(Concluded.)

The great body of discipline ought to be altogether aimed at hindering excommunication, the putting of a person out. Nine-tenths of the discipline which ought to go on is individual. If it comes to the question of the exercise of the discipline of "the Son over His own house," the Church ought never to take it up, but in self-identification, in confession of common sin and shame, that it has come ever to this. So it would be no court of justice at all, but a disgrace to the body. Spirituality in the Church would purge out hypocrisy, defilement, and everything unworthy, without assuming a judicial aspect. Nothing should be so abhorrent, as that, in God’s house, such a thing had happened. If it were in one of our houses that something dishonorable and disgraceful had happened, should we go on and feel as though we were altogether unconcerned, that we had nothing to do with it? It might be that some reprobate son must be put out, for the sake of the others-he cannot be reclaimed, and he is corrupting the family-what can be done? It is necessary to say, "I cannot keep you here; I cannot corrupt the rest by your habits and manners." Would it not, nevertheless, be for weeping and mourning, for sorrow of heart, and shame and dishonor to the whole family? They would not like to talk on the subject; and others would retrain from it to spare their feelings:his name would not be mentioned. In the house of the Son, how abhorrent to be putting out! what common shame! what anguish! what sorrow! There is nothing more abhorrent to God than a judicial process.

The Church is indeed plunged in corruption and weakness; but this is the very thing that would make one cling to the saints, and the more anxiously maintain the individual responsibility of those who have any gift for pastoral care. There is nothing I pray for more, than the dispensation of pastors. What I mean by a pastor is a person who can bear the whole sorrow, care, misery, and sin of another on his own soul, and go to God about it, and bring from God what will meet it, before he goes to the other.

There is another thing most clear. The result may be putting out; but if it ever comes to a corporate act in judgment, discipline ends the moment he is put out, and ends altogether-"Do not ye judge them that are within? But them that are without God judgeth" (i Cor. 5:12).

The question whether I can sit down with this or that person who is within never arises. A person staying away from communion (because of another, of whom he does not think well, being there) is a most extraordinary thing; he is excommunicating himself for another’s sake. " For we, being many, are one bread [loaf], and one body; for we are all partakers of that one bread" (i Cor. 10:17). If I stay away, I am excommunicating myself, because another has gone wrong. That is not the way to act. There may be a step to take, but it is not to commit the folly of excommunicating myself, lest a sinner should intrude.

All discipline until the last act is restorative. The act of putting outside, of excommunication, is not (properly speaking) discipline, but the saying that discipline is ineffective, and there is an end of it; the Church says, " I can do no more."

As to the question of unanimity in cases of church-discipline, we must remember, it is the Son exercising His discipline over His own house. In the case in Corinthians it was the direct action of Paul in apostolic power on the body, and not of the Church. The body claiming a right to exercise discipline! one cannot conceive a more terrible thing; it is turning the family of God into a court of justice. Suppose the case of a father going to turn out of-doors a wicked son, and the other children of the family saying, "We have a right to help our father in turning our brother out of the house," what an awful thing! We find the apostle forcing the Corinthians to exercise discipline, when they were not a bit disposed to do so. " Here (he says) there is sin among you, and ye are not mourning, that he that has done this deed might be taken away from among you (he is forcing them to the conviction that the sin is theirs, as well as that of the man); and now put away from among yourselves that wicked person." The Church is never in the place of exercising discipline until the sin of the individual becomes the sin of the Church, recognized as such.

There is all this,-"Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear" (i Tim. 5:20), "Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual restore such," etc., and the like; but, if evil has arisen of such a character as to demand excommunication, instead of the Church having a right to put away, it is obliged to do it. The saints must approve themselves clear. He forces these people into the recognition of their own condition, gets them ashamed of themselves-they retire from the man-and he is left alone to the shame of his sin. (See 2 Cor. 2:and 7:) That is the way the apostle forced them to exercise discipline. The conscience of the whole Church was forced into cleanness in a matter of which it was corporately guilty. And what trouble he had to do it! That is, I think, the force of ‘’ To whom ye forgive anything, I forgive also:for if I forgave anything, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ; lest Satan should get an advantage over us:for we are not ignorant of his devices." What the devil was at was this-the apostle had insisted upon the excommunication (i Cor. 5:3-5); and the assembly did not like it. He compelled them to act; they did it in the judicial way, and did not want to restore him (2 Cor. 2:6, 7). Then he makes them go along with him in the act of restoration; "to whom ye forgive," etc The design of Satan was to introduce the wickedness, and make them careless about it, and, afterwards, judicial; and then to make it an occasion of separation of feeling between the apostle and the body of saints at Corinth. Paul identifies himself with the whole tody, first forcing them to clear themselves, and then taking care that they should all restore him, that there should be perfect unity between himself and them. He goes with them, and associates them with himself, in it all; and so, in both excommunication and restoration, he has them with him. If the conscience of the body is not brought up to what it acts, to the point of purging itself by the act of excommunication, I do not see what good is done:it is merely making hypocrites of them.

The house is to be kept clean. The Father’s care over the family is one thing; the Son’s over "his own house," another. The Son commits the disciples to the care of the Holy Father (John 17:), this is distinct from having the house in order. In John 15:he says, "I am the true vine," "ye are the branches," "my Father is the husbandman," etc., it is all the Father’s care. The Father purges the branches, to the end they may bear as much fruit as possible. But in the case of the Son over His own house, it is not individual, but the house kept clean. "If we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged," etc.

There are then these three kinds of discipline:- 1st.That of brotherly relationship. Here I go as a person wronged, but it must be with grace.

2nd. That of fatherly care-the Father exercising it with loving-kindness and tenderness, as over an erring child.

3rd. Where the Son is over His own house, and where we have to act in the responsibility of keeping the house clean, that people should have their consciences according to the house in which they are- not only the individual, but the house, the body:the conscience of the body must act. The effect may be, graciously, that the individual is restored, but that is a collateral thing. When you come, to that point, there is something besides restoring; there is the responsibility of keeping the house clean-the conscience of all there; and that may sometimes give a great deal of trouble.

As to the nature of all this, the spirit in which it should be conducted, it is priestly; and the priests ate the sin-offering within the holy place (Lev. 10:). I do not think any person or body of Christians can exercise discipline, unless as having the conscience clear, as having felt the power of the evil and sin before God, as if he had himself committed it. Then he does it as needful to purge himself. It will all be for positive mischief-the dealing with it, if not so. What character of position does Jesus hold now? That of priestly service. And we are associated with Him. If there were more of the priestly intercession implied by eating of the sin-offering within the holy place, there would be no such abomination as that of the Church assuming a judicial character. Suppose the case of a family, in which a brother had committed something disgraceful, would it not be for bitterness and anguish of the whole family? What common anxiety and pain of heart it would occasion! Does Christ not feed upon the sin-offering? does He not feel the sorrow? does He not charge Himself with it? He is the Head of His body, the Church:is He not wounded and pained in a member? Yes it is so. If it be a case of individual remonstrance with a brother for a fault, I am not fit to rebuke him, unless my soul has been in priestly exercise and service about it, as though I had been in the sin myself. How does Christ act? He bears it on His heart and pleads about it to draw out the grace that will remedy it. So with the child of God:he carries the sin upon his own heart into the presence of God; he pleads with the Father, as a priest, that the dishonor done to Christ’s body, of which he is a member, may be remedied. This I believe to be the spirit in which discipline should be exercised. But here we fail. We have not grace to eat the sin-offering. I come to church-action and there I find yet more:it should go and humble itself until it has cleared itself. This is the force to me of "ye have not mourned," etc.; there was not sufficient spirituality at Corinth to take and bear the sin at all; "You ought to have been bowed down there, brokenhearted, and broken in spirit at such a thing not being put out-concerned as to the cleanness of Christ’s house."
It is another part of priestly service to separate between clean and unclean. The priests were not to drink wine nor strong drink, that they might keep themselves in a spiritual state by the habits of the sanctuary, being able to discern between clean, etc. This is always true. We must take as our object, in dealing with evil, God’s object. God’s house is the scene and place of God’s order. If it be said, that the woman must "have power [a covering] on her head because of the angels" (i Cor. 11:10), it is as the exhibition of God’s order. Nothing should be permitted in the house that angels could not come in and approve. All is in thorough ruin; the full glory of the house will be manifested when Christ comes in glory, and not till then; but we should desire that, as far as possible, by the energy of the Holy Ghost, there should be correspondence in spirit and manner with what shall be hereafter. When Israel returned from the captivity, after Lo-ammi had been written upon them, and the glory had departed from the house, the public manifestation was gone, but Nehemiah and Ezra could find that in which to act according to God’s mind. That is our present condition. But we have now what they had not:we were always a remnant, we began at the end -"Where two or three are gathered together in My Name, there am I in the midst of them "(Matt. 18:20). If the whole corporate system has come to nought, I get back to certain unchangeable blessed principles from which all is derived. The very thing from which all springs, to which Christ has attached, not only His name, but His discipline-the power of binding and loosing-is the gathering together of the "two or three." This is of the greatest possible comfort. The great principle remains true amidst all the failure.

If we turn to John 20:we find that when He sent forth His disciples, He breathed on them and said, "Receive ye the Holy Ghost:whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained." There is nothing like a corporate church system here; but the energy of the Holy Ghost in spiritual discernment in the disciples, as sent from Christ, and acting on behalf of Christ. Discipline is a question of the energy of the Spirit. If that which is done is not done in the power of the Holy Ghost, it is nothing.

In principle, what was needed has been said. I do not see any difference, whether it be in the hands of a remnant, or anything else; because then we get into the structure of a judicial process at once-sinners judging sinners. It is, first of all, a question what the energy of the Spirit is for ministry in God’s house. The unanimity is a unanimity of having consciences exercised and forced into discipline. It is a terrible thing to hear sinners talking about judging another sinner; but a blessed thing to see them exercised in conscience about sin come in among themselves. It must be in grace. I no more dare act, save in grace, than I could wish judgment to myself. "Judge not, that ye be not judged:for with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again" (Matt. 7:1, 2). If we go to exercise judgment, we shall get it.

As to the difficulty of saints meeting together, where there is not pastorship, my prayer is that God would raise up pastors; but I believe where there were brethren meeting together, and walking together on brotherly principles, provided they kept to their real position and did not set about making churches, they would be just as happy as others in different circumstances. One thing I would pray for, because I love the Lord’s sheep, is that there might be shepherds. I know nothing, next to personal communion with the Lord, so ‘blessed as the pastor feeding the Lord’s sheep, the Lord’s flock; but it is the Lord’s flock. I see nothing about a pastor and his flock; that changes the whole aspect of things. When it is felt to be the Lord’s flock a man has to look over, what thoughts of responsibility, what care, what zeal, what watchfulness! I do not see anything so lovely. " Lovest thou Me? . . . feed My sheep-feed My lambs." I know nothing like it upon earth-the care of a true-hearted pastor, one who can bear the whole burden of grief and care of any soul and deal with God about it. I believe it is the happiest, most blessed relationship that can subsist in this world. But we are not to suppose that the "great Shepherd" cannot take care of His own sheep because there are no under-shepherds. If there were those who met together and hung on the Lord, if they did not pretend to be what they were not, though there were no pastors among them, there would be no danger; they would infallibly have the care of that Shepherd. We must not impute our failure to God, as though He could not take care of us. The moment power in the Spirit is gone, power in the flesh comes in. J. N. D.

3.THE RESURRECTION OF THE SAINTS AND THE GREAT TRIBULATION.

It is evident from what we have been considering that the writers from whom we have been quoting are involved in the same great error. Overlooking the meaning of the time-gap in which we are, and ignoring or belittling the mysteries which give Christianity its distinctive character, we can be said to be in the "last days " of Jewish prophets, and "partakers of the promise given through Abraham to the sons of Israel." There is but one passage that I know which may seem to assert the first, and that is the quotation of Joel by Peter on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:17). But that is quoted to the Jews to whom through Christ’s intercession the mercy of God was yet giving time for repentance (Luke 13:8, 9), so that if even yet they repented nationally, the times of refreshing would come from the presence of the Lord, and He would send Jesus Christ again to them (Acts 3:19-21). This was soon ended by the rejection of the message.

That "in the end of these days " (of the prophets, ‘Heb. 1:2, Gk.) "God hath spoken to us by His Son" says nothing of our place in them, and no more than Heb. 9:26, which asserts what in reality is very different. The sanctuary could not have been opened for us if the ages of probation had not been actually ended for us; nor could the history of Israel have disclosed its types, if for us the "ends of the ages" had not "arrived."

Yet the "end of the age" has in the prophetic sense not yet arrived (Matt. 13:39; 28:20):so that we cannot be in it; and the age to come has still a probationary character for men at large. For us the cross of Christ has already manifested the character both of the flesh and the world, and we need nothing else to manifest it. But how important for us to realize the gap in prophetic time in which we stand.

We are now to go in company with some other writers who have given us their refutation-to themselves such-of the views for which we are contending here. If they come to us in fragmentary, and perhaps disorderly fashion, the responsibility is not our own. It is due very much to the lack of seriousness with which the subject seems to be taken up. As Mr. Cameron affirms, "None of the learned students of prophecy in Germany seem to think the modern vagary of a secret rapture of the Church before the end time is reached is worthy of serious consideration." We can but lament the influence which the attitude of these learned Germans seems to have exerted over others in this matter, even when they can afford some brief moments to it. Their language is too often tinged with a scorn which might be spared without injury to their arguments, and which can only impress favorably those for whom the larger part of the argument is the man who uses it. Their method seems to be to gather up a sheaf of statements in denial of what they are dealing with, point them with scripture references, and launch them at the unwelcome doctrine; leaving the point and propriety of the application often to be determined or taken for granted as suits best the temper of the reader. We shall have occasion to point this out as we proceed; but it certainly makes less easy the examination of arguments which have often to be first discovered, and perhaps unsuccessfully.
A tract is lying before me of twenty-one small pages, fourteen being taken up with an enumeration of the texts which have the words to show what the Scriptures say as to the question, "Can the Parousia (Coming in Person) of the Lord be separated from His Epiphaneia (Shining upon); or from His Apokalupsis (Revelation)?" The writer (Mr. Robert Brown) cautions us at the outset, "that positive and absolute statements of the Divine Word must of necessity be received before, and must therefore override, all inferences from other passages which seem to contradict them; as such inferences are, of course, merely human."

He concludes with some inferences of his own, which are, of course, as open to question as those of any other, and which we shall take up as such, but in the order which may be most convenient for us, and putting along with them the statements of other writers, as far as they may serve to give completeness to the subject before us.

But in the first place the question in the title of his tract is misleading, and as a consequence the classification of some of his texts likewise. For no one, as far as I am aware, would contend that the coming of the Lord could be separated from His manifestation or revelation. What is contended for is that the coming of the Lord into the air, as announced in i Thess. 4:, takes place previous to, and in fact some time previous to, His coming on to the earth with the saints He has gathered to Himself before. Both would be His coming; and therefore the merely quoting texts with the word "coming" in them would settle nothing.

But the passage itself declares that those who sleep in Jesus God will bring with Him; when He appears, therefore, they shall appear with Him. That the Thessalonians needed to know, that the dead had not lost their place with Him in that day. How then would this be accomplished? The dead would first be raised and the living then changed and caught up with them. And so they should be ever with the Lord.

It was in fact a new revelation, and so the apostle announces it as what he said "by the word of the Lord." The twenty-fifth of Matthew had shown that the living saints would go forth and meet Him, but had said nothing about the dead at that time. The apostle adds as to the dead. Dr. West indeed declares with his usual strong assertion, that "the word of the Lord" here is nothing but the Lord’s "Olivet discourse" (Matt. 24:; 25:). "It corrected the Thessalonian error as to the ‘any-moment view.’ Paul appeals to it to decide the question. He calls it the ‘word of the Lord.’ He had it on his table when he wrote both letters to the Thessalonians (!) He uses its very language. The seventieth week covers his own words in 2 Thess. 2:i-8."* *Daniel’s Great Prophecy, p. 130.* But that settles nothing as to what is here. Where is the declaration in the Lord’s prophecy as to the resurrection of the sleeping saints? One can only suppose that the gathering together of the elect from the four winds is taken to mean this; but the proof of it must be found, if found at all, elsewhere.
Moreover the apostle does not speak as if he were citing. In i Cor. 7:10, where he does cite, he says, "not I speak, but the Lord." Here it is the phrase used for a special revelation (See i Kings 13:2, 32; 2 Chron. 30:12; LXX.):"I say to you," but "by the word" or "a word of the Lord," (for there is no article,)-that is, by a revelation.

Our assurance of this will be still more confirmed if we consider that Paul it is to whom especially belongs the revelation of the "mysteries" (Eph. 3:3-9), among which is that of the Church as the body and bride of Christ (Eph. 5:32). Could there be a thing which required less (as we would suppose) a special revelation to make it known to him, than the institution of the Supper of the Lord? It is narrated by three of the evangelists, and as the common feast of Christians was known to every one; and yet, as showing forth in the participation of it the unity of the Body of Christ (i Cor. 10:17), and thus coming into the special sphere of his commission, it has to be the subject of a special revelation to him (i Cor. 11:23). It is therefore in perfect accordance with this that the taking home of the Bride (Eph. 5:27) should be in like manner the subject of a special communication. Thus everything unites to refute Dr. West’s assertion.

He has more, however, upon the subject of the resurrection of the saints which we must look at as nearly concerning us here. "Its time-point," he says, "is given with the utmost precision in the Scriptures. It is the time-point of the Second Advent for the salvation of the righteous and the destruction of the wicked, even as at the one time-point Noah and his family entered the ark, and the ungodly perished in the flood; and Israel was redeemed when Egypt was whelmed in the sea; and the Church fled to Pella when Jerusalem was destroyed. It is a time-point for both judgment and salvation. Asaph calls it the "shining of the Lord (Ps. 1. 1-6). Isaiah calls it His ‘appearing’ (66:5) in order to raise the holy dead, deliver Israel, destroy the Antichrist, and bring to victory the Kingdom. Five times in the Old Testament this illustrious Parousia of Christ is described, (1) as the coming of the Son of man in the clouds of heaven (Dan. 7:13); (2) of the Conqueror from Bozrah descending over Edom (Isa. 63:1-6); (3) of the coming of the Lord to Olivet (Zech. 14:5); (4) and to Zion (Isa. 59:20); and (5) in clouds both for Judgment and Salvation (Ps. 1:1-6; 96:13; 97:2-8; 98:1-9; 110:1-7; 72:2, 4, 9-14, 18, 19; 113:2-17)."* *Daniel’s Great Prophecy, pp. 197, 198.*

That is not the whole, but we pause here for the present. It is a good specimen of the style of argument on the part of one of the liveliest opponents to what he calls the "Any Moment Theory." One naturally supposes that all these references are to establish the time-point of the resurrection of the saints. That is what he is speaking of; but by a turn which, if we are not to call "dexterous," we must ascribe to his perplexingly involved style, a number of texts which merely speak of judgment and salvation at the appearing of Christ, come to look as if they were proof-texts of what he is seeking to establish;-even the Church’s flight to Pella when Jerusalem was destroyed! Let us examine, however, as far as necessary, what he has set before us.

And first as to Noah and the flood, we may frankly admit the application to the coming of the Lord which He Himself makes (Matt. 24:37-41). "The one shall be taken and the other left." But we must handle such things more carefully than Dr. West:"taken" how and for what? Those whom resurrection takes out from among the dead are saints and taken for glory. At the rapture of the living saints, it is the same. In Noah’s time, " the flood came and took them all away;" those taken are the judged and not the saved.

When the Son of man comes in the clouds of heaven, there will be a real correspondence with this. When the purification of the earth is in question, as it will be then, "the Son of man shall send forth His angels, and they shall gather out of His Kingdom all things that offend." But that is neither dead nor living saints. The application here, therefore, fails entirely.

But Dr. West has forgotten Enoch; though, as a living saint removed to heaven before the judgment of the earth, he occupies a sufficiently striking position to attract attention. One who actually prophesied, Jude tells us, of the coming of the Lord, and seems to fill the gap that would otherwise be left in what is really a very striking picture of the times that are at hand. But the application fails Dr. West. If Enoch had been taken away at the time when those shut up in the ark were nearing deliverance, how readily would he have seen and seized so fair an argument.

But Israel was redeemed when Egypt was whelmed in the sea! True; but I see nothing that points in that either to the Coming, the Resurrection, or the Rapture:everything seems to be lacking here that would give even the semblance of proof of what it is cited for. That Israel will be actually delivered from her enemies again when the Lord appears is true, and her former history may typify her latter:but that shows nothing as to the Church or the risen saints.

As to the Church’s flight to Pella, we need not waste time in imagining arguments from it, for those who have not ventured upon the task of pointing them out to us.

And what does God shining forth out of Zion (Ps. 1.) prove as to the time-point of the resurrection of the saints? Is it possible that ver. 5 can be the proof? It is clearly Israel that is gathered, for the psalmist says so; and nothing about resurrection at all.

In Isa. 66:5, the Lord appears to deliver Israel; but there is not even a hint of resurrection or rapture in it. In Dan. 7:, the "saints of the high places," as "saints of the Most High "should rather be, if applied to heavenly saints, as I shall not at all deny when judgment is said to be given to them (vers. 18, 22), infers, of course, that they must be risen to reign as such. But nothing is said as to the time of their resurrection further than this. In Isa. 63:, there is nothing at all of resurrection or of rapture. In Zech. 11:5, as Dr. West would even himself contend, the "saints," or "holy ones" coming with the Lord are probably only the angels, and thus every trace of resurrection or rapture is removed; and there is none in any of the texts that follow.

There is perhaps no need of question that upon none of these texts cited would Dr. West ground a very serious argument for the precision with which the time of the resurrection is fixed in the Old Testament. His real texts have been given before, and we must now go back to see what they have to say as to the matter in hand. He says:-
"Decisive and clear are the words of the angel, ‘At that time,’ when Israel is delivered,-‘many shall awake (literally, be separated) out from among the sleepers in the earth-dust; these (who awake at that time) shall be unto everlasting life, but those (who do not awake at that time) shall be unto shame and everlasting contempt’ (Dan. 12:2). … It is the resurrection of the holy, and of Israel’s holy dead that here is predicted, as in Isa. 26:19, and the non-resurrection of the wicked ‘at that time (Is. 26:14)."

The translation here given of Daniel is an old Jewish one, not by any means commonly accepted, and yet certainly possible. The application to literal resurrection is in both cases questioned by many, though in Daniel less than in Isaiah; but it would be an unnecessary labor for our present purpose to examine this. The connection in Isa. 26:(which is not history nor historical prophecy, but a song to be sung at a future day,) is not of a nature to give any but the most general idea of the time of the resurrection, and certainly not of the relation of this to the "time of Jacob’s trouble." In Daniel, at first sight, it seems otherwise, and that, if it be a literal resurrection that is here, this must be after the tribulation. Yet Auberlen remarks as to this:"To show the causal connection between the behavior of the individuals during the time of probation and their eternal state-this is the sole purpose for which the resurrection is introduced; as to the chronological relation between the time of distress and the resurrection, not the slightest intimation is given. It is worthy of remark in relation to this point, that the phrase ‘at that time,’ occurs twice in 12:i, while no time is fixed in verses 2 and 3."* *Daniel and the Revelation:translated by A Saphir, p. 174.* This, of itself, seems a sufficient answer; but we shall see, as we go on that we might admit all that is claimed with regard to the order of time without in the least involving what Dr. West supposes.

But let us go on to the New Testament:as to this the same writer says:-

"Ten times this time-point is fixed at the close of the Great Tribulation, and is described (1) as the Lord’s coming with His saints, the Holy Angels, for His saints, the holy living and the holy dead – a ‘ gathering of His elect’ universally, involving first of all, the resurrection of the holy who sleep in the dust of the earth, then the rapture of these and the holy living ones, and their meeting of the Lord in the air (Matt. 24:29-31, 40, 41; 25:i); these scenes followed by the deliverance of converted Israel, – ‘these My brethren,’ (Matt. 25:40); the judgment of the nations (31-46), and the welcome to the Kingdom; (2) as a time-point for "our gathering together at Christ’ (2 Thess. 2:i), ‘in the air’ (i Thess. 4:17); (3) as the thief-time (Matt. 24:43); (4) as the coming to judge the World Power (Rev. 6:12-17); (5) as His coming under the seventh Trumpet, to vindicate the holy dead by their resurrection (Rev. 11:15-18); (6) as His coming to reap the holy living (Rev. 14:14-16); (7) and at the thief-time (Rev. 16:15); (8) and after the sixth vial (Rev. 16:12); (g)and to destroy Babylon (Rev. 16:19); (10) and the Antichrist (Rev. 19:11-21; (11) and to enthrone and reward His saints (Rev. 20:1-6) …. From Moses to Malachi, and from Matthew to the Apocalypse by John, the resurrection of the sleeping saints is placed at no other epoch than at the close of the ‘ Tribulation Great,’ and of the ‘ Warfare Great.’ "

Again we have a number of passages grouped together, with merely a few words of application to mark his point; otherwise supposed to speak plainly for the view for which he contends:for he uses no argument, takes no pains to remove misconceptions, or meet objections; those who examine them must do the whole work both for him and for themselves. We shall attempt it nevertheless, with the more courage, that it is, at least, an enumeration of all the points that he can make, with great apparent precision. Let us attempt the examination.

(1) The first passages are evidently interpreted for us, and the interpretation becomes part of the proof. The "gathering of His Elect "is made to involve the resurrection of the dead and the rapture of the living. Yet we may question whether it does either, or rather applies to the gathering of the elect nation, Israel, from their long dispersion. In all the first part of the Lord’s prophecy here to 24:42, Israel is manifestly in the foreground, as all other details show:in the very next verse to the one in question, the parable of the fig-tree for instance. As for the "deliverance of converted Israel" following these scenes, he can only appeal, to the words, " these My brethren," which certainly does not show where the deliverance comes in. There need not be the slightest question that the appearing of the Lord itself marks the deliverance of the Jews at Jerusalem (as Zech. 14:3-5); which makes. it natural to speak of the gathering of those scattered afar off. The place of Christians with reference to the coming is shown in the parables (comp. Matt. 13:34, 35); but if the appeal to 25:i is meant to make the " then " with which it commences prove that the rapture of the saints takes place at the time of the appearing, it will not bear the weight of such an argument. The parables are connected by their ends and not by their beginnings. For after this first going forth of the virgins, there is the tarrying of the Bridegroom, the falling asleep, the midnight cry, the rousing and going forth again,-all following the "then." Will it be contended that this all takes place at the time of the appearing, instead of giving us a history of centuries? Let Dr. West defend this, if he can. But indeed he has merely indicated a text and left it. The rest here is not in dispute.

