Chapter XIII: Part 13

We never say _my church_. There is no being on earth who has a right to say _my church_. The Lord says, Matt. xvi. 18: “On this rock will I build my church.” He has a right to say “my church.” He gave himself for the church. The church belongs to him. He sanctified and cleansed it. This church, in Scripture, is frequently styled simply “the church,” and in our conversation about it, in nine cases out of ten, we can be understood sufficiently explicitly, if we say “the church.” We read of “the church in Jerusalem,” “the church in Corinth,” “the church in Rome,” “the church in Ephesus,” etc. We may say “the church in Cincinnati,” “the church in Covington,” “the church in Louisville,” “the church in Indianapolis,” etc. It is called in Scripture “the body,” “the body of Christ,” “the church of God,” “the church of the living God,” “the kingdom of God,” “the kingdom of heaven,” “the kingdom of God’s dear Son,” etc. These latter designations refer to “the whole family” in the aggregate. This body, or building, or temple, is the one of which Solomon’s temple was only a type. According to Scripture, _there is no other church but this_. The Spirit of God is in this. The life of Christ is in it. God dwells in it. In it is life. Out of it there is no life. It does not belong to the members, but they _belong to it_. It does not _belong to the preachers_, but _the preachers belong to it_.

We repeat, there is no other church but this according to Scripture. This church originated in Jerusalem more than eighteen hundred years ago. It was established in about one week after our Lord ascended into heaven. The King was coronated and crowned Lord of all. The great High Priest had entered the true holy place, not with the blood of slain beasts, but with his own blood, to make one offering in the end of the ages to purge us forever from our sins. The Spirit of God descended, inspired the apostles, and the church was established. That is the true church, according to Scripture, and there is no other church that has one particle of divine authority in it. The Romish Church was born hundreds of years too late. There is not a trace of a Pope in Scripture, except in prophecy, referring to him as the man of sin and son of perdition, nor in any other writing for centuries after the founding of the true church. Nor is there a reference to a Roman Catholic. There really was not one in the world, much less a Romish Church. For the first three centuries there was no church but one, “the church of the living God,” in existence. All others have come into existence since then, and have not one spark of authority.

Does the reader say, “You are not in that church yourself?” We are not discussing that question; but if we are not in it the loss will be as great to us as to any one else not in it.

Speaking of this church, or building, Paul says: “I, as a wise master-builder, have laid the foundation, and other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.” No man of any intelligence thinks there is but one kingdom of God, or but one body of Christ. If we are in that we are in Christ, in the Father and in the Son. To be out of the one body, or one kingdom, is to be out of Christ, out of the Father and of the Son. There is no union with the Father and with the Son, only in the body or in the kingdom.

We have no time to pursue this matter at present, but can easily, when we have time, amplify and explain to any extent, showing that the principles now only briefly sketched, pervade the Scriptures throughout. It means something to be in the kingdom of God, as it does to be “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,” “in Christ,” “in the Father and the Son.” It is to be in a state of justification, or acceptance with God.

THE BIBLE AND BIBLE MEN.

We have identified our fortune—_our all_—for this world and that which is to come, for time and eternity, with the Bible. It is the only revelation from God, the only guide for a sinful world. Christ, who is the only Light of the world, is seen and apprehended through the Bible, and in no other way. All claims to revelation, separate from the Bible, are mere empty pretences, idle and unfounded delusions and impostures, deserving to be exposed and banished from the earth. They, as a general thing, are wicked and malicious inventions, aimed to subvert and thwart the merciful and benevolent purposes of the Bible. The Bible is the only book from God; the only book that can be defended; the only book upon which all the pure and holy can unite. Those who adhere to the Bible, are happy while they live, and happy in death. It is emphatically _the book_ for man. We are for it, now and forever, and against all that is against it, or subversive of it, either directly or indirectly. We are for no half way work, no compromise nor equivocal ground. Let every man be for the Bible, or against it; on the Lord’s side, or against him; for christianity, or nothing; for heaven, or hell. We want no man who stands in doubt. If a man can not define his position, so that all can tell which side he is on, we have no use for him. We count no man whose position is doubtful. All men whose position is doubtful, are really on the enemy’s side, and would surrender any post we have, if the opportunity would offer. We are not to be gulled by these, nor induced to depend on them. We would greatly prefer that they would stand where they belong, so that all would know where to find them.

We have identified ourself with Bible men. Their cause is our cause, and their God is our God. Their work is our work. With them we are enlisted in a mighty effort to circulate the Bible as far among the nations of the earth as possible. We are proud to stand among the men of the Bible, to be enrolled with them, and in the enjoyment of their fellowship. The prospect before these is brighter now than ever before; their work is going on more triumphantly, and success is more certain, than at any former time.

BAPTISM OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.

