disobedient sinner to pray for the pardon of his sins without obeying from the heart the form of doctrine delivered by the Saviour and His apostles. See Mark xvi. 16, Acts ii. 38, and Romans vi.
Now if the brethren or any number of them have these departures from original grounds and have united with the sects at the boundaries between old and new, in praying for sinners to be saved in their sins, I do not, or at least should not, wonder at the speculations of spiritual influence or intuitive principles or innate consequences; but I shall be glad to see that there are some yet to be found who are continuing for the faith once delivered to the saints. May they be strengthened mightily, and may the brethren hold them up in advocating a cause that would be near the heart of every child of God. O, that peace may be restored to Zion again! that there may be one united prayer, for the advancement of the Master’s cause!
Date: April 8, 1850
W. P. C.
Remarks: We have abundant evidence that evils are threatening.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
181
Some of the churches from the influence of Dr. John Thomas’ heresy. That his ambition is to head a faction, we consider beyond doubt. Extremes are said to meet, and here is almost as striking resemblance between modern Spiritualism and modern Materialism, as between Calvinism and Arminianism, which, in many particulars, are identical. All is false in religion, save what is written in plain words. We cannot believe that a man of Dr. Thomas’ ability, though he be possessed of great intensity of mind, is capable of wielding a very extensive influence. Some, however, will always be looking for something new, and their restless moves, they call discoveries of truth. We believe Dr. T. will do us all the harm in his power.
T. F.
THE NEW BIRTH
We have before us a communication from some of the brethren in Texas, regarding the new birth in which the ground is taken, that the birth of water is experienced in this life, but the birth of the spirit will not be experienced till the resurrection.
We respectfully suggest to our brethren, that we do not consider it wise to engage in a discussion of the questions which would be involved, in examining this theory, and also that if we will first settle two or three preliminary points, there will be no necessity for such a discussion. The brethren will be so good as to remember that there is but one birth—not two—one of water and another of spirit. There is not a birth of our father and another of our mother, but it is one birth of father and mother. This new birth, in order to see the kingdom of heaven, is explained by our Lord to be a birth of water and the spirit; and this is a deliverance from the power of darkness, and a translation into the kingdom of God’s dear Son. If these conclusions are correct, there is no necessity for examining a fancy birth of water on earth, and another fancy birth of the spirit, to enter something—perhaps nothing—which these good brethren call the real kingdom, at the resurrection.
T. F.
PALESTINE, TEXAS
Brethren connected with difficulties in the church at Palestine, Tex., have furnished us with a report, requesting its publication; but as the proceedings seem to us informal, and of doubtful tendency, we have thought proper to decline the publication, at least for the present.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
with the sincere hope that time will heal the breach. Our beloved brethren must permit us to suggest that rashness is most manifest, and we shall listen with the greatest anxiety to hear more favorable news from “Palestine.” There should be no wrong among the followers of the stranger of “Palestine.” Bro. Hicks should not accept the “pastorate,” and the other party should open the house, and when all parties become sufficiently humble and devoted to God, possibly differences may disappear. Remember “Palestine,” of Asia, brethren.
T. F.
THE CHILDREN OF GOD. NO. 2
How are persons born again?
On this most important question there has been a vast amount of speculation, and no little most bitter, and unchristian controversy. It is not, however, for the purpose of stirring up the embers of unholy strife that I call attention to it at this time. With the controversies that have agitated, and are still agitating the religious world on this subject, I have nothing to do. But as it is a subject of paramount importance—one that vitally concerns the well-being of all Adam’s dying race, I desire to call the attention of the serious, and the thoughtful to the teaching of the Holy Spirit on this vital question. I have no new theory to advance, nor novel exposition to offer, no human system to defend.
Theorists and speculators have too long been the blighting curse of Christianity, turning away the minds and hearts of men from the life-revealing, life-giving, life-sustaining and life-perfecting word of Jehovah, to the dry husks of dogmatic theology. To this gracious word, then, the only source of instruction in divine things, let us go with hearts open to receive Heaven’s light and glean whatever it teaches.