(2) The next two references, from the two epistles to the Thessalonians, need nothing to be said, as we have no controversy with the Scriptures, and the argument is not produced. The first epistle we have looked at already.

(3) The third head takes us back to Matt. 24:43, and has nothing to do with either the resurrection or the rapture.

(4) The fourth brings us to Revelation; passing over the. decisive passages in the third, four and fifth chapters, as if they had no existence, and bringing us to the " Coming to judge the World-power " (chap. 6:12-17), to a passage which does not speak of it, but of the alarm in men’s minds as thinking of the Lamb’s day of wrath as having come.

(5) The fifth again gives us Dr. West’s interpretation "to vindicate the holy dead by the resurrection." The last words are his own, and a comparison with chap. 6:10 may well raise question of them. Yet did this refer in fact to the resurrection of the martyrs (chap. 20:4), there would not be the least perplexity growing out of this.

(6) As to chap. 14:14-16 again, it is the interpretation that is taken for the proof, as so often. There are harvests of various character and various times; and there is nothing to show that this is in the tare-field of Christendom. We shall have to look at the parable another time.

(7) The coming as a thief is to the world (i Thess. 5:2-4), and has in it no hint of the resurrection or the rapture; and (8) the eighth head is as little to the purpose here. Similarly the 9th and the 10th.

(11) One text only remains, and we shall consider it with Mr. Brown, Dr. West giving us no matter of contention really as to it. Our account with him is closed; although there may be something to add a little later:but as things stand we may certainly say that the strength of his argument is in no wise proportionate to the vigor of his language or the number of his texts.

Mr. Brown also contends that his texts prove that the saints are not to be raised before the great tribulation:-

"For they show that the saints are to be raised at Christ’s Parousia; and that this Parousia will not take place until Antichrist has come to the end of his career; for they tell us that he is to be destroyed ‘with the Epiphaneia’ of this ‘Parousia’ (2 Thess. 2:8), and that the saints only then ‘rest,’ when Christ Himself is thus revealed, 1:e. at His Apokalupsis (2 Thess. 1:7); when only they assume His likeness and are manifested with Him in glory (Col. 3:4; i John 3:1-3; i Thess. 4:17)."

We have the same peculiar manner of reference to texts that are not examined, as we have had before, the same putting in of words which are not in the texts, the same avoidance of opposing arguments and objections. One would think that our brethren had made a point of not reading the writings of those they are replying to. Think of people having need to refer us i Thess. 4:, which we have been constantly quoting in behalf of the views in question, to show us that the saints are to be raised at Christ’s Parousia! and then our needing to be shown that the manifestation of this Parousia destroys the wicked one. Why, we have been saying so all along; though perhaps without using the Greek word. What Mr. Brown needed to show us is that it is at the manifestation of the Parousia that the saints are raised.

Then he says that they "only then" rest when Christ is revealed; but it is Mr Brown who has put in the "only." The apostle tells the Thessalonians that they will have rest recompensed to them when their persecutors are troubled, putting these things together for the sake of the contrast; and it will be just as true when the Lord Jesus being revealed brings out the contrast, though the entrance into rest might be some time before. The next chapter shows that they were in danger of being led into the belief that their sufferings were a proof that the day of the Lord had come. Why, says the apostle, in the day of the Lord the opposite will be true:your enemies will be suffering, and you will be at rest.

But, says Mr. Brown, "only " at Christ’s revelation will they assume His likeness and be manifested with Him in glory! The passage in the first epistle of John does not say when we shall assume His likeness, but that when He appears we shall be in it:for to "see Him as He is" necessitates that. There is again no "only," which is a misleading addition to the text. The resurrection chapter (i Cor. 15:) shows that the dead in Christ are "raised in glory," and i Thess. 4:that the meeting with the Lord is "in the air." When we see Him, then, we shall be already in His likeness, and when He is manifested, we shall be manifested with Him. How can the last be made to eke out the proof that we must wait for that manifestation to be changed into His likeness?

"Moreover," continues Mr. Brown, "it is expressly stated elsewhere (Matt. 24:29-31) that the Parousia is not to take place till after, although it be ‘immediately after,’ that’ tribulation,’ while it is likewise stated that the martyrs under Antichrist (1:e. in the great tribulation) are to be partakers of the ‘first resurrection’ (Rev. 7:13-17; 20:4-6); and that this resurrection is to take place at Christ’s Parousia (i Cor. 15:23)! Now, as there are only two resurrections, (i Cor. 15:23, 24; John 5:25, 29; Acts 24:15; Rev. 20:4, 5), it is manifest that the saints are not to be raised before the ‘great tribulation"-a truth which is further confirmed by Dan. 7:21, 22, 25, which tell us that Antichrist made war with the saints and prevailed against them, until the Ancient of Days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the Kingdom."

We have looked at Matt. 24:sufficiently already, and have seen the mistake committed in supposing that the mere occurrence of the word "Parousia" proves anything in the matter. The question as to the martyrs in the tribulation having part in the first resurrection is one of more concern, and the consideration of it may give additional help as to some points which have been already before us.

In the revival of pre-millennial doctrine from its long slumber of centuries, the vision of the first resurrection given to John caused it to be thought that the saints that were to reign with Christ a thousand years were only the martyrs. It was not perceived, as it naturally had not been by the advocates of a "spiritual" resurrection, their predecessors, that there were here, in fact, two companies:first, thrones, upon which persons were sitting, to whom judgment was given; and then a company of martyrs, who alone were seen actually rising from the dead and joining the number of those already reigning.

Moreover these of the second company were not and could not be, all the martyrs that ever were, but specifically those that were slain for the witness of Jesus and for the word of God, and such as had not worshiped the beast, nor his image, and had not received his mark upon their foreheads nor on their hands, and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. The context shows, moreover, that, since all together make up the first resurrection, all the dead saints that ever were beside must be included in the first company of those already reigning when this company of martyrs are added to them.

Why, then, this strange division, as it might seem, between these two companies? There can be but one answer:it is a chronological division. These martyrs are people who died after the others (the great mass of saints) had been raised or changed and taken to heaven; and must have lived in a brief time at the end only, else no reason could be given for such a company being all martyrs, or at least, to speak within bounds, characteristically composed of them.

But this is again a very striking argument for the view for which I am contending:-the resurrection and rapture of the mass of dead and living saints having taking place before, yet not long before, the time contemplated in the vision. It confirms the truth of their being already in heaven in the fourth and fifth chapters, and agrees with what we find of the Gentile multitude of the seventh, that they had all come out of "the great tribulation." Thus the vision of the first resurrection in the twentieth chapter, instead of being against the view he is controverting, is in fact a remarkable witness for it. It shows the second company to have come into the first resurrection in an exceptional manner, and accounts for the strong way in which it is announced that all together these are the saints of the first resurrection. God’s grace has overruled man’s sin and violence to bring into it those who might naturally seem shut out.

The argument about two resurrections only, therefore, which Mr. Brown is not alone in advancing, fails entirely here. It is the very passage from which alone he really gets it, which itself makes and accounts for the exception as to it:it still remaining true that in character there are but two resurrections, the resurrection of life, and the resurrection of judgment, as in John 5:

Taking this now with us back to Dan. 12:2, let us notice how the addition to the first resurrection of this supplementary company (largely Jews also, as they necessarily would be) would set aside the difficulty that is made by Dr. West as to the first resurrection coming after the tribulation. It would even help to account for the terms used which express a partial rather than a complete number:"many," but still only a fragment of a larger number.

As for Dan. 7:21, 22 being in opposition to the view we are contending for, as Mr. Brown supposes, it is merely what all prophecy shows, that Israel’s distress goes on until the Lord’s coining ends it. F. W. G.

(To be continued.)

Prayer is speaking to God, and prophecy is I speaking from God; so that we need not be surprised to find them associated together in Scripture (i Cor. 11:4, 5; Acts 13:i, 2; i Cor. 14:i, 15). There are in the Church of God various gifts for the edification of the body, but there is no such thing as a "gift of prayer." Fluency, comprehensiveness, eloquence-are not essentials, nay they are often hindrances to true prayer. Every Christian must pray, and we might add, every Christian man in communion with God should be ready, if led of God, to pray in public. We long to see God’s beloved people delivered from the last vestige of clerisy. There is no such thing contemplated in God’s word as one man or a few men being the only ones used in prayer. As we have just said, prayer is no gift of words, belonging to some few, specially endowed. The babe can lisp its prayer, as the father can pour out the full longings of his heart; but all can pray. Is the soul in communion with God? Are we seeking to please Him? Then what possible hindrance can there be to prayer? Ah brethren, let us own the pride and worldliness which close our mouths and limit our faith. Let us search our ways and ask if we engage much in secret prayer. He who is familiar with God in his closet, will find it no difficulty to speak to Him in public.

Closely connected with this question is another:do we speak for God, individually? Are we finding the way open to speak to one and another of the great questions that must be answered? and can we without hesitation confer with our fellow Christians about the things of God? If we are in abiding communion with God this will be the case. We will not have to plead that we have "so few opportunities," or are "naturally diffident." When the Spirit of God is unhindered, He uses the weak things. Saints have no difficulty in speaking of the affairs of every day life:why this hesitation in speaking of the things of God? Is it not Satan robbing us?

Coming now to the corporate life of God’s people, we find simply an enlargement of scope, not a change of principles. Prayer and prophecy are closely associated and interdependent. Wherever there is a spirit of prayer there will be the spirit of prophecy, and the reverse. Both are having to do with God, and imply that reality which is always the mark of one in His presence.

By prophecy it will be understood that we are not referring to any supernatural manifestations, whether in prediction, designation of special persons for special work, or new revelation. We solemnly believe that all claims to such prophetic gift are antichristian and blasphemous. The systems which at this day lay claim to such gifts are ungodly to the core. God’s written word is ample and all sufficient, and in it we are told that revelation is complete (Col. 1:25).

But there is another sense in which the term prophecy is used in Scripture. " He that prophesieth speaketh unto men for edification, and exhortation, and comfort" (i Cor. 14:2). There is no question here of something supernatural. The man speaks for God, conveys His mind to the hearers. It is the word spoken in due season-suited to the need of the Lord’s people, comforting the weak, exhorting the faint, and edifying all. It differs from teaching in that its chief object is not to impart instruction, but to move to action, or to secure a definite result.

Now it is one of the primary principles of gatherings or meetings that no man should or can preside. That is the place of the Holy Spirit alone, "dividing to every man severally as He will."* *It will be understood that reference is here made solely to meetings of the assembly. An evangelist may hold a meeting, or a teacher, which is entirely upon his own responsibility as a servant of the Lord. In this no one dare interfere. But when the assembly as such meets, the evangelist or teacher is simply one of many. He cannot assume a place here-to do so would be to usurp the place of the Holy Spirit. There is a constant tendency to forget or ignore this, with the inevitable result of clerisy-clergy and laity-the one or the few taking all ministry, and the rest quite willing to have it so. Need we be surprised where this is done, to see leaders set one against another, with the saints taking sides, forming parties, sects, and divisions in the Church of God? This, we are persuaded, is the cause of divisions assigned in Scripture (1 Cor. 1:), and illustrated on many a page of church-history.* Here all are alike brethren, ready for the Spirit of God to use according to His sovereign wisdom. We need hardly say that the distinguishing meeting of all others to which this applies is that for the breaking of bread. Saints come together .for this purpose, are gathered to our Lord’s Name, and He according to His promise is in the midst. " He makes His presence known by the Holy Spirit. At this meeting no one should think of assuming charge, but all should be ready as channels of worship and of prophecy. Worship is prominent here.

But there are other meetings of the saints beside that for the breaking of bread, and it is of these chiefly that we would speak. Though most scriptural there is no injunction as to a prayer meeting. The general exhortation is, "not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is, but exhorting one another" (Heb. 10:25). We assemble together, for whatever the Spirit of God may have to give us, and for prayer.

It has sometimes been asked what is the special meeting which is alluded to in i Cor. 14:Our reply would be first, that every meeting of the assembly is covered by that chapter, but that we would naturally expect the "prophecy" spoken of there to have special prominence at other times than the breaking of bread. We deprecate the use of the term "open meeting" to characterize any special gathering of the saints. Every assembly meeting is open, that is, no man presides.

But the fact remains that freedom in prophecy is, or should be, a special feature in our meetings. We will be pardoned for speaking plainly, so as to be clearly understood. Of the first meeting, that for breaking bread on the first day of the week, we have already spoken. There is usually what is called a Bible Reading, or Reading Meeting. While open for all to take part freely, being more or less of an informal character, the main object is the study of the Word, and naturally those gifted as teachers would come prominently forward. But this would not preclude any from giving a word for the conscience or heart as the reading proceeded. Besides, there is freedom for prayer and praise at such meetings. We have not yet reached however that which is characteristically the meeting where prophecy would be expected to have the prominent place.
Most assemblies of God’s people have what is usually called a Prayer-meeting, at which, as its name suggests, it is expected that prayer will be prominent. At this meeting, of course, no one presides-all being free to take part as led of the Spirit. We believe that the spiritual state of an assembly can be gauged by the character and attendance at this meeting. Is there a free and earnest spirit of prayer? do all take part, not formally, but really? If so, we would expect to find an assembly walking with God, awake to its privileges and responsibilities. Let us, beloved brethren, search ourselves as to the prayer-meeting. Is it a weariness? a cold duty unwillingly performed, or neglected? Ah! have we nothing to speak of to God, no word of thanks, no requests for ourselves and others, no intercessions for the Lord’s work? We need not be surprised, if such is the case, to find all our meetings heavy, and the Lord’s work languishing.

But we must look a little further. It is our purpose to show that prayer and prophecy are closely linked together in Scripture, and as a result that a meeting for one would necessarily include the other. Let us look at a passage strikingly illustrative of this. In 2 Chron. 20:, in the face of a great danger, king Jehoshaphat and his people assembled in what might very properly be called a prayer-meeting. They gather together before God, pleading His promises, confessing their weakness and ignorance and casting themselves upon God. How beautiful is their attitude – "we have no might against this great company that cometh against us; neither know we what to do, but our eyes are upon thee " (ver. 12).

They do not have to wait long for an answer. "Then upon Jehaziel . . . came the Spirit of the Lord in the midst of the congregation. . . . ‘ Be not afraid nor dismayed by reason of this great multitude; for the battle is not yours but God’s’" (vers. 15, 16). How speedy and suited was the answer-a word in season, truly. What we wish particularly to notice, is that it is a word of prophecy in immediate connection with prayer. They had been speaking to God, and He speaks to them. Notice, too, the uplifting effect of this word:they worship God, "with a loud voice on high" (vers. 18, 19);-before the enemy has been met or overcome, they celebrate the victory.

But if prayer and prophecy are thus connected at a special meeting, why should it not be so always? "Pray without ceasing" and "despise not prophesyings" come very closely together (i Thess. 5:17-20). In fact they belong to one and the same closely connected paragraph. Do we believe in prayer? Do we believe in prophesying? Why then should there not be the freest exercise of both at the meeting which is characteristically the one where both would be expected to be prominent?

Need we go into any detail? "Ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn and all may be comforted" (i Cor. 14:31). It may be but a few words uttered, but if from the Lord they will come with power. Here no "gift" is required, but simply a soul in communion with God, and so, ready to give His word. Two or three would speak, the rest judging-not criticizing, but weighing and testing the word. As one finished another could utter what was on his heart; and as a result the presence and power of the Lord be manifest, even to an unbeliever who might be present (ver. 23).

Beloved brethren, what an attractive meeting! How the saints would flock to it, what a testimony would issue from it, and what power in individual walk and gospel work would result. Is this the character of our meetings? If not, then let us at once confess it, and turn afresh to our God, crying to Him who delights to hear and to meet His people.

We conclude therefore that the meeting ordinarily called the prayer-meeting is the one where we would expect to find the marks of i Cor. 14:; not, however, as we have seen, to the exclusion of other meetings. Let us become clear as to the teachings of that chapter, and fully alive to the blessedness of the Spirit’s presence, and we will prove the reality of all there promised. It is a matter too sadly common, that there is a dullness in the prayer-meeting-only a few attending and fewer participating. This ought not so to be. Let us see to it that it is not, and blessing, rich and lasting, will be the result.

We might add further that when no one is present who has it specially laid upon him to conduct a public meeting, this would be the natural and, scriptural way for the assembly to come together. The result, if there were real exercise before God, would be both prayer and prophecy under the power of the Holy Spirit. There would then be no need to complain of unprofitable or dull meetings. Saints would be edified and sinners converted, apart from any special gift. May our God stir us up as to these things.

Ques.14.-Has the Church any authority apart from the word of God?

Ans.-The Church has no authority in herself. Her place is that of subjection to her Head and Lord. He makes known His will through the Scriptures by the Spirit Therefore no action on the part of the assembly, contrary to the word of God is of the least authority. But, believing in the presence of the Spirit of God, and seeing from Scripture the responsibility resting upon the assembly to act for God, no one should raise questions save after prayerful deliberation, and in a scriptural manner.

Ques. 15.-If a matter on hand is put into the assembly to be settled there, and all the assembly except two or three decide that so and so is right, but the two or three see clearly from the word of God that the larger number in the assembly are wrong, would it be right for the two or three to give in to the others; or should they hold the truth even if the assembly cut them off?

Ans.-The question has been partially answered above. We would add, that an action nearly unanimous would suggest the Lord’s presence, unless it most clearly contradicted Scripture, therefore great care and patience should be used in expressing dissent. If a vital question is involved, principles affecting the very basis of fellowship, then a firm, definite stand even if but by one, must be taken, whatever the cost. But how much prayer, self-judgment and waiting on God should precede such a step. Then, too, the saints should be appealed to from some neighboring gathering, that if possible the entire weight be not left upon the two or three remaining firm at the local assembly. How much is accomplished by faith and love.

Ques. 16.-Are younger brethren In their place if they are trying to rule in the assembly.

Ans.-"Likewise ye younger, submit yourselves unto the elder" (1 Pet. 5:5). A principle is involved in this of wide reaching effect. Both in the history of Israel and of the Church the evil effects of its neglect have been manifest. But there is an inherent reason for such direction. It presupposes godliness, gravity, wisdom and the proper government of one’s own house, on the part of the elder. Alas, alas, how family failure has come in to render God’s order impracticable, and then self-assertion on the part of the young is only too easy.

But there is another side; "Let no man despise thy youth." And if there be a heart for the Lord, a devotedness to Him and true humility, the young man will surely find a place of service. What can be sadder than a forward restless disrespectful spirit on the part of the younger, unless it be the spiritual in-competency of the older that makes it possible.

Ques. 17. If a brother has been cut off from the assembly (it may be justly or unjustly) but he continues to come to the meetings, and at the worship meeting quietly takes a back seat. When a hymn is given out he joins in heartily and sings praise to God and God’s beloved Son his Saviour and Lord. Has any one a right to request him to be silent, not to sing in the meetings? Some found fault when a box of ointment was broken.

Ans.-We would say a brother if dealt with by an assembly, would feel the solemnity of the judgment, and as bowing under the mighty hand of God, would be quiet and undemonstrative. His demeanor would indicate this. On the other hand, a hard ungracious spirit should be avoided that checks the work of grace in the soul.

(Rom. 16:15.)

In this most wonderful epistle written by the apostle to the saints at Rome, these words are found, " Salute Philologus."The epistle itself, the foundation of all the rest, and of the Christian life itself, is worthy of our most careful study, unfolding as it does the utter ruin of the human race, and the redemption and full salvation of God, based upon the blood of atonement, and brought to light by the gospel.

The closing chapter is devoted to commendations, salutations, and personal touches all beautiful and perfect in their place. " Salute Philologus " is one worthy of note. Nowhere else do we read of this name upon the pages of inspiration. We never read that he was an evangelist as we do of Philip, nor yet of his pastoral labors, or teaching as is recorded of Paul, Timothy, Apollos and others; nor is he even commended for things noticed of certain others in this chapter:‘’ Salute Tryphena and Tryphosa, who labor in the Lord. Salute the beloved Persis, which labored much in the Lord," "Greet Mary, who bestowed much labor on us " etc.

There may have been in his case little or no gift, and perhaps not time nor strength to do much in the way of labor; perhaps little seen or known in public, but of all this Scripture says nothing, but simply those words "Salute Philologus."

One thought looms up before the mind as we meditate upon this part of the inspired word of God. Is the name an index to the subject? Is the name the characteristic of the life of this one so worthy of the apostle’s salutation?

If so then we have found the key to a life sweet and precious to God and worthy of a place in the closing part of this epistle; and to those familiar with the word of God, this line of interpretation will not be new, nor yet out of order. Notice this from Gen. 4:down through the inspired word; Eve naming her sons, Cain and Abel; Noah’s birth (Gen. 5:29), Leah’s four sons (Gen. 29:32-35), in fact the whole family; and again the Spirit’s interpretation of the name of Melchisedek (Heb. vii).Also the frequent change of names, as from Jacob to Israel, Simon to Peter, Saul to Paul, and Joses to Barnabas. These by the way as incidents true and divine in this line and order. But now, to return, if the name gives us a clue to this case, there was abundant reason why the apostle caused it to be placed upon the divine record"Salute Philologus"-a lover of the word for so is his name by interpretation. What a lesson this name has in it for us! the true secret of the Christian life, progress, and usefulness, the secret of true greatness before God. This epistle Paul had sent to Rome, and it was written by inspiration. Did not the apostle desire all the saints meditate upon the wondrous and precious themes therein given? Surely this was the apostle’s desire for the saints in that large city. Hence Philologus would be a pattern in this respect, and the mention of his name might inspire all to the same diligence and love for divine truth, " a lover of the word."

Beloved, let us, one and all, more truly answer to this name. These days are dark, evil is on the increase, lack of confidence is felt everywhere, and neglect of the word of God is felt all over, especially among the young.

May we have a reviving everywhere, and true hearty interest in the study of the word of God. It is written of one, "I have esteemed the words of his mouth more than my necessary food " (Job 23:12). And again still later,"I rejoiced at thy word as one that findeth great spoil." "I love thy commandments above gold, yea, above find gold" (Ps. 119:127, 162).

Again, "Thy words were found, and I did eat them; and thy word was unto me the joy and rejoicing of my heart" (Jer. 15:16). These also were true Philologuses in their day and time, and we do well to draw near, and as the heart warms in communion with the Father and the Son, love for the Word will revive. The range is large, the fields are immense, the mines are rich and full of heavenly ore, and yet many of the people of God are passing over and by, and gather little or nothing. Reading a few verses, or a chapter now and then, good and right in its place, will not give us this Philologus character. But ‘’ As new-born babes desire the sincere milk of the word" (i Pet. 2:2). "If thou criest after knowledge, and lifteth up thy voice for understanding; if thou seekest her as silver, and searchest for her as for hid treasure; then thou shalt understand the fear of the Lord, and find the knowledge of God " (Prov. 2:1-5). Then the Book will not appear dry, and hours spent therein will not grow dreary.

We may be dumb and have no utterance; deaf and hear little oral ministry; yet there lies before us the precious word of God, and if we are never commended, or rewarded for preaching or teaching, will it be said at the end that we have been lovers of the Word?

Philadelphia (Rev. 3:7) is a name akin to Philologus, and one thing is there said to Philadelphia, " Thou hast kept My word." Herein lies the secret of all spiritual power. How refreshing, in a day like this, when Higher Critics are doing their best to weaken and overthrow confidence in the Word, and again Satan in other ways draws away the hearts of men by love of pleasure, love of wealth, love for the world, to find here and there those who love the word of God, those who abide fast by it.

Search it! and love-beyond rubies or find gold- the precious things therein written. Of such we can truly say, The Lord increase their number, and to such we can yet write, "Salute Philologus." A. E. B.

In submitting to our readers the following correspondence upon the subject of baptism a few words of explanation may be in place. In the July number of this magazine a paper was published, entitled, " Has Water Baptism a place in Christianity?" It was with the exception and desire that the discussion there begun would awaken an interest in many minds in the subject. We purposely refrained from taking up any but the primary questions relating to baptism, examining the Scriptures to see whether it had any place in the economy of fully developed Christianity. It may surprise many to learn that there should be any necessity for such inquiry, but such there is. We trust that some who have been tempted to discard water baptism have seen their error, as pointed out from Scripture, and have returned to the "one baptism" which is ever connected with the "one faith."

But it was our desire to see the subject taken further, and we were glad to give place, in the August number, to the paper "Shall I disciple my little children?" This paper treated the question of household baptism, and brought directly before us the fact of our responsibility in regard to our families. As was expected, and desired, exception was taken to much in both papers, but we are grateful at least for the awakening.

Controversy is not our object, but the ascertainment of the truth is. Let us not fear scriptural discussion, even where we may not be of absolutely one mind. Let it be understood that this is no question of fellowship in the Assembly. Thank God, we hold enough in common to enable us to meet together about the Person of our adorable Lord, while not all of the same mind upon this subject. But let not this make us indifferent to the question. In any event we have a responsibility, connected with which we owe loyal and willing obedience. May the Lord grant that we know His way, and walk in it. We have the word of God; we have the Holy Spirit; -why should it be impossible to reach that oneness of mind, which must be His mind?

We now give the correspondence, taking the privilege of making such comments as may seem to be called for. We need hardly add that the effort is made to give the full meaning of the writer, omitting only personal allusions, or what has been alluded to by others.

Dear Brother:-By reading the paper " Has water baptism a place in Christianity," my soul was much blessed. I am thankful for the stand you take as to the truth once delivered to the saints. I have felt much grieved that brethren have forsaken the true ground as to baptism, and, as you say in your paper, even neglected it entirely. We are living in the latter days when men shall depart from the truth. And of your own selves shall men arise speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.

I find that laboring brethren press household baptism so much. Paul preached Christ and Him crucified; that was his first and last theme, and the other followed of itself, namely baptism. Why is there so much lukewarm-ness amongst God’s children? They are more occupied with doctrines of men than Christ. My beloved brother, keep Christ before the people and we will have happy saints and real Christians, such as know that they are born again, that they are dead with Christ and also buried with Him by baptism and raised with Him to walk in newness of life.

Remarks.-The spirit of our brother is evident. He sees and deplores the tendency to carelessness and looseness in the Lord’s things. We have failed, however, to notice what he observes,-the tendency to press household or any form of baptism. On the contrary we fear there has been an unintentional avoidance of the question for fear, perhaps, of seeming controversy. Now we believe that neglect is one of the great dangers. Let it not be called pressing a subject unduly when the Lord’s servants seek to lay before saints the teaching of Scripture and their responsibilities as to it. Let us indeed preach Christ, and live Christ, and surely we will desire to know His will in all things.