Since this practice of praying for the baptism of the Spirit is continued with such pertinacity, we have concluded to make a few remarks upon it. For the sake of making our remarks the more easily apprehended, we will arrange them numerically, as follows:

_First._ The baptism of the Holy Spirit was a miracle. It does not exist in our day, for miracles are not done now, not designed to be, nor of any use if done. Miracles can not be done but by the will of God, nor can they be suspended, but by his will. He did them when they were needed, and suspended them when they were not needed. No man can allege that miracles ought to have been continued in the church, without alleging that the all-wise God ought to have done what he has not done. This is absurd.

_Second._ The baptism of the Spirit was _seen_. Nothing of the kind occurs now that is _seen_. Therefore, there is now no baptism of the Spirit.

_Third._ The baptism of the Spirit was _heard_. Nothing of this kind is heard now. Therefore, there is no baptism of the Holy Spirit now.

_Fourth._ Cloven, or divided tongues, like as of fire, sat upon those baptized with the Spirit. Nothing of this kind sat upon those claiming to have been baptized with the Holy Spirit now. Therefore, none have been baptized with the Holy Spirit in our day.

_Fifth._ Those baptized with the Holy Spirit, spoke with tongues. None claiming to be baptized with the Holy Spirit now, speak with tongues. Therefore, none now are baptized with the Holy Spirit.

_Sixth._ Those baptized with the Holy Spirit prophesied. None claiming to be baptized with the Holy Spirit now prophesy. Therefore, none are baptized with the Holy Spirit, now.

_Seventh._ It is wrong to pray for the baptism of the Holy Spirit, because it is a gift that does not belong to us. Simon, the sorcerer, asked for a gift that did not belong to him, on account of which the Apostle said, “Thou art in the gall of bitterness and bond of iniquity,” and instructed him to “pray God, if perhaps the thought of his heart might be forgiven him.”

_Eighth._ It is wrong to claim to have the baptism of the Spirit, because the claim is as false and delusive, as to claim to be an Apostle. It is as shallow, empty and unfounded as the claims of Mormons.

SMALL IMPROPRIETIES AND ANNOYANCES.

To pour the wine, or divide it into several cups, before thanks, at the Lord’s table. We thank the Lord for the _cup_, and not _cups_. Thanks should invariably be given for the _one cup_, while the wine is in the one cup.

For some one to start and push his way out through the assembly while an invitation is pending. This is a most manifest impoliteness and disorder.

For some one that has eat about three dinners at once, to doze and nod in time of preaching, and in the midst of the exhortation, just when the preacher is trying to make an impression, to stretch his limbs, gape and crowd up to the pulpit, and get a drink to extinguish the fires burning within him. This is ridiculous.

To see some great strapping saphead get up in the middle of a discourse, and go stamping out, thus interrupting the whole audience. If these could _see themselves as others see them_, they would be very clear of showing themselves, as they frequently do.

To see a beautiful young lady sit in time of preaching, and then stand in time of an invitation, with her mouth spread and a broad and supercilious grin upon her face.

To see some fellow draw his watch and snap it at the preacher, as he shuts down the case, as much as to say, “I consider it is time you would stop.”

To see a lady sit and play with her infant, in time of preaching, laugh at its little pranks, and try to induce others around her also to laugh at them.

To see a lady get into a quarrel with her babe, in time of preaching; slap it, jerk it, hold it, and thus keep it squalling for about half an hour. If the preacher can keep the thread of his discourse, in a case of that kind, he is a pretty good preacher.

To have some man standing near the preacher, in time of prayer, chewing an enormous quid of tobacco, and about once in half a minute, hear a large spoonful of the filthy spittle splash upon the floor.

ONE IMMERSION.

Certainly not, but one immersion “into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” There is but one immersion commanded in Scripture; that one is _in water_, and “into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” Peter said, “Can any man forbid water that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Spirit as well as we?” Here the _water_ is mentioned as the element in which they were to be immersed, and they had already been immersed in the Holy Spirit; and in the next verse we are informed that “he _commanded them_ to be immersed in the name of the Lord.” The immersion _in water_, then, is the one commanded, and the only one.

The immersion in Spirit is not commanded; and the command, if it existed, to be immersed in Spirit could not _be obeyed_. Suppose the Lord would command any one to be immersed in the Spirit, how would he obey? No man ever was commanded to be immersed in the Spirit, nor was any man ever commanded to immerse any one in the Spirit. Man can not immerse in the Spirit. The immersion in water is commanded, and is the immersion “into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,” “into Christ,” “into one body,” the initiatory rite into the New Institution. Immersion in the Holy Spirit never initiated any one into any institution or anything. It was never commanded. No man ever administered it. The Lord was the only administrator of the baptism of the Spirit. It was a _promise_. It was a miracle. It imparted miraculous power. It never occurred except on Pentecost, and at the house of Cornelius. On Pentecost the subjects of it were in Christ before it occurred, and at the house of Cornelius they were not in Christ after it occurred till they were immersed in water. In both instances they spake with tongues and prophesied.