In all religious investigations the question should be, “What saith the Lord?”
In order to admit a person into God’s family on earth, two things are necessary:
- Faith
- Repentance
However closely these may be combined, or however soon a person may be born again, after leaving the world, still they are distinct acts, and should be distinctly recognized. The inability to perceive and note this distinction is one cause of the great confusion in the minds of many.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Born Again
Thus, while being born always, and necessarily implying being begotten; yet being begotten, does not necessarily imply being born again. The design of being born again is the impartation of a new, a spiritual life; the design of being born again is the enjoyment of this new, this spiritual life which has already been imparted.
First, then, how are men begotten again? Or, in other words, how is the new, this spiritual life implanted in the heart of man?
- I Cor. 4:15: Paul writes; “For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.” This, undoubtedly, has reference to the commencement of their Christian life; and through the gospel, preached by Paul, that they are said to have been begotten. The gospel, then, when heard and believed by the Corinthians, imparted to them a new life. Nor was this an isolated case. The gospel is God’s power, the instrument chosen by Him, by which to awaken the dead sinner, quicken his moral nature, and make him feel the pulsations of a new life, thrilling his innermost being. “Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth.” (James 1:18)
God, alone, can bring to life the sinner, “dead in trespasses and in sins.” But the question is, how does he do this? Doubtless he could do it by a direct exercise of his omnipotent power. But he has seen fit not to work in this way. In his wisdom he has chosen “the word of truth,” and made it the vehicle of his transforming, life-giving power. God begets us, but he does so by the word of truth. So teaches the Holy Spirit, through the Apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ. Many other passages of similar import might be adduced, but these two are amply sufficient. Indeed, one passage of God’s word, directly to the point of any question, is as good as a thousand.
A word of Jehovah, though uttered once, will stand forever.
How many persons have been born again?
Let the Holy Spirit answer. “Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth unto unfeigned love of the brethren; love one another with a pure heart fervently.” (1 Peter 1:22) “Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth forever.” (1 Peter 1:23)
A Note: Although ye were the servants of sin, yet (ye) have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. (Romans 6:17)
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
c~me the S!’nnnts of righteonsnc:;s.
Rom. vi. 17, 18.
A purified soul is certainly a new born soul; and one who has been made free from sin, has most assuredly been born again. We are taught by the Holy Spirit in the passages just quoted that in the days of the Apostles, souls were purified “in obeying the truth,” and that men were made free from sin, by obeying from the heart the form of doctrine delivered by the Apostles.
And are we not infallibly correct in the conclusions that souls are purified and made free from sin, now in the same way, and in this way only? Has “the word of truth” been shorn of its life-giving power? Has obedience to the truth lost its purifying efficacy? Or, has God set aside the gospel, or superceded it by other means? Nay, verily! Though heaven and earth pass away, the word of Jehovah will stand forever. It is then by reception of the truth into the heart that men are begotten to a spiritual life; and by obedience to the truth from the heart, that they are born again.
The Saviour explained the whole matter in one brief sentence. “Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” The Spirit, by implanting in the heart the spiritual seed which is the word of God, quickens, or makes it to begets in it new desires, new hopes, new life. And when the man thus quickened by the Spirit, makes an entire and unreserved subjection of himself, body, soul, and spirit, to the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ, he is then, and by this means, born again, received into God’s family, and made an heir of eternal life.
This, then, is the law concerning spiritual birth, and it is as fixed, as invariable as the law of natural birth. Every infant that has been born into the world, from the time the first wail of the infant Cain broke upon his mother’s ear till the present time, has been born in precisely the same way in which every other infant has been born. So every one who has been born into God’s kingdom from the day of Pentecost till the present moment, has been born into it, in the same way in which every natural being has been born into it.