Dear Brother:-I had thought several times to write you a word approving your plain scriptural position in regard to baptism, as given fn the July " Help and Food." I never could understand why brethren, who are so scriptural about most things, differed so greatly as to this, to me, plain Scripture teaching. I have been asked the question:"Do you believe baptism essential to salvation?" Now I do not answer such a question categorically. It is not a scriptural question. " Is it a command of the Lord?" Yes, I answer at once. And further it is a command of the risen Lord, giving it place on this side of His death, in this dispensation. And the command is not given to the believer to be baptized, but to the preacher of the gospel to baptize the believer, and it is the preacher who is the disobedient one rather than the believer. But the question is, being a command of the risen Lord, What is the consequence to him who disobeys or ignores it? Knowing now, as we do, that it represents death, His death, and our death with Him, as also our raising up together with Him, its importance, must, at least, be conceded, and the question is:What do we lose, what does the believing sinner lose, because the preacher does not obey His Lord in baptizing him? It is very evident to me why the command was given to the preacher to baptize, and not to the believing sinner to be baptized. We bury dead persons, and dead men cannot obey commands. But I ask again, what, if anything, does the believing sinner lose, through the disobedience of the preacher, teacher, or evangelist who refuses to bury him with His Lord, into the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, as commanded in the great commission? An act done under the solemn command of the risen Lord, could not be a mere formality, but must in some way connect the recipient with the divine blessing. That it shows the utter worthless-ness of the flesh, to be excised, cut off with a circumcision not hand made, and buried away, and a new man and a new life to take its, place in resurrection, is plainly shown in Paul’s teaching, and Peter’s also. But is there no connection between baptism and this result? Is the one attained without the other? Could you and I in teaching brethren, enforce our separation from the world, because of our death to it, as shown in our baptism by the teaching of Scripture, and leave it out? Did not Paul enforce his teaching as to our relation to the world, as being dead to it, as not living in it, and our confession of this in the act of baptism? Rotherham’s literal translation of Col. 2:11-13, makes all this wonderfully forcible. "In whom ye were also circumcised with a circumcision not hand-made, in the stripping off of the body of the flesh, in the circumcision of the Christ, being jointly-buried with him in [your] immersion, in which ye were also jointly-raised through the faith of the inward-working of God who raised Him from the dead; and you, being dead by the offences and the uncircumcision of your flesh, he jointly made you alive together with Him, in favor forgiving us all the offences." Is this all true, and leave out that which signifies it all? Baptism surely stands at the threshold of Christian faith and life, and sets forth our relation to the world, as dead and buried to it, and our new relation to Christ as raised up together with Him, and thus united to Him in resurrection-life by faith. Must not the blessing of God, " the inward-working of God " to bring out that which by Him is typified, attend an act that puts the believer under the protecting power of the triune God, and the only place where that ineffable Name is given in the Holy Scripture? Do we get rid of the flesh, the old man, without burying it? Yours in the love of the truth.

Remarks.-We do not see how anyone fully accepting the doctrines of grace could for a moment hesitate to answer in the most categorical way the question, Is baptism essential to salvation? To confound the two would be Romanism, would degrade the precious death of Christ into equality with a symbol of that death. We would fain believe that our correspondent does not mean this. But he evidently does attach the reception of full identification with the risen Christ to baptism. Is there any thing in Scripture to warrant such a thought? His quotation from Col. 2:12, 13 teaches the exact opposite;-we are raised through faith of the operation (or energy, Gk.) of God who raised Him from the dead. It is faith in the God of resurrection which gives us a share in the blessings of forgiveness, and of all that is connected with the risen Lord. The reception of baptism prior to the gift of the Holy Spirit has been frequently explained. Jews who had up to then rejected Christ, owned in this act Him as Lord, and thereupon received the Spirit. The reverse was true in the case of Cornelius, a Gentile. He received the Holy Spirit and was then baptized. So also in the teaching in the epistles. The reception of the Spirit is connected with faith, not baptism (Eph. 1:13). He would be a bold man to argue from this that faith included baptism which therefore had been administered.

But why should there be any difficulty? Grace is God’s, responsibility is man’s. "Why single out one act of obedience and make all the untold blessings of Christianity depend upon it? One who is disobedient is always a loser, but surely not a loser of what comes with a risen Christ. We would affectionately commend this to our brother, assured that in confounding grace and responsibility he is unconsciously in grave error.

Dear Brother:-While like yourself deploring the neglect of baptism, there are a few things in your July article which I must beg you and your readers to hear a few words on.

You say, p. 181,"In allusion to the fact that baptism was the act of making disciples." John 4:i says," Jesus made and baptized . . . disciples." When two verbs come together thus, if the one verb denotes an action and the other how that action was performed, the verb which denotes how comes first. He poured oil on him and anointed him. You cannot say He anointed him and poured oil on him, unless the anointing and the pouring were two different actions. So, if the baptizing was the making of disciples, it would not be "made and baptized," but "baptized and made." The fact that it is "made and baptized," the fact that "baptized" comes after, not before, " made," proves that they were made disciples first and then baptized. That baptizing is discipling is contrary to plain fact. Many a baptized person, even when the child of a believer, never becomes a disciple, a learner. But water can not make a learner. This is a fact.

It is remarkable to see you restating an argument which the former editor of Help and Food has given up. You say that in Eph. 4:4-6 there are three spheres. If there are three spheres in Eph. 4:4-6, why not in i Cor. 12:4-6? The passages are similar. Nobody holds otherwise than that in i Cor. 12:4-6, we have the Spirit, the Son, and the Father, each in His own distinct relation to one and the same sphere. The Ephesian passage is quite parallel. You call Ephesians "the great epistle of the One Body," yet you say that in chap. 4:4-6 there are two other spheres besides, i Cor. 12:4-6 shows that you are mistaken. It is the Spirit, the Lord, and the Father, each in His own relation to the one sphere, in both passages. Ephesians does not treat of the kingdom, nor of nature; but only of the assembly. If verses 5 and 6 are true of the assembly, as they surely are, what reason is there for applying them to other spheres?

You say, (p. 183) "Many who; accept household baptism do not obey God in having their children baptized." Thus you teach that child-baptism is obedience to God. There is no mention of child-baptism in Scripture. It rests on inference. Can we be blamed for considering it a mistaken inference when we see what baptism symbolizes?-washing away of sins. An infant has no sins to wash away. The putting on of Christ:-this can only be done by one capable of understanding what he is doing. Claim of a good conscience:-an infant cannot claim any kind of conscience. Burial with Christ:-an infant can be buried, but not" with Christ," which plainly implies intelligence; and Scripture does not separate resurrection from burial. Rom. 6:implies and Col. 2:asserts their inseparableness. You say Col. ii, ii, 12, "should doubtless be rendered ‘in whom.’" Forgive my objecting. The rule for deciding the antecedent to a relative is:-" The antecedent to a relative is the preceding noun, unless there be a clear reason to the contrary." Of course, you suppose there is here a reason to the contrary, but there is not. J. N. D. never saw one. With him baptism is resurrection (Letters, vol. 2:pp. 58, 330, 335). That baptism is resurrection appears from its being a putting on (Gal. 3:27) as well as a putting off. Putting on is only in resurrection (2 Cor. 5:2-4) and an infant can neither put off nor put on.

Remarks.-Our brother surely agrees with us that baptism is the badge of discipleship. We most certainly disclaim the thought of sundering baptism and teaching. The passage he quotes when taken in its connection explains itself. As to his use of John 4:i, it is his, not ours. We might add, however, that there is an explanatory use of a second verb. Thus, he made-that is baptized, disciples. But we never thought of excluding the "teaching" from John 4:1:

With regard to the three spheres in Eph. 4:; it is not because of the name of each person of the blessed Trinity that we speak of three circles or spheres, as our brother surely knows, but of the words connected with the name of each Person. "There is one Body and one Spirit . . . one Hope!" Who can for a moment question that none but believers, true children of God are here alluded to?
"One Lord, one faith, one baptism." Is it not possible that profession might come in here? Profession could not come into the one body.

" One God and one Father of all," surely reaches on to the truth of "God all in all." The similarity to i Cor. 12:is but external, and cannot therefore be used as by our brother. A simple comparison of the two passages will show this.

We do not question that the passages alluded to in the last paragraphs refer primarily to the baptism of believers. This was natural and necessary for those just brought into the pale of Christianity, but to say that the passages cannot be applied to the households of saints is assertion without proof.

-:Is it quite ingenuous to write:-"It is not the purpose of this paper to enter into the discussion of any of these questions," one of which questions is, " Who are the proper subjects?" and then to write:"The first is the sphere of the Church, of pure grace; the second is the sphere of the Kingdom, of responsibility. There is a third sphere, that of creation, One God and Father of all who is over all, and through all, and in [us] all?" For this interpretation of the passage in Eph. 4:is caused and necessitated by the desire to prove infants to be the " proper subjects," and is peculiar to those who hold "household baptism" so called. The article does therefore, indirectly, enter upon the question of who are the proper subjects; in fact it is quite impossible to discuss the doctrine of baptism without deciding, by the doctrine and teaching of the epistles, who are the proper subjects. Is not, in fact, the effort to apply baptism to infants, the cause of all the confusion about it, as the saints perceive that the doctrine contradicts the application. A paper therefore that avoids the question of the proper subject, fails to clear up the confusion. Scripture shows that the true Church is both the body of Christ and the house of God. Some have assumed that the bouse of God embraced false professors who are not in the body, and from that deduced the doctrine of infant baptism into the house. Others have refused this, but as they held infant baptism, a place for them must be found, and so they found it in the " Kingdom," which is substituted for the " house." The first teaching made the house include all the false material and identified the house with the Kingdom in the present dispensation. The second refused false material in the house and put it into the Kingdom; both justify infant baptism on the plea of false material having a place in one or both! A shaky foundation surely for it to rest on.

The fact is, the " house " of God and the " Kingdom of God " are identical in the present dispensation. The Kingdom will go on in the next dispensation, but the " house" will be on high. In neither the house nor the Kingdom does God own anything but what is real. The "house" is the habitation of God the Spirit. That is what constitutes it the house of God. God builds it and He does not build in false material. Man may build falsely but God owns it not. So the Kingdom; it is composed of those born of God, for it is formed by sowing the good seed. The rest is rejected from the beginning and in due time judged. Never owned by the King. But the sole foundation for baptismal efficacy for the entrance of infants is that the Lord owns and gives a place to false material in the Kingdom. If Matt. 13:says nothing of baptism being efficacious to put into it, but ascribes it to the reception of the " word of the Kingdom" into the heart, how dangerous is the doctrine that substitutes the ordinance of baptism for the word, and makes baptism precede the word instead of follow it! According to God, entrance into the Kingdom is by new birth, Matt. 13:proves this beyond controversy; and entrance into the house is by the Spirit. The persons who compose both are identical in this dispensation; while the false material in the house is the false material of Matt. 13:They are identical both in respect of the good and the bad. But the Lord did not own the bad as His, nor introduced by His authority, and linked the interests of the disciples with the treasure, the pearl, (the Church) and the good fish.

The interpretation forced upon Eph. 4:by the exigencies of the case, is strangely false for intelligent brethren to propound. Let us look at it as found in " Help and Food" for July 1898, for they are not all alike, at any rate in detail, and it is when we come to look narrowly into them that we are astonished and grieved at what we find.

"The first is the sphere of the Church, of pure grace." But is the "sphere" of "pure grace" limited to the Church? Is that not just what is going out to the whole world? Matt. 28:19 would seem to say so. One would rather take it that the Church is the sphere of our responsibilities, while even there we are not under law but grace, thank God.

"The second is the sphere of the Kingdom, of responsibility." And yet this is the "sphere" into which an infant is baptized! What are the "responsibilities" then of a baptized infant? Some teach that an infant is brought by baptism into the " sphere " of grace, not responsibility, in order to be saved; not baptized because it is saved. It is true the Kingdom and the Church alike are the " sphere " of our responsibility, (if I must use the word "sphere," of which there is no need.) In both I must maintain the one faith and confess the one Lord, and I begin to do this by the one baptism. Can an infant do this? the doctrine necessitates the absurd question. Then the baptism of an infant is not the "one baptism" of Eph. 4:and is therefore outside Scripture.

"There is a third sphere, that of creation:One God and Father of all, who is over all, and through all, and in [us] all."

Would it be believed that the precious revelation from the Lord Himself, "I ascend to My Father and to your Father, to My God and to your God,"-the revelation of a relationship which it is one of the special objects of this epistle to unfold, should be, by the necessities of this theory, perverted to apply to all born of Adam-creation! And this is a part of the unity of the Spirit, which is wider even than the profession of Christianity, and must include the children of the heathen etc.! Truly there is something to say after all for the doctrine of the Fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man!

But, thank God, we can turn back to Scripture and there all is plain and simple. The unity of the Spirit, composed of seven parts, in threefold relationship to the Trinity, (compare Matt. 28:19) embraces only those who are born of God the Father and are baptized by the Spirit into the one body, and who therefore can truly own the one Lord and the one faith in the one baptism. No other baptism than this is the one baptism of Eph. 4:Infant baptism is therefore but a superstition.
Water baptism has to do with the Kingdom. But our business is not with the spurious in the Kingdom; they are left to the day when He will purge out of His Kingdom all that offend and do iniquity. He made no place in His Kingdom for them, an enemy did it. Our business, I repeat, is with the treasure, the pearl, and the fish.

Scripture never teaches that baptism "effects" anything; then the baptism of infants is utterly meaningless. The confusion of which your paper complains is caused by this very teaching about infant baptism being efficacious to put into the Kingdom. It is the confession of those who enter, not the means of entering. It is not therefore one of the keys of the Kingdom,-a visionary idea. The keys are simply symbols of authority, and why should there be only two?

Remarks.-With regard to the first point made by our correspondent, we must leave the question of ingenuousness for settlement by our readers, remarking simply that the interpretation of Eph. 4:is not necessary for the support of either household or believers’ baptism. That interpretation must be tested simply by Scripture. If "one Lord, one faith, one baptism " does not refer to the Kingdom as distinct from the Church, then we have, in the body of Christ, the possibility of mere profession. We say possibility, for whether Kingdom or Church, no one contends for the necessity of mere profession. Does not every Christian shrink from the thought-of there being mere professors in the Church? And yet the faith of Christianity may be avowed, sealed by baptism, and " Lord, Lord " be said, without heart acquaintance with Christ. Where are such people? Certainly not in the Church. But with equal certainty are they in the Kingdom, the place of profession, and we add again, of responsibility, though grace be unknown.

As to the distinction between house and kingdom, it seems clear, where it is referred to, as formed by the Holy Spirit and indwelt by Him, that it is an aspect of the Church. As being the place of administration, taken up by man, as in 2 Tim. 2:, the house possesses some features in common with the Kingdom. To say that the presence of false material is the ground for the plea for infant baptism, is a thorough mistake. No one pleads for it on such grounds. It is to be feared that only too many who have professed conversion and been baptized in mature years, go to swell the numbers of those in the Kingdom but not in the Church. In fact it is not from the children that the ranks of profession are so largely swelled. No baptized child, who is scripturally taught, could for one moment indulge in false security because of that baptism.

As our brother suggests, the Kingdom has to do with earth and earthly responsibilities. Let that fact be remembered, and we have the justification of the baptism of the children of believers. Are not our children in circumstances far different from those of unbelieving households? Do they not enjoy privileges of light and truth, of being brought up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord? Nay, is not the sad failure so noticeable in many households, where the heads of the family are Christian, due to lack of living faith to count upon God for the children, and to act accordingly? This want of faith may be present as well where baptism has been administered as where it has not. But to that, and not to baptism, must the failure be attributed, from the standpoint of human responsibility. It was while men slept that the tares were sown, and may not the slumber of Christians as to the immortal interests of their children explain the fact that so many of them grow up unsaved? Hence it is useless to use as an argument against household baptism that it introduces mere profession into the Kingdom. Let sleeping parents awake and we shall see. Oh for a divine awakening among us all, a living faith to take hold upon God.

The way to see eye to eye upon this subject is to get before God. Amid the cries to Him, the trembling for the salvation of the little ones, and the faithful bringing up, we believe there would be little room for argument upon this theme. Parents would see that their children had a place in God’s thoughts, that "thou and thy house" had a special and tender meaning, and in the anticipation of God’s faithful performance of His promises, they would enroll their little ones under the Lord’s leadership and name His name upon them. Baptism would fittingly express this relation, even as in other connections circumcision did.

With regard to the error of the " Fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man," we see no danger in the interpretation of " one God and Father of all etc." He is that of " every family in heaven and earth." He will be manifested as such in the millennial and eternal ages, and as Creator, he is the Father of Spirits. There is no connection between this and that teaching based upon a denial of redemption and the atoning work of Christ.

My Dear Brother:-I am glad to find while reading the last number of Help and Food, August, that you have opened its pages again to the discussion of household baptism; and I am especially thankful for the article from your own pen, as to the importance and Scripture authority for baptism as a Christian responsibility.

I am also thankful for this article from F. A., on the subject, and that he thoroughly believes in burial-not sprinkling-as the baptism of Scripture,-as all of our brethren do. But I am especially sorry that some who really believe this, as to the doctrinal and theoretical part, are still willing to go on in disobedience as unbaptized believers, simply because they have been told that they were christened, or sprinkled in infancy. Therefore they cannot say before God, that they have been buried with Christ in baptism. And for two very potent reasons they cannot say it.

First, it was done when they were unconscious of any such thing being done; so that they are dependent on human testimony as to the past.

Second, it was sprinkling; which in Scripture is always symbolic of the application of the Word, never of burial, by which it was done:so that they can only say that, on the ground of two or three witnesses, they have been christened or sprinkled.

And to say, that they have faith to believe that they have been baptized is simply superstition, not faith at all. For " superstition is the subjection of the mind of man, in the things of God, to that for subjection to which, there is no warrant in divine testimony" (J. N. D.). To say that on the ground of two or three witnesses, I was sprinkled when I was an infant in my mother’s arms; is no warrant in divine testimony, hence is not and cannot be the ground for faith.

What then is it? A relic of the superstitions of Roman ism, which has come down to us through the perversion of a very important truth, in the apostasy of the Church in the third century, as every one knows who has ever read church history. In my judgment, F. A.’s argument (by inference) is one of the most convincing ever produced in favor of household baptism, and it would carry me back to that position again, but for one point, which he does not bring out. This, I hope, I may be allowed to give to your readers and to my brethren, as God has given me to see it, and which led me to give up household baptism;-for, once I was happy in baptizing children little and large; when the faith of the parents was united in it. So that you will understand that I once stood where our brother F. A. stands, though I did not get it out of the twenty-eighth of Matthew. Let me tell you how it was that I was brought to give up household baptism.

I was laboring in the gospel where there were a number of Christians interested and getting blessing, and some were exercised on the subject of baptism. They requested me to take up the subject. I waited on the Lord as to how I should take it up, for I had never lectured nor preached on the subject; and my mind was directed to the sixth of Romans and the second of Colossians.

In my meditations I was led to see, as never before, that baptism was the "burial of the old man," and in order to be valid must be an act of faith, on the part of the one baptized, not on the faith of others. Under the law things were done by proxy. The priest acted for the people:so that people who brought offerings, were accepted in the value of a sacrifice offered by a priest. But faith entered into the holiest, in Abraham’s day, without law or priest, but still in the value of a sacrifice, not yet offered but looking forward:we entered into the holiest in the value of the same sacrifice, without law or priest, looking back to the Cross. Grace supersedes both law and priest; but there is no en-trance into the holiest but for individual faith; and it is only the individual who has by faith entered into the holiest, who can in the reckoning of faith, "bury the old man," when faith has reckoned him dead. Now let us read from Rom. 6:3:"Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized unto Jesus Christ, were baptized unto His death? Therefore we are buried with Him by baptism into death:that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of His death we shall be also in the likeness of His resurrection."

This is the language of faith. How can I put my child in here? Just so in Colossians. The apostle is writing to those whose individual faith had, in "the obedience of faith," taken this portion. " And ye are complete in Him which is the Head of all principality and power, in whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands in putting off the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ. Buried with Him in baptism wherein ye also are risen with Him through the faith of the operation of God who hath raised Him from the dead."

How can I put my child into this? I fully concur also in this, that baptism does not bring the one baptized into anything, neither the Kingdom, nor the house, nor yet covenant relationship. But to faith it is the witness, or sign of subjection to Christ, and the receiving of a testimony which puts one in the place of death; and I believe also brings him into the place of a resurrection life:thus emphasizing, or rather, exemplifying what the blessed Lord Himself gives us in John 5:24-" is passed from death unto life."

This too is clearly seen in what the Lord Jesus says of John the Baptist in Luke 7:29, 30:"And all the people that heard Him, and the publicans justified God being baptized with the baptism of John. But the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him." We have been told that John preached the gospel of the Kingdom, and that John’s baptism brought them into the Kingdom. What then did Christian baptism bring them into? For they were baptized again, as we see from the nineteenth of Acts. And if baptism formed any part, or was in any sense preparatory to the entrance into the Kingdom, Why was it repeated? And if as our brother F. A. puts it; the great commission comes down to us, and we disciple and baptize our children in infancy, when they come to years, and have in the intelligence of faith come to the knowledge of salvation, they must be baptized again, according to Acts 19:5.

Now this is not an argument by inference, but from the simplest and plainest teaching of the Word. For Paul found disciples at Antioch who had believed – doubtless quickened souls-and had been baptized, but had never heard a full gospel, and when he gives them the proper word for an intelligent faith, they were baptized again, and received the Holy Ghost. Does this come clown to us also? This settles the question, that an intelligent faith should accompany, or precede a valid baptism. Does it not? How then can I accept brother F. A.’s inferential argument from Matt. 28:19, 20? May the blessed Lord give us to bow to His word.

Remarks.-All who have weighed Scripture would surely agree that immersion is clearly taught, but largely by inference, of which brethren seem so afraid. Our brother, however, in our judgment, in insisting upon the immersion of those who have already been baptized by sprinkling, unwittingly detracts from the honor of the blessed Lord. The emphasis is never put upon the mode of baptism, but upon the Name in which the person is baptized. See all through Acts, particularly in the 19th chapter referred to. Here, in the only recorded case of the baptism, the subjects had already been immersed. They were baptized the second time in the name of the Lord Jesus. Hence if a person has been once sprinkled in the name of the Lord Jesus, or of the Trinity-the full revelation of the Godhead brought out through the redemptive work of the Lord Jesus-to immerse him would be to ignore the value of the precious name already put upon him.

As to testimony of others, it does not bear upon the subject. Scripture warrants the reception of the testimony of two or three witnesses.

We have already spoken of the remainder of his argument from Colossians. As the apostle was writing, of course, to believers, it was natural that he would refer to what baptism meant, into the truth of which his words would lead them. Would it be impossible for children to look back, after their conversion, and see the significance of that which had been done for them years before?

I. ITS MEANING AND IMPLICATIONS.

We are going to take up, the Lord willing, a question (or questions) which of late seem more and more to be dividing those who alike look for the coining of the Lord as near at hand. The question is not, therefore, whether that coming be personal and premillennial or not:for, those for whom I write are equally assured that it is both; and the number of those who possess that assurance is, we may trust, becoming greater every day. For those who may still have question even as to this, there are now everywhere at hand abundant means of satisfaction. Nay, they have only, when once inquiry has been awakened with them, to examine their Bibles with a free and honest heart, to find it. They need but to give credit to Scripture for speaking with the same straightforwardness as we use with one another. They need only not to confound Israel and the Church; death or the taking of Jerusalem with the coming of the Son of man, and that in the clouds of heaven, and with all the holy angels with Him. To those simple, and not confused with unnatural interpretations, the word of God will become simple; and the great hope of the Church and of Israel will shine out with unmistakable plainness; nay, with a luster lighting up every other part.

It is not as to this, at any rate, that we are now to inquire. The question before us is one that will take more attentive consideration to answer. There are apparent difficulties on the face of Scripture itself with that which nevertheless we must accept as the true one; and there are correspondingly objections which require full examination before we are entitled to do so. Especially as they seem to have led many who not long since held it to abandon it for another.

The hope of the Morning Star may sufficiently characterize the view before us. Christ Himself is the Morning Star, and as such promised to the Christian overcomer. The morning star as such precedes the sunrise; does not enlighten the earth, but is lost in the beams of the sun when it arises. In Scripture it is the seal upon the closing page of the New Testament, as the Sun of righteousness is the seal upon the last page of the Old. It is connected with heaven alone; while the Sun in its rising brings heaven and earth together.

We hold, as many have held it, that Christ’s coming as the Morning Star is the hope of the Christian, and introduces him to the enjoyment of his place with Christ in heaven. The dead saints of all the past are raised; the living are changed and caught up to meet the Lord in the air along with these. And this is the first thing now to be looked for, whatever signs may in fact be given before it of the Lord’s approach; as even now there are many.

This "rapture of the saints" necessarily closes what we call the Christian dispensation. The true Church is gone from the earth, and what is left is a mere corrupt profession, now to be spued out of Christ’s mouth as utterly distasteful to Him, and which is soon to give up even the profession, and, not having received the love of the truth, to fall under the terrible delusion of Antichrist.
Darkness is then covering the earth, and gross darkness the peoples; and this is the time, and these are the circumstances under which the light begins to break for Israel. The day of the Lord begins amid such utter darkness, and not before we are gathered to Him. As long as the gospel is still going out, Israel are "enemies" (treated by God nationally as such) "for your sake"-that is, for the Gentiles (Rom. 11:28). Now the darkness begins to disperse, and instead of the remnant among them being added to the Church, as in the present time, they "return to the children of Israel" (Mic. 5:3):to Israelitish hopes and promises.

Prophecy as to the world, broken off with the breaking off of Israel, begins again, and time, which ceases to be reckoned when she is wholly (though but temporarily) given up as the people of God, now is reckoned again. The " end of the age," which is in fact the last week of Daniel’s seventy, brings with it the ability to reckon prophetic times, and thus amid the gloom to calculate the nearness of deliverance. And they will need and value it, while having to endure to the end, to find the promised blessing:for this is "the time of Jacob’s trouble " (Jer. 30:7), Israel’s travail-time in which the nation will be born to God, when at last every one written among the living in Jerusalem shall be holy, "when the Lord shall have washed away the filth of the daughter of Zion, and purged the blood of Jerusalem from the midst thereof by the spirit of judgment and by the spirit of burning" (Isa. 4:3, 4).

Terrible will be the time they come through, "great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be " (Matt. 24:21; Dan. 12:i). It is the time of Antichrist, of the abomination of desolation in the holy place:when the world is permitted to show itself in its full character, the restraint upon the development of evil is removed, Antichrist shall replace Christ in the worship of the nations, and the "abomination" in the temple of God in Israel, challenge Him also in His Old Testament character, as well as in His New. The denial that Jesus is the Christ will ac company the denial of the Father and the Son (i John 2:22).