When Paul wrote the letter to the church in Ephesus there remained but “one immersion,” the one of the last commission, connected with salvation, the remission of sin, or induction “into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” This is Paul’s “one immersion.” It is not “one pouring,” “one sprinkling,” or “_three_ immersions,” but “one immersion.” _Three_ immersions has not one scrap of authority in the commission or anywhere else. In the same sentence where the apostle has “one body, one Spirit, one hope, one faith,” he has “one immersion,” and it would be in no more direct violation of his language to talk of _three_ bodies, _three_ Spirits, _three_ hopes, _three_ faiths, than of “_three_ immersions.” There is no method by which the language can be so tortured as to get _three_ immersions out of the words, “immersing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” Such a thing was never thought of till the dispute about the Trinity sprung up. This dispute originated it. There is not a trace of trine immersion till more than a hundred years after the apostles were gone; till the shallow nonsense of infant sin, infant regeneration, infant immersion and infant damnation were introduced. Here, and not in the Bible, the friends of trine immersion go to find it, and here they find it among those who taught that infants were _guilty_ of original sin and liable to eternal damnation; that infants must be regenerated; that the stain of Adam’s sin must be washed away; that this can not be done except in baptism, to prepare them for heaven. They practiced no infant sprinkling, but infant immersion, and, in time, trine immersion, or immersed them three times. We think some of the Greeks do this to the present day.

INNOVATIONS IN THE CHURCH OF CHRIST.

In reading the history of the church, one is overwhelmed to see how innovations have crept in and eat the vitals out of the church. At every period of the church, when there was any vitality in it, any spirituality or devotion to God, there has been a constant effort on the part of the enemy, through some well-meaning, but worldly minded professors of religion, to work things into the church, or to work something out of it, in the nature of the case calculated to corrupt and destroy it. We must be awake to these wily manœuverings and guard against them, or they will ruin the great work so well begun and so successfully carried on in our time. The insidious, wily and stealthy machinations of the Grecian and Gnostic philosophers, did an immense work in corrupting the primitive church. Many of these did this, too, with the best intentions in the world. They thought it would be a grand acquisition to the Christian religion, an accomplishment and refinement, to append to it philosophy, and require every preacher to be a philosopher. These were constantly edging into the pure religion of Christ their fine philosophical notions, pagan customs and ceremonies, and destroying the church whenever they did it. On the other hand, learned Judaizers were foisting Judaism into the church at every opportunity. Between Judaizers on the one hand, and Gnostic philosophers on the other, they amalgamated Christianity, Judaism and Paganism, and made Romanism. It was easy to obtain the idea of infant membership from Judaism, the idea of image worship from Paganism, and the idea of one true church from Christianity, and thus incorporate a system with a membership based in the flesh, making all the infants members, without any regeneration, under pagan idolatry, in worshipping images, and at the same time, with the idea that they are the true church.

THE BIBLE GROUND.

For fifty years, we, as christians, have stood on the Bible alone, as a rule of faith and practice. Till recently, no difficulty was experienced in reducing it to practice. For forty years after the effort was first made in this country, to return to original ground, to the apostolic faith and practice, and restore the ancient order of things; submit to the law of the Lord in all things; we found no difficulty of consequence. But on the other hand we realized our vantage ground, answered all the cavils of creed-mongers, fought our way through, built up churches on Christ, set them in order under the law of God, and thus were happy in the Lord. No people in this country have ever been as happy and prosperous. All worked well. We silenced all opposition.

But more recently, subtle schemes are on foot to invent an excuse for something like the traditions of the elders among the Jews, substituted for the law of God, the unwritten traditions of Rome, that has assumed the place of the law of God, or the doctrines and commandments of men, in our time, embodied in human creeds. One man finds a “law of conscience,” another “a law of love,” another thinks we are not under law, but under grace, but does not notice that Paul’s law, that we are not under, is the law of Moses, and, that Paul’s grace, that we are under, embraces the “law of Christ;” the “perfect law of liberty,” the “law of the Spirit of life.” Another man finds a law of expediences, more extended than the Jewish Talmud, or the unwritten traditions of Rome. He soon has more opinions than faith, more expedients than commandments of God, more charity than law or gospel, more love for the pious unimmersed than for immersed believers, more charity than hope. His gospel consists largely of tuning-forks, note-books, hymn-books, choirs, organs, concerts, festivals, church fairs. He is great on themes not in the Bible; the unwritten word; the traditions of the fathers. These are dead weights on the body. They are enemies within, sensual, not having the Spirit. We must meet them with the same arguments that cut our way through sectarianism forty years ago.