There are not two ways of entering God’s family. Messiah teaches that he that entereth not by the door, but climbeth up some other way, is a thief, and a robber. Then, brethren, let us not be ashamed of “the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God unto salvation, to every one who believeth.” Let us now broadcast the “incorruptible seed” which God that liveth and abideth forever; that it may fall into many honest and understanding hearts.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Page 185
“ing hearts,” and bring forth fruit unto life eternal. My prayer is that all may come the knowledge of the truth as it is in Jesus, that they may thereby be saved.
In our next, and final article on this subject, we will endeavor to ascertain to whom the privilege is given to become the children of God.
B. F. MANIRE
Palo Alto, Miss., May 3d, 1859.
DEATH OF THE GOOD AND GREAT
“Man that is born of woman, is of few days and full of trouble. He cometh forth like a flower and is cut down; he fadeth like a shadow and continueth not.”
Within a few months past, some of our greatest and best men and women have fallen under death’s iron grasp.
Elder Ephraim A. Smith, perhaps more extensively and better known as a preacher of the Gospel than any other brother in the country, paid the last obligation to earth a few months since. We have anxiously looked for a biographical sketch of brother Smith, from some of his most intimate friends, but so far, we have looked in vain. We do not say that Bro. Ephraim A. Smith was a perfect man—there are none such—but we had evidence added to evidence for nearly thirty years, that he loved the cause of God. For it he labored constantly, humbly and efficiently.
His mistakes were always considered venial, perhaps the result of the weakness of nature; but no one who knew him doubted his sincerity and deep devotion in the cause of truth. We learn that “he died at his post,” and now awaits his reward.
President James Shannon fell asleep at his residence in Canton, Mo., on the 25th of February, 1859. For many years he was an untiring advocate of the truth as it is written. Perhaps his last essay, written to convince Bro. Campbell and others, that the name of Christian was not given by the enemies, evinces the highest regard for the authority of the Lord.
He was a very superior classical scholar, well versed in English literature, and was a man of most varied and general information. We doubt, if there is a brother amongst us, who occupies a higher position as a man of reliable information; and it is by no means disparaging to others to say, Bro. Shannon has filled more high and responsible positions than any one amongst us. He was Professor in the Georgia…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
University, President of the University of Louisiana and Missouri, was President of Bacon College, and died President of the “Christian University” at Canton, Mo. But he was still honored with a much more honorable position before the court of heaven. He was a “king and priest” in the temple of the Lord of hosts, and he overcame the world by the blood of the Lamb. Now he rests from his labors, and his works will follow him. Our beloved sister has the sympathy of thousands.
Sister Mary Williams, Missionary to the Holy Land, died near Joppa—Ancient Joppa—a few weeks since, full of faith and good works. No woman amongst the modern disciples of the Saviour has given stronger evidence that she looked for the coming of the Blessed One. She was long deeply impressed with the idea that the Lord would come in person to Palestine, and doubtless she was watching for his return. Brother Barclay reports that her faith failed not in life or death. Will not our sister’s example lead others to make sacrifices for the Redeemer?
T. F.
THE TRUE WORSHIP AND ITS ABUSES – ENCOURAGING
Fayetteville, Ark., March 21st, 1859.
Permit me to speak to you a word of encouragement, although it may come from a very humble source, and a very secluded part of our land. I assure you that it has been with pleasure and feelings of much interest that I have watched for a long time, the manner with which you have wielded the sword of the spirit against errors.
It appears to me, that the word of God presents a rich and vast field of glorious realities, sufficiently large for all the Christians in this wide world, without going into the vain and deceitful fields of modern speculative philosophy, to waste their precious time and talent; speculative persons not only spend their own lives unwisely, but also wound the cause of God. They cause many good and honest souls to take poisonous food, generated only by human reason.