The end will be delivering judgment by the coming of the Son of man from heaven, as the lightning gleam in the storm of judgment, from east to west over the heavens. The nations assembled against Jerusalem meet with complete overthrow; the leaders in the great revolt against God being cast into the lake of fire, Satan shut up in the bottomless pit; and the saints who have come with Christ to the judgment of the earth taking the place of rulers with Him over it during the thousand years of peace that follow.

Of course, this is not even a proper sketch of what takes place during and at the close of the interval thus indicated between the taking away of the saints to meet the Lord and His appearing in glory with them. The question before us is not of details as to the events that fill up the interval, but of whether it exists at all; whether the rapture of the saints and their return with Christ are separated by any appreciable length of time; whether or not the Church goes through the tribulation; whether the dispensations can so far overlap as to permit of Jewish saints, with hopes and worship corresponding to this, to coexist upon earth with Christianity and the heavenly hopes that accompany it; whether the calculation of prophetic times is designed for Israel or the Church, or both; whether we are to look for the events or some of them, which admittedly precede Christ’s coming in glory, as to take place before we are caught up to be with Him? The last point seems to be perhaps in special contention, one very vigorous writer regularly characterizing the view against which he contends as "Any moment Adventism." But our decision as to this will be best reached as the final result of answers given to the other questions, which manifestly all so bear upon one another as to make the decision of one very much that of all; while yet they constitute so many distinct lines of proof which, if they agree together in what answer they yield, confirm each the other as well as the whole view. They will be, not a threefold, but a fivefold cord, not quickly to be broken.

But before we take up such questions, in seeking answer to which the full strength of the objections made will be seen and tested, let us take into consideration the proof as to the whole which we may gain from a brief review of Scripture.

It is perfectly plain, and is said in so many words by the apostle, that "when Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall we also appear with Him in glory" (Col. 3:4). It is quite clear, therefore, if we may take Scripture in its full force, that the taking up of the saints to be with Him, as described in i Thess. 4:, must be before the appearing. This indeed still leaves it uncertain that any sensible length of time elapses between the two. Yet it argues that the Lord’s descent into the air to the gathering place for His people is not an appearing. It is so far an unseen stage of His coming, and the rising of His saints to meet Him likewise would be unseen also:for when He appears we shall appear with Him, and "those that sleep in Jesus will God bring with Him."

What is connected with these two phases of His coming it is important to notice. With the first, Christ’s reception of us to Himself, and the joys of the Father’s house (John 14:2, 3). With the second the reward of works, which is in the Kingdom. With the first, thus, the fruit of Christ’s work; with the second, the fruit of our own. The order is noticeable. The first is the hope of the Morning Star, Christ Himself the Christian hope, but which leaves the world unblest. The second is the day-dawn for the world, the "Sun of righteousness."

The coming of the Son of man, as in Matt. 24:, is manifestly the appearing. He comes in the clouds of heaven, with all the holy angels with Him, and the comparison with lightning shows plainly the approach of judgment. Now what connects itself with this in this chapter? First, the "abomination of desolation standing in the holy place "- the Jewish holy place, for when they would see it, those that were in Judea were to flee to the mountains. Secondly, and given as the reason of their flight, "For then shalt be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to that time, no, nor ever shall be."This unequaled trouble is to be as short as severe:for "except those days should be shortened no flesh should be saved, but for the elect’s sake these days shall be shortened:" Thirdly, immediately after this, "they shall see the sign of the Son of man in heaven; and then shall all the tribes of the earth" – or "land"-"mourn; and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory."

Now, here we find, in the last days, a Jewish remnant with some knowledge of Christ it must be supposed, for the exhortation addressed to them implies that they will be listening to His words, and yet so little Christian as to be under the strict law of the sabbath (ver. 20), and liable to be deceived by false reports of His being in the desert or in the secret chambers (ver. 25):just such as those disciples were whom the Lord then addresses. What has become of Christians and of Christianity at a time when this is possible, and when once more the holy place is recognized as in Jerusalem? Yet this is before the appearing of Christ, and some little while before, however grace may limit the time of tribulation spoken of. Does not this look as if Christianity were gone from the earth at this time, shortly before His appearing?

If we look further, this impression deepens. Our Lord has just referred us to Daniel. We find the equivalent of the expression for the first time, chap. 9:27:"for the overspreading of abomination he shall make it desolate." A better translation would be, "because of the wing of abomination, a desolator;" but for our purpose either rendering may suffice. This is in the well-known prophecy of the seventy weeks, and in the latter half of the last week. At the end of the whole period would come the blessing, for Judah and Jerusalem, of which the angel speaks:for then would be made an end of sins, and reconciliation for iniquity, and everlasting righteousness brought in, and the holy place anointed (not made desolate); and yet according to the prophecy desolation continues up to the very end of this time. The blessing must come, then, suddenly indeed. In Matthew we see how it comes, by the appearing of Christ for them, and as in a moment.

The prophecy in Daniel is an instance of that non-reckoning of time, which has been already referred to as characterizing the present period. The seventy weeks are but 490 years. Sixty-nine of them end (483 years) when Messiah first comes. He is however cut off, and has nothing (so we should read the twenty-sixth verse):He does not bring in the blessing, and a time of confusion follows. Plainly the last week has not been fulfilled, and it is of this last week that the Lord in Matthew speaks. Here the doings of the "prince to come" are described, and it is not Christ, but His total opposite. A comparison of the chapters makes this absolutely plain. From the time of Messiah’s cutting off until this prince appears there is only a gap of time, the length of which is in no way indicated to us; but we know that all the Christian centuries have in fact come in that break. The nation of Israel has been set aside, and the heirs of heaven are being gathered. With the seventieth week Israel again comes into prominence, and time begins once more to be reckoned:but instead of blessing there comes for her a time of unequaled trouble until the last week is run out.

Notice the time from the setting up of the abomination till the full end:half a week of years, "time, times and a half," three years and a half; forty and two months; according to Jewish reckoning, 1260 days. We see how divine pity has in fact shortened the days. These numbers are of importance to us just now as a link of connection with other scriptures which will presently come before us. The covenant also made by this Gentile prince – we should read here "he shall confirm a covenant with the many," (the mass of the Jewish people,)-which he breaks in the midst of the week, enables us to understand better the sacrificial worship going on in Israel according to such agreement, and the idolatry ensuing:"the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up" (Dan. 12:ii).

Thus far it is plain that the prophecies in Daniel and in Matthew throw light on one another. Let us put by their side a third, which links the time of this Jewish distress with the last days of Christendom. I refer to 2 Thess. 2:for the full scripture, which with the help of what we have already got, we shall now easily understand. The prophecy of the man of sin has been so long applied to the head of the Romish superstition, that Protestant Christians are very jealous of another application. Yet the apostle makes the revelation of the "man of sin" to be the sign of the "day of the Lord being now present," as the Revised Version rightly gives it, while popery has been fully manifested, for those that have eyes to see, more than 300 years. Moreover the "day of the Lord" leading us to Zechariah’s prophecy of Israel’s last trouble (chap. 14:), and Zechariah leading us to Matthew and to Daniel, the "abomination of desolation standing in the holy place "is so simply explained by one who "sitteth in the temple of God, setting himself forth as God" (Revised Version), that an unprejudiced mind can hardly refuse the identification of one with the other.

Every other circumstance corresponds. We find this man of sin the leader of the grand final apostasy of professing Christians from the faith of Christ (vers. 3, 9-12):God at last giving over to strong delusion those who believed not the truth when it was there,-an awful climax to which everything is surely tending now. Moreover, just as in Matthew the Lord appears at the end of the time of trouble, so here the wicked one is "consumed with the breath of His mouth, and destroyed with the manifestation of His coming"

Thus Christendom is apostate, or apostatizing from the faith at the very time that the company of believing Jews, which Matt. 24:shows us, are suffering in the great tribulation. Jewish and Christian apostasy unite together at the close (i John 2:22).

Now where, we may ask again, during all this time, are the saints of the present day? Where are the real Christians, when the mass of mere professors have become apostate, and the saints of Jerusalem are plainly once more professors of Judaism? and in that "end of the age" which, as the last broken off week of determined times for Israel, is unmistakably Jewish? The apostle beseeches the Thessalonians "by the coining of our Lord Jesus Christ, and our gathering together unto Him" not to be deceived:and we ought now to understand such an appeal.

But this is by no means the full weight of evidence. The book of Revelation as a whole may be brought forward as proof, the most detailed and elaborate that could be given, perhaps; and can only be rightly understood with what we had already before us. We must look at this, however briefly, or we could have no idea how full the proof from Scripture is.

Revelation is divided, and that by the Lord Him-self, into two main parts, "the things that are," and "the things that shall be after these " (meta tauta). " Hereafter" is not sufficiently explicit, and so far misleading:these divisions give us, as we shall see, the "present things," the time in which the Church of God is upon earth; the "things after these," that which begins when the true Church has been removed to heaven, and God’s dealings with Israel begin, for their recovery and final blessing.

Each part has a prefatory vision which is the key to all that follows. "The things which thou hast seen" (1:19) are the first of these:Christ’s own inspection of the Churches (the candlesticks), His witness for Himself during the night of His absence. The candlesticks are seven, the number of completeness; and while they are, in the first place, the seven Asiatic churches, yet these are clearly representative of the Church at large. Only in tins way do the ad dresses in the next two chapters attain due relation to the universal character of the rest of the book; only in this way do we understand the emphatic call at the end of each address, to every one who has an ear to listen; only in this way, question it however we may, does the Church of God on earth come at all into the prophecy. Moreover, it is anything but a new thing to say that these churches, as successively brought before us here, will be found, by any one who seriously inquires into it, to present the characters of the Church in successive st ages of its history to the present time.* *The proof of this, which it would be an injustice to it to give in the brief way which would alone be possible here, may be found at length in my "Present Things.’‘*

Thus we can see how more and more urgently, from the address to Thyatira onwards, as warning or as encouragement, the coming of the Lord is pressed; until to the Philadelphian overcomer is given the assurance of being "kept out of the hour of temptation which is to come upon the whole world, to try those that dwell upon the earth." And then, indicating the way of accomplishment of this, the announcement now is made, "I come quickly." How else should they be kept out of the very "hour " of a universal trial, but by being taken up to meet the descending Lord? After which Laodicea gets a final threatening to be spewed out of Christ’s mouth; He, though still knocking, being already outside the door!

Thus the "things that are" end, and a new vision be gins, with a Voice as of a trumpet calling up to heaven. The scene entirely changes, and the seer becomes in the Spirit afresh. A throne set in heaven is before him; and there are thrones* around the Throne. *Not "seats" merely, as in the common version.* These thrones have human occupants, who are priests as well as kings, and sing the song of redemption when the Lamb appears (chap. 5:8-10). Through the scenes that follow they are still in their places round the throne, "all the angels" being seen again round them in an outer circle. Other redeemed ones take their place "before" that Throne, but not " around " it (chap. 7:11, 15).?

But let us look at the Throne itself:it is a throne of judgment; "lightnings and voices and thunders" proceed out of it. The earth is threatened; nay, but the bow of promise, of the color of new verdure refreshed by rain, assures us that God’ covenant as to the earth is not forgotten; rather, it is coming into remembrance, as if anew. This storm is to purify and bless. Heaven’s open doors having received the multitudes of heavenly saints, the time of the earth is come; and therefore Israel’s. The book of God’s counsels as to the future is opened:who can open it? The Lamb! Yes, assuredly it is the Lamb; but notice His character now:"The Lion of the tribe of Judah has prevailed to open the book "(chap. 5:5). Judah’s, Israel’s, conquering King it is who opens the future now, and this makes doubly clear that which is to follow concerns the earth and Israel.

Pass on:the lightnings flash and the thunders utter their voice; but four angels stand upon the four corners of the earth to keep back the winds from every quarter, until, as the voice of the interpreting angel declares, they have sealed the servants of God in their foreheads (7:1-3). And who, then, are these? "A hundred and forty and four thousand out of every tribe of the children of Israel." Can these be simply symbolically such? No:Judah’s Lion is opening the book. The Gentiles are not indeed forgotten:look at the vast multitude out of all nations that, in the next vision, are seen before the throne. Ah, the great throng of the redeemed of all time are they? No, says the interpreting voice again, "These are they that come," not "out of great tribulation " simply, as our common translation has it, but "out of the tribulation, the great one," as it literally reads. They are a multitude gathered out of the time of the end, as we have seen it; and of Gentiles, separate from the multitude of Israel’s sealed ones:both joining together in testimony as to the period we have reached. The church-scroll that Peter saw let down from heaven, has been taken up thither again. Jew and Gentile are no more united into one body, but are in different spheres of blessing; the Jew having the foremost place, and becoming the communicator of blessing to the nations round; Israel becomes Jezreel, the " seed of God."

Surely, in all this, it should not be hard to determine the doctrine of Scripture as to the coming of Christ for His saints, or the hope of the Church as the Morning Star.

With the last week of Daniel’s seventy, the greater part of Revelation is concerned. What very definitely marks this is the frequent specification of the very time before mentioned, the half week or half-weeks, whichever way we take it, of the last week. It is variously connected (i) with the maintenance of a special Elias-like testimony, the two witnesses, in the time of the end (chap. 11:3-8); (2) with the flight of the Jewish remnant into the wilderness, and their protection there (chap. xii 6,14); and (3) with the "practicing" of the Roman "beast, "when the little horn seen by the Old Testament prophet has become the 8th head of empire as seen by the New Testament one. Here no essential mistake seems possible. In the 19th chapter, after the marriage of the Lamb has taken place in heaven, we see Him descend with His saints to the judgment of the earth. Here from the closing portion of the book, as before from the beginning of it, we have witness that the taking up of the saints precedes by some time, at least, His appearing with them; but this the other passages that we have examined, not only confirm, but develop fully.

For all this, there are many opposers of this doctrine; and we are now to look at the arguments by which they would substantiate their opposition. F. W. G.

A correspondent calls our attention to a book called, "In His steps, or What would Jesus do," and suggests that a word of warning might be given regarding it. It is written from the standpoint of reform, and while there is much to stir up the conscience of those who think they should be improving the world, and much of righteousness in it, it is not a book calculated to lead in the simple path marked for us in the word "Christ is all." Ah! how even earnestness does not lead to subjection to God’s word. It is sad when even well meant efforts are thus contrary to the simple gospel of the grace of God, and a testimony of pilgrim separation from everything here. Beside fiction, which is always to be deprecated in holy things.
******************************PAGES 197-244MISSING********************

Ques. 11.-Is the Injunction as to women asking questions, in 1 Cor. 14:35, applicable to the reading meeting?

Ans.-The spirit of the scripture is to be taken, and this is clear. In any meeting of a public character, woman’s place- even as nature would teach-is one of retirement. Thus where-ever a meeting ceases to be private,-we will say in a private house, for instance, or in a meeting specially for the sisters- the scripture would apply. It is difficult to lay down hard and fast rules, in fact, they are to be deprecated.

In general we would say, that when a meeting has an assembly character, the place of the woman is clearly defined. But where a few of the Lord’s people are studying the Scripture together, it would be a mistake to close the lips of any who desire to ask questions. Then again, there are different kinds f questions, those which in reality are for teaching rather than information, and those whose object is to get light. Perhaps the injunction, " I suffer not a woman to teach " might be considered with profit, by those inclined to ask questions of the first character.

Ques. 12.-How was king David justified in putting on a priestly garment, when the ark was brought from the house of Obed Edom to Zion (2 Sam. 6:), when he was not one of Aaron’s sons, or even a Levite? Uzzah had, just before, been smitten for unlawfully touching the ark of God; and, many years after, Uzziah the king, was smitten with leprosy for attempting to do the priestly work of burning incense in the temple of the Lord (2 Chron. 26:16-21).

Ans.-Two things seem clear:David’s act did not go to the length of burning incense, but seems to have been the spontaneous outburst of joyous worship. Secondly, faith is above all forms, where it is God-given, and lays hold of Him, in a day of ruin. David ate the shew-bread which was not lawful but for the priests. Everything was in ruins, and David, type of Christ, was a fugitive. Indeed in both these cases we see the type rather than the individual. It was the Priest and King, in the first case in rejection, and in the second establishing the throne in Zion who is before us-David’s Lord rather than himself.

In the case of Uzzah, doubtless a Levite, it was simply un-belief in all concerned. The ark was in the cart and therefore liable to be shaken. God’s judgment falls upon the whole proceeding, and Uzzah, as prominent in the sacrilege, is singled out for the visitation.

King Uzziah attempted to intrude into the priests’ office. "His heart was lifted up to his destruction." So instead of being a type of Christ, he was, in that particular, rather a type of the wilful king, "who opposeth and exalteth himself."

Ques. 13.-When we gather around the Lord’s table, and engage in worship, is it proper to kneel at prayer, or should we sit? Some think that to kneel would be turning the back upon the Lord, who is at His table.
Ans.-It would be a very harsh, precise following the letter to apply such a precious scripture, as "there am I in the midst of them," in the way suggested by some. We need hardly say that our Lord is not physically, bodily present. The thought that He is locally at the table savors of Rome’s altar-superstition. In kneeling we bow to Him, and therefore there can be no thought of " turning the back." As said, the thought would take us back to external worship, according to the flesh.

We are fain to call attention to the tendency amongst many of the Lord’s people to sit during prayer. We are not under the law, nor under the letter, but reverence, even of posture and manner, surely becomes us. In the epistle which speaks of our highest position-in Christ in the heavenlies-the apostle writes, "For this cause, I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" (Eph. 3:14). The same dear servant in commending the saints to God, kneeled with them upon the shore (Acts 20:36). Thus in public and private, he took the attitude of supplication. Surely this is becoming, and should be followed even at the slight inconvenience it may cost. In the act of breaking bread, it is needless to say that what is prominent before us is not prayer, nor even prolonged giving of thanks, but rather "do this," and therefore order and quiet would suggest remaining seated, with bowed heads, as with adoring hearts we partake. But in all other acts of worship we may well imitate the apostle, either by kneeling in prayer or standing in thanksgiving.

It seems to me that we have somewhat to learn as to the scriptural way of looking at death from a practical stand point. It is quite true that God has brought out in these last days, the two sides, I may say, of the gospel,-that is the blood of the cross by which our sins are met and put away; and the resurrection of the blessed Lord by which we delivered from sin, so that we can now sing:

" Death and judgment are behind us."

All this is blessed and cannot be dwelt on too much. For it is in comprehending the full truth of this gospel as reasoned out in Romans by the apostle, where he says, " I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ; for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one who believeth etc," that we have full liberty and joy in the Holy Ghost.

But now let us look at death in a practical way. Scripture tells us that, "as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned." Here then we get unfolded to us in a most remarkable manner, the fall of man and its dreadful results, as given to us in the book of Genesis, thus solving the riddle of man’s existence. Dispensationally then, do we not see sin reigning in the power of death until Christ came? I would now call your attention to the incident so familiar to all who read Scripture, recorded in the first book of Kings ch. 13:* *The reader might refer to a paper in this magazine also upon this incident, but not touching the points here raised, entitled "Under the Oak," on page 85, of the current year.* It is the history of the "disobedient prophet." One cannot but feel that there is in this short history much to remind us of the fallen head of our race-Adam. The history of the disobedient prophet is short and simple. He was sent by Jehovah to reprove the wicked king of Israel-Jeroboam. And after delivering his message to the king, and curing him of the palsied hand, which had been stretched out against him, (thus showing the impotence of man on the one hand, as well as the grace of God on the other) he would have returned home, but the king invites him to stay and eat with him, which temptation the prophet promptly refused, saying, "I will neither eat bread nor drink water in this place, for so it was charged me by the word of Jehovah." Here was faithfulness like to Daniel in a later day, who, though under different circumstances refused the king’s meat.

But as going through this world we are never free from the tempter. Now we must view Satan coming as an angel of light. It seems there was an old prophet dwelling at Bethel, " and his sons came and told him all the works the man of God had done in Bethel, and the words he had spoken to the king." He thereupon ordered his ass saddled and started to find him, which he did, "sitting under an oak." He then said to him:"Art thou the man of God that came from Judah?" He said, "I am." And now he persuades him to return home with him, by saying that he also was a prophet, and that an angel had spoken unto him saying, " Bring him back with thee into thine house that he may eat bread and drink water." " But he lied "unto him." The result of this disobedience brings God’s swift judgment upon him. For when he was on his return a lion met him and slew him. What a sad, sorrowful sight! The prophet who had as faithfully performed what Jehovah had given him to do, and then healed the king’s hand, is now seen lying by the roadside a lifeless corpse. The lion too and the ass stood by it. God, as in Daniel’s case had shut the lion’s mouth. But now listen to what follows. His carcase is brought back by the old prophet’‘ and laid in his own grave, and they mourned over him, saying, " Alas my brother."

How sepulchral these words sound. Not a ray of hope or joy do they bring to the soul, no comfort, no light, but consistent you might say with the day in which they were spoken. And, too, what a mournful occasion this was! and those too who stood by him, as his body was lowered into the grave, might well have been clothed in the darkest shade of mourning. How much this reminds one of the prophet Jonah, who when in the whale’s belly at the bottom of the ocean, said, " The weeds were wrapped about his head."

Let us now pass on many centuries in God’s history, to the time when He was displaying His glory in His own beloved Son. What we have set before us in His day, is not so much the power of the lion (Satan) bringing death into the world, but Christ the deliverer. He it was who brought life and incorruptibility to light, the One who came here and met the enemy, and by His own death upon the cross annulled his power.

Let us look now at the familiar incident recorded in the eleventh chapter of John’s Gospel. We see there the blessed Son of God, the two sisters and Lazarus. Death has again made its sting felt. But for what purpose? " That the Son of God might be glorified thereby." And how was the Son of God to be glorified? In bringing from the tomb one whom the lion had slain. How wondrous to hear Him saying in answer to Martha, who had said in an almost hopeless manner, "I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day,"-"I am the resurrection and the life, he that believeth in Me though he were dead, yet shall he live. And whosoever liveth and believeth in Me shall never die." Sweet and comforting words,, are they not? But again when Jesus said, "Take ye away the stone," his own sister would have put a hindrance in the way of the manifestation of the Lord’s glory, for she said as though it were useless:"Lord by this time he stinketh, for he hath been dead four days," thus showing how natural affection can never rise to God’s thoughts, and often comes in to hinder the workings of God’s Spirit, even where it is for the blessing of those we may love so tenderly. Let us learn a lesson from this. But He whose ways are perfect cannot be hindered thus, and so we hear Him saying," Take ye away the stone." "Then they took away the stone from the place where the dead was laid."

Now comes the simple, but not the less beautiful expression of confidence in His Father. " Father I thank Thee that Thou hast heard Me." "And when He had thus spoken He cried with a loud voice, Lazarus come forth." What a contrast this cry, with the lament of the old prophet of whom we have spoken. Put them side by side, and see how they appear:-

" Alas my brother,"-sin reigning in the power of death.
" Lazarus come forth "-" Eternal life the gift of God."
Yes, for His dear people death is past. We are now bathed in the light of His own blessed presence. No more to wear the habiliments of death, but to rejoice in that one who has forever set us free, that we might walk with Him in newness of life. Oh that we might be more consistent as to the place which His grace has brought us into. No more to be occupied with that which speaks of sin and the grave,- "Alas, my brother "-but rather rejoicing in view of what that blessed One has accomplished in His own resurrection from the dead. And may the words of Him who said; "Lazarus come forth" ever resound in our ears. H. S.

The first city to be overthrown by Joshua and the armies of Israel, in taking possession of the land of their inheritance, was Jericho. The details of that victory are given in full. Everything seems to point out the prominence of the place as a type, and as the first place to be overthrown suggests what is the first step in true conquest in spiritual things.

Jericho was situated near Jordan-and is therefore suggestive of the nearness of death, and of judgment, to all that is fair in the world. Its name, "fragrance," describes the attractiveness of this world, while its great walls show how impregnable it is to any but a divine power.

This is what meets the Christian at the outset of that conflict in which he gets possession practically, not as a matter of doctrine merely, of his portion in Christ, in the heavenlies. We are blessed with all spiritual blessings, in the heavenlies, in Christ. But to enjoy them there must be a practical overcoming of the power of the enemy. The world is his great stronghold.

So long as the world controls the believer, so long as he has not, in faith and for himself, overthrown it, he can make no progress in spiritual things; he remains a babe. Hence the immense importance of overthrowing it. Nor is it a slight task, nor can it be said that many have truly won this great victory. What is emphasized is the power of God. The ark is borne about by the priests, and the trumpets are blown. The people simply compass the city with these. The ark was the center of all God’s dealings with His people. It represented His throne, and the One who is that, as it were, for Him. The ark went before them opening the way through Jordan. It was a type of Christ going down into death for us, and rising again. So that now His people, as dead and risen with Him are a heavenly company. It is Christ then, and subjection to God as seen in Him, who is the power of victory over the world. Is Christ known in the power of death and resurrection? To "bear about" this is the sure precursor of victory over the world. We cannot exalt Him and be enslaved by the world. The trumpets are the call to arms, as it were, the declaration that the year of jubilee is near, and for us that the coming of the Lord is nigh. Thus Christ exalted, and His coming awaited and announced, are the weapons of warfare which are "mighty through God."

All else tells of weakness. No assault was made upon the walls; no battering rams were set. Day by day for seven days there was the procession of weakness-and yet coupled with the perfection of divine strength, as suggested by the sevens. It is the weakness of man that gives occasion for the power of Christ. Let us exalt Him alone, and with Paul we can say, "I can do all things through Christ which strengthened! me."

Victory is assured, and the judgment is to be complete-everything is to be devoted or accursed. AH is destroyed, or belongs to God. So with the world. If in spirit we spare aught of it, which is not surrendered to God, it will soon be our Master. Zoar, ("is it not a little one?") has too often betrayed and held captive the saints of God. Paul could say, "the world is crucified unto me and I unto the world." For Him the walls of Jericho had fallen down flat, and everything in it was devoted.

Perhaps we need not so much exhortation as prayer for one another, that there may be, in a real sense, complete and practical victory over a world which bars the way to all progress. Is not the spirit of it increasing, and with those who once had clean escaped the corruption that is in it? Alas, with many who once had witnessed its downfall it has reasserted itself in much of its old power. One of the saddest things is to see this lapse under the power of a once conquered foe.

It is this which is suggested in the warning of Joshua as to rebuilding Jericho. "Cursed be the man before the Lord, that riseth up and buildeth this city Jericho:he shall lay the foundation thereof in his first-born, and in his youngest son shall he set up the gates of it" (Josh. 6:26). This was directly fulfilled years later, when Hiel the Bethelite rebuilt the city (i Kings 16:34). It is a solemn thing to trifle with the word of God; in due time shall it be found that it will all be fulfilled.