We must rouse the spirit of the glorious pioneer men who fought the early battles, cleared away sectarian rubbish, built up churches all over the land and set them in order, and never stop till there is an end to all the subtleties and sophistries, and all the insidious devices now subverting “the right way of the Lord” and spreading dissension among the children of God. We must stop all the loopholes being invented for the introduction of _humanisms_, and _innovations_ of all sorts, put away from among us the corrupt, the enemies of the cause, and the worldly, and inculcate the pure teaching of the New Testament among all, and live nearer to it than ever.

We met all this twaddle about a printed hymn-book, a meeting-house, etc., not provided for by divine legislation, before we were in the Church one year, from sectarians, and answered and exploded it. Now we have men among us that talk of _progress_, _learning_ and an _advanced age_, who have _advanced back_, and are trying to build an excuse of the same matters for human legislation. They want to supply the deficiency in the law of God by human law. With them there is no church government in the law of God, and, therefore, we must make one. After we have governed the churches by the law of God, fifty years, they have advanced to the discovery that there is no church government in the law of God. What do they propose? To make a church government. There is a shorter road than this to sectarianism, and one that will be much less trouble, and that is, to go back at once to some sect that has set aside the law of God, and made one of its own, and adopted it. They have made as good human laws as we can make, and better, for they are old and experienced hands, and we would be but new and bungling beginners. The efforts we have seen are mere _abortions_.

THE WORK OF THE DISCIPLES.

Our heart is enlarged and our spirit is stirred within us, when we look at the great opening before us. The Lord has not raised us up, put into our hands such immense power, and made us such a great people, without an object. He has a great work for the Reformers of the nineteenth century. We, as a people, are set for the defence of the gospel. We occupy the only ground upon which man can stand and successfully do battle with unbelievers, with schismatics of every sort, and maintain the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace. We are the only people who occupy the proper ground for the evangelization and salvation of the world. We have cut ourselves loose from every thing but Christ. We present him to the world and defend him, both in his divinity and humanity, as the ineffably glorious person in whom dwells the fullness of the Godhead bodily. We believe in him, in all he ever said or did, in his religion, beginning, middle and ending, and nothing else. We will defend him and all he ever said and did. We will defend his word, his doctrine, the whole of it. Our work is not to defend our views, our doctrines, or ourselves, but to defend our Master and his doctrine. Our work is pre-eminently the following:

_First._ To convert the world to Christ, put men under him as their Leader, Savior and everlasting trust, to follow him for evermore.

_Second._ To collect from Babylon—spiritual Babylon—the wandering, bewildered and confused children of God, bring them back to their one shepherd, one fold, and unite them in one body under Christ, their only living head, that their name may be one, that they may be one, as he and his Father are one.

_Third._ To defend the faith once delivered to the saints, maintain it and spread it throughout the world.

_Fourth._ To inculcate piety, humanity, works of righteousness—in one word, implicit submission to Jesus the Lord in all things.

This is our work, and this, the Lord being our helper, _we will do_. We are pledged to Jesus, the Christ, to do this, for his glory and our good, and, by the grace of God, we will do it. We are not our own; we are the Lord’s. The work we are in is not our own; it is the Lord’s. The Lord our Righteousness is our King. It is his will—his bidding that we do this work. _He has commanded and the work must be done._ Brethren, see to it that the armor is in order, that it is on, properly adjusted, and every man at his post. Keep your eyes upon our Commander-in-Chief. Whatever he requires do it. No matter where he calls you to go, go at his bidding. He will bring us off conquerors, and more than conquerors. Go not in your own strength, nor in your own name, and rely not upon your own wisdom. Go in the strength, in the name and wisdom of the Lord. “O, Lord of hosts, blessed is the man that trusteth in thee!”

NOT TO KEEP COMPANY.

“But now I have written unto you not to keep company,
if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or
covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an
extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.”—_I. Cor. v. 11._

“Let every man examine himself and so let him eat.”
—_I. Cor. xi. 28._

The passage evidently has reference to common associating—in visits, ordinary, eating and the like. Such a man should not be in the church at all, to say nothing about communing. Christians should not visit and receive visits from such persons, or associate with them, but make them feel keenly the smart of being thus low and corrupt.

The remark of the apostle, “Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat,” is misapplied almost invariably every time it is quoted. It certainly has no reference to examining to determine whether a man is worthy to commune or not, for he says, “Let a man examine himself, and _so let him eat_.” The examination was to _precede_ the eating, and not to decide whether he should eat or not. The matter of trouble among the Corinthians was not to determine _who_ shall eat, but _how to eat worthily_. They were not to do this by coming together and eating a pagan feast, not discerning the Lord’s death and blood, by partaking of the loaf and wine, as the Lord appointed.