In your October number of the Gospel Advocate, you speak of abuses which seem to be gradually undermining that free, independent responsibility which should animate the bosom of every Christian. The worship seems to be taken from the hands of the people and placed in the hands of the few, and if Zion has no watchmen on her walls to cry out at the approach of the enemy, is she not in danger of…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Page 187
being taken, and her children led away captive by the prince of darkness? When we see an intelligent congregation of Christians sit and permit one brother to sing, read, pray, preach, exhort and attend to the breaking of bread, simply because he is a preacher, is it not giving too much power into the hands of one man? Again, let the brother be absent, the members meet not, hence there is not a word of praise, not a prayer ascends to the Throne of God, and behold, on the Lord’s day the church is as silent as the tomb; and why this neglect of Christian duty? Our preacher is absent.
Is not such a course utterly opposed to the heavenly influence which the Church of Christ should have on a sinful world? Is not such a practice causing spiritual death among the members? And hence, do we not see that the liberties and the power of the church are rapidly passing out of the hands of the many into the hands of a few, called ministers, pastors, etc.
Must a man be educated in college, to pray, sing, exhort or teach in the congregation? Has not the time come when our churches should have more teaching and less preaching? But we will say more on this point in our next.
C. J.
Look not on the dark side of the picture Brother J. The more Gospel preachers we can have, the better for the cause, if they will really do the work of Evangelists. When the congregations love the Christian religion, they will hold up the hands of the ministers of the word, in the dark regions of the earth.
T. F.
PRAYER, BY A MEMBER OF A BAPTIST CHURCH
Springfield, Tenn., March 10th, 1859.
Elder Fanning – In the January number of the Gospel Advocate, in your strictures upon Prof. Milligan’s article on prayer, you deny the existence of any ‘living faith’ that is not made so by obedience; and hence teach that unbaptized believers ought not to pray. You regard it as the result of ignorance, unbelief, and open rebellion to hear such (believing penitents) pray to their Saviour to forgive their sins, comfort their souls, or give them the good spirit, etc. Such may be true, but I cannot think it.
Will you allow me to suppose a case for consideration? (Better point to the word of God. T. F.)
…I was deeply convicted of sin, became a penitent believer in Christ, and desires with all his heart to do his commands; but having devoted but little of his life to the investigation of the contested subject of Baptism, feels unwilling to do anything until he can know…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
What is duty. Some time will be required in order to satisfy him, unless he have superior facilities. Now would you have such an one not to utter a prayer while thus deterred from duty? Would you teach him not to ask of God forgiveness for his daily trespasses, which now annoy him? Not to implore aid from God to assist in a correct understanding of his word; not to praise him for his many favors, lest he should thereby reveal a heart of unbelief and rebellion? If so, will your teachings not conflict with the promptings of the affections of the believing, loving heart?
And suppose he should decide, from the evidence before him, that the Baptist Church was the proper one, (Impossible to come to such a conclusion from scripture. ~. J. F.) but whose administration of the ordinance of Baptism (if I mistake not) you consider invalid. Would not, then, his prayers after such invalid baptism, be also in your view the result of ignorance, unbelief, and open rebellion? And, if so, are not the prayers of all denominations of the same kind, and hence unavailing; yea, horrid mockery? I may not have a logical eye, but it does seem to me, that these are the conclusions to which your theory inevitably tends. Is it not so? If my eye is dark, please give it light, and oblige,
AN INQUIRER
If we should not answer all the points of “An Inquirer” in our essays on prayer, we will cheerfully attempt to do so, if he will remind us of his difficulties. We give our readers the questions in this number, because they are such as occur to most persons, who think it is the privilege of aliens, or at least, those “near the kingdom,” to ask for its rewards and honors before entering it.
T. F.
QUERIES AND ANSWERS
M’ MINERVILLE, March 13th, 1859.
BROTHER F.
Will you give us some remarks through the Advocate, touching an inconsistency among us? The brethren teach that when sinners believe on the Lord and repent of their sins, they come to His promise of remission only through the ordinance of baptism. Why, then, do we so often defer or delay to bring them into the possession of the blessed promises of our Saviour? It seems to me to be a glaring inconsistency of our teachers, and one very justly wielded against us. Are we not playing by our actions, we do not believe what we teach, when we allow days and weeks to intervene…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
189
Between the confession and baptism of the penitent? What was the apostolic practice?