But let us look at this rebuilding of Jericho. It was in the days of king Ahab that it took place. The ten tribes had become established as an independent kingdom-independent not only of David’s house, but of David’s Lord. The sin of Jeroboam always marked Israel-the calf of which Hosea speaks with such sorrow, as he plead for his God. Ahab not only continued in this golden calf apostasy, but added more sin of his own. "There was none like unto Ahab, who did sell himself to work wickedness in the sight of the Lord." It was in his days-days of universal declension-that Hiel the Bethelite rebuilt Jericho.

Bethel is a name in Scripture that will always recall the history of Jacob, and link this with God’s house, the name given by Jacob to the place. He was a fugitive from his brother-with nothing save a staff-a wanderer from his father’s house, who falls asleep upon the hard pillow which he had made for himself. Many a man has made a stone pillow for himself, out of his own self-will. It was while he was asleep, unable to help himself, that God reveals Himself, the God of sovereign grace and love, who will fulfil all His promises, preserve Jacob wherever lie may go, and bring him back to the land in blessing. Such was Bethel. Years later, when sorrow and defilement had crept into Jacob’s household, he was called back to that place (Gen. xxxv). "Arise, go up to Bethel and dwell there." The house of God was to be his dwelling-place.

The house of God! how much does that suggest. Its history spoke of grace and of power. "Holiness becometh Thy house O Lord forever." To abide under sense of grace, to be at home in the presence of God, to realize His holiness-such seem to be the thoughts suggested by the House of God. To dwell there means that one is born of God, is a member of His family, and partaker of the divine nature. How solemn then for such an one (known by the place of his abode), to forsake Bethel and go down to Jericho, the place under curse, to rebuild that which is the direct opposite of the house of God.

And yet is it an uncommon thing for the child of God to rebuild the things which he once destroyed? Scripture, history, and experience alike furnish examples of this. Abraham, the man of faith, the pilgrim, goes down into Egypt because of the famine in the land. A land where all is dependent upon the rain of heaven, is the place where faith can be tested. The man on the water is the one who will sink, if the eye be taken off Christ. A famine in the land would be but the opportunity for fresh exercise of faith, but Abraham departs to well watered Egypt, where there was no danger, apparently, of famine. He had no suffering there, his strait was relieved, but what shame! and what contentions in his own household resulted from his bringing back the Egyptian handmaid Hagar.

David too, in his day, came perilously near rebuilding Jericho. He left the land of Judah-the abode of praise-and went down to the Philistines’ land-the abode of formal profession. He lost, temporarily at least, his family, who fell into the hands of the Amalekites (i Sam. 30:).

In a spiritual way, the wisest of them all, king-Solomon, was engulfed in that which wrought havoc and shipwreck in his life and testimony. How low did he fall, and yet his name Jedidiah, "beloved of Jehovah," tells of his-and our-place in the heart of God. And these are not all.

But we must hold to our theme, which is the rebuilding of Jericho, the re-establishment of the world in its place of supremacy and power. It is not general declension of which we speak, but of the special form of world-attraction, which is so mighty in these days. Hiel sacrificed, lost, his first-born and his youngest son in rebuilding Jericho. Literally, how often has this been verified. A child of God, in spirit takes up the world; it has its attractions, which draw him from Bethel, and in his own family he sees the sad consequences. Why is there so much in the families of the Lord’s people to cause sorrow? Ah! have not the parents been rebuilding Jericho? Can parents expect to see their children saved out of a world by which they are themselves attracted? Eldest and younger are thus engulfed in that which has recaptured the parents. To recur a moment to a previous illustration, Jacob living away from Bethel, finds his family in the world. Thank God too, the way to return is open, and thus he has fresh power over his house. When he is at God’s house, he can guide his own house.

Nor is this truth confined to the family. Take an assembly of God’s saints. Let the world begin to creep into the thoughts and ways of the elder, and how quickly will it blossom into fruit in the younger. Young persons grow up under our eyes, we lament that they do not walk in a separate path, and again we find ourselves to blame-our worldliness has sacrificed them.

In like manner this heart-searching truth can be applied to our own spiritual state. The first-fruits of the divine love, "the joy of thine espousals," are lost as the world reasserts itself; and the later fruits of the Spirit cannot live in that baleful atmosphere. All is sacrificed, to what?

May our gracious God teach us His lesson in these things. Surely there is but room for prayer, confession and a fresh turning to Him. Need we add how ready He is to meet us at His house, and what wondrous recoveries His grace effects? Whether individually or unitedly, let us take to heart these things, and find still the blessing there is for us in a world despised and trodden under, that the things of Christ, and the word of God may be all in all to us.

There is perhaps no doctrine in Scripture about which there has been more complete diversity of judgment than the subject of Baptism. It has been turned into the means of regeneration by Romanists and Ritualists, who hold that the priest by sprinkling a few drops of water upon an unconscious infant in the name of the Trinity makes it "a child of God and an inheritor of Christ’s kingdom." For such to be born of water means to be regenerated by baptism, to be put into the Church, and in due time, after instruction, to receive the rite of confirmation and partake of the "holy communion." As to all this those for whom we write need no word. Superstition of the worst form marks it; worst because it borrows the outward forms of Scripture truth to enchain men in the slavery of heathen error.

Passing on to less glaring perversions of truth, we find ourselves amid a confusion of variant voices upon the subject, which has resulted in many breaches among the true people of God. More closely connected with Romanism than they would admit, are those who regard baptism as necessary to salvation. It is to be hoped that the faith of some who hold this is better than their doctrine, else it would be impossible, of course, to consider them as children of God. The fact of baptism occupying so prominent a place in their thoughts betrays a sad ignorance of those commanding truths which control the heart and life, when held in power, and lift above all the petty occupation with that which may of itself be right.

But even where the gospel is to a good extent clearly understood, there is still a wide divergence upon this subject. What is its nature?-has it to do with the Church or the Kingdom? What is the proper mode?-is it sprinkling, pouring, or immersion? Who are the proper subjects?-believers only, households of believers, or all infants? What is the proper formula?-the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, or in or unto the name of Jesus Christ? Should it ever be repeated, if the proper subjects were not baptized, or in the proper manner, or with the proper formula? It is not the purpose of this paper to enter into the discussion of any of these questions. We simply state them to show the confusion that exists in the minds of most.

Our subject lies farther back. Some, in the reaction from controversy, and as a refuge from the confusion attending the matter, have wondered whether a question about which there is so much difference has any place in the dispensation of fully revealed Christianity. At any rate this would be a " short and easy method" of getting rid of vexatious questions, and would serve to bring together many of God’s dear people who are held apart simply by the subject of water baptism. Briefly presented, their thought is that water baptism is an ordinance similar in significance to circumcision, and that is has been displaced by the baptism of the Spirit, which is the only Christian baptism. They would argue that it has nothing to do with the Church, admission into which is by the Spirit’s baptism (i Cor. 12:13). Water baptism was connected with the Kingdom, and this explains why it was practiced by the apostles after Pentecost, and all through the book of Acts. They urge however that we find no teaching as to its observance in the epistles of Paul, and that therefore it has ceased to be binding upon saints to whom the new ground of grace is fully known. There is now no purifying of the flesh;-it has been set aside, and all is of the Spirit.

Our first thought regarding this is that it is a result probably of the variant views we have already spoken of. Amid such confusion is not the simplest and easiest way to drop the whole subject? If water baptism has nothing to do with Christianity, why should Christians have anything to do with it? But the question presses at once, Is this God’s way of getting rid of difficulties? If we are to drop every doctrine about which there are differences of judgment, we will soon strip our holy faith of all its most precious and distinguishing truths. Without doubt God has not intended that truth should be gotten without exercise. That which costs little is worth little, and truths accepted as a matter of course are not often valued as they should be. All will admit this as a general principle, and if it were applied in the case before us most of the difficulties would vanish. Then if the question were taken up prayerfully, in dependence upon God, we would be able to learn God’s thought as to baptism, as to all else.

But let us look a little at Scripture-teaching regarding the place of water baptism in relation to Christianity. We purposely omit all examination into other questions, necessary as they are, in order to have settled in our minds clearly this primary question. Is there water baptism in fully revealed Christianity? For those who have never had a question as to this, what we say may seem needless, but if it settle absolutely and scripturally in our minds the truth, on the subject, our effort will not have been in vain.

It will be well to remember that the baptism of John was not Christian baptism, nor was that of our Lord and His disciples during His early ministry. This is clear as to John from its nature as given. He came to prepare the way of the Lord, as a prophet, preaching repentance "for the Kingdom of heaven is at hand."It had not yet been set up, for the King had not been owned. What he insisted on was repentance, the confession of their sins with a view to their forgiveness. There was not the full declaration of forgiveness on the basis of grace, but a kind of legal pardon as expressed in the words of the prophet, "Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts:and let him return unto the Lord, and He will have mercy upon him:and to our God, for He will abundantly pardon" (Isa. 55:7).It was a call to the people to "break off their sins by righteousness," to "bring forth fruits meet for repentance." Those who were baptized took their place as disciples of John, waiting for a further development of truth. John therefore pointed on to the coming of One who should do more than this. He should baptize with the Holy Ghost.

Our Lord took up John’s work where he laid it down. When He heard that John was cast into prison, He began to preach the same message, "Repent for the Kingdom of heaven is at hand " (Matt. 4:17). The Kingdom was not yet established, but there was this added feature, the signs of the Kingdom were performed. Still men took the general place of confession of sin, awaiting the coming Kingdom. It was in this connection that our Lord baptized,-as John; and where there seemed to be a question raised that His baptism conflicted with John’s, He left Judea (John 4:1-3), and departed into Galilee. This baptism seems to have been confined to the earlier part of His ministry; we hear nothing of it later on. The King was presented and rejected; then everything waited for the setting up the Kingdom of an absent King, when baptism became a new thing and acquired a new meaning. This is alluded to for the first time by our Lord after His resurrection, when He gave the disciples a new commission (Matt. 28:18-20; Mark 16:15, 16), the preaching of the gospel including repentance and remission of sins-salvation-in His name, unto which men were to be baptized as" owning allegiance to Him, as members of the Kingdom of an absent King.

At Pentecost the Holy Ghost came down, and apostles and all believers were baptized into the One Body, the Church, by the Spirit. This marks the establishment of the Church-an absolutely distinct, new operation of God upon earth, though the eternal purpose of His heart (Eph. 4:). From now on believer’s were made members of that heavenly body which on its completion will be caught up to its true place with Christ on high-the bride, the Lamb’s wife. The only admission into this body is by the baptism of the Spirit. Water baptism cannot admit into the Church-the body of Christ.

And yet in immediate connection with this proclamation of forgiveness, and baptism with water in the name of Christ, is the promise of the Holy Ghost. "Repent and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost" (Acts 2:38).So it is all through the book of Acts. Believers were baptized, both men and women (Acts 8:12, etc.). They also received the Holy Ghost. In the case of Cornelius, he first received the baptism of the Spirit, and this was followed by water baptism (Acts 10:43-47); in the case of the disciples at Ephesus this order was reversed (Acts 19:1-6). But in whatever order received, it is to be noted that neither excluded the other. Only true believers received the Holy Ghost, but all who professed faith in Christ received water baptism. Paul, the chosen vessel for the revelation of the truth of the Church, both received and practiced baptism as all the rest (Acts 9:18; 16:15, 33; 18:8).This was the case both in Jewish and Gentile communities.

No one can rise from a perusal of the book of Acts without gaining the full conviction that baptism of water and of the Spirit, though absolutely distinct, went on side by side. Nor must it be forgotten that the assemblies formed-at Ephesus, Philippi, Corinth and elsewhere,-were those to whom the epistles unfolding Church position and order were written; some of them, as Thessalonians, Corinthians, Galatians, and Romans manifestly written before Paul’s imprisonment, recorded in the latter part of Acts, and others, as Ephesians, Colossians, and Philippians, during that imprisonment.

Further, it is clear that in Paul’s personal ministry he unfolded the same truths as in the epistles. We cannot, for instance, conceive that he preached one thing at Thessalonica and a few weeks later wrote another. Indeed he distinctly states that his written and oral ministry were the same. (See 2 Thess. ii, 5; 2 Cor. 1:13). Therefore "Church truth" was taught by the apostle during the period covered in the book of Acts. The force of this must be seen at once,-water baptism was practiced at the same time when baptism by the Spirit was taught.
But let us examine the epistles as to what they teach regarding water baptism. They are most assuredly Christian epistles, and unfold the precious truths of grace and the gift of the Holy Ghost. It is from them we learn the doctrine, as in the book of Acts we learn the fact, of the baptism of the Spirit. What have they to teach as to water baptism?

"Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into (Greek, unto] Jesus Christ were baptized into (unto) His death " (Rom. 4:3, 4). It is not within our purpose to dwell on the significance of the act of baptism,-which is however plain enough – but to show that it was the recognized practice among Christians. This the verse quoted clearly does. The apostle asks, "Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound?" and the answer is, We are dead to sin, and that is emphasized by the act of admitting us within the pale of Christianity. To be a disciple of Christ, to be baptized unto Him, was to own death, and the very act of baptism was a burial. The apostle refers to the baptism as the universally recognized badge of discipleship.

We see a similar use, in a different connection in the next epistle (i Cor. 15:29), "What shall they do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? " Christian baptism is for, or in place of, the dead. Saints died, passed off the scene, and fresh disciples took their places. They did so by baptism; that was their outward acknowledgment of the name of Christ. So here there is the recognition of, the taking for granted, the universal and necessary act of baptism. "As many of you as have been baptized unto Christ have put on Christ" (Gal. 3:27, 28). Here again, as in Rom. 6:, the allusion is to the Christian act. There is neither Jew nor Greek, but Christ’s name is upon all who have owned Him, and baptism was the confession of that. "As many of you," does not suggest that some had and some had not been baptized, in the original. The force would be "ye who have," or "your baptism" teaches thus and so.

In like manner Ephesians, the great epistle of the One Body, refers to water baptism as the manifest ordinance of Christianity-"One Lord, one faith, one baptism " (Eph. 4:5). The connection here is very clear and interesting. "There is one body and one Spirit even as ye are called in one hope of your calling. One Lord, one faith, one baptism." In speaking of the one body, the Church, the apostle links the Spirit with it; but when he refers to the Lordship of Christ, and the faith of Christianity, he connects with it the baptism which is the badge of subjection to Christ and the acknowledgment of the Christian faith or doctrine. The first is the sphere of the Church, of pure grace; the second, is the sphere of the Kingdom, of responsibility. There is a third sphere, that of creation-"one God and Father of all, who is over all, and through all, and in us all." Our only point here is that baptism has its distinct place, even in connection with other truths which show the unique place of the Church.

"Buried with Him in baptism" (Col. 2:12). This is a similar passage to that in Romans, and alludes to baptism in just the same way, as the universally recognized way of assuming the Christian faith. Should it be suggested that here it is connected with circumcision, both of them ordinances which are done away in Christ, it is sufficient to call attention to the fact that the circumcision is described as that ‘’made without hands" (Col. 2:ii):it was the circumcision, the death of Christ, in which we are circumcised. But it is not said the baptism was without hands. That was the normal Christian act which symbolized burial with Christ. The following clause should doubtless be rendered " in whom " and not "in which." We are risen in Christ, not in baptism, and it is by faith in God’s work who raised Him from the dead.

Thus we have found that in Paul’s epistles, those which notably dwell upon Christian standing as in Romans, deliverance from law as in Galatians, Church truth as in Corinthians and Ephesians, and deliverance from ordinances as in Colossians, we have not merely allusions to the universally accepted practice of baptism, but doctrines drawn from it. The conclusion is irresistible. Christian truth and water baptism are in no way inconsistent; they accompany one another. How different with circumcision, "If ye be circumcised Christ shall profit you nothing."

But it will be asked, Did not Paul say " Christ sent me not to baptize but to preach the gospel"? He certainly did; let us therefore examine the entire passage, i Cor. 1:12-17. The verse quoted is at the close of the passage, and must be taken in its connection or its meaning will be lost. Paul had heard of the divisions among the saints at Corinth. Among other names mentioned as leaders of parties was his own. He says, "was Paul crucified for you, or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?" He here speaks of the only foundation of our salvation-the crucifix–ion of Christ,-and the universally acknowledged act of baptism-each in its place absolutely distinct, and yet each well known and recognized. That does not look like a denial of baptism.

He next, in allusion to the fact that baptism was the act of making disciples, says he thanked God that he had baptized but few-Crispus and Gaius; and the household of Stephanas – but why? because it had been abrogated? No, but "lest any should say that I had baptized in (Greek, unto) mine own name." Paul allowed others to baptize, lest the impression should prevail that he was making disciples to himself. We can readily understand how, when faith waned, men would boast that so great a leader as Paul had baptized them. The ‘’ Name above every name " would be eclipsed by that of His servant. Thus we read (Acts 10:48) that Cornelius was baptized at the command of Peter, not by him. How everything emphasizes the absolute supremacy of that one peerless Name. It is this thought that seems prominent in Paul’s mind." He was not making disciples to himself-for Christ sent him to preach the gospel. Thus there is no thought of a denial of baptism, quite the reverse, but simply the assertion that Christ was supreme, and the gospel of Christ (introduction into the Church) was his chief work- baptism was necessary, but secondary.

But who that reads the book of Acts, can think of Paul denying baptism as binding? Did he see that the households of Lydia and the jailor at Philippi were baptized, without a knowledge as to Christ’s mission? Surely the question needs no answer.

The conclusion we reach therefore is definite and fully established. Water baptism was commanded by the risen Lord as a badge of discipleship in His Kingdom. As such it was administered by the apostles at Pentecost and throughout their labors in the gospel. The Church was formed at the same time by the baptism of the Spirit. The truth of the Church and of baptism by the Spirit was unfolded in Paul’s epistles, and in the same epistles water baptism is frequently referred to as taken for granted. Those who see the distinction between the Kingdom of heaven and the Church should therefore have no difficulty as to the binding nature of water baptism into the Kingdom.

One further passage calls for a remark:"Which figure also now saves you, even baptism, not a putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the demand as before God of a good conscience; by the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (i Pet. 3:21, J. N. D’s. version). Just as Noah was brought through the waters of death in the Ark, so the figure of baptism saves-1:e. figuratively shows how we are saved-as setting forth our going through the waters of death in Christ. And now the demand, the response rather, of a good conscience before God is-not baptism but the resurrection of Christ. Thus the passage falls into line with all the others we have been considering. It contains a reference to baptism, as the well known act of reception into the pale of Christianity, and proceeds to enlarge upon the spiritual truths which it suggests.

We thus take up the question at the head of our paper, and unhesitatingly reply that if we are to follow the command of Christ, the practice of the apostles in the Acts, and their teachings in the epistles, water baptism has a clearly defined place in Christianity; it is the outward badge of allegiance and responsibility to the Lord, and therefore belongs to all whose place is in the sphere of that responsibility, all who name the name of Christ-the Kingdom of heaven.

Of the importance of this subject it is scarcely needful to speak. All Scripture is important, and demands implicit obedience. There are dangers we can only point out. Those who deny baptism have no scripture for the Lord’s supper. They may inconsistently keep it, for the heart shrinks from disregarding our Lord’s request. But the same Lord ordained, and the same apostles prescribed the one and the other. One is for the Kingdom, the other for the Church. May our gracious God make us obedient to His will.

This suggests one of the probable reasons for so much confusion and denial, as to baptism. Very many have no settled convictions on the subject. They have drifted along, practically ignoring it. The Lord abhors neutrality. Many do not know whether they hold so-called believers or household baptism. Many who accept household baptism do not obey God in having their children baptized. We would affectionately urge the Lord’s people to seek His mind as to this matter. If they see what His will is, let them obey it. We believe there would soon be little inclination to reject what is so clearly the will of God-baptism in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. We would ask those who have hitherto refused this, to accept the truth, and to obey our Lord’s word, remembering they are giving up that which is the distinctive act of confessing allegiance to Christ before the world. "As many of you as were baptized unto Christ have put on Christ."

Num. 3:39-51.

It was the first-born of Egypt who were slain on the passover night, and the first-born of the Israelites who, sheltered by the blood of the passover lamb, escaped a like doom. The first-born is the heir, in whom the hopes center, and he fittingly represented all, whether in the family or the nation. So they have always been taken as typical of all who, sinners as they were, were endangered by their sins and exposed to judgment; but who have been shielded from that judgment by the blood of the Lamb without blemish or spot. It is not our purpose to dwell upon this feature, admitted by all true Christians.

It will be remembered that immediately after the awful night in Egypt, before they left that land, God put in His claim of absolute and special ownership of all the first-born. " Sanctify unto me all the firstborn, . . . both of man and of beast:it is mine" (Ex. 13:2). This right of ownership was emphasized by actual transference, in the case of clean animals to the Lord, and in the case of unclean animals and of man-solemn and suggestive association-by a special redemption. "All that openeth the matrix is mine; and every firstling among thy cattle, whether ox or sheep. But the firstling of an ass thou shalt redeem with a lamb:and if thou redeem him not, then shalt thou break his neck. All the first-born of thy sons thou shalt redeem " (Ex. 34:19, 20).

When the nation was fully organized, if we may use such language, each tribe and individual having the appointed place, this divine ownership of the first-born was emphasized in taking the whole tribe of Levi as the substitute for them. Nor was this a vague and general transfer, either in the service to be rendered by the Levites, or in the number of the men compared with the number of the first-born. There were twenty-two thousand Levites; and two hundred and seventy-three first-born above this number.

Men would have said this was "near enough." But no:each one of these had to pay a special ransom of five shekels, a substitute for a Levite lacking. Thus again was emphasized the fact of God’s absolute ownership, by right of redemption, of each individual among the first-born.

We have said the Levites were called to a distinct service. They were "given to Aaron," and were to be employed, under his direction, in connection with the holy things of the tabernacle. Each part of the tabernacle was entrusted to some branch of the family of Levi. Into all this, most interesting and instructive, we do not enter here.

Passing now to the spiritual application of all this, little remark is needed. We have been redeemed from a bondage worse far than that of Egypt, and sheltered from a judgment compared with which that visited upon her first-born was as nothing. We have been redeemed "not with corruptible things such as silver and gold, but with the precious blood of Christ as of a lamb without blemish and without spot." As such we are no longer our own, "ye are bought with a price." And just as Israel’s first-born were the Lord’s, so are we, distinctly and absolutely.
Nor is this divine ownership in us an uncertain, vague thing. There is now no class of Levites who can be substituted for the first-born. All redeemed are both. We cannot transfer our responsibility to substitutes. With Israel, when the first-born had seen the claim for his service laid upon the Levite, he could go on and seek his own concerns. But this is not so with us. We are the Levites, whose life-long service is to show the reality of the fact of our redemption.

See how exact this service-requirement is. There are no odd ones who, though redeemed, have no responsibility for service. Just as surely as an Israelite first-born was redeemed, so surely was service required of a Levite, or its equivalent. Is it not so now? Has God any idlers among His ransomed? Surely not; but each individual has a place in His service which no one else can fill.

And this is service. It is under the control and guidance of our great Priest that we are to render it, according to His mind, not according to our choice. Is there one who says, I have no service to perform? Such an one might well question his redemption. As to the nature of the service, Another must tell us. There is honor in doing the least thing for Him. But there cannot be a moment’s doubt that somewhere in His work He would appoint us our place. Many who are not clear as to salvation anxiously seek assurance as to that, and the word of God gives it to us amply. Is there the same anxiety to ascertain our place in service, and to have the assurance as to that? Surely we cannot have a doubt that the Lord would have us know our true place.

It will be said, All this is old, simple and well understood. Quite true, but because it is old, we need to have our minds stirred up by it, in order that we may put our ministry to the proof. Redemption and service:-how indissolubly are these two facts linked together in God’s word. May they likewise be so in the lives of His redeemed people.

Ques. 10.-It is frequently said that though the believer is born again and has a new nature, he also has the old nature. Scripture says our old man is crucified with Christ, and that means death. Is the flesh the same as the old nature, and what is the difference between the old man and the flesh?

Ans.-"The old nature" is not a scriptural expression, though its meaning is sufficiently clear. "The flesh "is the scriptural term and refers to that which belongs to the nature of fallen man. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh." "The old man" refers to a person, responsible before God- what we were in Adam. This old man, this responsible man in the flesh, has come to an end in the cross. He has ceased to exist before God. But the flesh, the nature that belonged to that old man, still exists and has to be constantly judged and its lusts abstained from.

When the Lord was here He mingled freely among men of every class. He had come to serve men, even to the laying down of His life for them. He loved men, and their needs drew Him on.

But it was not hard for men to see that He was not as one of them. That He had come from another world, was actuated by motives different from theirs, loved not what they loved, and in His ways and words shed a light upon them which condemned them and made them either repent and follow Him, or resist and hate Him.

When He returned to His glory He left His people behind to continue this on earth. His Church as a whole should practically be here a Nazarite as was her Lord. But if, wedded to the world, she has ceased to be that, it is still both the privilege and responsibility of individual members of the Church to be what, as a whole, she ought to be.

This necessitates their separation from the church world as well as from the world itself. Nor is such separation to be confounded with that made by heresy:Heresy separates to be free to have its own way, and to make a center of itself. Nazariteship separates because it cannot otherwise be free for Christ. Christ is its all. At whatever cost it must yield Him the obedience which is His due.

Nor is it the obedience of a hireling who works for pay. It is "faith which worketh by love." It is from a heart captivated by His grace. It is that living water which having first quenched the sinner’s thirst, becomes "in him a well of water springing up unto everlasting life " (John 4:).

The coming of our Lord is near. The heat of the day is well-nigh spent. What an encouragement for the hearts of His beloved people to be true to Him. P. J. L.

At our general meetings, mornings and afternoons are commonly occupied with readings and open meetings; the evenings are generally devoted to lectures. Might we not take a little profitable counsel here, and consider any possible danger, as regards our way as to the evenings?

Should we not be on our guard against deciding or arranging as to what we would prefer? Should not those who take the lead be jealously on their guard against this, so that what is ministered may be truly of the Lord-not human arrangement, nor human wisdom?

If no one announces beforehand his purpose to address us, would it not be better to assemble without soliciting any one, leaving the way open for any one who may be led at the time to speak to us?

If no one has been announced as desiring to lecture, and yet a certain one or other is counted upon, should we not be very careful to hold this desire and expectation with such reserve, that if some one else arises to speak we shall be ready to receive from him whatever is for edification?

These are delicate considerations, but the Lord will help us to keep the balance.

If we had spiritual strength would there not be place for lectures in open meetings? why should not the whole time be taken up by one, occasionally? Would not the power and edification manifested show to all that the lecture was of God-though no time was left for others- and others would be more free, in an open meeting, to shew their fellowship in prayer and praise? And even at a "lecture" would it not be well both for the speaker and his brethren to count upon the liberty of the Spirit, in any such open hearted expression of fellowship and joy, as might especially be manifested at the close of a heart-filling address?