It is not the work of the administrator to tell who are communicants, when administering, any more than he should tell who should sing, pray, or give thanks. The communion was delivered to the church, and we are communicants by virtue of being in the church. If any are walking disorderly they should be dealt with, and not allowed to continue in disorder, but forbidden to commune. The whole church should be kept in order and all worship, not at the Lord’s table only, but in all parts of the worship. The question is about _who are members of the church_, and not about _who shall commune_. All the members should commune, all _christians_, and there should be no others in the church.

EXTENT OF ONE MAN’S INFLUENCE.

Every preacher that becomes secularized, and ceases to employ his energies in behalf of the poor, of mercy, of righteousness, of God, is an immense loss to the world. There is no calculating or estimating the difference in the condition of the world, in the day of judgment, all growing out of the indolence or indifference of one man, though he might see that he was effecting but little in his operations. Let any man of reflection select a preacher of but humble abilities, who was operating zealously in the great cause of truth only twenty years ago, and trace the effects which a finite being can clearly see have grown out of his labors, and he will be astonished to see how different the present state of society would have been, had he relaxed his energies. But, let his influence extend twenty years more, and where will be its boundaries? Let it extend one hundred years and who could compute it? But all this may be but a drop to the ocean of the vast train of influences that would all have been lost by one man failing to act his part. With this before us, is it strange that God should hold him highly accountable?

But this is not the worst case. Let a man of talent, influence and energy, fall from his station, and become an apostate and enemy, let the cause be made to bleed and suffer from his want of reputation, while he hurls back his javelins with all the malice and fury of the Prince of the bottomless pit; and then, compute the change made in the condition of the church and the world? No one, short of the Infinite Being Himself, can compute the vast number that will be seriously injured, in one century, by such a miserable being. Who, then, can tell the difference his conduct can make in the condition of the world, at the adjudication of all things? Let preachers, then, remember that they are laborers together, and that no one can be lost without an injury to all.

PULPITS.

We have, in our own mind, long since repudiated pulpits entirely, as a useless, and worse than useless appendage. No work done, that we know of, with the idea of usefulness, more completely misses its aim than that of erecting pulpits in which for men to stand to preach the gospel of Christ. We have, for a long time, utterly refused to go into many of the castles we find around the country. In many houses the preacher is hoisted high in a pulpit, from twenty to thirty feet from the nearest person to him, and many of his hearers fifty and sixty feet off. This is all as irrational as it can he. If there had been a special study how to defeat the preacher, no better method than this could have been invented.

In a large house, there should be a platform some fifteen feet square and sixteen inches high, with a small table, the height of a common table, for a Bible and hymn book, which the preacher could set in front of him, if he desire it, or if not, set back against the wall. There should also be a few chairs on or about the platform for speakers, where there are several, or for persons hard of hearing. The speaker can then advance forward near enough to the people to address them effectively, and they can see him from head to foot. The floor of the house should rise some twelve inches in twenty feet. If the house is crowded, persons can then be seated all round the speaker, leaving him simply room to stand. There should be two brilliant lights back of him, near the wall, elevated a little above his head, and some ten feet apart, so as to shine down each side of him into the book before him. If the speaker desire to stand back near the wall, he can then do so; or if he prefers, as we certainly do, to stand on the front of the platform, he can have the privilege, and have room to walk about a little, which is both a relief to the speaker and audience.

If the house is small, the platform should not be more than ten feet square and eight inches high.

WHY INFIDELS OPPOSE THE BIBLE.

Neither Joseph Barker, nor any other man on the continent can give one good reason for his hatred of the Bible, or desire to ridicule it. Suppose it were all he says of it; superstition or what not; why is he so enraged at it? What is it that exasperates him so? What is it that puts such men to so much trouble? We suppose the stories of witches, ghosts, etc., the signs of the zodiac, the moon, etc., etc., are superstitions, but they do not trouble us, and we do not think it worth while to war upon them. Why do not modern sceptics put the Scriptures down on the same list with these, give them the go-by, and be at no more trouble about them? Ah, why not? Simply because they can not. They have within them spirits that can not rest. The Bible is a book they can not let alone. It will not let them alone. It follows them by day, and thunders in their ears at night. It is before them when they rise up and when they lie down. It is before them in public and in private. It alarms them with the terrible announcement that the dead shall be raised, that the world shall be judged in righteousness, and that the Lord shall render to every man according as his work shall be. It annoys them with terrible threatenings, fearful punishments and righteous retributions. It follows them with the only impartial history the world ever had, spreading out alike the good and the bad, and showing up the entire history of man.