Did they or did they not baptize immediately on confession? Or as soon as practicable, another question.
We say the Apostles baptized for the remission of sins. Why do we receive persons from other churches and not re-baptize them; merely because they have been immersed? For none others baptize for remission of sins, but we usually receive them in fellowship if they have been immersed, no matter how, nor by whom. Is this right? Please give us your views of the Apostles’ teachings, and then the reasons, if there are any, why we, as a people, do not adhere closer to the truth as taught by them.
A Lover of the Truth.
ANSWERS
- The jailor, “the same hour of the night, heard, believed, was baptized, and rejoiced with all his house.” Baptism was never delayed in the days of the Apostles. It is wrong to wait till tomorrow to do what is right to perform today.
- We do not place the validity of baptism upon the office of the administrator, or upon the opinion of a “church court,” but merely upon the sincerity and understanding of the subject. Hence if one has, upon any full acknowledgment of the authority of Christ, been immersed with the view of “obeying the Gospel,” or submitting to the authority of Christ, and is conscious that in so doing he yielded himself soul and body to God, we consider it valid baptism. We do not suppose any one is baptized comprehending fully all the forms of expression in the New Testament upon the design of baptism; and we consider it fortunate that a clear understanding of any form seems to embrace all that is intended. If one, for instance, believes and is baptized in order to salvation, it is sufficient. Baptism for remission is not more pointed than “baptism is the seeking of a good conscience,” or by the act, “we put on Christ.” But, we repent, some form of expression must be understood in order to scriptural obedience. Should one be baptized “because he has got religion,” or is pardoned, and wishes by the act, to be initiated into some Baptist or other sect, we should not consider it obedience to God.
T. F.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
CONSULTATION MEETING
At Franklin, Tenn., Friday before the second Lord’s Day in August, 1859, it being the 12th of the month.
As there seems to be a general interest amongst the brethren, in reference to the contemplated meeting at Franklin, August the 12th, we would very respectfully make the following suggestions:
- That every church have a representative.
- That the brethren be prepared to report the condition of the congregations.
- That all come together with the view of endeavoring to gain a clearer understanding as to our duties to God, our brethren, ourselves, and the world.
The appointment is settled.
Come, brethren, to the meeting.
FRANKLIN, TENN., May 15th, 1859.
Bros. FANNING & LIPSCOMB: The disciples of Christ at this place extend a cordial invitation to the churches and brethren throughout the State, and in middle Tennessee, to meet them in a consulting capacity on Friday before the second Lord’s Day in August. It is thought needless to urge that the brethren will most cheerfully divide their living with all who may attend. Come brethren, and let us cultivate a more intimate acquaintance.
By request of the Church.
F. H. DAVIS,
O. T. CRAIG,
The brethren at Hartsville, write by Bro. Thos. S. Stalker, that all are anxious for the meeting.
We do not recollect any appointment in the State to which the brethren have looked with more anxiety. We have been to some extent torn asunder by apostates and factious men, and no doubt we will be profited to seeing each other face to face. Let us meet brethren, at the time appointed, and if we do nothing more than look at each other, talk to each other, sing and pray with each other, and read the word of God together, we will be simply repaid.
CARTER’S SPRINGS, TENN., May 30th, 1859.
Dear Bro. Lipscomb: Please announce in the Gospel Advocate that Bro. G. W. Elley will hold a meeting at Union Meeting House, Sumner County, Tenn., commencing on Saturday before the first Lord’s Day in July. Bro. Elley proposes to spend some fifteen or twenty days with the brethren in Sumner County, and we would take this…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
191
method of inviting brethren from other congregations to meet with us,
and aid us in our effort to promote the cause of Christ.
Fraternally,
F. M. CARMACK.
FANNING:
Our Bro. THOMAS M. ALLEN, of Mo., held a meeting in Murfreesboro’, a few days since in which some 18 persons made the noble confession, that Jesus Christ is the Son of the Living God, and were immersed. Bro. Allen leaves on the cars for Ky., where he expects to hold a meeting in Paris.