We will all agree that what is needed is that all should be led of the Spirit, whether those speaking or those who are silent. There is One who searches the hearts.

If we are in prayer and waiting upon God, the word of ministry will be the word suited for us. It will strengthen us for the way, it will fill us with joy. Deeply humiliating it is, both for speaker and hearers, when it is otherwise.

If our open meetings are sometimes humiliations, let us learn the needed, lesson; let us not be discouraged; let us seek restoring grace. Let us pray without ceasing. E. S. L.

We commend our brother’s remarks upon this most important subject to the prayerful consideration of the Lord’s people. Our sweetest privileges may become snares if they are not used aright. Anything that comes between the soul and God, even though it be a gift from Him, is a snare. On the other hand each one is to recognize his personal responsibility to minister what the Lord may give. Two principles seem to be involved, which though, of course, not contradictory are clearly distinct:the presence and guidance of the Holy Spirit, on the one hand, and individual gift and responsibility for its use, on the other. At a general meeting, or any meeting, these principles are to be remembered and acted upon, not only when such a meeting may be in session, but during the intervals as well. A spirit of prayer should mark all our gatherings. Where God is thus owned and waited upon, there is little difficulty as to details. We do not believe it to be a mark of spirituality to sit in barren silence. Such silences are often a reproof for our lack of prayer and faith, and are alas too often broken in upon in mere fleshly energy. A mere "open meeting" will not remedy this. God must be waited upon, must be counted upon. It is this we are sure our brother would emphasize. May we not ask ourselves if the intervals between the meetings might not be given more to prayer, to silent meditation, or godly converse? We are persuaded that this is done in good measure, but may we not "abound more and more"? A sweet sense of God’s gracious presence with us will result, and a quiet restfulness of spirit which is ready to be silent before Him, to hearken to others, or to speak ourselves, will mark our coming together.

Where this is the case the nature of the meeting will be easily understood. Those who have a word from God will be ready to give it, while those with a longer message will not hold back. Each will feel his responsibility.

But we do not think that this will necessarily exclude the lecture, or even its announcement beforehand. If a reading meeting is announced beforehand, may not a lecture also? If there be present servants of the Lord from whose ministry we have profited before, is there any denial of the Spirit’s control, after waiting upon God, to give a meeting to such, in which it is understood that the meeting is entirely in the hands of the speaker, to use as God may guide? We do not think that such meetings should exclude the open meeting, nor, as our brother suggests, that even at an open meeting a long address may not be given. But it is merely a question of fellowship, whether a brother should not be conferred with beforehand as to whether he has it upon his heart to give us a lecture. Some of the most precious ministry we have received has been given to us in this way.

We need hardly say that such meetings should form but part of the general meeting. Ample time should be given for Bible readings and for the open meeting.

With regard to the open meeting, the saints we fear shrink from their responsibility. "Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge " (i Cor. 14:29). We have here a twofold responsibility:the prophets are to speak "two or three," not in unlimited numbers, and the rest are to judge. Those who speak are to do so "as the oracles of God." What dependence, what holy fear, what singleness of eye are here involved. They are to speak too in limited numbers, "two or three." Saints are confused by a multiplicity of addresses. Doubtless this has been frequently ignored, to our loss.

But there is another side of this responsibility which is perhaps even more overlooked. It relates not to the speakers, but to the hearers:"Let the others judge." This does not mean, let them criticize. That alas, is too common, and nothing grieves and quenches the Spirit more quickly. But the hearers are to discern the Lord’s mind as to what has been spoken. They are to try the words, " For the ear trieth words, as the mouth tasteth meat. Let us choose to us judgment:let us know among ourselves what is good" (Job 34:3, 4). It is just here that firmness and love find their place. Instead of speaking disparagingly of a brother’s failure, or of the unsuitableness of his remarks, the responsibility of the saints is plain. They are to speak to such a brother, not of him. We believe this would most effectually check the spirit of criticism. If a brother manifestly violates the liberty of the Spirit, he should be spoken with gently, but firmly. It is this that will help to clear the open meeting from the reproach that rests upon it. We believe that if the forwardness and irrelevancy, so often deplored in secret, were charged to the brethren who offend-in all love and kindness-there would not be such shrinking from the open meeting. These precious privileges are of too great value to be trifled with for fear of offending a brother. If he is in a right state he will not be offended by the "faithful wounds" of a friend.

May we be permitted to add a further word as to the general meeting? We are sure the hearts of many have been pained by the great number of hymns given out at meetings for breaking bread, and the general spirit of forwardness that sometimes has marked that holy season. Far be it from us to say a word that would check Christian liberty or put a damper upon Christian joy. But the heart yearns for the chastened quiet, broken only by the leading of the Spirit of God. Then a hymn will be the echo of heavenly praise, and every word will lift the heart to God.

We have much, very much to thank God for, but we trust we are not so satisfied with ourselves as not to "suffer a word of exhortation."

What a mighty influence this world exerts over us! It is ever interweaving something into the framework of our hourly life; drawing a film between the soul and God, and deadening the keenness and sensibility of our spiritual perceptions. There is no moment when it is not upon us. Like the law of gravitation, which universally takes effect wheresoever it is not kept out by a special counteraction, so is it in our intercourse with the world. All the day long there is an influence playing upon us which draws our characters to the surface, and there fixes them; it rushes upon us with an overwhelming torrent; enters into the soul through our eyes and ears, and every inlet of the senses; through our instincts, our wants, and our natural affections; smothering or extinguishing every thing that would lead to something higher; each day drawing a fresh, hard layer over the heart; each energy laying another touch on the deepening character, and every moment fixing its colors with deeper steadfastness, until we live and act as if it were our only home.

For all this, we need a strong counteracting influence. Our life is too outward and visible among the throng of men; we are not enough alone with God; we live in the unreal, and become unreal ourselves. There must be the calmness of intercourse with God. God’s presence is full of reality; and His presence must be the antidote to the withering blight and the hourly infection of this world, and must abolish in us all that is not real and eternal. Never do we so put off the paint and masquerade of life as when alone with Him. The duplicities of the heart, which the world had interweaved, are held in check, and by habitual communion with God are weakened and overcome. This is the only counteracting and transforming influence; and think as we will, we may rely upon it, that, if we are not under it, the world will most surely and deeply conform us to itself.

In our intercourse with it, a thousand tests touch us on every side; and if we would maintain uninterruptedly our communion with God, we must also be watchful. We must watch against sin, against the world, and against self.

We must watch against sin. Nothing so darkens the soul as sin, or produces so deadening an insensibility. And it gains an entrance with inconceivable subtlety. Just as we contract slight peculiarities of manner, tone, and gait, without knowing it, so in like manner, does the soul become warped and darkened by sin. It can hide itself from the conscience; it is most concealed at its highest pitch; and when it is at the worst, it is least perceived-it has no sensible pain. Thus our insensibility becomes continuous. We come to live without any true relation to the presence of God; consenting to the darkness of our own hearts; cold and dead in our affections; formal and lifeless in prayer; and the whole moral and spiritual nature estranged from God. Pride and vanity, self-complacency and envy, scornfulness and wrath- all follow in the train of this spiritual deterioration.

This is the cause of much of the insensibility and deadness of which people so often complain. Sins unconfessed and forgotten lie festering in the dark; and our whole communion with God and our spiritual character suffer in all its parts and powers. It is the deadness and insensibility consequent on this that obstructs the spiritual life, and thrusts itself between the soul and" the presence of God.

For all this, there is only one remedy-immediate confession. Come and throw yourself in to the arms of everlasting Love! Open the heart, with all its sins and stains, to Jesus. His love is the light in which we shall see our sins, and the light in which we shall see them forgiven.

Let nothing harbor or fester in the heart. If sins be allowed to linger, they will only taint and estrange it more; the sins and spiritual decays of to-day will run on into to-morrow, and to-morrow will begin with an inclination to a lower tone. One day heaps its sin upon another, and our spiritual decline gains in speed as it gains in time. In this, there is one specially alarming thought-the degrees are so shadowy, and the transitions so imperceptible, that it is like a motion too slow to be measured by the eye, or so intense as to seem like rest. If we are not much in the presence of the Lord, these decays will be always advancing.

The true secret of preserving our spirituality of mind, and maintaining our communion with God is, to bring our sin to Jesus the moment it is committed, and while it is fresh on the soul. In the street, in the throng, in the routine of every-day life, let the heart go up in unreserved confession. Let us guard against hesitation. Hesitation brings reasons for delay, and delay opens the door for forgetfulness. One moment’s delay brings unknown hindrances. The suggestions of God’s Spirit are like the flowing of the tide, which, taken at the full, will lift us over every bar-tarry and lose them, and we are stranded! Let us go at once to Jesus with them all. So shall the "blood of sprinkling" be precious to our souls, and we too shall " walk with God."

We must watch against the world. On many Christians, this world weighs heavily, and lowers them to its own standard. Only the few rise above it. All its efforts are exerted to shut out the stern reality of the cross. Its pleasures and amusements, its mirth and its songs, its religion and its worship, find no place there, and cannot go with us into the presence of the Lord. Let us watch against the standard and tone of its society, against the spirit of its social life. To mingle with it in safety to the soul there needs gifts the very reverse of which make men its favorites-caution, retirement, silence; and its tone and spirit will surely be caught up unless we are in habitual intercourse with God.

We must watch against self. Unless God be the center of the soul, it will be a center to itself. Such a spirit is a deliberate contradiction of Him who made Himself of no reputation. Let us watch against ourselves; our self-pleasing and self-love; our tempers and our spirits; our inclinations and our aims; our desires and our imaginations; our thoughts and our words. Let us bring them all into His presence. There we shall see them as they are. There we shall learn the true character of them and of ourselves. It the light of His presence there are no illusions. All the colors and shadows, the false and changeful hues, the gloss and the glitter which we put upon ourselves in the world, and even in the light of our own conscience, are there dispelled. Thus shall our souls be filled with His brightness, and we shall ‘’ glorify God both in our bodies and in our spirits, which are God’s."

(Concluded from page 134.)

Paul ends the presentation of the glad tidings in the eighth chapter of Romans, and then goes on to other themes.

In the eleventh chapter he says, "Blindness in part is happened to Israel until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in " (ver. 25). This will close this Christian dispensation when the dead saints shall be "raised, and the living ones changed in a moment, and all together caught up to meet the Lord in the air, and so shall be ever with the Lord" (i Thess. 4:12). It is then that "the saints are clothed upon with their house (new bodies) which are from heaven " (2 Cor. 5:2). " For (or because) our citizenship is in heaven, from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto His body of glory, according to the working whereby He is able to subdue all things to Himself " (Phil. 3:20). After this we are taught by Paul that Israel shall be taken up again, as God’s earthly people, and the kingdom of Israel be restored, with David’s Son, the Lord Jesus, as King, who will (as David in his day) subdue all the earth to His sway, until "every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord to the glory of God the Father" (Isa. 45:23, and Phil. 2:10,11). This is the work of the blessed Lord Jesus when He comes again to earth, though the world’s church, in its own darkness, pride, and self-sufficiency, has usurped it, and is now striving in vain to accomplish it!

Paul concludes this epistle of the gospel to the Gentiles in these words:"Now to Him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ according to the revelation of the mystery which was kept secret since the world began, but now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets (new dispensation prophets) according to the commandment of the Eternal God, made known for the obedience of faith" (chap. 16:25, 26). Again, "We speak the wisdom of God in a mystery" (i Cor. 2:7).

We come now to the next epistle of Paul (as our version is arranged) which is specially addressed to the Church, and contains special instructions for God’s order in the Church on earth. Please keep this in mind, as it is important for a proper understanding of Church truth. All these epistles are to the saints and for their teaching and edification in the Church of God, ‘’ which is the pillar and ground of the truth"-or should be. They are not written for outsiders at all, and cannot be apprehended or understood but by the Spirit of God, whom only the saints have. He dwells in the saints, and is their great Leader and Teacher-by the word of God-if they only have the faith for Him. Here in the beginning, after forbidding any division among them- which command alone should extinguish all sects- he says, "We speak the wisdom of God in a mystery"- and much more:turn to your Bibles and read it (chap. 2:7).

In the eleventh chapter we have some things for which he praises the Corinthian Church, and others in which he does not praise, but condemns; and one of these is the disorderly manner in which they observe the Lord’s supper. First, he tells them there are divisions (sects) among them, and that it is impossible to eat the Lord’s supper aright in divisions, because it is in itself a symbol of the unity of the Church, all one in Christ Jesus. "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion (all of one mind with God) of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? for we being many are one loaf, one body, for we are all partakers of that one loaf" (i Cor. 10:16, 17). It is therefore impossible to partake aright of the Lord’s supper in sectarianism, because it is in itself a type, or figure, of the one Body, the oneness of the body of Christ. "Is Christ divided? " (i Cor. 1:13.)

In the twelfth chapter we have a full description of the Church, the one body-of which all believers are members:"for by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body;" and thus by the Spirit of our God are we all united together into the one body, and by the same eternal bond to our Head who is in heaven. Therefore as all the members of our bodies are completely subject to the head, so also should we all be subject to Christ- in all things. His will for us and about us is fully made known to us in His word, which we have in our hands, and we all have "an unction from the Holy One," to enable us to understand and obey it. Our responsibility is to do this.

In the thirteenth chapter we have set forth the love which characterizes the Church. The word rendered "charity" in our version is better translated "love." In the fourteenth chapter God even gives us the order of worship in the Church. There is no clerisy in it. Clerisy is of man, not of God, and has no place in God’s order for worship. Clerisy is believed by many to be the " Nicolaitanism" of Revelation 2:All worship, and all order in the Church, is of God by the Spirit, gathered by Him unto the name of the Lord Jesus, to remember Him in His death, and with Him in the midst (Matt. 18:20). He rules and reigns in His assembly, and all said or done is to be in subjection and obedience to Him. He is the Head, and we the members of His body, subject to the Head:for no man can call Jesus Lord, but by the Holy Ghost (chap. 12:3). Here all things are of God, according to the order set forth in this fourteenth chapter. If one reads or expounds the Word, gives thanks, breaks the bread, sings praise, or exhorts the saints, it is to be by the Spirit and according to God.

The epistles to the Corinthians and also that to the Galatians, as well as all of Paul’s earlier letters, are addressed to the Church; but later, in Ephesians, Philippians and Colossians, he addresses himself not to the Church, which is significant, but "to the saints and faithful brethren" as individuals:as though the churches had already begun to lose their first love, as is charged against the church at Ephesus in Rev. 2:

In these epistles is set forth the highest grade of Christian truth contained in the whole Bible. In Ephesians we have the highest blessings and privileges of the Church set forth. There is no justification in it, but the saints "blessed with all spiritual blessings in the heavenlies in Christ." "Herein is made known unto us the mystery of His will"-"the eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of His calling, and what the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, and what the exceeding greatness of His power to us-ward who believe, (the saints) according to the working of His mighty power, (resurrection power) which He wrought in Christ, when He raised Him from the dead and set Him at His own right hand in the heavenlies, far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come:and hath put all under His feet, and gave Him to be Head over all to the Church, which is His body, the fulness of Him that filleth all in all" (Eph. 1:18 to end of chapter).

"We (the saints of which the Church of God is composed) are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus (new creation) unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them " (chap. 2:10).

In the third chapter we have Paul’s gospel specially set forth. It is a new dispensation, God’s new order for the Church in the world, and is revealed to him out of heaven.

It is "the mystery, which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men" (vers. 3-5). It was given to him, he tells us, "to preach the unsearchable riches of Christ, and to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, to the intent that now (never before) unto the principalities and powers in the heavenlies might be known, by the Church, the manifold wisdom of God, according to the eternal purpose which He purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord" (vers. 8-11). There is much more of it in the chapter, which concludes with that wonderful prayer that the saints may be able, by the power of God, the Spirit, to comprehend the breadth and length and depth and height of all this; "and to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, (out of which all this blessing comes) that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God’"

In the fifth chapter, we have the relationship of Christ to His Church set forth under the figure of husband and wife. As the wife is-or should be-subject to her husband in all things, so is the Church to Christ. "Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the Church and gave Himself for it; that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the Word, that He might present it to Himself a glorious Church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself; for no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the Church:for we are members of His body. . . . This is a great mystery:but I speak concerning Christ and the Church."

What a marvelous intimacy exists between Christ and His Church! It is God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus, united into one body by the Spirit, blest with all spiritual blessings in the heavenlies, united to Christ the Head in heaven by the Spirit, dead to this world and risen with Christ, as we get in Colossians; and now awaiting His return, thus to get our new bodies of glory, and go to be forever with Him in the Father’s house above!

This is the mystery which had heretofore been hid in God, but is now revealed unto us by the Lord Jesus from heaven, through His chosen messenger, Paul. It is to him, "My Gospel," "The mystery of the Gospel," God’s new order of things for His saints in this dispensation of grace.

In Colossians we have from Paul again, "I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to complete (pleroo) the word of God; the mystery which hath been hid from ages and generations, but now is made manifest to His saints." This mystery is revealed through Paul, and not through Peter, James, John or any of the other apostles. He was chosen to complete the word of God to man. It was incomplete until "the mystery of the Church" was revealed.

In the second chapter, we are told that "we are complete in Him," in Christ; "in Him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily" and "in Him "- all is in Him-"ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ" (chap. 2:ii). It is not "the sins of the flesh," as in the common translation, but the body of the flesh itself, the Adam nature set aside in the cross of Christ. The old man has been set aside forever as being unfit for God and incapable of being made fit; therefore he had to be cut off, and was cut off in the cross. This is why the Lord Jesus had to die. He died for us, was cut. off as a substitute for us, and we in Him. Believers accept this truth, by faith take their place with Him in death, the outside place, come to the end of themselves before Him, "reckon themselves dead indeed unto sin," and are made alive by the power of God in new creation. It is the miracle of the new birth, and when so born we are entitled to all the privileges and blessings won for and freely given to us by the Lord Jesus Christ. It is, "as is your faith, so be it unto you." The table is spread, the good things are all provided, come in and take all that you will have! We are "blessed with all spiritual blessings in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus"; but " in Christ" is out of Adam, to faith. This is resurrection life. It is "risen with Christ" and so beyond the cross, beyond death. It is life, new life, eternal life! It is God’s new creation in Christ Jesus. It is, to faith, out of Adam, and "in Christ"; out of the world, and in the heavenlies!

" If then ye be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. Set your affections on things above; not on things on the earth, for ye are dead and your life is hid with Christ in God. When Christ, our life, shall appear, then shall we also appear with Him in glory" (Col. 3:1-4).

We shall appear with Him when He comes to judge the earth, because the saints will have previously been caught up to meet the Lord in the air, as set forth in i Thess. 4:The appearing is set forth symbolically in the nineteenth of Revelation, when "the marriage of the Lamb has come, and His wife has made herself ready."

All this, and much more, is the portion of the Church. The way into it is through death and resurrection. Death with Him and resurrection "in Him." It is all of God, by Jesus Christ; real now to faith, and realized in all its fulness when "He that shall come will come and will not tarry."

This is the Church according to God’s mind, as set forth in the Word; and which man in the unbelief of human wisdom has entirely missed; just as Israel missed the knowledge of their own Messiah. It is man’s failure under this dispensation of grace as it was man’s failure under the past dispensation of law.

The World’s Church Judged.

In the book of Revelation we have set forth the Lord in judgment subduing the earth; and first we see the world’s church judged in chapters two and three. The Lord Himself in person, as Judge, is set before us in the first chapter, judging the Church; and in the two next chapters the whole history of the Church in the world is symbolically described from the beginning. It is a sad picture of declensions through the whole of its seven stages, from loss of "first love" in Ephesus, to the pride, boasting and complete ruin of Laodicea,-spewed out of His mouth. Out of it all, only a little remnant that "have kept His word and not denied His name" remains! This remnant is the little church of Philadelphia-"brotherly love."

Out of this scene of judgment the saints are all caught up to meet the Lord in the air, and the whole scene changes to a heavenly one in the fourth chapter. Here is seen the Church in heaven, under the symbol of "the four and twenty elders." Now "the days of vengeance of our God " (Isa. 61:3) are fully come, and the judgments of God are visited upon the earth from heaven, until the nineteenth chapter, in which the Lord with His saints descends to earth and rules and reigns over it in millennial glory.

In all this judgment of the Church, as set forth in the second and third chapters, we have at every step downwards the word of God sounding in our ears, "He that hath an ear let him hear what the Spirit saith to the churches." The appeal, it will be seen, is to the individuals in the churches. " He that hath an ear let him hear," etc. The world church will never be reclaimed and brought up to the unity and fellowship of the Church of God revealed to us through Paul; therefore the appeal here is to the individual saints, as to Abram of old, to "leave their country, their kindred, and their father’s house, and go unto a land that I will show thee." It is to come out of the world to Christ; to walk on the water to go unto Him, and this can only be in the faith that God giveth,-to the humble, believing, submissive soul. He is found now in the outside place, the place of rejection, as ever before. "We have an altar whereof they have no right to eat which serve the tabernacle (the worldly sanctuary); for the bodies of those beasts whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high-priest for-sin, are burned without the camp-in the outside place; wherefore Jesus also, that He might sanctify the people with His own blood, suffered without the gate; let us go forth therefore unto Him without the camp, bearing His reproach, for here we have no continuing city, but we seek one to come. By Him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is the fruit of our lips, giving thanks to His name " (Heb. 13:10-16). J. S. P.

True Christianity ever magnifies Christ, and we may test the claims of that which assumes to be true by proving whether Christ is glorified by it or not. Let us look at the inspired words of the apostle Paul:"I am crucified with Christ:nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me" (Gal. 2:20). Now, much Christianity which is accepted as devout, looks for perfection in a result which may be summed up thus:"I am Crucified." This being crucified is regarded as the highest attainment. Self is mastered; the world conquered. There is victory over passions and temptations, and the "crucified," being dead to all that to which he was once a slave, is in this world a superior power to the world. To such as have reached this elevation our paper is not addressed. But there are many who are striving to crucify themselves, to put themselves to death, to be master over themselves and the temptations and allurements of the world and their enemy, sin, and to those especially our few words are directed.

Now, the apostle does not say, "I am crucified," but he says, "I am crucified with Christ." It is quite possible to say, "I am crucified," and yet to leave Christ out of one’s religion, and all the while to be an enemy of Christ’s cross. "I am crucified" may be merely the outcome of fancied spiritual attainment and the result of spiritual pride. But "I am crucified with Christ" is in no sense whatever a sign of superior goodness; on the contrary, it is the evidence of the terrible nature of sin which demanded for our salvation the cross of the Son of God; and it is the blessed assurance that, vile as we are in ourselves, by being crucified with Him we have been judged and condemned, when Christ in mercy was judged and took our condemnation upon Him, on Calvary.

"Crucified with Christ" does not allow us, in ourselves, one single standpoint before God. It sweeps away all our hopes of self-betterment, and of our dying to what we are by nature, and instead, it accepts with reverence and with love, the position our Lord and Saviour took for us on the cross in grace as our position. In His judgment we were judged, in His death we died. As a man might say of his substitute, "He died not only for me, but I died with Him," so we are privileged to say of our Saviour and Substitute, "He died for me and met my deserts, and I died with Him and receive the satisfaction rendered to God by His death."

Here is the true beginning for the Christian-"I am crucified with Christ." He does not, therefore, look to himself for power to die to himself, but he looks to Christ’s cross and knows that there he was crucified with Christ. The cross of Christ is his judicial end in the sight of God, and when by faith he takes in God’s fact about himself, he starts his spiritual career with the reality of his utter badness by nature, and the condemnation of what he is by Christ’s cross.

Having spoken of the end of the old, the apostle proceeds to the beginning of the new. "Nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me." The apostle lived in the energy of the Holy Spirit of God; he was a witness on the earth to divine love and power. Whence then this life? Of himself He had spoken:" I am crucified with Christ." Now of himself as the Christian, he in effect says, Though crucified, still I am a living man, spiritually, but the source of this life is Christ. This is not victorious self reasserting itself. It is not Paul, the Jewish Pharisee, nor Paul, the Christian Pharisee-no, Not I, not self, but Christ. " I live, yet not I, but Christ who liveth in me."

Neither could it be said Paul so became crucified that Christ could live in him, for he says, "I am crucified with Christ." He did not become crucified by slow degrees, but with’ Christ who was crucified on Calvary. To leave out "with Christ" would be to leave us a crucified Paul without Christ. And this would be that kind of Christianity which endeavors by following Christ, to arrive at Christ crucified, whereas God begins with Christ crucified for us and our being crucified with Christ, and thus opens up to us the Christian life in its power and faith.

" I am crucified with Christ" is grace and not attainment. It is the portion of every believer, and we should so deport ourselves as to conform to the reality.

"Nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me," is also not attainment; it is grace, absolute grace, and it is as much for us as for the apostle. There is none other life for any Christian whereby he lives before God in holiness than this:"Christ liveth in me." There are not two lives for the Christian whereby he lives to God, one more exalted than the other-one for the selected saints, the other for the general class. All God’s children are in Christ, and Christ is in all God’s children. But when we speak of the manner of our living, another subject is before us-then we have degrees of excellence before us, and attainment in practical holiness.

The apostle said, further, "And the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave Himself for me." Now, in this there is attainment-there is spirituality and true holiness. From Christ he drew his strength for each day and hour. The wonder of his zeal, the beauty of his character, arose from Christ, in whom he lived daily by faith. Faith is our own. Each believer has faith for himself; and a life of faith is the personal and constant reliance of the soul upon the Lord in heaven.

It is very delightful to hear the great apostle say, "Yet not I," also of his labors for God. He magnified God’s grace in all that God did by him:"I labored more abundantly than they all:yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me " (i Cor. 15:10). He gives us the true secret of power, of living and of working, and the secret is Christ, "not I."

" And He gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ" (Eph. 4:11, 12.)

We need hardly remind our readers that punctuation, as we now know it, is of comparatively recent origin. In the Greek manuscripts there is nothing of the kind, words and sentences following one another without marks of separation. While for us this would render reading more difficult, we must not think of it as affecting or necessarily obscuring the meaning. The arrangement of words in the sentence frequently took the place of punctuation most effectually, and sometimes a change of word or particle would render the meaning clear.

A striking instance of this last will be found in the latter clause of the passage at the head of this paper. In our authorized version-most admirable, and for all ordinary purposes, exact translation-the passage stands as we have quoted it. The English reader would think that "for the perfecting of the saints for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ,"gave us three distinct and Coordinate objects contemplated in the various gifts of Christ to the Church. He would not suppose that the word "for," thrice repeated, is a translation of two different prepositions; and yet such is the case:"For (πρoς) the perfecting of the saints, for (εις) the work of the ministry, for (εις) the edifying of the body of Christ."