Why do they not let the Bible alone? If it is only a fable, a legend, or mere fiction, why trouble about it? “_Let it alone!_” says the sceptic, “how can I let it alone, when it constantly tells me of every sin I ever committed, describes even the thoughts of my heart, and exposes every wicked desire I ever had? I can not let a book alone that describes and publishes me to the world as a sinner.” What of all that, if you do not believe it? There is the trouble. The apprehension that _it may be true_, after all, hangs about men. They may rant, ridicule, defy, scoff and laugh, but the fearful apprehension still rises, thundering, “_It may be true, after all_.” There is no getting rid of the fearful apprehensions, the wonderful forebodings, the consciousness that all scepticism might be a mistake, after all. They know they have nothing settled, nothing established, no fixed principles, no certain knowledge. They know that they are acquiring no substantial knowledge. Their work has not been to settle any thing, to fix any thing. They are drifting about, floating in an uncertain current, not knowing whither they are going. With them, all is in doubt, uncertainty, and obscurity. They are completely unsettled, wandering in the dark, and without a resting place. They are poor and miserable, blind and naked. They have no encouragement, no support, and no promise, and nothing to promise anybody else. Their pursuit is an empty chase, without any promise or hope. There is not a more vain and empty bubble in this world, than that pursued by these men. They are working without an object. They know not what they are aiming at. Their work is not to prove any thing, to settle any thing, or establish any thing; but to unsettle, confuse and throw into doubt. What have they done for the world? What do they propose to do for man? Nothing, only to pull down religion, do away with the church, and put the Bible out of the world! They appear to think that the principal thing now required to do, for the happiness of the world, is to rid it of all religion. But where is the evidence that they are doing any good? Where have they made the people happy? Where have they done any good? What good are they now doing? None under the shining sun.

MIRACLES.

What is a miracle? A miracle is not, as Hume defined it, “something _contrary to the laws of nature_,” but something above the laws of nature, or something that the laws of nature, in their legitimate and ordinary operations, could not produce. For instance, the laws of nature, in their legitimate and ordinary operations, from parents, can produce offspring, and bring them to manhood and womanhood. But the laws of nature, in their legitimate course of operation, never produced a man and a woman, without parents, or never brought into existence a man and a woman, at sufficient maturity to care for themselves and live, without parents. No law of nature, in its legitimate and ordinary course of operation, brought Adam and Eve into existence, at maturity, and without parents. In other words, no law or laws of nature, in their legitimate and ordinary operation, ever began the human race. In the plainest terms, no law of nature ever produced a human being without parents. In other words, it is not a miracle for children to come from parents, but it was a miracle to create the first human pair. All who admit that the human race ever had a beginning, must admit that it began by miracle. It is not a miracle for an oak to produce an acorn, nor for an acorn to produce an oak; but it is a miracle to produce an oak without an acorn, and equally a miracle to produce an acorn without an oak. The laws of nature, in the legitimate and ordinary course of their operation, never produced an acorn without an oak, or an oak without an acorn. The first acorn, or the first oak, was, unquestionably, a miracle. The first man was a miracle. The second man, the Lord from heaven, was a miracle. Isaac, the child of promise, and the only son of Abraham, as Jesus was the child of promise, and the only begotten of the Father, was a miracle. To sum all up, and express it in one sentence, everything,—every species of animal, insect and vegetable, began by miracle. The laws of nature create nothing, give us no new species or kind, but simply propagate and perpetuate that which was given by miracle at first. By the established laws of nature, the human race have been propagated and perpetuated, but the human race had its commencement in miracle.

The laws of nature never raised a man from the dead, instantaneously gave hearing to the deaf, speech to the dumb, or sight to the blind. No laws of nature can heal a leper in an instant, multiply “five loaves and a few small fishes,” till the amount will be sufficient to feed five thousand persons, leaving “twelve baskets full of fragments,” or enable men to speak in some fifteen or seventeen languages, never studied or learned in the ordinary way. A miracle may suspend laws of nature for the time being, do something above them, or something that they never perform; but to be a miracle at all, something must be done above all human art, device or ability, and something which we know the laws of nature, in their legitimate course, and ordinary operation, never perform. When anything of this kind occurs, we know that it could not have taken place without foreign and direct interposition. This is a miracle; it is above and superior to all human art or device; above and superior to any thing ever done by the laws of nature, as well as different from anything they ever do.

“AFFIRMATIVE GOSPEL.”

We heard an illusion to the fanciful idea that some have conceived of preaching an “affirmative gospel,” or, as some have expressed it, “preaching the gospel _affirmatively_,” or, as we suppose, to come a little nearer their idea, merely to preach, maintain and defend the truth _affirmatively_, and let the _negative_ alone; or still, if possible, to be more fully understood, to preach _truth_ and not preach against what is _not truth_; to preach what _is to be done_ and not what _is not to be done_. Look at the following Psalm I.:

1. “Happy is the man that walks _not_ in the counsel
of the ungodly.”
2. “_Nor_ stands in the way of sinners.”
3. “_Nor_ sits in the seat of the scornful.”