Nashville, June 7th, 1850.
WORKS OF BARTON W. STONE
The first volume of the works of the good man, whose name is before the eyes of the reader, has been kindly sent to us by Bro. J. M. Mathes, but want of time has prevented us from doing more than merely noticing the arrangement of the book, and a few historical items. Every impression upon our mind, touching the work, is most favorable, and we would be pleased for the brethren generally to read it. Address Elder J. M. Mathes, Bedford, Ia.
T. F.
PREACHER WANTED
HANTON, ALA., April 2d, 1859.
Brethren: – Will you be kind enough to state, through the Advocate, that the Churches of Christ, some six or eight in number, in this part of the Lord’s vineyard are entirely without an Evangelist. They desire to procure one of some experience, of approved piety, and who is willing to work, and will compensate him liberally. Address me at this office.
Truly yours,
P. D. LAWSON.
There is no portion of the South which offers a more inviting field than the section indicated by Bro. Lawson.
Who will go?
T. F.
CORRESPONDENCE
Bro. W. W. BOARD, of Paris, Texas, writes encouragingly to the Gospel Advocate. “I am rejoiced to hear that it is well sustained by the brethren. Its circulation, I am satisfied, would do more good than any paper among us.”
Bro. M. LOVE, writes February 7. – Dear Brother, I again give you an item of news. I have recently visited Walker and Chalooga Counties, Ga., during which trip we had ten additions, five by letter.
192
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
and five by confession and obedience. The prospect for doing good is very flattering. May the Lord hasten the day when sectarianism shall lose its unallowed influence in our land, and the cause of our blessed Redeemer triumph most gloriously.
I am traveling and preaching very extensively this year. The cause is onward in Georgia. Let us thank the Lord and take courage.
Yours, affectionately,
NATHAN W. SMITH.
OBITUARIES
Brother John Banning:
It is written, “that all flesh is as grass, and the glory of man is as the flower of grass;” and were it not also written, “that the word of the Lord endureth forever,” and that that word promises life and immortality through the gospel, then, indeed, man had been made in vain.
Brother John B. Smith fell asleep on Thursday morning, 31st of March, after a short but most excruciating sickness, inflammation of the brain. Brother Smith was born in Lawrence District, South Carolina, on the 28th day of February, 1814; consequently, forty-four years, one month, and 6 days old. He was born of water and of the spirit, according to the scriptures, in August, 1837; having received immersion, for the forgiveness of his sins, from the hands of Brother John L. Barnes. He received the yoke in his youth, and has borne it unflinchingly till he laid it down in death; and we are comforted by the assurance of hope, “that He that raised up Christ from the dead, shall also quicken his mortal body by the spirit of Christ which dwelleth in him.”
For, as we are assured, that they who, by patient continuance in well-doing, seek for glory, honor and immortality, receive eternal life; we feel fully assured that his rest is the rest that remaineth for the people of God. The nature of his disease, at an early stage of his sickness, deprived him of both speech and reason, but as he will be judged for his life rather than by his death, the writer of this obituary, who knew him well, can say he was one of those who always kept his lamp trimmed and burning, and with David could say, “The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing to the heart.”
He adorned the social circle in the various capacities of the devoted husband, the judiciously affectionate father, the faithful friend, the kind neighbor, and the instructive minister. He leaves a mourning wife and eight children, together with a large circle of friends to lament his loss; but their grief is not without hope, for they know in whom he trusted, and rely on meeting him in a better home, where God shall wipe all tears from their faces, and they shall part no more.
“Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord.”
D. H. P.
But a few weeks ago, Bro. Smith was with us at the college, and had fair to outlive most of us. We can scarcely become reconciled to his death; but the ravages of time are great, and we know not who will fall next. Sister Smith says, in a letter to our sister wife, “Oh, God have mercy, I am a widow.” Amen, says every pious heart. The Lord will bless the widow and the orphan.
T. F.