The word also translated "perfecting" has perhaps a different meaning in the original. It is from the same root rendered "mending" (Matt. 4:21; Mark 1:19), "fitted" (Rom. 9:22), "prepared" (Heb. 10:5), "restore" (Gal. 6:i). The thought is not making perfect in the ordinary sense of the word, but fitting, preparing for a definite use,-as in a net, or a vessel.

Returning to the clause, having noted these points, it might be rendered, "for the preparation of the saints unto the work of the ministry, unto the edifying of the body of Christ." It will be noticed that we have now removed the comma after "saints," because of the change of preposition, and instead of having these coordinate objects for which gifts were given, we have one, "the perfecting or fitting of the saints;" and this again is for the work of the ministry and the edifying of the body of Christ.

But surely our object has not been to point out some nicety of grammar or translation. We believe that the passage as it now appears will give a fresh view of a most important subject, and correct a very gave error in which the Lord’s people are constantly in danger of falling.

As the passage is ordinarily understood, there are certain "gifts" which Christ has bestowed upon the Church, men especially endowed and entrusted with the work of the ministry. The danger here is in regarding a certain limited class as entrusted with this work, so that the vast bulk of the Lord’s people are either excluded or exonerated from the activities of the body. Many introduce a safeguard in the suggestion that all have one or the other of these gifts. We believe the rendering indicated will obviate either interpretation.

There are certain clear and well defined gifts of a leading character, if we may so speak. The apostles and prophets are clearly connected with the foundation or establishment of the Church (chap. 2:20). We have them in the inspired Scriptures, and in the order of the Church as at first set up. Evangelists, pastors and teachers, are the three gifts respectively for gathering in, caring for and instructing the Lord’s people.

Now it is evident that these three gifts are entrusted to certain persons. The apostle asks in another passage, "Are all apostles, are all prophets, are all teachers? " (i Cor. 12:29). It will not do to say every Christian is an evangelist, or a pastor, or a teacher. Neither Scripture nor observation will bear this out. Evidently these gifts are special, and in a sense limited.

But if this be so, the upholder of the clerical system will say we have here our authority for a limited ministry-"a one man ministry." Notice how absolutely the Scripture guards against such an abuse. These special gifts are for "fitting the saints to the work of the ministry." It is the saints, all the saints, who are to engage in this work of the ministry, and for this they are fitted by these gifts endowed of Christ.

Next to the assumption of clerical authority even by one who has distinctly a gift, we believe that the effort to assume a gift unpossessed is unscriptural and injurious. It is not every one who can hold an audience and speak to edification, whether to saints or sinners; often the way of truth is evil spoken of because unsent men, presuming upon a "free ministry," intrude themselves where God did not intend them to go.

But worse even than this disorder is that clerical spirit so closely allied to Rome’s priesthood, that they blend together. Let us keep the even balance of truth.

Returning for a little to the passage we learn that some, not all, are evangelists, and so on. But we learn further that the special work of these fits all the saints for ministry; and how varied is that ministry. We may not be teachers, but we may in our measure be "apt to teach," able to teach or help one another; we may not have a clearly marked gift as an evangelist, but we can tell of Christ to a sinner; we may not be pastors, but we can love, care for, and help one another.

There is not a single member of the body of Christ who should not be engaged in the work of the ministry; man or woman, each has his appointed place and service. None are exempt; none dare refuse at peril of impairing the usefulness of the body.

But who denies this? we are asked; why all these truisms? We reply, Because they are not believed and not acted upon. We would call the particular attention of those who know these things to them afresh. Gifted brethren, you say, preach, teach, and visit. Ah! gifted brethren are not given that the others should fold their hands and do nothing. They are rather to furnish all for the work. A teacher who does not prepare teachers, an evangelist who does not equip evangelists, is not only half doing his work,-he is hindering, or quenching, the Spirit. In like manner the saints who remain apathetic are quenching the Spirit.

No amount of precious truth can take the place of the activities of Christ’s body. Nay, truth will lose its power, or change to error if it find no response in the ministrations of love.

What a personal matter this is! Each brother and sister can ask, Am / being used in the work of the ministry? Am I edifying the body of Christ? If not, let us remember that no one can do it in our place. If we are idle, our work is never fully done, and the body suffers. May our hearts and consciences be stirred as to these subjects during the little time that still remains.

By cloud and storm Thou teachest me.
While o’er life’s main Thou leadest me
The haven reached, at home with Thee,
I’ll bless Thee for their ministry.

I may not know what storm, or shoal,
Awaits me on life’s tide;
I may not know if joy, or woe,
Shall tend my footsteps as I go,
The while I shall abide-
Life’s sea is rude and wide.

I only know the past is full
Of clouds of varying hue;
I may not see why this should be,
Or that, but oh, I know that He
(Though all should fail,) is true,
He’ll safely bear me through.

This strange and tangled web I weave,
Mysterious to me!
His love alone could mark and own,
A work so miserably done,
Yet He accepts most graciously,
What love hath wrought imperfectly

I may not draw aside the veil
That kindly intervenes:
But, come what may, I know some day,
He’ll tell me in His own blest way,
What every trial means
By which my heart He weans.

No sorrow’s ever small to Him,
By which I learn His love.
His tender heart feels every dart,
The bitter tear, that oft will start,
Doth e’er His pity move.
How infinite His love!

My grief, however great it be,
His greater heart doth know,
And oft I need-(though heart may bleed)
The knife that roots out some rank weed,
He will not let it grow,
Because He loves me so.

Forgive, if I should murmur, Lord,
And chafe against Thy ways;
Some day, this fast retreating past,
With all its darkening shadows cast,
Will all Thy .mercies trace
And magnify Thy grace.

Ah! then I’ll know, as now I would,
The wisdom of Thy ways.
A troubled dream this life will seem
When I shall catch the first bright gleam
Of glory from Thy face.
Earth’s clouds will have no place.

Life’s storms and clouds and shadows o’er,
The school of sorrow past,-
The garnered grain needs not the rain-
Yet, through the discipline of pain,
And earth’s rude tempest blast,
He’ll bring me home at last.

These threatening storms that surge and roar,
These waves that wildly lash the shore,
But make me long for Thee the more,
And tell me, "night will soon be o’er."

H. McD.

Grace never thrives in a negligent and careless soul . . . We read of "being rooted and grounded." Grace in the heart is the root of every gracious word in the mouth, and of every holy work in the hand. Now in a heart not kept with care and diligence, these fructifying influences are stopped and cut off; a multitude of vanities break in and devour its strength. . . . "How precious are Thy thoughts to me O God! how great is the sum of them! If I should count them, they are more in number than the sand, when I awake I am still with Thee." "My soul is filled with marrow and fatness, when I remember Thee upon my bed, and meditate on Thee in the night-watches. My soul followeth hard after Thee; Thy right hand upholdeth me." . . . The stability of our souls in the hour of temptation will depend much upon the care we take in keeping our hearts. The careless heart is an easy prey to Satan in the hour of temptation … it is the watchful heart that discovers and suppresses the temptation before it comes to its strength. … I may say to the Christian who is remiss and careless in keeping his heart:" Thou shalt not excel." . . .

Furnish your heart richly with the word of God. … Be not discouraged Christian. The time is coming when thou shalt be discharged from thy labor, . . . when all vanity shall be removed from thy thoughts, and they shall be everlastingly and delightfully exercised upon the supreme goodness and excellence of thy God and Saviour; and when thou shalt lay down the weapons of prayers, tears, and groans, and put on the armor of light, not to engage in battle, but to triumph forever through Him who has loved you and left you this gracious encouragement:"To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with Me in My throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with My Father in His throne."

I was nearly twenty years of age, and had learned that Christ had died for my sins according to the Scriptures, and the knowledge of it filled my soul with joy and thankfulness. But though I had the sense of pardon, I had not deliverance from this present evil world; but was mixed up with its pleasures, its balls and concerts, when the Lord put a stop to it all. I was all dressed for a large party, and my mother and maid had pronounced the word "perfection," when it was found that I had half an hour to spare before the carriage would arrive. Thanks be to God for that half hour! I dismissed my maid, and having locked my door, knelt down in prayer. On rising from my knees, I stood before the mirror, and felt ashamed before the Lord. I took up my Bible; it opened at the eighth of Romans, and my eye caught these words "who walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit." I again stood before the mirror, when in an instant every part of my costly attire – each ornament, each piece of jewelry – seemed to speak:-all joined in one common chorus, "After the flesh! after the flesh!"For a moment there was a conflict. The coming scene, the brilliant drawing room, the gay, cheerful companions – all had their charms, and at that moment pressed strongly upon my heart. Again I turned to my Bible. "There is therefore now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus."All the love, the grace, the forgiveness, the kindness of God, seemed wrapped up in that little word, " no condemnation;" and all that it cost His own Son to secure for me that "no condemnation," His death of agony, His being forsaken of God, seemed all to unfold from that little word, "in Christ Jesus,"and filled, my soul with such a sense of God and His grace, that the conflict was over in a moment. With a quiet joy impossible to describe, I began to disrobe. I put off every ornament and all my costly attire; I put them off before the Lord-I put them off forever. When my relatives came in they found me robed in a simple evening dress! I told them how God had spoken to me through His word, and read the Scripture to them. It was a sore blow to my friends; but from that hour my whole life was changed; and, through grace, I have lived not unto myself, but unto Him who has loved me, and washed me from my sins in His own blood.

There are two sides of life’s road,-the side on which are lying the suffering, the needy, the despoiled, the dying, and "the other side." The "other side" is a well trodden side. It is the easier side to go on. There is nothing to interrupt you. You do not need to lose time in stopping to help people who are weak, fainting, wounded, or in any need or trouble. It is hard for some to do anything for unfortunate people; it pains one’s heart even to look at them in their distress. The "other side "would seem the better side for us to take. Yes, if comfort and speed and the saving of money and earthly success be life’s real ends. But do you know where the "other side" goes to? If you will turn to Matt. 25:41, you will see the farther end of this delightfully easy road:"Then shall He say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from Me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels:for I was an hungered, and ye gave Me no meat:" etc.

We should not overlook the fact that the two men who passed by on the "other side" in the Lord’s parable of the good Samaritan were regarded as religious men of the best type in those days. They were rated as good men,-typically good. They professed to stand for God. They prayed for the people, and offered sacrifices for them. They were thought to have compassionate hearts, able to sympathize. Yet, when they were brought face to face with great human needs they "passed by on the other side." The religion of our Lord’s day was weighed and found wanting. Faith without works is dead. The religion of Christ never takes a man on the "other side;" it takes him right among human needs. The priest and the Levite came, and brought no relief. Then God sent another man. This man differs from the others, he is Samaritan. He will not do anything for this wounded Jew. But see! he is stopping. He gets off his beast and goes over to the dying man. He bathes his wounds and lifts him up on his beast; bears him to the wayside inn where he personally cares for him over night, and on leaving in the morning makes provision for his care until he has recovered from his wounds.

This Samaritan did not take the "other side." He took the side of the suffering and needy. It cost him much. He lost time, and to a business man time is money. He put himself in danger from the robbers. He got his clothes soiled, dusty and bloody.

It was hard work for him to get the wounded man to the inn. Then it was an enemy he was helping. The "other side" would have been easier,-less costly. People seem to get along better not to worry with benevolence and charity, not to try to be kind to the unfortunate, not to trouble themselves with attempts to rescue the imperiled, or lift up the fallen, or save the heathen. Good Christian people who are active in city mission work could find much pleasanter ways of spending their time than in visiting the slums, and in working among the degraded, trying to do them good. The Christ side is not the easy side to go on. Jesus himself did not find it easy.

But we know where this side comes out in the eternal world.-"Then shall the King say unto them on His right hand, come ye blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:-I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat:" etc.
They had taken the side where the unfortunate were, and hands and heart had joined in service.

Which side are you on?

It is a fact, astounding as it may seem, that the Church of God, is to this day unknown to Christendom. The Church of God, built by Jesus Christ (Matt. 16:18), the one body (i Cor. 12:), is founded upon the Rock that Jesus Christ is the Son of the living God (Matt. 16:16). " the mystery " is referred to in the following passages:Mark 4:11; Rom. 11:25; 16:25; i Cor. 2:7; Eph. 1:9; the whole of the third of Ephesians; also Eph. 5:32 and 6:19; Col. 1:26; 4:3; i Tim. 3:9.Instead of this exhibition of the Church, the mystery, we have sectarianism, not the Church of God at all. This even the world can see, and hence the prevalence of infidelity throughout Christendom to-day, and the progress the world is so rapidly making down to the apostasy of the last days (2 Thess. 2:351 Tim. 4:i; 2 Peter 2:; Jude 17, 18, 19). I trust the reader will turn to all these references, that he may get a clear view of this subject. This appalling condition of Christendom has all resulted from the perversity of human nature, in having its own way, in spite of all the word of God and the example and teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ. He"came, not to do His own will, but to do the will of His Father who had sent " Him. Christendom, instead, has gone its own way, in its own will, according to its own wisdom; and hence division instead of unity; human conceptions, instead of God’s word; following men instead of God; some of Peter, some of Paul, some of Calvin, Wesley, or others. Men lost faith in God, and instead of believing in Him, and submitting:to His word as to the gift of the Holy Spirit, "the unction from the Holy one," the One that should lead them into all truth, because they could not see Him they have walked by sight and set up human leaders instead of the divine One. Hence we have the world’s church instead of God’s; sectarianism instead of Christianity.

Laying aside the Old Testament scriptures for the present, though full of Christ in type and symbol, from Abel’s lamb, and Abraham’s sacrifice of his only son to the end of the book,-let us look at "the mystery of the Church " as made known for the first time from the Lord Jesus Christ in heaven, after He had risen from the dead and ascended to glory, through Paul, chosen of God for this special purpose. This truth of the Church which characterizes this Christian dispensation was unknown until revealed through Paul. It was hid in God from eternity until Paul’s day. It is not in Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, or even in the Acts. In Matthew the Lord Jesus said "upon this Rock"-Jesus Christ the Son of the living God, – " I will (in the future) build My Church," and not otherwise is it referred to in the Gospels. In Acts, though the assembly of the saints is called "the Church," as elsewhere in our translation, (more properly it should be translated " the Assembly ") Church truth was not then made known. What we have in the Acts is, as it were, only the door of entrance the vestibule of the Church viz., "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost" (Acts 2:38). "Be it know it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this Man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins; and by Him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses " (Acts 13:38, 39). This, the forgive-ness of sins and justification by faith, is all that we get revealed in the Acts of the Apostles up to Paul. And this is all that Christendom has to-day or ever has had since the days of primitive Christianity. The Acts gives us the transition stage of progress over from Judaism into Christianity, but not its fulness or completeness. It was chiefly to the Jews though not refused to Gentiles, though the Jewish believers as a rule were "all zealous of the law," and then mixed up Judaism with their faith in Christ. See Acts 21:20.

This is the condition of things to-day in Christendom. It is Judaism and Christianity mixed together; and hence as Paul writes to Timothy of those days- they are "always learning, and never able to come to a knowledge of the truth" (2 Tim. 3:7), "Having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof "-putting up human leaders in place of the Holy Ghost.

RIGHTLY DIVIDING THE WORD OF TRUTH.

Much of the failure of Christendom is due to the fact that men have so rejected the divine Leader as Teacher, that they have not been able to see a rightly divided Word. They have therefore mixed up the word of the different dispensations, giving to one that which is intended for another, so that they have lost the mind of God as to His things. They have neglected or forgotten Paul’s caution to Timothy:‘ ’Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth" (2 Tim. 2:15).

In a rightly divided Word we have:

First.-"The glad tidings of the Kingdom."

Second.-The glad tidings of salvation by faith, or justification.

Third.-What Paul calls "My gospel"; the glad tidings of the Church of the living God. " The Mystery of the gospel" (Eph. 6:19). It is this that is unknown to Christendom.

THE GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM.

This gospel, or glad tidings, was from God to the Jews, as representing all Israel and to them only. It was the good news that their long expected and long foretold Messiah was coming as announced by John the Baptist, and had come as taught by the Lord Himself and His disciples. "We have found the Messias, which is being interpreted the Christ," was said to Andrew (John 1:21), Jesus Himself preached it (Matt. 9:35). After this gospel is preached in all the world then shall the end of the Jewish dispensation come (Matt. 24:41). Israel in unbelief rejected their own Messiah, and handed Him over to Gentile rulers, who nailed Him to the cross in obedience to Jewish clamor. This ended the gospel of the Kingdom for that time. It will however come in again after this Christian dispensation is completed. "God at the first did visit the Gentiles to take out of them (not to convert the world, as the world’s church claims) a people for His name. After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up, that the residue of men might seek after the Lord" (Acts 15:16). Over this restored and rebuilt tabernacle of David, the Lord Jesus will yet reign as the Son and Heir of David and the King of the Jews. Of this restoration, and the glory of Israel on the earth in the latter days, the Hebrew prophets spoke and wrote in the most glowing terms. In the confusion of sectarianism this glory has been commonly claimed for the Church, but this is only one of the many perversions of the word of God that has grown out of the confusion of Christendom. There is no Christian church foretold, except in type, in the Old Testament scriptures. It is " the mystery of the gospel" which was hid in God until revealed through Paul, by the Lord Himself from heaven.

THE GOSPEL, OR GLAD TIDINGS OF SALVATION BY FAITH-JUSTIFICATION.

God had tried man, as of the Adam race, from the beginning; as unfallen in the earthly paradise, and as fallen, up to and through the deluge, through the times of Noah and Abraham, Joshua, Judges, Saul, David and Solomon-all the way to Jesus their own God-promised Messiah; and at every step man had proved a failure, unwilling or unable to meet the requirements of God as to righteousness. In Abraham God set forth all that sectarianism has, even to this day. He believed God and it was accounted unto him for righteousness. This was justification by faith, and Abraham became father to all them that believe.

Besides this teaching set forth in the Gospels and in the Acts, we have it confirmed unto us more completely and fully in the epistles of Paul; and specially in that great letter to the Romans in which he opened up the glad tidings of God to the Gentile world.

All His former dealings with man on the ground of works, doing for salvation, obedience, having failed, because of the depravity of human nature, the ruin wrought by sin-God in His great love and mercy opened up in Abraham a new way of salvation for man; even the forgiveness of sins; pardoning him in mercy, in view of the sacrifice for sin whom He had already prepared in His own counsels to be offered up when the hour should come. Salvation to Abraham, and in his day to all whom God had chosen, was by faith, even as now. "Abraham saw my day and was glad," said the Lord Jesus to the Jews. Abraham believed in the coming Saviour, just as we believe in Him after He has come. He pre-trusted, we after-trusted, so righteousness is imputed in both cases. See Rom. 4:

Christendom then at this day has only what the old patriarchs and prophets had viz., justification by faith-imputed righteousness, a righteousness resulting from the forgiveness of sins. If sins are forgiven by God, the believer is thereby clean from sins and stands before God justified from all things from which he could not be justified* by the law of Moses. *As to justification by faith the principle was laid down to "Abraham, but as a revealed truth with all its consequences,-of freedom from law, known salvation etc., it was not known till after the cross.* This is righteousness, the righteousness which is of God, made by the blood of the cross of Jesus the Christ, and this is salvation. But it is not the gospel or glad tidings of the church; "My Gospel," as Paul calls it, or

"THE MYSTERY OF THE GOSPEL."

After offering the truth of the gospel to the Jews in the Acts, Paul turns away from them fully and completely in the last chapter, after he had partially so done before, and opens up the glad tidings of God to the Gentile nations in his great epistle to the Romans. Rome was then the mistress of the world, and through her he opened up the truth of God to all the nations of the earth. Here we have fully set forth both the ruin and the redemption of man. Man ruined by sin so that "there is none righteous, no not one; none that understandeth, none that seeketh after God, all gone out of the way;" all gone away from God even after they had in the beginning known Him. Now all in sin following their own lusts, appetites and passions until they had become beastly and idolatrous, their ruin is complete. Out of this beastly condition God has made a way of complete redemption by Jesus the Christ, the anointed of God, and His death. He died that we might live, and live to God. " He was made sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him." "In Him" remember, not in ourselves.

The way into the Church is revealed for the first time by the Lord Jesus Christ Himself from heaven, through Paul, to whom the Lord appeared after His ascension and whom He even caught up into the third heaven, into Paradise, when were revealed to him things so marvelous that he could not utter them! To him was thus committed "the mystery of the gospel," and it is fully set forth in his epistles beginning with the sixth of this epistle to the Romans. In the fourth chapter we have righteousness imputed to faith. In the fifth, " Being justified by faith we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ."

But though our sins are forgiven and we are happy in this consciousness, we have still the root of sin in us. It is in our nature as fallen creatures. It is natural for us to sin; yea as natural "as for the sparks to fly upward," We have a nature that cannot be forgiven with the sins. This nature is the root of sin. It is a sin-nature and though our sins may be forgiven, and we happy in the knowledge of it, we may find the fruit of this sin-nature springing up and we become conscious of sinning again and again-until we are led through all the experience of the seventh of Romans, and are ready to exclaim with the apostle "who shall deliver me from this body of death" (Rom. 7:24). Though our sins were forgiven as set forth in the fourth and fifth chapters, we find we need something more than the forgiveness of sins and justification to bring us deliverance from sin. To be delivered, death must have come in; not physical death, not the death of the body, but the end of ourselves as men in Adam, as men in the flesh, as natural men in the earth, over and into Christ, the last Adam, the Head of the new race; God’s new creation by Jesus Christ for an eternity of fellowship with His Son in glory.

" What shall we say then," after our sins are forgiven and we are justified and have peace with God, Paul asks, in the sixth of Romans; "shall we continue in sin, that grace (the favor of God, to forgive us over and over again, day by day, and hour by hour) may abound?"-"God forbid " says he, "how shall we, that are dead to sin" not sins, but the principle -"live any longer therein?" If dead to sin, and the nature judged out of which the sins spring, how shall we live in that to which we have died, and are dead? It is impossible that we should! Our great teacher continuing in this sixth chapter goes on to show us that "our old man is crucified with Christ that the body of sin (not sins) might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin, the principle. For, or because, He that is dead is freed from sin." But free from it in the death of Christ. This for faith. This is deliverance from the body of sin, our old self gone. It is out of Adam into Christ! Delivered from all the sins, and the nature that is the root of them judged; so that "there is therefore now no condemnation to them who are in Christ Jesus." Nothing to condemn! sin is forgiven, sin in the flesh set aside, condemned, in the cross of Christ; "as He is so are we in this world" (i John 4:17). All of God, by Jesus Christ.* *There are in the Epistles four expressions which, though related, have not the same meaning; "sins," "sin," "the flesh," and "the old man."

"Sins" are the acts committed,-"the deeds done in the body," for which men are judged. For the believer these are forgiven, through the death of Christ.

"Sin" is the principle, or power, which reigns in the natural man. It corresponds to Pharaoh the king of the Egyptians, from whom Israel was freed. Sin sometimes is closely linked in meaning with "the flesh," as "sin in the flesh," but it is usually the principle which reigns in the sinner. It is never forgiven, but condemned, in the death of Christ.

"The flesh" is the nature of fallen man, so called from the lowest part of his being, the material part. This is always present in the believer, but he is to walk in freedom from it, in the Spirit.

"The old man," is the formerly responsible person in Adam. Paul’s " old man " was what he was before he was saved; what he was in Adam, as contrasted with the new man, what he was in Christ. Our old man is annulled, set aside, by the death of Christ. As Paul has said, "I am crucified with Christ, nevertheless I live, yet not I, (the old I, the old man) but Christ liveth in me" (Gal. 2:20). Scripture is always accurate in the use of terms, and it is well to grasp the distinctions suggested here.*

In the seventh chapter we have the believer carried out from under the law as a result of the death gone through with in the sixth chapter. In the sixth he is delivered from sin, which came in by Adam, through the death which Jesus, the Christ, bore for him and as his substitute; and now through this death he is also delivered from the law, being dead to that in which he had been held. The law is God’s rule of right for man in the flesh, in Adam, but being dead to that-to faith-in which he was held he is now freed from the law, and is set into full liberty in Christ, He is God’s freed man! Freed from sins, freed from sin, freed from the law! all by Jesus Christ and all the free gift of God to every living soul!

This brings us to the eighth chapter, wherein we get the result of this wondrous deliverance. "There is therefore now no condemnation to them who are in Christ Jesus"! Notice the therefore as well as the now. We have come to it by what has gone before in this epistle and hence the " therefore," and this place has never been reached before and hence the "now." The last clause of this first verse of the eighth chapter is an interpolation and does not belong there, but it comes in its proper place at the end of the fourth verse. "For (or because) the law of the Spirit of life (the blessed Holy Spirit) has made me free, or set me free, from the law of sin and death " (ver. 2). "The law of sin is in my members," as we see in the twenty-third verse of the seventh chapter, and the law of death, is the decalogue, or the law of the ten commandments, as we see in the same seventh chapter. "Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that you should be married, or united, to another, to Him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God " (ver. 4). Not by law keeping, but by power from God in virtue of our union with the risen Man in the glory! "When the commandment came, sin revived, and I died" (ver. 9). "And the commandment … I found to be unto death" (ver. 10). "For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me " (verse ii).

By the law of the Spirit of life then the saints are delivered from both the law of sin which is in our members, or in our flesh, or Adam nature; and also from the decalogue. "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, (a sacrifice for sin) condemned sin in the flesh:that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled (or completed) in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit" which is the new life. "If Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin " (ver. 10).

In this eighth chapter, we get the highest round, so to speak, in the Christian ladder. It is new life, new creation, in the Spirit, in Christ, no condemnation, God’s Spirit dwelling in us-children, heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ! "The Spirit making intercession for the saints according to God." "All things working together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called ones, according to His purpose." "Foreknown and predestinated, that Christ might be the first-born among many brethren." "He called them, He justified them, or counted them righteous, and He also glorified them." So sure are they of the glory with Christ, that they are here spoken of in the present tense, as though it was already done, which it is, in His eternal purpose.

"What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us who can be against us? He that spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all (all the saints) how shall He not with Him also freely give us all things? Who shall lay anything to the charge of God’s elect? It is God that justifieth (or counts us righteous) who is he that condemneth?" " It is Christ that died, yea rather that is risen again (all for His saints) who is even at the right hand of God (the place of power and authority) who maketh intercession for us." Therefore nothing shall separate us, or can separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord! Herein is the consummation of that purpose. This is the standing of the Church of God which is the Bride of Christ, espoused to Him and now awaiting the coming of the Bridegroom. "I go to prepare a place for you, and if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you unto Myself, that where I am there ye may be also." J. S. P.

(Concluded in next issue.)

(Luke 15:8.)

What woman having ten pieces of silver, if she lose one piece, doth not light a candle, and sweep the house diligently till she find it?"

We were recently asked at a Bible reading what the broom means in this parable. But, as this useful instrument is not mentioned in the verse, I had not given it much thought. However, as it is evident, that the woman must use a broom to sweep with, the inquiry was not out of place.