These three items are _negative_—things that the man whom the Lord pronounces _happy, does not_. This is not leaving the negative part out, but inserting it first, and pronounces the man happy that does not these things.

In contrast, the Psalmist of Israel proceeds to give us the following, which is affirmative:

1. “His delight is in the law of the Lord.”
2. “In his law he meditates day and night.”

The Lord gives the following guarantee to those who do not say the negative part, but do the affirmative:

“He shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that brings forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither, and whatever he does shall prosper.”

What an awful contrast with this is the ungodly:

“The ungodly are not so; but are like the chaff which the wind drives away. Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregations of the righteous.”

To this the Lord adds the following conclusion:

“The Lord knows the way of the righteous,” or _approves_ it, “but the way of the ungodly shall perish.”

The negative is to be preached and taught in all that pertains to preaching and teaching as zealously and faithfully as the affirmative, and is to be regarded equally as much of divine authority. The first commandment the Lord ever gave to a human being was negative. It was in these words: “You may not eat of it.” This was negative—what must not be done. The Bible abounds with this negative teaching, setting forth what may not be done. Look at the following list, gathered from I. Cor. xiii. 4-8, setting forth affirmatively and negatively, or what love _will and will not_ do. First look at the affirmative side, or what love will do:

1. It suffers long.
2. It is kind.
3. It rejoices in the truth.
4. It bears all things.
5. It believes all things.
6. It hopes all things.
7. Endures all things.

This is the affirmative side, or what love _will do_; but the divine authority does not stop at that, but tells us what love _will not do_. See the following:

1. It is not envious.
2. Vaunts not itself.
3. Is not puffed up.
4. Does not behave itself unseemingly.
5. Seeks not her own.
6. Is not easily provoked.
7. Thinks no evil.
8. Rejoices not in iniquity.
9. Never fails.

The negative is longer than the affirmative in this enumeration.

The man with his affirmative gospel is like the man with his two oars, faith and works, to his skiff. He pulled one alone for a time, and run round and round one way, and then pulled the other, and run round and round the other way, and then seized both and pulled them at the same time, when his skiff moved straight ahead beautifully. We must take the whole of the divine teaching, the affirmative and negative; what we are to believe, and what we are not to believe; what we are to do, and what we are not to do. We are to show not only what is truth, but what is not truth; what is of divine authority, but what is not of divine authority.

Had some of our affirmative gospel men been in the place of Paul, when he came to Athens, they would have made no attack on the altar with the inscription: “TO THE UNKNOWN GOD,” but would have gone on with their affirmative gospel. Paul was not of that type of preacher, but brought their view of the unknown God into direct contrast with the revelation of the true God—the Jehovah. He admits that theirs was to them an “unknown God,”—“God who made the world, and all things therein”—“Lord of heaven and earth,” and who “dwells not in temples made with men’s hands,” and “is not worshipped with men’s hands, as though he needs anything, seeing that he gives to all life, and breath, and all things, and has made of one blood all nations of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined before the times appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; that they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us.”

Not content with this attack on their altar, and the inscription on it, he proceeds to quote and turn their own poets against them: “Certain of your own poets have said, ‘For we are also his offspring.’” Hear him as he proceeds, and see how he wades into their ignorance and superstition, and, above all, how utterly exclusive he is: “For as much then, as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device.”

Now for the charitable part of his discourse: “And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent.” “The times of this ignorance” was before the gospel came, and the “now,” brought in contrast with it, is since the gospel has come. Seeing that the light has come, men are inexcusable to be in ignorance.

He proceeds to give a reason for the commandment, “to all men everywhere to repent,” in the following words: “Because he has appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he has ordained.” But he knew that some man might call that in question, when he closed up with the following: “Whereof he has given assurance to all men in that he has raised him from the dead.” That is, he has given assurance to all men, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, that he will judge the world in righteousness, by that man whom he has ordained. The logic runs thus: As he raised Christ from the dead, he will judge the world; and as he will judge the world, all men, everywhere, are commanded to repent, in view of the judgment.

The inscriptions to the unknown God must be set aside, with all the doctrines and commandments of men; the traditions of Jewish rabbis and Romish priests, with all the unauthorized lumber of Protestants, and the devotees to each and all of them, must be shown that they are unauthorized, and the man who shuns to do this, only does half work, or rather, only half does his work, and will be responsible to the great Shepherd and Bishop of souls.

HOUSEHOLD BAPTISMS.

It is claimed that whole households were baptized, and that these must have included infants; as, for instance, the following:

1. Lydia and her house. All that is said of Lydia is found in two verses, Acts xvi. 14, 15, and the passage contains not one word about an infant, or a child of any sort. It is stated that “she was baptized and her household.” But it is not stated that she was a married woman, that she had any children, much less that she had any infants; and, therefore, there is nothing here about any infant baptism.

2. The next household mentioned is that of the Jailor, Acts xvi. 33. “And they—Paul and Silas—spoke unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house. And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes, and was baptized, he and all his straightway. And when they had brought them into his house, he set meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in God, with all his house.” Here are two things stated of these that can not be said of infants. They spoke unto him—the Jailor—the word of the Lord, and _to all that were in his house_. The Jailor rejoiced, believing in God with all his house. Here it is asserted of the household that they rejoiced, believing in God. The word of the Lord was spoken to them, they rejoiced and believed in God. This can not be said of infants.

3. The next case of a household, which we shall mention, is that of Cornelius, Acts xi. 14. Here, however, is conclusive evidence that there were no infants, for the angel said, “Send men to Joppa, and call for Simon, whose surname is Peter; who shall tell thee words whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved.” Infants are not _told words whereby they are saved_. Those who practice infant baptism do not tell them words whereby they may be saved, and do not believe they are saved in or by baptism.

4. There is but one other household mentioned in the New Testament, in connection with baptism. That is “the household of Stephanas.” I. Cor. i. 16. In the same letter we find one thing affirmed of this same household that can not be affirmed of infants. “They have _addicted themselves_ to the ministry of the saints.” I. Cor. xvi. 15. This is a thing infants can not do.

There were, then, no infants in these households, and nothing particularly strange about that. The writer has baptized many households and never baptized an infant.

KNOWING AND NOT DOING.

“That servant who knew his Lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.” See Luke xii. 47. From this language there is no escape. If the men of whom we speak, say, they are not servants, then they will be condemned for refusing to be his servants. There can be no middle ground, no neutral ground. “He who is not for us is against us,” says the Lord. We are not simply to do some benevolent deeds favorable to the Lord, or to his cause, but we must be on his side, belong to him, be his; identified with him; one with him, so that his cause is our cause, and his will is our will. But to the mystery again: How can it be, that a man can love the Savior, his people and cause, so as to defend them, give his money to aid them, have confidence in them, and be pleased with their work; but decide to stand, in relation with their enemies, in the same state with them, and not in relation with the Lord and with his people; in the same state with them?

What a fearful thing it is to be _against the Lord_, and to encounter his terrible sentence: “Shall be beaten with many stripes.” Why should a man stand in such a condition a single day? We see not how a man could rest for an hour with such a responsibility on his soul! Why should any man not be willing? nay, more, why should he not _seek_ to place himself under the guidance of Him who is so wise that he can not err, and so good that he will do all things well? What a blessedness for man, that he can have infallible wisdom to guide him, and almighty power to save him! How can it be possible for any well disposed man to stand aloof from the Lord and from his divine arrangement for our happiness, and trust to his own wisdom and his own strength, when he could have the wisdom and power of God pledged for his security? Why not come to the Lord; let his kind hand lead, and his gracious providence guide in the way of life everlasting.

There were old men, too old to be on the muster roll, and boys too young, the history informs us, who fought in the battle of Bunker Hill, in the American Revolution. These received much praise for their good will to the cause and the service they rendered: but they did not belong to the army and received _no pay_. In the same way, we fear, many of these good friends that defend the cause and even pay their money to support it, will lose their reward, because they have never _enlisted_. _They do not belong to the army._

Many such men have noble wives striving to serve the Lord, to train their children in the way of righteousness and bring them to God. These are dearer to them than life. Can they stand out in the ranks of the enemy, and see their companions who gave them their hearts and hands in their better days, struggling to save their precious children, and not stand by their side, aiding and encouraging them? What a responsibility there is here! They know their Lord’s will, and _do it not_ and _will be beaten with many stripes_!

The Lord suffered and died for these. He hung on the ignominious cross for them, as well as for us all, and poured out his warm heart’s-blood to cleanse them from sin. All this appeals to them. All the exhortations of saints, their prayers, songs, tears and solicitudes appeal to them, by all the tender mercies of God and the infinite compassion, to come to the Savior and live. If they resist all this, turn their ear away from it, and, in the midst of all these entreaties, go down to ruin, what an everlasting source of regret it will be to look back and see what was done for them, but all in vain! “Turn you, turn you,” says the prophet, “and live.” “You would not come to me that you might have life,” says the Lord. “He is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” “The Spirit says, Come, and the bride says, Come, and whoever will, let him take of the water of life freely.”

THE BIBLE VS. HUMAN CREEDS.

It is admitted on all hands, by all Protestants, that we should receive nothing more than is contained in the Holy Scriptures.

It is also admitted, that we should receive nothing less than is contained in the Scriptures.