We believe the "woman " here refers to the Holy Spirit, and the "house " to the house of Israel. God had lighted "a candle" in sending His Son into the world (cf. John 1:9), and the Spirit of grace in Christ was seeking the "lost sheep" amid the rubbish and filth of Judaism (cf. Matt. 15:24).

The Son of God has returned to heaven and sent down the Holy Spirit to continue the work of grace until He shall return. The sphere of activity has widened out to the whole world, and the Divine Worker needs many brooms. This suggests Rom. 10:14. "How shall they hear without a preacher?" And if the broom is a convenient instrument for the housewife to sweep with, so must the Holy Spirit use instruments wherewith to draw out from their hiding-places the precious souls buried in sins and iniquity, the price of whose redemption, as the ‘’silver " here suggests, was "the precious blood of Christ" (cf. i Pet. 1:18, 19). Are you willing then, to be a broom,-to be worn out in such lowly service as He requires? A broom, you know, must be well made and fitted to the hand of the user, and thus ready for use when wanted. The thrifty housewife pays the price for one, and consecrates it to her service. So we have been " bought with a price"; and God has "created us in Christ Jesus unto good works" (Eph. 2:10). And we are told in Rom. 6:to "yield ourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and our members as instruments of righteousness unto God." It does not suit the natural pride of our hearts to be assigned to so lowly a place as that of a broom, but this shows how we unfit ourselves for effective service by allowing high thoughts. You might like the fame of Paul, but are you willing to suffer in like manner, and then be "defamed" and "made as the filth of the world and the off scouring of all things "? (i Cor. 4:13).

In our text the "one piece of silver "is emphasized, showing how God values one lost soul. God feels His loss, and is willing to pay the cost of its redemption. It is not hard here to read John 3:16 into the context. The lighted candle is now the word of God with which we are illumined (cf. Luke 11:36). The diligent seeking and sweeping sets forth the perseverance of divine love-"till she find it." But the humble instrument used in this loving search is not mentioned. Are you willing to give up reputation (cf. Phil. 2:5, 7), and "present your body a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God," as His servant? Saith the self-emptied apostle, "Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos but ministers (servants) by whom ye believed?" (i Cor. 3:Are you willing then, in fellowship with the love of God, to be a broom:to be jammed into the filthy corners of the earth, through scorching heat or piercing cold; to be crushed and bruised; to die, if need be, in order that the grace of eternal life may be carried into the haunts of sin, and to the precious souls for whom God gave His Son; that His heart may be filled with joy over one repenting sinner? Are you willing "for Jesus’ sake " to be a nameless broom? C. E. B.

What said those women as they bore
Their fragrant gifts away?
The spices that they needed not,
That resurrection day?

Did Mary say within her heart,
Our work has been in vain?
Or counting o’er the spices bought
Of so much waste complain?

Not so, for though the risen Lord
Their spices did not need,
Not unrewarded was the love
That planned the reverent deed.

For though unused their fragrant store
Yet well might they rejoice,
Since they the first who saw the Lord,
The first who heard His voice.

Sweet story, hast thou not some truth
For my impatient heart?
Some lesson that shall stay with me
Its comfort to impart?

Have I not gathered in the past,
In days that are no more,
Of spices sweet and ointment rare,
What seemed a precious store?

A little knowledge I had gained,
A little strength and skill,
I thought to use them for my Lord,
If such should be His will.

Alas my store unused hath been,
The strength I prized hath gone,
My weary hands have lost their skill,
And yet my life goes on.

In all the busy work of life
I have but scanty share,
And scanty is the service done
For Him whose Name I bear.
So many hopes and plans have died
In weariness and pain,
My heart cries out in sore distress,
Was all my work in vain?

Be still sad heart; thy hopes and plans
Are known to One divine;
He knoweth all thou wouldst have done
Had greater strength been thine.

My unused spices, Dearest Lord,
They were prepared for Thee,
Yet if for them Thou hast no need,
Let love my offering be.

We are creatures of extremes, and are apt either to unduly emphasize and distort a truth or to ignore it altogether. Perhaps in nothing is this more clearly seen than in the subject we are about to consider.

The doctrine of succession-call it apostolic, presbyterian, or by some other name,-is one of the most fruitful sources of error. Under its plea, in Rome, all sorts of unscriptural and disgraceful errors are maintained; and, with well-nigh every one, antiquity is supposed to guarantee accuracy, and to be an assurance of orthodoxy. Let us always remember that sin is ancient; that error began in the garden of Eden. Time then can never give sanction to what is unscriptural.

It is hardly necessary to more than mention a few of the errors which are supported by "them of old time," as illustrations of this. The sacrilegious service of the mass has come down unaltered through centuries. The same may be said of the priesthood of Rome and the papacy. A long line of popes- with certain very troublesome breaks to those who rest the Church upon this foundation-reaches back into the very early centuries of the Christian era. Coming to doctrine, "the Galatian heresy"-of law keeping, observances of days and times-is as old as Paul, and still shows signs of vigor for evil.

Time then cannot make true that which is false. But let us look a moment at the opposite extreme. There are some who despise antiquity and who, like the Athenians are always ready "either to tell or to hear some new thing." Such persons dwell upon individual responsibility, and even where they do not go into extreme of error, seem to be always in danger of drifting. Thank God for many who, while they have this tendency, hold fast to the divine truth in the great fundamentals of that most holy faith which was ‘’ once for all delivered to the saints." But with these there will often be an instability in matters of great importance, which renders them unfit to be "pillars" in a true and scriptural sense.

Now is it not true that God’s way lies between these two extremes? We are not blindly to follow the past as though time had made a groove for faith to run in; nor are we to set up to be new lights, as though Christianity did not exist before our time. Surely we are not to guarantee the permanency of error, by following the fathers blindly; we are to test everything by the word of God. But we are to remember that in all times of His church’s history, God has had a witnessing people; that even when Elijah-like (alas how unlike Elijah in other respects) men may have said, "I, even I only am left," God has had His seven thousand. Beloved, does it not thrill our hearts as we think we are joined in faith and testimony with an innumerable number of God’s elect in every time and place? Linked with Christ we are, indwelt by the Spirit too, but by virtue of this very fact linked with the whole Church as well. But this is not quite our subject.

With the establishment of Christianity at Pentecost and during the days of the apostles, God gave to His newly formed Church a body of divine truth- "all things pertaining to life and godliness." That truth covers every phase of divine life in the Church. We may divide it roughly into three parts-doctrine, order, and practice. Of course, it is not our purpose to go fully into things; to do so would be to write a treatise upon Christianity. But at the beginning God, by the Holy Spirit, through inspired men, gave a mass of precious truth, as to Himself, as to Christ, -His person and work; as to salvation and all connected with it. At the same time and in the same way, He gave principles and details of conduct becoming those who belong to His Church’; and He established a Church with ministry and order in which the truth and walk were to be exhibited. We might also add that all this was connected with all His previous dispensations, in such a way as to harmonize most perfectly, and to manifest the holiness and wisdom of all His ways.

Thus in a most important sense the "apostles and prophets," having laid the foundation, have passed away. We have none now save in the "living oracles" they have left us, our guide for all time. Neither can there be, in the sense of gift or authority, any such thing as apostolic succession.

But apostolic truth remains, and apostolic order and practice, and it is of this that we wish to speak, laying a word upon our consciences. Paul, Barnabas, Peter, John; Timothy, Titus, Stephanas-all these and countless others of faith and devotedness, have passed away. The whole fabric of divine truth- under God the Holy Ghost – was in their hands. They were to teach it, to maintain its order, to exhibit its fruits. Long since have they gone to their rest, but the Church remains. Others were brought in to continue the testimony which was intrusted to them. These also have "fallen asleep;" and so through the centuries this priceless heritage has passed until at the present time it is in our hands. That which Paul stood for is now in our hands. The responsibility has been transmitted until it has reached us. The very fact that we are Christians necessitates this. Would we free ourselves from this?

We need not look around, near or far away, to find those to whom this trust has also been committed. Each of us for ourselves has it laid upon us to hold fast, to maintain the very truth for which Paul contended. Does not this solemnize? If we are unfaithful, we cannot think of others as being true, the responsibility rests upon us. But let us apply briefly in the way we have already indicated.

We are entrusted with all the doctrines of God’s word, to know, confess and teach them. They are contained in their perfection in the word of God, but they are there for us. What diligence this means in study. What Christian dare leave his Bible closed, or but grasp a few of its simpler truths? We are to learn them all, and to be able to contend earnestly for the faith. If anything could accentuate the importance of this, it would be the almost universal departure of the professing Church from the truths of Scripture. Nay, that very Scripture is being questioned and treated as a merely human production. May each of us ask ourselves, What am I doing toward holding, and maintaining God’s truth in this time of error?

But we look at another phase of this question. A divine order was established for the Church in its administration upon earth. Divine directions were given as to reception, discipline, ministry, worship- in fact no true activity of Christian testimony was omitted or unprovided for. Here again we are brought to face our responsibility. It has not lessened since the apostles’ time. In one sense, as ruin and weakness-all foreseen by the Spirit of God- have come in, greater care, we might almost say, is required in the administration of. Church order. The word of God is to be searched as to its teachings upon this point, every indication is to be carefully noted, and we in a sense of weakness, are to take up the solemn load.

We are convinced that this is all too little realized by the vast bulk of the Lord’s people. Self is so prominent in our thoughts, our own interests are so central, that we are apt to forget what is due to God, and the simple path of obedience in which we are to walk.

Is it said, So few walk that path? Then an added responsibility is laid upon those who are willing, in all their feebleness but in reliance upon unfailing grace, to walk it alone if need be. Who that thinks of this can fail to tremble, and to confess, as Daniel, our own and our fellows’ sins?

Closely connected with this is the testimony before the world with which we are entrusted. Let us think of the saints of that early Church, and its unfaltering testimony; spite of mockery, temptation, yea blood it stood firm for Christ. Their testimony is ours, beloved brethren. How are we maintaining it? Apply the question to a hundred details, of private and corporate responsibility. Our walk before the world, our business and our home life, our conversation-these and all else are to be measured by the standard. As we think of those devoted ones, torn by beasts or tossed into the flames, with songs of triumphant joy on their lips, does not the blush of shame tingle the cheek? We are not called to cruel mockings and scourgings, but to bear a little discomfort, to endure a little scorn; and how do we meet it? Alas!

Take the preaching of the gospel. If Paul was entrusted with its message, are not. we also? if necessity was laid upon him, are we free? Are we less debtors than he?

How this thought of the same responsibility should move us. A child moves about his father’s possessions, little thinking that some day they will be his to administer. His father dies, and he, come to years of maturity, must take up, not only the comforts and honors, but the care of that inheritance. So is it with us. The men of faith, from Abel down, have lived, witnessed, and died. Here are we, in their place, with all their responsibility upon us. God help us to feel and meet it.

Ques. 3.-Please explain 1 John 1:8:"If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us." Also the same epistle, chapter 3:6. " Whosoever abideth in Him sinneth not:whosoever sinneth hath not seen Him neither known Him."

Ans.- "Without holiness no man shall see the Lord." To say that sinning, in a believer, is a natural and necessary thing, is an awful denial of Christianity. We fear that a dreadful misuse has been made of the truth that the flesh, the old nature, still remains in the believer. True it is there, but does Christianity effect no change? Now chap. 1:8 assures us of the presence of sin as nature in all, even in the believer, and the more he walks in the light the more does he realize this. He knows too the value of the blood and walks with a good conscience.

Chap. 3:6, with many other similar passages, shows the transforming power of divine life. Holiness is produced. One who goes on in sin has neither seen nor known Christ. We would note the use of the word "abide," which suggests the presence of faith, and not merely a new nature. Of course, the nature will act, but the acting is what is here spoken of. Alas, it acts weakly in all, compared with what should be. However, all through John’s epistle the line is clearly drawn between holiness and sin. "He that practices sin is of the devil." "He that is born of God doth not practice sin."

Ques. 4.-Is it according to the word of God to instruct saints in the assemblies to deny their little ones seats by their side at the Lord’s table, and to relegate them to back seats because they are unconverted?

Ans.-So long as children need the eye of their parents they should unquestionably sit by them. A hard legalism which would force a separation is, we feel, not in accord with the gracious spirit of the gospel. On the other hand we believe, for the sake of order and to avoid confusion, persons who are not breaking bread-if present in any numbers-should be provided with seats separate from those who are to break bread. To these seats children might go when they reach a more mature age, nearly or quite grown. However, if there be but one or two persons to occupy such seats, it might seem ungracious to insist upon an isolation which has no merit save to avoid confusion. A mere local position, we need not say, has no spiritual significance. If it fosters spiritual pride-"stand by thyself, I am holier than thou "-it is most injurious. On the other hand strangers take no offense if graciously shown to seats provided especially for them.

Ques. 5.-Does Hosea 6:2 furnish any ground for the statement, based on our Lord’s resurrection, that the return of Israel and the appearing of Christ will take place in the first part of the twentieth century? Some have argued from the seven days creation, a thousand years for a day, that the millennium will come at the beginning of the seventh thousand years.

Ans.-The passage in Hosea seems most clearly to refer not only to the national revival of Israel, but connects it with that which is the pledge of it-our Lord’s resurrection. The familiar quotation in Matt. 2:15 from Hosea 11:1-"out of Egypt have I called My Son "-shows how Christ is ever before the mind of God, and what apparently refers to the nation only, has a deeper allusion to Him.

With regard to the chronological question, we believe that there are two mistakes;-one that the millennium is the seventh day, and the other that the world’s history has been divided into definite periods of the same length. The seventh day is the day of rest, and points to that time where all labor is over-the eternal rest which God will have with His redeemed. This would make the millennium the sixth day, and fittingly we have the man and the woman-type of Christ and the Church-associated in dominion over the earth.* *See as to this a " Chart on the course of time from Eternity to Eternity " published by Loizeaux Brothers, price 40 cents, with key.*

With regard to the division of various periods of two thousand years each, as we believe it to be unscriptural, we can say but little upon it. We might remind our readers however that the coining of the Lord for His Church is an event absolutely independent of "times and seasons." It is imminent at all times-"nearer than when we believed." Instead of turning us to chronology, history or astronomy, the Spirit of God would occupy us with those heavenly scenes where our home is, and with the promise of our Lord, " Behold I come quickly."

Ques. 6.-In a case of discipline in an assembly, and the person under that discipline complains of injustice and appeals to the Lord’s people elsewhere, do you not think that assembly should be willing and ready to lay herself open to any investigation from without?

Does not the principle of ‘’One Body, One Spirit, one Lord" make this even imperative? that is. would it not really be independency to refuse, though we may find some appeals very trying?

We necessarily uphold the discipline of the assembly toward an individual member, according to Matt. 18:18. else what but confusion and anarchy could be the result. Is it not, however, equally necessary to uphold the responsibility of each assembly to all the rest when occasion, such as above mentioned, requires it?

Ans.-The question carries with it the answer upon a subject of great importance in connection with the fellowship of the Lord’s people. Unquestionably the local assembly is but an expression of the entire Church. It acts, as it were, for the Church. If any question as to a matter of discipline arises, and the local assembly is asked about it. not only courtesy and a love of truth would necessitate a full answer, but responsibility to the Lord demands that the consciences of those who share that responsibility should be fully set at rest. There is no such thing as ‘’a purely local matter" in the sense that our brethren elsewhere may not inquire as to it. Suppose the assembly has erred, that self-will has prevailed; is all inquiry to be hushed under the plea that ‘’ the assembly has acted"? What becomes of the scripture, "if one member suffer, all the members suffer with it"?
On the other hand the opposite extreme must be guarded against. When an assembly has acted, It is to be supposed that it has done so righteously in the fear of God. That action should not be questioned in a light or trifling way, or without grave cause for fear lest all should not be right. The matter should then be laid before the assembly which most certainly would be expected to give opportunity for the fullest investigation. In general, when a righteous decision has been reached, whether by an individual or an assembly, there is a perfect willingness to submit the matter to the examination of others. The opposite would argue a weakness of conviction that feared the light. May the Lord preserve His people both from self-righteous independency, and a meddling spirit.

Ques. 7.-Is there authority from the Scriptures for the thought expressed in one of our hymns, "He wears our nature on the throne "?

Ans.-Most certainly not if it be understood to suggest a hint of fallen nature. This were blasphemy. And yet alas in some quarters there are those who do not shrink from using such language, covered by forms of piety. They would say our Lord thus knew what temptation was, and could sympathize with us. All this robs us of a holy Christ. We need hardly say that the temptations which assailed him were only from without, never from within. If He was "in all points tempted like as we are," it was " apart from sin." But surely few of our readers need a word as to this.

On the other hand the expression in the hymn is simply a statement that our Lord was, and is still, a man. He wears human, not fallen, nature on the throne. It would correspond thus to that passage in Hebrews, "He took not hold of angels, but He took hold of the seed of Abraham" (Heb. 2:16. (Gk..); though the thought is not exactly the same.

It might perhaps be well to mention In giving out the hymn that it is not fallen but human nature-"the man Christ Jesus."

Ques. 8.-Does Rom. 15:7 speak of receiving into fellowship from outside, or those who are in fellowship as they go from place to place; as Phebe? Does the "wherefore" in verse 7 apply to verses 5 and 6?

Ans.-Evidently the "wherefore " is the conclusion from the whole previous paragraph, not only verses 5 and 6, but the entire previous chapter (14:) and the first verses of the fifteenth. This treats of reception, and would primarily refer to first reception and not the recognition of those already in fellowship, though it could also apply to that.

Ques. 9.-In trying to hold the truth in grace while faithful to others too, when should we withhold our hand from our brethren? Should it be done in personal disagreements, or when matters are not clearly manifest?

Ans.-As to the last question, we think it may be frequently said that personal questions may best be left to the Lord. There will be, of course, occasion for faithful dealing with one another in personal matters, but such disputes are too often but occasions for mutual strife and enmity. Our conviction is that in the majority of cases the part of wisdom and of grace is to leave it to the Lord to manifest it in His time, either here or at His judgment-seat.

There are however, cases not of a personal character which we cannot leave. If the person’s state of soul involves the testimony, brings a reproach on the Lord, or stumbles His people, we are to endeavor to recover him.

First of all, we would be reminded of our own walk. "Ye who are spiritual," "considering thyself"-would surely beget in us a sense of lowliness that would give power.

Next, when we learn of a brother’s state, if we are truly concerned, we will pray for him. Let us beware of that interest in the short-comings of others which does not drive us to our closets.

If there is self-judgment and prayer we can be ready to be led of God, who will at the right time and place lead us to our brother. We need hardly say this will be private. There is nothing more delicate than a case of departure from God. Let us beware of taking it up with either unclean or rough hands. Let no one think he can lightly rush in and settle a matter. We believe wrong attempts to right matters have often occasioned as much difficulty as the original trouble. The complicated cases are always difficult.

If we are now alone with our brother, and have in a spirit of grace gone over his course with him, we will in all probability gain him. If not, we may seek to win him together with two or three others. If he still refuse, he is to be treated as a stranger.

Often we may, after having exhausted all gracious ways, withdraw from a brother who is disorderly. We may avoid him, and no one else but himself may know it. This individual treatment is often blessed, where it is manifest that nothing but love prompts it.

How much the Lord’s sheep need loving, faithful care. Do not the following words speak to our consciences? " The diseased have ye not strengthened, neither have ye healed that which was sick, neither have ye bound up that which was broken, neither have ye brought again that which was driven away, neither have ye sought that which was lost; ‘but with force and with cruelty have ye ruled them" (Ezek. 34:4).

God ordained governments for man in his unredeemed condition in the world. The Christian is saved out of the world, and is no more called upon to go back into it to engage in politics than was Israel called upon to go back into Egypt; though governments are for the Christian, as well as for the world-as they are for all men. As a doer of good in the world the Christian is not to decide for himself what he is to do. His path is marked out by the word of God. The Word marks out for him a far higher witness and more powerful influence for good than he could ever have as a politician. In separation from the world, he sheds light upon it, praying, interceding for all men, and for those in authority. In mingling with men in politics he belies his own character at the start,* as if Israel had gone back into Egypt to reform it, or as when Lot went down into Sodom and sat in the gate. *Suppose a soldier slays an opponent, a fellow Christian he had been with in prayer a month before:this he professes to be ready to do, in war, if he is a voter.*

But it may be said we are to mingle with men to reach them. But we are not to give up our character, which is separation from the world, and from every unequal yoke, or we cannot reach them with the testimony of God. As in Noah’s time the ark was his testimony and the place of refuge, so now the Christian’s testimony is the gospel:"As sons of God in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation among whom ye shine as lights in the world, holding forth the word of life " (Phil. 2:15)

In short, God ordained governments in mercy to men and to the Church; but He ordained the Church for a different purpose, a purpose upon which thorough confusion is thrown by the very thought of a Christian in politics. The very thought is a refusal of God’s purpose, and a determination to substitute one’s own purpose, and be a doer of good on mere human grounds.

And this brings to mind the root of the difficulty- the heart not submissive to the truth of God as to the fallen condition of man. This pervades the Church to its confusion and exposure to heresy in many ways. The heart is not serious, not in the realization of man’s awful condition by sin, not really submissive to God as to His judgment of the world. Any link with the world defiles. "Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing." As to God’s providential interfering or overruling in the governments of men the Christian is to be fully alive. He is a priest, and is to intercede, to pray, to give thanks " for kings " and "for those in authority " and "for all men," that we may lead godly and peaceable lives (i Tim. 2:i). He is to be an example of orderly conduct, and ready submission to the law (Rom. 13:1-8; i Peter 2:13-17).

How precious a true Christian testimony! how jealous should we be to maintain it pure; how falsified it is and ruined by politics, as by any kind of worldliness.

A second general consideration is this, the exhortations of Scripture imply separation from politics, as for example the one above referred to in i Peter 2::"Obey every ordinance of man." Evidently men who make these ordinances are a company of whom the Christian forms no part, he is outside of them, but he is to obey the laws the make. It is like that word in Heb. 9::"As it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment." Here again "men " are a company of which the Christian forms no part, he will never come into judgment and may not come into death, and will not come into it as having the sting of sin, and approaching judgment. It is an appointment for "men" but not for the Christian. So "men" are law-makers, but the Christian is separated from that company by the cross. He is a new man under Christ, the Head of a new and heavenly race.

A third consideration is this, already suggested necessarily but it may be more definitely stated:a Christian engaging in politics must act without guidance from the word of god, and therefore without faith and "whatsoever is not of faith is sin" (Rom. 14:23).This alas, is no difficulty with many, and reveals afresh a root of confusion in this matter:in submission to God and to His word, human judgment displacing the spirit of obedience from the heart, and so lowering the tone of life and testimony of the Church in general. But any one who knows the blessedness of peace with God through the assurance of God’s word is glad to apply the Word at all times, and is consciously weak if he goes beyond it or acts without it. "Thus saith the Lord" he must have for every step, and he finds guidance in the Word for everything. Otherwise how could it be to him, "a lamp to his feet and a light to his path"? (Psalm 119:105).

Let us apply this briefly to various relationships and duties. In the relationship of a parent, of a child, of a husband, of a master, of a servant, of a subject under the government – in all these relations light is shed on the Christian’s path; but none at all on his path as a politician, he has gone beyond the Word, and must act without it. In fact he is acting merely as a man, a natural man, not as a spiritual man, not as a Christian. We have an illustration of the Christian place of honor and sanctification in the place accorded Mephibosheth by king David. "Mephibosheth shall eat bread alway at my table," was the king’s word. Ziba and his servants and his sons were commanded to till the land for Mephibosheth, and to bring in the fruits to him, but Mephibosheth was to eat bread at the king’s table as one of the king’s sons. Ziba was the servant of Saul. Saul’s kingdom a type of the power and governments of the world that are to pass away before the coming Kingdom of Christ. Ziba’s servants and sons may speak to us therefore of the men of this world, and of its governments who, occupied with earthly things, really serve the children of God. Whatever is done to promote good government and prosperity is a service by God’s appointment for His glory and for blessing for all men, but especially for His own (i Tim. 4:10). But the Christian, like Mephibosheth, is at the king’s table as one of the king’s sons. He is a priest unto God and has too high and holy an occupation to turn aside to the work of the servants of Saul.

For a Christian to be even prime minister or President would be but a misuse of time and opportunity. Saul’s servants are doing this work. The Christian is a worshiper of God, and one who is to hold forth the word of life, and to be a witness for Christ, to walk as He walked, to " follow His steps"-leaving us an example (i Peter 2:21).

No steps of His can be found in the arena of politics. The following His steps will most certainly lead in a direction wholly apart from anything of that kind. Even the world can see this. They know very well the inconsistency of a Christian in politics.

Peace and joy are in the way of separation from the world, and the taking up our cross and following Christ, afar from Egypt’s turmoil and unrest, and ungodly principles and ways. What we need is to have a clear perception of our heavenly calling. We wait to be taken to heaven where Christ is, and then He will appear and rule this world at last with perfect government, and establish a Kingdom that shall be forever (Dan. 7:27).

Israel departed from Egypt and commanded repeatedly to be carefully separate from the Canaanites; and Abraham, called to leave his country, answers plainly to the equally plain teaching and commandments of the New Testament, as to the path of separation from the world, enjoined upon us.

Let us rejoice in our happy deliverance, and let us give thanks to God that we have been called to such an honorable testimony. May we by example and exhortation help one another, and seek the salvation of souls.

May we abide in Christ. In Him we are blest with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places. By Him we have access to the very presence of God. No defilement is admitted there. Nothing that is of the spirit of this present evil age, but what must unfit one to approach Him.

Let us walk upon our high places, and see that no wile of Satan mars our worship and our testimony.

"Hold that fast which thou hast that no man take thy crown." "Behold I come quickly."

What if the priests who marched round Jericho with the ark and blew the trumpets, had left the ark and had gone into Jericho to work reform. Yet such is the course of Christians who go into the world to make it better. It is confusion and disobedience. Let us suppose Paul to have been turned aside from his work in the gospel to a political career however great, the thought is heart-breaking, and yet how many are ensnared and robbed of their crown, in this and kindred ways; for the unequal yoke is a snare in every line, whether in business, or marriage, or benefit societies, or politics. Do we not desire to honor the Lord, not to dishonor Him; to comfort our brethren, not to grieve them-to be true witnesses for Christ? "If any man serve Me let him follow Me." "What fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness, and what communion hath light with darkness, and what concord hath Christ with Belial, or what part hath he that believeth with an unbeliever, and what agreement hath the temple of God with idols, for ye are the temple of the living God, as God hath said:I will dwell in them and walk in them and I will be their God and they shall be My people. Wherefore come out from among them and be ye separate saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing, and I will receive you and will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters saith the Lord Almighty."
E. S. L.